| GatKong |
|
Tetris Mason
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 04/20/07
|
|
Posts: 5907
|
|
Loc: Sector 9
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
#378810 - 10/05/18 08:41 AM
|
|
|
Why do you support your decision?
|
|
|
|
Re: Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
[Re: GatKong]
#378821 - 10/05/18 10:52 PM
|
|
|
> Which was the first true FPS
> Battlezone (Atari)
> Catacombs Abyss, The (IBM)
> Dungeon Master
> Last Survivor (Sega)
> Maze/Maze War (NASA/MIT)
> MidiMaze (Atari)
> Spiasm
> Super Spy, The (SNK)
> Wolfenstien 3D (iD)
> Xybots (Atari)
>
> Other (specify)
>
>
> Why do you support your decision?
I doubt there is a clear answer to this, it's a genre that has evolved.
Not sure why things like Super Spy are on here tho, that's no more an FPS than Operation Wolf, it's not even 3D, it's layered 2D with a fake 'going down corridor' bit.
but there are '3d' games on home platforms involving shooting even back in the mid 80s (something like The Sentinal on the speccy) but that's generally considered a puzzle game (you're aiming at trees in a 3d environment that is rendered, but also doesn't move in an accurate way as you scroll around)
I guess things like battle zone are viable options, it's a true 3d environment, you shoot things, it's first person, but there's no real level design as such and personally I think level design is an important part, otherwise any old space shooter could count too (unless you decide 'being on the ground' is a primary requirement)
|
|
|
| Comboman |
|
Can't think of a good title
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 12/30/12
|
|
Posts: 431
|
|
Loc: Halifax, Canada
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
[Re: GatKong]
#378822 - 10/05/18 11:10 PM
|
|
|
I doubt you can find one older than this.
|
|
|
|
Re: Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
[Re: Haze]
#378824 - 10/06/18 01:06 AM
|
|
|
Either you decide that a 'true FPS' is a game that is (a) first-person and (b) a shooter, or that it's something else, and as Aristotle says, the whole is more than the sum of its parts.
Given that I'd consider Wolf3D to be the first.
|
|
|
| R. Belmont |
|
Cuckoo for IGAvania
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 9716
|
|
Loc: ECV-197 The Orville
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
[Re: anikom15]
#378829 - 10/06/18 02:44 PM
|
|
|
> Either you decide that a 'true FPS' is a game that is (a) first-person and (b) a
> shooter, or that it's something else, and as Aristotle says, the whole is more than
> the sum of its parts.
>
> Given that I'd consider Wolf3D to be the first.
Agreed. Wolf3D is definitely the progenitor of the genre as we know it, with an honorable mention to iD's earlier Catacomb 3D.
|
|
|
| GatKong |
|
Tetris Mason
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 04/20/07
|
|
Posts: 5907
|
|
Loc: Sector 9
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
[Re: R. Belmont]
#378838 - 10/07/18 12:09 AM
|
|
|
You wouldn’t credit Maze Wars as being first? In 1974 it was first person and it shoots! Granted it was crude, but given the tech at the time, it broke ground. Plus, that eyeball! It’s iconic now 👁
As for galvenizing the genra, yeah, Wolfenstein.
Considering Catacomb 3D, then why not Hover Tank, which gave birth to Catacomb 3D?
|
|
|
|
When was the last true FPS and why?
[Re: GatKong]
#378845 - 10/07/18 01:10 PM
|
|
|
I guess some are still being made, but the majority these days seem to have just become simple 'corridor shooters' or at best 'arena shooters', taking out the exploration, multiple paths, puzzle solving, backtracking, areas that cross over other areas, shortcuts, secrets etc. (outside of finding the odd collectable etc. which is a dour mechanic)
The level design on the majority I've played recently has just been *horrible*
Even ones I've played that claim to take influence from the older designs still seem a lot less interesting than the original Doom or Quake.
I know level design in general has taken a hit, but I can't think of a single FPS or third person shooter that comes close to the level design of say the first Dark Souls (as one of the more recent games I felt has had a really good work design) Borderlands had potential, but the actual maps in that are all actually quite basic designs too if you strip them down to core elements, there's not much exploring as such.
