I saw someone write this the other day on a video for the trailer. I don't know, maybe that person is too young to realize that Wolfenstein is not "just another first person shooter"...but that it is THE first person shooter. There's never been a bad one, ya know.
Wolfenstein
Game » consists of 9 releases. Released Aug 18, 2009
B.J. Blazkowicz returns, guns blazing, to stop the Nazis from harnessing the power of an alternate dimension known as the Black Sun.
"Just Another First Person Shooter"...
Well, duh, I'm sure you shun games your elders loved too :P
I don't know if I'll get it day 1, but Raven is a solid developer, as long as they're given the freedom, time and budget.
They weren't involved with the last Wolfenstein but they did make the awesome, golden Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast, you know.
RTCW was good but I wouldn't call it THE fps, not until Splash Damage came with Enemy Territory, and that was stand alone and free.
They're not involved here so I'm thinking Raven should just go for an awesome SP experience this time and skip MP until they can focus on it.
I saw someone write this the other day on a video for the trailer. I don't know, maybe that person is too young to realize that Wolfenstein is not "just another first person shooter"...but that it is THE first person shooter. There's never been a bad one, ya know.April Fools post?But does anyone else feel and see this problem? There are so many younger gamers nowadays who know about Call of Duty 4, World at War, Killzone 2, and they know nothing about Quake III Arena or Wolfenstein or Unreal Tournament. Have the FPS games of our generation become "just another first person shooter"?I know I'll be getting this on day one, because it's Wolfenstein, and there is NO way to fuck that up.
"jakob187 said:Absolutely not. April Fool's is stupid.I saw someone write this the other day on a video for the trailer. I don't know, maybe that person is too young to realize that Wolfenstein is not "just another first person shooter"...but that it is THE first person shooter. There's never been a bad one, ya know.April Fools post? "But does anyone else feel and see this problem? There are so many younger gamers nowadays who know about Call of Duty 4, World at War, Killzone 2, and they know nothing about Quake III Arena or Wolfenstein or Unreal Tournament. Have the FPS games of our generation become "just another first person shooter"?I know I'll be getting this on day one, because it's Wolfenstein, and there is NO way to fuck that up.
"Well, duh, I'm sure you shun games your elders loved too :P"Like what? What is there TO shun? I come from the days of Atari 2600 and NES as a kid, pumping quarters into arcade machines. So what do you mean "shun games your elders loved too"? I AM the elders...and I'm 26!!! lol
"I mean, look at Jeff for a minute. He mentioned something about Unreal Tournament III on the PC a couple weeks back on a Bombcast, if I remember correctly...and how the PC community just isn't there. Why? UTIII is a solid game...but is it too "old school"?"Not old school enough. I'm pretty sure UT2k4 has a much larger community than UT3 ever had (right now). The game wasn't console enough for Gears players, and it wasn't the UT that any of the actual PC players and fans wanted. It's solid, sure, but it doesn't hold a halogen lamp to any of the other UT games (besides 2k3).
"jakob187 said:Well, and I understand that the lack of mods on UT3 really hurt it on PC as well...but for fuck's sake, can't a base game be good enough for people to play for ONCE nowadays? I thoroughly enjoyed UT3, but unfortunately, there's nobody online! As for the Gears players...hey, most of the Gears players wouldn't know a real game (or a good game for that matter) if it bit them on the ass. Granted, I liked Gears 2 more than the first one...but nonetheless, Gears is a horrible franchise. Far too slow, far too methodical, far too easy."I mean, look at Jeff for a minute. He mentioned something about Unreal Tournament III on the PC a couple weeks back on a Bombcast, if I remember correctly...and how the PC community just isn't there. Why? UTIII is a solid game...but is it too "old school"?"Not old school enough. I'm pretty sure UT2k4 has a much larger community than UT3 ever had (right now). The game wasn't console enough for Gears players, and it wasn't the UT that any of the actual PC players and fans wanted. It's solid, sure, but it doesn't hold a halogen lamp to any of the other UT games (besides 2k3)."
