Good Criticism, and Anti to boot

this is one of the best video game reviews i have ever read, despite (and truthfully, as a result of) barely even mentioning the game in question. this is because that game, Halo 3, does not deserve to be talked about. as an artistic and meaningful experience, the article bitingly points out that Halo 3 "doesn't even try." Radosh's points are admittedly fundamental to people like myself, who are almost universally seen as radicals for our thoughts and opinions on game design, but to an outsider or a "gamer" as defined by the usual connotation, i think the article will be an eye-opening read

once you have read it, there are a few things i would like to expand upon. in addition to Halo 3 utterly failing artistically, it is equally unremarkable when viewed as the mindless entertainment that video games are often seen to be. as a game where the goal is to shoot things and not die, or more accurately, reach the end of the level, Halo 3 is in no structural way an evolution or even refinement of the systems present in classic shooting games like Galaga and Space Invaders. in fact, it is a regression if anything, because of its first-person perspective and three-dimensional environment. these attributes, while undoubtedly modern, are incredibly conflicting with Halo 3's base design and goals, which are archetypal at best

here's why

a multiplayer match Halo 3

in a shooting game, the number of enemies on screen, the direction from which they are coming, and their relative distance to the player character are all paramount to performance. Halo 3's design is inferior and inefficient in all of these areas when compared to more traditional examples of the genre. case in point: in a sidescroller on a two-dimensional plane, the player is not limited by point of view. the perspective is constant, and challenges are assessed and deduced immediately

two games which many people consider to be excellent 2D shooters, Ikaruga and Contra

the player is also unlimited in its projectile firing and aiming. many of these sidescrollers allow shooting in every direction, and though many still do not, the cardinal movement found in all 2D games allows for swift and precise changes in direction. this level of control is impossible in a first-person shooter due to perspective. the control shift to an aiming reticule rather than of a character is also arguably less interesting

these design conflicts are not found in all FPS games, though. perhaps the best example comes from Nintendo, who i am finding more and more to be the only ones really skilled at video game craft. they recognized these problems immediately when adapting their sidescrolling Metroid franchise into the third-dimension. the result, Metroid Prime, instead exemplifies 3D's strengths. it quite logically is less about shooting and aiming and more about exploration and immersion

showing the transition from 2D (Super Metroid) to 3D (Metroid Prime)

while it may not be apparent from these screenshots, the original Metroid Prime (the game has since been rereleased on the Wii with updated controls) did not allow direct control over the aiming reticule, like most FPS games. it instead relied on a Zelda-esque lock on system for aiming. whether or not this was ultimately the best approach is debatable, but it without question further exemplifies the series' staples of atmosphere and environment


the fact that first person shooters are by far the most popular genre in video games right now, and that very few developers have even a basic grasp of the ideal conditions of a shooting game, is quite troubling