> Which was the first true FPS
> Battlezone (Atari)
> Catacombs Abyss, The (IBM)
> Dungeon Master
> Last Survivor (Sega)
> Maze/Maze War (NASA/MIT)
> MidiMaze (Atari)
> Spiasm
> Super Spy, The (SNK)
> Wolfenstien 3D (iD)
> Xybots (Atari)
>
> Other (specify)
>
>
> Why do you support your decision?
|
|
|
|
Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: GatKong]
#388891 - 12/03/20 11:45 AM
|
|
|
Necroing this because it’s important.
I’ve been told that many people consider Space Panic to be the first platformer and that really bothers me. They argue that it has platforms and that makes it a platformer. It’s such an asinine way of defining the genre; not to mention that nobody fucking played this game back in the 80s or whatever anyway. It reeks of such a ‘well actually’–level of pseudointellectualism that I don’t even want to make an argument against it, but I will.
Donkey Kong has jumping. Donkey Kong’s third level is specifically centered around timing and jumping, a protoypical ‘athletic’ level. It’s so analogous to what the genre is and what it’s evolved into that to argue otherwise is an insult.
Space Panic doesn’t have jumping. It’s a puzzle action game that happens to be vertically oriented, but it’s no more a platformer than Solomon’s Key.
So generally when someone tries to ‘correct’ me by bringing up some ancient ZX Spectrum ‘game’ or Amiga demo or whatever that no one’s heard of, no I’m not going to accept that just because it’s older. There’s more to a genre than its parts. It has a cultural context to it, and that context is part of its definition.
|
|
|
|
Re: Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: anikom15]
#388892 - 12/03/20 01:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: anikom15]
#388893 - 12/03/20 02:57 PM
|
|
|
> Necroing this because it’s important.
>
> I’ve been told that many people consider Space Panic to be the first platformer and
> that really bothers me. They argue that it has platforms and that makes it a
> platformer. It’s such an asinine way of defining the genre; not to mention that
> nobody fucking played this game back in the 80s or whatever anyway. It reeks of such
> a ‘well actually’–level of pseudointellectualism that I don’t even want to make an
> argument against it, but I will.
>
> Donkey Kong has jumping. Donkey Kong’s third level is specifically centered around
> timing and jumping, a protoypical ‘athletic’ level. It’s so analogous to what the
> genre is and what it’s evolved into that to argue otherwise is an insult.
>
> Space Panic doesn’t have jumping. It’s a puzzle action game that happens to be
> vertically oriented, but it’s no more a platformer than Solomon’s Key.
>
> So generally when someone tries to ‘correct’ me by bringing up some ancient ZX
> Spectrum ‘game’ or Amiga demo or whatever that no one’s heard of, no I’m not going to
> accept that just because it’s older. There’s more to a genre than its parts. It has a
> cultural context to it, and that context is part of its definition.
Well, actually any game can be a first even if you did not heard about it. That doesn't mean anyone else did not played it. Culturally speaking, platform games on that era were labeled "ladder games" when the term "platform" did not exist. Donkey Kong was reviewed as a ladder game, just like Space Panic. So in 198x, Donkey Kong was the first ladder game where you could jump.
I chuckle at the idea some people catalog Metal Slug like a shot'em up. If that were true any platform game where you shoot could be a shot'em up instead. Contra is as 2D sidescroller platform game as Mario Bros, just like Metal Slug. The issue in fact is how specific you personally want to be in order to define a genre. A new mechanic like jumping doesn't make a complete genre, but you can make a subgenre out of it. Marketing nand subjective views at its best.
|
|
|
|
Re: Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: BIOS-D]
#388902 - 12/04/20 06:59 AM
|
|
|
Okay but ladder games don't really exist as a genre today, assuming people actually referred to these types of games as 'ladder games' which I've never heard before.
People aren't saying Space Panic is the first ladder game. They are saying it's the first platform game, and that's just wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
> Okay but ladder games don't really exist as a genre today, assuming people actually
> referred to these types of games as 'ladder games' which I've never heard before.
>
> People aren't saying Space Panic is the first ladder game. They are saying it's the
> first platform game, and that's just wrong.
When the game came out, it was classified as a climbing game or a ladder one as shown on this page from Steve Bloom's "Video Invaders" (1982).
People categorize things from different perspectives and knowledge as this thread showed. So, you shouldn't stress over someone categorizing a game using a different point of view. Don't let the Nintendo fanboyism take the worst of you, it doesn't have to be first at anything. Usually what defines something new isn't always the first in some subjective category, they are improved across later iterations. In other words, things don't just pull out from thin air. There will always be a first, even if it isn't a known one by newer generations.
