Do you also hate brainless FPS? Or just brainless games in general?

[smackababy]

I hate brainless threads most of all.

 

[Ika]

is this a total troll thread and is everyone just taking it seriously? seriously guys?

 

[MJinZ]

is this a total troll thread and is everyone just taking it seriously? seriously guys?

So srsly bsns

 

[smackababy]

I also hate people who think they need to make threads on everything they dislike about something.

 

[coolVariable]

Troll much, OP?

 

[aigomorla]

Mindless slaughter has its time and place.

LOLz..

This.

L4D is like an instant bad-mood killer.

Id say prototype is a better example.

 

[simonizor]

This has got to be a troll thread if the OP thinks that COD is any less mindless than the other games listed.

 

[pontifex]

This has got to be a troll thread if the OP thinks that COD is any less mindless than the other games listed.

While I like CoD: MW 2, I hate how people refer to it as just CoD, like it's the only game in the series.

CoD, CoD2, and CoD4 MW were awesome games, with awesome stories and made you really feel like you were there, especially CoD1.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Sad we don't see FPS like this and UT popular anymore.

If you like UT, you can still play it online. There are populated servers for UT99 CTF and organized 5v5 pug matches, and UT 2004 has some populated Onslaught and Invasion RPG servers.

 

[shortylickens]

Yes. I don't like games that rely on mindless action.

This.
Diablo is overrated. For that matter, so is Starcraft. Once you get a pattern memorized (that some 12 year old Korean probably figured out years ago) theres not much thinking any more. I noticed I started doing the same thing with Age of Mythology recently. There seems to be a good system for each race, regardless of map type. If executed properly you can always win. No more thinking. I grow bored.

Thats why I like my wargames. Grid based and such.
Always thinking. Brain is stimulated. I dont fall asleep. Fun times.

 

[nitromullet]

It's always a matter of opinion. I do enjoy some mindless shooting at times, but it depends on the game though. For instance, I really dug Borderlands and Crysis (esp. Warhead), but neither Painkiller nor Torchlight did anything for me. I also enjoyed the last few Infinity Ward made CoD single player campaigns as well as all the Halo campaigns.

That being said, I don't really see how say Crysis is mindless, and CoD MW2 is the antithesis. It pretty much all boils down to point-n-shoot until you can move on to the next level in each game. As a matter of fact, Crysis probably gives you more tools in your arsenal to achieve your objective different ways than MW2. Some ways of approaching enemies in Crysis is more effective then others, figuring out what this is for each encounter is probably the intended way of playing the game.

I died enough times in MW2 that most encounters were pretty much trial and error (get sniped... oh, there's the bad guy). Whereas Crysis actually gives you the tools to survive the encounters the first time through if you pay attention and plan a little. Of course if you play Crysis as a trial and error game like you do MW2 it makes the game pretty easy, but if you actually try to survive it makes the game better and more interesting. I think you are basing your criteria for mindless on whether or not you like the game because there really isn't any other rhyme or reason to your logic.

Truly cerebral games are tough IMO. I've recently been playing through URU:Ages of Myst, and I find some of the puzzles engaging, some too easy, and others are just vexing. The challenge for a developer to make a smart, but not frustrating to a wide audience game is probably fairly difficult. I guess that's why we have different games for different folks.

 

[Terzo]

This reminds me of Armed & Dangerous. Did anyone else play that game? Pretty much a straight forward shooter but I loved the humor and visuals. The shark gun was always fun too.

 

[GaryJohnson]

Play Halo's campaign and tell me it's mindless (plot-wise).

I played it begining to end. It's mindless. I found the whole game to be boring and repetitive. I kept playing it because everyone kept telling me how awesome it was and I kept thinking, "maybe it gets better after this level". But it didn't.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Play Halo's campaign and tell me it's mindless (plot-wise). The plot of Halo is up there with some of the best Sci-Fi in video games. That goes for the original Halo: CE, as well as Halo 1-3 as a whole.

That is, of course, assuming you're talking about games' single player campaigns. I assume that you're not talking about online multiplayer because while I completely agree that Halo's multiplayer is mindless entertainment I can't think of any FPS which DOESN'T have a mindless multiplayer mode.

i thought halo's storyline was good for the most part. some things (like the gravemind) just didn't make sense. it's like "wtf did that come from?" and the ending was ok i suppose.

by far the worst offender in the halo series was "here's a giant hallway to go down....(5 levels later)....now you have to backtrack the way you came."

seriously, that's just bullshit.

 

[darkswordsman17]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*breath*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Halo's plot is completely childish, and is no way innovative or interesting in the science fiction genre.

It's like saying Avatar has one of the best plots of the science fiction genre.

I don't see where he said it was innovative. The appeal of Halo is that its half-homage, there's a lot of references to other sci-fi (the movie Aliens for one). No game has an innovative story that isn't ripped off from other work, but that doesn't mean they can't still be good. I didn't really find the overall story of the Halo games to be that great, but you seem to be looking at them as wholly serious. I view, at least the original game, as sorta like Hot Fuzz, in that it actually has its own serious storyline, but it draws from the genre and pokes fun at it and itself both.

