Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


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

MMOFPS Games The Next Big Thing? 80

Posted by Zonk from the blam-blam-ha-ha-n00b dept.
GameOgre writes "Despite a few lackluster attempts at a major MMOFPS like PlanetSide and now (in some ways) Star Wars Galaxies, could the MMOFPS genre one day rival MMORPGs in popularity and become the next big thing in MMO gaming?" From the article: "Imagine the possibilities of the MMOFPS genre for a second. Instead of going through the tired old tread mill of generic missions and level grinding, blast through a combination of other players and intelligent bots on a massive scale. There would be no rooms or lobbies that you have to scan through to find a vacancy, but one persistent world. The game would be as simple as an FPS but would have enough depth to keep you coming back. You would also not be able to camp a certain monster for treasure, because their would be no monster or treasure." The big issue I see here is pricing. The monthly fee for Planetside is just too high for what they offer.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MMOFPS Games The Next Big Thing? More

MMOFPS Games The Next Big Thing?

Comments Filter:
  • My take here is that having large-scale FPS battles still requires a LAN. Sure, it would kick nearly infinite amounts of ass to have an online FPS war with several hundred people, but the latency issue would be huge. Huxley looks pretty cool, though.
    • Given that Unreal Engine 3 supports streaming of levels, I don't think this will be much of an issue a few years down the road. That and the increasing amount of high-speed internet users, will help. There's gonna come a point where 56k modems aren't going to cut it for anything.
    • My take here is that having large-scale FPS battles still requires a LAN.

      The battle itself won't be large-scale; it'll be several normal FPS battles in one seamless world. Here's a very rough example: Halo's Blood Gulch is obviously a valley inside a larger formation; what if you could fly between gulches? You're only visible from at most two gulches at once, so it's not going to require handling too many players affecting each other at once.
    • The Quakeforge guys were talking about this five years ago.

      Basically, you'd have different maps run on different servers, with a trigger brush forcing a clientside connect command to a different server. With the way Quake was set up, you wouldn't have needed an engine mod for this; just a few lines of additional QuakeC.

      I still think it would have been fun.

      The problem lies in tracking stats. (In Quake 1, just frag counts) It would have to be on a central server. But how do you ensure appropriate tracking
      • How would have closed source really prevented cheating though? It hasn't on a lot of other games, the problem isn't open source, the problem is trusting the clients. As long as the clients, not the server, is responsible for sending that info you are going to have a problem.
        • The client is responsible for handling player input and you could easily add an aimbot to your binary.
          • you set honeypots to trick the aimbots.

            poke around cheater forums and find the methods the aimbot uses to pick out a player head from other surroundings.

            on honeypot servers send out levels with objects that look like normal terrain and decorations to a human player but look like heads to the aimbot. perhapse adding false character objects at a tiny scale or using spots of similar coloration. whenever a player shoots too many of these spots the admin takes a look at that player's history and puts word out
            • That only works with closed source, otherwise they can just get the "where are the enemies" data out of their client software. Then you'd have to create entity data the client can't distinguish from players.
              • and also, if a honeypot looks like a wall, there is client software used for aimbotting that is based entirely on what is seen on the screen.

                It's not perfect, but:

                "You don't have to be perfect, just better than the competition"

                Computer reflexes are in many ways superior to humans'
    • I can remember playing Day Of Defeat (Half-Life 1 mod) on a 56k modem. It worked fine up to 10 players, and with tolerable lag up to maybe 20 players.
      Now let us consider only the data transmission needs for a moment, and assume
      1) the necessary bandwith is proportional to the number of the other players on the map
      2) you have a 1000k DSL connection (which is not uncommon these days).
      In that case, the above numbers scale to 200 people with good performance and 400 people with tolerable lag.
      • Yeah, but you're assuming network requirements scale at O(n) for the number of players. I'm not sure that this is the case. I guess we'll see as games like this are released.
        • Client-side yes, but I admit that things will be harder on the server:
          I am assuming that you want to send data for all (n) nearby players to each player (m) times per second, with m being a constant determined by the max. acceptable lag.
          Then the required network throughput will be (n)*(m)*(amount of data for one nearby player) per second for one client. That is a complexity of O(n).
          On the server side, you have to do this for (n) clients, so you have a complexity of O(n^2). That could make things expensive f

  • Private Servers (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bigwang ( 67863 ) on Friday December 09, 2005 @09:03PM (#14225335)
    I would definitely love a MMOFPS.
    RPGs bore me to tears.

