New ideas for the fps market?!?

[Bob_F_It]

errrrrrrrmm.... i'd probably make a sort of MMOTFPS (i challenge someone to work out what that means ), which would have around the same number of players as M.A.G (256 players), and players will be split into squads of about 4-8.

Tach side will also have one player acting as the general of the entire team, who can give objectives to the squad leaders. Squad leaders can also request certain things from the general (such as reinforcements, which the general can provide by requesting another squad to support them).

There should be one primary objective (e.g., capture the enemy general, who can be inside a bunker on each side of the map), but while each sides primary objective should be the ultimate goal, the general can set secondary objectives that will help to reach that primary objective (for example, i turret may be blocking the way to the objective - the secondary objective of a squad/squads could be to eliminate that turret so they can get to the primary objective.

Of course there would be class system in place, and a squad would work best with at least one of each of the classes within it, as they could support each other.

Vehicles could also be designed with this in mind - each designed to work best when manned by a crew of a single squad, or maybe even with specific classes occupying a specific role within the vehicle. (e.g., a heavy weapons class using the weapon mount on a APC could increase the accuracy and power of the gun, while an engineer class driving might make the APC go faster, and be more resistant to damage)

To add to the originality, maybe there could be more than 2 sides? considering the number of people in a game, maybe there could be 4-6 sides, and the generals of each side could freely form alliances with different teams to gain an advantage over another.

basically the game i make wouldn't have one very large original factor to it, but many smaller design choices within it to make a very unique online experience.

Are you sure you're not describing [a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetside"]Planetside[/a]?

 

[Blood_Lined]

a survival horror title with a resident evil theme but call of duty game mechanics with hopefully an rpg element focused in as well.

 

[Baneat]

errrrrrrrmm.... i'd probably make a sort of MMOTFPS (i challenge someone to work out what that means ), which would have around the same number of players as M.A.G (256 players), and players will be split into squads of about 4-8.

Tach side will also have one player acting as the general of the entire team, who can give objectives to the squad leaders. Squad leaders can also request certain things from the general (such as reinforcements, which the general can provide by requesting another squad to support them).

There should be one primary objective (e.g., capture the enemy general, who can be inside a bunker on each side of the map), but while each sides primary objective should be the ultimate goal, the general can set secondary objectives that will help to reach that primary objective (for example, i turret may be blocking the way to the objective - the secondary objective of a squad/squads could be to eliminate that turret so they can get to the primary objective.

Of course there would be class system in place, and a squad would work best with at least one of each of the classes within it, as they could support each other.

Vehicles could also be designed with this in mind - each designed to work best when manned by a crew of a single squad, or maybe even with specific classes occupying a specific role within the vehicle. (e.g., a heavy weapons class using the weapon mount on a APC could increase the accuracy and power of the gun, while an engineer class driving might make the APC go faster, and be more resistant to damage)

To add to the originality, maybe there could be more than 2 sides? considering the number of people in a game, maybe there could be 4-6 sides, and the generals of each side could freely form alliances with different teams to gain an advantage over another.

basically the game i make wouldn't have one very large original factor to it, but many smaller design choices within it to make a very unique online experience.

Yeah,,,, Your average FPS player (like me) would drift off about 3 sentences into explaining that. It's all about the "It's a shooter, here's how to shoot, don't get killed, off you go kill shit"

 

[AfricanSwallow]

I'd like to see more emphasis on a realistic experience, even if it isn't kid / instant gratification / retard / console friendly.

Take a graphics cut, expand the world and make it truly interactive and destructable environment.
Slow down the run speeds, take out the jumping, add large respawn timers.

The style of the gameplay and cost eliminates the rude, ignorant, and noob kids from the game.

The Delta Force series was heading in the wrong direction for a little while, but got lost along the way.
Same thing with R6 and the Ghost Recon series.

Combine a little Delta Force, Ghost Recon, and the original Call of Duty and COD UO and you'd have a winner.

Probably wouldn't be real popular with the younger kids, they all seem to be all plasma rifles and space marines and fast paced.
But it would appeal to the serious gamers that have the coin behind them. The same guys still playing IL-2 and COD UO with mods even though they're 6 years old.
Sure IL-2 is a flight sim, but it's a good example: guys there spending 3-6k on custom rigs, pedals, sticks, throttles and simpits (simulated cockpits).

Create something that appeals to that niche demographic for a change - one of them is worth 10 or 12 of the other consumers.
We don't want "game", we want "simulation".

It won't sell the 6 million copies that Half Life did, but it'll only need to sell 200 000 to have the same or bigger influence on the market.

