Why Slow Shooters Are Better

Support me on Patreon: / shreddednerd
Join the Discord: / discord
We always tend to think that shooters should be fast paced, but is this really what people want?
#gaming #fpsgames

[@Mechenyi-]

Slow or fast, I think the problem is ultimately just nerds trying to turn every single shooter into an e-sports title, that's what really kills a game(Halo Infinite.)

[@343ishill]

Nah Halo Infinite died due to a lack of content and technical debt.

[@utbunny]

Almost no e-sports game was designed to be a good e-esports game. All the greats were designed to be fun first, and the competitive communities grew around them.

[@EmilyKimMartin]

The whole competitive e-sports/livestream material type of gaming is a cancer that has destroyed the industry over the past few years. It's also, in part, why battle royales became so popular and oversaturated the market with their braindead, objectively unrewarding style. You design a game for what's literally 1% of the entire playerbase and listen to them exclusively while alienating everyone else. Because of this shit you get horrible nerfs and weapon balancing, shit map design, games literally removing content (cough Overwatch 2 cough), cancerous "Engagement Optimized Matchmaking", shitty ranked modes and other trash.

[@arrestedsolidyhe77sp]

Quit crying about people being better than you in Halo Infinite

[@hedgehog11953]

i hate halo infinite, but how was halo infinite an esports title? The game has a terrible ranking system and you can pretty much ignore the ranked playlist and still get pretty much everything you want out of the game's multiplayer

[@jameshodgson3656]

Good slow shooters like CS force you to plan out your kills Good fast shooters like quake force you to constantly think about your movement and plan out your path around the map. Both are good and fun.

[@christiansmemefactory1513]

Not necessarily. There have been CS teams that have had extremely basic strategies and compensate with having insane mechanical skill.

[@mel0-NRG]

Getting kills in quake is not easy….unlike CS. in CS, you can randomly flick and shoot and have recoil bless you with instant headshot rng

[@merucrypoison296]

Sneed won

[@marko-gj1uj]

@@merucrypoison296 sneed is good, but i prefer son of the mask.

[@arieson7715]

@@mel0-NRG CS' aim is the worst aiming system I've seen in any game ever and I'm so glad aim down sight completely erased its shitty accuracy system.

[@bazookaman1353]

I don't think fast movement and strategy are mutually exclusive.

[@Terraqueo22]

Depending on design choices they do, thats why balancing is a thing

[@sealsharp]

I think you have a point there. Gamedesigners differentiate game loops based on the time. Frame based gameplay, like spotting an enemy, aiming, dodging, killing, all in a second is too fast to make a conscious decision , that mostly muscle memory and instinct while everything longer than seconds goes into the tactical. With wider maps and more space and the matching timeToKill and game objectives, fast movement games an be made tactical.

[@SolRC]

Correct

[@mel0-NRG]

Slow games is there to lessen the skill gap. Fast games allow for skill gaps between players to be more varied and vast. Some players get so good that you have no chance as a new game layer unless you grind for years

[@Terraqueo22]

@@mel0-NRG Dont think so... Skill is something very subjective. Speed doesnt mean more variation or vast approaches...you can still get cheaped out by bad game mechanics... To be actually frank is speed is just one way a game can be... But it doesnt necessarily means speed vs slow which one is better. because it all comes down to preference and game balancing.. You can still get vast and varied approaches to a situation in slow games you just gotta get creative the same way you do with quick games

[@shelly8563]

Serious Sam: You are slow but all of your enemies are olympic sprinters

[@marko-gj1uj]

Slow shooters like this would be cool

[@metroided34]

You are slow but you have an armory that lets you commit 10 different genocides. Also the S key.

[@InfernalMonsoon]

I feel 3 and 4 adding sprint gave you just enough speed to be a little more flexible than just holding S, but it was just the right amount of added speed because I really enjoy how they still pushed you to carefully consider strategies depending on your weapons and enemy encounters, and not rush in like a maniac. And even then there's still plenty of running backwards.

[@metroided34]

@@InfernalMonsoon baiting and dancing around enemies >>>> le epic turbo "press space multiple times to accelerate into mach 3"

[@saisameer8771]

Ahh! Serious Sam! The game everyone claims is dumb and mindless but is actually one of the most strategic old school shooter I've ever played.

[@ILoveBees]

I don't think the issue is with games being inherently fast or slow. Quake 3 was extremely fast in terms of movement, yet still tactical because you had to plan out your route through the map to get pickups and adapt to the enemy movements, not just in combat but also which pickups THEY had already taken and which were therefore currently on a cooldown. My biggest issue is with INCONSISTENT gameplay. Which is why I dislike most "modern" movement shooters. They include mechanics like sprint, slide, wallrunning, etc. that have you zoom around the maps, but then also mechanics such as ADS, clamber, assassinations, etc. that almost have you come to a full stop in order to use them. It's a jarring transition, flip-flopping between extremes every couple of seconds. These games try to have their cake and eat it too, yet fail on both accounts. "Jack of all trades, master of none."

[@TheLetterJ10]

Exactly. this is one of the reasons why Counter Strike and Team Fortress 2 are still going strong despite their age; Pacing is much more consistent and isn't jarring like Paladins or Valorant.

[@ANDREA57ITA]

Titanfall: 😐

[@Guarrow]

I don't see the issue with anything you've mentioned. It's not always about constant speed, some games makes it about tempo. Ads makes you an easier target, same for assassination bur it's satisfying and cool I really don't see an opposition. Sure it would be weird in an Unreal Tournament game, but that's why they never did it, but in a game that's basically a faster CoD it works great

[@elfascisto6549]

​@@GuarrowADS isn't satisfying and cool, ADS makes every FPS look the same and makes the gameplay actively less skillful and worse

[@asscheeks3212]

​@@elfascisto6549ah your one of those types. Dude ads stance is subjective, some games NEED ads to make them for autobalance, do you see quake using ads? No, it's doesn't. Literally a different playstyle. So far I'm seeing you Anti ads types forcing your opinions on the pro ones. We ain't touching your games.

[@Windowlick_]

So are you saying that battle royales could be described as being slow burn, genre defining, spine tingling, with no jumpscares? Sounds like a gem to me.

[@marko-gj1uj]

That would be cool if done right

[@clinton4484]

stop posting coal

[@danksmemington362]

Truthnuke

[@andrewtelford-gt7nz]

dust thoughbeit

[@MrFrankBill]

Jumpscares are prevalent in the battle royale genre

[@ender_z4nd3r83]

I love both kinds of games and that's why I love titanfall 2, you have the fast movement gameplay as a pilot and once your titan has landed you have the slow tactical gameplay

[@wesleyfreeman5918]

i dont know why he pointed out titan fall as being a bad example, you are insanely punished for bad positioning as a titan. like holy shit. if you are cought in a bad spot you will die.

[@ender_z4nd3r83]

@@wesleyfreeman5918 because he is biased towards slow games

[@NahIdSword]

@@ender_z4nd3r83 yea, since he was talking like titanfalls movement and reaction based gameplay is a problem it failed. it isnt. it failed because it was released between battlefield and cod, not even mentioning the hackers that ruined the servers for several years.

[@spectrallmusic]

Crux of the problem: People confuse speed with intensity. They don't understand there's a difference between the two. Halo is "slow" but the matches can be extremely intense. Same with Battle Royale, R6S, and CS. The moment we can stop confusing the two, and acting like they're the same thing, then we will all be better off.