I don't think it was the lack of mods. One problem with UT2004 was people didn't fucking play mods. So many good ones thanks to the Make Something Unreal Contest, yet none had a consistent fanbase. Red Orchestra was probably the only one you could consider succesful (prior to going stand alone) and it too didn't have too many players. For some reason, people just didn't play mods all that much. Probably because UT2004 offered so much by default, but really, I don't know how they could ignore such aaaaawesome experiences. Oh, Alien Swarm had some fans too. Whatever happened to its Source version. No updates in ages... I used to run a website dedicated to that material and broke it off for my army service hoping to come back and start again but damn, modding isn't what it used to be... People just don't like free fucking games anymore and bitch and whine about every little thing that isn't AAA quality about them. Frackers.
"I don't think it was the lack of mods. One problem with UT2004 was people didn't fucking play mods. So many good ones thanks to the Make Something Unreal Contest, yet none had a consistent fanbase. Red Orchestra was probably the only one you could consider succesful (prior to going stand alone) and it too didn't have too many players. For some reason, people just didn't play mods all that much. Probably because UT2004 offered so much by default, but really, I don't know how they could ignore such aaaaawesome experiences. Oh, Alien Swarm had some fans too. Whatever happened to its Source version. No updates in ages..."I was kind of talking about the underwhelming performance of UT3...but oooookay. PC mods are another argument all on its own...
"I didn't like Return to Castle Wolfenstein very much, I remember looking forward to it and being a little disappointed by the singleplayer. The multiplayer was apparently quite good though. It's a shame though because they had some great developers working on it, but in the end it felt it was a bit uninspired and made me want to play the original game more than anything."I had no disappointment with it, but maybe that's because I knew what to expect from it. However, did you play it on PC or Xbox? If you played it on Xbox, then yeah...that wasn't a great port of the game. It was okay...but that's about it. The PC version, however, was stylin' and profilin'!!!
"I don't think it was the lack of mods. One problem with UT2004 was people didn't fucking play mods. So many good ones thanks to the Make Something Unreal Contest, yet none had a consistent fanbase. Red Orchestra was probably the only one you could consider succesful (prior to going stand alone) and it too didn't have too many players. For some reason, people just didn't play mods all that much. Probably because UT2004 offered so much by default, but really, I don't know how they could ignore such aaaaawesome experiences. Oh, Alien Swarm had some fans too. Whatever happened to its Source version. No updates in ages... I used to run a website dedicated to that material and broke it off for my army service hoping to come back and start again but damn, modding isn't what it used to be... People just don't like free fucking games anymore and bitch and whine about every little thing that isn't AAA quality about them. Frackers."Tons of people played shitloads of UT2004 mods. They just didn't play total conversions very often. Entirely different scene. Although Source mods have blurred that terminology.
"You know what, though? I love the classic games, but most of them have evolved into something not so revolutionary."Dead Space didn't do anything to revolutionize the survival horror genre...but it was still a fan-fucking-tastic game.
Can a game like Wolfenstein or Unreal or Quake compete in the "new FPS" market...especially since consoles have come into play as much as the PC for the genre?"Well, i do believe that if those "new FPS" games introduce something new to the known formula, then they might have a good chance in competing with a game like Wolfenstein for example, but that formula must be something out of the ordinary, something that the consumer would look at and say:"Woah, this looks good".
"jakob187 said:Right, but should someone really throw around the words "just another first person shooter" on a game that will assuredly be awesome (given that the companies behind it rarely fail) just because they don't introduce some crazy new shit to the formula? I mean, this world-shifting thing or whatever it is...it's whatever. I just think that a game should be held on the merit of what it DOES do, and not the fact that "oh, well, it doesn't introduce anything new, so it's just another first person shooter".Can a game like Wolfenstein or Unreal or Quake compete in the "new FPS" market...especially since consoles have come into play as much as the PC for the genre?"Well, i do believe that if those "new FPS" games introduce something new to the known formula, then they might have a good chance in competing with a game like Wolfenstein for example, but that formula must be something out of the ordinary, something that the consumer would look at and say:"Woah, this looks good"."
