Is the arena FPS genre dead?

Is the arena FPS genre dead?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=sXrOoODYPNE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Overwatch is an arena FPS game :^)

yeah but its also the most casualized game of all time

i was playing quake live 5 mins ago so no

>People bitch about no more arena FPS games
>new one comes out
>everyone refuses to play it purely on the basis that it isn't quake3
It's the same shit as RTS games dying off because it isn't a *craft game or beat 'em ups dying because it isn't SoR / golden axe.

I'd never heard beat 'em up games having this problem. That's interesting. And I think RTS games have it less than arena shooters but it does happen like that sometimes. Though it's spread out across more games than just Starcraft.

Halo 5 returned to it's series arena fps roots, so no There's also the UT4 alpha or whatever

>Arena shooter
>class based

pick one. It's got arena FPS influencs in it's map design and movement but that's about it

RTS has it way better than arena shooters and they "died" off due to MOBAs becoming way more popular and accessible. At least RTS still has a sizable amount of players in games like CoH2 and AoE2HD, as much as I hate the former.

But you're right, arena shooters suffers from people wanting a carbon copy of Quake 3 and refusing to budge from that position when something does come out.

What are some decent new arena shooters?

>implying

quake live
quake champions

The only set definition of an arena shooter is players fighting in an "arena".

Anything beyond that is people's personal idea of what constitutes one. To me an arena shooter is where players are dropped into a symmetrical level, everyone starts with identical weapons and upgrades/weapons are strategically scattered throughout the level.

do people really not know what an arena shooter is anymore? is this place completely taken over by children?

define arena shooter

>new unreal tournament coming out
>IS THE ARENA FPS GENRE DEAD?

yes, yes it is

overwatch is an arena shooter and its better in almost everyway to 90's shooters desu.

class based shooting adds a whole new level of complexety. Old school arena shooters are for retards anyways.

Because it actually takes a lot of skill to be any good at arena shooters. Maybe 5% of an already small playerbase actually wants to get decent, not even good. That's never a good thing for a game that isn't aiming for the niche of a niche.

No it's not. OW is fun but it's a completely different sub-genre of FPS compared to Quake 3 or UT.

>coming out

It's still in alpha, my dude. At least it's free.

>overwatch is an arena shooter

wrong, it's just some casual class based fps for shitters

overwatch is a tf2 clone which is a clone of tfc which is a clone of quake fortress

educate yourself, see:

I'll define what it's not. It's not a game that has zero weapon or power up pickups and lane based map design. And I don't hate OW, you just have to be a complete retard whose out of his league in this conversation if you actually think OW is arena

>quoted the same comment twice

still got that (You) tho

kinda

Beyond the standard 'you shoot things from a first person perspective' and going by a similar method to the Berlin school of defining roguelikes

STRONG INDICATORS
>Weapon, health, and potentially armour/power up pickups exist
>Advanced movement mechanics are present which require skill to execute properly, such as bunnyhopping, rocket jumping, etc.
>Fast paced gameplay in which lot ttk is offset by your ability to evade
>Resource management is a key component of multiplayer
>Can carry several weapons and freely swap between them at any point
>All players spawn with equal equipment loadouts and character abilities in any given typical match

WEAK INDICATORS
>There is no minimap
>There can be no dedicated taking cover mechanics
>Regenerating health is not present unless in the form of a pickup
>Reloading isn't standard for the majority of the weapons
>No secondary class of weaponry is present (e.g. grenades are a distinct weapon you must equip before usage and not bound to a separate firing key)


A game can defy some or even all of the weak indicators and still be an Arena FPS, but if it breaks more than maybe one of the strong indicators then chances are it isn't a true Arena FPS and instead just borrows ideas from the genre.

It was never alive. Counter Strike and Team Fortress were always more popular since they are better games.

>Fast paced gameplay in which lot ttk is offset by your ability to evade
*in which low ttk is offset

Serious Sam would be an area shooter correct?
The only thing not really important in SS is bunnyhopping.
Cause Serious Sam 4 is happening soon™

CS released after the peak of arena fps and only became really popular as they went into decline, and team fortress was literally just a popular quake mod that didn't come close to exceeding Q3 or UT's popularity at any point even until they both died.

Arena FPS was THE multiplayer FPS format for the entirety of the nineties and a solid chunks of the early 00s.

