An exciting and wordy discussion has been wandering across several of Tap’s forum threads, notably here, and also in various comments on articles. Fully grokking a conversation being held by the Tap community requires a certain ability to master the art of tangential crossover.
ANYWAY, to quickly sum up: some of our debaters did not like Half Life 2, some did, but for variant reasons; everyone likes STALKER but some wanted different things from it; System Shock 2 is very scary but may not have aged well; and something to do with Neocron, plus some other stuff.
Then our xtal asked the yonder question:
Do any of you enjoy a shooter for, say, the action?
This was in the wake of lots of recent discussion (not all in that one forum) about the complexities of modern shooters and what should be there and what shouldn’t and how much standing around without shooting there should be and how much shooting and of what and whether the shooting needs to have a point and whether your character should have feet in a shooter and whether or not you should be expected to eat and something about Neocron and whether Deus Ex: Invisible War was a crime against humanity or just misunderstood and so on.
The forum erupted with NOs and even more discussion and meanness toward Half Life 2 which is unwarranted, blasphemous, and will not be tolerated at this site ever ever again.
But YES! Sort of.
Two games immediately come to mind in which I can say absolutely, unadulteratedly yes, I played for the action: Painkiller and Bulletstorm. I can’t recall the exact line, but Tom Chick once said about Painkiller that sometimes you want and need “nothing more than the simple joy of shooting hideous things.” While the art direction and nihilism were brilliant, I really kept coming back for pure action.
Meanwhile Bulletstorm is so much fun it’s actually scary. I’m near the end now, which makes me sad, but kicking people into cacti never gets old. The amusing dialogue and flamboyant childishness of the game are a huge part of what makes it so great, but from a pure action perspective they absolutely nailed it. It is a raucous, brightly colored lunacy, from the immense set-piece boss battles to the individual combat events. Even meting it out to myself in small nightly doses, which inevitably get longer than intended because I’m having so much fucking fun, Bulletstorm is wild and over the top and just… pure action joy.
And Gears of War. I love Gears, again, for the action. People Can Fly and Epic seem to have their formula down right, and even if they don’t deviate from it, I think they’ll always do okay.
And Crackdown. But that wasn’t really a shooter. And Prototype, probably, but that wasn’t either. There’s not much to either of those games except action.
In shooters particularly, “the action” is a part of any game. Arguably “action” in its traditional definition is the core of shooter gameplay, in a way that it’s not in a turn-based strategy. Meanwhile “gameplay” is always a core part of any game, or at least any great one. The experience of playing the game, at the basest level, is what we look for in our games. Right? We go to the movies for the experience of seeing a movie, and if someone made a movie that was a book it probably wouldn’t be well-received because it isn’t a movie. We look for other things in media too – storyline, art direction, cinematography, directing, challenge. But in a dumbed-down, Captain Obvious way people play games because they want to play games.
Half Life 2 I played for the action and outstanding level design, but I really keep coming back (and laboriously reconstructing the nonsensical plotline) because I care about the characters and find the game world interesting. Moreover, I recognize that the series is a commentary on the Iraq war, which I appreciate as an example of games acting as allegories for other things, an essential component of literature. In my opinion it has literary merit, great production values, and quality immersion as well as good action.
But didn’t Cliff Bleszinski himself, genius designer of Gears and and an important part of Bulletstorm, once say that the future of shooters is RPGs? It is, you know. There is less and less room for “pure” shooters, where all you do is shoot stuff, in the market. Back in the 90s during the DOOM craze that’s all there was, except for System Shock, which failed in part because it wasn’t a pure shooter. Nowadays the so-called “corridor shooter” is a bit of a rarity, and of those that do exist, even ones that are considered truly great – like Platinum’s Vanquish – often fail miserably at retail. Heck, Bulletstorm wouldn’t be doing half as well as it is if it weren’t for the whole “it makes you rape people” chaos, and it’s close to being a perfect pure action shooter.
I am not a terribly picky person about many things in my life. I really don’t care whether I’m drinking Budweiser or some expensive craft brew. And I like a good corridor shooter as much as a good RPG-shooter hybrid – witness my parallel love of Bulletstorm and Fallout: New Vegas. And while both are genuinely great examples of game design, is there that much about either that’s revolutionary? Not really. Frankly, though, I’m not a big fan of the idea that every game needs to be wildly innovative; in fact I think that could lead to a whole lot of Lynchian art house games that I would find very dull. While I’m the first to admit we need studios like Ice-Pick Lodge, I’m also first to insist that if every studio became Ice-Pick Lodge I’d be a very unhappy bunny. You can’t eat foie gras and truffles every day for breakfast, lunch, and dinner without losing appreciation for the fact that they’re rare delicacies. Sometimes you want a bowl of goddamn Cheerios.
