Sure, rant about the menus, even though it is the least important point out of all the ones brought up here. We don't have an FPS game using HRTF, that's all you need to know. We don't have one with proper controler support, possibly using force feedback as well. There, I gave you two ideas that don't change the mechanics of your game in major ways.

Oh absolutely, I am not denying these are the issues of BGT, and that is a bigger problem, everybody wants to use this same code base and build their games on it, so each game has the same flaws, unless you have the experience of Sam and Carter and know how to fix them, which most beginners don't and should not in fact. I don't know, it's easy to just say move away from BGT, but clearly nobody is  doing so and who knows if they ever will unless Windows updates force them  to, which I really don't want to happen since there are tons of great offline games we would be losing.

Most blind developers, especially younger ones, not only have never played a mainstream game, but don't have a very nuanced appreciation for what combat is like in any sense. This is why the only thing that matters for guns in these games is distance and firing rate, rather than proper aiming, recoil, etc. Sniping in fps games doesn't mean perching yourself on an elevated surface like a hilltop or a tower and trying to aim at people from far away, it just means a rifle that has really long range.

@3, yes, the goal of FPS titles is to kill each other. But that doesn't mean they have to be that simple. Adding additional layers like those "bells and whistles" you mentioned does, in fact, make a difference. Mindlessly mashin the fire button is not the same as tactically using weapons or other mechanics, or cooperating with a team to hunt down another team.
@13, I'd argue that multiplayer in fps titles, like fighting games, is actually the main component. Sure they have campaigns, but that's actually what's meant to be additional content... most people expect to spend the bulk of the time playing online with friends in teams or in free for all, with the campaigns as something to play when you want  bit of a break. But it's definitely true that the fps titles that are being cranked out by this community need offline content, as well as online.

What I want? I want an fps with realistic gun physics and realistic ammo counts. Something where it's not just a race to see who can press the arrow keys and fire button the fastest. Less ammo for guns so you actually hve to carefully consume rounds, and proper aiming that requires you to actually find a good position when run and gun just doesn't work. And I want to see this idea of a progression level system disappear where you keep your gear and upgraded statsevery time you log in. I've never seen a mainstream fps do this, or if it does, it's in a much more balanced way that doesn't give newbies less motivation to play. Better to have default loadouts, and for levels not to effect actual stats, this is not an rpg... levels or ranks could be for bragging rights, or possibly leader boards. Basically, something with a bit more balance and more nuanced gameplay than who can shoot the fastest, reach 51234678 health first, or the like. IT also wouldn't hurt for people to, you know, look at mainstream fps titles and how they work and what makes each one unique, rather than the unimaginative just give me a gun and let me blast away gameplay we've been geting of late.

@Assault:

To be fair, mainstream FPSes have their own isues. I absolutely loved the craziness of COD4 Shipment. Small map, frantic action and that game had run and gun down well on that map. I got bullshit kills by just yeting grenades anywhere I could...

Let's take a moment to figure out why Cod4 Shipment worked so well.

1. It had weapons that unlocked at various ranks. Here's the thing. Just because you unlocked a new gun didn't mean it was better. You had used your current gun for so long you had the risk/reward of oh should I stick with what I got or go for the new gun and learn that one? You unlocked attachments and skins for your weapons by playing and beating challenges, some passive, like the Marathon one, run 26.2 miles, some to get X number of kills with an attachment, Y headshots with this pistol or so on, that's how you unlocked things as well as levelling up.

You had 5 loadout slots as wel as the five default ones that had a mix of stuff you couldn't unlock for a while for various styles. Hel you had to get to a certain level just to make one custom loadout and then unlock more slots.

You had perks that gave you bonuses.

You had regenerating health.

You could be a run and gun hero,, a sniper who camps all day and rages at being snuck on and stabbed, a grenade launcher wielding noob...you could play how you wanted. You /had/ to aim down the sights for snipers though.

There were maps for everyone, or, if you were like me, just go on Shipment 24/7 and blast at folks.

Of course, COD4 had issues, the god damned tactical nuke was one, killstreaks being another. Put a Harrier over spawn and enjoy the free kills, har har har, it had that 2000s ultra pisy gamer culture (MW2 had it beat for that), and it had its own balance issues, and on PC at least, a fuckton of hackers, and certain weapons were flat out /better/ and it wasn't even close, and some weapons were almost guarunteed to show up in a loadout else you had no hope of countering things.
The perks were broken too, but not to MW2 levels of absolute bullshit lunge from 50 feet away and one hit kill someone...

Well, this is just why I am playing video games (mostly, like 99% of my time). Japanese devs just turned my attention to play audio games but that's it. There were some (just few) examples of other audio games I was having fun just for sometime but not that much to be honest.

It is hard to play music without any practices and it is hard to make games without playing them (I mean you can , but everyone can see the results here very often)

I agree with 31. I also think many of the devs ship games that are not ready for production. I played BloodStorm for a while, and I kept thinking this game feels like an Alpha instead of a release Version.

Personally, I would like to see a game that was more of a finished product. I think most of these guys just throw something together and release it.

