FPS design ~ the evolution

Are we having a chicken or the egg discussion now? I am confused...how does something happen both suddenly and over a period of 10 years.

Haha, don't kid yourself man. Although consoles have been around a long time, they are no doubt most of the sales pie these days, and design decisions are dictated by that.

The problem is hardware interface. We need a more accessible control scheme for FPS games; mouse and keyboard are too difficult to pick-up. The dual analog sticks are slightly better, but I still see beginners really struggle with it. Almost every other game genre is easier to pick-up, I feel like.

Quote from Campaignjunkie

The problem is hardware interface. We need a more accessible control scheme for FPS games; mouse and keyboard are too difficult to pick-up. The dual analog sticks are slightly better, but I still see beginners really struggle with it. Almost every other game genre is easier to pick-up, I feel like.

As far as I'm concerned the kind of control that the Wii and now PlayStation Move allow is exactly what's needed. Microsoft have made a bit of a blunder with the Kinect IMO because it's pretty much limited to casual/party games and is basically just a glorified PlayStation Eye. Conversely, Sony and Nintendo have the best of both worlds: gestures, buttons/sticks, and precision pointing — although Sony's technology is considerably superior and doesn't feel jittery.

Sony are now without a doubt in the best position to enable excellent control in just about any genre, finally bringing to a high-definition console the kind of precision a mouse has. First-person shooters, real-time strategies, and god games can finally breathe. If we don't see those genres start to hit a whole new level during this generation, we sure as hell will during the next one.

Of course Microsoft could flip their fortunes if they bring out a Move-esque controller that uses the Kinect camera, just like the Move uses the PlayStation's camera.

Quote from Patrick_H

Are we having a chicken or the egg discussion now? I am confused...how does something happen both suddenly and over a period of 10 years. Haha, don't kid yourself man. Although consoles have been around a long time, they are no doubt most of the sales pie these days, and design decisions are dictated by that.

To reiterate, it's the shifted demographic that dictates design decisions and, although this has moved many developers to them, blaming it on consoles is just lazy.

There are concessions being made as a result, no doubt. For example it’s reasonable to say there’s less vertical gameplay on a game whose target platform was the 360. But movement speed and non-linearity?

Quote from Taylor

Or perhaps, instead of casual console movement speeds suddenly rearing their heads after over two decades, it's a product of games, across all platforms, becoming more casual orientated and having more of a focus on a expensive, cutscene-heavy, story-driven game structure.

There is a legitimate argument over console controls, specifically analog stick movement, discouraging complex level design. With a mouse looking around and finding different paths is fast and thoughtless compared to panning your view over with the right stick. Playing doom level maps with an analog stick's speed penalty for turning around is really annoying, I've tried it. It encourages smoother flowing, more corridor-esque maps. You just don't really want a 270 degree turn in a console shooter, because the player will get annoyed by taking three seconds just to go around that corner.

Quote from Campaignjunkie

The problem is hardware interface. We need a more accessible control scheme for FPS games; mouse and keyboard are too difficult to pick-up. The dual analog sticks are slightly better, but I still see beginners really struggle with it. Almost every other game genre is easier to pick-up, I feel like.

Mouse is dead simple and completely obvious to anyone who gets ten seconds to figure it out. Keyboard is significantly more of a barrier to entry (so many buttons). I've often been tempted to try and set up a joystick + mouse setup for my PC, but then that would take the effort to dig out my ancient joystick out of storage and hope that somehow I could get it working on a modern OS (or buy a new one but damn that sounds like such a waste of money as a concept).

Annoying how pretty much every single PC game ever that supports gamepads will only support the gamepad alone, or KBM alone, and refuse to let you mix and match. Dual Shock + mouse seems like a pretty good compromise to me.

Fun fact, I didn't get a PC for a while because I clung to my A1200 (and later A1230). As such my first FPS was Gloom and the first time I completed Doom was on the SNES with a D-Pad.

It is nice being able to instantly turn 1080 on a dime, but I see no correlation with it resulting in entirely linear levels. Forcing you down dead ends with no point and having you turn around might be more tedious with slower turn speeds, but it is bad design on both. A level with good flow isn’t going to force you to do this. Bioshock, a game made with consoles in mind, has plenty of hub sections that work fine.

I would play more fps' on a console if they let me use the n64 controller. Best ever.

