Are there any other single player FPS that have both good gameplay and a good story?

I personally really liked it. It gets shit on from people whop went run n' gun and finished the thing in 6 hours.
I always thought of the Crysis franchise as meant to be played kind of stealthy or tactically. It also has a lot more dialog and character development compared to the first two. Buy it for 10 bucks for PC.
The multiplayer is also god-tier though I'm not sure how many people are even playing it.

I know there's a heavy emphasis on a bow in the promotional material, so I guess stealth is the way. 2 was rather run and gun, so I guess everyone just assumed 3 would be the same.
They honestly deserve the fate in store for them. They overplayed their hand. Who opens 8 fucking branches just because they had the money to do so?

Borderlands sucks cock. Far Cry 2/3 have no interesting story. Shooting gameplay is mediocre. Open world busywork crap.Fallout New Vegas and Deus Ex are excellent RPGs, but again, the shooting isn't great. Also Stalker. Not good gunplay. Wolfenstein TNO was also pretty mediocre.

I know it's disliked on Holla Forums, but you can't go wrong with Halo CE/2. Great story. Great, smart gunplay. Highly recommend pirating the PC ports. Also:
Retail Black Mesa (Half Life remake) is nice
RAGE has good gunplay if you can get past the shitty driving stuff
Crysis 1, Bioshock 1/2 are also nice

I'll give you a short list of my grievances
infact, most of the "graphics improvements" are something to this degree, and they don't do much good improving the game.

In 2033, the controls and animations felt a bit clunky, but they weren't difficult or hard to grasp. For some reason, they decided to add the press-button-to-make-bad-guy-fall-asleep button, which makes the game trivial on all difficulties, since its not hard in the slightest to pick off people one by one with melee kills, because the enemy placement on maps wasn't built for this, it was built for pure stealth using ranged kills or evasion, melee was a last resort, as stabbing someone in the back didn't guarantee they weren't going to scream and alert everyone. Stealth didn't need this crazy buff in the slightest, as going loud was already stupid and punishing enough to begin with.

Removal of equipping your knife, throwing knives, and grenades did nothing but make the game harder and feel less realistic on ranger hardcore

they completely ruined this by putting these everywhere, rather than near major armory locations, where it would make sense

less options for different playstyles, even if they weren't too game changing, it was still a cool feature that added a sense of progression to the character himself, when you arrive at Polis, you're supposed to feel like you're not just some guy delivering a message to get some help anymore, you're all that your station has.

The list goes on and on, there was so much shit they just flat out gutted and added that didn't make sense or didn't fit at all. If you didn't notice them, why even discuss this game, its like you weren't paying attention.

The original Halo trilogy. Also there's XIII, but the gameplay could be better on that one.

I'll have to disagree on both points because the story feels cliche and gameplay is unnecessarily easy (But, then again, I have yet to finish it).

Fair enough I guess? I think it looks more mystical and weird which fits well with a lot of the occult stuff in the game.
I think it's just very subjective.

This is in the game. You go to the weapons tab and equip the three different grenades and the throwing knives.

So wait, not being able to do silent kills makes the game more immersive? Are you roleplaying as a retard in the game that can't kill people silently?

Listen I get where you're coming from with some of this stuff, but most of it is so minor that I have a really hard time believing it could actually completely ruin the game.
If you wanna say that you like the original better and that Redux is a slightly inferior remake then that's absolutely fine, but none of this makes the game shit.

Very easily fixable with mods, user. Like one weapon pack and ZRP and game is fixed.

Is it a good idea to install mods on a first playthrough?
I started playing the game but got bored kind of quickly

Yes, but Stalker with mods is one of the hardest shooters you will ever play.
New players get easily lost or confused. Stalker in itself has a shitload of stuff and details that one needs to know. Mods add x10 times more stuff and changes to the world including A.I behavior.

I do suggest installing simple stuff like Arsenal Overhaul with some good graphical mods. Best for new players. Then stuff like Call of Chernobyl with addons is the best experience for Veterans.

Pic related is Call of Chernobyl mod with Absolute Nature/Structures Redux, Fluffy Grass V2, Arsenal Overhaul, Smurth's Dynamic Hud, Enhanced Sun Effects, S.W.T.C., Muffled PDA/Geiger Counter 1.2, Arsenal Overhaul Step Sounds - Old Version, lootmoney for CoC , Better torch / flashlight and Call of Chernobyl HD Models Addon.

Blows any other "survival" and apocalyptic game out of the water.

You were able to do silent kills in the first game, it was just a roll of the dice on whether or not they were going to alert everyone on dying, kinda like how it is in the real world. They steered you towards evading people rather than killing them, and if they wanted to make that easier, they shouldn't have made it as simple as standing near someone and pressing a button.

Not in the same way as it was in 2033, when you equipped your throwables, they were a weapon in your hand that you could see and keep on the ready if you wanted to throw fast, rather than something that needed to be pulled out and then thrown. Also, they had unique melee animations too.

The only thing I will admit that's improved is the amoeba section.
Did you even play the original, or did you just play the redux?

I didn't play the original, no

One of the worst sequels ever made.

