29th December 2005, 1:48 PM
Paco, read my posts again. Not at any time did I say the 360 is doomed or anything like that. I said they need of two things to keep moving forward with th market share, a killer app or strong Japanese support. As weak as the PSX lineup was it had Japanese support from the get go, the same for PS2 (especially). The XBox and 360 are completely missing out on an entire region of Earth, wouldn't you agree that's something to work on?
I'm not even gonna try commenting on the rest of your post, it's pretty blatent fanboy defense and angst. However I will comment to what ABF also said:
Hopefully you'll agree that there are many different types of FPS games, each offering something different, like a smaller catagories inside the main genre.
COD is a FPS. I totally agree. COD uses the FPS genre to create a realistic depiction of WW2. You run with a squad who performs scripted events through the level which is itself a scripted event. In COD you use weapons with realistic recoil and attributes, firing an automatic will mean and unwieldly experience that is best used in spurts (just like real automatics). Combine this with realistic gun play, such as the one shot death with very aggresive AI that tries to hit you even through cracks in the wall and you have an experience that is very simulator-esque and less arcade-like.
As apposed to say Halo, which is all about running and gunning. No matter the recoil of the weapon, shooting, aiming, etc is never a chore that requires any advanced skill. The skill in a game like Halo comes from the strategies implemented in how you score the kill and particular timing - very arcade-like.
In COD, if you played it like a 'normal' FPS with arcade-like gameplay, you would die really quick and/or your squad might suffer. In COD you have to constantly use cover, rely on your squad and enter the mindset of an actual soldier in WW2, taking no risks and attacking when the time is right. In Halo you can run up to a huge group of enemies and take them all down, it's designed to be a shooter just like Galaga is designed to be a shooter: take down the targets.
COD is not designed this way, taking down targets is context sensitive and sometimes isn't even required in particular areas of the game, the main focus in COD is getting your squad from point A to point B and performing mission objectives. I will agree however that in COD there are some missions that are EXTREMELY arcade like, where it's very much a shooter. But these levels are there to break up the gameplay presented in the meat of the game.
You could call it a squad based shooter, or a tactical shooter or maybe 'wartime' shooter, but it is something different than your typical PC or console FPS games where taking down massive amounts of targets is the point of the game.
Metroid Prime recieves the odd 'Action Adventure FPS', I wouldn't call MP a straight FPS because of it's RPG elements (brought from earlier Metroid games) so if you use Halo (which is basically Goldeneye or PD) as the definition of a straight FPS, COD seems to fall outside its definition. Perhaps simulator is the wrong term to use, but I call Gran Turismo a 'racing simulator' simply because of its super realistic handeling of cars. So when COD's trying to be super realistic with its wartime combat it makes sense to me to call it a 'simulator' as well simply because it is much more grounded in reality than straight FPS's and for the fact that 'shooting' is not the primary function of COD (more based on tactics and securing objectives to slowly advance through battlefields).
Hopefully that will clear things up.
I'm not even gonna try commenting on the rest of your post, it's pretty blatent fanboy defense and angst. However I will comment to what ABF also said:
Hopefully you'll agree that there are many different types of FPS games, each offering something different, like a smaller catagories inside the main genre.
COD is a FPS. I totally agree. COD uses the FPS genre to create a realistic depiction of WW2. You run with a squad who performs scripted events through the level which is itself a scripted event. In COD you use weapons with realistic recoil and attributes, firing an automatic will mean and unwieldly experience that is best used in spurts (just like real automatics). Combine this with realistic gun play, such as the one shot death with very aggresive AI that tries to hit you even through cracks in the wall and you have an experience that is very simulator-esque and less arcade-like.
As apposed to say Halo, which is all about running and gunning. No matter the recoil of the weapon, shooting, aiming, etc is never a chore that requires any advanced skill. The skill in a game like Halo comes from the strategies implemented in how you score the kill and particular timing - very arcade-like.
In COD, if you played it like a 'normal' FPS with arcade-like gameplay, you would die really quick and/or your squad might suffer. In COD you have to constantly use cover, rely on your squad and enter the mindset of an actual soldier in WW2, taking no risks and attacking when the time is right. In Halo you can run up to a huge group of enemies and take them all down, it's designed to be a shooter just like Galaga is designed to be a shooter: take down the targets.
COD is not designed this way, taking down targets is context sensitive and sometimes isn't even required in particular areas of the game, the main focus in COD is getting your squad from point A to point B and performing mission objectives. I will agree however that in COD there are some missions that are EXTREMELY arcade like, where it's very much a shooter. But these levels are there to break up the gameplay presented in the meat of the game.
You could call it a squad based shooter, or a tactical shooter or maybe 'wartime' shooter, but it is something different than your typical PC or console FPS games where taking down massive amounts of targets is the point of the game.
Metroid Prime recieves the odd 'Action Adventure FPS', I wouldn't call MP a straight FPS because of it's RPG elements (brought from earlier Metroid games) so if you use Halo (which is basically Goldeneye or PD) as the definition of a straight FPS, COD seems to fall outside its definition. Perhaps simulator is the wrong term to use, but I call Gran Turismo a 'racing simulator' simply because of its super realistic handeling of cars. So when COD's trying to be super realistic with its wartime combat it makes sense to me to call it a 'simulator' as well simply because it is much more grounded in reality than straight FPS's and for the fact that 'shooting' is not the primary function of COD (more based on tactics and securing objectives to slowly advance through battlefields).
Hopefully that will clear things up.