I'm growing tired of the current Tactical FPS space...

[@donaldhysa4836]

Its super tactical when your super duper badass operator character dies of exhaustion after a 5 second sprint trust me bro.

[@RDD756]

true!!!! if you didnt know actual soldiers are actually less athletic than the basement dwelling neckbeard, this is verifiably true

[@YungcellyTV]

Don't forget they can climb a ledge or walk over a log either. Only way to have a tactical advantage.

[@galis4383]

They also can't control the recoil of a 5.56

[@donaldhysa4836]

@@galis4383 They usually shoot like they have never shot any weapon before, especially in Tarkov. Its like their developers really thought that weapons were supposed to be utterly uncontrollable in reality , because they had never shot any weapon in their lives due to strict russian gun laws xD

[@aidan3170]

I wish old games like SOCOM & Splinter Cell would make a comeback

[@jeremybrown9611]

They wouldn't work

[@CornFed_3]

@@jeremybrown9611, they would work just fine.

[@Kiryu_Kazuma01]

They probably would, but I will guarantee you they will never be the same level of greatness they were 20 years ago

[@-Belshazzar-]

@@jeremybrown9611 and why wouldn’t they? a good game is a good game. i wish games like that would return. the AAA gaming industry is stagnant or even regressing since around 2010. no innovation in gameplay or tech, just better more realistic graphics, that’s it. the problem is that these kind of games (story driven with voice over and plot and so on) are super expensive to make so indie devs cant really take that from the AAA industry and so we are left with crappy AAA games ir good indie games but as good as they might be they lack that story, characters, voice acting etc…

[@carljcmjk8609]

all the games looks the same it’s trash

[@Tranger1994]

Wild how youtube allows literally nude pfps on these pornbots that spam comment sections.

[@GamingSpider115]

Shouldn’t be shocked since Channels with Nudity or Those Content Farms aren’t banned

[@donaldhysa4836]

Thats disgusting! Where?!

[@HPVideoArchive]

@@donaldhysa4836 That's disgu....WHERE?!

[@coolersnoipah173]

@@HPVideoArchive LOL

[@gangatalishis]

We need another adpocalypse

[@See12Run-Gaming]

Summary: They aren't making games. They are making bloated vertical slices. Proof of concepts.

[@DatAsianGuy]

is that really the fault of devs or the lack of funding for these games.

[@DJPUPPETMASTER-RESURRECTED-]

Exactly,The sole reason why most modern tactical games suck nowadays

[@See12Run-Gaming]

@@DatAsianGuy let me tell you a huge secret that people don't want you to know. You don't NEED money to develop a game. Money, primarily should be for paying the people that are making the game. But as far as the actual development of the game, funding is not some inherent requirement. BattleBit was developed with basically no money, and when it did start to receive reasonable funding, that all basically went towards servers, which you DO need money for, but not for the development of the game itself. So yes, it's the fault of the devs. Most programmers, are not great project managers or even directors/designers. A lot of indie teams lack the structure and variety of skill sets necessary to execute the visions they see. Game development is hard, but there a lot of avoidable situations if you do the research.

[@DatAsianGuy]

​@@See12Run-Gaming Sure, it is not impossible to make a game without funding, but you also seem to imply there is zero benefit to having funding before start of development. -full-time dedication, -less risk of burnout, -faster pace of development, -hiring co-developers to help with the project I don't know what size of a project you think is good for "tactical FPS" game, but if you expect small teams, let alone solo indie devs to work on their game with no funding, then also expect those games to take a long time to cook and be small in scale.

[@See12Run-Gaming]

@ I never implied that. My point is games not operating beyond a level of tech demos or proof of concept is not due to funding.

[@philipmurray19]

Ready or not dealt with this well I think, their “story “ mode with your squad and their stress levels, evidence collection, police HQ upgrading after each mission..

[@RedactedBrainwaves2]

I still think Ready or Not should make their story a bit more coherent and clear to the player. It has material for some amazing storytelling but the devs are just sleeping on it it seems. Sometimes details they add to the environment that seem significant are just changed on an update, problems like that.

[@LeadMetal82]

@@RedactedBrainwaves2 There have been changes with the environment, i agree, but that's mostly BEFORE official release. Post official release, there's almost no changes whatsoever. And the story is purposefully vague because we're seeing it from the outside perspective (LSPD SWAT), though there are still ways the devs should implement to explore it.

[@actofaggression8060]

​@@RedactedBrainwaves2that was before release where they intentionally gaslit people to where stuff was heading. And I think this was a good approach, making sure everybody comes back for v1.0. Now we have the very on the nose story elements like the tablet and the conversations but also details work, detective / police work if you will but you have to work for that. I think this is great nevertheless as you're a crisis responder, not one of the actual detectives so nobody is going to brief you on the giant picture before the mission. Espc with the shush stuff going on within the LSPD, FISA and USIA.

[@Mawsodawso]

@@RedactedBrainwaves2the story is coherent if you listen to the briefings and go through all the “paperwork” everything connects

[@LeadMetal82]

@@actofaggression8060 Exactly what i meant. You wanna know what's going on? Start looking around. Look for notes, photos, videos, recordings, etc. Visit the evidence room and hell, even check the TV for news. There's not gonna be any cutscene to spoon feed you information, you gotta work for it. They're quite easy to find and even easier to study.

[@K9Tvz]

My buddies and I felt the same way years ago. We got tired of bitching about the same thing so we decided to get into game dev. We are on 3 years of production now of something actually good in the genre. Everything made in house. No bogus asset flips. All made with passion love and story behind everything.

[@K9Tvz]

@@Phillip_Graves just start man, don't wish. Just take the step and start on your own.

[@K9Tvz]

@@Phillip_Graves no one is until you start to learn, no one is born with knowledge and skill its all self taught. Don't make excuses, just do it.

[@K9Tvz]

@ get a job earn some money and do it. Again all I’m hearing is excuses. I paid for my first pc by saving cans and selling them to recycle place and mowing yards at 14. Excuses excuses.

[@Phillip_Graves]

@@K9Tvz oh you're one of those idiots 😂 ok nvm I can't take you serious. Next time you have a death in your family just get a job and fix it.

[@K9Tvz]

@ yea man that was called for. Weirdo man. I hope the best for you friend!

