The brilliance of the sun blinded us all as we emerged from the bombed-out subway system for the first time in days. It had been a hard trek to get to what had been supposed as a largely undefended strategic outpost, the capture of which would aid us immensely in our campaign. The base was exactly where, and in the condition, that we had expected, but it transpired that appearances were deceiving. An eagle-eyed guard spotted one of our scouts and the station was suddenly a hive of activity, and we were forced to take up our arms as enemy forces poured from the heavily fortified gate. Our infantry, including myself, took up our weapons, firing with reckless abandon in the belief that our information was correct and their numbers were few.

It seemed that for each of their number that fell beneath the hail of our bullets, another rushed out. The minutes drew out, our barrels growing hot and our ammunition supplies quickly dwindling, but we hooked in. Not a lot of time had passed before some us began to cry out in consternation as they discovered that they were completely out of bullets, and with no other options and no backup, those of us that still could pushed forward. As a single entity, we raced toward the gate that continued to spew out the twisted hateful faces of our enemies. It was a hectic, dangerous environment, but we reached the gate and, as we did, the flow of enemies seemed to stop almost as though someone had flicked a switch in the cosmos that saw them suddenly run out of reinforcements. Once within the walls, it was almost child’s play to take the compound, and it signalled the turning of the fortunes of our army.

The preceding anecdote is not drawn from any particular game that I’ve played, but the goal of it is to draw attention to what I perceive as a very serious flaw that permeates the campaign of just about every military-based shooter of recent times. That’s not to say that it is exclusive to that genre, but certainly most prevalent within it. What I’m referring to is a design shortcut that is used to ramp up the challenge in high-tension moments, but ultimately winds up doing little more than being a grand frustration for more cautious players like myself. It is the obscenely common idea of endless amounts of respawning enemies, the tide of which can only be shut off by advancing to a trigger point somewhere within the throng.

In its barest sense, the mechanic appears to be largely derived from the thrills of multiplayer, in which players are able to be constantly within the action, be they dealing or absorbing damage. It facilitates the competitiveness of the multiplayer scene by not excluding anyone and also by allowing the much sought after Kill/Death ratio to rise to phenomenal heights, provided the player is of a high enough skill level. In many ways, within this multiplayer area, it exemplifies the always-on/instant gratification mentality that seems to permeate gaming, and it is for this very reason that Deathmatch and related game modes are so immensely popular.

Unfortunately, this same high-octane, adrenaline-seeking type of gameplay isn’t the kind that is most often sought after by players that prefer to enjoy campaigns almost exclusively, such as myself. I daresay that such players enjoy their games in a similar manner to myself and move through the scripted levels cautiously, conserving ammunition and keeping damage incurred as minimal as possible as a result. For me, first person shooters are often treated with the mentality of a sniper, with the enemies being completely cleared out with carefully controlled bursts of fire before even daring to peek forward. Thankfully, this tactic often works and although it must raise the eyebrows of those that enjoy ploughing through their games like an ’80s action hero, there must be some readers that share my tendencies.

Bearing this in mind, it should become immediately obvious as to why I find the idea of a constant supply of enemies an appalling prospect. It forces players to adopt a brute force approach of diving gleefully into the fray. For all that it offers in pure exhilaration, it lacks in any finesse or sense of subtlety. It wrenches a degree of control away from players in an experience that should be entirely about facilitating their options. Arguably most heinous of all is the fact that it allows developers to put their brains on standby, forget about the importance of intricate level design and careful enemy placement. It requires no real inventiveness, leading to laziness and, often also, to cheapness. Enemies reappear too quickly and in too great numbers to allow the player to press forward, easily resulting in multiple frustrating deaths thanks to a sudden unbalancing.

Above all else is that it is a quick high and cheap thrill. You can argue that that is exactly what most modern shooters are designed for, thanks in large part to the popularity of the near-brainless Call of Duty, but that doesn’t mean that it should be applied to each and every shooter. Before long, it becomes a point of prominence and begins to reek of a complacency that really shouldn’t be present. Moreover, it detracts from the uniqueness of each title, acting as just another way for such experiences to bleed together into an indefinable orgy of blood and violence. I think that it’s time to stop, especially when some of the best shooters in recent history, including Battlefield 3, Resistance 3 and Bioshock, didn’t have to stoop to such levels. There are better ways to engage players and offer difficult situations than this tired idea.

Damien Lawardorn
Damien Lawardorn is an aspiring novelist, journalist, and essayist. His goal in writing is to inspire readers to engage and think, rather than simply consume and enjoy. With broad interests ranging from literature and video games to fringe science and social movements, his work tends to touch on the unexpected. Damien is the former Editor-in-Chief of OnlySP. More of his work can be found at https://open.abc.net.au/people/21767

Devil’s Third: THQ Returns Rights to Valhalla

Previous article

More Final Fantasy XIII Content Coming?