Quote from Campaignjunkie

The problem is hardware interface. We need a more accessible control scheme for FPS games; mouse and keyboard are too difficult to pick-up. The dual analog sticks are slightly better, but I still see beginners really struggle with it. Almost every other game genre is easier to pick-up, I feel like.

Something like this ? http://www.emotiv.com/

I wasn't blaming it on consoles! I thought my meaning was inferred there. "Consoles" encapsulates the related demographic shift to blame...more developers work on console games because that's where the money is, and therefore they create level designs with that in mind.

Quote from Jetsetlemming

There is a legitimate argument over console controls, specifically analog stick movement, discouraging complex level design. With a mouse looking around and finding different paths is fast and thoughtless compared to panning your view over with the right stick. Playing doom level maps with an analog stick's speed penalty for turning around is really annoying, I've tried it. It encourages smoother flowing, more corridor-esque maps. You just don't really want a 270 degree turn in a console shooter, because the player will get annoyed by taking three seconds just to go around that corner.

Jetslemming, you described exactly the FPS designer's considerations for console FPS.

I work on console FPS games. I can tell from experience that when we interview candidates from PC backgrounds to describe the the differences for developing FPS between PC and console, if they don't answer accordingly then they are no longer considered. I started doing PC level design mods and I was asked the same question for my first job. It's fine to disagree with that philosophy but good luck finding a job. Never mind 270 degree turns, I had to fight to include 90 degree turns in my designs at work.

Quote from Patrick_H

Jetslemming, you described exactly the FPS designer's considerations for console FPS.

I work on console FPS games. I can tell from experience that when we interview candidates from PC backgrounds to describe the the differences for developing FPS between PC and console, if they don't answer accordingly then they are no longer considered. I started doing PC level design mods and I was asked the same question for my first job. It's fine to disagree with that philosophy but good luck finding a job.

I wasn't blaming it on consoles! I thought my meaning was inferred there. Obviously the demographic shift is to blame...they are one and the same.

Cool then, can I have a job at where ever it is you work?

I said there were differences; in fact I supplied one of my own. I disagree with the notion that capped turn speed means all games must devolve into straight lines, citing Bioshock as an counter-example. Luckily I already have a job and can retain my ideal of a world with junctions.

But yes, this was a misinterpetation of your inital post being a "bloody consoles, they come over here and simplify our games" post. Which is wasn't, and I apologise. So let's not get bogged down.

Quote from Taylor

I said there were differences; in fact I supplied one of my own. I disagree with the notion that capped turn speed means all games must devolve into straight lines, citing Bioshock as an counter-example. Luckily I already have a job and can retain my ideal of a world with junctions.But yes, this was a misinterpetation of your inital post being a "bloody consoles, they come over here and simplify our games" post. Which is wasn't, and I apologise. So let's not get bogged down.

I would respond to your Bioshock example by pointing at Bioshock 2, and the second half of Bioshock 1, where both games became significantly more linear and straight forward than previously. Remember that before Bioshock Irrational was a PC exclusive developer and Bioshock likely began its life purely as a PC game. We already know lots of OTHER structural stuff changed in development.

I would also point out that IMO those earlier sandbox-esque levels in Bioshock, up to the level before you get to Ryan, are significantly more fun and entertaining to me.

Edit: Also the very first level of Bioshock, the one the demo's comprised of, was also pretty linear, and also added way late in Bioshock's development title as Irrational realized people were having trouble getting connected to the game world with the previous way the game sort of dropped in players in media res.

So you admit Bioshock does, at least in part, have non-linear sections? And not only are these playable despite supposed limitations with movement speed - that are so set in stone to say otherwise renders you unemployable - they actually are your favourite parts of the game?

I can't really think of many FPS developers that don't have a PC background. It is historically a PC genre and, in my opinion, still best platform to play them. Undoubtedly they have been altered by many factors, as we've discussed, but you’re not going to convince me that the increase in linearity comes from rotation speed. We can cap this whole Bioshock example off with Bioshock Infinite. From what we’ve seen it’s pretty much a straight line, but it's also a rollercoaster of expensive set-pieces, cutscenes and story making the linearity almost mandatory. Which was my original, if badly executed, point.

Edit: Having a linear opening level is usually going to be a good idea. Even in an open-ended game you want a controlled section to teach the player and set the scene. System Shock 2 started the same way, iirc.

Like I said, you can disagree with that point of view all you want. I personally disagree, but the industry at large mostly conforms to it.

Fair enough.