Well, that would explain it, go and play the original, its a significantly different game that I have trouble explaining with text.

Okay, I'll get to it eventually

...

Is the crysis trilogy really that good for singleplayer?
Also some user here mentioned Tit Anvil 2's singleplayer campaign being good, would pirating that be worth it?

Titanfall 2 has the most enjoyable single player shooter campaign i've played since Metro.

1 is decent, better with mods and going for the 0g level skip.
2 is meh and a downgrade in many aspects compared to 1, it does run and look better but I'm putting that on cramped urban environment
3 tries to grab some of the 1 style back and partially succeeds but then it turns out to be 3 hr long so meh.

Crysis 1 is decent, Crysis 2 is god-tier and Crysis 3 is fairly good.

Warhead on the other hand is absolute cancer. But it din't even matter because if you add a 1920x1080 fix, Steam will no longer recognize that you're playing the game. This way you can finish the whole thing for even replay it for as many times as you want. The once you get bored you can just refund it because Steam only counted like 5 minutes of gameplay.

Nobody ever talks about Marathon, so you know it must be a hidden gem.

The only reason it gets brought up at all is because it was on the PC and the original wasn't. Apart from that it's a shitty cash grab sequel.

There's nothing wrong with linear level design as long as the gameplay is fine.
Not everything needs to be a system shock ripoff

The original game had this somber tone and this hub based level design with sidequests and shit

Only in nu/v/ do people think that non-linear = must be System Shock.

The original game was more akin to Deus Ex in that you had this big city to explore with stuff to do. Whenever I've replayed the Darkness I'm always stunned that it barely gets mentioned because of how great of an experience it was.

Bungie being as shit as they are now I can say for sure Marathon was lore heavy and interesting in the early 90s. I played it on my dad's iMac back then but the machine couldn't handle infinity. The alien and computer story was amazing.

Yeah, and Fallout 1 and 2 were isometric CRPGs, that doesn't stop me from enjoying New Vegas.

Point being, if the game is still good, who gives a fuck about what the sequel did.

Extremely few people who play any of the Marathon games actually finish them because of how labyrinthine the maps are. It gets to the point where a single map in Marathon can take literal hours to complete compared to maps in Doom.

Nah.

Literal tech demo game that Crytek made to sell their game engine.

The game has a completely retarded story with some of the worst voice acting in a Western game. (It makes shit like the original Resident Evil's voice acting look good). The AI is also really slipshot and stealth isn't really much of an option. Which makes playing on the harder difficulties pointless.

Also the game gets way, way, way worse as soon as the mutants appear. Similar to how Crysis got worse once the Aliens appeared. To the point where it turns from an okay fps to a shit one really fast. It was just more evidence Crytek was a shitty gamedev.

Ubisoft Montreal remade Far Cry on the Xbox as Far Cry Instincts and it had a way better story, way better pacing, combat was enormously better etc. It's sad to me it was never ported to PC.

That buggy game that had a nonsensical retarded plot, terrible art direction, bad gunplay and AI ?

I only had trouble with one or two maps though? The first Marathon is easy once you realize that most of the beginning maps are linear, it isn't until you get the one where you need to refuel oxygen while hunting for switches that the labyrinth starts to show up. But by that point I already pinpointed the pattern the map designers liked to do and so most attempts to pull a fast one on me failed. The greatest padding of length was needing to go back and fourth recharging health and/or air supply and some sadistic jumps where it's all but guaranteed you'd hurt yourself.

I mean shit if you didn't see the elevator trap coming I think you need to take a good look at yourself and rethink how you approach old games, since you won't last against many of them.

I played the first and durandal, but it was sad to see the actual level design didn't improve in a real game play sense. The final level of durandal was an awful climax. the weapons are bad and the enemies aren't interesting to fight against.

uh-oh, you're going to anger that one guy who insists farcry is great and the trigens are a great addition to the game.

...

Get out underage faggot.
Return to Castle Wolfenstein is superior.

Eat shit and die.

Yes. It's pretty fun, the graphics are fantastic, and it brings a very satisfactory conclusion to the plot.

Blame EA for selling it only on Origin, not Steam.

What does it have that's missing from the free mod? (Multiplayer is not relevant for me.)

I hope you didnt fuck up.

Any info graph to install and play marathon? Already played all the doom games except for doom 3 and nudoom.

RTCW is good don't get me wrong but it is still a dated game

like a lot of the enemies are bullet sponges, a lot of the weapons are unsatisfying to use (like the mp-40 you use for like half of the game is really unsatisfying to use especially on groups of enemies). The storyline is also very basic and the final boss is a notorious joke.

I'd even argue games like Necrovision and Singularity are closer to what Grey Matter was trying to do with RTCW. Whenever someone brings up RTCW now, 99% of the time it's to mention that it spawned Enemy Territory. Which is much more talked about.

You mean mods? Because the Marathon series is real easy to get and install. (Unless you're on Linux, then you have to compile it.)

alephone.lhowon.org/

Can you even buy the superior original version anymore?

Good game

...

The story was mediocre and the atmosphere was over the top.

