# Games/game genres you will never touch with a 100 foot pole **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [May 6, 2011, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/games-game-genres-you-will-never-touch-with-a-100-foot-pole/580913 "2011-05-06T01:37:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/games-game-genres-you-will-never-touch-with-a-100-foot-pole/580913/81 "2011-05-17T00:39:28Z")
> [@Kiros](#): > > Military Porn. Not FPS games in their entirety, as I’ve always liked the Unreal games and goodness knows TF2 is a lot of fun. No, I am completely tired and have no interest in the vast genre of games that are set in World War II, Vietnam, Iraq, or wherever else will let them play to the military fantasies of 18-30 year old American males without actually having to design an original game. It just happens that the vast majority of these are FPSes. > > Maybe that was a little harsh, but the degree towards which Call of Duty and its various subgeneres have taken over the gaming industry kind of gets me going. The first Call of Duty was based on the exploits of Easy Company (Band of Brothers) so at least it’s not made up out of whole cloth. ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/games-game-genres-you-will-never-touch-with-a-100-foot-pole/580913/82 "2011-05-17T00:46:18Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > I purchased it the day of. I despise the UI, which was clearly made to integrate well with consoles, but the game itself isn’t too bad. I’m not entirely sure how game-changing the parkour is, but it is fun to run around a map with a decent amount of freedom. > > Still, I would say TF2 is more value for money. The UI is dogshit on the consoles, too. It’s got a bad lobby system, despite being a rather fun game. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/games-game-genres-you-will-never-touch-with-a-100-foot-pole/580913/83 "2011-05-17T00:58:39Z")
> [@Airk](#): > > I was really thinking about the “modern” FPS, where all the various Call of Duty/Black Ops/Wolf 3d/Killzone stuff are all pretty much the same game. I really wish I could find that screenshot that had the screenshots of Killzone, Call of Duty, and something else all in one image and I swear they looked creepily similar. You’re really lumping all first person games into the “military/vaguely military first-person shooter played primarily in online multiplayer” category. I don’t think that’s fair to a lot of the games that are first-person perspective but that aren’t FPSes like that - Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Mass Effect, Elder Scrolls, etc… And even within that genre, there are ones that make for some fairly compelling single-player play- the old Tom Clancy: Rainbow Six games come to mind for requiring serious mission planning as well as FPS shooter skill. My main complaint is that they’ve pretty much given up on the simulation aspect; that was what made the Rainbow 6 games (up through Raven Shield anyway) so compelling. If you got hit once in the right place, that was it. Or possibly you could get winged, but then you limped around, couldn’t aim, and most importantly made a lot of noise. This is single as well as multiplayer. Playing something like Call of Duty on anything but hardcore mode is just idiotic. ---
**Author:** ![Airk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de053/32.png) [@Airk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airk)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2011, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/games-game-genres-you-will-never-touch-with-a-100-foot-pole/580913/84 "2011-05-17T19:00:37Z")
> [@bump](#): > > You’re really lumping all first person games into the “military/vaguely military first-person shooter played primarily in online multiplayer” category. I don’t think that’s fair to a lot of the games that are first-person perspective but that aren’t FPSes like that - Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Mass Effect, Elder Scrolls, etc… I don’t really consider any of these “First Person Shooters”. And it’s first person shooters I am deliberately addressing here. RPGs are in their own category. > [@](#): > > And even within that genre, there are ones that make for some fairly compelling single-player play- the old Tom Clancy: Rainbow Six games come to mind for requiring serious mission planning as well as FPS shooter skill. > > My main complaint is that they’ve pretty much given up on the simulation aspect; that was what made the Rainbow 6 games (up through Raven Shield anyway) so compelling. If you got hit once in the right place, that was it. Or possibly you could get winged, but then you limped around, couldn’t aim, and most importantly made a lot of noise. This is single as well as multiplayer. > > Playing something like Call of Duty on anything but hardcore mode is just idiotic. Right. It seems like you’ve more or less already provided me with my own answer to your initial argument though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/games-game-genres-you-will-never-touch-with-a-100-foot-pole/580913.md?page=4)