I think some devs should do there research before making a game like this, not only on weapons, but like how to make a good map, and by that i mean, alot of the time, there just thees big ass maps like 3000 tiles, wich makes it hard to like kill, for example, you just got killed by this won person, you spawn, he's 1200 tiles away, sure you may have a sniper, but i dout any dev will have a gun that reaches 1200 tiles, anyways, now you would half to walk all the way over there, at the chants at beeing killed, now it isn't a problem, sense   you don't no what's coming, are you going to be sniped shot what ever, is part of an fps, but just saying, make the maps smaller, second of all, cover, now, i think there has to be some sort of cover systom hear, all thees maps, just are flat, with mabey a mountain, or stuf like that, they should add dryed up river beds bolders stuf like that to have some sort of cover, wow you reload or heal  or hide, and this is also something, i would like, some sort of stlef mode, like in the vale wen you sneek past the soldiers. and i no i'm sounding like a gi who sounds like i'm just saying what i want, but i really don't no any other way to put it,  just saying,  thees devs need to think a little bit mor, not just killing, getting new weapons, to kill kill kill, teams are fine, but stuf like that.

Oh, i also want to add that every game that is released, it's never going to be perfect, it's not gonna have what everyone wants. there's all wase going to be someone who hates it, or wants this added.

Yeah but like, the river with tk isn't like fast to take cover if you get that, you would half to put on the mask dive down, by dryed up river beds i mean just dive in, fall 3 4  tiles reload like i said.

@Topic in general:

I might call the following rant "The almost lost cause - Or the search for fun in audio games".

What I found in almost all  requests for game features is that people don't seem to understand what a game feature is supposed to do.

A game is like a well balanced cocktail. You first have to have a vision how it should taste. Then you add the ingredients to achieve this vision. They could be the freshest juice, the oldest whiskey and the ripest fruits - if all you wanted to make is a Bloody Mary you've done it wrong.

Always ask the questions:
- why would I add this?
- Will this be fun?
- Will this fit?
- Will the fun it might provide add to or distract from the vision I have?
What I mean by this is: Know your game first, then try to add stuff according to your vision. Don't water it down with randomly poured liquors - all probably tasty on their own - add just the right amount of carefully picked ingredients to really hone the taste profile.

A well established development practice actually does it almost the other way around as I see in most feature requests on this forum. They actually don't even think of a feature first. They first search for the fun and then try to emulate it with a specifically tailored feature.
Super Mario 64 started with just Marios move set. They didn't have a single level design in mind. They first tried to make just his movement fun.
The developers of the new Doom Games wanted to discourrage careful and slow play and wanted to make combat more erratic and action packed. So they invented the Glory Kill mechanic where you have to confront the demons and engage in melee combat to gain goodies. If you play cowardly you quickly run out of health and ammunition.
The list goes on and on. I really recommend the YouTube channel Game Makers Toolkit for anyone actually interested in game development.

There is nothing wrong in adding realism or more sophisticated maps into an FPS. It can make combat more complex and strategically engaging.
But this is again putting the cart before the horse. Try this one out instead: I want to have a more complex and strategically engaging combat. How can I achieve that?
With a single change in perspective you all of a sudden have a much broader scope of solutions. What if instead you make the game physics super unrealistic, maybe extreme weapon recoil, maybe super fast or super slow movement, maybe randomly appearing cover.
Or what if you make the maps super small and simplistic? You'd have an extremely quick paced game about aiming precision and reflexes.
And the best thing about this is: No one could ever call those games clone because they aren't! Even if they have 100% of sounds and even weapon loadout of any other FPS on the market.

Tldr:
Mechanics should always serve the game, never the other way around.

Well,  first of all, a little bit of  maturity perhaps.
Second of all, Some creativity. You don't have to be an elite programmer to create fun games. look at the games aprone made, some of them are simple but extremely fun to play.
What assault freak said however is also should be taken to account, Perhaps it is hard to younger generation of blind developers to have a perception of game mechanics, just simply because they have not experienced it but this  is just a difficulty that they have to work out. You can research, talk to other developers, listen to streams, listen to youtube gamers, read news, read articles, browse reddit,  google about the things you don't know, gather inquiries.... Are you going to tell me that these are all impossible by a blind person?
And finally yes. The creativity and variety of the recent released audio games has gone quite on a downhill. It's been  a few years that the concept of battle royale is out there but a visually impaired gamer has not experienced it yet so far, same with the recent mafia style game that among us has started the trend with.
IT is not wrong to go out and ask, IT's not wrong to research, It's not wrong to come up with new ideas  that are completely out of the ordinary.

Hi,
posts 1, 9, 38 +1. Enough said.
7, look up the number of people and budget those games had to work with, and what people forget whilst throwing up their suggestions is the time and effort required for everything. can the games created here expect even 5% of what these games you rave on about pull in.
a little leighway goes a long way, that is, even if say developer X comes to you with a FPS or Game Y, even if you think it's crap and you either shut up or give polite constructive feedback. you never know that developer down the line might come up with something that might be slightly more interesting and or fun, or even something amazing that blows your mind.
Think about this the next time you want to put that guy down who just created a game which you are hating on.
  I don't even want to start with how stifling this sound thing and rampent copyright fobia is  for creativity or all out having fun on the forum these days.
Grryf