 

[Bored Tomatoe]

An FPS where you play a civilian in a conflict zone, and the game focuses on running and hiding from both the zombie/alien menace, and the jock space marines who shoot first and ask questions later, not caring about collateral damage. A bit of a spin on the genre.

 

[Agent Larkin]

Healthpacks, vehicles, steampunk, World War One, Zeppelins and i might include an over the top time travelling pirate named Artsy McPherson whos sole purpose in life is to bring about an end to a war that destroyed his country........ Not that ive given this any thought.

 

[Lovelocke]

Alternatively, I'd like to bring up a point: Mixing elements of other genres into the FPS genre is a very risky gamble and isn't necessarily "easy money". Call it an RPG primarily, but Fallout 3 was so interesting to me because it combined open world gameplay with an actual multi-branched storyline... but that's ONE game out of how many?

Many FPS games that have come out over the past 5 years are entirely too overloaded with so-called "Innovations" or what I'd call "Pin the tail on the donkey features" that either none of them really work or you could skip using them completely and STILL beat the game, thereby rendering the extra time/button mappings useless.

My wants for an FPS are simple... I kinda loved Doom because you could mow down hundreds of enemies in a single level and be able to walk past mountains of corpses... haven't seen a new FPS or game engine do that yet. Postal 2 was the last "good" (very fluid term here) game to feature extreme animated violence, and it was a fun little stress reliever because of it. Feature #1: Return of extreme/excessive violence please.

If we can't have "Geomod" bodies, then I would love greater emphasis on destructible environments. Crysis had some good physics in it, but you needed a monster rig to have any fun doing it. The N64 game "Battletanx" was VERY mediocre, but me and my friends rented it frequently due to the ability to level out entire cities! I'm not suggesting that you should be able to chip away a skyscraper with your knife, or even that you need realistic physics mapped to each and every brick: But being able to go from an online multiplayer map filled with cover spots/tactical posts to a largely open field of rubble and debris, possibly even covering up "reliable" ammo restock spots and forcing players to get desperate would be very nice. Request #2: If we can't have excessive violence, excessive destruction works too.

Those are the two major things I miss from FPS games, which is weird since it's what gathered most of the attention towards the genre in the first place. That said, without any particular details, here's some more stuff that would be *new*...

1. Import sprays/decals into a game? Cool... let me import my face.
2. Improvised weapons: While you're busy picking up real world objects to solve physics-based puzzles, why not be able to pick up random world objects and be given the option to make it your melee weapon? Can you imagine how bitching it would be to stealth-kill a guy with a pizza cutter? Or being able to use a discarded soda pop to splash in a guy's eyes to momentarily distort their vision?
3. Aiming lag. Yeah, this is a wierd one, but it goes like this: In most PC FPS games, your mouse controls "the aiming"... problem is, your "camera" is inherently bound to the mouse as well. That means you have the "First Person" view of the gun and not your eyes. A lot of players rely on this whiplash-inducing camera jerk to "reflex" shoot guys... but I think a slight "forced" delay here could add a bit more to a game tactically. How many trained supersoldiers in the world can realistically say they can whip around 180 degrees and target a headshot on two bad guys, one on the roof and one hiding behind a car in a fraction of a second? They've been simulating recoil forever, but not reaction time. If you move the mouse 180 to look behind you, that SHOULD move your head... and it would take about one full second for the gun to "match" what you're looking at. This would solve the "super player" issue in most online FPS games as well as provide a more deliberate pacing for games.

Yeah, it's a lot. I'll stop there... maybe I'm totally wrong.

 

[Agent Larkin]

And also anyone whose voice reaches above a certain number of decibels gets kicked. And all Brits and Yanks have to pass a not an asshole test before being aloud to play.

 

[AfricanSwallow]

An FPS where you play a civilian in a conflict zone, and the game focuses on running and hiding from both the zombie/alien menace, and the jock space marines who shoot first and ask questions later, not caring about collateral damage. A bit of a spin on the genre.

Thats an interesting concept.

Play the game once as the Space Marines, and the level of benevolence or malevolence you show towards the civilians (and other forms of collateral damage) in the first part determines how trigger-happy shoot-it-if-it-moves the soldiers are during your civilian phase.

Somebody write that down.

 

[Zersy]

everyone is going on about how some fps arent getting anything new to the genre but i ask u!! what would u do if u where making a fps game what new things would u bring to the genre

nevermind about the flashey graphics or realism of it! just something new to it..something no other game devolpers have done before

eg: fraction and its terrin defromation

Go back to over the top madness

where realsim only ment that guns kill things

and a fun story would be nice

 

[Twilight_guy]

I would give it cell shaded graphics and tell the "hardcore" crowd to suck it. Seriously, I think that would be a good idea.

 

[Lovelocke]

I would give it cell shaded graphics and tell the "hardcore" crowd to suck it. Seriously, I think that would be a good idea.

