First Look at the CCP Game That Isn't Eve Online

Logan Westbrook

Transform, Roll Out, Etc
Feb 21, 2008
17,672
0
0
First Look at the CCP Game That Isn't Eve Online

Can Eve developer CCP successfully branch out into console shooters? That may depend on how much you like microtransactions.


Announced at Gamescom earlier this year, Dust 514 is something of a departure for CCP, best known for its one and only product, Eve Online. CCP announced that Dust 514 would mix FPS and RTS gameplay and interact directly with Eve, but beyond that all we got were acouple of snazzy screen shots. At this year's annual convention, FanFest, we finally got to see a bit more.

Dust 514 is a team-based first person shooter, being developed by CCP's Shanghai studio, with players cast as members of great mercenary companies, battling other mercs for control of planetary resources on their employer's behalf. Players can define their own roles within the game, so if you want to play an anti-tank medic, then that's fine.

The goal of each Dust match is to eliminate the opposing team and destroy their command post, which takes the form of a huge ship, hovering above the battlefield. This is done by building installations - or weapon emplacements - and taking over structures which allow players to make use of the resources of the level. One player takes the role of commander and for them Dust becomes an RTS, as they view the conflict from above. Players on the ground aren't stuck to trudging miles over the levels however; they can call in vehicles at any time, provided they have accumulated enough war points, which are earned by completing a variety of in-game activities.

While Dust isn't an RPG, and won't have skills per se, there will be what CCP call an "achievement matrix", which will give players a framework of advancement and allow access to more impressive weapons and equipment. CCP says that the world of Dust will be persistent and that the victories and loses of Dust players will shape it. Dustwill tie in with the upcoming EVE expansion Dominion as part of Eve's revamped sovereignty system, and Dust Corporations can be hired by Eve players to take over a planet. Outside of matches, there will also be a social aspect on the Dust War Barges; giant ships in which players can rent apartments, view trophies and chat with other players, a little like PlayStation Home.

Sounds pretty good, right?

Well, yes, as a press-release it sounds amazing, but having seen the game, I must admit to having my doubts. First and foremost it looks like it could be Battlefield 2142's younger, prettier brother, as the gameplay that I saw seems almost identical to that 2142's Titan mode. One thing that Eve Online is known for is the quality of its graphics and Dust continues that trend, but in a much more generic way. In a way the game is a victim of its own setting, because it centers around capturing infrastructure, but the futuristic factory level CCP showed off could have been lifted straight from any of a dozen recent games.

CCP's decision to make Dust a console shooter also seems a strange, as Dust feels like it should be a PC title. The console release presents CCP with certain problems, as console shooter fans are a very different breed to PC MMO fans. The FPS market is pretty stuffed, so unless Dust can make itself stand out in some way - and I'm not sure the persistence is enough - it will very quickly fall by the wayside. CCP will almost certainly add more content later, but the initial release has to be pretty solid.


There's also the difficulty of co-ordinating the players of two different games spread over at least three different platforms; can PS3 players and 360 players fight each other? We simply don't know yet. CCP has assured us that there would be gameplay outside of matches between hired teams, but that rather defeats the entire purpose of the game.

Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.

It's unfair though to be too critical of the game at this stage, as it's still in a pre-alpha stage and will likely change a lot before its release. Personally, I want this game to prove all my doubts wrong, because CCP has a philosophy towards game design that I like, but I'd be lying if I said I was sure.



Permalink
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.
I only have one thing to say to micropayments: Fuck off you dozy wankers! I don't want to be outdone by some bastard who decided that he'd pay an extra £2 to get a better gun than me. I think Battlefield: Bad Company suffered from this as well from what I remember (I'm quite drunk, so I may be wrong). The DLC for Bad Company was new weapons which were innaccessible to those who didn't get the DLC. This, my friends, is stupid. I'm of the opinion that - especially in an FPS or RPG setting above all else - that paying for something should never give you a tactical advantage over your opponents or vice versa. It fucks up game balance terribly and I don't like it.

