First-Person Shooters: A Growing Sameness

This past week marked the one-year anniversary of the release of Titanfall. To celebrate a successful year, Respawn Entertainment announced that all DLC would be free for the lifespan of the title. And in a move which surprised no one, they shortly followed that announcement by confirming Titanfall 2 is in production. Titanfall was a nice glimpse into what the future would hold for the Xbox One, but in an already diluted marketplace, how badly do we want another vaguely post-apocalyptic futuristic first-person shooter?

Halo: Combat Evolved first debuted around the end of 2001 and with it came a revolution in console gaming. Online play took the gaming world by storm and suddenly, console gaming was relevant again. Bungie and Microsoft knew they had a hit nearly instantly and it wasn't long before others entered the marketplace. In 2003, Infinity Ward would release the first Call of Duty, which would spawn seemingly infinite sequels. 2004 brought Far Cry and Halo's first sequel. The list would grow exponentially over the next few years.

It seems now, developers seek to slightly out-do themselves annually, planning on releasing the sequel before the original is even complete. The generic FPS is now nearly indistinguishable from its opponents and the yearly releases almost seem like expansion to the original. Case in point: the Call of Duty franchise. Advanced Warfare aside, each release since World at War feels like $60 spent on a handful of new maps. Same scorestreaks, same perks, same guns. Same game.

Fast-forward to 2015. Call of Battle: Dutyfield continues to find new purchasers each year. Destiny is celebrating 6 months on the market. Halo has had a recent release. Borderlands has an impending release. Several more are still in production. And now a Titanfall sequel is confirmed. For a game that felt like a gimmick and an example of things to come, I guess the question is this: Does anyone really care?

Don't get me wrong... I'm sure the game has a lot of fans, but Titanfall had an air of a game that was a placeholder until the developers had more time to build better games. Now we have some of those better games (i.e. Destiny) and it feels like a decade since the game's been relevant.

So is Titanfall 2 really necessary? I think not. Respawn's efforts would be better served exploring a new genre or even creating one. For instance, Evolve has the makings of a title that could change the gaming landscape. Even though their idea is in its infancy, it has already acquired a significant following. In Evolve, players can choose to be either a monster trying to avoid death, or as part of a pack of hunters in hot pursuit. The major complaint I have heard is of limited content, however that could be solved with a simple DLC patch. Turtle Rock Studios' Evolve potentially has laid the foundation for a new sub-genre within the FPS genre with their 'squad vs. 1 play.'

Of course, the last thing we need is a dozen clones of any game, even an ambitious effort like Evolve. The point is that we, as gamers, need to reward developers who aren't afraid to take chances on new ideas. If we don't, the gaming community will quickly become jaded with purchasing the same product over and over. If you look closely, you can see the interest already starting to fade, which I think is what we have to thank for Sledgehammer Games' Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. Regardless of how you feel about the implementation of their idea, you have to at least be satisfied that they tried to mix it up. Let's encourage the other studios to do the same.

Brian Zientak
@BZientak