> 2533274801176260;13523:
> In the sense that there is one memorandum that holds highest authority over the meaning of the word? No. But most people still have a clear grasp of what an Arena shooter is. You’d be hard-pressed to find anybody claiming that Quake isn’t an Arena shooter but, say, Call of Duty is. The disagreement only starts when considering hybrid genres or games (which includes Halo and is probably the reason this issue pops up so oftern) and in very specific details of the games that ultimately only a very select few people consider to be an additional requirement (like the aforementioned hitscan/projectile debate or the question whether or not it has to be on PC to count). Just look at that “UT was not an Arena Shooter” thread we talked about. If you scroll down, they asked the users to give their very own definition of Arena shooters. And while their exact phrasing might differ, almost all of them mention the same criteria. (Except that one guy that names classes and kill-rewards as a requirement, whom I think is merely trolling.) That is still a definition, even if it wasn’t explicitly written down in a dictionary.
> One can’t just label anything an Arena shooter if one so pleases, is all I’m saying…
But no one’s labeling any random game arena shooter here. When I say people have different defitioins, I don’t mean that there’s some guy who thinks character customization is an important component of arena shooters. But even if you look at that thread, while there are some common themes that arise, such as pick-ups and fast movement, the range of these definitions varies a lot.
Take this for example:
> - good responsive movement and variety in movement techniques
> - good game pace that is not slow or boring (granted the players do affect this too)
> - responsive netcode that behaves as you’d expect
> - well thought out, fun maps
> - no RPG-style unlocks/levelling - real skill required’
This is quite vague with words like “good” and “fun”. The only really definitive statement is the one about unlocks. Without that point even something like Titanfall would be an arena shooter under this definition.
Then consider this:
> - Short matches (10-20 mins/match).
> - Dynamic matches (not 10-sec delays per spawn pick, like in TSD/SD).
> - Varied & Unique combat situations (=> Very distinct weapons).
> - Not promoting unlockables/cosmetics too much (having them is ok, excessively promoting them is not).
> - Medium-difficulty in killing opponents (one-shot-kill situations should only exist for head-shots or super-weapons).
The only bullet point here that agrees definitely with the previous one is the “no unlocks”. And again, that’s really the only point that prevents this from including a large number of games people don’t traditionally consider as arena shooters.
Then how about this:
> Fast-paced with depth in regard to movement
> Aim consistency (where you aim is where you fire)
> Emphasis on map control (whether it be power-ups or geography)
> Individual differences in players derived from personal attributes not class
> Level playing field from visibility to character traits (no leveling)
This is the first that’s actually restrictive by putting emphasis on movement and consistency of weapons. This is the first I could actually get behind (because the first two said nothing meaningful about gameplay). Note first appearance of equal starts as an important feature.
Then this (I omitted some remarks in parentheses to conserve space):
> - No gameplay interfering unlocks
> - Deep gameplay mechanics
> - Balanced weaponry
> - Fast paced
> - Biggest reward in arena FPS is personal skill progression
Again, no unlocks and fast pace as a common theme, but otherwise this is really vague. “Deep gameplay mechanics” and “balanced weaponry” is about as vague as it gets as those should arguably be a part of any game with weapons in it. It’s not like anybody wants a shallow and unbalanced game.
The next:
> - gameplay takes place in specific enclosed environments (arenas) - players have to use weapons and items placed around the map - all players in the game have the same abilities and stats on each spawn
Believe it or not, but this is only the second time pick-ups and equal starts are brought up as an important aspect. This is the first literal interpretation that talks about “enclosed environments (arenas)”, whatever that means.
I’m not going to go through all the definitions in the thread. This sample of the first few definitions just shows that the definitions vary from vary vague to reasonably restrictive. Some of these definitions agree on some things, but none of them can agree on any single thing. Some put emphasis on movement, and some on pace in general. Others don’t even mention either of those things, but instead consider map pick-ups and equal starts as important attributes. But these are, again, disregarded by others. I don’t claim that there aren’t common themes in some of these definitions, but I also feel like you’re underestimating the amount of variance all these have.
