[Rant] What's Wrong with Video Games These Days?

We often hear about games being gimmicky in the interest of appearing innovative. There is also a serious problem with nobody buying the truly amazing games out there, like say Eternal Darkness, Psychonauts, or Okami. The games that do sell and the ones that get the most advertising tend to get torn apart by the people who will tell you why the game was terrible, and will also tell you that they know how they could've made it.

So the one of the purposes of this thread is to discuss big name titles that were atrocious, and give details as to how it could have been done better. Perhaps a game was too brief, and focused too much on graphics, or some gimmick element that was supposed to be revolutionary, or maybe a game played itself too much and didn't really allow the player to become immersed in the game.

Apart from that (or rather, entirely close to that) there seems to be a problem with video gaming in general. I'm not the best source on the subject, as i only own a Wii, and don't have the money to buy many games, let along other current generation consoles. I hear lots of people talk about how the general level of quality in the industry has dipped, and that change needs to happen. What are these changes? Is there a blanket statement that covers the greater industry these days? Who's to blame?

A game that i was largely depressed with was Final Fantasy XII. I found myself unable to relate to any of the characters, and it seemed like SquareEnix was under the impression that people played MMO's because they liked the battle system. If they went to a more traditional battle system, and tried some new character archetypes i probably could have enjoyed the game alot more. Unfortunately, that won't happen, as Final Fantasy has become the flagship for RPGs these days, and seeing as how it sells like hotcakes why would anyone want to try and fix it? This brings me to my next observation.

Does gaming just have to be for the Hard Core? As time goes on, more and more companies are trying to cater to a wider audience, creating the casual gamer. I'm ok with that, but as soon as that flood gate is open, it gives developers an excuse to dumb down games to the lowest common denominators, and the games that actually have time and care put into them are too "uninviting" or "complex" for the lay gamer to approach. I guess this boils down to, then, were we better off when we were the social outcasts, with only the people who truly cared about gaming making the games as opposed to the corporate money makers at the top?

So my questions to you. Games you didn't like that you thought could have been better, and what needs to happen to enter a new golden age of gaming?

EDIT: Forgot to categorize the thread. If a mod wants to do that that's fine.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

The problem I personally have with games is that they're too action-oriented, which just bores me terribly for the most part. I love games like Shenmue, Persona 3 and 4 or Planescape: Torment, which are more about having an "adventure" in the game world, and fighting is just a relatively small part of it. And in the case of the former two, the modern setting is also a huge plus for me. I'm disappointed that there aren't more games like that, but I imagine most people don't share my preferences, so what can you do.

I don't think games are generally being "dumbed down'', though. They just have better interfaces and usability.

The next Final Fantasy will have a traditional battle system, by the way.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Personally, I think most games have too much 'flash' and little to no 'substance' in them. Developers say shit like improve lighting and graphical improvements but the story blows (interaction also limited), characters are too shallow and the gameplay does not involve a lot of thinking (Go to point A, kill enemy, etc).

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

You guys need to stop acting like if there's a lot of flash, there can't be substance. If they'd dumbed down FF XII's battle system, they would have had better character development.

No. If they'd had better writers there would have been better character development. You're also using revisionist history. Every system had this happen. There were a handful of quality titles, and then a whole lot of filler. Yes, the SNES had FF IV, FF VI, Chrono Trigger--to stick to the clear RPG bias this thread seems to be taking on--but it also had Paladin's Quest, Dungeon Master, Drakken, Secret of the Stars, Lord of the Rings, and Dragon View.

But its not like games have finished innovating all of a sudden. LBP is a game of near perfection, you listen to racing enthusiasts and there's an endless stream of quality out there, the only thing not happening is they aren't making games exactly the same as they used to. Now, to me, I miss the stories of games like Final Fantasy Tactics, but a lot of people don't. And we just have to accept that video games aren't as niche anymore. It used to be you made a game for the small core of people who would play it, whereas in the current market, you make a game for the masses. That's how it works. So we're not going to get classic Secret of Mana gameplay, because if we did, all of us would buy it, but people who never played SoM would think it was too simplistic. With good reason.

I agree the game industry needs some talented writers infused into it. But can we focus on that instead of saying the other aspects need to grow stale and pointless while we do so?

Without innovations, we don't get gems like LBP, or Ico, or Shadow of the Colossus. Or do we all forget how blown away we were by how good FF VI looked when it first came out?