From personal experience working as a consultant I can say that many things which sound good on paper don’t execute well. There’s a reason, for example, that they pulled a bunch of mechanics from STALKER: they made the game unbelievably boring. And STALKER is not a game I would say most people “play for the action,” by which I mean there are a lot of slow parts as it is. But good slow. Slowing things down further, especially in the context of a game world, where our perceived affordance is different from that in the real world, could have been dangerous.
I play games because I want to play games, and indeed I often enjoy them more than is entirely reasonable given their overall quality (sometimes for 91 hours, 17 minutes, and 38 seconds). Typically I say I play games for the story and the experience, but more simply I play games to play games. Play just for the action? Very rarely does anyone do anything for only one reason. But it’s definitely a part of it.
Send an email to the author of this post at steerpike@tap-repeatedly.com.
I don’t think anybody should ever eat foie gras because it tastes like dog shit with a splash of donkey piss, never mind the ethical reasons for not doing so. Honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever tasted anything so horrible in my life. Besides, ‘Tap-Repeatedly does not like liver.’
I haven’t played the Bullet Storm demo yet (despite having it downloaded, installed and everything) but Vanquish is one slick piece of work. I remember getting very stressed with the cover system in Gears way back but in Vanquish it’s just so tight and the action is an absolute blast. I’m tempted to say it’s the most fun I’ve had with my clothes on but that would be a lie. The question is: could it sustain my interest? Because that’s where most pure shooters stumble.
I don’t think I’ve actually ever had it. It’s just that I was watching Iron Chef last night and there was foie gras. I have had other kinds of liver though and I don’t like them. If Tap-Repeatedly doesn’t like it, that’s good enough for me.
I thought you’d be all over the eating of strange organs, Gregg, being from the Land of Steak & Kidney Pie. ; )
The hardest thing about pure action is making it hold you. Bulletstorm does it. Painkiller did it. Many, many others try and fail. Either we just got sick of pure shooters during the DOOM craze or we simply expect more from our games now. I’d probably never buy a game purely for the action, but I’ve definitely enjoyed some for only that reason.
Some good points as always, Matt. I’ve just started Bulletstorm (just started as in, I played the introduction level and left it there) but I’m already having a blast with it. The only reason I stopped was because I want to play it with some decent sound quality, and having just bought a nice new pair of Sennheisers, I might jump back in tonight.
In terms of the very most raw thrill of shooting at something, I think I’ve bought games on this basis maybe a handful of times, but I’ve always enjoyed them immensely. I love shooters where the action takes a back seat behind story, character and immersion (BioShock), but I also love big dumb shooters where the idea is just to kill things and enjoy doing it (Bulletstorm, Vanquish). I’m suffering a little genre fatigue from the middle ground – the dumb shooters that try to be more than they are – although I have just bought Killzone 3..
Gregg, I very nearly didn’t buy Vanquish for that exact same reason. I played the demo a couple of times, loved the style and mechanics, but quickly got bored of the demo and questioned if the full game was worth it. Then I spotted the game on Amazon for £16 and dipped my toes in. The result was probably the most pure and enjoyable 6 hours I’ve experienced this gen.
I had foi gras about a year ago at a restaurant called Beast. As you might imagine, they are into their meat. It was terrible. It tasted like lard to me. I almost spit it out but I was with a cute friend and hacking up a mouthful of ground up goose paste into my napkin didn’t seem like it would set the right tone. Everyone else was raving about it though so apparently it was delicious and I didn’t get it.
Okay, I guess I’m going to have to try Bulletstorm. I’m in the mood for a big stupid game. And pizza.
Oh! I can see Vanquish keeping me entertained for its duration, especially with the challenge modes as an added sweetener. I’ll be picking it up when I get my pile of games down a bit.
I’ve just finished the Bulletstorm demo and can’t say I was that fond of it. It looks great and the voice acting is bang-on. The skillpoints are a nice way of adding some replayability to each ‘echo’ but I’ve no real desire to try and increase them substantially. The crouching felt really clumsy on the left analogue stick and for some reason the weapon switching had gone mad. The controls page said that triangle switched weapons but sometimes it just wouldn’t work unless I pressed up on the the d-pad which incidentally isn’t listed in the controls. Very strange. I think this is definitely one to play on the PC though. I’d expect the finesse of a mouse and keyboard to help rack up those skillpoints much more easily.
The Painkiller demo was good fun for a while but my interest started to flag after the first couple of levels. Having said this I enjoyed what I played of Doom 3 and F.E.A.R. Perhaps it’s the added horror elements that made those two more interesting, I’m not sure. It seems I’m pretty damn fussy with action games though.
