Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
First Person Shooters (Games)

The Crossing - A New Way to FPS? 184

1up has a look at Arkane Studios' extremely ambitious new project. Called The Crossing, the FPS title looks to combine single and multi-player modes in a new way. From the article: "In the simplest sense, story missions are single-player shooting with an exception: Naturally intelligent human opponents take the place of A.I. There are two types of players: Elites and skirmishers. Elites are gamers playing the game in story mode. They're beefed up, heavily armored, and heavily armed. They have to be able to hold their own against a swarm of skirmish players. Skirmishers are gamers who typically play on multiplayer maps: well-trained, rank-and-file soldiers playing primarily to have some quick fun and increase their rank through defeating the occasional Elite. Skirmish players can also invade story maps and 'possess' A.I.s ala Agent Smith in The Matrix." So even if you're playing through the story, you'll still be challenged by the 'NPCs', all of whom will be played by a real-life human. Sounds like it could either be awesome or a total flop. Which side are you leaning on?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Crossing - A New Way to FPS?

Comments Filter:
  • by Remus Shepherd ( 32833 ) <remus@panix.com> on Monday January 22, 2007 @01:46PM (#17712608) Homepage
    Step 1: Allow PvP griefing in your game.
    Step 2: ???
    Step 3: Profit!

    Sounds like someone is trying to invent step 2, there. Like any other PvP, whether it works will depend on how well the game is balanced. One player -- who probably is not a die-hard PvPer -- against a swarm of PvP-savvy opponents? That sounds very difficult to balance correctly. Best of luck to the designers, they're gonna need it.
  • Ugh (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 22, 2007 @01:49PM (#17712658)
    I'm really looking forward to being spawn-camped in single player.
  • Hmmm... (Score:3, Funny)

    by kitsunewarlock ( 971818 ) on Monday January 22, 2007 @01:49PM (#17712660) Journal
    I've always wondered about a pokemon game in which you played the "random trainer"... You must stand entirely still, hoping to hell that after 20-40 hours the hero comes around. If he does, without avoiding your watchful gaze, you get a single battle against him. Oh joy. Afterwards, he might be desprete enough to talk with you...maybe even register your phone number... But seriously, this is basically DnD inversed (1 player vs. 90 GMs). Sounds like Splinter-Cell Multiplayer...or objective counterstrike maps on servers that don't kick you for rescuing hostages/pslnting the bomb. Doesn't matter though. In the end it'll go down to "get the most kills".
  • Re:Ugh (Score:5, Funny)

    by Canthros ( 5769 ) on Monday January 22, 2007 @02:07PM (#17712944)
    Not to mention being repeatedly owned by a half-dozen Korean kids.
  • by GeckoX ( 259575 ) on Monday January 22, 2007 @02:58PM (#17713688)
    Paraphrase:
    It'll suck because the fictional heroes aren't realistic.
    But if they based it on this particular fictional hero it'd rock!

    Conclusion:
    You're not making any sense man!
  • by SP33doh ( 930735 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:53AM (#17720254)
    hey... uh.... can you deliver this letter for me?

"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra

Working...