[@p3num6ra]

Very certainly - even fast paced arena shooters like Quake 3 Arena can be slow despite being known for fast paced gameplay. Just look at the rapha vs evil quakecon 2016 match. Low kill count and one of the most intense duels in quake history.

[@TheLetterJ10]

tl;dr movement and pacing are not synonymous

[@bannedmann4469]

Including him in this video..

[@D_Evelyn_cat]

Yeah take Neon white for example, a game where you move at light speed shooting demons with cards but the game is a very chill experience and its not intense at all

[@jackknifed796]

@@D_Evelyn_catis that the colour theory visual novel game?

[@snowyoukai]

i feel like tf2(one with funny fat guy) is perfect middleground, fast but strategic, reactionary but also requiring thinking about positioning and punishing for playing dumb and out of position

[@hairyballs089]

that's called understanding nuance and knowing things can't be put in black and white terms like "slow" and "fast".

[@bosyogurtlight]

Team Fortress 2?

[@snowyoukai]

@@bosyogurtlight yeah, that tf2, not the other 5 tf2

[@cheesegreater5739]

@@bosyogurtlight I always call the valve game TF2 and the respawn game TF|2

[@darksoulsismycity]

el gordo y sus amigos 2

[@mel0-NRG]

“Fast games are about reactivity” no, when games get so fast, you have to rely on prediction and out thinking your opponents because reaction is no longer a valid strategy. Slow games reward reactivity. Look at counter strike, cod, or tarkov, with time to kills so fast and no movement option, it’s all about who shoots first, no thinking required

[@eyywannn8601]

There is some strategy in positioning with slower games but I agree mostly.

[@a1337turtle]

basically, yeah. you really cannot unga me aim better your way through quake duels unless there's a very massive skill gap and i mean massive. of course, this is a thing in CSGO, but there have been pro players who's identity is just "i click head better than you" i.e scream.

[@aldrichhf35]

or nggers acting like constant dopamine of quick movement is good

[@user-vm8ix5nh8b]

I agree

[@thesand8580]

TTK is the main factor with this, a game like halo works differently bc the ttk is way longer

[@MoronicRoc]

For a bit of time, I've been disappointed that TF2 didn't have bunnyhopping like TFC, but over time I realized that there was good reason for it to be gone besides balance reasons. One of the main reasons TF2 works is because of the pacing, and while it does have plenty of movement mechanics, they're often a bit more limited. Add bunnyhopping, and the game probably would get a lot more tiring.

[@marko-gj1uj]

Agree.

[@ananon5771]

Also makes servers that have it enabled more fun

[@EmilyKimMartin]

TF2 thrived entirely on its own identity. Every class had a purpose, every weapon had a reason to exist and to be chosen, and every match played around the synergy between player choices. Too bad they had to go on and fuck everything up by trying to turn TF2 into CS:GO. Meet Your Match completely destroyed the game by screwing over community servers and introducing the cancerous, unprotected, objectively shit matchmaking infested with bots and an anti-cheat that literally does not work. Not even mentioning how they ruined every fun weapon in the game by nerfing them to hell for the fat lifeless nerds who took the game too seriously. R.I.P. Ambassador, Enforcer, GRU, Tide Turner, Caber and 2/3 of Pyro's arsenal.

[@cooldud7071]

Tf2 is an incredibly fast-paced game, but each class follows specific archetypes. Adding bunnyhopping would degrade the game's image.

[@tangerinepaint3643]

@@EmilyKimMartin People try to justify the Amby nerf by saying "Spy shouldn't be a Sniper that can go invisible" and guess what the Amby shouldn't be a sack of shit that doesn't work beyond breathing distance either.

[@errentthought9057]

"not every indie game has to be quick" I think you have to consider that games take a while to make and a ton of devs decided to make the movement shooter of their dreams years ago.

[@saisameer8771]

Ehhh...arena shooters like quake can be incredibly strategic, moreso than a lot of slower shooters. A good part of quake's appeal is predicting your opponents next move and denying him the power items like mega health and mega Armour. And practicing a single skill for a 1000 hrs is a terrible idea. Getting good at faster games is really all about just playing them and getting into the rhythm of it all.

[@rafaelflores448]

it also requires alot of map knowledge to know when and where wich weapons and pickups spawn

[@gavinrobinson8925]

But the difference is time given to make those choices. Faster games like quake require more quick thinking and decision making instead of a more methodical and slow approach.

[@lucasbastosrodrigues140]

Estrategy can be more deeper than this, what you say is a very easy and simply estrategy so it wil get old fast anyway, of course is better than pure reaction, but not enough to expand the game life time so much, That not mean is a bad game, thats just mean you will get bored if play too much.

[@saisameer8771]

@@lucasbastosrodrigues140 lol I didn't even scratch the surface of arena fps strategy. I suggest checking out "ESL classics Rapha vs Cooler" if you want to get an idea of how deep quake can be at high levels.

[@filip2210]

​@gavinrobinson8925 yes because in the end when you have to think you should think fast otherwise you'll die stopping to think will just give the enemy more time to get stacked and demolish you

[@eponymous3784]

Gotta love how doom 2016 and eternal are some of the fastest paced and most acclaimed shooters of the last few years ... And they didn't have ads or sprint

[@Nolsjokes]

cause you were already fast as fuck

[@dkskcjfjswwwwwws413]

doom 2016 isnt fast

[@Nolsjokes]

@@dkskcjfjswwwwwws413 biggest bullshit ive ever heard in my life

[@jagar5580]

Ads and sprint are independent from slow or fast games. They can be in either genre and feel good as long as they're implemented well

[@Saad72Shahriar]

@@dkskcjfjswwwwwws413 It's fairly fast. Not as fast as Eternal though

[@ilusions4]

"The better product is the one you can consoom 24/7"

[@RustyShackleford556]

The entire argument here is that slow dumbed down games are better because they appeal to a wider audience of slow dumb gamers. You can't just use player numbers as a metric of good and bad. Of course games with higher skill ceilings are going to have less players, the average idiot isn't going to bother with being good at the game. They just want to play a game. Games are made now with nothing but money in mind, and the best way to make money is to make a slow dumb game that every slow dumb gamer can play and spend money on.

[@slimpickens4187]

Plenty of strategy goes into fast-paced shooters like quake, although it may not be apparent to those who don't play them much.

[@angquangnguyenthac2833]

The problem here with those game is actually the same with people who want slide cancel back in MW2022: Most people who likes fast movement want fast movement to ALSO be a knowledge check. Because of this, they praised fast movement games in the past and shit on the jetpack era games. It comes from salt of no longer be able to seal club anymore, and throwing "high competitive" play, where both players are basically on the same playing field out as proof that strategy exist isn't actually much since those were duels between people of similar skill level. What the old movement shooter "fan" wants is to feel superior, NOT playing the game for how well made and well balanced gameplay mechanics are.

[@slimpickens4187]

@@angquangnguyenthac2833 Garbage take. How do you know what the movement shooter fan wants? I personally want to go fast, have big guns and have fun with a style of game I enjoy, win or lose, ofc .

[@angquangnguyenthac2833]

@@slimpickens4187 Then you are a minority

[@yourmanjimbo1302]

Titanfall 2’s struggle to continue existing is due to server issues. Now the servers are fixed, it’s got 15,000 concurrent players

[@batattitude]

I think it's about modulating the emotional state. An "all sugar" game is the challenge of reacting to the changing environment, whereas what you're talking about with these more modulated shooters like the BRs has that execution challenge, but also has it balanced with picking your moment and building to a plan. Like shooting free throws as fast as you can, vs actually looking for an opening to throw the ball from all the way across the court.