I played the Bulletstorm demo last night. It was surly, dumb, and fucking awesomely fun. I’m buying it today immediately after I leave this building where I earn monies etc.
Oh, and thanks for defending HL2, St33rp1k3. I actually haven’t stopped by the bordello to see anyone’s response to my semi-snarky question 🙂
Honestly I don’t *get* the hatred of that game. I want to fight back and claw some of your throats out … but I prefer all-around civility, so I shan’t be cussing at you all like a crazy person. I just remember how much excitement HL2 delivered for me personally and I don’t really care to venture back in my brain to remember flaws that to me weren’t there.
My intention is not to goad any of you folk, but is it fair of me to ask: has Half-Life 2 become some cultural artifact that really wasn’t so bad, but people willingly try to remember it in such a way? Perhaps to validate their own sense of higher learnedness in the time since passed?
A good example of what I mean would be, let’s say, Nirvana’s Nevermind. Fawned over so much over time that some people hate it now just in spite of that. It’s like, probably the most hated album ever. Which is just stupid of course, because the most hated album ever should be anything ever made by the insipid clowns known as Rush.
*Ahem* Backlash, I suppose. I guess I’m saying that even though it may not be the best thing since sliced bread, it didn’t really ask for all that adoration either. You can fault people for over-hyping or overrating something, but can you fault the object itself?
And so… Half-Life 2. Do some of you dislike it because of outfits like PC Gamer, who foolishly and selfishly called it “the best game of all-time,” as if such brawny statements will opinion into fact. Is it because of stuff like that?
I just need to know if you’re hating on this game I love because you’re down with the backlash … or do you genuinely believe it’s crap? I NEED TO KNOW, just like Matt Damon NEEDED TO KNOW if Sarah Palin really believed dinosaurs existed 4,000 years ago. Hahahahaha.
If it’s the latter I have to cry. And if it’s the former I have to hurt you. Just with words, though. Not like, garden tools.
It’s interesting, my love of Half Life 2 has grown since I played it originally. I reviewed it back then, and was pretty complimentary, but I had fundamental complaints that have since withered a bit in my mind – chiefly that the story is weird and doesn’t make any sense. As an experience it has only improved for me.
I’m glad I’m not all alone!
Oh man, so much to comment on. Loved!!! Bulletstorm (on the PC.) Played it through twice, on normal, then hard difficulty. Looking forward to playing it again in a few months.
Couldn’t get more than 20 minutes into Pain Killer however. It’s slow, repetitive, and boring. How many times can you kill the same damned monsters coming in different colors in the same damned environment without being bored to shit?
I think the two were very different games. Bulletstorm is fun and exciting and dynamic, and has a pretty good storyline and great voice acting. Pain Killer could be mistaken for a bottle of aspirin.
As for HL2, and the hate people sometimes lob towards it, I think it’s the same thing we see with FF7. These were games that received so much praise and were loved by so many, that trolls on the internet feel they have to shit-talk them now to, I don’t know, prove their manliness or something.
I mean, there was a reason so many people shit themselves with glee over these games, and it’s because they took videogames to a new level, and were really really really fucking fun! Maybe they don’t age so well (and that’s a huge maybe,) but try finding games like ’em before they came out and you won’t come up with too many options.
I never saw an Iraq war allegory in HL2 though. I’d love to hear your thoughts on that Steerpike.
Finally, Nirvana’s Nevermind will ALWAYS be a good album, along with everything else by Nirvana. Anyone who wants to hate can go listen to Oasis (or Rush)
Fucktards.
Armand’s pitch-perfect Bulletstorm review, BTW: here.
We must have had totally different Painkiller experiences. They NEVER repeated monsters; all were original from level to level, and the craziness of some combat just thrilled me. Plus the art direction. Oh god, the final level… when you finally get to Hell and see their depiction, it’s… it’s something. That 60 seconds alone where you’re trying to figure out what you’re looking at, then it all clunks together and you SEE it and realize that this is exactly what Hell would be like, that’s worth enduring any displeasure with the game.
As to HL2 and Iraq, it’s a reverse-insurgency scenario. Nation (world) overwhelmed by vastly superior military force, turning to terrorism as a way to assert re-independence. Torture of innocents; abductions in the night; prisons turned into nightmare hellchambers, technology vs. desperation.
Admittedly, I don’t know if they meant it that way. I just always saw it.
I don’t think I could be sustained by a purebred shooter these days. I need something else to go along with it, otherwise I worry it’ll be too repetitive.
That said, I’ve lined up the Bulletstorm demo for download on my PS3, so I’ll check it out soon and see what all the hoo-ha is about.