And by the same token, you can't expect John Q(warky)* Public to appreciate innovative games off the hop, because they're usually very, very niche. So be happy they happened. Be happy you got to enjoy them, but don't be annoyed when the public doesn't run out to buy a game where you play a wolf spirit of the Japanese god of creation where you get to use ink brushes to paint bridges.

Seriously.

*relax, Qwarky. I know you think you know games good. It was a joke.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

High Definition gaming (PS3 or 360) is killing the innovation or evolution of gaming. This generation is basically the exact same as the last but with a shiny coat of paint. Developer costs are huge, and companies aren't willing to innovate or make risky games because there's the chance they won't sell. That's why the games that sell well are getting churned out like a motherbitch. Unfortunately we now have a plethora of games with burly men shooting aliens and shiny racing cars. It's getting stale.

HD gaming has also basically killed console exclusives, instead now opting to bring out the game through as many avenues as they can to try and get the most sales. The only exclusivity is now exclusive features or DLC. Of course there are a few exceptions, but nothing that could greatly influence one console choice over another.

The there's the Wii. Now I am not suggesting the Wii is the saviour of gaming or anything like that, far from it, but it's taking a step in the right direction even though very few games have utilised the thing to its potential. The Wii is still flying off the shelves and this comes with a major drawback, everyone is trying to cash in as qucikly as they can. That's why the Wii's catalogue is plauged by horrible, horrible mini-game collection, Wii Sports rip-offs and second-rate PS3 and 360 ports. These "casual" games are just as bad as the uninspired "hardcore" offerings.

The Wii-more hasn't changed anything drastically either, it's possibly created improved control set-up for already established genres, but people aren't buying it for that. They're still buying the thing to play Wii Sports.

Basically this generation of consoles is shit. Sure there are a few stand-outs, but nothing too mind-blowing. The next generation is going to be the interesting one.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by NovaX

High Definition gaming (PS3 or 360) is killing the innovation or evolution of gaming. This generation is basically the exact same as the last but with a shiny coat of paint. Developer costs are huge, and companies aren't willing to innovate or make risky games because there's the chance they won't sell. That's why the games that sell well are getting churned out like a motherbitch. Unfortunately we now have a plethora of games with burly men shooting aliens and shiny racing cars. It's getting stale.

Yeah, because there wasn't all that on past consoles. It's not like we got a new NHL 0X every year, or a Madden/ESPN/Joe Montana on the regular. It certainly isn't like we got a bunch of zelda clones, or Contra clones. The only things that have changed is capabilities and the rise of the FPS from PC to Console.

Quote:

HD gaming has also basically killed console exclusives, instead now opting to bring out the game through as many avenues as they can to try and get the most sales. The only exclusivity is now exclusive features or DLC. Of course there are a few exceptions, but nothing that could greatly influence one console choice over another.

Okay, now explain to me how more people getting to play a game hurts its abilities. Explain to me how broadening a player base is a bad thing for the industry.

No, no. It's fine. I'll wait.

Quote:

The there's the Wii. Now I am not suggesting the Wii is the saviour of gaming or anything like that, far from it, but it's taking a step in the right direction even though very few games have utilised the thing to its potential. The Wii is still flying off the shelves and this comes with a major drawback, everyone is trying to cash in as qucikly as they can. That's why the Wii's catalogue is plauged by horrible, horrible mini-game collection, Wii Sports rip-offs and second-rate PS3 and 360 ports. These "casual" games are just as bad as the uninspired "hardcore" offerings.

The Wii-more hasn't changed anything drastically either, it's possibly created improved control set-up for already established genres, but people aren't buying it for that. They're still buying the thing to play Wii Sports.

Please explain to me how the wii has been the step forward in gaming. How useless gimmicks and no games whatsoever with any art, story or push to them is fantastic. Please explain how regressing is progression. And while you're at it, please tell me all about how swinging my arm would make for a greater experience, a greater depth, to a game.

Again. I'll wait.

Quote:

Basically this generation of consoles is shit. Sure there are a few stand-outs, but nothing too mind-blowing. The next generation is going to be the interesting one.

Oh yeah. Not like Uncharted basically redefined the action-adventure genre, implementing itself in a pristine way never seen before. It's not like LBP has taken user created content to a new level, incorporated fun like no game in over a decade, and formed a userbase so strong it encompasses people from 4 to 80.

Man, it's not like the 360 has managed to bring players together on a console for online play in a fashion never before seen. It certainly isn't like any of that is true.

