Not too long ago, I took
to Reddit’s Truegaming section to pose a question: what kind of lasting effect
have guns had on video games? I think
it’s a legitimate question, considering how you pretty much can’t have a game
these days without guns. Okay, maybe not
every game has guns (Tokyo Jungle comes
to mind, and is stronger because of it), but there are ENOUGH games full of
guns to give pause. It really doesn’t
say good things about the state of the industry when I read a GameInformer article about Gearbox’s
upcoming game Battleborn, and the
first paragraph talks about how the dev established itself as a FPS ace with Halo: Combat Evolved. And in that very paragraph, it goes on to say
that Gearbox left its comfort zone by making Borderlands…another FPS, only with RPG elements, sort of. And then their new game is -- hold on to
something -- another FPS. Only
different! Somehow.
I’ve
gone on about this before, but it bears repeating: guns are a useful tool
in-universe and out of it, but they can be limiting in the very same
method. Think about it; a character’s
weapon of choice/fighting style says a lot about their personalities, and in a
video game it can decide (and jazz up) the mechanics. Or, to put it a different way, compare a
handful of shooters to a handful of fighting games. There are basic principles that carry over
from, say, Street Fighter to BlazBlue, but the varying characters,
styles, and mechanics make each fighting game a whole different beast. Conversely, playing one shooter gives you
nearly everything you need to succeed in another. There are nuances that set them apart, yes,
but there’s only so much you can do in terms of deviation.
So the question that’s
been on my mind, now more than ever, is simple: what makes a good shooter? And I intend to find out.









