Is The Arena Shooter Dead?

The Arena Shooter

Is it dead?

by exterminat

©2012 Nicholas Laborde

Part of progression is the simple act of moving on.

We live in a day and age where the past is continually being dwelled upon (see: the influx of HD re-releases), and we’re about to jump into the next cycle of video game technology with the imminent next generation of consoles and engines.

Something that constantly irks me, though, is of how one particular type of game seems to be breathing its last weak sighs; the arena shooter.

The modern mentality coupled with “everyone else is doing it” has led the Call of Duty franchise to momentous heights, and in my opinion, it’s hammering the final nail into the coffin of one of gaming’s most cherished pastimes.

What “is” an arena shooter?

The definition of “arena shooter” is clear yet hazy. My personal definition is that of any multiplayer shooter which does not allow the player to choose any type of pre-game attributes (perks and weapons) that give you an advantage over other players.

Quake and Unreal Tournament are perfect examples and are true arena shooters. The last two modern arena shooters that have somewhat conformed to modern standards but still stay true to their roots are Halo and Gears of War.

You may think this article is drenched in nostalgia and is the ranting rave of a man who does not want to accept that the games he played years ago aren’t still prevalent. While that may be true to a small degree (we’re only human), let me ask you one simple question.

What is more objective, fair, and skill-reliant: entering a game session at level 70 with perks that give you super health and speed, spawning with the best weapons and dominating everyone who isn’t at your state?

Or, everyone spawning with a default weapon, having no inherent advantages over each other, and the weapons must be acquired on the map?

I think many will agree the latter is the most logical way to approach a shooter (but that doesn’t mean we always have to), especially in a competitive environment.

The modern mentality of instant gratification has allowed approaches similar to that of Call of Duty to easily take hold and become ubiquitous, slowly killing off the “old world” of arena-based shooters and the subsequent level of tact that goes with them.

And quite frankly, it’s depressing.

Why dwell on them?

I have found that, over the years, arena shooters are much more gratifying to the player, and offer a much more competitive environment.

What’s more satisfying: killing someone with a sniper rifle, which you had to run for your life to obtain? Or, killing someone with your overpowered assault rifle from across the map because you’re max level?

The fact that even Halo is going to be adopting Call of Duty-esque traits in its next adaptation is a major red flag for the arena shooter, and a perfect cause to be alarmed.

The arena shooter grew out of the 90s mentality of fast-paced action and skill. Try playing DOOM, and then start up a match in Battlefield 3. The sheer difference in something as simple as the player speed is baffling, and shows how shooters have evolved from their humble beginnings.

I feel that while embodying the best of gaming’s beginnings, arena shooters give us the perfect playground in which to settle our scores.

Over the past few years, I’ve found myself playing each Call of Duty release less and less, with the only true reason to justify each purchase being the fact that most of my friends play it.

If I join a matchmaking game with them, they’ll instantly dominate because of their extensive unlocks, thanks to their subsequent playtime. Even in a private match, I couldn’t best them even if it came down to a “pure” display of skill.

On the complete contrary, I can boot up any Halo title – whether it be Halo 2 or Halo: Reach – and instantly dominate them. Halo maintains its signature feel, and stays true to its arena roots throughout the entire franchise.

The only disadvantage is not knowing where the non-default weapons spawn on each individual map, but even then, your enemies do not have any inherent advantage over you thanks to the lack of inclusion of stat-boosting perks.

Arena shooters also showcase higher quality level design, as having weapons spawn on a map – versus having a player loadout – both encourages exploration, and draws attention to specific points on the map.

In many games like Call of Duty, you don’t even memorize the layout for posterity… you memorize it to find the best camping spots.

On the contrary, knowing the map in an arena shooter allows players to converge on multiple points and take full use of the map itself, rather than just running past random bits of static meshes and geometry.

My convoluted point is this: modern gaming is taking the skill out of competitive multiplayer.

Bleak or bright future?

Only time – and hands-on – of games like Halo 4 will tell if there is any hope for the competitive shooter genre.

Titles such as Gears of War 3 and Halo: Reach represent the last stand of arena shooters on a AAA scale.

What do you think?

Am I just staring vividly into the past, and bleakly into the future? Or is a genre about to become extinct?

Related Reading…

  • The Death of Classic Multiplayer – Read More
  • The Death of Split-screen (old, but still prevalent) – Read More
©2012 Nicholas Laborde

xxxxxx Support R18+ In Australia

buzz-yahoo gamekicker Add to diigo Bookmark and Share News for Gamers
Add to Technorati Favorites

Published by


I'm an American from steamy Louisiana, one of the most electronically deprived areas of the United States. I've gamed since I was four years old as a result, and plan to do it onto my deathbed. I discovered I could write in June of 2010 when I started a little site called Fans of The Genre with a few friends, and that eventually collapsed three months after due to social lives kicking in. No less than two weeks after that I discovered OXCGN via the community gamer gab competition, and become a staff member shortly after. In February of 2011 I was welcomed to the Editorial staff, then in March of 2012 I was promoted to co-owner... and here I am!

7 thoughts on “Is The Arena Shooter Dead?”

  1. Developers today look at Call of Dutys success and try to imitate it their own game but whatever they do CoD does better because it started that way. You can’t beat innovation with imitation ;you can only beat innovation with innovation. The Halo formula work great for Halo but trying to make it work with the CoD formula just does not work. Sci-Fi arena shooters will soon just be PC exclusive in the coming years and maybe even dead.


  2. Hit the nail right on the head. Arena shooters are dead and you can thank the casuals that demand instant gratification and CoD for giving it to them. It’s truly sad what video games are starting to become.


  3. Competitve shooters are dead. Even gears is going to become a cod clone(gears might as well be now with the ridiculously high damaging assault rifles). “Arena” shooters will still be around but not for long. It’s a shame what call of duty has done to gaming.


  4. I have to agree wholeheartedly. I’ve had my best gaming moments in Red Faction 1/2, the TimeSplitters and Unreal Tournament series,

    I really miss competing with top notch players who know the layout of every map and even the item spawn times, Whenever I played Timesplitters Future Perfect (my fav. FPS) I rarely felt bad when losing because I knew my opponent had the edge on me in the respective situation. But unfortunately these games have been replaced by countless class-based shooters that don’t give me the enjoyment that I still have such fond memories of.

    great article, thumbs up


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s