[_proofs]

this is really a short-sighted and uninformed take on what games have been successful and praised by fans over the years.

four of the most successful (perhaps iconic) games in history do not exactly meet your description in any meaningful way: baldurs gate franchise, warcraft franchise, different mmo franchises, diablo franchise.

but let's take your description and apply them to iconic fps over the years:

doom, ok shooty mc shooty goes shootin -- doomguy agrees. but theres a lot more to doom than just shooting.

cs source: nah sorry tactical strategy is not shooty mc shooty goes shootin.

quake world up to quake live/quake champions: nah sorry tactical strategy and fps-chess (duel) is not shooty mc shooty goes shootin.

halo franchise: epic sci-fi campaign story which was differentiating at the time AND tactical strategy -- while it sorta fits your description, it also sorta bucks it in the face because it was praised for its campaign as well as its online play.

overwatch: role-based tactical strategy.

battle royal genre: kinda shooty mc shootin goes shooting, but on hard mode with variance and.. tactical strategy requirement.

i mean the list goes on. reducing the surface area of FPS games historically to just some reddit meme bc it gets a lot of updoots makes me think you do not have a ton of experience playing shooters historically or otherwise (happy to be proven wrong here).

marketing is strong.

[ehnto]

My argument is basically, if your game is so good and interesting, would it stand alone without combat? Could a different mechanic have stood in its place for a more interesting, novel game?

I have been playing FPS, guns or no guns, for 25 years. I also vehemently seek nuanced, interesting and intelligent game mechanics, and there is certainly many amazing games that fit the bill.

I am well informed, this is just my desire and not a fact or what I think should happen.

At any rate, the comments in defense so far have told me some of the most popular games are not shooters, and then that there are shooters with depth. No dispute there. I probably should have not been so pithy and stated it's combat in general, not shooters.

I also make games in my spare time, so I am at least practising what I preach. I think combat is a crutch for the gaming industry, and I would love to see more mechanics be explored with the budget a typical combat focused game gets. Gimme a AAA first person puzzle explorer ala Obduction, Pacific Drive, Viewfinder. Imagine a Fallout scale narrative exploration game that doesn't require combat to fill in the gameplay.

Cyberpunk is a fantastic story and exploration game, with interludes of stat based combat. I have spent hours just wandering the city and finding the cool hidden stories, but most 90% turn into 5 minute combat crescendos that add nothing to the story, while super obvious mechanics that would match the story go unexplored. That's more or less what annoys me, it's not a big deal I just find it a shame.

Again, I don't exactly care what other people play or do, this is just what I want.