"ZeroCast said:Totally agree.Some people are stupid enough to say "just another FPS" because they obviously don't know who is behind the said game, it's like judging a book by its cover and saying:"jakob187 said:Right, but should someone really throw around the words "just another first person shooter" on a game that will assuredly be awesome (given that the companies behind it rarely fail) just because they don't introduce some crazy new shit to the formula? I mean, this world-shifting thing or whatever it is...it's whatever. I just think that a game should be held on the merit of what it DOES do, and not the fact that "oh, well, it doesn't introduce anything new, so it's just another first person shooter".Can a game like Wolfenstein or Unreal or Quake compete in the "new FPS" market...especially since consoles have come into play as much as the PC for the genre?"Well, i do believe that if those "new FPS" games introduce something new to the known formula, then they might have a good chance in competing with a game like Wolfenstein for example, but that formula must be something out of the ordinary, something that the consumer would look at and say:"Woah, this looks good"."That's the thing. Saying that Wolfenstein is "just another first person shooter" is putting it in the same class as Haze, TimeShift, Legendary, and all the other flailing FPS games that honestly sucked and WERE "just another first person shooter". We're talking about WOLFENSTEIN, not some run of the mill bullshit!!!Maybe it's just my age showing, but I would rather have excellent gameplay over fucking with a formula that isn't broken. = /"
"Oh this book sucks"
You reply :"Do you even know the author?"
He says:"no"
You:" STFU then".
It just doesn't work that way.
And you wanna know something interesting? Haze sucked even though it was done by the TimeSplitters guys, and look what happened to them? They formed a new company to remove any association with a stupid game like Haze.
People are saying THIS Wolfenstein looks like 'just another first person shooter', I think. Because so far it looks like a sub par FPS, frankly. I liked the original Wolf3d, RTCW was pretty good, and Wolf : ET was great for free. Can a game like THIS compete on consoles against modern FPS games? I don't think so. I'm just basing this on what I've heard and seen, but just because they use the Wolfenstein name, that doesn't mean the game is any good.
" JazzyJeff said:"You know what, though? I love the classic games, but most of them have evolved into something not so revolutionary."Dead Space didn't do anything to revolutionize the survival horror genre...but it was still a fan-fucking-tastic game.Crackdown didn't do anything to revolutionize the open-world genre...but it was still a fan-fucking-tastic game."So I guess this raises the age-old question: does a game HAVE to be revolutionary in order to be worthwhile? Isn't "fucking awesome" enough?
I was not around at the stat of Wolfenstein 3D but i have since played a lot of it (thank you XBLA) and the follow-up, Return to Castle Wolfenstein. I believe this new game will be pretty rad, as all the weapons I have seen are great. I would say that these type of games can still survive in this generation but don't expect it to sell up to the standard that COD4 or Halo 3 has set these past years.
" What they once were doesn't matter, if those games don't change anything except the graphics as the years go by, then yeah they are just another first person shooter game. "What has Call of Duty changed over the years except the graphics and (more recently) the setting?
I'm getting it one day one, but honestly the trailers aren't as impressive as I was hoping for. I remember my brother playing return on PC all the time when I went to his house...good memories lol...I had to settle for the Xbox version.
If it aint broke don't fix it . There is nothing more you can do for the genre its come as fr as its gunna get
The history of the franchise has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the new game. Even if it is Wolfenstein. It is really stupid, however, that people take a look at this game and say that it's "generic" but will look at the COD series and will say "if ain't broke, don't fix it" or whatever the hell. Point is, we just have to wait and see.
