Workshop: Building the Perfect Shooter

Counter-StrikeI think it’s safe to say that the preferred gametype among the GamerSushi faithful would have to be that of the shooter. Whether we’re talking about some old school favorites like Counter-Strike or Goldeneye, or jumping to the present to wax philosophically about games like Brink and Crysis 2, we’ve all got our opinions. Best of all, everyone here is reasonably well-mannered and articulate enough to share their thoughts without everything turning into an all out flame fest. It’s one of the many reasons we love you guys.

Well, I figured that we all spend enough time talking about our favorite shooters that it would make for a fun (and informative) exercise for all of us to construct what we’d consider the perfect shooter. To really think about the kinds of features we would love to see, the kinds of maps we would like to play, and the way we would like to take down our foes. Great games have done any number of things over the years to capture our hearts and minds – so let’s put all of those to the test and put them against one another, grudge-match style.

I developed a list of things that you can quantify in shooters, and basically, I want you guys to vote on them. The list is by no means perfect or even comprehensive, so add whatever you want to it, or totally ignore something things as you see fit. Basically, I think it’d be cool to take what everyone votes for and do a write-up of all the features we really love. The whole thing is a bit out-of-the-box for what we normally do around here, but I thought it would make for a good time. So yeah, let’s do this.

Here are the categories and options I came up with. If you don’t like the options, feel free to add your own!

Viewpoint:
First-person
Third-person

Setting:
Futuristic/Space Marines
Modern/Tactical
Past/Historical

Arsenal:
Weapons placed around the map
Weapon load-out determined before spawn

Movement:
All on foot
Vehicles
Brink’s parkour-style navigation

Spawning:
Spawn on a squad leader
Spawn points

Lives:
Infinite respawns
Set number of team spawns
One life to live

Combat:
Shields/extended firefights
Realism: one shot, one kill

Maps:
Wide open and sprawling
Small with insane firefights

Bonuses:
Perks and attributes
Bonuses placed on the map (including power weapons)

Multiplayer:
Objective-based
Slayer

Match Size:
4-8
9-16
17+

Classes/Roles:
Class-based characters with specific loadouts/roles (Battlefield)
Classes that don’t matter all that much but offer a bit of variety (Halo: Reach)
No classes (Counter-Strike)

Experience:
Earn new weapons/abilities
No experience – everything accessible up front

Skill:
Level playing field
Large separation between mediocre and good
Large separation between elite and good
Separation between skill levels but help for the little guy

Mutliplayer Type:
Matchmaking
Dedicated Servers

Feel free to give examples of games that have done each of these things well, and each of these things terribly. There’s basically no format here, so comment as you will. If enough people come up with a category I might have overlooked, then I’ll add that to the list.

Go! Build!

Written by

I write about samurai girls and space marines. Writer for Smooth Few Films. Rooster Teeth Freelancer. Author of Red vs. Blue, The Ultimate Fan Guide, out NOW!

10 thoughts on “Workshop: Building the Perfect Shooter”

  1. So, it’s multiplayer only? That’s a bummer.

    I’d love to to a singleplayer first-person shooter/adventure that takes place in another world. Something truly non-linear, where you can join factions that actually contribute to the main story, rather than just being long sidequests. I’d love to have faction-specific powers that evolve and grow as you do, and open up new styles of combat. No more empty promises. I’d love to be able to truly travel everywhere and explore anything. I’d love to fight bosses, but still have amazing setpiece moments. I want to fight in open areas and in corridors. I want to fight crowds of enemies and small groups. I want to fight with the AI and all alone. I want variety, with a hint of conformity and familiarity.

    I don’t play much multiplayer, though, so I’m not too good at crafting the ideal multiplayer experience. 🙁

    1. Trogador, if people seem to enjoy this, we’ll do it for several genres and gametypes. I figured the multiplayer shooter would be the easiest one to break the ice.

  2. In general tf2 is my model
    viewpoint:
    First-person

    Setting:
    mixed. Not super serious or specific

    Arsenal:
    Weapon load-out determined before spawn.
    around map gives annoying advantages like map control in quake.