I'm talking specifically about the first game. The latter games, as I explain later I find to be disappointing.

This.
Diablo is overrated. For that matter, so is Starcraft. Once you get a pattern memorized (that some 12 year old Korean probably figured out years ago) theres not much thinking any more. I noticed I started doing the same thing with Age of Mythology recently. There seems to be a good system for each race, regardless of map type. If executed properly you can always win. No more thinking. I grow bored.

Thats why I like my wargames. Grid based and such.
Always thinking. Brain is stimulated. I dont fall asleep. Fun times.

Various games appeal to various aspects of your brain. If you're only playing games to appeal to aspects of strategy, then yeah, games like Diablo and tons of others won't be all that appealing to you.

Based on your posting, I have to wonder why you even bother playing single player campaigns. You've realized games have a limit in that they can't develop AI that evolves with you. In fact, I think the developers have specifically made the game so that you can always win when you figure out the method. You really should only be playing against other players if you want challenge and an opponent that can potentially change strategy. Of course some games aren't very good still, and you'll run into a wide variety of opponents, many that might not be very good, and then others that are considerably better than you, so you're not likely to be facing relatively equal opponents to yourself which can make the game frustrating (not fun to constantly dominate or be dominated).

Lastly, as far as mindless games go, especially FPSes, the funny thing is, they actually do improve your brain. Its actually a good thing that your brain has functions that implement basically free from your critical thought as otherwise we'd be dead as a race a long long time ago if we sat around thinking every single action. In fact, the way some gamers talk about utilizing spatial awareness via audio feedback is similar to how a blind person develops their awareness. So yes, it might be mindless, but don't delude yourself into thinking its brainless.

 

[darkswordsman17]

i thought halo's storyline was good for the most part. some things (like the gravemind) just didn't make sense. it's like "wtf did that come from?" and the ending was ok i suppose.

by far the worst offender in the halo series was "here's a giant hallway to go down....(5 levels later)....now you have to backtrack the way you came."

seriously, that's just bullshit.

Yeah, I hated the Flood and Gravemind. They should have just left it out and focused solely on the Human and Covenant. Halo 2 was a huge letdown in that they built it up like this big last stand, and then it dissolves so quickly, and then next thing you know there's this giant talking plant thing and you're just, uh...

It was better the second play through, but still disappointing. Reach sounds like it will be more of what they were wanting to do with Halo 2, but I'm not sure that I care about the franchise much any more. With each game it lost what appealed to me in the first, and I had no interest at all in ODST.

The back tracking in some areas didn't even bother me too much, but the Library level straight up killed the flow of the game. It had some good moments, but I can see why people say its an overrated game as it had some significant flaws as well, but I personally found it to be appealing overall. The sequels just never quite recaptured things for me personally. Did not like everything turning Shiny in Halo 2, and one of the funnest things in the first game was playing with Warthogs since they were indestructible (the races, and even just running into each other and doing stunts was one of the main things we did in multiplayer).

The music also appealed to me more than in most games, although I felt the third wasn't as good in that aspect. I also am sure I would not have liked the games nearly as much if I hadn't played them mostly co-op.

 

[Dumac]

I don't see where he said it was innovative. The appeal of Halo is that its half-homage, there's a lot of references to other sci-fi (the movie Aliens for one). No game has an innovative story that isn't ripped off from other work, but that doesn't mean they can't still be good. I didn't really find the overall story of the Halo games to be that great, but you seem to be looking at them as wholly serious. I view, at least the original game, as sorta like Hot Fuzz, in that it actually has its own serious storyline, but it draws from the genre and pokes fun at it and itself both.

Well, he said that the Halo series had one of the best sci-fi plots (in video games), but the plot is just terrible.

It isn't a homage; it is just lazy writing. They didn't do references in any clever way. The game doesn't EVER poke fun at itself or the science fiction genre. They just reused old, tired science fiction plot devices and setting.

A plot can't be "up there with some of the best" when it isn't innovative or interesting. Something so derivative as Halo can't be described as a shining example of excellent writing.

And please, don't use the "oh no video games ever have good plots so I judge them on a scale where shit gets an A+" line. That's a silly, and untrue, excuse.

I do agree that the first Halo was the best, just in terms of presentation. The plot and setting still lacked.

 

[LumbergTech]

what games arent mindless? most of them are VERY easy

 

[LumbergTech]

Well, he said that the Halo series had one of the best sci-fi plots (in video games), but the plot is just terrible.

It isn't a homage; it is just lazy writing. They didn't do references in any clever way. The game doesn't EVER poke fun at itself or the science fiction genre. They just reused old, tired science fiction plot devices and setting.

A plot can't be "up there with some of the best" when it isn't innovative or interesting. Something so derivative as Halo can't be described as a shining example of excellent writing.