I really want Dust to be good as (while short) my stay with EVE Online was really quite enjoyable so I've got a fair bit of faith in CCP from what I've seen so far. I'd love for them to do away with a micropayments system and I hope others will express their displeasure at such a thing. As you said though, it's still pre-Alpha so a lot will change between now and release. I have high hopes for Dust and if it pulls out the stops to be an impressive game I would be behind it every step of the way. More MMOFPS please! Sony's Planetside is one of the few ones out there and I'd love to see the genre expanded.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,352
8,853
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
Kwil said:
Any chance you could get some info from them on why they've decided to go console over PC?
Wanting to avoid cannibalizing their own playerbase, I guess? I'm not sure. EVE isn't what I'd call a graphically-demanding game, so maybe they're hoping that console gamers with relatively low-spec computers might decide to cross over and check out EVE as well.

Amnestic said:
Fuck off you dozy wankers!
I know what a wanker is, but what does 'dozy' mean?
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
The Rogue Wolf said:
Amnestic said:
Fuck off you dozy wankers!
I know what a wanker is, but what does 'dozy' mean?
According to dictionary.com, it means "drowsy/sleepy." Dictionary.com doesn't take British slang into account. We use it to mean anything from 'slightly ditsy' to 'stupid retard'. Gotta love flexible slang, ya tosspot!

;3
 

initialdelay

New member
Sep 29, 2009
192
0
0
Since CCP like to develop games continuously, this could eventually lead to an amazing supergame where you can pilot a lander ship capable of atmospheric entry and play a part in ground battles. In my idealistic rose tinted imagination anyway...

[/nerd mode]
 

Caliostro

Headhunter
Jan 23, 2008
3,253
0
0
nilcypher said:
Sounds pretty good, right?
Actually no.

A much better and more experienced company already tried this, and it didn't work. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rXp1cFYq_Y#t=3m0s]

Not saying CCP can't make it work, but I wouldn't put my money on it.
 

Flying-Emu

New member
Oct 30, 2008
5,367
0
0
Caliostro said:
nilcypher said:
Sounds pretty good, right?
Actually no.

A much better and more experienced company already tried this, and it didn't work. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rXp1cFYq_Y#t=3m0s]

Not saying CCP can't make it work, but I wouldn't put my money on it.
What about Savage and Savage II? For their low budget, they're fun games that satisfactorily combine RTS and FPS gameplay.
 

Caliostro

Headhunter
Jan 23, 2008
3,253
0
0
Flying-Emu said:
Caliostro said:
nilcypher said:
Sounds pretty good, right?
Actually no.

A much better and more experienced company already tried this, and it didn't work. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rXp1cFYq_Y#t=3m0s]

Not saying CCP can't make it work, but I wouldn't put my money on it.
What about Savage and Savage II? For their low budget, they're fun games that satisfactorily combine RTS and FPS gameplay.
Quite honestly, haven't played either so I can't comment... But I have no idea how they might have (if they have) fixed the above issue.
 

chromewarriorXIII

The One with the Cake
Oct 17, 2008
2,448
0
0
From what you've said it sounds pretty interesting. I'll definitely be checking it out but I can't say that I will pre-order this nor that I'll be waiting impatiently for it.
 

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
Amnestic said:
Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.
I only have one thing to say to micropayments: Fuck off you dozy wankers! I don't want to be outdone by some bastard who decided that he'd pay an extra £2 to get a better gun than me. I think Battlefield: Bad Company suffered from this as well from what I remember (I'm quite drunk, so I may be wrong). The DLC for Bad Company was new weapons which were innaccessible to those who didn't get the DLC. This, my friends, is stupid. I'm of the opinion that - especially in an FPS or RPG setting above all else - that paying for something should never give you a tactical advantage over your opponents or vice versa. It fucks up game balance terribly and I don't like it.