[@Ares_gaming_117]

10:17 what you say here about strategy can be applied to reaction as well. When the movement speed is turned up the game becomes less predictable and forces you to "adapt to unexpected scenarios" in the form of reacting to less predictable, faster/more advanced movement. That's why I prefer movement shooters over CS, because every gunfight feels dynamic and different, vs the rote learning you mentioned for slow speed, slow burn methodical shooters like CS. I do respect the elements of strategy though, but I think we're selling reaction/twitchy movement shooters a bit short.

[@jurassicarkjordanisgreat1778]

I gotta say, The reason I enjoy the old halo and cod games. over the new ones is because I feel like I can actually have time to process the information i'm given. It felt like it actually respected the players patience. In the older games you didn't go 5 million miles an hour, you had limited movement and it was more skillful because it meant you had to actually plan out what you where doing more. With advanced movement, if you make a bad turn that would normally result in a death, you can just slide or wallrun out of that. In modern shooters. you have to have such a quick reaction time to everything and you get no time to think (which seems to be the trend with this generation). The only way to win is by being lucky enough to have the right reactions at the right time and taking ten hundred grams of Adderall. It just feels like such a stressful experience in these games, when you have to constantly go fast and not even take a second to think. It feels like the game doesn't respect my intelligence. There are so many times in halo where planning out our attacks went so much better then just mindlessly running into the enemy's front lines. For example in halo reach, using the hologram to trick the enemy into leaving the flag capture spot open or luring them into an easy to kill position is so much more skillful than any advanced movement. This is not even helped by the aggressive SBMM these games have. Which encourage people to go faster and sweatier. Everything casual in games has been killed off because companies want to make money off a competitive scene. despite the fact most competitive scenes didn't require 5 different movement styles to exist.

[@MrNotSpecified01]

My preference = Good, based Your preference = Bad, stupid Like seriously. That's all you're saying here. You don't even try to think about why someone would enjoy fast combat. You just say slow is more skilled and fast is for people who don't think. Does that seem like a good faith argument to you?

[@jurassicarkjordanisgreat1778]

@@MrNotSpecified01 I never called slow combat based or fast combat stupid. I just said I felt like slow combat is more skilled for the reasons provided. Faster combat doesn't give you much time to think and it based on the reaction you have rather than what you planned out. You are one to talk about "good faith" when you completely misrepresent what I am saying. I never once tried to claim anything I said here was fact. Its my personal opinion. I didn't just say "my preference was good and yours was bad" I gave good reasons to why I felt that way. You just summarize everything i'm saying and ignore key details to make an argument.

[@KreepKarnage]

i wont stop your opinion from being your opinion. i just think you prefer strats/mindgames versus muscle-memory inputs. MW22 fails from having slow movement and insanely fast TTK. it leaves a gap/balancing issue with positioning/rats, bad spots mean death, because retreat is not fast enough. less skill, more luck. trademarks of a milsim, not an arcade shooter. there has to be skill ceilings or you get fortnite i understand, and slowing down the gameplay lets you think and not React. but, the feeling of bhopping is like winning a game in itself. letting your animal brain take over so you can React to the corner/door frame coming up at mach 3. an unfathomable drug, until you try it.

[@antifnafrevived859]

@@MrNotSpecified01 "Don't criticize my heckin wholesome fast shooter genre!" "Slow shooters are shit and your stupid for not enjoying fast shooters!" Zoomer spotted.

[@MrNotSpecified01]

​@@jurassicarkjordanisgreat1778Yes I summarized it as a rhetorical device. I thought it was clear that I summarized it like that to make the point that your argument was not consrructive.

[@fluppet2350]

The great thing about games with a slow default pace is that you can scale it up and down with more leeway. A game all about running around will not reward someone taking it slow, but a game where taking your time is rewarded, being someone who is gung ho and runs in can be rewarded with the skill to back it up

[@StephenYuan]

My immediate reaction to this video is to think of the evolution of Gears games over the past 17 years. You have a slow and steady evolution from the slower, assault rifle based cover shooter of the OG Gears to gradually faster, more flashy movement you see in Gears 3, 4 and 5. Shotgun play and wall bouncing, using the cover system as movement, has gradually increased in importance. The speed of the cover slide has been constantly evolving. I think it was pretty fast in 3 and 4, which gave a big boost to that short range style. Towards the end of 4's lifecycle the cover slide speed was equalized with walking speed, a bit of a nerf. There has always been a really loud and assertive community that loves the movement system and the skill gap that results from it. But there's also a huge divide in the community because the vast majority of Gears players don't even touch pvp. PVP, PVE and Campaign had diverged into separate universes with only some overlap, which is a weird thing to happen to something that's supposed to be the same game. As much as I love the wall bouncing, gnasher fighting style I think it might have been overemphasized. I personally think that a lot of the older maps play better than the newer ones. They're more open, gnasher's do not dominate. These are maps that privilege the midrange assault rifle game. Position taking and flanking are super important. I've played wiht a lot of people and I'm frankly a little sad taht the current state of Gears 5 pvp excludes most of them. Most of them can't wall bounce and they don't know what a roadie strafe is, and they can't wrap shot. They don't know any of the arcane cover tricks that a veteran like me has spent years learning about. Is this a sustainable state for this franchise? Gears PVP is dominated by frenzied, short attention span players who are just all aggression all the time and no strategy. The really great ones can do that and think on a strategic level, but they're few of them. I think the developers need to make a decision about what kind of approach they want to reward. Also I can play 3 matches before I'm totally exhausted.

[@der_shingen8548]

That's what eventually turned me off from Gears 5 despite loving the rest of the original trilogy. I loved the shotgun meta of gears 2/3... when I was young and had the energy. Now that I'm older I simply can't bother with the sweatfest anymore and I don't have a ton of spare time to invest in training just to get to a level where I could hold my own. Come to think of it, I just straight up don't play shooters much anymore because of these obsessions with speed and battle royales.

[@demoncloudstrife]

Is it really fair to say they don't have an attention span when they've clearly been focused on the same game for a long time to get that good?

[@niku6281]

People who suck at Quake :

[@Simianstumbler]

I beat quake on nightmare difficulty

[@semmehh]

I agree with most of what you said, except for the idea that fast paced shooters are more "niche" than we would expect, and the implication that people might not know what they want. I think the vast majority of first person shooter fans enjoy something fast paced, and a sizable minority prefer something more slow and thought out. The issue today is that there's really no casual shooter for fans of slower paced games. Its a massive market that's just being ignored.

[@deriznohappehquite]

I disagree entirely. If you have someone play fast a game for an hour, they’ll like it, but then they’ll go home and play a slow paced Battle Royale or Call of Duty or something.

[@semmehh]

@@deriznohappehquite ehh, kinda, but those games are only slow paced because of the gaps in time between firefights, the fights themselves are extremely snappy, with fast player movement, and almost 0 player inertia. Like cod is all sliding and hopping around like you cracked out of your mind, even in the BR mode. These game are still fast paced, also the rebirth mode for cod literally speeds up the gameplay by making the map smaller and its one of the most popular modes. I do hope more casual, more truly slow paced shooters, hit the market sometime soon.

