FPS: the documentary. It's okay. It's not so much a documentary as it is a list. You get a list of games in semi-release order, and for each you either get a dev story if devs were interviewed or random people saying how great the game is when no one involved was interviewed. Sometimes you get a long story, sometimes a very short one. Of course the "definitive" in the tagline of means absolutely nothing, as it is not definitive in any sense. In fact half-way through it becomes quite unfocused.
I guess it's just not for me, a person who played a lot of FPS games and is familiar with a lot of the genre history. I have learned nothing new. Who is it for then? Would a person who doesn't play games sit down & watch a 4 and half hour doc? It was nice to occasionally see faces of devs who don't give many interviews, even if they sometimes appeared just to say a sentence. YMMV, of course. A good comparison would be the horror doc In Search Of Darkness, to which I had a very similar 🤷♂️ reaction
Oh yeah, and also 90% footage of older games is recorded using modern ports that aren't credited anywhere, and sometimes differ drastically from originals. Half-Life footage, for example, is recorded from Half-Life: Source with Blue Shift models.
@dosnostalgic there's also - among many omissions - the lack of any news about Duke Nukem Forever, a deliberate choice which makes the random "Bombshell" reference even stranger. I'd imagine anyone not knowledgeable about 3D Realms to be like "wait who?!".
As for me, I can say I did learn about the development Halo but mostly because I don't really cared enough to research it. Not much else.
@damianogerli By the Halo point in the documentary I admit I was mostly listening and not watching anymore. Otherwise I'm sure I would have noticed more inconsistencies.
@dosnostalgic Yep, I immediately noticed this during the opening credits — Wolfenstein 3D and DOOM footage stood out in particular. I'm guessing this has been done to fit the 16:9 aspect ratio a bit more cleanly or something?