" @DOUBLESHOCK said:Setting is huge, that means all new environments, character models, and weapons. Multiplayer has several ranks, unlocks, challenges, and game modes. Gameplay is different now with the quick zoom where you look down the sights to take your shot. COD4 is not just another fps, I don't need to give you proof just look at the amount of people who play it." What they once were doesn't matter, if those games don't change anything except the graphics as the years go by, then yeah they are just another first person shooter game. "What has Call of Duty changed over the years except the graphics and (more recently) the setting? "
Setting is huge, that means all new environments, character models, and weapons.That's one change. And it's just aesthetic for the most part. The only difference between the Russian soldiers and the Middle Eastern soldiers is what they yell when they're getting shot at. Compare that to Painkiller where each level has a distinctly different setting and each chapter has it's own batch of enemies who not only look different, but fight completely differently.
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
Multiplayer has several ranks, unlocks, challenges, and game modes.I was talking about the singleplayer, but I'll concede this point.
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
" Gameplay is different now with the quick zoom where you look down the sights to take your shot.That's been around since the first Call of Duty.
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
COD4 is not just another fps, I don't need to give you proof just look at the amount of people who play it. "
Wii Fit must be the greatest game of all time. It certainly is the best selling.
Wii Fit must be the greatest game of all time. It certainly is the best selling. "Well, apparently soccer moms think it's the best video game fitness toy, nothing to do with being the greatest game, just means the target audience is much easier to sell to and there's really nothing else out there. Anyway, I never said anything about COD4 being the greatest fps of all time either, I just said it stands out. It sells a lot because it's a very well done game with an exp/reward system that was quite new to FPS players.
"Can a game like Wolfenstein or Unreal or Quake compete in the "new FPS" market...especially since consoles have come into play as much as the PC for the genre?"No.
Quake 4 - sold like shit
UT3 - sold even worse than shit
Woldenstein - jury is out. We'll see in a month.
Well, I know I'm going to buy it. Innovation is great and all -- and I say that without sarcasm -- but sometimes there's nothing better than a solid, adrenaline-charged FPS.
" Well, duh, I'm sure you shun games your elders loved too :PI don't know if I'll get it day 1, but Raven is a solid developer, as long as they're given the freedom, time and budget.They weren't involved with the last Wolfenstein but they did make the awesome, golden Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast, you know.RTCW was good but I wouldn't call it THE fps, not until Splash Damage came with Enemy Territory, and that was stand alone and free.They're not involved here so I'm thinking Raven should just go for an awesome SP experience this time and skip MP until they can focus on it. "Agreed, Jedi Knight 2: Outcast was freaking awesome!
I have doubts for it but all the same I hope that it is an amazing game and is received well. I used to play hours upon hours on return to castle wolfenstein multiplayer. I actually forgot it was coming out so soon that I already spent all my money and can't afford it, too bad guess I'll have to wait.
I've been saying this since the day Halo was released on Xbox. But people don't listen, they don't care to listen either. It's a shame that people refuse to acknowledge the fact that Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake, etc were wow-ing people, paving the way for more modern games and most importantly, technologies. Not to mention the strides they took to support mod communities (and in fact, without the mod community for these games, we would not have Heretic, Hexen, and more notably, Half - Life which ran originally on a heavily modified Quake engine, and a ton of other classic and influential games and technologies)
These games were laying down the foundation for what we're enjoying today before Master Chief was even a twinkle in someones eye. Heck, forget twinkle, it's an outright reflection, whoever thought up Master Chiefs design obviously spent a LOT of time playing Doom as a kid. All you need to do in order to prove that is look at the guy, he is the Doom guy, i'm honestly surprised there was no lawsuit.
But hey, to some extent it's about education, and we're all guilty of that to a degree. For example, anyone who thinks Wolfenstein 3D was the first FPS game is completely wrong. There was another ID game (the name of which I forget) before Wolf that used similar Raycasting technology, the tech that would eventually power the Wolf 3D engine. And before that there was Faceball, a first person shooter (I shit you not) for the Atari 2600 and Gameboy. There were also numerous university projects involving technology that utilised a first person viewpoint for gameplay, and one of them was even commercially released.