[@Xenoonmobile]

You expressed exactly how i feel about the tactical shooter genre. They're all fun for the first time, the second time, maybe even a third time... But after that, there is just nothing to do

[@Unknown_Genius]

Yeah, because everyone seemingly looks at ArmA and goes like "Well it works for them", generally ignoring that ArmA got a campaign, coop scenarios and on top the Sandbox + Mission Maker (which is especially something most of the other usually miss). It's quite ironic that Tactical FPS are the way to play a game because you enjoy playing it without shoving levels into your face, having to unlock stuff and the such and yet they usually throw away that entire benefit for being... too repetetive.

[@Kiryu_Kazuma01]

Same. I left for other genres, I mean, yeah I’ll play CS2, but FPS’s don’t grab me anymore, I began getting involved in other genres because the tactical shooter genre isn’t the same level of quality like they were 10-15 years ago +

[@mynameiscolb]

the OG Rainbow Six games come to mind. Those were in depth story driven games

[@OscarLopez-gq4he]

rsv2 baby

[@Kiryu_Kazuma01]

Dude, compare that to what R6S has become, my god. I’m okay with a _tiny_ bit of fantasy in tact shooters, but Siege is just effing crazy now

[@-Belshazzar-]

raven shield and swat 4, the pinnacle of tactical shooters! raven shield, a game from 2001 lol. what a game!

[@LLAAPPSSEE]

Anyone know Siege's story? XD

[@charlescabbage2933]

​@@LLAAPPSSEEyeah... This new story is has a better story since it's first release aka the White Mask faction... Now we have a Rouge Rainbow operative called Deimos is planning on killing most of Rainbow, he let himself get captured so rainbow will take him and all of the Recruits to Hereford Base... Since Deimos is one step ahead against Rainbow... Already had his Agents pretend as Recruits and now have infiltrated Rainbow ... Sooo that's the new game mode the game will be having Where you get to play as most rainbow operators while the other team play as the Evil recruits... You will have to defend objectives to prevent the base from destroying

[@Shortmansam1993]

The other issue is that, it feels like the AI hasn’t even improved that much since the OG Terrorist Hunt in Rainbow 6. While it bugs sometimes, I love the AI in Last of Us (of all things). They flank you, they suppress you, they pop your head if you re-peek an angle. There a stealth system where they are drawn to your last known location rather than magically knowing where you are. The enemies don’t auto detect you from 100 yards away while you’re crouching in cover. This is the AI we want in tactical fps.

[@DJAngelcakes]

I remember a video from a couple years back that said something to the effect of "these games don't want to be games, they want to be gun simulators."

[@GameBoyyearsago]

Give me that video link Bra : )

[@IndyGuest]

Trepang 2 is a great example of making a shooty shooty demo into something cohesive and compelling.

[@DxBlack]

It was comprehensive, but FAR from compelling...especially when it has no replay value other than any DLC they're releasing. Totally mid a game.

[@superjesse645]

​@@DxBlack I don't appreciate it being another 'erm ackshually ur a bad guy and you die at the end' game. I just wanted a Fear-like.

[@Basementshoes]

⁠@@DxBlack As a console player, the last game I could even compare it to was Max Payne 3 and that was years ago. I’ll admit, it’s probably not compelling on PC but for a console player it’s quite literally a breath of fresh air.

[@vladimir_ckau]

Nah, trepang is boring af. If someone wants movement shooter with slo-mo and cool gunplay done right there's hidden gem of Severed Steel awaiting.

[@captainsewerrat]

It took you 10 years to get fed up? Respect. I've been lamenting the death of single player narrative campaign driven shooters since CoD turned into "Yeah it has a campaign, now sit down and play MP."

[@GameBoyyearsago]

Same Agree with you bra, im tired of online games : )

[@mattmattmatt131313]

I miss the times when "Multiplayer" was just one of the fun side game modes you did after finishing the whole game.

[@TomD16V1]

This is why I constantly end up coming back to Insurgency Sandstorm

[@JakeMcGarryDrums]

Wish more people played, it is so fun and simple

[@aryabratsahoo7474]

It needs some sort of singleplayer mode with objectives and it would be perfect.

[@ceilingfan7393]

​@@aryabratsahoo7474 Like with a story or just a single player mode? Because you can play solo with bots on your team in most of the game modes.

[@toddconnell6256]

@@JakeMcGarryDrums it has potential for so much more too

[@imembridibuddha]

@@aryabratsahoo7474 I'm still bummed about the devs neglecting the AI and offline experience. The game could definitely work as a offline skirmish game.

[@stepgames7698]

This is what I kinda like in Insurgency Sandstorm, where the voice actors for the characters/air support/etc have so much personality, you really feel like there's an actual setting, not just faceless AI.

[@Xenoonmobile]

I:S is definitely my number 1 tactic fps. Great maps, great gunplay, great voice acting and overall Audio design. I don't play it much these days, but whenever I get that tactical itch I hop on I:S

[@CcSmokecC]

Wish they’d make another Insurgency “____” based on the setting. I know it’s cliché bc of recent talk, but something around the cartel wars could work well. You can have generic enemies with Mexican military on one side. Sad NWI was disbanded and we probably won’t see another one.

[@Xenoonmobile]

@CcSmokecC wait nwi is no more? Damn didn't know that.... I was hoping for another insurgency. Well here's to another 5 years of playing IS lol

[@AcceptableAsGenerallyDecent]

arguing with ai enemies with the shout feature never gets old (they dont know im echolocating their exact position)

[@Xenoonmobile]

@@AcceptableAsGenerallyDecent truly an underrated feature. Nothing beats yelling profanities in the middle of a gunfight

[@Wrongday]

This is exactly why I put hundred of hours in Escape from Tarkov. The lore is so immersive, every details in map design tells a story. You always have goals set going into raid (quests, maxing traders, hideout, money run, etc). Yes it has its flaws, but it blows the competition out of the water by miles on the reasons you get to log back in.

