I don't see why people seem to think that you can't have an MMO without questing or leveling. Both of those are part of the reason that I don't play MMO games.
Wither the MMOFPS?
- Thread starter GordonFawx
- Start date
Recommended Videos
MMOFPS? I've been contemplating that for a while as well. FPSs are popular, especially on the 360. And MMOs are just a great way to make the moneys (see WoW) and spend (or waste) useless time. Putting two and two together seems to be like gold, but then again, we remember that two and two do not make four in entertainment most of the time. Its like Indiana Jones and Inter-dimensional Aliens, just a bad thing. Or in an off chance, it would be Indiana Jones and a Refrigerator, in which its not a good idea, but made for some REALLY great laughs.
I don't know about an MMOFPS, but i'm excited about Section 8.
Shameless plug! http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.88162
Shameless plug! http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.88162
TsunamiWombat said:
I really wish Tribes: Vengeance (tribes 3 as it's called since people avoided the console travesty) was good. It had an interesting storyline but ended up feeling unfinished, and I didn't want storyline anyway, I wanted tribes 2 with better graphics, so...I guess I shouldn't have expected so much.hagaya said:
I loved Tribes 2... ._.;
A couple things.
1. Huxley has been abandoned by it's developers. They released the code for the entire game on the internet for free, and currently a mod team is tinkering with it, but won't have much chance in launching or keeping an mmo running with their small resources.
2. I played Planetside for a long while and it's a great game. For whoever asked for a free mmofps, I think Planetside is still running where you can play for free forever, but only get up to rank 5. Basically that just lets you pick 1 set up with armor, weapons, and vehicle. Most of the time it works just fine, you just have to respec your points if you want to switch sets.
3. I think the mmofps has failed so far (relatively) because there a crap ton of people who suck at fps. An mmorpg there's a much, much larger group of people who can do it well. It's far slower and is more often about knowledge and strategy rather than quick mouse aiming and reflexes. Also many mmorpg's have become popular by appealing to people who might not normally play video games. I knew plenty of people who play(ed) WoW and that's the only video game they've ever played. Also they dumb it down repeatedly and try to make everyone happy.
In an fps no matter how much people complain about things being unbalanced or unfair, it usually comes down to who's the better shot and the game company can't improve your aim for you. (without hax...which would be hax)
1. Huxley has been abandoned by it's developers. They released the code for the entire game on the internet for free, and currently a mod team is tinkering with it, but won't have much chance in launching or keeping an mmo running with their small resources.
2. I played Planetside for a long while and it's a great game. For whoever asked for a free mmofps, I think Planetside is still running where you can play for free forever, but only get up to rank 5. Basically that just lets you pick 1 set up with armor, weapons, and vehicle. Most of the time it works just fine, you just have to respec your points if you want to switch sets.
3. I think the mmofps has failed so far (relatively) because there a crap ton of people who suck at fps. An mmorpg there's a much, much larger group of people who can do it well. It's far slower and is more often about knowledge and strategy rather than quick mouse aiming and reflexes. Also many mmorpg's have become popular by appealing to people who might not normally play video games. I knew plenty of people who play(ed) WoW and that's the only video game they've ever played. Also they dumb it down repeatedly and try to make everyone happy.
In an fps no matter how much people complain about things being unbalanced or unfair, it usually comes down to who's the better shot and the game company can't improve your aim for you. (without hax...which would be hax)
Counter-strike?
That has tons of players. Then you CS free online clones like Soldier Front or Crossfire that get loads of players..
That has tons of players. Then you CS free online clones like Soldier Front or Crossfire that get loads of players..
It's also shutting down in less than a week >Valiance said:
I would love to play a GOOD MMOFPS. A lot of people are outlining current concepts that could be incorporated into an MMOFPS but to be honest I would like to see an entirely new concept.
Yes, I know.Nivag said:It's also shutting down in less than a week >Valiance said:
I would love to play a GOOD MMOFPS. A lot of people are outlining current concepts that could be incorporated into an MMOFPS but to be honest I would like to see an entirely new concept.
