Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Matrix ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register
The Offical Matrix Groupchat is online! >>CLICK HERE<<

What do you want in a "next gen" Modern Shooter? (Patreon)

Published:
2021-01-21 03:25:59
Imported:
2021-12

Content

Other leakers are starting to say similar things about Battlefield 6 to what MLID has reported in the past: It is indeed a soft reboot with a lot of resources behind it.  In fact, it is being directly compared in significance to how Battlefield 3 revitalized the franchise's popularity.

This got me and Dan thinking....What do you all want in a "next gen" modern shooter?  I have to say that we personally got into COD:MW 2019 recently simply because it has been so long since there was a half decent modern shooter.


What types of "Time to Death" systems (quick like COD, or slower like Halo) do you want?  What weapons?  What level of customization?  What level of teamwork and scale?

Let us know in the comments below, and there is a chance we will get to your thoughts in the next Die Shrink!


https://wccftech.com/battlefield-6-soft-reboot-ps4-xbox-one/

Comments

Anonymous

I miss what seemed like complete environmental destruction and changing the landscape from BF:BC series. It was so unique and amazing experience.

Anonymous

I like the old school type of shooter with longer TtD that is not so much a twitch shooter, but more a thinking mans shooter. Use strategy and the environment to defeat your enemy. I also want to see more games incorporate a VR headset into the visuals of the game, use a controller or mouse and keyboard to control your character, but also use a be headset to look around more naturally and have a much larger FoV

Anonymous

This might fly over most people's heads, and might even sound like a first world problem; but First Person Shooters face a fundamental problem - the direct coupling of viewport to the shooting direction (crosshair, if you want). If you were to track a target perfectly, the target would be unmoving on your screen - only the background would have movement. I've had that occur once for two seconds, after which I was rather disoriented. When you're close to perfect tracking, you even suffer a different symptom, in the form of feeling that your sensitivity is suspiciously low, despite that being an illusion due to the low amount of movement from the well-tracked target. It is also one of the most frame pacing sensitive game genres, so you would kill two birds with one stone, by rendering cubemaps of the game at much more reasonable intervals - then the input handling is wholly independently tied into the projection angle(?) of the cubemap into a human-usable format. By doing these things, you get less insane hardware demands for keeping a consistent level of performance and responsiveness. bear in mind that i don't expect to see something like this unless i make it myself, so i just put that out there again for shits and giggles personally then i have a preference for extremely long times to kill (mudwrestling), but as long as it's not Counterstrike one-tap clownfiestas i am not particularly miffed

Mican Andrews

tarkov is basically open world rpg shooter, were the levels are integrated into one world were you just pick what part of the map say shoreline to engage in combat or search the hospital/scavenge for loot to bring back to your base since you actually have to build your weapons so you are looking for upper receivers bolt carriers mags etc to build you guns. You can choose to fight it out cod style or sneak and build your hideout full of weapons guns items upgrades bitcoin farms it's insane. A full marketplace to buy and sell every component of every weapon to fully customized weapons down to the types of bullets you take into a raid. A full character skills rpg system with quests. Theres more like no enemy/friendly markers make for fun

qhfreddy

Personally my favourite FPS game is still BF3, at least in terms of the weapon handling and damage profiles, and I have yet to play another game that really matches that. However I do need to put an asterisk there that I mainly played BF3 on the city maps in 5v5 and 8v8 competitive environments, I personally dislike air maps (a lot) and any map with more than one vehicle in it (one of my favourites was 8v8 with 1 IFV per team on Grand Bazaar). So to some degree my perception of BF3 is slightly different from what I think was considered the norm. BF4 also had some good infantry centric maps, but was often held back by RPG/grenade spam more than BF3 was. What makes BF3 the best to me? As I mentioned the weapon handling is just one of the best balanced of any game I played while being very satisfying to play. Damage was reasonably low, most fast assault rifles being at least 4 non-headshots to kill, dropping to 6 at range. Accuracy was relatively good and there was also a good amount of skill ceiling with burst and recoil control mechanics. Importantly, the ranges of gunfights in the maps really well matched the performance of a lot of the common ARs, there were a lot of opportunities for relatively long range gun fights, something I think has always been lacking in Call of Duty, especially since CoD4. Warzone sort of has the right map scale but it's not a team vs team map, I think also the player movement is too slow to reward skilled players and there isn't enough skill to recoil control and such. I think the way gunfights played out, with drawn out gunfights, some reward for suppression fire, not too much penalty for emptying several mags into an enemy position, relatively fast healing mechanics, and encouraging people to play in groups was really what made the game fun. Customisation wise I don't think many modern games slip up, I quite like the CoD MW attachment system, but I think also the simpler BF3 system is fine. I do prefer when games fully expose weapon stats and characteristics though, something that is lacking in CoD MW. Teamwork and scale I think I covered mostly previously, I prefer team based games rather than Battle Royale (though BR is fun too), I dislike large air maps, though tank/IFV heavy maps can be interesting for more casual gameplay some BF3 and BF4 maps did this alright, but still often slipped up on infantry vs armour balance, cheese mechanics, and map design. Scale wise I think gunfights should happen mostly between 30 and 300 metres, longer is fine as long as it's not excessively enabled by lenient one-shot kill snipers and a lack of cover (or too luck based), shorter can be fun (like R6 Siege) but needs to be very carefully implemented in terms of map design and other elements.

