The future of first-person.

by WyldKard on November 15, 2000

Ever since Wolfenstein 3D hit the shareware scene, the first-person shooter genre hasn’t stopped erupting. In every generation, features are added that revolutionize how we kill, whether it be with a jumping front kick (ala Duke Nukem 3D), or a giant nuke that we can fly around (ala Unreal Tournament). The days of whipping out your boomstick on unsuspecting AI monsters are not only numbered, but they’ve really been dwindling, and this whole “play on the Internet” thing doesn’t sound as though it’s going to go on a similar decline anytime soon.

With all these changes, you better bet the farm that games are gonna get more and more complicated. Adding a Z-axis was one thing, but the new breed of games hitting shelves isn’t the same. It took me well into DN3D’s fame before I started using the mouse; I played and beat classic Quake using the keyboard only, and it wasn’t until I started gaming online seriously that I forced myself to adapt to a new playing style. Mind you, I was still the best keyboard gamer in FPS history, but admittedly, I couldn’t rely on the same old voodoo forever. Three control changes later, I finally settled on my current mid-keyboard movement style, with the non-inverted mouse as my friendly weapon/aim control.

When games like Thief hit me over the head with their splendid concepts and well-constructed strategies, even my current playing style needs adaptation, however. I mean, adding buttons to lean around corners ain’t simple, man, especially when most of the convenient keys around my hand are already in use. And don’t even get me started on the terrible gameplay involved in such recent games like Hitman.

So, games are getting more complicated. That’s a good thing, though, but where is the FPS genre headed? Games like System Shock 2 and Deus Ex are huge hits, not only for the gore and mayhem of such classics as Doom, but for the strategies employed and *gasp* roleplaying elements thrown in. Don’t get me wrong, shooting the crap out of your local baddies isn’t gonna die out anytime soon, but lots of folks are tired of that, especially since it takes little skill. The games we’re seeing that are hits nowadays take more than a little aim and some mouse movement. And the online realm only makes these elements more important.

In the near future, we’re going to see a lot more online FPS games, and they’re going to incorporate far more strategy than we’re used to. Granted, the single player FPS area won’t go extinct just yet, but its days are invariably numbered. Frankly, I’m fairly sick of playing against crappy AI, or even with bots that don’t play the same as people do. And with bandwidth levels increasing all the time, and consistent, massively multiplayer games proving that they’re economically feasible, we’ll see more than 20-player-max games coming to a server near you.

While strategy is certainly important, unlike in more instinct-oriented games like Quake 3, it can’t be too complicated. While the Rainbow Six series was a hit, the games didn’t receive the following they could have gotten if their engines had been a tad nicer, and the strategy a tad less complex. I mean, I like outfitting my team as much as the next guy, but sometimes, I’d rather not play the Combat Barbie Dress-up Game, and focus more on killing stuff. That’s why Counterstrike was so appealing to me, and why it’s currently the most popular online FPS, beating out commercial competition. That’s an important aspect: fact-paced action.

While Counterstrike is the crown jewel of online FPS, it has numerous problems, not the least bit of which is the communication aspect. This is, in fact, a problem that most team-oriented games have. Take Counterstrike for example: I can either spend precious moments camping while I type out my messages to my team, or I can fumble for the radio command keys while I’m in hot pursuit of an (or running from a pursuing) enemy. That ain’t good.

Valve Software, in their release of Team Fortress 2, intends on rectifying the problem by integrating a voice communication system into the game, ala Roger Wilco. While companies such as Microsoft have jumped on the bandwagon to try bringing games new communication strategies, none of the solutions thus far presented is perfectly flawless. While bandwidth isn’t as much of an issue, communicating clearly is. For one, background apps are not the best way to handle this, and neither is forcing the user to use headphones, which defeats the purpose of my (and many other’s) expensive speaker systems. I should be able to play my music and sounds as loud as I want (or as loud as Calvin wants on his ridiculously loud, THX-certified speakers), and still be able to communicate with my buddies without broadcasting the battle around me to him. He should, after all, be able to hear my voice above everything else.