[@soundwave3092]

It’s just so god damn flawed. I love everything the game tries to do, I can’t stand everything they continue to get wrong at this point. I’ve paid them $150 and waited a good 4 years and so many of the same old massive issues are still there. Don’t get me wrong they’re definitely improving (recoil changes for example), it’s just hard to stick with. I play it for PVP (even though I’m terrible at it) and after PVE mode got added to the game, it’s just sweats on sweats on cheaters and I had to drop it

[@LUCAS420BLZ]

If EOT was single player I'd play it endlessly but it being multiplayer and horrible netcode and cheating puts me off I love survival games and if EOT was just a massive map you can survive in it would be perfect everything already exists for that purpose

[@fourthstage9375]

It needs more better events for late wipe

[@Grieva-SeeD-]

@@soundwave3092 Since playing SPT and finding the sheer amount of quality mods I have not really gone back to EFT. It was good to see the PvE mode come in but the AI is still crap and cannot even come close to SPT with SAIN and Realism mods.

[@soundwave3092]

@ I just cannot derive enjoyment from the game unless I’m up against real players, it just doesn’t work for me sadly

[@thejeremymotley]

bots are out in force on this one

[@BigfryTV]

Just hid them again. So fucking annoying

[@mostlygamingstuff1260]

I haven’t seen obvious bots on bigfrys videos… maybe I’m not quick enough to look at them before he hides them…. I have noticed on Penguinz0 (Charlie’s) vids there’s frequently comments about some kind of ‘youth related’ crimes that have awful spelling and have no relevance to whatever shenanigans Charlie is talking about lol…. Idk what the purpose of such nonsense comments are

[@Captain.AmericaV1]

I report them. KZbin usually deals with the annoying gots

[@Prosperous.Intuition]

@@BigfryTV Love your content man and really glad you talked about this I feel the same.

[@DRHellcat319]

​@@BigfryTVhave you played Blackhawk Rescue Mission 5

[@FriendlyGiant0]

one saying I heard a while back which sums these games up. there is a lot to look at but nothing to touch. this saying goes through many different games whether that's FPS, survival, action adventure. one recent game that strays away from this is stalker 2. there are many areas that are unused in the story but these areas have character, secrets and lore. when you come across the tornado in S2 its mind blowing, its set on the edge of the map where many players wont go. that saying "There is a lot to look at and nothing to touch" actually changed the way I buy games. yes gun play looks fun or the world looks cool but if you have a world where all you can do is go from point A to point B with nothing in between you might as well make you game linear. even in fps games. if you maps don't tell a story, its just a box with boxes inside a box with no real story on what this map is about. as much as people hate destiny/destiny 2 I always loved the world building and the map design because it always was a part of the story and you can find lore on about the map or destination and it was deep too. the design of the maps always reflected that story incredibly well to. when I can interact with the world, I'm happy

[@Lenariet]

Hmmm not sure about Destiny 2. I think I liked exploring the maps for the first time while I was around (up until Forsaken). They definitely were gorgeous to look at, I wish the console version would have had a photo mode at the time. But the levels didn't feel as if they were brimming with good life in terms of content. You had the occasional public event and those lazy fetch/kill quests aka patrols. But that mostly was it already. Or I don't remember too much more anyway. Most lore (which Destiny 2 has tons of) was expressed in the lore books both in- and outside of the game but not really in a meaningful gameplay manner. I'm not saying D2 is the worst example but if you ask me it isn't the best either.

[@ughneyko]

You couldn't be more spot on with this video, especially about Ground Branch. My friend and I both bought the game to play together and do coop tactical missions. For the first two or three missions the game is fun but after that you just realize that there is basically zero content beyond killing random nameless bad guys. No progression, no story, no unlocks. It's just another copy paste tactical shooter with a bunch of gear.

[@navyrangeryt4829]

I think that Gray Zone is setting themselves up for success because they include the things you’re talking about. The game still has a looong way to go but it has me hooked and I’ve loved the 115 hours I’ve put in. Overall, you’re bang on dude. Keep doing awesome stuff and ignore the haters my man.

[@WavvyboiKhris]

I would love to play it if my pc can handle it

[@craigluedtke3885]

Gave Gray Zone a 2nd chance after the 0.2 update. Been really enjoying it. I like the slow gameplay that's not all CQB. Night raids kick ass. Devs have pushed a few small patches since 0.2 as well, and seem pretty responsive.

[@daedalus6433]

@@craigluedtke3885Does it still run like ass?

[@Troubl3_Actual]

Concur. GZ has me hooked

[@cove1008]

​@daedalus6433 unfortunately yeah... 2080ti i9 9900k 32gb ram, still lucky to push 60fps.

[@kruxxme5372]

Good new on Ground Branch, one thing that will keep me coming back, is single player friendly AI team (not much of a multi-player guy), and the campaign mode - from their roadmap: 'Full-fledged missions with briefings, multiple objectives and team selection/loadout for both single player and online co-op. Our unique “campaign” format will deliver smaller, more localized sets of 2-4 missions based around global hotspots. The choices you make along the way may affect future engagements and objectives. Missions will involve all kinds of different goals, from special reconnaissance to high-value target assassination and personnel recovery.' Unsure on the timeframe of course...

[@LocalGuardsman]

They’ve promised that for quite a while though.

[@doctormantistoboggan2339]

Roadmap has a time-frame listed. They usually update annually around Christmas or NYE

[@ResetIncoming]

Ground branch is a dead game that lost its devs.

[@yourfavoritelawnguy2722]

i mean if you plan on coming back to play Ground branch in like 2030, it might be realistic.

[@XxgoodbudsxX]

Road map is just code for we hope we can do this. I wouldn't hold your breath.

[@MrFathead6]

Ground Branch is a perfect example of this situation. My buddies and I put hours and hours into this game and now when they want to play it or anything similar I'm just burned out. Its a repetitive cycle of game for me. As much as I enjoy what they're doing to the game long term I don't think I will stick with it.

[@mostlygamingstuff1260]

lol I play Ground Branch solo while I’m waiting to get into the server on Squad on busy nights

[@PabloPhreshcobar]

Ground branch just feels so empty even if it has more maps than almost every other game in the genre and probably the best customization, too. There's nothing to work towards, no real goals other than to complete the mission you get no reward for, the AI is just dog shit even on the highest difficulty, etc. I wouldn't say it's lacking in content; there's just nothing to do with that content, and I don't really care about the bugs bc sometimes they're pretty funny lmao. The game has been in EA for almost 6.5 years and the last time I checked it was still in alpha, and that's crazy.