Anonymous

Who gets to decide the pacing of a next gen shooter anyways. Back in my day(bf3,mw3), battlefield was slow recoil heavy tactical gameplay and cod was arena/arcade shooter speed. Now it just feels like every gun in every game is slow, bounces like a spring, and doesn’t kill fast enough. My next gen shooter is an arena or twitch shooter the likes of quake, unreal tourney or team fortress 2. Bring back the speed in shooter games!

Anonymous

I actually don't see gameplay ways to improve "Next Gen" multi-player multi-platform FPS shooters. Graphics are tapering off for all but the most serious games. Controller input is as good as PC if you train. Bullet physics, good. 5v5 to 64v64 games. Net code is hard but many games have done it well by now. I struggle to see how the genre improves. I likely have blind-spots but I'm not a hater, I have 100+ hours in Siege and it's because I have some friends that play. If I could offer a next gen suggestion it would be match-making. I'd like a AI-backed squad building system for playing with randos that ultimately builds connections and fun. Even without machine learning, you could improve a squad with a *simple* menu at join that asks: Your play style, Willing to teach others, Your knowledge of the map? A seriously improved matchmaking system could bring joy to players and game adoption. Flavor-text: Best multiplayer FPS game ever is OG Day of Defeat

Anonymous

Definitely longer ttk. They need to separate themselves farther from cod, not become more like it. BF3 was definitely a blast and flying choppers was my favorite thing to do for hundreds of hours. After all the nerfs and shit though i fell out of love with the game. They need to dial in the balances asap instead of abrupt changes after people have gotten used to how the game plays. They should have enough experience to get things pretty close at this point.. Offer early access to people to test these things.

Anonymous

An actual coherent story for the SP, and an AI smarter then wet cement.

Anonymous

I like the weapon customization and time period of COD MW, but I have one large problem with the game that needs to be solved in order to make games like COD and Battlefield truly great. Modern Warfare (and especially warzone) suffers from poor developer communication. Patch notes were not correct and did not include all the changes made to the game, and the Integration of Cold War weapons into Warzone was straight up botched. The balance was completely off as each weapon added was either completely overpowered or completely useless, and the attachments did not do what they are described as doing. A foregrip that says it gives you faster melee speed gives you recoil control and a barrel that says it decreases bullet velocity gave you more range and more bullet velocity. I personally have not bought Cold War so I do not know how that turned out. These huge franchises make their publishers more and more money each year and I want to see them have proper after launch support and community feedback.

Vipast

I assume you mean single player and not multiplayer? You didn't reference that in the question.... I think the single player (story) mode.. Needs to start focusing on more coop options. I like the story lines in games but i always enjoy sharing the experiences with teammates even up to 4 people. Even the original doom had a simple coop mode which is all you need sometimes.. The game story mode can still be on rails but allow 2 or more to enjoy the game with adjustable difficulties. I was highly disappointed with the latest Doom and I refused to purchase the game just because it didn't have a coop mode. All first person shooters need more Rock N Stone!

Anonymous

Responsive controls are important, don't care about battle royale or coop, add some maps with more than 200 players on two sides of the conflict from Day 1 (not DLC), should not work on 8th gen consoles or old PCs (let's forget about them), should be only for SSDs and Zen 2 or better CPUs, environmental destruction as good as it can be, to wreck havoc and mayhem on buildings, rocks and foliage, satisfying VR support, must include every category of tanks, airplanes, motorcycles etc. Field Commander which was a role in Battlefield 2 and 2142 could come back and issue orders. Maybe the person with most success points would fit into that role. Taking care of cheaters is critical for fun experience. Cheaters are a big no no in every FPS.