Man, not every game is brilliant. Not like on the old consoles, where every game was fucking perfect



What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by NovaX

HD gaming has also basically killed console exclusives, instead now opting to bring out the game through as many avenues as they can to try and get the most sales. The only exclusivity is now exclusive features or DLC. Of course there are a few exceptions, but nothing that could greatly influence one console choice over another.

I can't see how that's a bad thing.

FELIPE NO

Games are dumb because gamers are dumb. HTH

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Okay, now explain to me how more people getting to play a game hurts its abilities. Explain to me how broadening a player base is a bad thing for the industry.

No, no. It's fine. I'll wait.

I think what he's getting at, and sort of what i was getting at, is that as soon as we try to cater to everyone, the industry tries to cater to everyone. This is the standard, cause it makes the most money. The bottom line has ruined the experience because all anyone ever wants anymore is a halo clone.

Quote:

Please explain to me how the wii has been the step forward in gaming. How useless gimmicks and no games whatsoever with any art, story or push to them is fantastic. Please explain how regressing is progression. And while you're at it, please tell me all about how swinging my arm would make for a greater experience, a greater depth, to a game.

Again. I'll wait.

Actually, i agree with what NovaX said. The Wii has lots of potential, but as soon as what i presented above is taken into account, nobody wants to buy a Wii intensive game because that's all they see it as, swinging their arms around, and there's no manly men shooting aliens and driving big cars. The Wii has a lot of potential, i just wish developers would use it. I personally would love more shooters using the motion sensitive controls. I hate having to aim with those shitty analogue sticks.

Quote:

Oh yeah. Not like Uncharted basically redefined the action-adventure genre, implementing itself in a pristine way never seen before. It's not like LBP has taken user created content to a new level, incorporated fun like no game in over a decade, and formed a userbase so strong it encompasses people from 4 to 80.

Man, it's not like the 360 has managed to bring players together on a console for online play in a fashion never before seen. It certainly isn't like any of that is true.

I agree with you here. This generation has done a lot for the industry, but it just seems to me that for every step forward the big names take, they take 1 or 2 steps back. Sure we have online play that is the best in gaming history, but story has taken so many hits lately in the interest of improving graphics, and appealing to the lowest common denominator.

It just seems to me that innovation today means innovation by brute force. Progress is making things faster, and look shinier, and maybe adding some tits. I praise the Wii for at least trying something different. Sure it's cocking things up pretty good, but at least they're trying.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Helloween

I think what he's getting at, and sort of what i was getting at, is that as soon as we try to cater to everyone, the industry tries to cater to everyone. This is the standard, cause it makes the most money. The bottom line has ruined the experience because all anyone ever wants anymore is a halo clone.

Okay. So then why are more games not Halo clones? Sure, there's Saints Row and a handful of others. But how many Mario Clones were there? As many if not more. I get what you're getting at, and what I'm saying is after we say boohoo games don't cater to me, we need to use logic and realise we're the old man on the front porch yelling about how things were better in our day.

Guess what. It wasn't. It's just that we remember the good and not the bad. Selective memory, it's a bitch. You can say certain genres are more pervasive now than they once were, and others are less so, but that's about it. That's not better or worse, that's sales figures and more people wanting a certain type of game.

That's not something wrong with games, that's something wrong with gamers.

Quote:

Actually, i agree with what NovaX said. The Wii has lots of potential, but as soon as what i presented above is taken into account, nobody wants to buy a Wii intensive game because that's all they see it as, swinging their arms around, and there's no manly men shooting aliens and driving big cars. The Wii has a lot of potential, i just wish developers would use it. I personally would love more shooters using the motion sensitive controls. I hate having to aim with those shitty analogue sticks.

So you bitch about halo clones, and then claim the best innovator is motion controls that might make a halo clone better? Again, explain to me how motion controls are great for the industry. Explain how buying games because they make aiming in an FPS more natural would somehow make games have depth, meaning and artistry.

It wouldn't. The wii is just motion controls on a less-powerful system. That's it. It's not a step in the right direction, it's a step sideways. We have light guns. Every system pretty much has had one. Play duck hunt. OMG innovation.

No. It's not about innovation, it's about quality. And the wii lacks it more than any of the next gen systems. If you want to be a classicist about things, great. But don't then muddy your argument with bad examples.

Quote:

I agree with you here. This generation has done a lot for the industry, but it just seems to me that for every step forward the big names take, they take 1 or 2 steps back. Sure we have online play that is the best in gaming history, but story has taken so many hits lately in the interest of improving graphics, and appealing to the lowest common denominator.