I really want Dust to be good as (while short) my stay with EVE Online was really quite enjoyable so I've got a fair bit of faith in CCP from what I've seen so far. I'd love for them to do away with a micropayments system and I hope others will express their displeasure at such a thing. As you said though, it's still pre-Alpha so a lot will change between now and release. I have high hopes for Dust and if it pulls out the stops to be an impressive game I would be behind it every step of the way. More MMOFPS please! Sony's Planetside is one of the few ones out there and I'd love to see the genre expanded.
where are BC's DLC guns?
I think you *are* drunk, friend.
friends don't let friends drink and post

and yeah, this game looks quite similiar to 2142's titan mode, mixed with some project reality and a healthy LoD boost (all 3 of which are good things)
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
MR T3D said:
Amnestic said:
Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.
I only have one thing to say to micropayments: Fuck off you dozy wankers! I don't want to be outdone by some bastard who decided that he'd pay an extra £2 to get a better gun than me. I think Battlefield: Bad Company suffered from this as well from what I remember (I'm quite drunk, so I may be wrong). The DLC for Bad Company was new weapons which were innaccessible to those who didn't get the DLC. This, my friends, is stupid. I'm of the opinion that - especially in an FPS or RPG setting above all else - that paying for something should never give you a tactical advantage over your opponents or vice versa. It fucks up game balance terribly and I don't like it.

I really want Dust to be good as (while short) my stay with EVE Online was really quite enjoyable so I've got a fair bit of faith in CCP from what I've seen so far. I'd love for them to do away with a micropayments system and I hope others will express their displeasure at such a thing. As you said though, it's still pre-Alpha so a lot will change between now and release. I have high hopes for Dust and if it pulls out the stops to be an impressive game I would be behind it every step of the way. More MMOFPS please! Sony's Planetside is one of the few ones out there and I'd love to see the genre expanded.
where are BC's DLC guns?
I think you *are* drunk, friend.
friends don't let friends drink and post

and yeah, this game looks quite similiar to 2142's titan mode, mixed with some project reality and a healthy LoD boost (all 3 of which are good things)
I am drunk. There's no question of this, the question is whether the drink is affecting my memory. I recall (vaguely) that there was a big huff a while back about some DLC for a Battlefield game (which I think was Bad Company) which gave the purchasers of the DLC an advantage in gameplay over those who hadn't bought it. Whether that was guns or something else, or indeed if they took it out after people voiced their disapproval I'm not sure. As I said, I only recall it vaguely but I do recall something like that.

I was right, sort of [http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/09/battlefield-bad-companys-dlc-guns-are-free-but-require-marke/]. I am trying - desperately - to form a coherent argument here but I drank an Irish bloke and a Scot under the table so I'm having a little trouble. That I can find my keyboard at all is a bloody miracle I'll say that much.

And all my friends have passed out :p
 

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
Amnestic said:
MR T3D said:
Amnestic said:
Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.
I only have one thing to say to micropayments: Fuck off you dozy wankers! I don't want to be outdone by some bastard who decided that he'd pay an extra £2 to get a better gun than me. I think Battlefield: Bad Company suffered from this as well from what I remember (I'm quite drunk, so I may be wrong). The DLC for Bad Company was new weapons which were innaccessible to those who didn't get the DLC. This, my friends, is stupid. I'm of the opinion that - especially in an FPS or RPG setting above all else - that paying for something should never give you a tactical advantage over your opponents or vice versa. It fucks up game balance terribly and I don't like it.

I really want Dust to be good as (while short) my stay with EVE Online was really quite enjoyable so I've got a fair bit of faith in CCP from what I've seen so far. I'd love for them to do away with a micropayments system and I hope others will express their displeasure at such a thing. As you said though, it's still pre-Alpha so a lot will change between now and release. I have high hopes for Dust and if it pulls out the stops to be an impressive game I would be behind it every step of the way. More MMOFPS please! Sony's Planetside is one of the few ones out there and I'd love to see the genre expanded.
where are BC's DLC guns?
I think you *are* drunk, friend.
friends don't let friends drink and post

and yeah, this game looks quite similiar to 2142's titan mode, mixed with some project reality and a healthy LoD boost (all 3 of which are good things)
I am drunk. There's no question of this, the question is whether the drink is affecting my memory. I recall (vaguely) that there was a big huff a while back about some DLC for a Battlefield game (which I think was Bad Company) which gave the purchasers of the DLC an advantage in gameplay over those who hadn't bought it. Whether that was guns or something else, or indeed if they took it out after people voiced their disapproval I'm not sure. As I said, I only recall it vaguely but I do recall something like that.