Josh Law (adn)

i want a return to the halo CE approach to gameplay, where youre given a sandbox of unique weapons and your knowledge of the maps, what the weapons do, where they are, and how you work with your team is just as important as your ability to aim. i feel like all games, even the new halos, have devolved into cod style low time to kill super sprinting sniper spam redundancy. edit: also fuck loot boxes

Kiwi Phil

Somthing that can re take the first person RPG space like a fallout or Stalker. But with a very well optimised engine and as every thing gets more similar inovation will be more needed in order to increase enjoyment / increase advancement in the industry,.

Anonymous

To answer the question: My favorite FPS's atm are Squad/Hell Let Loose. Mil sims with arcade quality of life features with a strong focus on Team Work.(also no loot boxes) I really love how you get in a car/truck/chopper and cover vast distances with a few Squad mates that are just part of a bigger stragedy work out by the team. I hoping these expand and bigger bigger environments and and Broader Game play styles. An example might be a Battle front style squad with a planet being a attack by a fleet of ships. 3 zones of combat: Space, Air, Land/Sea all in one map or a few separate maps(where it all one game but different maps load for different battles). all working towards some objectives that affect another part of the game. E.g Anti-orbital artillery on the surface, air corridors for landing ships, Space ships that bomb the planet EtC. Basically more teamwork rewarding games is what I want with cooler vistas. Extra--My BF:BC2 rant On a more main stream note I think Battlefield: Bad Company2 is incredibly over looked. it really the proto BF3 and I actually prefer it to BF3. BC2 had the first multiplayer destructible terrain in BF series and had a interesting division of work from the team work perspective. Assult: Has an ammo box and under barrel grenade launcher. Medic: Has a health box,Defib and a machine gun Engineer: Has a carbine and AT options Recon: Has a sniper and sonar ball. a squad of 4 with all 4 classes was very powerful and it was seamless to work together, but at the same time you can hold a building forever because it will explode. Best of all there was no going prone. This meant snipers could hide behind rocks and be impervious to being shot, it was hard to to camp and as a result the game flowed a lot better. There was some cheesy tactics of course but they at least required team work. It also had a satisfying slow knife. the Knife took a second or 1 to land(think like an axe) so you had to plan it a small bit which made it more satisfying that cod4 IMO.

Vipast

AI is the next improvement really needed in all next gen games. Adaptive skill NPCs, reactions, problem solving, multiplayer BOTs and AI multiplayer matchmaking. Biggest issue with multiplayer, public non competitive, is the match making. The biggest balance issues in games aren't always the weapons, hiding spots, tricks, etc. Matching players who clearly have 1000 hours logged in random servers with a person who logged in for the first time can ruin impression of a game in an instant. Placing newbies into a server mix of bots with adaptive skills until the player improves its skill with in game data collection.. Taking into account stats such as accuracy, reaction times, K/D ratio, movement styles and many other types of other stats. Placing them progressively with other players with similar stats/ skills will make for closer matches and more rewarding gameplay. You will never feel like someone is cheating. This type of extreme statistic matchmaking couple with anti-cheat software will either pit cheaters with cheaters in matches and/ or help find and eliminate cheaters.

Anonymous

Idk if yall tried insurgency sandstorm, its like low ttk-janky mw2019. Honestly i like my modern shooters immersion soaked, no onscreen hud or hit markers. Ttk can be varied, just have everyone need to rely on wits n awareness. Realism mode in MW is now the sole mode in multiplayer i play (or the 2v2 with a friend). Battlefield 1 was a masterpiece in immersion. Audio cues out the wazoo, visual cues for every action, and distinct player models per team. Ttk was longer than an insergency or modern warefare, but still felt a cut above imersion wise

Anonymous

I want them to try and make the characters more realistic. Battlefield V has great gameplay that, in my opinion, gets partly ruined with anachronistic characters. Women weren't fighting as uniformed soldiers on the Western front. The scandal from the cinematic trailer showing a woman with an artificial arm running around shooting people was completely avoidable. If they are going to make a game that takes place in the past (or even the present) the characters should reflect that place and time.

Anonymous

I'd love a shooter that shows restraint. One house mission from Modern Warfare had more engagement than the rest of the game, Imo you should either lean in on that or just go the other way to Halo. I think multiplayer should also be more grounded, developers are afraid to encumber the player, but I think consequence and a kick in the players ass every now and again would get more engagement. And at the very least, have an fun single player that isn't just meant to shuffle people into the multiplayer. There's no way to have fun when there's hack shenanigans. Who are we kidding, everybody wants to be Fortnite. I can't wait until more of these companies chasing that contemptuous model start hemorrhaging cash like with the MMO craze. Games are games, not a platform to facilitate regular commerce for indefinite periods. The first shooter that actually understands that is NextGEN in my book. Expectations are at the bottom of the Mariana trench, can't wait to be disappointed.