It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I'd like to list all the recent and upcoming retro-ish FPSes.

In no particular order:
-Prodeus
-Ion Maiden
-Amid Evil
-Dusk
-Wrath: Aeon of Ruin

Are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
Not gonna include WADs or mods n such.

Feel free to post any other ones.
Post edited May 11, 2019 by pkk234
avatar
pkk234: I'd like to list all the recent and upcoming retro-ish FPSes.

In no particular order:
-Prodeus
-Ion Maiden
-Amid Evil
-Dusk
-Wrath: Aeon of Ruin

Are the one I'm aware of at the moment.
Not gonna include WADs or mods n such.
Not gonna lie...Ion Maiden looks like it's gonna be good.
It feels like it took too long for there to be a revival, like what was the hold-up? At least now we're here. :P I've also noticed some games taking on the PS1 aesthetic of rough textures and low poly.
avatar
pkk234: I'd like to list all the recent and upcoming retro-ish FPSes.

In no particular order:
-Prodeus
-Ion Maiden
-Amid Evil
-Dusk
-Wrath: Aeon of Ruin

Are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
Not gonna include WADs or mods n such.

Feel free to post any other ones.
- Immortal Redneck
- Project Warlock
- STRAFE: Millennium Edition
- Tower of Guns

?
low rated
Painkiller: Black Edition. IMO it is also the undisputed King of all FPS games ever made.
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: Painkiller: Black Edition. IMO it is also the undisputed King of all FPS games ever made.
Can't agree more and darkness II as well as VTMB1
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: Painkiller: Black Edition. IMO it is also the undisputed King of all FPS games ever made.
+1
What gets me about this "revival" is that they keep making the same stupid mistakes with checkpoints and no quick saving etc. Wouldn't catch me playing a '90s shooter without a save system.
avatar
darthspudius: What gets me about this "revival" is that they keep making the same stupid mistakes with checkpoints and no quick saving etc. Wouldn't catch me playing a '90s shooter without a save system.
That should be a difficulty option you can toggle on or off.
avatar
darthspudius: What gets me about this "revival" is that they keep making the same stupid mistakes with checkpoints and no quick saving etc. Wouldn't catch me playing a '90s shooter without a save system.
DAMN RIGHT!
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: Painkiller: Black Edition. IMO it is also the undisputed King of all FPS games ever made.
Painkiller is way too simple and repetitive to be considered that. There is no clever use of space to make different types of battles, the last battle feels and plays exactly the same as the first one. You also don't do anything in those levels except kill stuff until the next area opens. There are a ton of different enemies, but they are basically all the same two types with different skins; one level you fight a knight with a sword, next level it is a WW1 soldier with a bayonet, next it's a motorcyclist with a hammer, it's all the same shit over and over again. Also the game lacks good airborne enemies and bigger enemies in normal battles.

If we are going to talk about retro 2000s shooters, then Serious Sam The Second Encounter wipes the floor with Painkiller. It has larger weapon variety, enemies come in all shapes and sizes with much more varied behavior, it has more complex and better level design with some areas even using physics and gravity in interesting ways. Large scale battles are much more varied with enemies attacking on foot and in air and on several fronts at once. Painkiller doesn't come close.
Sometimes, dead is better.

One of few 90's FPS I can stand today is Quake and Quake 3, and that's only because the engines are fantastic.
avatar
antrad88: Painkiller is way too simple and repetitive to be considered that. There is no clever use of space to make different types of battles, the last battle feels and plays exactly the same as the first one. You also don't do anything in those levels except kill stuff until the next area opens. There are a ton of different enemies, but they are basically all the same two types with different skins; one level you fight a knight with a sword, next level it is a WW1 soldier with a bayonet, next it's a motorcyclist with a hammer, it's all the same shit over and over again. Also the game lacks good airborne enemies and bigger enemies in normal battles.