It just seems to me that innovation today means innovation by brute force. Progress is making things faster, and look shinier, and maybe adding some tits. I praise the Wii for at least trying something different. Sure it's cocking things up pretty good, but at least they're trying.

But what you're slagging the other guys for, innovating graphics at the cost of others is exactly what the wii does: innovating motion controls at the cost of graphics, story and everything else.

Do you get why your argument is asinine, now? And story has -not- taken a hit. I dare you to give me a dozen titles in the history of gaming that have great story. Not storytelling. A few have done that fairly well. But a great story? If you read more than just pulp fantasy novels, you know gaming has never been a bastion of great literature. I'm not saying modern games have a great story among them, but neither did the classics.

There's been some classic games with stories I've loved. FFT, Kartia, Mark of Kri, and FF VI as examples, but I'd put Uncharted right up there with them for a well implemented storyline. So if you prefer the old games, fine. So do I. But these arguments you've put up are laughable. Just say you're a nostalgia-guy and move on. Just because you like it doesn't mean it has to be perfect.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Not that I agree with most of what NovaX is saying, but I love how Deni is saying Uncharted redefined anything (besides acceptance for mediocre content with a nice coat of paint), while the Wii is suddenly the useless gimmick no games console, how the likes of Super Mario Galaxy, De Blop, BoomBlox, No More Heroes and Smash Bros Brawl magically don't count when talking about well designed/artful/rich gaming experiences.

I agree with most of what Deni said though. I may not care for HD gaming, but it's certainly not killing videogames.

You are the new Cetra, I swear :3

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Qwarky

Not that I agree with most of what NovaX is saying, but I love how Deni is saying Uncharted redefined anything (besides acceptance for mediocre content with a nice coat of paint), while the Wii is suddenly the useless gimmick no games console, how the likes of Super Mario Galaxy, De Blop, BoomBlox, No More Heroes and Smash Bros Brawl magically don't count when talking about well designed/artful/rich gaming experiences.

I agree with most of what Deni said though. I may not care for HD gaming, but it's certainly not killing videogames.

You are the new Cetra, I swear :3

You don't understand a damned lick about storytelling if you don't get why Uncharted is important.

And as for my thinking the wii is terrible, I don't. I like my wii. But I wouldn't call it anymore of a step in the right direction than any of the other consoles. And neither would you. Because you're not an idiot.

Alas, poor Qwarky, you confuse my not agreeing with people about how wii is the most innovative thing ever to mean I don't like any games on the system. How foolishly you overstep yourself. Again. And again. And again.

You're just mad about the John Q(warky) Public joke

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Denicalis

And story has -not- taken a hit. I dare you to give me a dozen titles in the history of gaming that have great story. Not storytelling. A few have done that fairly well. But a great story?

This was almost my thoughts exactly when reading that current gaming has apparently given up the ghost with regards to stories, which is utter bullshit. We're still not at a point where games have great stories (though I'd argue that there's been plenty of good stories in recent game experiences), but there's more professional writers working with the game's industry today than there ever has been, and people are working harder towards those great stories than ever before.

You're truly living in some fantasy land if you think gaming has gone downhill in the recent years. The industry may not have developed how you would have liked, or innovated in the areas you prefer, but that doesn't mean it hasn't moved forward.

As Deni says, there's always been good games and there's always been plenty of bad games (and clones and rip-offs of whatever had done well at the time). Nostalgia and selective memory don't get to rewrite history.

At the end of the day, if old games were that fantastic, go back and start playing them again. I have a funny feeling you might find that most weren't as amazing as you remember, but hey, it won't be this corrupted, sterile HD gaming we have now.

I was speaking idiomatically.

I think I'd like HD gaming if I had the proper setup. Have you tried reading text messages in GTA4 while on a regular TV? It's freakin' brutal. But, anyway, the idea of everything being in HD just for the sake of being in HD seems like a common practice. Kind of like how color TV replaced the old black and white ones.

I'd like to have more games that are graphically appealing while still having an intriguing story. Maybe hire better writing teams. Then again, if a game's fun, the writing sometimes doesn't matter... like, MGS4. More than half of that shit made no sense to me, but it was still a hella fun game to go through. Sure, it'd be nice to have a great, coherent story, but I guess sometimes you have to give up one for the other.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by VitaminZinc

I'd like to have more games that are graphically appealing while still having an intriguing story. Maybe hire better writing teams. Then again, if a game's fun, the writing sometimes doesn't matter... like, MGS4. More than half of that shit made no sense to me, but it was still a hella fun game to go through. Sure, it'd be nice to have a great, coherent story, but I guess sometimes you have to give up one for the other.