I've never played them so I can't really say, but after a google search it seems to look like they are yeah.

>CS released after the peak of arena fps

That's factually wrong.

heard Reflex is pretty good

CS released after the last two big arena FPS had already come out.

How is that not 'releasing after the peak' ?

What was the first dedicated arena fps? By that I mean a MP only game with no real SP campaign, like Quake 3 for example.

Get your facts rights you fucking underage idiot.

Where the fuck is Engie?

we were the engineers all along user

>What was the first dedicated arena fps? By that I mean a MP only game with no real SP campaign, like Quake 3 for example.

Multiplayer-only games were never a normal thing aside from Q3 and UT.

Not surprising that Half-Life completely eclipsed both games, in both singleplayer and multiplayer.

Turok: Rage Wars I believe. It actually released before Q3 and UT. If there was something earlier than that then I don't remember.

Building a sentry near the spawn

Not really, though...

Halo 5 is suprisingly good on the multiplayer side of things. The single player is garbage, though.

But there's a MP/map editor only free PC port, so

Even starts
Focus on platforming as part of the movement and map design
Weapon and powerups on map

I think this is a bit too strict and focuses too much on insignificant design choices of UT/Quake, but this is a good list otherwise

>Toxikk shoots itself in the foot by forcing Free players to wear a mark of shame and not access the server browser
>UT2014 is dead in the water because Epic refuses to actually develop content of their own for it
>Quake Champions actually has what people want but drowns it in what devs took from Overwatch
>five people know that Reflex Arena exists so they decided they needed cosmetics out the ass

Yeah it's down to the last holdouts on Q3A/Live and UT2004. There's nothing to draw new people in, so it's just a matter of time until the community is dead.

>dead
>when a wildly successful one just came out last year and has over 25 million players
I think you and I have very different definitions of "dead".

>overwatch
>arena shooter
pick one

Too easy. I pick Overwatch since it automatically gives me both.

Overwatch is an objective-based fps, like Battlefield or Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory.

can't have an arean shooter with a class system.

Start up hl2dm, we've been here the whole time

Yes, meanwhile Dark Souls is popular.

Guess which one is said to be the hardest.

Not an argument

Then so are Quake and Unreal Tournament. There's always objectives in every game, whether it's to be the last man standing, get the highest frag score, capture the most flags, control/assault/defend certain locations, and so on.

Clearly you can or else Overwatch wouldn't even qualify as one.

Objective-based refers to things like Team A blowing up a wall to access the next part of the map, which Team B is defending, so Team A can't reach the Bank and steal Gold under a certain amount of time.

OW doesn't qualify as an Arena Shooter for a multitude of reasons, as explained in this post The simple fact that it's based around objectives and every character / class being different for the other with their own loadouts disqualifies it from being this particular sub-genre.

>Weapon, health, and potentially armour/power up pickups exist
Health and armor packs: check.
>Advanced movement mechanics are present which require skill to execute properly, such as bunnyhopping, rocket jumping, etc.
check
>Fast paced gameplay in which lot ttk is offset by your ability to evade
check unless they have a shield, which the vast majority of heroes do not
>Resource management is a key component of multiplayer
check, literally every match is determined by ult economy
>Can carry several weapons and freely swap between them at any point
check, you can swap heroes at any time in your spawn room, and some heroes like Mercy and Torbjorn can swap weapons at will.
>All players spawn with equal equipment loadouts and character abilities in any given typical match
check, any player can choose to spawn as any hero, and no matter which player picks what hero that hero's stats and abilities will be the same as if anyone else picked them.

>There is no minimap
>There can be no dedicated taking cover mechanics
check and check
>Regenerating health is not present unless in the form of a pickup
>Reloading isn't standard for the majority of the weapons
>No secondary class of weaponry is present (e.g. grenades are a distinct weapon you must equip before usage and not bound to a separate firing key)
And here's where Ovewatch falls short. No to all of the above.

Looks like Overwatch easily hits every strong indicator and 2/5 weak indicators. With custom games in the server browser you could alter the rules to hit all of the remaining weak indicators, so if those are dealbreakers for you that's no problem.

Honestly, Overwatch isn't even a good game and i stopped playing it out of boredom several months ago, but anyone saying it's not an arena shooter is fucking delusional.

