Someone thought of giving developers some hints in order to get good FPS games up on the launching pad assuring their success. That someone is the Game Career Guide site, where they've posted some rules for making a FPS game both good (in terms of game quality, that doesn't necessarily mean it will be enjoyed by every player) and appealing:

"Don't allow the player to play the game half-heartedly, which is a dangerous stumbling block at any point of the game. Example: Half-Life 2. While the introduction presenting the environment of City 17 was much more effective than the tram sequence of Black Mesa from the game's predecessor, the sheer length of time between point insertion and getting the crowbar would never have worked in any other game."

And isn't it true? Aren't some games just too damned boring when they take off? Unlocking your first power and special moves, getting a better weapon do defeat restless foes, or doing something as simple as crossing a bridge or opening a door is sometimes a never-ending job of walking around in a vast imaginary land, that often isn't that good looking either. Plus, when the story-line makes a sudden turn taking you to a different part of the game where the difficulty level is increased, yet you don't have the proper hints letting you know what you have to do, or what exact item it is that you have to use, players can sometimes end up in a several-hours-long quest that eventually gets them a small achievement.

It's good that sites like Game Career Guide give hints about making FPS games better and don't think they aren't entitled to do that. Even your opinion counts when it comes to how a game should be like, because there are a lot of good ideas out there that didn't get the chance to be applied and all of them should be taken into consideration, even if they end up to be just a small feature added to the game. The little things are the ones that often count.