A noise-canceling microphone will only be the start. For this technology to become mainstream in the FPS genre, it will require a software component that keeps certain background noises from broadcasting. Additionally, it will need numerous channels for communication (different squads, individual players, etc) to be implemented, and will broadcast audio feedback from the battlefield itself. For instance, when you approach your enemy, and he’s talking into his mic, you’ll be able to hear that.

Improvements in communication aren’t the only strategy builders out there, though. Dedicated roles, like snipers and demolition men, are concepts that will receive more focus in the future. Team Fortress is already taking us there, and its sequel will definitely help focus the industry in that direction. I’m certain that these roles will become even more important when killing is less of a goal than completing mission objectives.

Unreal Tournament’s Assault mod was fantastic, and Counterstrike’s bombing and hostage missions definitely add to gameplay. As server space is increased, mission-oriented games will certainly take precedence over simple shoot-em ups, even if the goals are simple and repetitive like in the aforementioned games. Complex scoring systems will make completing these objectives even more satisfactory, especially if used to the extent as ngworldstats, and shipped alongside games like it was with UT. The key, of course, is to reward players with teamplay, rather than just kills. Imagine how different the Counterstrike community would be if your score was dependant on rescuing hostages, taking a shot for a buddy, or using smoke bombs effectively.

Both scoring and mission objectives will be further developed when consistent worlds emerge. Right now, the FPS genre relies on small servers of maybe 30 or less people, with levels changing ever so often, and gameplay becoming rather redundant. As Everquest grabs the hack’n slash crowd, massive FPS games will take over where small servers were once the norm. While these games would have to be cheap or free to play, a game where you try to keep your character alive (instead of rushing five people with a pistol) will change how we play FPS games, especially if the rewards are great. Character enhancement via skills ala Deus Ex will come into play here, and finding and holding onto unique or modified weapons will be important. Imagine a game like Counterstrike that takes place city-wide, where you can literally walk for miles in any direction, where you have to make money through hits to buy weapons and ammo. That’s a lot different than making sure you have that five thousands dollars to buy an AWP for a couple rounds in CS.

With gaming engines that can support huge landscapes like the revamped Unreal engine, or the engines used by Delta Force or Tribes 2, you have to expect consistent world games to seep into the fray quite soon. Add a few roleplaying elements and NPC’s, and you can easily have dynamic mission goals. Heck, why not go all out and incorporate world building into the engine, with extensible cities and AI? Beats fraggin’ just 12-year olds, and it’d add that beautiful sense of moderation that’ll keep the kiddies in check. Just watch out, ’cause it’ll happen.

Controls? Oh, you bet your ass we’ll be stickin’ with the keyboard and mouse for a while. Sure, Microsoft wants to feed you that bull about how their “weapons system” will make your gaming experience easier, but unless it has as many buttons as a keyboard, or works as smoove as a mouse, that crap won’t catch on. Logitech realized that years ago when their “3D mouse” flopped. Eventually, though, an array of controls will be present on your desktop for the FPS, so when you jump into that airbus, you can drop the mouse and keyboard and grab onto your joystick. After all, flight sims with the mouse are just lame.

A lot of these changes are coming soon, while others will slowly follow. The FPS genre is evolving, though, and for the better. In a few years time, don’t be surprised to see yourself running through a brutal landscape alongside three squads of allies, running flank while your buddies encroach on combat bikes and light tanks. You’ll have to watch your back, not only from the guy chasing you down the corridor, but from the quarter mile landing between you and the extraction site, with enemy snipers, gliders, and jeeps scouring the perimeter. Hopefully, you’ll have invested enough skill points into speed, else you won’t get those bonuses you were hoping for running a successful scouting operation to unveil the enemy numbers to your buddies.

I’m drooling already.

Similar Posts:

Leave a Comment