The argument of "if the game is fun the story doesn't have to be fucking genius" might hold water better if you didn't for some reason use a series known for being considered interactive movies more than games as your benchmark for good gameplay.

Like, for instance, Saint's Row 2? The story is completely retarded. You start out escaping from an Alcatraz-like prison after being blown up in a boat explosion and emerging from a coma. On a helicopter. And that is probably one of the least retarded stuntss you pull in the game. The actual gameplay is fun, and the wink-wink nudge-nudge attitude the game has towards its own campiness just makes you not care anymore about how impossible what you're doing is. You just want to see what ridiculous lengths it'll go to next.

FELIPE NO

Hey, if we want to talk about great gameplay and no storyline to make a top notch game, we just have to look at Grandia Xtreme. Well...at least I can.

Quote:

It wouldn't. The wii is just motion controls on a less-powerful system. That's it. It's not a step in the right direction, it's a step sideways. We have light guns. Every system pretty much has had one. Play duck hunt. OMG innovation.

But not every system has had a light gun that could do fancy motion tracking and possibly do a rad job of emulating arcade light gun games such as Police 911 and those others which track your entire body. Or, you know, they could make the FPS actually feel like a real shooter instead of me sitting on my couch fiddling with some knobs.

Also, I'll be the first to admit that I feel Wii Tennis has more potential than any other Tennis game I've played. I mean, I can't wait for them to come out with a full-fledged Mario Tennis using controls like Wii Tennis.

It's ok, though. You can just ignore me since I only play games that nobody cares about anymore because they're more than a month old.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Earthworm Jim's revival got canned twice, that's what's wrong with vidya games these days. Entire genres fading away probably hasn't helped, either. If you want a platform game you pretty much have to slog through some licensed bullshit like Spongebob's Hernia Factory.

Oh yeah, don't forget the embarrassing 'hardcore' vs. 'casual' meme! Man, I remember the hardcore term being used for people that sunk unhealthy amounts of time into something until they could break da law. Now you just have to play Call of Duty online every now and then. Casual gamers? Man, fuck them for wanting to play video games. Tetris isn't a video game!

Edit: LANDSTALKER REVIVAL GOT CANNED TOO. >=|

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Infernal Monkey

Oh yeah, don't forget the embarrassing 'hardcore' vs. 'casual' meme! Man, I remember the hardcore term being used for people that sunk unhealthy amounts of time into something until they could break da law. Now you just have to play Call of Duty online every now and then. Casual gamers? Man, fuck them for wanting to play video games. Tetris isn't a video game!

As much as I hate that division, I really think that's just a creation of nerds who hate the idea that someone older than them plays games.

My mom has been playing Call of Duty: World at War over the past couple of weeks, and my dad's been playing Wind Waker. My mom's getting ready to pick up a 360. In recent years my mom's also played all three of the new Metroid games, and in years past she beat Super Metroid in... 1 hour 45 minutes, somewhere around there, with 99% items. Depending on who you ask, my parents, who work 50-hour+ weeks and play video games sparingly, are hardcore gamers simply based on their game choices.

That's a fucking horrible definition. Can't we PLEASE just get back to using hardcore gamer for those people who have 10,000 XP in Halo again? It fits them so much better.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Can't we get back to ignoring idiot distinctions like 'hardcore' or 'casual' games at all. You play games, great. Need a label? Not really. Move along now.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

But then how will we know who are the gamers that we should look down our noses at and be condescending?

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by House Hippo

But then how will we know who are the gamers that we should look down our noses at and be condescending?

they post on gamefaqs.

I was speaking idiomatically.

It's been my observation that gaming became too serious. The rise of the FPS, and realism in general, has lead developers away from creating games that are fanciful flights of imagination. I'm not saying such games don't exist - Okami, Professor Layton, Katamari Damacy are shining examples in their field - but overall, games lack the same whimsy and charm they did even just five or six years ago. No, of course a Tom Clancy game isn't supposed to be charming, but just the same, it feels as if there's a kind of saturation taking place, a gaming algorithm which states that for each title that truly captures the heart and soul of our imaginations, like Metal Gear Solid, we must slog through six, cookie-cutter titles such as Crackdown or Killswitch.