If we are going to talk about retro 2000s shooters, then Serious Sam The Second Encounter wipes the floor with Painkiller. It has larger weapon variety, enemies come in all shapes and sizes with much more varied behavior, it has more complex and better level design with some areas even using physics and gravity in interesting ways. Large scale battles are much more varied with enemies attacking on foot and in air and on several fronts at once. Painkiller doesn't come close.
I don't think comments are accurate at all.

No flying enemies? Then what are these: https://youtu.be/OzMAakLspLU?t=547 ...?

There's tons of creative and highly varied different uses of space, i.e this level where you have to carefully tread through a haunted asylum with skulking enemies who you can barely see, and who are unlike the enemies in other levels: https://youtu.be/uXDOwdOYsHk?t=239

By contrast, the first part of this level requires you to use long-range firefight tactics in order be successful: https://youtu.be/KtW9UZS9WLA?t=59

Playing this level with only the stake gun, as is necessary to get one of the Black Tarot cards, is a completely different gameplay experience than anything else in the game:
https://youtu.be/_Jfy1A-NJ2E?t=14

All in all, the enemies in Painkiller, have a huge variety, in both appearance and the ways in which they attack you; way better variety than in most FPS games. They are not "reskins" of each other.

Further to address the idea that all the fights are the same: playing on the harder difficulties and going for the goals is quite difficult, and it requires a smart use of tactics, a smart a choice of which Black Tarot cards to equip (and earning each of them in the first place is also one of the goals), a smart choice of using the right ammo vs. the right enemies, a smart choice of when to conserve ammo, a smart choice of when to go for souls or when to let them disappear because it's too risky to go for them, a smart choice of when to or when not to activate Demon Form, a smart choice of when to activate your very limited number of Black Tarot card usages, etc.

In other words, Painkiller is not nearly so simple & dumb as many people often misconstrue it to be.

As for Serious Sam, I played one of them before, and it didn't hold a candle to Painkiller. In Serious Sam, I spent a lot of very boring times wandering around through levels that I'd already cleared out, trying pixel-hunt for the way forward. It was more like doing a chore than playing a game. Plus the monsters & environments & weapons & levels in Serious Sam were way less interesting than those in Painkiller.
Post edited May 12, 2019 by Ancient-Red-Dragon
avatar
darthspudius: What gets me about this "revival" is that they keep making the same stupid mistakes with checkpoints and no quick saving etc. Wouldn't catch me playing a '90s shooter without a save system
Agreed. I simply don't understand where the "90's FPS = checkpoint only and random procedural levels" fake history thing came from for the current bunch of "new old school" games like Strafe, Ziggurat, Project Warlock, etc. Every major 90's FPS I own (eg, Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Heretic, Hexen, Quake, Unreal, Blood, Strife, Rise of the Triad, Redneck Rampage, Shadow Warrior, Half Life, AvP, etc) that the new games are "inspired" by, all have both static level designs and if not standard F5/F9 Quick-save/load, then at least manual "save anywhere" option. Most early 2000's first-person (Deus Ex, FEAR, HL2, MoH:AA, NOLF 1-2, Prey, RTCW, Serious Sam FE/SE, System Shock 2, etc) continued that. Lack of quicksaves + checkpoint-only seemed to be something that only really started en masse mid-2000's for shooters initially with the most consolized and lazily ported games, then became gradually "normalized" towards the end of the decade as AAA PC exclusives got replaced by cross-platform design.

Crippled dumbed down saves certainly wasn't a 90's or even early 2000's thing for most shooters. Personally, I think the real reason for adding that in new games is simple cheap padding, ie, devs have figured out that by forcing replays via checkpoints, they can make a 12hr game appear nearer 15hrs, whilst quicksaves will exclude more of that replay time from total gameplay time.
avatar
DadJoke007: Sometimes, dead is better.

One of few 90's FPS I can stand today is Quake and Quake 3, and that's only because the engines are fantastic.
Agreed. I have no interest at shooting at hit boxes that are supposed to represent white male privilege.