[@ender_z4nd3r83]

but most fps are slow, at least compared to my favorite one: titanfall 2

[@semmehh]

@@ender_z4nd3r83 aside from mil sim games, I can only think of csgo, valorant, Halo and sorta battlefield. But if Titanfall 2 is your benchmark then im not surprised lul

[@Harold-fe5bd]

@@deriznohappehquite cod before warzone 2 was a fast shooter, not slow.

[@Xhaleon]

Tribes was a franchise (rip) that could be described as "fast but committed", you had a mix of raw speed with careful planning of movement. Building up a high velocity was an important part of the game but you couldn't change directions or speed very quickly or very often. The definition of a "fast game" today appears to more accurately be "high acceleration, low commitment".

[@CetomimusGillii]

I desperately wish someone could muster both the balls and brains required to make a spiritual successor to OG Tribes. There's never been anything like it, including the sequels

[@thedonut2118]

@@CetomimusGillii I think there was a game called “Midair” that tried to do that at one point, though it also had pretty limited success

[@CetomimusGillii]

@@thedonut2118 Huh, good to know. I always thought Tribes was the kind of game that should've spawned a whole sub-genre. I'll have to look into that for curiosity's sake. Thanks!

[@nezzu2656]

@Xhaleon Hi-rez are doing a playtest for Tribes 3 atm.

[@psionicflash]

Quake does not lack strategy despite its fast pace, nearly everybody I've talked to in the Quake 3 community has said that winning matches comes down to decision-making rather than skill. It's just that decisions are much more spontaneous than they would be in a slower, methodical shooter.

[@babelfish9948]

I would like to say that arena shooters like quake also have a lot of strategy elements in them, a big part of quake's gameplay is not only knowing how to aim, rocket jump, bunny hop, etc, but also establishing control over the different resources on the map (armor and weapons) and predicting where your opponent is going when you can't see him. And also TF2 is a movement shooter and its one of the multiplayer fps that has been active the longest time, still appearing among the most played games on steam after 15 years of having been launched.

[@EpsilonXenos]

For me, most multiplayer games become tiring because it becomes a contest on who has the ultimate map knowledge, like glitch spots, weapon spawns, camping spots, etc. I like uncertainty, I like working with my team to adapt to a constant and changing environment while also being a, "slow" shooter and I think Battlefield 1 was honestly that. Most the buildings were destructible, therefore eliminating snipers camping in buildings. You also had the airship which would always crash depending on where it was shot dowm and who the pilot was. The location of the carcass of the destroyed airship would make or break games. Another thing is the artillery and where explosions would detonate. You could essentially create more safe areas by making more craters to hide in on the Battlefield. That was so fun and I still never get bored of it I wish more games had variable maps and interactables as well.

[@deriznohappehquite]

Bobby Fischer had the same opinion about Chess.

[@a1337turtle]

map knowledge is legit the basics of forming strategies in shooters though. if you don't know, you can just learn... then you can move to complex strategies.

[@Swattii]

Battlefield 1 doesn't seem like a "slow" shooter to me. It has the same pacing as COD, just bigger maps. When I think of slow shooters, I think of tactical FPS games like Ready or Not, Ground Branch, Arma 3. It's slow because you're weighed down by all the heavy armor and gear you're equipped with and the lethality of it all makes you play slow.

[@deriznohappehquite]

@@Swattii The movement is CoD, Battlefield, and the like is pretty slow.

[@Swattii]

@@deriznohappehquite I still disagree. Battlefield in general never felt like a slower shooter to me. Again, refer to actual slow games like Squad or Hell Let Loose.

[@ChubbsterBrown]

I like shooters that make me feel like I’m in the old 80s 90s action films. Able to run and gun, blasting from the hip when applicable, still with god effect. But that only feels good when the enemies are clever. Half life 1 mods and source based shooters really capture that feel for me. You still need to be methodical but it doesn’t detract from that “Quaid blasting goons at the end of Total Recall” feeling. You still benefit from pausing mid firefight to assess the situation. Not being punished by all projectiles like in the new Doom boomer shooter renaissance games. Or the thoughtless one tapping drone type enemies ala call of duty where the only challenge is in being overwhelmed and getting laser beamed.

[@Coach__Gaming]

I like slow and fast types of games, I can go from playing DOOM Eternal one minute and the next i could be playing a tactical shooter like insurgency sandstorm. Both fast and slow games have their ups and downs, but both are great

[@ShatteredQvartz]

Sorry, but this is the most uninformed and biased video ever, and it should be taken as just an opinion

[@jayocaine2946]

are you implying there's video game YT videos that should be taken as fact?

[@mrminecraftcubeable]

We need to make shooters where you use muskets

[@Dacker888]

I personally believe the lack of popularity for "fast" fps games is due to them pretty much universally requiring a relatively high skill floor where as something slower like COD, Battlefield, and Fortnite have lower skill floors. This lower skill floor allows the game to cast a wider net and thus retain more players than a movement shooter like Titanfall can. The total inability to, lets say, camp or play "tactically" in a game like Quake Champions will forever limit that game's reach while COD can appeal to corner campers and movement kings alike.

[@Rikka_unOf]

The one way to get nerds typing paragraphs outside of school 💀

[@fakepretender]

Is to say something controversial or stupid,yea.just got that into your mind?

[@Rikka_unOf]

@@fakepretender to anger people online with a bold opinion.

[@fakepretender]

@@Rikka_unOf bold?

[@lantica112]

Very interesting take about passing and speed. This is what frustrates me the most about insurgency sneedstorm. Encounters are super fast in this game, movement speed is fast for the type of game it tries to be to, but everything else is so tediously slow - reloads, crouching, vaulting over covers - it takes so long it breaks the flow and immersion, it just so silly to see soldier be so unbothered to reload the gun or dive to cover in middle of combat.

[@noobguy9973]

honestly when ı saw that in gameplay vids of Insurgency it annoyed me too ... until ı've got the game through gamepass and regularly get 1-3st place on PVP scoreboards and ı don't know why 😅 I've really liked insurgency sandstorm though its really fun, today a lvl 12 guy called me a cheater twice so its great. Edit: actually now that ı think about it the fact that Insurgency Sandstorm having a decent co-op playerbase that sometimes plays pvp, new players who've gotten the game month or two ago through gamepass and the game being crossplay with consoles having hardly every aim assist unintentionally gives players like me easy greenhorns to murder which is probably why ı can get top frags so easly ...

[@Nurse_Xochitl]

Insurgency 2014 was slower and was basically perfectly paced. Sandstorm tried too hard to be like COD, that I don't really like it as a sequel. I think of it more like a better COD, but still I wanted a proper sequel to 2014's game.

[@deaglan6641]

something I think is interesting is with ultrakill specifically, it still requires a lot of skill and resource management and it doesnt use its movement and fast pacing as a crutch for good gameplay. You have to constantly manage your resources, what enemies are alive and where they are, and your positioning so you dont get killed. It just makes you do all this faster then other games, but its made to compliment the game and not have the player rely on being purely reflexive/grinding out advanced techniques

[@stormycd392]

You’re poking a hornets nest, you won’t hear the end of it from the keyboard slayers.

[@Vizeff]

This video has so many flaws, but at least the comment section calls it out.

[@jimmycarburator2012]

Cultic is a great game that is more slow. You could describe it as a hidden, spine-tingling, ganre-redefining, slow-burn, atmospheric, slight horror gem. But I cant deny being able to sprint at mach 10 and swing around with a grapple shotgun is really cool and fun. What im saying is pick whenever or not your game will be 100% fast-paced or slow-paced in terms of gameplay.