    Movement:
    All on foot

    Spawning:
    Spawn points

    Lives:
    chose in gamemode

    Combat:
    extended firefights except for headshots

    Maps:
    large but linear or small arena like

    Bonuses:
    Perks and attributes. no mix and match

    Multiplayer:
    gamemode

    Match Size:
    server choice + gamemode

    Classes/Roles:
    Class-based characters with specific loadouts but not crucial to advancement. ex. no enginner needed to bypass something

    Experience:
    looks + achievement items

    Skill:
    Separation between skill levels but help for the little guy

    Mutliplayer Type:
    both
    Matchmaking and
    Dedicated Servers

  3. Eddy, this is an awesome article idea! I’d love to see more genres, and maybe you guys can revisit this Multiplayer FPS genre if you come up with more categories.

    Here are my specs for a perfect Multiplayer FPS that really hasn’t come out yet. It’s generally made for large-scale battles where each player can choose their own equipment but adheres to specific roles within a class when taking on objectives, which are important.

    Viewpoint: First Person: It’s the smoothest viewpoint for aiming, although Third-Person is good for cover-based shooters.

    Setting: Tactical & Futuristic: I always like futuristic settings, but I don’t care for Quake-esque bunny-hop fests with silly guns. I prefer guns that require accuracy, and perhaps even having special equipment like in Black Ops that affects players without necessarily killing them (like how the Jammer or Motion Sensor affects combat). For a futuristic setting that has tactical gameplay, shields and futuristic gadgets can make combat interesting and provide interesting firefights between guys who specialize in big guns vs weaker folks that specialize in overloading shields.

    Combat Style: Relatively Realistic & Fast to Kill: As much as shields are cool and long bunny-hop fights are intense, at the end of the day, if the combat is Halo-style where killing one guy will usually bring you down to no shields and near death unless you have a power weapon, it can be frustrating in large battles.
    While I may complain about being sniped because a guy only had to shoot me three times, I still get shot by DMRs from across the map and can’t do anything but die in the next 3 seconds because all I have is an Assault Rifle, so it ends up being the same. But if I’m playing Battlefield and they’re using a sniper rifle, I have a chance to hit them even with my sub-machine gun thanks to the range. I’m a big supporter of giving people a chance no matter what weapon they’re stuck with.

    Arsenal: Loadouts: I prefer being able to customize my combat role as soon as I spawn in so that I’m not left with a crappy pepper-box while the enemies have already securing the Sniper Rifle and Shotgun. Loadouts allow for more interesting engagements and let players know that they’re responsible for their success or failure in combat or objectives.

    Bonuses: Pointstreaks: Medal of Honor Afghan Assault had a really interesting idea with their pointstreaks, where if you got kills and completed objectives, you got points which would add up to give you streak rewards like UAVs and airstrikes and better ammo. I’d expand this idea to give the player and his team bonuses ranging from faster shield regeneration to bullets that do more damage against vehicles

    Classes: Custom Equipment, Specific Roles: I like being able to customize my equipment, although I also like having specific classes that fulfill a certain role in combat, like being able to play as an Engineer who can set up defenses but can use a shotgun or an assault rifle. Ehhh, then again, maybe those two things defeat each other’s

    Movement: On-Foot: On-foot is just nice and simple, although vehicles do add some cool moments. Still, unless you can spawn with a vehicle or have some way of taking them out, vehicles can be discouragingly overpowered. Vehicles are only good for sprawling maps.

    Spawning: Select a Point: Being able to choose where you spawn is always better than being dropped in the middle of the enemy’s backyard. It’s best if you have enough options and can see where you’re spawning and how violent it is.

    Maps: Uh, Large but Varied: I’m always a sucker for massive, sprawling maps…as long as the game is well designed for it. What I really like is when a map is large but has open and close parts. In one part of the map, there could be a system of catacombs where combat is close on on-foot, while at another part it’s a wide open battleground for epic vehicle engagements. Overall, games like Halo that incorporate infantry & vehicle combat well (which isn’t easy) are the best for large maps.
    Although for infantry-only shooters, tighter maps are usually better because you can optimize the sight-lines so you’re not getting sniped from a galaxy away. At the end of the day, Variety, even in a single map, is necessary whether it’s medium or large. Small maps I understand have to be close-quarters with maybe one long sight-line if it can fit.

    Gamemode: Objective: As much as Slayer is fun and simple, I think Objectives, even if they’re secondary to “kill the enemy team”, are an interesting way to spice up gameplay. Going on with that idea from my paragraph about Perks, if the objectives rewarded capturers with more than just “points” which end the game faster, it would help the folks who want to play slayer just as much as the folks who want to capture all of the objectives.