[@genaraloffire]

im so glad their finally going to be implementing missions that could change this

[@doctormantistoboggan2339]

Gb has a roadmap and made progress tho

[@-Belshazzar-]

GB has almost no players now. in the last few months every time i logged in to play there were like 5 servers max and all completely empty. if they won’t get their act together this game will die

[@RedactedBrainwaves2]

Finally someone said it. Most games imo should have a story and should not be built around coop or multiplayer pvp, even if you make the story entirely text based like the old Stalker games. What we can't have is empty game engine kits with weapons and maps like we're getting. At least Ready or Not is trying to weave a story through the environment but quite frankly even that is a bit dissatisfying to me, just barely acceptable.

[@Ghost_Text]

Not even that. Prior decades were more interesting because there was a blend of cosmic horror, mystery sci-fi and physics that changed the nature of the gameplay such as from F.E.A.R and HL2. This stuff could mesh well with tactical genre pacing, and bring in some paranoia But we only have some titles like Stalker giving it a shot while other milsims mainly stick to PvP.

[@tehlulzpare]

Someone else said it but holy shit I agree; Jagged Alliance, but in an FPS form. You build a team of mercs, equip them from what you can buy from gun-runners or find during a mission, and then crucially, make it single-player or co-op with an interesting story with a satisfying conclusion. The problem a lot of the time I think is twofold; if it’s a small dev team, they are focusing on the stuff you mention, adding massive amounts of customization but no meat to chew on beyond that, no reason to do the missions. And larger dev-teams must bake in live-service or constant updates to keep a game fresh. We didn’t expect that back in the day, we could buy a game fairly cheaply, beat it in a week or two, then shelve it and go “damn that was fun”. But games are so fucking expensive to make and gamers expect such high polish and graphics that really, small teams often lack the ability to really nail down having all of that. Bigger dev-teams also have to often pay for server space. Those Exfil games are often pretty expensive in that regard, and live service is the only way to even begin to turn a profit not just loss. But by going Jagged Alliance style, you can make interesting mercenary characters(at least, not entirely flat ones) and XCOM style upgrading of a base and Tarkov level gun customization could then be married to a system that doesn’t need to support a multiplayer infrastructure, or at least not a large one. Co-op is often off the host, right? So that’s another plus for a company. Set it on a delightfully scenic and beautiful location with some fun internal politics to cause a fuss, and you can make a pretty compelling game.

[@supersanegames]

Very good idea

[@whippedflame8484]

I disagree with progression systems. Too many games have been built entirely around those systems, that other aspects of the games suffer. I want campaigns and story driven games to return though.

[@HHZanarkand]

yeah something is better than nothing

[@Lenariet]

Plenty of players need/want them. Imho the issue already starts with all the adhd kids of today not knowing what to do or why to play games any longer if there isn't a shiny new bling bling and message of approval every five seconds. You could go much deeper with all this. The gamers of today are to be blamed to some degree too, not just devs.

[@andersdanielsenanimator]

Good points all around Bigfry, couldn't agree more! I can't wait to see our game, SCP: 5K, get to this point, we're adding more storytelling and lore elements with every update, and our focus has shifted from just good gunplay and "guns... lots of guns" to becoming a primarily story-driven experience with lots of replayablility and great game modes. We're getting there!

[@BigfryTV]

Very excited to hear that you guys are thinking this way!

[@Nogaret_]

Well for zero hour they don't have a very big customisation, but they do have a sort of story, you unlock the solo maps from playing, and the maps try to have some lore outside of kill the bad guys, even if it's the only thing you do in the end

[@WanuboiOfficiel]

Ready Or Not and Six Days in Fallujah to rule them all

[@Madcore.]

I thought it was just me, that I was getting board of FPS games but your right. I would love more story telling in my games and have better objectives or a progression system to work towards and unlock or collect. These kind of games don't make me want to come back and play over and over.

[@camerontapia9072]

Heck, even just give people the means to craft narratives for you with mod tools and stuff

[@Lenariet]

​​​​​@@camerontapia9072I remember games coming pre-shipped with level/scenario editors. But devs/publishers nowadays often want to sell you snippets of "content" themselves. Mods would mean less sales for that stuff. Hence why modding is often not supported natively any longer, even if it would be as easy as ever from a distribution standpoint with Steam Workshop. But then you also have the issue of people not being able to host their own servers and crossplay being forced. Modding afaik still is even less of a thing on consoles than on PC and crossplay wouldn't necessarily make much sense to have if PC players were all to run heavily modified games. So, there are actually several things that make modding and creating own things difficult - or at least getting it into the hands of the players.

[@GameBoyyearsago]

​@@LenarietExactly I Like to mod my games, if i cant mod my games there is not point of playing one games in long run : )

[@biffski01]

What you are missing, BF, is something called "a story driven campaign". What you have lost and won't get back, is your youth. Once you lose that then repeating the same map over and over again leaves you thinking "life is too short for this bs". It happens to us all in the end.

[@GriZZZly123]

The only tactical fps that made it out of early access and is good is Ready or Not.

[@JonMyers-hf8js]

Except that the AI are extremely op which makes the game broke. And before you make a comeback, they are BROKE. The absolute instant your head barely becomes visible around a corner they are instant aimbot.

[@Zurenarrh]

Who said tactical shooters need to be set in modern times only? Maybe what we need is a time change. I'd play a realistic, squad based halo. Halo-cqb game or project reality but with Halo assets would be a banger...........

[@Phillip_Graves]

Sounds like you wanna play halo 🤣

[@fourthstage9375]

​@@Phillip_Gravesi think he mean halo but with much quicker TTK

[@Zurenarrh]

@@Phillip_Graves I mean halo but without spartans, just project reality with halo assets, playing as regular soldiers, insurrectionists or covenant. Gameplay will be exactly like project reality but assets will be from halo. I'd play ready or not with halo assets too. Set in 2550's in an alien world, play as an ODST in human covenant war in forerunner facilities. Squad based tactical halo. Is that clear ?