If it weren't for the scripted combat, bulletsponge mutants, and more linearity than fucking CoD, that statement would be true.

Well OP, if you enjoyed Metro 2033 regardless, then King Kong is just the game for you. It has no health system but the gunplay is better than Metro. The graphics aged quite well, the story is competently written, and the voice acting is pretty nice on top of that.

Loved this game, but fuck those giant worm things at the end

RTCW has shit gunplay. TNO has powerful weapons and great gore, although the guns are less varied.

...

Thanks, friend

Yeah, on Origin.

Or get an old box.

I enjoyed The Darkness, but holy shit does the gameplay suck balls.

Yeah, might not be as much double dipping niggers trying to resell you a box they just activated considering normalfags prefer redux.

Forgot it was a steam pc exclusive, I guess you could pirate or get the ps3 version

I got a question about Gaylo, are you supposed to be playing on the hardest or the second hardest difficulty? I started off on the second hardest for the first level and thought it was too easy so I changed to the hardest, and now every one of those big fuckers with the plasma rifles take six hours to die without spamming nades, and it doesn't seem to me like the AI actually changes.

There's one bullet sponge enemy, the librarian, and the point is that you don't have to fight them.

The funny thing though is that it's always easier to fight them in Ranger mode, just pump them full of overpumped steel darts. and just like that they're dead at no ammo cost.

...

...

There are a bunch, such as when you have to run away from the monster in library with your muchachos.

No, they're all bullet sponge. In King Kong, you can flinch an enemy with pistol rounds or drop them down with a shotgun round. In Metro, they keep attacking you. The animations are shit as well.

Define "giant", because I don't see it. CoD 2's levels are pretty huge and explorable as well.

A headshot to a watcher or a nosalis with a pistol or anything stronger (dirty rifle rounds won't) will definitely kill it instantly on ranger hardcore. I can say this safely as someone who can run the game only using one medkit.

its not like they're flooding your screen and making it impossible to not look at them, and even when the parts where looking away doesn't work, you can still sprint through areas no problem

The only mutant I'm surprised you didn't mention was the amoebas, which everyone regards as some of the worst enemies in the game.

I'll agree here, the levels aren't giant, but they're not entirely linear like CoD, they still give you choices on how to move through the level without getting seen, and on the surface, there are quite a few sidepaths that result in good loot.

Crysis had sequels?

Nigger aside from Gayman appearing here and there the game has indeed very little story on it's own. It only becomes good in the context of Half Life 2.

Didn't they all suck (Except for Crysis 2)?

Didn't Crysis suck and only had graphics but nothing else?

I'm not talking about the amount of bullets it takes to kill a creature, but how many shots it takes to disable it for a second. It feels like the creatures of Metro feel no pain. I always turn on the hitmarker due to this lacking gunplay.

They are. I hate games that mix cutscenes with gameplay.

I don't know the names. I hate every single one of the muties disregarding the species, they're so annoying and unsatisfying to kill here.

Not every single level though. I can appreciate the levels with human enemies in Metro, but the mutants are just shit.

Crysis is fun, the mechanics are great, the devs just don't know shit about game design.

Nah, it was a pretty good game once you were actually killing shit. Also, I had a lot of fun with mods and maps, though I can see why that isn't a proper argument in the game's defense.

Fairly certain they can't get animation cancelled, but if you shoot them before they start, again, with any weapon that doesn't shoot piss water, they'll flinch.

Also, why are you aiming to disable it or stun it instead of trying to outright kill it with a headshot? All of the guns have ridiculously tight spreads if you fire in bursts, even the bastard gun; all you have to do is just aim in the general area of the head as it charges you and chances are you'll get a kill before it even gets within swiping distance.

I have never had a problem with managing mutants fighting like this, but then again, I've probably played the game one too many times.

So you're complaining about a single scripted sequence that's nothing but a lazy way to move along Artyom to the next area? I admit, I don't like losing my agency too, but this is your opinion.

that's your opinion too

Also, nosalises are the ones that walk on two legs, and the ones that have wings and screech; the watchers are the guys on the ground that look like dogs; demons are the winged beasts; amoebas are the slimes in the reactor area; and librarians are the giant gorillas.

the ones you encounter most frequently are nosalises
The majority of them do, the only ones that don't are on-rails, and are some of the more worse levels in the game.

test

Bored with first time play? How in the fuck can that be? Every gunfight is intense. I know i can reinstall the game now and my ballsack would still shrink when the lab is mentioned. Did you put it on master difficulty?

it's fucking nazis and communists for the 1 billionth time, it is lame as shit

You might like Resistance for the PS3. I personally do not like alternative history stories, but that game seemed to be pretty flushed out story and game play wise, the 1st Red Faction as well.

Get out of here, stalker.

It's just something that makes shooting enemies feel satisfying and responsive. Try to play King Kong, you'll understand how satisfying it is to blow away a raptor with the shotgun.

I found more than one. I played this game a long time ago, so I can't remember which particular parts, but I remember being so annyoed by the game.

I don't remember seeing more humans than mutants.

Metroid Prime