    I think instead of having a big server where everyone connects to, it would be nice to have individual private servers like FPS use now.

    However, they would be overseen by a master server (sort of like how they implement anti-cheating and anti-piracy now). So that your "profile" would carry with you. So each individual server could be like a country. With set dimensions, and rules, maybe even textures. And once you reach the limits of the server you are on, you would connect to another server. And the servers would be arranged on the master server by latency. So that if you live on the east coast, you would get the best pings on east coast servers. But you could still travel to the west coast servers, and that would add a different dimention to the game.

    That I imagine would defray the cost, so that no monthly fees would be needed. And yes, you would depend on the kindness (and uptime) of strangers, but that community (strangers hosting CS, TFC, CoD, BF, Q3 servers) sprung up out of nowhere and it's very robust.
    • So you just want another generic FPS? Cause that's about all it would amount to. Part of the problem is that the moment you've got servers in the hands of everyday people, people are going to start bending the rules. It's one thing to have an individual user cheating his own way through an MMO universe, but something totally different when that same type of person decides to fiddle with the rules on his server, thus affecting people that may not have even realized they were getting illegitimate gaming ex
      • some fps hosts already limit certain modifications one can do to your game doesn't seem hard to imagine a game company creating a parternship with one of these hosts and disallowing these kinds of changes
  • I've been waiting for this to hit for a while now :)

    They've got to keep it from becoming just a fragfest though...historically, games with a tad of strat mixed in do best (counter-strike!).
    • Maybe having different zones would be a good idea, one for more strategy type situations and others where it is just a fragfest. I enjoy both at different times and would like to be able to stay in the same game when I decide I want to stop with the strategy and start with the fragfest.

      • Re:Yes! (Score:2)

        by KDan ( 90353 )
        That's a brilliant idea. I hope someone picks it up.

        Imagine a game where you can join as a builder, a general or a soldier (each of which probably has a number of sub-classes).

        As a builder, your focus is on accumulating resources in your designated area (which is delineated based on which areas are free for your camp to exploit... of course when there are none you are spawned as a soldier instead until an area frees up). You build up the areas to give maximum defensive advantage to your soldiers (who wi
    • Screw couterstrike, think Operation Flashpoint on a laaarge scale, game-in-progress joining, and no stupid "Tequila Sundown"-style CTF matches. Oh, and built-in voice chat that makes you sould like your on a transistor radio.

      Yes, I'm bitter.
    • Strategy in Counter-Strike consists entirely of "rush left".

      For real strategy, try something like Tribes 2, or even Red Orchestra. You actually have to work with your teammates, and there is a distinct difference between offense and defense instead of just "shoot the other guys".
      ---
      "I hate quotations." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
      Generated by SlashdotRndSig [snop.com] via GreaseMonkey [mozdev.org]

  • Planetside rocks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Sparr0 ( 451780 ) <sparr0@gmail.com> on Friday December 09, 2005 @09:09PM (#14225373) Homepage Journal
    The monthly price for Planetside IS too high. But if a similar game was published for, say, 1/3 the price, I would definitely pay for it. I love the game, and the concept, but I play FPS in too rare of a pattern to pay the same monthly fee as for a MMORPG where i spend 20 hours a week.

    • Re:Planetside rocks (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Achoi77 ( 669484 )
      Seriously. They need more granularity with their subscription rates. Why is it so difficult to bill by the hour? And people wonder why the MMO market only caters to the hardcore? It's kinda like the cell phone business. I guess we'll have to wait untill the MMO market itself levels out, then we will start seeing "Fair and Flexible" plans..