[@KRN1VOR]

You are quite right - humor me to consider this as a synopsis: The 80/20 rule, aka the Pareto principle, states that 80% of outcomes come from 20% of causes - which is the guiding force for optimal use of dev time - bang for the buck ie. produces an acceptable degree of satisfaction - if we separate game dev 20% (the game loop and story) and game play 80% (the physical interactions and visceral reactive emotions) - the player's participation and enjoyment initially is based on the immersiveness, game mechanics and instinctual response mechanisms (the twitch factor and/or the primary narrative) and perhaps think of maps or levels as the acts or stages of a story with their own internal pacing ie. the introduction, conflict / rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution representing a sense of accomplishment/achievement/fun -then, a switch occurs: there are cooldowns or breaks in the action - the transition from one state to another - and the need for a new goal begins - this represents a mental organization of events which the player desires as a reconciliation of his efforts and fuels the motivation to continue on this path to enrichment ...

[@ArcangelGamingEntertainment]

I'm telling ya First person, hardcore, tactical, extraction shooter is the hardcore, multiplayer, zombie survival game of the 2020s. Same damn thing, slightly different genre.

[@shaunnormandy]

That really hurts as someone who loves the idea of both. Really opposite issues too. Zombie survival must be a fucking cursed genre since DayZ, because no solitary person or group can seem to successfully make a similar experience with modern graphics and gameplay; and the market has never been more saturated with semi-polished hardcore tactical shooters, but so few have any soul, or even interest longevity beyond randomized enemy spawns. "You're a special forces guy now. Do SF things." "Like what?" "Kill bad guys." "... Okay, what else?" "Do it AGAIN."

[@jeremybrown9611]

I mean yeah

[@GameBoyyearsago]

​@@shaunnormandyHaha Agree : )

[@connorbutters8479]

Dunno why tactical FPS have to be always military and always "realistic" and "hardcore" There's a lot more you could do in this genre if it broke free of it's hackneyed tropes Like what if you had a tactical FPS with the setting and setup of a jagged alliance game Needing to scavenge or purchase weapons for your squad would provide the much needed progression and a more significant punishment for failure. Plus needing to balance your budget with your fellow mercs wages, ammo and other resources for base upkeep Or a WW1 trench clearing shooter with the disadvantages brought upon by the weapons of that time. There's a lot of things you can do really

[@Bban-w7d]

Both of your ideas fall into military, realistic, and hardcore lol. You answered your own question with that.

[@82hellas]

I agree with the lack of story or campaign, but I HEAVILY disagree with a progression or unlock system. So many games are just dopamine simulators where you play JUST to unlock the next thing. If the gameplay cannot speak for itself than the game is a failure. I come back to Ground Branch, OG Ghost Recon, OG Rainbow Six, Ready or Not, etc because they are FUN with friends. Not because I need the dopamine hit of "Wow I unlocked multicam in another game!" How fun! Story mode is what these games need. Linear levels can be a good thing too. Not everything has to be a sandbox. Randomize the enemies a little for replayability and there you go. Terrorist hunt gamemodes were also the core of a lot of the games we played years ago. That is why Ground Branch and Zero Hour are the way they are, but campaign was the focus in those inspirations. A good game loop compromise could be play the campaign and unlock those maps for T-Hunt like OG GR and R6.

[@RedactedBrainwaves2]

I think by unlock BigFry doesn't mean necessarily battle passes or leveling systems but a general sense of directionality. The gameplay needs to go somewhere, just like writing can't just be endless descriptions of random scenery it needs to build up towards something of a climax with characters and conflict. Some games, especially multiplayer ones, use progression exactly for this purpose.

[@jericho1-4]

A game from more than twenty years ago that did this very well was Splinter Cell, it always had a great story/campaign mode, and the more you played on the different difficulties during a full game play the more alternate routes you would find and it had a great co-op story/campaign mode to play with friends or family. While I like customization when the game itself suffers cause there is so much of it takes away from the games overall appeal. Sure I could speed run the hell out of a lot of the OG titles now having thousands to tens of thousands of hours playing them I'd rather take my time and enjoy them the way they were meant to be played.

[@Sleepyless]

Left the tactical space a while ago, its the same boring shit

[@Choccymilk2996]

Like you said, they never promised it but Groundbranch has so much potential to be the military version of ready or not with plausibility behind bigger maps / more military esque targets etc.

[@FUBAR_VR]

I agree with your takes 100%. It’s cool to play dress up with all the Gucci gear but at what cost for the actual game. I’ve played all the games you mention in this video and I always find myself going back to Squad for my tactical fix. A game with no real weapon customization like GB or RoN etc., yet the gameplay is just top notch. Squad really makes you feel like you’re part of an actual team and not a one man army. The issue with squad, though, are the people that come from games like COD or BF and think they can be a one man army.

[@mikew2911]

How's your "Game of the Year", STALKER 2? You put a lot of hours into it or did you just cash the check?

[@F1NKST3R]

I see your point but at the same time I love that I don’t have to grind and spend hours unlocking gear or cosmetics. I don’t mind that some games are built for casual gamers and non sweaty players lol. If I wanna grind at a game I’ll play the COD’s, Delta Force, Battlefield games. I love the simplicity of Ground Branch and Zero Hour and they are a lot of fun to just pick up and play. Idk if you’ve been keeping up with the Ground Branch team but the next update is adding in team AI and adding real mission objectives like collecting intel and a somewhat story mode to the missions they are building. Ready or Not, Six Days & Grey Zone all have Tactical FPS feels with story lore. Also, Zero Hour was like $12 lol

[@cundan0484]

I want to see more Insurgency style immersive but casual multiplayer shooters

[@Диего_де_ла_Вега]

I think most of those games underestimate the importance of singleplayer modes. The genre is too small to have a billion multiplayer games. I hope Dagger Directive will be good.

[@Eagle-ci9dr]

To be fair, Ground Branch does have a story mode in the works. I know it's been a while since any large update has hit Ground Branch, but it is a very small team from what I could find out on them. But I get what you're saying, if they had a progression system so you had something to work towards in the mean time it wouldn't be a bad addition at all.

[@jaysteeze508]

I definitely feel this... believe it or not I've spent countless of hours on ground branch. It was great but there's really nothing to keep me motivated to play the game. Nowadays I just find myself on Tarkov

[@PitBullet]

Man I really miss old-school Ghost Recon days and how those games were designed, the original GR and Jungle storm specifically

[@ThinkingAtheos]

The weird thing is, what you're talking about is really one of the easiest things to add to a game. It's just a bunch of "If played without getting hit or not kill a hostage > unlock badass scope". It reminds me of Worms Armageddon training exercises where you could go for the perfect score which made it so awesome to replay. Damn I miss oldskool gaming.

