Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Nintendo 64 Forever. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
N64 fps
Topic Started: Sep 20 2017, 04:19 AM (584 Views)
mikezelot
Member Avatar
Star Wolfs Worst Nightmare
I have a theory on n64 fps games I wanted to discuss with you guys. It seems to me that the fps genre split in two during the time of the n64. One branch would start with golden eye then perfect dark and past the n64 with the timesplitter games. The other branch would be doom to duke nukem to Turok then past the n64 to the call of duty games. I can't put my finger on what defines each branch but I feel like there is something there.

Thoughts?
Posted Image N64 forever starfox 64 champion
"Im an elephant" - Conker
Both the n64 and the ps4 have 64 bit processors. Now I'm not saying the 64 could run crysis at 60 fps but I'm not saying it couldn't.
115 games
2 consoles
6 controllers
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ItalianBaptist
Member Avatar
Senior Member
It's kinda hard to group Doom and Duke Nukem in with Turok as they were already established series way before the N64 came out. I do think you're on to something with comparing and contrasting the Goldeneye "series" (including Perfect Dark in this) and the Turok series. Both original games were major releases early in the N64's lifespan and paved the way for the genre's future at the very least on the console.

The questions I would ask are:
What were the primary differences between Goldeneye and Turok at the time?

How did each of those games further develop those differences to stand out on the N64?
(Or did they at all? Did they become more similar over time as each perhaps borrowed ideas from the other?)

What's the connection between these older games and the newer games you're suggesting add another bud to the branch?
It must be exciting to never have played a Zelda game before - No64DD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vaettur
Member Avatar
Established Member
Mmm... I agree with ItalianBaptist when it comes to Duke Nukem and Doom. Both were quite influential for the FPS genre (understatement), but were already aged at the time of the N64.

Aside from the control-scheme i don't think there is much of a "split" between the two.

Sure, Turok has much more of a "Quake" feeling, but Goldeneye/PD has non-linear, mission-driven gameplay, a feature very important in shooters nowadays (like CoD).
It was a natural evolution in an (at the time)upcoming genre, and all had their influence on the genre in general.


Perhaps the only "split" that I can think of is the A-to-B shoot everything in your way type of game (doom/duke) and a more story/mission driven shooter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ItalianBaptist
Member Avatar
Senior Member
Idk if it's a matter of age, it's just that neither of those games are primarily N64 games. The 2 main ones to compare would be Goldeneye and Turok and their respective sequels.

I never got the chance to own either one but when I played them at friends' houses I remembered the controls being different, but I also have heard that that's not as big of an issue because both had multiple control schemes. Would the primary for both be "move with the stick, aim with the c buttons"? Because that model is still technically in use today, just with a right analog stick.
It must be exciting to never have played a Zelda game before - No64DD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vaettur
Member Avatar
Established Member
ItalianBaptist
Sep 20 2017, 12:26 PM
Would the primary for both be "move with the stick, aim with the c buttons"? Because that model is still technically in use today, just with a right analog stick.
Actually, it's aiming with the stick and move/strave with the c-buttons, quite reversed from today's control scheme!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The White Falcon
Member Avatar
Senior Member
Quote:
 
The other branch would be doom to duke nukem to Turok then past the n64 to the call of duty games


There's a big FPS elephant in the room you seem to be forgetting.

Posted Image

;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sanni
Member Avatar
Senior Member
To me it feels more like a linear evolution starting from Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Turok, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Timesplitters, Halo 1, Call of Duty all the way to Battlefield.
Although personally I feel that Halo 1 was the pinnacle and it did go downhill from there since in the games that came after the devs preferred constant spectacle over good game play.
Posted Image

Posted Image Posted Image Posted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
gamerjerome
Member Avatar
Established Member
Vaettur
Sep 20 2017, 12:48 PM
ItalianBaptist
Sep 20 2017, 12:26 PM
Would the primary for both be "move with the stick, aim with the c buttons"? Because that model is still technically in use today, just with a right analog stick.
Actually, it's aiming with the stick and move/strave with the c-buttons, quite reversed from today's control scheme!
I think controls had a lot to do with it. While you did used the c-buttons it was more of an analog version of just another joystick. They had the right idea. It just took years before the industry and Nintendo to really figured it out. The Sony Dual Shock was what we needed before we even knew what we needed. Once gamers learned how to use two joysticks it really opened the doors.

It's like when racing games went from using buttons for gas and brake to using triggers.

As for Goldeneye, there was one unique thing that it did that even today's shooters don't really do. That's when you aim or turn into a direction and the gun aims into that direction also. It's almost virtually reality ish. Timesplitters did it. That game was also made by some of the people who worked on Goldeneye. Although that kind of mechanic didn't really work on PC. People wanted the center of the screen always be the crosshair. Over time that's what consoles did. It's just easier to aim when your crosshair isn't also moving on the screen.
Edited by gamerjerome, Sep 20 2017, 07:07 PM.
Twitter - Youtube - Collection