[@InnuendoXP]

Even Tribes was a "slow" game really. It's all relative. The speed in units per second was pretty fast, but the scale was so large what "fast" really meant was precision, anticipation & calculation. You'll never do well in a Tribes match by playing it like a twitch shooter, or even by focusing on movement more than strategy & positioning.

[@HeDronHeDronHedron]

if the shooter is fast enough you have to think, in games like splatoon or tf2 you can't just walk into the sniper sights and outmaneuver, because they can kill you in less than half a second. also with scout (assuming you're human and not an aimbot) it's not viable to aim where they are, you have to see the area they're going to be in and flick there. and if you're moving you literally can't react since hitscan so you gotta think of where they're looking

[@HaraldQuake]

A game isn't better when it makes bad players feel good... Titanfall isn't even fast when compared to Half-Life or Quake... Counter-Strike Global Offensive has super fast ground acceleration now. I'd say it allows you to peek corners unrealisticly fast. Personally I absolutely love oldschool Arena Shooters like Quake Live and Half-Life, because their movement is balanced in a way were you can go fast and you have the control but you can get knocked into a trap and lose control. Also it doesn't make sense to move fast all the time. Sometimes it's better to move slowly, stealthy and carefully. It has good tradeoffs and that's what makes it interesting. You can make games that can be fast but also methodical. I like it when games allow both playstyles. Fast games only work with perfect hit-detection and netcode. My theory is that companies prefer to make slow games because it lowers the entry level for new players and it lowers the server cost because you can get away with low tick rates... Also controller players with unfair aim assist also can play better in slower paced games because you don't have to do too many actions at once... For example in Quake you have to move around your view to accelerate in mid air, press strafe keys, jump, aim, switch between many weapons and in CoD you basicly only have to move aim and shoot but you normally don't have to do too many actions at once... I think fast paced shooters work on modern consoles but they should not have aim assist but use gyro-aim and Keyboard and Mouse support.

[@christiansmemefactory1513]

Exactly. Quake even has a walk button, and some of the weapons make a sound when you have them out. These guys think Duels are some run and gun idiot fest. They're talking out of pure ignorance.

[@nou1178]

If you want to try a really slow (burning, bone chilling gem) game, play Doom 2 with the Hideous Destructor mod. It'll make killing even imps and pinkies extremely rewarding

[@233Hicks]

If you like and want fast, if you're good at fast you'll be frustrated by slow. Trying to appeal to as large a market as possible will lead to slower. Is there a large enough market to support a fast title? Seems not currently. One approach is exclusive, the other is inclusive. Depending on your ability it'll likely put you in one of the camps. I miss Unreal Tournament :(

[@adamnxx]

sometimes what people want and what’s actually good are different things entirely

[@josesosa3337]

Some times I feel like ea battlefront 2 is sometimes clunky/slow with its blaster and lightsaber combat, and then i came up with a realization. If you imagined the characters as robots and vehicles, it would be like a mech battle or car combat game. Here, the character is a "mech" and the player is the "pilot". In this scenario, theres an emphasis on movement and placement. If that makes sense.

[@tacoloco6080]

This is why I feel bad for call of duty developers Back in 2011 people were starting to burn out on the old cod formula during MW3 they wanted new innovative and different things this is why bo2 succeeded cause treyarch introduced a lot of new stuff even speeding up the pace, it was faster compared to the games that came before. (well the original MW2 was actually the fastest tbh.) Then cod ghost came along it was so slow with big gigantic maps and people were so distraught and frustrated they cried for simplification of maps and faster gameplay (I missed it’s perk system) Then advanced warfare came along speeding up the gameplay with advanced movement, (jet packs) high vertical play People were divided on this one And bo3 (a copy of titanfall.) released and people were starting to get burned out of advanced movement. And it didn’t help that infinite warfare released in the worst timing for fans possible they started to cry for boots on the ground and slow pacing. Then ww2 and bo4 released and they were boring back then (now people look fondly on them now) the devs tried different ways to change it up, to avoid changing the movement, like create a class, double down on specialist, or time to kill. But In the end, gamers don’t know what they want. It looked like call of duty was finally dying until infinity ward did a complete overhaul of the fundamentals of cod as a last ditch effort (mw2019 was going to be the only live service game for a long time if it didn’t succeed.) they gave what the cod fans were craving which was a realistic tactical shooter with mw2019, and with warzone it was a huge success. But people wanted to be faster again they started doing all this crazy movement techs and streamers were crying out for those exploits to be fixed. For movement to reward strategic play and positioning like mw2019 was supposed to be. Cold War and vanguard started on copying mw2019, just with their own take and by the end of them games life cycle they were sped up by fans looking to go fast, doing everything to be fast. MWII came out (I loved mwII a perfect middle ground between the old mw games and mw2019 with a great parkour advanced movement system) and people were tired of the slow tactical and semi realistic things that 2019 introduced and were crying for the old call of duty to comeback… And with MWIII they’re getting all excited for the old arcade coming back with slide canceling as feature to be hyped up for.. (people in WZ1 were crying out for slide canceling to be fixed and never be a thing.) And we are now back to where we were before bo2 The cod cycle continues to this day I would say the only way to break this cycle is to not release cod every year but when low attention span with short term memory hypocritical fans start to look back at vanguard fondly.. (cod vanguard of all things) and are wanting advanced warfare 2 (jet packs) to comeback then well what can you do?

[@saisameer8771]

Problem with call of duty is that there are just way too many games. They need to cut back on the yearly releases.

[@doodguytheblank2403]

At that point they should of just had a specific series focuses on one type of gameplay

[@lukemccullough9279]

This might be your most controversial take yet.

[@KnightEnjoyer69]

As a warframe/ultrakill player, this video was pretty interesting. I played metro recently, and it was such a shocking diferent experience. I finished metro in less then 3 days, and didnt feel burnt out at all.

[@Stewpedu]

Dude, I fucking love your type of humour and how you pace it. I love how you sprinkle in bits and jokes here and there. It always cracks me up

[@purebaldness]

Love these discussions. I'm a Quake guy but whether or not I agree is never the point. What I will say is that the strafing and jumping in a Halo 3 BR battle, trying to land those headshots, can never top the satisfaction in merely strafe jumping proficiently in an empty Quake 3 map. Gears of War was my console shooter of choice because of the unintentional shotgun meta and it's ironically fast paced movement system.

[@necrosteel5013]

Speed feels like something i would argue about when i was less informed. What matters is a split between strategies and skills, The good shooters have both... Doom and most of its descendants up to quake are a perfect example. Games from duke nukem to unreal have complexities with items, preparations, proper weapon usuage and skills. All games have their balance Doom's framework has it's own capabilities, rules, ideal pacings and conventions Halo had it's own style with all of these factors too. The greatest games establish their own frameworks, which the descendants are compared to.

[@EffingCherry]

The thing with Ultrakill (though brought up briefly) that makes it different from other movement shooters outside of being singleplayer, is that it DOES also involve strategy. Mainly in the sense that one must get very well tuned in with which guns are perfect for which scenario and how to combo them to set up for massive damage towards a boss/an instant room wipe. One other thing I feel must be brought up about ULTRAKILL is that it was originally planned to be a much slower stealth shooter, and the creator of the game instead started adding things that he found more fun until we ended up with the Ultrakill we have today. Regardless there were some surprisingly valid arguements in the video, wont deny that.