Perhaps it better allows us to appreciate the true milestones of creativity, but so many games have a grim, forboding mood now - and that's not what I personally seek. I like a little whimsy in my gaming; a game can be realistic and still possess an upbeat charm. This is the difference between Burnout Paradise and Gran Turismo: one is meant for having fun, the other is meant for being pretentious without leaving your armchair.

Maybe it's a super-conscious move on the part of developers (and audiences) who believe that as technology becomes more sophisticated, so too must the subject material. For the longest time, gamers were forced to use a lot of imagination to accept a game on its own terms because there was just no way to reflect reality. Seriously? Floating blocks, magic mushrooms, invincibility stars, enemy turtles? We bought into it! Realism has its place - remember how your jaw dropped repeatedly during Resident Evil 4? - but I like the lighthearted stuff too. Dead Rising took the same formula, pushed it over the top, and became a loltastic thrill.

But when you see all these titles - Rainbow Six, Gears of War, Halo 3, Team Fortress, Call of Duty, etc. - and they all seem like the same game with different paintjobs, that's what's wrong. If I want to see that kind of grim depiction of warfare, violence and mankind's bleak outlook upon itself, I'll watch the daily news. Video games are supposed to transport me away from that shit, not reinforce it.

Maybe we just take ourselves too seriously now, maybe we think we've come this far and now we're too good for some of the stuff that provided gaming sustenance over the past years. It's okay for games to be silly. That's part of their charm. I think it's why I prefer Pokemon over Halo: Instead of a gun, I get a giant, fire-breathing dragon. That's pretty cool.

Most amazing jew boots

YouTube Video

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Crash Landon

But when you see all these titles - Rainbow Six, Gears of War, Halo 3, Team Fortress, Call of Duty, etc. - and they all seem like the same game with different paintjobs, that's what's wrong. If I want to see that kind of grim depiction of warfare, violence and mankind's bleak outlook upon itself, I'll watch the daily news. Video games are supposed to transport me away from that shit, not reinforce it.

Maybe we just take ourselves too seriously now, maybe we think we've come this far and now we're too good for some of the stuff that provided gaming sustenance over the past years. It's okay for games to be silly. That's part of their charm. I think it's why I prefer Pokemon over Halo: Instead of a gun, I get a giant, fire-breathing dragon. That's pretty cool.

Threadsniping here because FPS are my life~*

Your comparison seems a bit farfetched there. I don't think I'll look on the news anytime and see mankind's bleak outlook against invading aliens or any Team Fortress-esque wackiness anytime soon. Part of what makes First Person Shooters so much fun to play is part of the ability to run around and shoot things with guns and feel all manly without having to actually you know, put yourself in any real danger. It's a flight of imagination just like any other genre. Come on, rail guns, rocket launchers? Your fire breathing dragon ain't got shit on a Proton Cannon Spartan Laser.

The genre is also greatly varied. For every Halo there's crazy shit like Serious Sam or Duke Nukem, which is far too silly to be considered grim and bleak. Most of them play differently as well, but then I'm just being asinine in that regard since in the end you are at it's most basic, shooting guns at other things.

Also mirroring the sentiments that nothing has really changed. There's tons of Okami's, No More Heroes, Little Big Planets, Patapon's and so on that take games in an interesting and new directions. Hell, even old titles get awesome makeovers, like Kirby did with Canvas Curse. If you aren't seeing enough variation or innovation it's just because you aren't looking hard enough.

*Grammar and shit may be wacky, I blame being up at 5am.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Tails

The genre is also greatly varied. For every Halo there's crazy shit like Serious Sam or Duke Nukem, which is far too silly to be considered grim and bleak. Most of them play differently as well, but then I'm just being asinine in that regard since in the end you are at it's most basic, shooting guns at other things.

Games like Serious Sam and Pain are exceptions to the rule. Most FPSes these days are new Halo clones, WW2 shooters, or a different variant on Tom Clancy's shambling corpse of a tactical franchise.

I can't even think of a recent game that went balls to the wall rockin with your cock out endless stream of bloody gibbing enemies to annihilate heavy metal riff festival.

Additional Spam:
I really fucking hate WW2 shooters by the way. It wasn't even a "good war" but that doesn't stop you idiots from buying Call of Duty: World at War and playing through the same scenarios that were in the first Call of Duty.

Jam it back in, in the dark.