>these mental gymnastics.

youtube.com/watch?v=sXrOoODYPNE

I wish there were more closed arena ish maps

none of which are arena shooters

Today we're seeing a bit of a pushback against health regeneration and slow moving speed in shooters, if anything it's inviting for a comeback of arena shooters.

The most popular gamemode is 1v1s so even though player count is low, find matches isn't much of a problem

the most popular gamemode was NEVER 1v1 for any quake game and anyone that says this is a liar

My bad, I was talking about reflex

fair enough then

Comic mild spoilers
He's taking care of the Administrator by providing her with Australium

FPS in general is moving away from those awful modern mechanics; slowly but surely.

yeah these are the only two I play anymore. Im game for something new but nothing feels as good as q3 or ut2004. not by a mile

UT4
Quake Live
Halo 5 (just for multiplayer)
Also, old arena games like Q3 still living.

Halo 5 is pretty great(yes its different from previous halos and plays much more like arena shootan now)

Exactly

Was Quake 3 responsible for introducing fucking huge weapon view models?

Does Halo 5 Forge (the Halo 5 for PC) has multiplayer?

But Halo 1, 2 and 3 plays like a arena shooter, isn't?

You forgot the most important thing, Quake Champions has a classic mode with no abilities and shit.

cg_fov 110

console fucking newb.

and no. unreal 1 did that

Considering there's going to be a new Quake, it won't be dead for long

People don't really talk about beat 'em ups. To be absolutely fair, the most recent ones I'm aware of are Castle Crashers, that Scott Pilgrim game, and Mother Russia Bleeds

Is that new Unreal Tournament good?

Ut2k4 refuses to work on my computer nowadays.

>Is the arena FPS genre dead?
fps's have been dead since Autoaim

its also a completely false equivalence

>beat em up game
>any features
ok its a beat em up game the genre literally hasnt moved an inch since like 1994

>fps game
>doesn't have a single map that is a 10/10, quake-level map
DOA. And the games never have 10/10 maps

People who weren't part of quake era don't actually understand how much the maps matter...like for instance the maps are actually the reason overwatch isn't fun, not the overriding game design.

Berlin interpretation i shit though.

It's a waste of time trying to appeal to hardcore niches. It's a bit like the CS 1.6 crowd who will never be happy with a new CS game unless it's a carbon copy. You just leave them alone to wallow in their own misery and make a game that appeals to the casuals and makes shit loads of dollar from gambling elements.

CHOKE POINTS
FUCK HANAMURA

Quake Champions is the one and only FPS that is coming any time soon.

UT4 is dead. It will never leave alpha stage and even if it does no one will care because it's just UT3 with a new coat of paint with same exact issues.

how is it UTIII? It doesnt even have vehicles.

Yes, it was perfected 18 years ago by Quake 3, you can't change anything without making it worse in one way or another and you can't keep releasing the same thing over and over again either, that's why all the recent arena FPS are dead or almost, even the big names like UT.

At least Id Software understood this with Quake Champions. They keep what made the old formula so good but they are doing something "new" with it.

They think they understood it, but didn't.

The audience that buys crates and skins and shit will get tired of this game in

No, Bioshock Infinite came out just a few years ago and got rave reviews.

>Yes, it was perfected 18 years ago by Quake 3, you can't change anything without making it worse in one way or another
Why? It seems unreasonable that a perfect game like that can exist. Not simply flawless where it's mastered everything it tried it's hand at, but actually fucking perfect where you can't make anything better at all.

you are partly right but the main reason why they are dead is becuase most people cant play fps's with a keyboard and mouse so they dont like the gameplay.

>only the actual dm players will be around after very long and that's who should've been catered to
But they did? QC is just Q3 with optional flare added that can be turned off.

>is just q3

reductions like this are meaningless without having played it

i doubt it'll be anywhere near as good as quake3 but i'll give it a shot

>i doubt it'll be anywhere near as good as quake3
Based on what, exactly? Like you just said, "
reductions like this are meaningless without having played it."

>Based on what, exactly

based on being made by people who were not alive or old enough to experience the quake era

there's a difference between a meaningless reduction and an evaluation based on important, known facts

And what are those facts?

holy shit dude people like you are fucking insufferable

kids wanting to do nothing but fucking argue online

All I'm asking is for you to back up your claims.