I was right, sort of [http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/09/battlefield-bad-companys-dlc-guns-are-free-but-require-marke/]. I am trying - desperately - to form a coherent argument here but I drank an Irish bloke and a Scot under the table so I'm having a little trouble. That I can find my keyboard at all is a bloody miracle I'll say that much.

And all my friends have passed out :p
there was a deal about DICE planning on doing it, but community outrage made them just lump the guns into rank 25.
and why are you on the internet drunk? unless you were with some shick whom is currently passed out, and you, being a gentleman DO NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION
 

Voodoomancer

New member
Jun 8, 2009
2,243
0
0
I went to FanFest, and saw the demo. It was Awesome. Game looks beautiful, like all things CCP, and the fact that it's basically another part of EVE online is just brilliant.

If this doesn't become a top seller, the gaming community has no sense about... uhm... nvm, that sentence falls flat over itself.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
MR T3D said:
Amnestic said:
MR T3D said:
Amnestic said:
Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.
I only have one thing to say to micropayments: Fuck off you dozy wankers! I don't want to be outdone by some bastard who decided that he'd pay an extra £2 to get a better gun than me. I think Battlefield: Bad Company suffered from this as well from what I remember (I'm quite drunk, so I may be wrong). The DLC for Bad Company was new weapons which were innaccessible to those who didn't get the DLC. This, my friends, is stupid. I'm of the opinion that - especially in an FPS or RPG setting above all else - that paying for something should never give you a tactical advantage over your opponents or vice versa. It fucks up game balance terribly and I don't like it.

I really want Dust to be good as (while short) my stay with EVE Online was really quite enjoyable so I've got a fair bit of faith in CCP from what I've seen so far. I'd love for them to do away with a micropayments system and I hope others will express their displeasure at such a thing. As you said though, it's still pre-Alpha so a lot will change between now and release. I have high hopes for Dust and if it pulls out the stops to be an impressive game I would be behind it every step of the way. More MMOFPS please! Sony's Planetside is one of the few ones out there and I'd love to see the genre expanded.
where are BC's DLC guns?
I think you *are* drunk, friend.
friends don't let friends drink and post

and yeah, this game looks quite similiar to 2142's titan mode, mixed with some project reality and a healthy LoD boost (all 3 of which are good things)
I am drunk. There's no question of this, the question is whether the drink is affecting my memory. I recall (vaguely) that there was a big huff a while back about some DLC for a Battlefield game (which I think was Bad Company) which gave the purchasers of the DLC an advantage in gameplay over those who hadn't bought it. Whether that was guns or something else, or indeed if they took it out after people voiced their disapproval I'm not sure. As I said, I only recall it vaguely but I do recall something like that.

I was right, sort of [http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/09/battlefield-bad-companys-dlc-guns-are-free-but-require-marke/]. I am trying - desperately - to form a coherent argument here but I drank an Irish bloke and a Scot under the table so I'm having a little trouble. That I can find my keyboard at all is a bloody miracle I'll say that much.

And all my friends have passed out :p
there was a deal about DICE planning on doing it, but community outrage made them just lump the guns into rank 25.
and why are you on the internet drunk? unless you were with some shick whom is currently passed out, and you, being a gentleman DO NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION
Actually the lass that I was with (and her friend) ended up leaving early which meant I ended up drinking more than was really wise, although I'm starting to feel sobriety creep up on me. My liver's still crying though. I have to get out of bed in six hours to pose for a massive smart photo. That's going to be bloody interesting. I wonder if they'd mind me wearing sunglasses to cover up my eyebags?

Why am I on the internet drunk? Because it's 00:51, Suiseiseki is on instant messenger and I've been drinking double vodka red bull mixers on and off during the night so sleep is basically a far gone dream at this point. Dunno if it's just me, but those things set me brain-a-buzzing for hours on end.