With that said, I don't want this new generation of FPS gamers to look at the comments I've said and think "oh, well, he's saying we should play Wolfenstein just because it is the granddaddy of FPS games, so we should show it respect like it's the fucking Don or something". Part of me is sad that old school FPS gaming gets less attention than the new stuff today, but I'm saying that people should play Wolfenstein because it will more than likely be a damn good game. Wolfenstein has, in my opinion, never put out a bad game. A bad port, maybe...but a bad game? Never. The fact that FPS vets like Raven are behind this game (remember, these are the guys that made the Hexen franchise, as well as Heretic, and also have Singularity in the works) sell me on the quality without even having a name attached to it!
well thats certainly what i think, im not a big wolfenstein fan so i dont know what the hypes about, am i missing something here?, to me it just looks like another chaotic first person shooter with evil robot Nazis (ok thats original) but apart from that i dont understand, whats unique about it??
" well thats certainly what i think, im not a big wolfenstein fan so i dont know what the hypes about, am i missing something here?, to me it just looks like another chaotic first person shooter with evil robot Nazis (ok thats original) but apart from that i dont understand, whats unique about it?? "Did you need something else other than a solid control scheme? That's the problem with gamers today: if it doesn't have a ton of new bells and whistles on it, they don't think it'll be any good. Nonetheless, there WERE games before Halo and Gears and blah blah blah. So long as it has solid multiplayer and an ass-kicking single player, then it'll be exactly what I want out of Wolfenstein.
Nonetheless, the game does feature this "veil" thing that shifts you between dimensions. That's something new to the series. Personally, as long as I get to shoot some Nazis in the face, I'm cool.
Fill me in with this info.
Are the same guys that made all the other ones makin' this one too? If not, it won't be that great.
" Fill me in with this info. Are the same guys that made all the other ones makin' this one too? If not, it won't be that great. "id Software made Wolfenstein 3D. Gray Matter made Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Splash Damage made Enemy Territory. Raven is making the new one. Each installment was made by different people. Therefore, I don't understand your question.
Raven Software is currently known for making the Marvel Ultimate Alliance and X-Men Legends games, but long ago, their starting roots were in making Heretic and Hexen. These were two games that came out alongside Doom as originators of the FPS genre. They've been in the FPS genre for a while. They are also working on Singularity.
ok so i think that the retro classics like quake and the original wolfenstein were revolutionary at the time of release, but as games evolve and improve, most of the older games can't stand up against the newer games. people should recognize classic games place in gaming history but also know that games evolve.
as for the new wolfenstein, (i loved the original at the time), i personally think that it looks fun but not spectacular.
I have never played a fps before I got my PS2 so my opinion may be skewed. I don't personally believe that games like these (Wolfenstien, Duke Nukem, Serious Sam) can make the transition to modern fps' without destroying what ever audience they have. The settings and characters are lost on people like myself and if the physics and viewpoint (iron sights zoom-in) are not like COD or Battlefield you can pretty much count me out as well.Can a game like Wolfenstein or Unreal or Quake compete in the "new FPS" market...especially since consoles have come into play as much as the PC for the genre?"
But if you do make these changes are you alienating the people who are buying this for a good old shot of nostalgia. Its a difficult line for a developer to tread, so I will be holding of on buying this until I hear some reviews, but I am interested in it .
I might get this game next month when money starts rolling in again. Hopefully I will see good reviews.
I was kind of in an odd age gap for all these old school classics. I was too young to really have an atraction to them when they were big (My first shooter of any type was Goldeneye... But I only had that since I had a 64). But I have given them a go retroactively, such as UT99 and Enemy Territory (thanks to Quake Wars).
But some of them (ie, Wolfenstein) have eluded my attention, so I can't really offer an opinion on them apart from I can recognise the impact they've had and I can respect that. These younger kids who got Halo for their 8th birthday and only have COD on their shelf to compete still annoy me as much as they do all you old-schoolers. For example, I talked to someone once who was under the impression Halo implemented the 'Killing Spree' multiplayer award, and hadn't a clue what I was talking about when I mentioned Unreal/Quake.
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment