Kill.Switch arguably invented the mechanics that most cover-based shooters currently employ.

Alow, by that logic, any shooter ever falls under the category.

I'm open to the idea of cover-based shooters being good. The Uncharted series did it well, in that they gave you a lot of PoP-style movement so that you could mix the acrobatics with the environments to find safety in different ways, but would then counteract that with smart enemies that could exploit weaknesses in your cover. The part in Tibet where you're stuck on that giant signpoast, hopping between all of the signs on it for cover is one of my favorite video game moments. Gears of War 1 did it well, too, because it made the cover system an integral part of the gameplay. Most other games I've played, though, just throw it in there just for the sake of having it.

As far as 2D games go, you could throw Blackthorne in there as well.

I'll agree that I love me some RE4 long time Vert, but I disagree in a friendly way. To say we should just get rid of a mechanic is kind of close-minded (not insulting you personally, I see the sentiment a lot in regards to anything in gaming), in that you just don't want to see why it can possibly be good. I dislike racing sims, but I don't think we should get rid of realistic driving physics in all games just because of my opinion or tastes. Hell, if done well, I think I may enjoy a racing sim or two one day, but that hasn't happened yet.

I'm definitely not saying cover-based shooting hasn't been misused. Inserting a feature that makes you effectively invincible as a core feature can lead to bad times. Knowing you're invincible, coupled with the fact that you're limited to popping off of other cover-bound enemies who won't move an inch one at a time does not make for engaging gameplay. Not to mention how it has limited art direction, in that you can tell when you'll be attacked and from where, when you see a few rows of identical, neatly arranged waist-high walls. Mass Effect did that pretty badly, especially in outdoor areas.

But it can be done well. In Uncharted 2, you're given a Prince of Persia-style set of moves for both platforming and combat. You can jump around, hang off of objects and ledges for cover while firing, and climb around to get different vantage points. The enemies are programmed to do these types of things as well, so it's a mixture of playing against the course and your opponents. It's also used for stealth mechanics, where you can wait in cover for an enemy to come by and silently take him out to thin out their ranks before engaging in a firefight. These are all great things that the game did with a cover system, and I feel it would have been worse without one. Here's a video showing off what I'm saying (I'm sorry if you dislike commentary and in-jokes, their commentary-less version isn't working for some reason):



(Also see: Just Cause 2 for a similar yet different approach)

Another example is Brothers in Arms 3: Hell's Highway. The previous two games didn't have cover systems, but I think they put it in this one because it was frustrating in the first two when you thought you were in safe protection, but a random lucky rifle bullet would hit your pinky-toe that was out in the open and take off like a third of your health (no health kits or regen health in the other games). So in Hell's Higway, they put in a cover system, but didn't half-ass it. It plays well into the suppression mechanic where you have to control teams of soldiers to fire at enemies to keep their heads down while out-maneuvering them to get a better angle on their position (Think of it as a more streamlined Full Spectrum Warrior, if you played those). You have to pop in and out of cover to keep enemies from becoming more agressive and pinning/killing you and your squad. There's also a risk/reward system, in that a lot of the cover is destructible, whether through heavy gunfire, explosives, or both, allowing you and your enemies to exploit weaknesses. Again, using the mechanic in different ways to make the game more challenging and fun.

Hell, in Gears' case, they throw in giant monsters that can dig, fly, move quickly, or blow everything the hell up, so that you constantly have to be moving or reacting, but not forcing you stand in the open in danger until you can duck behind a corner. It's balanced pretty well (though I will admit the normal/easy modes aren't great for this. I usually stick to the second-highest setting).

I'll say it's been misused all day, but at the end of the day, it's just a mechanic that was probably inserted by pressure from publishers/marketers in the wake of Gears of War, or by teams that used it as a crutch for gameplay limitations, or just without thinking of how to make it an integral part of a fun experience. I think it can be and has been used well, but it was in one of those overused fads like bullet time, or those "hard" games that seriously tried to copy I Wanna be the Guy without realizing it was kind of a joke.

Funny how inspiration is dead, when if this was 10+ years ago, we'd have almost nothing but side-scrollers and mascot platformers. This stuff goes in waves. We get plenty of fun, over-the-top games these days. I honestly blame people being more of a problem if you can't/won't look for them, then blabbing about how they're not there when they really are. It strikes me as really rude to the developers who put in the time to make this sort of thing.

For shooters, we just had Bulletstorm, a game where you throw mutants around with a laser whip while wrapping them in chain-mines, so you can use them as a way of blowing up their buddies, meanwhile getting points for pulling off fancy kill tricks, like an insane Tony Hawk. Then there's Hard Reset from some of the old Painkiller guys, where you mow down hordes of murderous robots. Then Crysis 1/2, a game about a super-soldier who can turn invisible, jump 20 feet in the air, and shoot down squid-like alien gunships with a laser chaingun. Then there are other semi-recent games like the Left 4 Dead series, Borderlands, the Bioshock games (and upcoming Infinite), and a new Brothers in Arms, which is going away from my favorite series by making it into into a Nazi-chainsawing Grindhouse-wannabe, but it still proves my point. I'll admit the art was dormant while we finagled with new-gen tech, but it's far from dead.

For other genres, we get Back Breaker, Blitz, fun little Wii/Kinect/Moves games for sports. Then there's Prototype, Infamous, No More Heroes, Saint's Row, and Just Cause 2 for open-ended action games. Point and click adventures are back with Machinarium, Whispered World, and Double Fine's Kickstarter project. Rayman: Origins and Super Meat Boy are there for platformers. Fuck, Legend of Grimrock is the first major Dungeon Crawl I can remember since what, Arx Fatalis? These are all great, fun, unrealistic games that are easily distinguishable from one another. With new tech and purchasing systems, we can and have been doing a lot of cool things. I love me my favorite old games of my youth, but with Steam, console marketplaces, and the new Kickstarter movement, gaming is only going to get better.