Back to Bad Company though: Yes, they changed it from the community outrage. One would hope that CCP would have seen this previous example and taken note of it. Of course, as Nil said, it's still a very, very early build which means there is always time for change, but I would hope that such microtransactions - or indeed any microntransactions which affect game balance - wouldn't exist in an MMO setting. It's just something I'm not a fan of.

And I would never take advantage of a drunken lady. 'Twould offend my Gentleman's Code.
 

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
Amnestic said:
MR T3D said:
Amnestic said:
MR T3D said:
Amnestic said:
Oh yes, it has micropayments too, and even worse, it has micropayments for weapons - or at least for the schematics to build them - and while the more potent weapons will require players to have advanced up the achievement matrix, it still means that players can buy an in-game advantage for out of game money.
I only have one thing to say to micropayments: Fuck off you dozy wankers! I don't want to be outdone by some bastard who decided that he'd pay an extra £2 to get a better gun than me. I think Battlefield: Bad Company suffered from this as well from what I remember (I'm quite drunk, so I may be wrong). The DLC for Bad Company was new weapons which were innaccessible to those who didn't get the DLC. This, my friends, is stupid. I'm of the opinion that - especially in an FPS or RPG setting above all else - that paying for something should never give you a tactical advantage over your opponents or vice versa. It fucks up game balance terribly and I don't like it.

I really want Dust to be good as (while short) my stay with EVE Online was really quite enjoyable so I've got a fair bit of faith in CCP from what I've seen so far. I'd love for them to do away with a micropayments system and I hope others will express their displeasure at such a thing. As you said though, it's still pre-Alpha so a lot will change between now and release. I have high hopes for Dust and if it pulls out the stops to be an impressive game I would be behind it every step of the way. More MMOFPS please! Sony's Planetside is one of the few ones out there and I'd love to see the genre expanded.
where are BC's DLC guns?
I think you *are* drunk, friend.
friends don't let friends drink and post

and yeah, this game looks quite similiar to 2142's titan mode, mixed with some project reality and a healthy LoD boost (all 3 of which are good things)
I am drunk. There's no question of this, the question is whether the drink is affecting my memory. I recall (vaguely) that there was a big huff a while back about some DLC for a Battlefield game (which I think was Bad Company) which gave the purchasers of the DLC an advantage in gameplay over those who hadn't bought it. Whether that was guns or something else, or indeed if they took it out after people voiced their disapproval I'm not sure. As I said, I only recall it vaguely but I do recall something like that.

I was right, sort of [http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/09/battlefield-bad-companys-dlc-guns-are-free-but-require-marke/]. I am trying - desperately - to form a coherent argument here but I drank an Irish bloke and a Scot under the table so I'm having a little trouble. That I can find my keyboard at all is a bloody miracle I'll say that much.

And all my friends have passed out :p
there was a deal about DICE planning on doing it, but community outrage made them just lump the guns into rank 25.
and why are you on the internet drunk? unless you were with some shick whom is currently passed out, and you, being a gentleman DO NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION
Actually the lass that I was with (and her friend) ended up leaving early which meant I ended up drinking more than was really wise, although I'm starting to feel sobriety creep up on me. My liver's still crying though. I have to get out of bed in six hours to pose for a massive smart photo. That's going to be bloody interesting. I wonder if they'd mind me wearing sunglasses to cover up my eyebags?

Why am I on the internet drunk? Because it's 00:51, Suiseiseki is on instant messenger and I've been drinking double vodka red bull mixers on and off during the night so sleep is basically a far gone dream at this point. Dunno if it's just me, but those things set me brain-a-buzzing for hours on end.

Back to Bad Company though: Yes, they changed it from the community outrage. One would hope that CCP would have seen this previous example and taken note of it. Of course, as Nil said, it's still a very, very early build which means there is always time for change, but I would hope that such microtransactions - or indeed any microntransactions which affect game balance - wouldn't exist in an MMO setting. It's just something I'm not a fan of.

