Are FPS games progressing?

Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/Are FPS games progressing?

I know what your saying, doom 3 does look like you can touch it, but it still doesn't look as real as most other games mostly due to the lack of substance in the lighting. To me it feels like a film noire set in an animation studio. the problem with this kind of primitive shader technology we have now, compared to pre rendered stuff is that the more real something is, the more pronounced flaws are.

Mainly because were looking at things we know. Look at the criticism on TigerZ's realistic old man on another thread. It's a great exercise in realism, but anyone can be a critic because we look at people every day and arfe expert at spotting inacuracies.

As a game I don't like HL much either, but the lighting is far more realistic to doom 3's because it has depth and ambience reflected in shadow areas, rather than inked in black shadows, which for me is more cartoony. I know what your saying though, and despite the subject matter, the latest GF7 shader demo's show what we can expect in the future.

Fear despite being over dark, is a more enjoyable game as the enemy don't have pre defined paths and ovely simple behavioural triggers. I don't like the fact that most of the enemy are clones and all look alike. But it's nice to be chalenged by the AI.

Far Cry was great, right up until the point that the monsters took over being the enemy. After that I lost interest as I'm much more into sneaking around in the open and arranging plans. For me half of the fun is snealing around reconisance, planning actions and escape routes and luring those bad guy mercenaries to carefully laid out traps, controling the situation. If you mixed the best elements of Fear and Far Cry you would have the best FPS game ever.

Other than that, the most enjoyable singleplayer FPS for me was Rid@#!*, allthough once completed I get tired of his attitude the second time around, and don't feel inclined to play it through again.