And I'd like a good MMOFPS too, and Tabula Rasa didn't even have first person view until deployment 14. :/
I registered for the beta for Parabellum...
http://parabellum.xg1.net/
It's probably too late, but hey, I can hope.
Hah. Oh. Sorry!Valiance said:Yes, I know.Nivag said:It's also shutting down in less than a week >Valiance said:
I would love to play a GOOD MMOFPS. A lot of people are outlining current concepts that could be incorporated into an MMOFPS but to be honest I would like to see an entirely new concept.
And I'd like a good MMOFPS too, and Tabula Rasa didn't even have first person view until deployment 14. :/
I registered for the beta for Parabellum...
http://parabellum.xg1.net/
It's probably too late, but hey, I can hope.
Anyways, I checked out that link and it sounds cool so I'm signing up too!
I forgot its name, but there's a superhero console MMO coming soon.
Otherwise, MMOFPS sounds kinda... Iffy, in my opinion.
Unless the made the Elder Scrolls games online.
That'd be sick!
Otherwise, MMOFPS sounds kinda... Iffy, in my opinion.
Unless the made the Elder Scrolls games online.
That'd be sick!
The biggest problem with making an MMOFPS, in my mind, is that the genres as they stand have a fundamental incompatibility: player growth. In shooters, the playing field has to be as even as possible. Games have made unlocks work (CoD4, TF2), but this is because the unlocks don't convey very significant play advantages (the G36 isn't a huge improvement over the M16, for instance). At most they represent a more specialized option, vastly better in a narrow circumstance, than the vanilla version. A player with a year's experience reinstalling the game will almost surely wipe the floor with someone who's played for three days and gotten a few unlocks, and the game wouldn't be an FPS as we think of it he didn't.
MMOs thrive, however, on building your character up over time. It's not you, your gun, and the flag to capture, but you in the midst of a world full of other players, and you're out to get to the next quest, or find that next piece of loot. PvP is meaningless if there's a significant disparity of level or equipment, and if this wasn't the case, the sense of building a character up would be diminished. Planetside worked because character growth wasn't, beyond the initial specialization, a major factor in the game. An hour into play you could go toe-to-toe with anyone on the battlefield (at least of the same class) and stand a chance of winning. I thought it got old rather quickly, and that Battlefield 2 managed to pull off battles of the same scale with a much sharper focus.
Of course, it's possible to take the RPG out of MMORPGs, or to redefine what we expect of a shooter, but my gut tells me that the result wouldn't be as compelling as either of the original types. A game in first person without the immediacy of an FPS loses an essential element, and a game based on community with no sense of progress will become a glorified chat forum. World persistence is a possibility, but some method of making players feel invested in it is essential, but what happens if someone 'wins' a persistent-world FPS? (The bomb has been planted...)
MMOs thrive, however, on building your character up over time. It's not you, your gun, and the flag to capture, but you in the midst of a world full of other players, and you're out to get to the next quest, or find that next piece of loot. PvP is meaningless if there's a significant disparity of level or equipment, and if this wasn't the case, the sense of building a character up would be diminished. Planetside worked because character growth wasn't, beyond the initial specialization, a major factor in the game. An hour into play you could go toe-to-toe with anyone on the battlefield (at least of the same class) and stand a chance of winning. I thought it got old rather quickly, and that Battlefield 2 managed to pull off battles of the same scale with a much sharper focus.
Of course, it's possible to take the RPG out of MMORPGs, or to redefine what we expect of a shooter, but my gut tells me that the result wouldn't be as compelling as either of the original types. A game in first person without the immediacy of an FPS loses an essential element, and a game based on community with no sense of progress will become a glorified chat forum. World persistence is a possibility, but some method of making players feel invested in it is essential, but what happens if someone 'wins' a persistent-world FPS? (The bomb has been planted...)