    Size: 8-16 (nine players wtf lol): I prefer fairly large teams (well, large for a console) because any fewer and the combat is pretty much limited to getting double-teamed in small corridors. Ah, at the end of the day, the size depends on the map and gamemode. 8-16 is best for objective games and makes slayer decently epic. Anymore players and you’ll some seriously massive maps, epic objectives, and a way to give players incentive to work and stay together lest they be overwhelmed and triple-sniped every time they spawn.

    Experience: Gain Aesthetic Rewards over time: Having to work your way to better guns and perks can really screw up balance in a shooter, so it’s best to leave equipment to the players and the gamemode. Aesthetic Rewards allow players who play for a long time to get some cool loot, while players who want to just having every weapon available and play can do that and not worry about their appearance.

    Skill: Level-Playing Field: Nobody likes being matched against Pros when your team are all noobs. Which happens. A lot.

    Server Types: Both Matchmaking and Dedicated Servers: WHY HAS NO ONE MADE THIS!?!?!?

  4. Definitely First Person

    Definitely would have to go with an old historical Pirates and British Empire era theme… With a little steam punk for added fun

    A pretty rigid class based system, I am tired of people sitting around for ages figuring out their perfect loadout for just one round of COD. Hmmm this grenade or that. Wastes time.

    Smaller tacticle vehicles plus a better Brink Movement System, Maybe go into third person for the parkour and being in cover bits.

    Spawn initially in base, but then on the leader

    Tight ass maps with lots of verticality and some bigger streets/areas, that are the main routes, for good vehicle pushes, with still having verticality.

    three lives total but can be incapped and have to be revived. Kinda like brink

    Not bullet sponges but not one hit one kill. Somewhere in between. Like the scout or at most the engineer in TF2

    No bonuses or anything like that, gotta have skill baby

    Objective based, Small Squad gameplay.

    9-16 players on a server

    Puts players of equal skill against each other. Maybe a league system like StarCraft 2. But there has to be an extremely high glass ceiling.

    Like Cossack Said I want both MatchMaking when I want a quick/balanced game and Dedicated Servers when I feel like playing mods, or in a clan etc.

  5. I was actually discussing this with a friend while playing Modern Warfare today. Not quite down to this level, but i think it would be enjoyable to have a more ‘evolving battlefield situation’ type feel. For instance, a set of randomly picked objectives are chosen by the computer that correspond to another, such as hold a randomly selected but defend-able position. If you succeed, the next step is to evacuate in Humvees, in a Black Hawk Down-esque convoy, while the team that failed to oust you from the building attempts to ambush and successfully destroy the better part of the convoy. In order to create this sort of dream game, the choices would be

    Viewpoint: First-person. I feel like the third person only is necessary when your are dealing with cover systems and would not translate into this game.

    Setting:
    Futuristic/Modern/Tactical. Im leaning more towards the Modern side, because this type of gameplay would lend itself more towards cities or open battlefields, while most futuristic shooters seem to feel the need to anchor themselves in space stations or spaceships, instead of a Futuristic Seattle, which i personally believe would be very cool.

    Arsenal:Weapon load-out determined before spawn. I dislike having to sacrifice tactical choices to get the better weapon in a game type.

    Movement:Vehicles, Brink’s parkour-style navigation: Brink’s navigation style would lend itself well to the said ambushers of the convoy, but without vehicles there would be no convoy. So a marriage of both would be necessary.

    Spawning: Spawn on a leader. With some restrictions, however, because having enemies magically appear on the guy your trying to kill would be very aggravating indeed.

    Lives: Set number of team spawns. It would be necessary for a “hold position” type of game to have a way to measure success, and that seems like the way to do it.

    Combat: Realism: one shot, one kill. I personally hate shooting at someone just to see them glow and run away. But beyond that there isnt a lot of reason for that choice.

    Maps:Wide open and sprawling, Small with insane firefights. Either or, really. The basis of my game is to avoid the ruts in which most shooters fall, so to get that “every game is a bit different” feel, the maps wouldnt adhere to a certain size.

    Bonuses: Perks and attributes: although in more of a class system, because martyrdom and juggernaut have taught me to swear like a sailor.

    Multiplayer: Objective-based. Evolving battlefield!

    Match Size:9-16. Coordination is important, but 4-8 is really to small

    Classes/Roles: Class-based characters with specific loadouts/roles. With a little leeway into what weapons you choose, like a Brink approach to classes, i feel like classes are the best choice for objective game types, especially when teamwork is a key component.

