Comments

  • `xinoN`xinoN Posts: 356Player
    Judging by the awards AA received, It could definitely have said something more about AA other than "America's Army (2002) was created by the US Army as a recruiting tool masquerading as a game".
    Oh well.
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,140Player
    edited February 2016
    `xinoN wrote: ยป
    Judging by the awards AA received, It could definitely have said something more about AA other than "America's Army (2002) was created by the US Army as a recruiting tool masquerading as a game".

    Agreed. The game was also one of the most popular FPS games of its time.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • CrushmasterCrushmaster Posts: 501Player
    That's a pretty pitiful mention of AA.
  • -[U|S|A]-Bunny_Hopper{MEGA}-[U|S|A]-Bunny_Hopper{MEGA} Posts: 87Player
    edited February 2016
    Man, soooooo many games.... "doom" ,"golden eye", and "medal of honor" bring back memories XD,

    AA got a bad/small spot in that article

  • KodenKoden Posts: 284Player
    Wonderful article! I really like most Ars Technica articles a lot :)
    Derob6.jpg
  • [ENG]Uni-Sol[ENG]Uni-Sol Posts: 3,191Player
    I like the article too, FPS have certainly come a long way.. what I don't like is how these kinda things make me feel old :(
    If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.






  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    They didn't mention CrossFire at all and that's an FPS that's claimed over 6,000,000 concurrent users and 500,000,000 accounts -- insanely huge. Popularity and influence aren't the same.
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,140Player
    To be fair, AA was really the first successful present day multiplayer military shooter. It was after AA's success that all of the big publishers started to flood the market with modern day shooters.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    So was Counter-Strike not military, not multiplayer, or not a shooter?
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,140Player
    edited February 2016
    I guess you can throw CS in, although, I've never looked at CS as a military shooter regardless of the available skins nor as something belonging to any kind of modern conflict/war (the game didn't exactly specify a time period in which it takes place). Either way, I still don't think you can undervalue what AA brought to the modern FPS area. I know many here like to say negative crap or downplay the success that AA2 had for whatever reason. However, the game was top notch for its time and extremely popular. You'd be lying to yourself if you actually believe that the game's success didn't have an influence on other mainstream titles.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    Let me rephrase -- what was the technical innovation/influence that AA brought that influenced subsequent titles?


    When I think of unique characteristics AA had that hadn't really been seen before, I think of things like:
    -- the training+qualification classes, but those have largely stayed unique to AA
    -- the "all players are always the Good Guy" model tricks, but I don't think this really caught on either
    -- the price ("free"), but others did this first and I think this plays into part of why it was seen by many as propaganda.
    -- gaming as a message delivery vehicle? Again, this toes a line with "propaganda" and I think the medium as a means of storytelling is just naturally a part of any entertainment medium.

    I'm hearing a focus on "modern military". BF and MoH series both started in WWII and slowly worked their way forward in time; I think that progression didn't depend on any other series for inspiration. Ghost Recon released in 2001 and was 100% modern military shooter set in the Caucasus.


    By no means am I saying AA was bad. There's no "negative crap" from me. I just don't think it had some massive influence that modern gaming journalists are now trying to downplay.
  • `xinoN`xinoN Posts: 356Player
    What about realism? I know today we don't look at it as the most realistic game ever but It won a few prizes related to realism.
    Oh well.
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    I think a trend towards realism was emerging at least partially as a response to the popularity of Quake and Unreal and twitch gameplay and partially as just a new direction developers wanted to explore.

    That said, games like GoldenEye certainly were already aiming in that direction in the mid-90s. SWAT 3 and Rainbow Six were doing tactical FPS with a huge emphasis on realism in the military and police realms in 1999 and 1998. Ghost Recon was doing military realism in 2001 in open outdoors environments (as opposed to Rainbow Six's CQB/indoors). All of those predate the AA series.

    One distinction to draw between the semi-realistic titles like GoldenEye and the realistic AA is health penalties and damage modeling. While GoldenEye and its ilk didn't penalize for low health, the earlier military simulators certainly did. Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon both penalized movement and aim based on hit location (not sure on how the SWAT series handled that).
Sign In or Register to comment.