[@ThisIsGlitch]

i'm going to be devils advocate, GB said that the campaing mode is coming.... granted, its taking a while but its coming

[@doctormantistoboggan2339]

It's slated to be in the update after the upcoming one iirc

[@cameronnovy3718]

It’s funny, your point about having a connected story through mission progression is something I’ve done in my own head for a long time. In Ground Branch for example, I might think to myself ‘terror attack in the city, gathered info off dead terrorist leads to training facility, then information on the big bad residing in a compound’. It’s great when a game has a structured narrative like Ready or Not, but I think it can also be good when the game gives you the freedom to think this way and make up your own story. Maybe that’s just my take from playing a lot of games that leave much to be desired on this front, or that have an entirely different focus.

[@ArcticWolfOfficial]

Sucks that we don’t really get arcade shooters anymore

[@vladimir_ckau]

Wait, what? I thought in Zero Hour I was looking for mad sadistic doctor from horror movies. Solving hostage situation at the embassy. Dealing with bad guys in their lair like in Raid movie. But okay, if Bigfry says there's no lore with faceless bad guys...

[@Messothelioma]

give Black One Blood Brothers another look, it has gotten some good updates, still needs work, but you can tell they are working on it.

[@robina6645]

Still sad that the Insurgency Sandstorm campaign was scraped..

[@harrymasononvacation]

I don't necessarily think a tactical shooter needs a strong overall narrative, but environments need those small details that give it life. Mechanically, i'm glad that there's no unlocks, but bare minimum tactical shooters need a campaign mode with permadeath for operators. Something to tie things together into a more metagame feel. Otherwise, yeah, it's basically just running the same botmaches over and over.

[@shannonbright9942]

I wish some of these small teams could pull together and help each other. Gray zone warfare might ops update restored my hope in that game.

[@TastyDizaster]

I wish the SOCOM games made a come back, their story and missions were great. Their story with the systems of something like groundbranch would be incredible

[@OniBookie]

We need a tactical shooter that’s like Darktide

[@isaacmacqueen9695]

There's a reason I have 250+ hours in gray Zone warfare and about 90 in ground branch and 500+ in ghost recon and about 6 in zero hour. We need something to fight for

[@Texan_American]

I just want ultimate realism. That's all. Don't need a story. I like what Six Days is doing with the random generation. Would love a modern tactical Ghost recon 1 style game. Slow and intentional open ended maps with some map generator options that dint suck and actually good AI. The big issue with all of these games is the shit AI. Really good AI goes a long way in replayability and fun.

[@SocalThero]

In total agreement here, not to knock anyone's work or talk bad on us consumers, but it seems like once a game comes out, it grabs our attention until the next game comes along and then takes it away again and honestly as consumers (I'm not one of these as I enjoy as much as I can out of the content I pay for) I don't think we have the attention span to go back to a game over and over again for update after update to where it gets the game in a better playable state. I agree that these games are releasing WAY to early to the market that it gets a "Hey look I'm a new game" response but that the player base doesn't return until something big and drastic comes along to show that its crossed its finish line (A great example of this is the progress of Ready or Not up until it made it to the 1.0 launch and now doing even better with the DLC's coming out after). I bought ground branch on the recommendation of a friend and after playing it was not very impressed by it. To the credit of the game however, I didn't take the time to research and read into what it was and what the goal was for the game to that it was more of my fault rather than the developers on not checking on the features and the status of the game which had I done so, I think I would of been less let down (Again my own doing and not the developers).

[@BigfryTV]

100% - I dont want to shit on any of these guys work because, well, I'm living that life right now and I understand the trials and tribulations. BUT, when it comes to designing these things, I dont see a lot of these devs thinking this way.

[@SocalThero]

It would be the equivalent of you releasing your game into early access with one level and slowly updating it over the years with better guns, better graphics, better ai, more levels, etc. That by the time it was in what you would feel is a finished state, has lost most of its fan base as the initial "wow" or "honeymoon" period is now over and consumers have moved on to the next consuming game.

[@radon4163]

Real and true. The core gameplay loop in tactical games are very bare bones. They have a great foundation but there is no reason to play the same levels again after completing them once.

[@CouncilmanTom]

As I listened to this, I opened steam to see when I last played some games. I last played Zero Hour 12/27/21 @ 7.2 hours and don't even have it installed. I last played Ready or Not 5/28/24 and haven't even updated it. I got Bodycam, but last played it 9/6/24. I last played Operator 10/19/24, with 3.1 hours in. All of these games and I've played more Battlefield 2042 and R6 than them all combined. All because those other games lack progress, and reason to play outside of getting with friends to grind out some bullets or checking out a update. Completely understand this video.

[@thelittledetailscr7231]

Possibly because you engage with the fps space every day for hours.

[@EyeXombie]

Nah its because most the games suck

[@arudimentaryimplant]

If you actually look at most of these tactical fps You ll understand him

[@thelittledetailscr7231]

@arudimentaryimplant if you do anything all day everyday, it gets old.

[@ryanse4]

True, it's his job and passion. I trust Bigfry's opinions especially because he genuinely understands the genre and what makes a game special.

[@aryabratsahoo7474]

​@@arudimentaryimplantthere's nothing that makes them stand out from their competitors. All of them are just multiplayer matches with no substance other than the weapons and customisation. Ready or Not has a singleplayer campaign with friendly ai and worldbuilding, Six Days in Fallujah shows the authentic experience of the battle of Fallujah. Most of them make the mistake of making them multiplayer focused which ironic since that kind of gameplay won't attract enough players to keep it active.

[@tonythatyga2782]

I feel this. A little progression and story would go along way in a game like ground branch. The feeling of being able to use every piece of gear right from the start kinda turns me away. Ready or not did a great job with unlockables depending on how you do missions.

[@CaZuaLDeMoN]

Not surprised you mentioned Ready Or Not because no one does it like they do.