[ATTACHED IMAGE]
|
|
|
|
Re: Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: BIOS-D]
#388906 - 12/04/20 11:33 AM
|
|
|
You’re missing the forest for the trees. Nobody considers ‘ladder games’ or ‘climbing games’ to be a genre anymore. It’s all been delegated to the generic ‘action’ or ‘action puzzle’ label. But platform games is a broadly defined and well-known genre that exists today. You can categorize things however you want, but the collective, today, is categorizing games as platformers, and Donkey Kong has the essence of that genre. You can’t argue that Space Panic has that essence. It’s not there, because the essence is jumping. It’s not ladders. Maybe it was some time ago, but it’s not anymore. Nobody cares about ladders. Ladders aren’t interesting anymore.
It’s not fanboyism. I don’t even like Donkey Kong. It’s acknowledgement that there’s more to a game than just its mechanics. Its affect, its legacy, is important as well, and that is something so often missed by critics. Indeed, it is missed by so many people, for most people focus only on the details, rather than the big picture.
The same argument is why WOLF3D is the first FPS.
|
|
|
|
Re: Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: anikom15]
#388910 - 12/04/20 06:38 PM
|
|
|
> You’re missing the forest for the trees. Nobody considers ‘ladder games’ or ‘climbing
> games’ to be a genre anymore. It’s all been delegated to the generic ‘action’ or
> ‘action puzzle’ label. But platform games is a broadly defined and well-known genre
> that exists today. You can categorize things however you want, but the collective,
> today, is categorizing games as platformers, and Donkey Kong has the essence of that
> genre. You can’t argue that Space Panic has that essence. It’s not there, because the
> essence is jumping. It’s not ladders. Maybe it was some time ago, but it’s not
> anymore. Nobody cares about ladders. Ladders aren’t interesting anymore.
>
> It’s not fanboyism. I don’t even like Donkey Kong. It’s acknowledgement that there’s
> more to a game than just its mechanics. Its affect, its legacy, is important as well,
> and that is something so often missed by critics. Indeed, it is missed by so many
> people, for most people focus only on the details, rather than the big picture.
>
> The same argument is why WOLF3D is the first FPS.
I could say the same too. You miss the elephant in the room, the genre is not called "jumping" or "platform jumping". It's called PLATFORM, a game you travel across surfaces using any means necessary, yes that includes walking and using ladders for climbing to them. Jumping was only an improvement to the genre. If the collective today agrees like you say, we wouldn't have this debate. So you want to keep a legacy by removing another? Then you go as far as using a single game mechanic (or absence of it) from a game you didn't know (but Japan where Donkey Kong origins does) to miss the big picture/historical context. Sounds quite hypocritical to me.
In the end it doesn't matter. If marketing, fanboyism or a personal preference invents a new (sub)genre to claim be the first one, it won't make me lose my sleep. History is there to claim otherwise. Donkey Kong was known as a climbing game just like Space Panic. Grouping both or separate them for being in between is merely subjective.
|
|
|
|
Re: Donkey Kong was the first platformer
[Re: anikom15]
#388917 - 12/04/20 10:50 PM
|
|
|
> People aren't saying Space Panic is the first ladder game. They are saying it's the
> first platform game, and that's just wrong.
I would class it as a platform game.
You can dig a hole, fall through it, and land on the lower platform.
It has gravity, you fall, there are multiple levels at different heights across the screen, aka 'platforms' You can even dig holes and fall multiple levels; the mechanic of dropping an enemy through multiple holes in platforms is even a key part of the game. The game is all about manipulating the platforms and verticality to your advantage, moreso than even DK which is more of an obstacle course for most of the stages.
Those criteria along separate it from a similar game done overhead eg Heiankyo Alien / Digger.
Now if you were to tell me Naughty Mouse isn't a platform game, I'd be more inclined to agree, at a push, that that one is a ladders game. Actually it's an elaborate and very extensive hack of Pac-Man, it has no concept of gravity or platforms, it's closer to a 2D overhead game presented with a visual trick to make it look side-on.
Being able to jump has nothing to do with it, that's like saying Pac-Man isn't in the same genre as Pac-Mania because one has jumping and the other does not. Both games in that case are 'Maze' games.
IMHO jumping / not jumping is just a detail, like for example if the screen wraps / doesn't wrap.
|
|
|
Previous 
Index 
Next 
Threaded 
Which was the first True FPS? And Why?
Reply
[Re: 
