I''m with you GG. I''ll even go a step farther and say that aside from co-op I don''t really like team games either. To this day I still prefer the chaos of a good DM map and a few good friends. You can keep your tactical, realistic, team FPS''s and give me a straight forward shooter anyday.

yeah....but ever since ET came out I really love teamplay..it makes simple DM so boring..

you probably just need to play on a really good server where people just ""know"" what to do..and you can silently (or near silently) get objectives done and people know what their class is supposed to do and understand the objectives.

I enjoy realistic shooters off line as a single player experience. Operation Flashpoint was a blast. It delivered fun gameplay. The Thief Series also. Slow games like Thief require patience, and not a lot of gamers have the time for it, but I fit the niche nicely.

I''m just now starting to really appreciate the FPS genre. I missed out on all the HL/CS hoopla. I was too busy playing MMORPGs. Well, with wolfenstein I found some really enjoyable team play online. I also just got Rainbow Six, and altough I''m only a few days into it I''m having fun with it. The co-op mission games on Live are pretty fun.

What I miss are the class based team play found in Wolf. In R6 it''s really just follow each other around and try to pick off terrorists that appear around corners, in windows, etc. Each person is really no different from the next. In Wolf you have a Medic keeping everyone alive. An engineer repairing and building objectives. A field ops passing out ammo, laying mines, providing air support. Co-vert ops sneaking and taking out enemies behind enemy lines. Everyone running around seemingly on their own, but all working together towards the same goal. Ah, it''s a beautiful thing. And of course, no matter what class you play there''s still plenty of twitch-reflexing fragging going on.

Don''t get me wrong, I''m really enjoying R6, at the moment.

The best online FPS experience I had was with Tribes TAC (Team Aerial Combat) What a rush.

If there is one main downside to FPS''s it is the FPS community, IMHO. It seems to attract more immaturity and I don''t necessarily mean age. I don''t know, maybe it''s just a different mindset than I''m used to.

My favorite multiplayer FPS experience was Tribes 1, which in my mind fits in nicely between Operation Flashpoint and Quake 3. So I guess I''m not agreeing with any of you

I find some mods q3 like True combat seem to strike the a very good balance. With some small varaence on the top 3 list the folks at work who dominate at RA3 still kick the rest of us all over the place in UT and TC at lunch.

The things that make them so dam dangerouse is not just the twich circle strafe but the over all acuracy at any range. The are the guys whill rail gun your ass from a mile awya in RA3 or blow it off with a rocket point blank but in the real mods they are still pegging you left and right before you even know they are there. The skills sadly build on eachother much to my chared ass dismay .

Ravenshield in it''s current state isn''t really very realistic. Considering there circle strafing happens quite often, and one of the best tactics seems to be to put a silencer on an assault rifle and run at full speed while spraying full bursts at your targets and still being able to hit them with quite a bit of success it seems like it would be right up GameGuru''s alley.

Personally I don''t even think it compares to Operation Flashpoint in terms of realism.

or they get perma-banned!

The best multi-player FPS for my buck is still UT (the original). I have yet to play another shooter that felt as tight and ran as well as that. With CTF as my game and a sniper rifle in hand, I was as happy as a pig in sh*t.

Of course, I think part of that was the level design. The levels were well put together (the popular ones, at least), and the textures were simple and colourful. None of this ""make a level that''s bigger than Texas"" and ""use really intricate textures that don''t look quite right but still confuse me... I mean, people"". I guess I''m just simple folk, but I loved UT. I just felt like a purer FPS experience.

I think a 3-on-3 game of Day of Defeat is the most fun I ever had at a LAN game. It helps that we all knew each other, but the sheer fun of working together as a team, using the proper tactics for our weapons, was just a blast.

I happen to enjoy both kinds of shooters, but there is a hitch. If you give me off the wall sci-fi weapons, or strange new fantasy weapons, I don''t expect anything save that I''m going to fire it at someone and they''ll get hurt. If you give me a gun, based off of a true to life equivalent, I expect to fire it and drop my target in one or two shots. No questions.

Thus, the only games I have a problem with are those that don''t follow this. I don''t like the damage model in Battlefield, for example, no matter how much I like the game. I send a .30 cal bullet tearing through your torso, and I expect you to go down. I shouldn''t need to pelt you with five or ten. Matter of fact, even the damage system in Army Ops is too gentle for me. I''ve had to put five or six rounds into the torso of someone at short range. That''s ridiculous. I want the rounds to be deadly. Absolutely deadly. That may mean I get killed just as quickly, but I have the tactical thinking and deceptive maneuvering skills for a game like that.

So, what that means is that I can play Unreal 2 XMP for hours and have a blast, and then move on to a few hours of Red Orchestra or Operation Flashpoint and enjoy it just as much. One is run and gun, the other is sneak and outwit.

I just don''t like when they try to blend the two.

I did all I could with Day of Defeat ages ago. Red Orchestra takes care of all my World War II infantry needs for the time being. There''s also the fact that I can''t stand the way Half-Life looks anymore.