[@FebiMaster]

late 1990s to early 2010s are the golden era of tactical shooters, mostly dominated by passionate developers making story driven games filled with meaning and coherence, no asset flips, no sandbox only games, there are plots, in game universe, memorable characters and settings. Ever since ubisoft left that era, no one has been able to fill the void just yet, the closest one is Ready or Not, but it's not quite there yet when we compare it to the likes of Ghost Recon, and Rainbow Six. Call of Duty has that memorable plots but they aren't tactical shooters by definition

[@Kanji_Cowboy]

THIS NEEDED TO BE SAID!! literally hit the feels. Well said 💪

[@walczak9862]

This reminds me of how i felt playing the forever winter. Art, environments and characters/atmosphere in that game is amazing but every mission type is just “go get this and get out with it” or “go kill this guy” and it bummed me out cuz they could make the game awesome if there was actual objectives that force you to engage with them like puzzles or something like you said about reading lore you find etc. something to make it a game and not a walkable artbook that has shooting.

[@justjozua1827]

So how would you think your complaints would fit into a game like Post Scriptum/Squad 44?

[@BigfryTV]

PVP experiences are a bit more nuanced, especially when they try to pit real factions against one another (RU vs US etc)

[@l.3626]

Its always the same with the military simulation games, they only focus on the simulation part forgetting that its supposed to be a fun game

[@emilianocastillejos1330]

A lack of story/background information is why I stopped playing a lot of the games you mentioned. It stops being fun to play against “bad guy #46” after a few games and makes me feel like the game is unfinished. It would take a couple of days minutes for them to make some sort of terrorist group or something to help identify and flesh out the bad guys, and for a game like Ground Branch they could also just make a campaign by linking all the maps together, literally just 1st mission, then 2nd, 3rd and so on. Btw what game is this 9:50?

[@SmokyMcP0t]

XP unlocks do not add substance to a game, they just artificially boost player counts from people grinding these proxy objectives. In terms of single player games though - many games do feel like a lazy bare bones tech demo with no story.

[@Lenariet]

If you don't have 'em lots of players complain though. You can't make a game without bloat and arbitrary progression systems anymore, plenty of players simply don't know what to do or why to play else.

[@vaporwavelabs5283]

Imagine a time travel game where you have to save historical figures but if you fail or kill the wrong person , it will change the outcome of the next level …. All good points big fry ! Thanks for the honesty!!

[@goldy_on_pc930]

Imagine spending 15$ on a game and crying because 40 hours later it doesn’t fulfil you anymore

[@issahumps]

I’m just over here enjoying squad updates. I started ignoring all the other tactical games coming out 😂

[@tzav]

Thank you for bringing this up! It’s frustrating to see so many discussions about tactical shooters, yet no one mentions this issue. These games are missing strong mission design. Right now, missions lack dynamic events-there’s no pacing, no surprises, and no sense of progression within the mission itself. The bots just roam aimlessly, and you hunt them down, often ending in an anti-climactic search for the last one. There’s no real flow or reward for completing the mission beyond basic AI encounters. Progression systems and unlocks are fine as extras, but they shouldn’t be the main focus. The game itself should be the reward. Missions need scripted moments and triggers to create tension, excitement, and a sense of accomplishment. Otherwise, even games like Ready or Not-as great as it is-fall into the same repetitive formula of bot hunts with no variation. Adding new maps without improving mission design won’t fix this problem. These games need more thoughtful scripting and pacing to create memorable experiences, not just surface-level aesthetics or grind mechanics.

[@ogPunkcln]

This hits the nail on the head. I have all these tactical games in my library, but almost all of them only have 2-3 hours clocked in each. There is just nothing to do, playing them feels like a waste of time. Why shoot the same bots on the same maps when I can boot up Stalker Gamma or Ghost Recon games, games that have actual progression systems. A bit far off topic, but this also made me realize why I don't like Cyberpunk 2077 and Rockstar games as much as I wanted to. The story modes of these games don't have more stuff going on after the credits roll. Yeah, you can complete sidequests, but there's not much else that is dynamic, repeatable, or gameplay chunks that take advantages of the open world. Game designers everywhere, both AAA and indie, should focus more on making the time spent in games valuable, satisfying, rewarding and fun, which feels like they're lacking nowadays.

[@jackolamp5149]

The majority of the games in this genre are just straight up simulators. There’s no game underneath that, and I too have lost interest in playing that because I’m not those type of guys. A perfect example of an actual game is ready or not, they copied the swat games formula and it works. There’s an actual campaign now and got me coming back to play it. Excited to see what more they can bring on the table and refine the gameplay and lore.

[@electronic2471]

Bigfry, there is an amazing indie game on Steam that I think has everything you’re looking for and the developer is super active. It’s called Burkina Faso: Radical Insurgency

[@skeppo5586]

To me the only tac fps game worth playing are ready or not and GZW

[@hatchet646]

That is why i always load up once a year the OG delta force 1-2. They not just throw you on the map, once you finish the mission you and unlock the next you get a briefing about what did you achieve by collecting that laptop or whatever. It's a series of missions that follow a story. Like old ghost recon games. Or Rainbow six.

[@dustin0133]

Why not just focus on tactical games that actually are doing cool stuff? Like beautiful light. I feel like this year was huge for indie shooters

[@LightTrack-]

Not every game can be Ready or Not. Gray Zone is still in development but has potential. R6 has a story and nobody cares. Zero Hour is basically R6 without the disbelief. 6 Days In Fallujah is basically a co-op campaign. Multiplayer modes don't translate well to a narrative experience outside that content. Insurgency did very well and it didn't have a story. I can't wait to see your game finally come out and see you set an example instead of talking about it.

[@mf1936]

I didn't realize I was done with this genre until I also realized I have stopped playing them. Has always been the most fun type of game for me but something is just missing

[@megamaggotmrh9085]

I agree with the idea of bare minimum story doing wonders. Just add something to give some immersion to get the head space of who we're playing as. Helldivers 2 is an excellent example of that. It's just randomized missions every time. But having the lore. Having a continuous story to be a part of. It has immersed so many people into the role of the character and kept the game going. Imagine a tactical shooter where the story is constantly evolving around taking down this new terror group. And with the updates to the game, there's actual story brought in to explain the update. Not just "a new house in a rich neighborhood is now playable."