    Experience: Everything is accessible from the get-go, but customization options on your character and guns are earned.

    Skill: Level playing field

    Mutliplayer Type: As a console player myself, matchmaking is the way to go for me, but i would never bar Dedicated Servers.

    If you chose to read all of this, Thank you!

  6. Viewpoint:
    First-person: First person viewpoints are familiar and easy to get into. Third person viewpoints can easily feel clunky or uncomfortable for people in multiplayer shooters.

    Setting:
    Modern/Tactical: Relatable and varied.

    Arsenal:
    Weapon load-out determined before spawn: Easier, experienced players have an upper hand by knowing the weapon locations otherwise.

    Movement:
    All on foot/small, weak vehicles: Most combat on foot, with a few small vehicles like the mongoose in halo or a Jeep, for faster transport in the large maps.

    Spawning:
    Spawn on a squad leader (Spawn points): Squad leader would be primary, to promote team play, the spawn points would be secondary, just in case the player feels like it.

    Lives:
    Infinite respawns: People who die constantly won’t negatively affect the team as much.

    Combat:
    Realism: one shot, one kill: this teaches people to be careful and conservative. Instead of running out and getting killed immediately, players are taught to stay in cover and be patient to succeed.

    Maps:
    Wide open and sprawling also with many small, enclosed areas: It accommodates to many play styles.

    Bonuses:
    Perks and attributes: I think there should be “bonuses” to give a + and – effect. Like -firing rate, +accuracy. +bullet resistance, -explosive resistance. etc. and you would always be able to take none.

    Multiplayer:
    Objective-based/Slayer: a choice is always better. Objective would be things like capture the flag, or capturing strategic points.

    Match Size:
    17+: I think it’s really awesome to feel like you need the rest of the team with you, and that you are just playing a part in the bigger picture.

    Classes/Roles:
    Class-based characters with specific loadouts/roles: as long as you wouldn’t need certain classes for objectives. It’s fun to master a certain role in a group and not have to change to something you hate or cant stand.

    Experience:
    Earn new weapons/abilities: If players made no progression, they would likely stop playing after a short while.

    Skill:
    Level playing field: It’s no fun to go against people who are much better than you. It’s lots of fun when you need to try hard to beat the enemy and emerge victorious against players who are about your level.

    Mutliplayer Type:
    Matchmaking: I tend to prefer this because there aren’t community members who make their own changes to the game. I like things being the way they were made.

  7. Viewpoint: First-person
    Setting: Modern. I like the guns we have nowadays.
    Arsenal: Weapon load-out determined before spawn. My main complaint with Uncharted’s MP is this very point. It’s a good thing the initial loadout is well balanced. Also I spend about as much time in Create a class as I do in a match.
    Movement: All three but a specific class must be chosen for Brink’s parkour-style navigation and they have limited access to weapons (eg. Pistols only)
    Spawning: Dependant on game mode.
    Combat: Smaller health bars like CoD or BFBC but, unless it’s a headshot I don’t want to see 1S1K.
    Maps: Wide open and sprawling crossed with small with insane firefights if that’s possible. It is, however, dependant on the game mode. Large maps work better with some objective based games but not others (Conquest and Search and Destro respectively) and some tend to work well on either (CTF, TDM).
    Bonuses: Perks and attributes. Classes FTW!
    Multiplayer: Objective-based but sometimes I feel like TDM.
    Size: 17+, 32 perhaps? Once again dependant on game mode.
    Classes/Roles: Class-based characters with specific loadouts/roles (Battlefield). This, but more degrees of freedom within the role.
    Experience: Earn new weapons/abilities. CoD does this perfectly.
    Skill Level: A perfect matchmaking system wherby everyone is matched up with those of an appropriate skill level. And style of play.
    Mutliplayer Type: Well I already said matchmaking above, but I prefer dedicated servers. How about a REALLY good search function for finding the right server that goes beyond searching for ping time and game mode?

  8. Viewpoint:
    First-person primarily, with togglable third-person. I love me some games with options.

    Setting:
    Futuristic, but not necessarily Space Marines and not post-apocalyptic either. Just something with interesting technology without being Halo.

    Arsenal:
    Weapon load-outs determined at the start.

    Movement:
    All on foot always.

    Spawning:
    Spawn points

    Lives:
    One life to live. I’m kinda big on the whole Counter-Strike way of playing so… yeah.