And I would never take advantage of a drunken lady. 'Twould offend my Gentleman's Code.
Glad to see another person whom abides to such a code. and yeah, we are starting to derail this thread, but so be it. and yes, microtrannies are simply a bad idea, no matter what acccounting says.
 

ma55ter_fett

New member
Oct 6, 2009
2,078
0
0
here is my thoughts on all this,

First train of thought: who should be the commander in this game? (aka the top down RTS general role)

My idea: Since it's an fps game, no one playing it can really be expected to be good playing a RTS role. My own fps skills are pretty good (if i do say so myself) but when it comes to an RTS i'm a fail general. Also anyone good at RTS games plays them on a PC not a console, since there are so few good RTS on consoles. It would be cool if a player on a PC could act as the General for the console players. The keyboard/mouse contol scheme would make it easier to contol anyway.

Second train of thought: Microtransactions, good or bad.

my Idea: Being able to pay real world money for an in game advantage is a bad idea. We all know why this is.

but how about this

since an eve online corporation is paying you some form of ingame currency to fight for them (I'm guessing isk). Then make all in game weapons cost in game money to use. Everytime you respawn you have to pay for a new weapon and new equipment. And if your out of cash you get provided with cheep, crappy, second hand equipment that has been salvaged from the battlefeild. then just kill someone to get there gun and equipment loadout (hopefully its better than yours). There could be an option for the corporation to pay to give you a great gun and good equipment each time you spawn. this would give some value to in game currency. player would compeat to be employed by the richest corporations.

other thoughts of what would be cool:

corp has to pay the eve market value of a new clone each time a player working for them respawns.

corp can pay extra to outfit it's army with better vehicles (or more of them)

would like to hear about more game modes, battlefeild 2142 already had a ship/base destruction mode "titan" or something like that. a d-day like battle with space ships entering the atmosphere and dropping troops who could then assult bunkers and stuff would be awesome.

large scale battles with at least 20 players on each side.

hope this game is awesome when it comes out.
 

Avernus

New member
Jun 10, 2009
110
0
0
'corp has to pay the eve market value of a new clone each time a player working for them respawns.'
- Hope not unless you're talking about basic clone price. My own clone cost is enough to buy a Battlecruiser. :p

As for player numbers, they are looking at anything from 64 to 256 players at the moment. I imagine that would be dependant upon several things, like the map size, scenario, and the merc corps involved. Too early to say, this number can easily fluctuate a lot before release.

Hopefully the first iteration of Dust is a very strong contender, with good balance and economics. For blueprints, we don't even know if this would be dependant upon the individual player to provide for themselves, or if it there is some kind of collective corporate pool that you could contribute towards.

CCP do have a good set of heads among them, will be interesting to see what they come up with.

I do agree that the industrial setting wasn't the best of choices they could have demonstrated, but it remains to be seen what variety they will give players, I have a feeling the variety will end up being rather diverse (hopefully).
 

Rylock

New member
Jan 25, 2008
3
0
0
Caliostro said:
Flying-Emu said:
Caliostro said:
nilcypher said:
Sounds pretty good, right?
Actually no.

A much better and more experienced company already tried this, and it didn't work. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rXp1cFYq_Y#t=3m0s]

Not saying CCP can't make it work, but I wouldn't put my money on it.
What about Savage and Savage II? For their low budget, they're fun games that satisfactorily combine RTS and FPS gameplay.
Quite honestly, haven't played either so I can't comment... But I have no idea how they might have (if they have) fixed the above issue.
They are not as fast paced as most FPS's (ranged combat was nearly useless in Savage 2, you needed to get in there and melee it up) and map control is more important. In TF2 you can travel with a small group of people or even be on your own and be able to handle most situations. In Savage it's harder to win on personal skill alone, you need to be a part of the overall strategy, such as setting up and defending forward spawn buildings and destroying the enemy as they try to do the same.

I felt it worked because both the players on the ground and the commander (the RTS player) needed to work together to accomplish their goal, and there was enough interaction between them that both could influence the others playing.

If what Avernus says about the player count is accurate this could work, because at that number of players a single guy won't have the same effect that they do in, for example, CounterStrike. A team of 30-100 players with an overall strategy should best a somewhat stronger team without one (or at least make it a close game) simply because it is harder to brute force your way through that many people.