Done and done... and the gamers, hardcore and casual alike, banded together and said "suck it" with their wallets and bought Max Payne 2 instead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdY-qR9zSVo

 

[DM.]

MARIO FPS DAMNIT.

 

[Twilight_guy]

I would give it cell shaded graphics and tell the "hardcore" crowd to suck it. Seriously, I think that would be a good idea.

Done and done... and the gamers, hardcore and casual alike, banded together and said "suck it" with their wallets and bought Max Payne 2 instead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdY-qR9zSVo

I need to play that games someday. Its poor sales records demonstrate a valuable point, there will never be anything new in the FPS market because if its new, then it is instantly despised. Only the same generic FPS will ever be accepted by the majority so it will continued to be made forever.

 

[Lovelocke]

I need to play that games someday. Its poor sales records demonstrate a valuable point, there will never be anything new in the FPS market because if its new, then it is instantly despised. Only the same generic FPS will ever be accepted by the majority so it will continued to be made forever.

But the thing is, cel shading is just a graphical approach and is by definition "nothing new". The game itself *WAS* the same generic FPS that you've played and despised for years... only worse, because the game does everything it can to pull you OUT of the action by reminding you that you're looking at a "comic book/cartoon". It's kinda like the most recent release of "The Warriors" (movie, not game) where they skip over whole chunks of the film with forced, post-produced comic book panel segues.

You can't just elect to "Cel Shade" a game just because "It'd be neat looking". Wind Waker worked because additionally it was so colorful and well animated... in fact, I'd still consider it the best example of cel-shading for that reason.

It's like Madworld now for the Wii... I've not played it, but just looking at it? The black and white (and red) thing has a very good effect on the game's theme: Same for Okami on the PS2.

 

[pantsoffdanceoff]

How about one based in WW2? I've never seen one before but I think it can be done if we get the right developer to do it.

dude..... are u serious???? if you are, man thats kinda sad... There are soooooool many WW2 fps games, ranging from retarded spin-offs to games of the year... Seriously dude, the new call of duty is a WW2 game. do you not keep up with current events?(if so, for like what, the past 5 years????)

Decently sure I much more sad then you right now, YES I was joking...

 

[onelifecrisis]

please... PLEASE stop quoting me...

Why?

 

[Chester41585]

How about a well put-together WWI FPS?
A spectacular Spanish-American War FPS?
An absolutely eye-catching Revolutionary War FPS?
Game-Of-The-Year award-winning Medieval FPS, anyone?

I'd like to see more challenge in an FPS. The usual "Here's a machine gun and rocket launcher, craptons of ammo, and some grenades. Go blow up that shed" gets kind-of old.

There's something about a musket, arquebus, or bow that add a level of "hey, you need fucking improve your skill" to a game.

 

[mduncan50]

How about something like a game version of Cloverfield. You just a normal person, and there's something destroying the city. You have no guns, you have no health packs, and no clue as to what the heck is going on, you just need to try to stay alive long enough to escape.

 

[Starke]

A persistent sandbox. Bonus points if it has a squad control system of some sort and actual RTS elements.

Now, Imagine if you will, Far Cry 2. You play a free agent between two factions. Instead of simply working as a free agent, as you start working for one side, their soldiers are more likely to see you as friendly, now, as you go further, you can side with one or the other, or (as the game DOES) play both against the middle.

Instead of using your money for weapons and equipment upgrades, also allow you to build actual bases (not the safe houses, though that template might work). That include your own personal mooks, so, when you're off doing a job, you might be able to take some of your mooks with you.

Persistent in that, like Crysis, if you blow up a building, expect it to stay blown up. Same with vehicles, wrecks on the road, ect. with possibly AI units pushing them off to the side of the road. Also allow combat between the two sides, and a constant land war between the factions which you can participate in if you choose.

STALKER Clear Sky did some of this, but not, really enough.

Basically, give me a sandbox, a real sandbox, that lets things change as the game progresses based on my actions, not just in some scripted sequence the designers envisioned.

I just cleared out a checkpoint, that doesn't mean when I come back from the mission I'm on it should be restocked like nothing ever happened. I want the option to call in friendlies to secure it. I want the option to reinforce it further, and when they inevitably turn on me, I want the option to blast the damn thing to dust so no one will build a new one there. I want to be able to spend my blood diamonds building a doom fortress with my own army of followers. When my vehicle gets shot to hell and back I don't want the bullet holes to disappear after 60 seconds. I don't want the corpses to disappear. When an objective tells me to go back to someplace I've been before it should be a tense torn apart landscape that would make someone else wonder, what happened here, and makes you wonder, "what am I doing here?"