Controllers - Boxed US (8/8) - Blister (7/7)
Games - Sealed - (9) - Boxed (79) - Lose (77)
Grey Variants - (9/14)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cabanon
Elite
Vaettur
Sep 20 2017, 12:48 PM
ItalianBaptist
Sep 20 2017, 12:26 PM
Would the primary for both be "move with the stick, aim with the c buttons"? Because that model is still technically in use today, just with a right analog stick.
Actually, it's aiming with the stick and move/strave with the c-buttons, quite reversed from today's control scheme!
thats the best controller scheme ever. I cant stand aiming with c-button and going forward with the stick. thats why I hate so much FPS on modern console, I cant freaking play that way lol !
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mikezelot
Member Avatar
Star Wolfs Worst Nightmare
I would say three things make the speration
1. Control scheme
2. Game environments (golden eye/perfect dark) more of a realistic setting and game play with objectives and open worlds (Turok/doom) more fantasy driven
3. Game engine. The game engine from doom-duke nukem-Turok-quake all seem like a more evolved version of the last one
Edited by mikezelot, Sep 21 2017, 05:26 AM.
Posted Image N64 forever starfox 64 champion
"Im an elephant" - Conker
Both the n64 and the ps4 have 64 bit processors. Now I'm not saying the 64 could run crysis at 60 fps but I'm not saying it couldn't.
115 games
2 consoles
6 controllers
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grizzmeister
Member Avatar
Latter-day Nostradamus
Weren't early FPS titles like Doom often referred to as corridor shooters? That seems to be the difference in my mind in that games like GoldenEye and Turok moved the action to more expansive outdoor environments.

Personal note: back during the N64 era, I didn't really care too much for first-person-shooters preferring third-person-shooters like Armored Core instead. Years later I did love playing the original Halo, though, because me and my friends would network several Xbox consoles together for some amazing LAN parties. I guess Halo changed my perspective enough that nowadays all I seem to play on my PlayStation 4 are Call of Duty games. :P
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vaettur
Member Avatar
Established Member
The White Falcon
Sep 20 2017, 03:10 PM
There's a big FPS elephant in the room you seem to be forgetting.



;)
Talking about elephants.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The White Falcon
Member Avatar
Senior Member
But that really has nothing to do with this discussion, which was largely about controls.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vaettur
Member Avatar
Established Member
The White Falcon
Sep 21 2017, 02:23 PM
But that really has nothing to do with this discussion, which was largely about controls.
More so, it's about N64 shooters, which neither of them are. :rofl:

On-topic:
There is a lot to say about the single player, but I think the multiplayer is where the N64 shooters build some great foundations.
Of course, the Goldeneye single player was memorable and not much like the mindless shooters of nowadays, but it's multiplayer was of great influence for console multiplayer shooting (and multiplayer fps in general), proving that it is possible to build a fun, fast-paced multiplayer fps on a console.
Perfect Dark build on that, by for example introducing a ranking system which is still vital and widely used in today's shooters.

That's why I think there is no clear "split", as the genre was still very young and rapidly evolving at the time.
What I mean to say is that CoD (just to name one) got influenced by games like Quake and Doom, as well as Goldeneye and Perfect Dark.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stinger9142
Member Avatar
Endure and survive...
I tend to group FPS games in to two separate styles when I look at them. "Mindless" (albeit sometimes fun) shoot everything in sight, and "Thinker" games that mix lots of shooting with other mission based objectives.

I can't speak much for C.O.D. games, but I have spent thousands of hours on Battlefield games. I may be in the minority, but I tend to think of them as "thinkers" much more than a lot of folks seem to. I try to develop strategies and out think my opponents. Rather than play straight up death matches, most games are objective based attack/defend style games. I think the addition of vehicular warfare plays a part to. Adds to the diversity. Not that they have to be played as thinkers, but I certainly think playing them that way benefits ones efficiency when playing online.

I see Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, & Half Life all having pioneered and influenced a lot of FPS games. Timesplitters as well. I didn't play a lot of Turok (hated the controls :lol: ) so I can't speak on which I would lump it in with. Duke Nukem, Doom, and Wolfenstein clearly have a different feel to me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vaettur
Member Avatar
Established Member
I can understand your thoughts about Battlefield being a "thinker". I can only speak for Battlefield 1943 (which I've played quite extensively), but the maps are huge and largely based on team battles, which just ask for a tactical approach. I guess that's the difference between the two big ones; CoD tads to be a bit over the top action-based, while Battlefield tries to keep it realistic (hence why thinking is very important).

That Duke, Doom and Wolfenstein have a different feel for you is not strange at all, they are pretty much the genesis of the genre and quite the epitome of a "mindless" shooter.
That said, I still play Doom multiplayer almost daily!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grizzmeister
Member Avatar
Latter-day Nostradamus
Since TimeSplitters has been mentioned, are the GameCube versions still playable today? Which is better TimeSplitters 2 or TimeSplitters: Future Perfect?
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
buddy1983
Member Avatar
Veteran
I completed TS2 on the gamecube last year, still great fun to play although a bit tricky with the small right controller stick. Haven't played FP.
Youtube

Wii U user name: Read1ngFC (thats a one and not a i)

Switch friend code SW-4595-4819-7191

UK resident

Posted Image

I'm currently playiing triangle in a reggae band. I just stand in the back and Ting
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grizzmeister
Member Avatar
Latter-day Nostradamus
Back around the time TimeSplitters: Future Perfect was released on the GameCube, I recall hearing that it was pretty good in multiplayer. Never got a chance to experience it myself but all my friends who were fans of GoldenEye and Perfect Dark spoke very highly of it.

I was considering buying a used copy of FP and then noticed that it's still rather expensive for such an old game. I wonder if that's because of popularity or because not that many copies were produced?
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ReliantLion
Member Avatar
Newbie
Regarding the C-Stick on the Gamecube controller, it's quite simple to replace the yellow with a grey. I've played both TimeSplitters games recently, and the controls are akin to modern games.

As to thinking games vs mindless, I go back and forth between styles. Some games, like GoldenEye, to me are more of a role-playing game. Not in the normal sense of 'RPG', but that you are Bond, and in order to succeed, you must BE Bond. Does that make sense?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grizzmeister
Member Avatar
Latter-day Nostradamus
It'd be fun if TimeSplitters Rewind ends up finding its way to the Switch. :D
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Gaming & General Nintendo 64 Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply