Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Combat in Mirror's Edge is clunky as hell, they took pains to portray Faith's lack of weapon expertise, and even if you try to shoot your way out you can't. And Portal does have lethal violence, the turret shoots at you, for god's sake.
I responded to a specific question with a specific answer.
I guess what I meant was "lethal violence caused by you" but it's rather irrelevant. My point is simply that you don't fight turrets in Portal the same way you fight soldiers in Call of Duty, and that is a very important difference.
I don't think that "an FPS without guns" necessarily refers specifically to Portal. Or at least, not under your argument and point of view.
You fight them like with the gravity gun of Half-Life, which I'd say is pretty much you'd consider an FPS
The specific question called for examples, of which Mirror's Edge and Portal are the only examples. Not that I wouldn't like for there to be other games in that category.
Question, teacher! Where do games where you can shoot things and switch perspectives like Deus Ex and Vampire The Masquerade fall?
The gravity gun is not the reason for Half-Life being considered an FPS.
RPG's?
They fall under the games category.
^They are not RPGs because you switch perspectives. Otherwise, Metal Gear Solid would be the best RPG.
Thats not why they are RPG's but Deus Ex and VTM are RPG's.
I'm aware. My point is that it's a bad answer simply because it's an irrelevant similarity.
Dear pupil, you forgot The Elder Scrolls and the Bethesda Fallouts. I'd say the questions falls into what kind of engine does the game use to render both perspectives.
It's one of the many reasons it's considered an innovative FPS.
> the fuck is a punter?
someone who punts.
First-person perspective is a presentation format, not a genre.
Action is a genre; combat action is a subgenre. Counter-Strike is a combat action game with first-person perspective presentation.
Portal is a puzzle game with first-person perspective presentation.
Elder Scrolls: Arena is a character-centric role-playing videogame with a first-person presentation. I think.
I thought TES and F3/FNV were RPG's too but in the First person.
Er, the Gravity Gun might not be an standard gun but it does operate as one (as in, it shoots projectiles)
make of that what you will, of course.
General comment:
Genre is more about the thought-processes behind the player's interaction with a game, than any particular feature of the game itself.
Portal is technically an FPS. Most FPS games are combat action games, so people have kinda equated "FPS" with "combat action in first person". However, Portal is not about combat and more about environment-manipulating problem-solving, and the player spends more time and energy scratching their head and mentally simulating the results of various paths of action than dodging bullets and making use of cover or trying to aim for headshots or such. In this way it is a puzzle game.
Well, the genre definitions now are. But I feel like that's the wrong way to go about it.
> family guy
Those kids look like they are dead.
Though considering Family Guy's idea of humour they probably are
I figure I actually don't really care that much.
No, one of them's a zombie. I saw it blink.
Anyway...
OK, lemme put it this way, man. If you just came off of playing Portal and you wanted a similar game, would you buy Call of Duty, Bioshock or Halo?
But it doesn't provide any information you wouldn't get from a screenshot.
But what's wrong with having terms for that information?
How would you prefer games to be classified?
The issue is not that there are genres but that the genres are ridiculously broad and thus, they don't allow for proper classification, which leads to misinformation for the average consumer, which in turn leads to possibly unsastified consumers. And even if it didn't lead to the last two, the fact is that it's still a flawed system
First and foremost, determine the genre behind the narrative, whether it is horror, dramatic, adventure, romantic or whatever.
Second of all, have the name indentify the mechanics behind it. Not just something like "This is a first person game where you aim guns", but something that actually explains the approach behind the game.
So under this logic, I'd say Portal should just be nominated as a Puzzle Adventure game.
I would buy Braid. Maybe not Braid, actually, since it's more puzzle than action. But basically, some other action puzzle game.
Yes it does. A screenshot would merely show the player-character holding what appears to be a gun, in first person. A genre description of "action/puzzle" says that the player directly controls the main character and uses that control to get through situations using creative, not-immediately-obvious solutions.
You're evading the whole point of the question, dude.
Correction: actually, it depends on what you liked about Portal.
If you liked the setting, buy Half-Life.
If you liked the puzzle aspect, buy Braid or download n (or some other action puzzler; I'm sure there are 3D action puzzlers).
If you liked the FPS aspect in a futuristic setting, then buy Halo.
I would say something about shooting accuracy and skill, but Portal doesn't really get at that.
@Juan:
Can you give an example? Other than Portal, I mean, because you're calling that a puzzle game and that's what I'd already call it.^^^ Okay, what was your point then?