[@ishanagarwal475]

Just overcharge your green shotgun shoot and dash man. The game ain't that complicated.

[@EffingCherry]

@@ishanagarwal475 I only ever do that for the oracles or whatever they're called (the ones who call the white orbital strikes), I prefer going up into the air, charging the blue variant, and shooting the dynamite with malicious railgun midair for that big ass red explosion for an instant nuke. You can take this EVEN further though by knuckle blasting a coin into the sky, throwing two more high up in a way that lines up infront of you for a railcoin add, dash back, charge the dynamite and lob it high, and if you do all of this fast enough you can shoot either of the 2 coins with the blue railgun and you'll do a railcoin (with a coin add if you're even faster) that annhilates whatever is infront of you and then on top of that does a room wipe on a red explosion! The freedom and insanity that the weapon sandbox allows for is what makes ULTRAKILL truly special

[@suncanny1418]

Doesn't also learning boss attacks and how to counter them count as strategy ? (Like the judgement kick)

[@EffingCherry]

@@suncanny1418 Yeah it does! Especially learning to parry bosses like Sisyphus Prime and Gabriel

[@KennyFrierson]

My favorite part of Titanfall is the giant robot which are slow (I also just love big robots)

[@meman24]

That's what made it great, the late game robo-s falling from the sky that completely change up the dynamic of the game. It's literally in the game title but he didn't mention that part -__- Titan Fall was like 2 totally different games in one!

[@danksmemington362]

@@meman24 It was

[@ender_z4nd3r83]

2 perfect games@@meman24

[@commanderdead4499]

I have something to add on why slow shooter is great, one of my fan favorites have to be "Due Process" as it's one of a kind with the designed concept where all maps are procedurally generated changing every week so that it's hard to make any long lasting meta strategy, planning out every round on how you're going to breach in to defuse the bomb or defend it, while adapting along the way as not all plans go smoothly. But it's a shame that not many people know about it or play it.

[@pmakerschannel6976]

I feel that fast shooters only work (work really well mind you, I'm a sucker for these) in either very competitive deathmatch-based games or single player games

[@-obamium5320]

A spine tingling, slow burn game

[@sheenshoako3708]

I feel like I'm the only one who prefers the moment to moment gameplay of the first titanfall game to the second. There wasn't too much advanced movement tech beyond wall running, and the slower moving titans felt like they had far more survivability and power. You weren't trying to shoot at people b-hopping or airstrafing at 50kph while you were doing the same all the time. It was nice.

[@ender_z4nd3r83]

titanfall 1 did some things better than the sequel, but I think titanfall 2 is the better one, and critics and players seems to agree with that, although I know what the majority says is not always the truth

[@filip2210]

Keep up old man sometimes people aren't going to wait for you to shoot I get what you're saying but to me that just sounds like futuristic CoD and I would never ever look at titanfall that way

[@charles-vi7qb]

I like both

[@filip2210]

@@charles-vi7qb that's fair

[@blehmeh9889]

3:30 I'll be honest, I've never quite gelled with people calling Team Fortress 2 a movement shooter. Sure, it has some wacky movement mechanics for some classes as a feature, but it's usually on a handful of classes, namely blast jumping for Soldier and Demo, "trimping" for Demoknight, the occasional sentry gun blast/bullet jumping for Engineer, and Scout's variety of inherit movement kit. However, these are a handful of classes and it's not essential to use or get good at these all the time. Classes like Heavy, Engineer, and Sniper revolve more around careful pre-emptive positioning and planning than they do movement and action. They have a couple of movement techniques on their own (heavy jumping around a corner while revving the gun in mid air, or Engineer doing a sentry jump to get into an unusual spot), but one exists only to get around a limitation of a weapon and the other is a careful positioning tool to use before a firefight to get into an unusual spot. These aren't "movement shooter mechanics" essential to combat the same way that Titanfall's movement mechanics are essential to combat. As Soldier main especially, I personally prefer to buck the trend of the rocketjump-centric playstyle by equipping a shotgun instead of the gun boats. I walk slowly to the front line, sure, but when I get there, I have 4 rockets, 6 shotgun shells, and 200 health at my disposal, and I find myself defeating scores of enemies before being taken down because I had that extra firepower to work with, or walking away from fights that I totally would have lost without a secondary or a full health pool not being eaten into by rocket jumping. Sure, I'll rocket jump to traverse tall obstacles or ledges sometimes if I need to take a shortcut, but I don't rocket jump around battle or to the front lines just because I'm impatient and I want more action. TF2 has tradeoffs that sometimes reward moving less or adopting a more strategic and slow playstyle, and this is likely what bolstered TF2's popularity moreso than the movement mechanics; if you want a movement shooter, Scout, Soldier, and Demo can serve you VERY well, but if you're not that fast or want something more methodical, you have other classes or even playstyles within a class that revolve around more strategy and planning with finite movement being a limitation to work around in exchange for more health or a more powerful weapon; when I stopped rocket jumping and started walking, I walked away from more fights because I had more health and ammo.

[@swagguy7515]

Damn, that whole essay just made me realize how TF2 is even more of a masterpiece than I already thought it was. And you’re right. While movement based classes like Scout, Soldier, and Demoman are generally more powerful and versatile classes, that doesn’t mean more slow and methodical classes or playstyles are left behind. This can be seen in sixes, where two soldiers are regularly played with the exact opposite playstyles. The roamer is Soldier’s movement incarnate, taking advantage of all of Soldier’s movement tech with the reduced rocket jump damage of the Gunboats to flank the enemy from vulnerable positions. The pocket is Soldier’s boots-on-the-ground variant, equipping the Shotgun using that extra firepower along with his hefty base health to protect the team’s Medic whom is often overhealing him making the pocket even more of a wall. Different playstyles have give and takes, strengths and weaknesses that are strategically used in the right circumstances. That doesn’t mean the roamer can’t be effective on the ground, or the pocket being not effective whole rocket jumping. That’s another strength of TF2 like you said: versatility. I want to talk about a class I find fascinating when discussing movement: the Spy. By design, the Spy is not a movement based class like the Scout, Soldier, or Demoman. Other than his above average base speed, the Spy’s default loadout has no movement options. In 2007. Since then TF2 players have discovered trickstabbing, a way of tricking your enemy into showing their back to you in order to backstab them through moving. Spy players that to use level geometry, jumping, and especially strafing to trickstab. Trickstabs take just as much skill as stuff like sticky jumping and rocket jumping and pulling one off is just as exhilarating as getting a kill with rocket jumping or sticky jumping. I find it fascinating that even without moving at Mach 2, Spy has these micromovements that simulate that same feeling of going fast through the trickstab. That’s not to say the movement based trickstab playstyle is more superior to tradition Spy mind you. In a causal lobby with the average player skill level being quite low trickstabs are VERY effective in getting kills especially with weapons like the Big Earner and the Conniver’s Kunai. However in sixes and highlander, where players are skilled and knowledgeable about Spy and his trickstab shenanigans once a Spy is ratted out he is most often killed immediately with no chance at pulling off a trickstab. This is where the traditional method of playing Spy comes in using a mix of map knowledge, positioning, and game sense to get a vital kill on key target like a Demoman or a Sniper before dying immediately. That’s not to say trickstabs can’t be used on high skilled players or that traditional Spy gameplay is inferior to trickstabbing. Like the roamer and pocket, there is a time and place to using these skills that make Spy one of the most unique pieces of gameplay in FPS history.

