I want a game thats a cross between Geist and Outrigger and Timesplitters. Arena combat where you play as cats on coasters and can possess bowls of dog food.

SpaceGazelle wrote:

or

Dark Soldier wrote:

Play Blands 2 now. It's incredible. I'll lend you the 360 version for a bit if ya want.

Free to play all weekend on Steam, £10 to buy.

I used to be a bit of a fan when I migrated to the 360 after the Gamecube and just found myself getting insanely bored of them after one year. I like FPS's that don't really feel like the usual twitch affairs, Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress openly enforce team work, rather than just give you the option. This sort of thing I can be doing with. Can't be doing with military based shooters, I enjoyed COD:MW2 but everything after just felt like retrogressive and tired. Even Battlefield 3 lost its edge for me after a few weeks.

I've never really liked the idea of unlocking equipment and abilities either, why punish new players?

Every time I see a new trailer for one I just roll my eyes these days. Even Titanfall which supposedly (to some extent) gave the genre a bit of fresh air didn't appeal.

I'd like to see more of the Doom/Resi4 apporach to design maybe. The whole fun over reality and cohesiveness approach. I think I'd enjoy a bit more slapstick as well, I loved Timesplitters and Metal Arms, local MP setting up a shit load of your own games with AI bots. They all seem to be so fucking serious and 'epic' these days its just kinda stale.

The idea of shooting a man dressed as a duck appeals far more.

that actually looks alright

Dogfingers wrote:

I've never really liked the idea of unlocking equipment and abilities either, why punish new players?

Rewarding continued play isn't punishing new players. CoD4s online unlock progress is a masterclass. The weapon you start with is not worse than any other but new players will want to move from three shot bursts to full auto.

Encouraging you to get 10 kills with this weapon thru that scope while lying down almost guarantees you'll find your style and has the added benefit of spicing up online matched if there's one guy that's trying desperately to get a multi kill by throwing c4.

They should have extended Halo 3's decorative armour upgrades.

Dogfingers wrote:

I dunno, what about that perk where you got to hold 2 weapons,

I can't remember that perk but I do remember having issues with the perks upgrade path in general.

Dogfingers wrote:

I didn't think you liked Halo?

I loved 2 and liked 3. 4 was lols for the butt ache it caused.

Diluted Dante wrote:

IanHamlett wrote:

and has the added benefit of spicing up online matched if there's one guy that's trying desperately to get a multi kill by throwing c4.

Who might not care about losing as long as he gets that multi-kill with C4.

Yep. That is also the downside.

See also mongoose mowdown achievement in H3.

For multiplayer, I'd want a fast paced free-for-all on small maps. If a developer could put its heart and soul into an XBLA throwback arena game (without the standard online teething problems) it would definitely interest me. For single player, I think I'm done, and have been since I gave up on Halo 4's campaign. The genre is a casualty of my decision not to make eyes at everything with stratospheric metacritic ratings.

IanHamlett wrote:

Winning a round feels good but a 10 min round has maybe 30-50 encounters that you can win or lose. When I think of great online moments, the winning screen isn't in there. To answer the op, this generation is going to be about maneuverability.

It doesn't just affect the final screen. It affects the whole balance of the game. I'm talking about the entire duration of the round, not a specific moment. Are you seriously telling me you don't find it frustrating when you find a player on your team who isn't trying to do the objective of the game?

I include in that btw people playing objective who treat it like deathmatch.

For the record though, I find winning and losing to be quite important in games. I'm less fussed if I lose because the other side were just better. If someone wasn't pulling their weight, or was away, that pisses me right off.

AJ wrote:

This popping up made me watch a Shootmania trailer again. Still looks like the most appealing multiplayer shooter about. Might have a go on the demo, see if anyone's actually playing still.

Q3A returns like a motherfucker. Though it ain't the same without Ken Scott's textures:

Diluted Dante wrote:

For the record though, I find winning and losing to be quite important in games. I'm less fussed if I lose because the other side were just better. If someone wasn't pulling their weight, or was away, that pisses me right off.

It can be annoying if you're on a team full of retards or if the other team are using shady tactics but even that can be rewarding. I was playing against a bunch of cunts on a team of clowns once. The cunts had a building locked down and my clowns were trying to make a human pyramid or some shit. I ran into the building and killed six of the eight man team before they took me down.

We got absolutely pasted that round but I didn't feel like I'd lost.