    Combat:
    Realism, but preferably where somebody can maybe take 2-5 shots before dying. Just nothing ridiculous like Unreal Tournament or Team Fortress 2.

    Maps:
    Wide open and sprawling, I like exploring.

    Bonuses:
    Attributes, not as much perks. I’d like to keep it simple.

    Multiplayer:
    Mixed bag

    Match Size:
    2-16. I like a game that can be fun either head-to-head or with a bunch of guys gunning at eachother from behind cover. Any more than 16 though and it starts to get a little too chaotic.

    Classes/Roles:
    No classes, just choose your weapons and maybe armor and move out.

    Experience:
    Earn new things you can add to your character’s appearance or new models/skins for guns that don’t really change gameplay, only show how elite you are.

    Skill:
    Large separation between mediocre and good, mostly because I want for it to be a game all about perfecting skill more than anything else. When the guys who just started playing are doing just as well as the guys who have been playing for ages, then it makes it seem as though the player themselves aren’t much affecting the match results, only dumb luck.

    Mutliplayer Type:
    Dedicated Servers.

  9. Viewpoint:
    Third/First person view. This would implement a sort of SW:Battlefront feel. You can change from third to first at any point, without it truly impeding any of the game play. Being in first person would lower your FoV, but you would gain iron-sights and more HUD features. Third person would increase your FoV, but you would have over-the-shoulder view for aiming, and some minor HUD features would be lost.
    Setting:
    Modern/Tactical. The game would actually require you to have some sort of skill, not just running and gunning, or standing in the middle of a field with a machine gun killing people without dying.
    Arsenal:
    Mixture of pre-game load out and weapons placed around the map. You would be able to custom-class you’re your weapon classes, and also find various weapons spread across the map, depending on the map itself.
    Movement:
    All on foot, but vehicles are unlockable.
    You don’t always need a vehicle to get around, but for instances where say, you need a quick insertion, a scouting mission, distraction, or to pick up a fallen comrade, you need a quick way to get around.
    Spawning:
    Spawn points/zones.
    Lives:
    Infinite lives.
    Combat:
    Upgradeable armor. The armor setup would be very similar to that of Halo:Reach, where you get to choose/upgrade your own armor appearance. However, the armor you pick also determines your defense, HUD, and equipment, as well as stamina, shooting ability, and various other things. If you were to say, choose no helmet, then your HUD would show an estimate of certain aspects, such as your compass location, amount of ammo, etc. If you had something to increase attributes about your helmet, it would affect your HUD. And if you have extra/bigger patches, then you can hold more/less.
    Maps:
    Wide, big maps. There would be a mixture with most maps of large areas, and short tight areas.
    Bonuses:
    Perks/Attributes. Perks and attributes would be based off of what the player does, rather then just unlocking them as you level up or buy them. This way, you get the perks that you are most likely to use, based on how you perform and what you do.
    For example, if you reload a lot, eventually you would become a master of reloading, and reload faster. Or, if you’re always running/sprinting, then you would get perks that would allow you to move faster our sprint longer.
    Multiplayer:
    Objective-slayer based. The game type would have certain objective that you could do, however it is by choice if you want to do the objectives or not. They would greatly improve your teams over-all performance, however you can choose just to kill the enemy and ignore the objectives. Some objectives solely just help you in getting new positions, weapons, etc.
    Match Size:
    Map-dependent. Maps will have certain player-maximums, based on the map itself. This doesn’t mean, however, that size is the factor. If it’s a large map, but it’s in the dark, to add an increased suspense, it might have only four to eight players, so that you have more chances to keep to sneaking and trap-making.
    Classes/Roles:
    Class-based. Class system would be very similar to Black Ops, however there is one main default class that would be used for situations when classes can’t be picked.
    Experience:
    Experience based on use. Very similar to the perks system, you gain certain weapons based on use. You do unlock weapons through leveling up, but to get the more advance weapons for certain weapon types, you must use that weapons type.
    Skill:
    Level playing field based on filtering. Before you can even start the game, you create a First-Time Biography. This biography would cover your playing style, preferences, experience, etc. You can then choose to filter what players you can or can’t play with. After around a month of playing, you would be prompted to do an optional Follow-up Biography, which you can update based on your playing experience of the game.
    Mutliplayer Type:
    Mix of Matchmaking and Dedicated Servers.
    The default would be Dedicated Servers, however you can hop into an automated matchmaking service, based off of the more recent Call of Duty’s.

Comments are closed.