[@vaniellys]

Halo used to be a perfect balance of speed, fast enough to be "action" but slow enough to be tactical.

[@taejoonpark9613]

When i saw the video i immediately thought of the killzone series i live how heavy the characters feel when ur moving around

[@CherryDad]

I definitely agree, I feel overwhelmed by how nearly every medium seems to be in a race to the bottom for pacing, trying to be faster, give you that sugar rush, and I'm so exhausted. Just let me slow it down, let me breathe.

[@Mastergrunt9dawg]

Great video! You nailed what I've been feeling and saying for YEARS. There's a certain level of staying power and enjoyment from playing slower games and the faster games like CoD are much better in small bursts. I find myself enjoying games like Halo, MechWarrior, and Hell Let Loose more than the fast paced high movement games... if I even enjoy playing those games to begin with. I find needing to strategize on the fly and focus on positioning is much more engaging and mentally stimulating than trying to flick to targets at breakneck speeds. Especially now that I'm older and it's not as easy for me to keep up with the level of reaction times that a lot of these games demand, but I can still problem solve and strategize as well, if not better, as I could as a kid.

[@thefakebanette3483]

I think for some people a lack of speed lowers options and that is the main issue. Another factor is more a sense of showing your skill. It's not an easy thing to show that you got a bunch of kills based on planning and tactics, but showing you jumping and sliding around flicking on heads, yeah that is easy to show off how good you are at something

[@maxih.6710]

I think that movement shooters can also be about strategy. One of my favorite games is Ultrakill (it's a really fast movement shooter for those who don't know it) and in its later levels you can't just go in and mindlessly shoot everything. You have to prioritize the stronger enemies and find the best walls to jump of to get to better positions. If you can't beat a level after a few tries you will start to make up a strategy on the best rout to take and which stronger enemies to kill thirst. Yes it still is a lot about good movement and fast reaction time but also, like i said earlier, a lot about strategy.

[@MrSchnorkel]

When talking about fast single player shooters it's important to note that some games shove the player through a door and straight into a fight while others frequently give the player an overview of the area before the fight starts. By the second method you can have strategy as well as fast action. I really enjoy these videos exploring game design even if I'm more interested in the single player aspect. Please make more.

[@GuyWithAHat_GWAH]

This video was pretty hard for me to swallow at first, but honestly I really do end up agreeing with how fast paced games don't hold as much longevity. Titanfall 2 is my favorite game of all time, but I haven't played it in a few months. If its my favorite game, why wouldn't I be playing it every day? I think it mostly has to do with the fact that I'm in college with generally less time to play games, and the increasing skill ceiling prevents me from playing a lot of modern shooters, because I just can't keep up. A great example is Escape from Tarkov. I have a few thousand hours in it but I cannot compete with most of the other people playing it simply because I can't, and don't want to put in the time and effort some other players have. The game just wiped recently, and within the first two weeks I saw people who were level 50+, I was level 8, and the highest level I had gotten to in a wipe ever was 32. I find myself slowly playing less and less multiplayer skill based games and more stuff like Borderlands 2 or Stardew Valley. I wouldn't be surprised if, like what I said above, just the amount of time people spend playing video games nowadays has a lot to do with fast paced games being less and less accessable, at least multiplayer ones.

[@xanderabbey8529]

As a fellow uni student, this is why I like sandbox multiplayer FPS games where strategy is just as important as speedy reaction times. Battlefield and Halo are great for this. Choosing what gadgets and weapons to use for a certain map or engagement is as important as mechanical skill.

[@animator6231]

I personally agree that movement shooters don’t have as much staying power. But for me it’s because of the skill ceiling being so unbelievably high rather than a “sugar rush”. I took a whole week just to reach my old kraber quickscoping self. And even then I wasn’t at my peak of 20 kill shenaniganery against the pinnacle of the player base. I also disagree with the idea of “no think in movement shooter” because you do end up having to think how you pace your movement so you don’t get into a bad spot, in the end something like titanfall imo has a higher skill ceiling since if you end up way too far behind enemy lines and they know where you are, movement won’t always save you. As for most games, I love all speeds but quite frankly I sometimes end up dragging my stupid high speed flank maneuvers around, they do work tbh in most games. Speaking as someone who loved halo and titanfall (like it’s literally my pfp i drew 2 years ago). What matters imo is the time you can dedicate and how ready you are to invest in getting better at a game.

[@theclowninghasbegun3442]

You know what i hate about newer games? Motion Blur, Gives me headaches

[@Nachy]

I noticed devs noticed how much of a marmite it is with players in the recent 5 or so years of games that even in console they allow you to toggle it off, or at least tone it down.

[@HANDLEHANDLEHANDLEHANDLE27]

It's hilarious how people who don't make games tell people who actually make games are wrong when it comes to making games. It's like not knowing how to cook anything and still yelling at the cooks at the restaurant you're eating at for "not making the food right" despite the cooks having more experience in a kitchen than you do.

[@user-cc3ef7qh1x]

I don't know if this comment is a joke or just a brain rot

[@crunchybombed2614]

You are able to sit back and camp in titanfall pretty effectively. EA screwed them with launching it between two well known series. Also Michael bay paces his action well and so does titanfall with the titans. Titans do slow it down

[@ananon5771]

as someone who almost embodies the fast = good kind of guy, this is actually true to some degree, even in my perspective. the example i will give is not a console shooter, but tf2, tf2 has many of the mechanics of quake and can get very fast, but two things make it different. -casual atmosphere, you can dial back and be friendly, or use another class like medic or sniper. -the classes that are not as AFPS-like are still fun to play. tf2 embodies being able to sustain itself while having these fast movements, and i think it should be looked at for advice on how to do it. and on the SP fps side, something all boomershooters have is lower difficulties, even DOOM mods, a community made for the most hardcore players has mods like DAKKA and combined arms for just being powerful, or even mods like hideous destructor (DOOM, but a milsim) and live through DOOM (DOOM but survival horror) to slow down to pace (and hardcore players love these mods, especially for easier maps that would be too easy in normal DOOM). though i will say strategy can play a role, like im playing a DOOM map-set now and no amount of aim will make such bad positioning work against an archvile

[@cooldud7071]

Sniper is the worst class in the entire game because it goes entirely against the game's design philosophy. It is the most low-risk class, and offers no movement complexity. Even classes like medic and spy require you to constantly be on your toes. Spy has a lot of movement complexity regarding the types of backstabs, and medic requires you to constantly be dodging in order to not die.

[@ananon5771]

@@cooldud7071 you are right about sniper, but the others classes although they do use movement, it's not the same as a soldier or demo. you're also forgetting engie, heavy and even W+M1 pyro.

[@cooldud7071]

@@ananon5771 Engie isn't meant to have crazy mobility, but even he has sentry jumping. Heavy purposefully has restricted movement. Pyro, on the other hand, has a myriad of movement options, from flare jumping to the jetpack. Not to mention using enemy rockets to rocket jump, or enemy stickies to sticky jump.

[@preeyus4037]

I definitely prefer fps games with slower movement and faster ttks but titanfall 2s multiplayer will always be one of if not my favorite, maybe it’s the contrast of the highly mobile and fragile pilot and the tanky hulking titans

[@centy2490]

Interesting thing to think about and way of putting it. I never quite thought about it that way. Nice vid!

[@nenoroalzafen30]

I like a fps when it's between not too slow, not too speed just making sure i won't get sick of blurry movement or fast movement It's rare for me to find a fps where i can start and finish without being sick.