      Sheesh

      • Puzzle Pirates has the absolute best pay system of an MMO game out right now. You can pay $10/month for unlimited play, or you can play on a "dubloon" server. Basically, a dubloon is a quarter ( little less if you buy them in bulk). In order to unlock certain areas of the game, you need to spend between 1 and 10 dubloons for a monthly pass to those features. If you don't want to unlock those parts you can simply not pay and play the other areas (wether free areas or other pay areas). Also, the 30 day pass i
  • I remember hearing a lot about this up and coming genre when Neocron was in beta, but then it never really materialized, at least in the states. http://ng.neocron.com/ [neocron.com] if you're interested.
    • well i played in Neocron. It was a bit FPS like, but the game lacked a lot of balance and players to play to make it a big FPS game with good fights. The experience was fun, but i lacked time to play and it got a little repetitive.

  • Essentials (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Idealius ( 688975 ) on Friday December 09, 2005 @09:22PM (#14225466) Journal
    Being someone who has played plenty of FPS's and MMO's here are the essentials to a great MMOFPS:

    1. No Guns! (or the option to play without vs those who choose the same option)
    - guns mean aimbots, you need some swordplay like the Jedi Knight series, Rune, etc. to prevent cheating.
    - gameplay > all. sometimes complicating a game by allowing you to have super leet grenades only makes it less fun. Think of a chessboard double it's regular size with twice as many pieces. Anyone can aim a gun, it's not fun anymore and it's not competitive unless you decide to stick to one gun game for the next two years to avoid having to relearn aim in other games -- an absolute nightmare if you own multiple gun games.

    2. Clans!
    - FPS's main method of keeping a steady population years after their release is by allowing anyone to make a clan, screw MMO's and their factions, I want to choose from factions real people create.

    3. Make organized clan matches result in territory wars a la risk, but make them scheduled like real FPS clans schedule matches.
    - That means whenever they want as long as all parties agree, but no set period where they must protect their territory because even though all those stories about some kindergartner being god at Quake sound appealing, most of the really good FPS'ers are young adults with lives, too. The clan matches should revolve around my clan's schedule, not the game's schedule. You can make the control a clan has over a certain area gradually disappear with time so clans can't sit forever on a piece of land and refuse to fight for it.

    4. Balancing an MMO's duels between different classes is easy. A FPS is much harder, in fact I would say nearly impossible unless they're restricted to the same weapons vs each other in a symmetrical world or something ridiculous @_@. Either, spend a lot of time ensuring this is balanced, or force players to use the same weapons vs each other to make it fun -- or even make the stats/experience system allow for a higher gain if duplicate weapons are used.

    5. Fair fights are fun because the other person can't claim a handicap if you win!

    6. Tie "virtual material possessions" to the land a clan fights other ACTUAL PEOPLE to retain. Basically, make it more like life.

    Some other ideas:

    -Use the Instancing model to support low ping duels.
    -Crafting has a place in a FPSMMO, think about clothing, it shouldn't hook into your gear, though, because that just leads to unfair fights which, as said, I believe to be the cornerstone of a FPS.
    -So what's there to do? Kill people to earn stats, higher stats go to new areas opening up and allowing you certain privileges in your clan such as the ability to arrange a clan match, or the ability to induct a new member.

    To be honest, I would be satisified with current FPS's having some kind of "teleport to another server" portal, but if you're going to go all the way please do it right.
    • Your #1 rule is "No Guns!". Then you talk about guns in the rest of the rant. You don't want stats, armor or people fighting each other with different weapons.
      • Grandparent doesn't talk about guns at all after point #1. Guns =/= weapons. I don't see anything about not wanting stats (the contrary is suggested, actually).

        I agree with the poster that having armor or a better weapon going into a fight is unfair.

        Tangent: You know what might be fun? 4 on 4 Smash Bros over a large area with capture the flag rules and stamina mode turned on (ie run out of health as opposed to accumulating damage).