[@thedales6366]

Ready or not is definitely scratching that itch for me. Interaction with suspects. Play it like you’re a swat officer instead of playing like you’re a SEAL. you get a totally different experience

[@grand1957]

A lot of the issues you describe are mostly implemented into Ready or Not, which is why it has become my go to tactical fps

[@chucklesdeclown8819]

This is why my friends and i like ready or not, it may have some problems but there are some skins to unlock at s rank on many levels, there is an actual briefing text that tells you why you are even sent in to many of these places(from gangsters to rogue millitant groups.) like ok this is cool, can we have more of that please?

[@SKELLY420xD]

I agree man, im feeling like this about all games. In older games achieving and unlocking things were meaningful, now theres none of that, anything cool has a micotransaction attached to it. Youll NEVER see the coolest looking gear, gun, or whatever attached to progression or skill in the game. Things like tracksuit or kappa in Tarkov or Champ charms in rainbow six come to mind. Cool shit worth grinding for that shows off that you did the grinding is whats needed instead of generic sandbox shooters pushing people towards microtransactions or games that make insane trailers for games that are not even close to done, aka cashgrabs.

[@jan2606]

I bought Groundbranch sololy based on watching your gameplay but when i got in, i felt something is wrong and that it was that the game had no purpose other than spawning in those maps and killing the bots. It felt soulless, then i left and never entered the game :(

[@Wafelkowiec]

I wonder how well would Helldivers 2 style of storytelling worked for those games. I think that existing titles are too static for that, but it could work if you added a little rng and slowed down the access to the armoury. You are a newly established international taskforce fighting with few organised crime/terror organisations. Maybe add something like Nemesis from Shadow of War, and make community working up to and then taking out a lieutenant of a cartel a big thing. You find new intel that teases upcoming map, your rep with the brass goes up so you get new toys. HD2 does the majority of this through text boxes, 1 guy next to a console, and a few ingame ads.

[@white_men_sek4878]

Games are often designed without narration. Adding narration to an existing framework requires considerable skill. In most cases, it's best to run the narrative elements parallel to other aspects of development to enhance the overall outcome and impact. Nowadays, developers tend to focus on features that meet their competitors' requirements or adhere to the established baseline for a particular genre. What they often forget, however, is that a game always tells a story. A game is not solely about visuals, features, story, technology, or sound. It is the combination of all these elements, carefully crafted to convey a specific story and let the player experience a unique adventure.

[@joeallen3388]

I feel like they forget they are making a game first and go to far in the "realism" sode of things

[@ossihurme7572]

I'm old school but when I think tactical shooter, I think story and campaign with team mates not 5vs5 multiplayer. Ready or Not did this and it was fun but I think they dropped the ball with the morale system. In the end you just replaced officers with other randomly generated officers without any attachment to them. But I don't have interest for tech demos either. Quick summary of the concept is fine but call me again when you have few maps and gameplay loop. Until then I'll stick with other games.

[@LeadMetal82]

Yeah, the morale system is very much half baked and leaves a lot to be desired. Also officer traits the effects barely have any impact on my gameplay.

[@thedeleted1337]

Tactical FPS games all suffer from two major basic gameplay problems. Recoil is INSANE when in real life its not especially if you're trained... Player control is usually awful

[@Unknown_Genius]

What games have you played where the recoil is insane? It's usually on the "what you expect from a shooter" scale - unless you take BF or CoD, but both of those are just point and shoot to laser anything away in automatic mode, good for a round maybe but that kind of gunplay gets boring very quickly.

[@thedeleted1337]

@Unknown_Genius squad, insurgency, tarkov, arma 3. The recoil and spread in those games is atrocious. Playing the lottery is a horrible gunplay. Laser beaming is also not ideal and is an easy fix by increasing spread after x amount of shots fired but game devs are bad at their jobs.

[@cha0ss0ldier-4]

@@thedeleted1337tarkov redid the recoil fairly recently. It’s way way lower all around, especially on stuff like SMGs and intermediate rifles and anything on semi auto

[@-Belshazzar-]

@@thedeleted1337 i can’t speak for tarkov but recoil in the other games you mentioned is not wild, it’s fairly realistic (fairly not exactly) but definitely not wild. player movement i agree with you completely though. this is something Insurgency do the beat imho, the movement and gunplay is smooth and satisfying, shame they went the arcade route lately, i stopped playing it also because of that and the no story issue

[@Unknown_Genius]

@@thedeleted1337 Not sure about the others, but ArmA 3 doesn't have high recoil in any way, it also doesn't have high spread, if it does on close range then I'd honestly check what mods you got that cause it. If you complain about spread on the average engagement distances of 200-500m, then idk what to tell you except for what do you expect? A gun isn't necessarily that accurate on those distances unless they're specifically layed out for precision. Not sure about Tarkov (generally a bad game imo), insurgency (haven't played that for a long time, last time I did recoil was fairly basic) or Squad (haven't really played it, never spoke to me).

[@latvianpotatoe]

Gray Zone executes this well with tasks, that adds purpose to go out and fight bots. But Incursion Red River doesn’t have the same drive. I think it comes down to depth and player progression.

[@njva228]

That's what I've always thought. I'm a big fan of the genre, but there is a serious lack of progression... Even in something like Insurgency Sandstorm or Ready or Not I feel. I beat RoN multiple times but I miss gear progression... At least as a setting for commander mode. As you clear missions you should progressively get a bigger arsenal. I understand why you get everything from the start but I wish I could opt out of that so I can look forward to something.

[@Goon_Six]

I agree 100%, so many of these games do a section of the genre great, but they all seem to miss on a bigger picture. Task w/ purpose. Give me a short term goal, long term goals, and a reason to want to complete everything in between.

[@ChrisHolzer]

What we need is a game like *Battlefield 2*, which had more tactical depth and teamwork than Dutyfield but IS NOT a MilSim. Sadly no one seems to be interested to make that. All the small studios seem to think that they haev to make MilSims....

[@billymays5542]

I’ve always said the biggest problems with tactical shooters is their refusal to have progression systems. I know so many people hate me for this but 90% of the reason games like cod and battlefield are so addictive for many people is that they have mastered having a good progression system.

[@willybe6427]

only nicki minaj can save this genre now..

[@Phillip_Graves]

She could probably do better than Activision at this point.