I totally agree that there's way too much focus on combat in a lot of games, especially triple-a releases. I love a good fps but I also appreciate games that manage to be engaging without using violence. Portal, Antichamber, The Stanley Parable, Event[0], and Distance are a few that come to mind.
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2023
22 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
1495 readers
1 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Exactly!!
Why wouldn't games have guns? If you're going to have combat in your game, it's either ranged combat or melee combat. Starfield has both, why wouldn't an open world sci-fi game have guns?
There's no lack of games without guns. Hell, there's no lack of games that don't even have combat now. You just need to find games you enjoy.
I'd argue that Starfield having guns is really at odds with the theme of the game. It turns it from a space exploration game into just another FPS but you have to drive through some space to get to the next mission.
It's not at odds, it's the way you engage with enemies. Starfield at its core is still an RPG, gunplay is just one facet to it. You can choose not to fight enemies and just explore, talk to NPCs, build bases... You could decide to play melee or do different builds like stealth instead of just blasting enemies. It's a choice.
That's like saying Skyrim is just a mindless game about whacking people with swords. Combat is a part of it, but the game isn't about combat, and they've never advertised it as such.
I really disagree on both points. I don't see why I should be exploring the galaxy by mass murdering everything in it.
And Skyrim is definitely 100% about the combat. Every single mechanic serves that purpose.
Have you tried No Man's Sky? I've been having a fun time being a pacifist space explorer cataloging all sorts of random creatures, plants, and rocks. Only a handful of hours of playtime but so far it looks like the combat is optional.
I have. I found that it was a little too repetitive and shallow, but it was fun for a while. Tbh I had hoped that Starfield would aim to be a better version of NMS.
I hope that unlike Fallout 4, Starfield has more encounters you can talk your way out of. It drove me crazy all the named Raiders with cool back stories that you only found out about through terminal entries and handwritten notes. Don't get me wrong, I do want that sort of storytelling too, but it does sort of lend weight to the criticism that it's too gun focused, and I am definitely timid about Starfield ending up the same way.
That may be a possibility, but I worry that it will be a second-class citizen in a game that really, really wants you to shoot stuff.
I mean yeah but some are really fun like titanfall and sims 3.
Ah yes, the Sims 3, a famous shooting game /s. But seriously, are there guns in the sims 3?
Bruh moment. Is that a mod or just normal base game or DLC content?
Custom content. The Sims modding scene is wild.
Sims 3?!?
True, some of my favourite memories in gaming were YOLO-No-Scoping n00bs in The Sims 3.
For what it's worth, OP, I'm with you. Starfield was a massive disappointment, it could've been so cool and then the first proper info we got about it was "look you get to shoot stuff". Like, have some imagination!
🙏
I personally can't really imagine anything else. Sure, there are melee weapons, but controls are hard if you don't want to go the "click a button and deal damage in a small cone in front of the character" route with them. Imagine trying to come up with a control scheme for a flail. You could control it with one of the analog sticks or the mouse, but I don't think that would be very precise.
Or did you mean you want more games that are like "shooting magic orbs out of your hands"? At the end of the day that would still be guns but with a different "skin".
Edit:// To be fair, For Honor tried something else with its melee combat and I think it's a really nice approach, but it doesn't seem to appeal to the masses, sadly.
To be clear, I think shooting orbs and shooting bullets are fundamentally the same thing. And honestly I think you're not the only one who can't imagine anything else, the game industry clearly can't either 😂
I think it's just that the whole concept of shooting/ gunplay really lends itself to the first person viewpoint. Another example is racing games or flight sims. Plus, aiming/ shooting is a great example of easy to pick up, hard to master skills in both games and real life. So I think it's just a natural use of the technology
Isn't having a gun of some sort intrinsic to the name of the genre? First Person Shooter
I don't think op was saying that fps games should get rid of the shooting, but more that they're getting tired of shooter games as a genre
Absolutely agreed!
I'm not a fan of that sort of violent video games, it's made me struggle to find decent alternatives to my Rocket League addiction. I like competitive online games but I don't care for shooters
Would like to see some mad reimagining of the FPS genre, wouldnt be too hard, keep the fps type progression, unlocks and perks and whatnot, replace the guns with an array of cameras, DSLRs/2000s digitals/ polaroids, set it in a mad anime type crazy world or somethin. Then objectives can be nature photography or still lifes or food porn or maybe even PI work like be on a stakeout.No guns all shooting is done through a lens lol. Id play it.
Did you watch the rest of the Xbox Games Showcase though? Those big game showcases are typically full of more interesting projects and this one's no exception.
Granted, there are lots of non-gun games. I guess I mostly take offense to Starfield because it feels so out of place.
I mean, this has always been Bethesda's "thing". They make RPGs. I grew up making incredibly dumb character builds in Oblivion where I'd bounce around rooms dodging fireballs and karate chopping people with a character that looked like Patrick Stewart.
On the other hand, I get it, Bethesda's "strongsuit" has always been exploration, lore, environmental storytelling, just living in a world... and I think Eastshade is a cool take on how to make a game that's just about that.
Maybe you just don’t like fps games. Which is okay.
Personally, the gameplay loop of fps games is really engaging for me and I like it a lot. I also happen to like other systems a lot.
And anyway, hard disagree on the counter strike thing. Even modern counter strike games suffer from the rapidly aging gunplay model of the original counter strike days and I feel that it’s tired and frustrating.
I agree there's still quite a bit of focus, but I've also noticed that FPS's are actually starting to branch out beyond just shoot'em up, bang, bang content; so guns aren't the only focus.
For instance, if you look to the early 2000s, most FPSes were literally just some flavor text with your character behind a targeting reticle shooting everything, but now adays, there's strategy, crafting, narrative, and a bunch of others; there's more variety to the gameplay.
I'd argue that FPS games have been more than that for ages. What about Half Life? Metro? Bioshock?
What do you propose a first person shooter features, if not guns? Non-violent FPS games exist like Splatoon, but those are still guns. Bows are an option, but that's still projectile-based violence.
Maybe we just stop making FPS games if we can't innovate on them?
Could make that argument for every genre though. Racing games will always fundamentally be about making a vehicle get to a finish line before the other ones, etc. Applies outside of games, too. Music, books, film, if you set the bar for innovation that high then we just all stop doing art.
Don't tempt me