I miss the old first-person shooters and the concept of self-contained servers (instead of a global user profile system). Games last for a couple hours, and everyone starts at zero and gets weapons & perks as the game continues (so newbies aren't stuck with bad guns while level 100+ players dominate the server). In 30 minutes of playtime or so you'll have earned enough points (by killing enemies, etc) to be able to afford any weapon you want, compared to now where getting to the top takes months of grinding. There was also no global profile system, so no need to worry about your rank, K/D ratio, etc.
As a result the games were pretty relaxed, there wasn't any rage and the chat conversations were respectful and actually substantial (akin to an IRC network). The game was Crysis & Crysis Wars (and unfortunately the developer ruined all that going forwards with the sequel).
That sounds a lot like a Battle Royale... which is also very popular now. If you ignore the "rankings" that is, and play each game in isolation which I tend to do.
How is that different from new shooters? In Fortnite, PUBG, Call of Duty etc you also start from 0 in each match. Leveling up gives you cosmetics only.
CoD is the odd one out, as levelling gets you weapons. But I don't think that's the issue, you unlock them all in a few dozen hours, a weekend for the average teenager.
The issue is modern matchmaking doesn't have the same community-building effect as joining the same few servers every day, getting to know the people you're playing with.
As a result the games were pretty relaxed, there wasn't any rage and the chat conversations were respectful and actually substantial (akin to an IRC network). The game was Crysis & Crysis Wars (and unfortunately the developer ruined all that going forwards with the sequel).