And please, don't use the "oh no video games ever have good plots so I judge them on a scale where shit gets an A+" line. That's a silly, and untrue, excuse.

I do agree that the first Halo was the best, just in terms of presentation. The plot and setting still lacked.

yep...halo's gameplay is ok, but the plot was absolutely fuckin terrible

 

[AznAnarchy99]

MW2 was the most retarded single player campaign I have ever played.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

Like Doom, Quake, Crysis and other shitty games?

Some games, like Grand Theft Auto, may be worthless pieces of trash played only by trash in our society, however, they are actually semi-intellectual works.

But when games do not even pretend to have that aspect, and they are just brainless mindless POS like many FPSes, that really really draws my ire.

/This message brought to you by What Really Grinds my Gears ®

PS. There are some great FPSes like the Call of Duty series that are antithesis of the topic.

Wow, I was going to say "Like Call of Duty?" And was going to talk up gams like Quake and Crysis. But ok.

Call of Duty. Deep.

(because they're beyond braindead)

 

[Dankk]

Meanwhile, I'm having a great time running planes into buildings and blowing up stuff in Just Cause 2.

I like both kinds of games. But for when you just have 20 minutes to kill and you don't feel like thinking much, there are definitely games for that.

 

[JackSpadesSI]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*breath*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Halo's plot is completely childish, and is no way innovative or interesting in the science fiction genre.

Well, he said that the Halo series had one of the best sci-fi plots (in video games), but the plot is just terrible.

It isn't a homage; it is just lazy writing. They didn't do references in any clever way. The game doesn't EVER poke fun at itself or the science fiction genre. They just reused old, tired science fiction plot devices and setting.

A plot can't be "up there with some of the best" when it isn't innovative or interesting. Something so derivative as Halo can't be described as a shining example of excellent writing.

And please, don't use the "oh no video games ever have good plots so I judge them on a scale where shit gets an A+" line. That's a silly, and untrue, excuse.

I do agree that the first Halo was the best, just in terms of presentation. The plot and setting still lacked.

Dumac, I completely disagree that individual forms of media (and even genres within them) shouldn’t be judged on their own scales. If someone tasked me with making a list of my top five favorite horror movies I could do that. I would describe all five of those movies as “good, for a horror movie”. However, I know that none of those movies would appear on my list of top five OVERALL movies.

I maintain that the overall story arc of Halo 1-3 is up there with some of the best Sci-Fi in video games. The only way to refute that would be to come back with actual counterexamples.

As for the issue of Halo being an homage, that isn’t true in the sense it is being taken here. I dislike darkswordsman17’s comparison to Hot Fuzz. Halo isn’t a spoof or satire. Yes, Halo draws inspiration from other creative works, but that doesn’t mean it should “poke fun” at itself.

I played it begining to end. It's mindless. I found the whole game to be boring and repetitive. I kept playing it because everyone kept telling me how awesome it was and I kept thinking, "maybe it gets better after this level". But it didn't.

You’re confusing plot with gameplay. Halo’s gameplay is roughly that of every other FPS: go kill things and don’t die. I spoke of plot.

i thought halo's storyline was good for the most part. some things (like the gravemind) just didn't make sense. it's like "wtf did that come from?" and the ending was ok i suppose.

by far the worst offender in the halo series was "here's a giant hallway to go down....(5 levels later)....now you have to backtrack the way you came."

+1 that Gravemind actually detracted from the plot of the trilogy. Also +1 about the “backtrack the way you came” issue, but don’t make the same mistake as GaryJohnson of confusing gameplay and plot. I’m not sticking up for Halo’s gamelpay.

Yeah, I hated the Flood and Gravemind […] Halo 2 was a huge letdown […] I had no interest at all in ODST […] The music also appealed to me more than in most games

(Sorry for trimming your quote, but it was very long) I liked the Flood but I didn’t think they needed a speaking role (e.g. Gravemind). The Flood were so central to the overall plot arc that I’m not sure it would even be Halo without them. Yes, Halo 2 was a huge letdown. I also didn’t care for ODST, which is why my post only mentioned the core story arc of Halo 1-3. I’m apprehensive about Reach, too, but I’ll give it a try. Finally, +100 for Halo’s music. Always fantastic!

Off topic with regards to Halo, but needs to be addressed…

This.
Diablo is overrated.

Diablo is mindless, but Diablo is not overrated. Those two words are not interchangeable.

 

[CurseTheSky]

The only non-mindless FPS I can think of in recent times is Half-Life 2. Yes, there are others with a decent story behind them (COD4 comes to mind), but to me mindless vs. non-mindless comes down to whether or not I'm killing things just to try new weapons or get to the end of the level (mindless), or killing things to get somewhere specific, advance the story, see what happens next, save someone from certain doom, that sort of thing.

 

[Anubis]

The only non-mindless FPS I can think of in recent times is Half-Life 2.

Mass Effect