Next article

6 Comments

  1. Brilliant article and i could not agree more. Many games rely on this infinite enemies mechanic and it can get aggravating. Call of Duty is infamous from employing this in campaigns. When you play like we do, as a slow and cautious player (which is often required on higher difficulty settings) the games become almost impossible

  2. Brilliant article and i could not agree more. Many games rely on this infinite enemies mechanic and it can get aggravating. Call of Duty is infamous from employing this in campaigns. When you play like we do, as a slow and cautious player (which is often required on higher difficulty settings) the games become almost impossible

  3. Well said! Although (and it&#039s been a while, but I&#039ve been through it a couple of times), I don&#039t think KZ2 or KZ3 are part of this problem – CoD would be a _much_ better example.

    I&#039d also take issue with BF3 being considered one of the best shooters in recent history (from a SP perspective, which is what you&#039re talking about here). BF3&#039s SP was dull, poorly designed and uninspired, and had at least one instance of the issue you raise here ;).

  4. Kz1,2 definitively had this. In the first one there was this one level I remember where I had to move past a certain point before the game moved on. There&#039s also the ADVAAAANCE every time you&#039re about to run into enemies, even if they&#039re just standing there. MOH also has this… in almost every mission.

    Things I hate in video games:
    1) Stupid AI that are expert weapon handlers that seem to shoot like an aimbot, and always know where you are. Although, when you get close, they yell and raise their arms like a retarded bear, only for you to run your knife along their coat and have them instantly die. If anything, knives are slower! They also like to do things like shoot a rocket launcher point blank, killing both. I would whip out my pistol!
    2) AI you cannot kill, or an infinite amount, so that nothing matters.
    3) TURN BACK BLAH BLAH. Or, INVISIBLE WALL!!!
    4) Vehicles that you cannot drive, and are only driven by those idiot AI
    5) Getting stuck on something. I&#039d rather have my guy fall or do a roll than just stand there, running in place like I&#039m on a treadmill because there&#039s a little board there. Sometimes I think developers are just lazy with gameplay, but go all out on graphics.
    6) Quick deaths that result in waiting 10 secs each time after the, you&#039re dead! Goes away.
    7) In a team AI tactical game, one of my guys go down, if I don&#039t go to rescue him, I get killed. If I go down, I&#039m not down, I&#039m just dead and it&#039s game over.
    8) Bullets not leaving the gun&#039s barrel. I say, make the bullet go where the gun is pointing and everyone&#039s happy!
    9) Unbalanced gameplay (so it&#039s not fun for everyone)
    10) Too balanced of gameplay (so it doesn&#039t matter what you choose for a gun)
    11) AI that level up with you. Just set them with health and regen and leave it. Let them level up like you.

    I guess inconsistency is the worst. AI that have the same abilities I can have would be nice, like, when AI uses last stand, while I can&#039t. I also think that they should be able to be revived by teammates so you actually need to kill him.

  5. Well said! Although (and it's been a while, but I've been through it a couple of times), I don't think KZ2 or KZ3 are part of this problem – CoD would be a _much_ better example.

    I'd also take issue with BF3 being considered one of the best shooters in recent history (from a SP perspective, which is what you're talking about here). BF3's SP was dull, poorly designed and uninspired, and had at least one instance of the issue you raise here ;).

  6. Kz1,2 definitively had this. In the first one there was this one level I remember where I had to move past a certain point before the game moved on. There's also the ADVAAAANCE every time you're about to run into enemies, even if they're just standing there. MOH also has this… in almost every mission.

    Things I hate in video games:
    1) Stupid AI that are expert weapon handlers that seem to shoot like an aimbot, and always know where you are. Although, when you get close, they yell and raise their arms like a retarded bear, only for you to run your knife along their coat and have them instantly die. If anything, knives are slower! They also like to do things like shoot a rocket launcher point blank, killing both. I would whip out my pistol!
    2) AI you cannot kill, or an infinite amount, so that nothing matters.
    3) TURN BACK BLAH BLAH. Or, INVISIBLE WALL!!!
    4) Vehicles that you cannot drive, and are only driven by those idiot AI
    5) Getting stuck on something. I'd rather have my guy fall or do a roll than just stand there, running in place like I'm on a treadmill because there's a little board there. Sometimes I think developers are just lazy with gameplay, but go all out on graphics.
    6) Quick deaths that result in waiting 10 secs each time after the, you're dead! Goes away.
    7) In a team AI tactical game, one of my guys go down, if I don't go to rescue him, I get killed. If I go down, I'm not down, I'm just dead and it's game over.
    8) Bullets not leaving the gun's barrel. I say, make the bullet go where the gun is pointing and everyone's happy!
    9) Unbalanced gameplay (so it's not fun for everyone)
    10) Too balanced of gameplay (so it doesn't matter what you choose for a gun)
    11) AI that level up with you. Just set them with health and regen and leave it. Let them level up like you.

    I guess inconsistency is the worst. AI that have the same abilities I can have would be nice, like, when AI uses last stand, while I can't. I also think that they should be able to be revived by teammates so you actually need to kill him.

Comments are closed.

You may also like