For what it’s worth, the demo doesn’t do justice to the game. And I agree with Gregg that the left-stick-click to crouch was very clumsy on the PS3.
Here’s a test video of me playing! It may help clarify the madness in a way the demo doesn’t.
Painkiller: delightful then, delightful now.
I’ll go far enough out on the thin limb to risk falling (or being pushed) to my death by claiming HL2 isn’t really a shooter. It’s adventure game cum physics showcase. Use floating barrels to raise the ramp!
Xtal, it’s not that HL2 is a bad game. It’s a very good game but when it was new my interest flagged after the rooftop/tenement chase. A recent replay of that beloved section was not near as tense as remembered. Not a slight–I think. It may be a great piece of design which is forgiving but still tense. I need to recruit fresh eyes and put my eyes on ’em as it’s played.
About Pain Killer, I meant just in the first 20 minutes. All I fought were skeletons and little old ladies, with one gun I never had to reload, all in the same cemetery setting, room after room after room…
I think that’s sort of the point of the game (right?) but it just got dull way too quick. I keep wanting to give it another try just based on your praise for it, but so hard to get through the beginning.
“Has Half-Life 2 become some cultural artifact that really wasn’t so bad, but people willingly try to remember it in such a way? Perhaps to validate their own sense of higher learnedness in the time since passed?”
Just to clarify: I’ve never hated Half-Life 2 or even thought it was bad (they’re words I reserve for GTA IV), I just didn’t get swept up by the experience in the same way that everybody else apparently did. I played it on release so it’s not like my less than stellar reaction to it was a product of its revered cultural status or anything — I was looking forward to HL2 in the same way as everybody else. When the rest of the world seemed to be falling over themselves to praise it I was left thinking ‘why the hell didn’t I enjoy this as much?’.
I loved the visual design; I loved the sound design; the mysterious story and the way it was delivered was compelling; the characters, their motions and voice acting were unparalleled (and in certain respects, still are); the atmosphere Valve created with all these things was palpable but it frequently boiled down to shooting the same Combine foot soldiers over and over again in pretty much the same ways. If it wasn’t irritating man hacks it was these walking bullet proof vests that seemed to exhibit very little of the intelligence that I seem to remember the marines having in the original Half-Life. HL was probably the reason why I felt underwhelmed because its weapons were fresh and fun, the enemies were varied and interesting, and from what I remember there were areas that were non-linear. The pacing too was perfect until reaching Xen.
Forgetting about the vehicle sections and introduction of physics (the two additions that made the game) Half-Life 2 felt much more conservative as a shooter in keeping with the serious tone of the game and I think the gameplay suffered somewhat as a result. I think I just expected more from the bare bones shooting aspect of it; an aspect which makes up most of the experience. I think that’s the crux of it for me. But I still don’t hate it or think it’s bad. I feel like playing them both again to see if I’m talking out my ass.
Oh and Armand’s review is excellent. I rescind my words on Bulletstorm and await the funds to buy a new PC capable of running it. It’s nice to know that skillpoints can be spent on upgrades, ammo etc. instead of just being a way to take part in a global dick-swinging contest.
Bulletstorm is a grand ol’ time. And not to my surprise, it’s nothing like what it was advertised to be (juvenile toilet humour). Although to Fox News’ credit, I’ve already raped two of my close friends and maimed one co-worker. Dastardly!
Seriously though, I’m having a total blast with Bulletstorm, and it’s not a dumb game. It’s sharp, actually. Very much so. This game, like Serious Sam was a send up of Doom, is a send up of the Halos, Killzones and Gears of Wars of today.
All great games, but ridiculous ones quite often. Sometimes it takes an even more ridiculous great game to admire both the sword and pen.
[Disclaimer to Fox News in case they read Tap-Repeatedly: I have not raped or maimed anyone in the wake of my Bulletstorm experience. Sigh.]
I forgot to mention: Jarrod! Are we PSN friends? Can we be! Please oh please!
My PSN ID: xtal84
Great review, Armand.
I’m so in love with Bulletstorm. I subconsciously play it with a stupid grin on my face. It’s just so much fun to play. I’ve just got to the bit where you first meet the female character. The ensuing dialogue about killing dicks made me laugh out loud. Not sure what that says about my sense of humour!
“Wait, what? You’ll kill my… dick? What does that mean?”
A lot of the dialogue is priceless. Once you realize it’s so intentionally written that way, like Max Payne was written that way.
I laughed out loud too, Mat. A good line, but the delivery was pitch perfect, turning it into a great line.
@ xtal – I’ll add you when I’m online next (sharing an internet cable at the moment :S )… if you beat me to it, I’m ‘WinterGod’.