[@suncanny1418]

"more popular=better"

[@rigfordthebarbarian2895]

Another banger. I need Soylore pt 3 injected directly into my veins, please.

[@AHandleWasAlreadyTaken]

Either it’s like a rhythm game or it’s a strategy game

[@dubsguy7986]

Billions must shoot

[@minignoux4566]

a lot of people's reason for liking fast movement shooters is because of the fatigue of games like call of duty a game being fast or slow does nothing to change how strategy based it can be, but being fast just looks and feels cool, and that's what people want in a game: fun i don't really play modern games that much, since i'm happy with my old consoles, but the recent shooters that have caught my attention the most, and that i *actually* want to play someday, are those new boomer shooters

[@voodoo1582]

I implore you to try Titanfall 2 CTF, I think it lets speed as well as strategy really shine in the Titanfall 2 sandbox

[@DavidNwokoye]

Fast shooters suits PvE games well. Slower shooters are better for PvP

[@marko-gj1uj]

You are right here. If Fortnite Save the World only had current Fortnite moves, it would make Battle Royale more challenging

[@arkaua]

I honestly really dislike fast shooters for PvE games too, the insane crackhead pace ruined Killing Floor with the second game... KF1 is slow paced, tactical and a single mistake could wipe your squad out, but you can always see it coming and react accordingly, I really enjoy that for PvE games

[@TrappedInFloor]

Slower shooter are better *team-based PvP

[@benniebees]

The way I see it. There are 2 categories of skill. Physical and cerebral. Physical skill is how quickly and precisely you can do inputs. Cerebral skill is how well you understand the game and can make decisions that have good chances of winning. In any game, making it faster, or making hitboxes smaller, will increase the focus on physical skill. And thus hurt the value of cerebral skill. A game can have complex mechanics that leave a high cerebral skill ceiling, but if the game is too fast it doesn't matter that you learned the cerebral aspects of the game. You might have set up the parameters of the engagement such that you have an advantage, but it doesn't matter, cause you miss your shots and the opponent didn't. (ie you engaged with a weapon that is superior for that range over your opponent's weapon, but it doens't matter cause you don't hit your shots) For this reason, the importance of physical and cerebral skill in a game are not independent. If physical skill becomes more important, cerebral skill automatically becomes less important, even though the complexity of the game didn't change. As such one could say that a game has a certain balance of focus between physical and cerebral skill. (A simplified way to look at it would be: a game can for example be a [40/60] game or a [70/30] game) [opinion warning] And this is why halo infinite sucks. Aim assist is gutted, and skill expression is dominated by hitting your shots over anything else. Contextual weapon balance was thrown out of the window in favor of physical skill weapon balance. (assault rifle is objectively worse at all ranges than the pistol, because it is easier to use *vomits at dogshit game design*). Looking at For Honor (a fighting game where everything is much more easy to react to than your typical fighting game) you see that the slowness of the game is actually creating the opposite effect. The game becomes less cerebral and more physical, because a player can react (or learn to react) to the opponent's attacks, and thus not need to make reads. (ie use their brain). What it means to be "good" at for honor is to have a fast enough reaction time such that you don't need to make any reads. In my opinion this is really not good game design either. So yeah, make a game too slow and it actually hurts cerebral skill and promotes even more physical skill. Thanks for reading my monologue lol. I'm quite passionate about this topic haha.

[@zuffin1864]

An unbroken flow of gameplay is really important, ads does hinder that. Halo & CS are slower than quake, but the action flow is unbroken (except for reloads)

[@aidancoleman7307]

To say fast shooters are all reaction seems reductive especially when considering many slow shooters rely on fast and accurate aiming.

[@Milkyoid]

halotroon brimstone

[@sedeuphadude80]

ultrachud super omega fossil fuel coal

[@marko-gj1uj]

Xe is mad

[@bazookaman1353]

Len'en pfp?

[@Milkyoid]

Nau Roudexingu@@bazookaman1353

[@aacc4954]

AKTUALLY C-CHUD, GAYLO IS B-B-BASED AND KINO AND HECKING AWESOME

[@Ares_gaming_117]

"I find strategy a far more interesting skill to focus on in a game[than reaction]" -🤓 Slowpoke detected🐌🤓 Jokes aside, nice video. Great food for thought, as always!

[@Pickle-Rika]

slowburn gemeralds 😌

[@sedeuphadude80]

Fastburn coals 🤮

[@neonthunder3261]

I feel like this crisis also applies to some fighting games. A lot of them have sped up a lot and focus on long combos. Maybe I’m high though.

[@noble_lemon]

I like when game gives you opportunity to choose what pace you want to play. Usually my style is a calm walking or stealth with extreme exploding if needed.

[@pandaprewmaster325]

This also applies to really any other type of games I mean have you looked at lets say sudden strike series? It might be interesting to look at since it emphasizes the player overall deployment of troops and how efficient those are and what is and whats not maybe check it out if you are more interested in this kind "speed"

[@DollaSignD]

Imma disagree that fast paced titles lack strategy. Also the slower games can suffer from the same exact problem of people being so reliant on twitch reaction that it becomes unfun

[@MJS-lk2ej]

I don't think mr. Mccord comments on Titanfall being "all sugar" are entirely true, and I unironically question how extensively he played his game, because as you said in your video on Halo Infinite's campaign, planning traversal is a tactical decision (also strategy is the highest level of military decision making, it determines the course of war through theatre control, the proper term to use here is tactical, which is the lowest level of military decision making, it is your plan to win the battle), if you don't pay attention to where combat is happening and traverse the map with that in mind then you are going to have a bad time. I think the "all sugar" sentiment about Titanfall is due to design half-measures (like ADS), and unintelligent map design (the maps certainly need to be bigger and better integrate Titan and pilot gameplay). Ironically respawn does not think "there is any where to innovate with the Titanfall IP" (as that dev publicly stated recently), yet we have senior developers also saying on twitter that Titanfall has no strategy, and that is why it failed, clearly this is somewhere that requires innovation, or does Titanfall actually require strategy? at this point I am not sure if the entirety of AAA developers have a shared braincell between them

[@michaelpsellos770]

The best example of no one wanting to play a fast shooter is the death of tribes or quake games everytime it comes out

[@troo_6656]

I've had blast with Holdfast a napoleonic era shooter... I think that speaks for itself. Slower and more methodical pace of the matches with emphasis on teamplay make that game really a gem.

[@quinkledinkle3760]

I think Titanfall 2 just released at a HORRIBLE time. Apex Legends got super popular not only being free, but also releasing around the pandemic. Its the only reason why i hopped on.

[@charlesdexterward7781]

HEY MAN ALL I KNOW IS WHEN I PRESS A BUTTON SOMETHING AWESOME BETTER HAPPEN

[@ToweringPepsiMan]

Titanfall 2 was released around the same time as a battlefield and a cod game. It was murdered.

[@CULTURESHOCK3643]

I regret you not mentioning some of the slower third person shooters, like the last of us. Having to slug around as joel or ellie made fast and assertive kills much more satisfying, especially in the second game. Slow movement and methodical combat majorly contribute to immersion and engagement, i cant think of a single fight in either of the last of us games where i wasnt at the edge of my seat.

[@vwtdi1579]

Slower shooters bring inherent risk to every movement. America's Army and Blackhawk Down are old, but have a diehard base. The first Unreal had an Infiltration mod that dramatically slowed the game. Its a shame that the player base has moved on because it was so much fun with its sinplicity.