Don't know what it is about this genre

Most of the times I've played shooters, I've enjoyed it and they've been decent games. But none of them ever really catch my interest. I've played, briefly, the Halo games, the Gears games, a few of the CoD games, and so on, and none of them struck me as bad. But I've never bought any of them myself, nor do I exect I ever will.

THRILLHO wrote:

nor do I exect I ever will.

So, what's the point of this topic again?

timesplitters

Timesplitters and Killzone are the only shooters I truly enjoy.

Haven't played those. What makes them better than other shooters?

they/re made for consoles
other shooters will play better on pc or are better suited to havinga mouse

Timesplitters is funny and Killzone has a great atmosphere. And it's Dutch. >_>

Killzone has a multiplayer where you get to play as the bad guys. Just like Star Wars Battlefront.

Timesplitters...I haven't played it.

Santa Rockstar wrote:

Killzone has a multiplayer where you get to play as the bad guys. Just like Star Wars Battlefront.

Timesplitters...I haven't played it.

I've played Timesplitters, as said above, the story is funny, yet different as well. Also I find the controls really good, unlike most shooters (well, on PS2 anyway) which usually seem real touchy.

On another note, the MOH games are good as well with nice smooth controls. Currently I'm working on Battlefeild 2.

i believe right now online is why they're so popular

Eh, it just seems to me that this it's in this genre that gamings almost inherent repetitiveness is most obvious.

Timesplitters 2 was fantastic, but Killzone was overhyped, and there are many better shooters. I'm not a fan of WWII shooters, so manyof the Call of Duty games leave me cold, but stuff like Bioshock and Gears I adore. Halo....not so much.

THRILLHO wrote:

Eh, it just seems to me that this it's in this genre that gamings almost inherent repetitiveness is most obvious.

adrenaline chared violence makes up for monotomy