    • Re:Essentials (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 )
      Ok....I gotta say I see quite a few holes in your logic, feel free though to discuss as I'm more interested in debate than mod points.

      1. The no guns thing - People like guns in FPS. Thats why they're called first person SHOOTERS. Now, don't get me wrong, there are a few great examples of melee combat done fairly well, the Jedi Knight series being at the top. And I know there are a few new Fantasy FPS in the works right now that look promising. But people want guns. And they want variety of guns. And

      • 4. Ah, see, here is the thing. The vast majority of players don't necessarily want balance in a FPS. They want to find the right weapon/vehicle, and use it to blast the shit out of the other helpless players. Yeah, they want some challenge, but they sure don't want everything to always be evened out. And NOBODY likes to be forced into using certain weapons.
        The individual player might not want balance. As long as the unbalance is in his favor. But if he is on the receiving end, he gets unhappy pretty fast. T

    • With clans and territory to hold, it almost sounds like a FPS/Risk hybrid.

      That has some interesting possibilities. Have anyone be able to start a clan, have a decent alliance system, pre-arranged "duels" between clans, and it could be quite an addictive game.

    • Re:Essentials (Score:2, Informative)

      by NateE ( 247273 )
      This parent apparently never played Planetside. Think BF2 but on a larger scale.

      1) Guns make the FPS.
      2) You have sides and small teams to accomplish missions.
      3) Your overall goal is to capture territory.
      4) Each of the 3 Planetside factions have unique weapons and vehicles. This did lead to a lot of balance complaints. The developers tried to address these complaints over time.
      5) Unfair fights do not ruin the overall experience in a MMOFPS. You just learn to avoid putting yourself in these situations.
      6) I'm
      • 1) uh Aimbotting?
        4) yay for only 3 factions :(
        5) easy to say, hard to do, and if you're fighting someone who knows the strategies to "avoid putting yourself in this position" then they will easily defeat you. Eventually it comes down to who chose the best weapon, unless TA-DA: You're using the same weapon.
        6) what makes you think I was talking about planetside
        7) Since lag affects your aim, it most definately affects your play in large battles, unless it affects everyone else's lag at the same time.
        9) Team an
  • I'd think that it should be a realistic current day game. With modern guns, vehicles, etc. Maybe even map major cities as they really look. No load times other than the one load into the game would deffinately seal the deal (I know that would be demandingto a computer, but hey, it's supposed to be a massive 'fps' right?).
    • The problem with modern weapons is the lack of variety. Most shoot fast bullets more or less accurately in bursts or full auto. Nothing like homing missiles, slow but powerful projectiles, bouncing shots, energy beams, etc. No way to dodge shots, very few different tactics and other annoyances. Reality is very limited when it comes to the number of possible play styles.
  • I had an idea that if you made a current day or even slightly futuristic FPS, you could pay for server/bandwidth with advertising as opposed to a monthly fee. I see an urban combat game where soda cans, billboards, stores/restaurants, even vehicles could have a sponsor. If it was done properly, the advertising would make the game more realistic and involved.

    This scheme would help lure the casual gamers, since no one has to worry about "getting my money's worth".

    As a side note, if this idea gets stolen,

    • Free gaming has a problem (Score:4, Interesting)

      by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Friday December 09, 2005 @10:35PM (#14225928) Journal
      No paid account to ban.

      MMO's like everquest while having a share of kiddies (or mental retards, it is sometimes hard to tell the difference) are still havens of silent intellect compared to much of the net.

      Certainly compared to one MMOFPS Joint Operations by Novalogic. I was an early beta tester and it was fun. Then they opened the beta more and more and wow. The designers had made a mistake. They had spotted the obvious kiddie dream of just gunning down their own team and disabled that. However satchel bomb could be dropped anywhere (including vehicles) and then remotely detonated. So cue endless hours of fun of not so good players running into a helicopter (the slightly better ones waiting to pick up some other players) then take off and blow up. If the explosion did not kill you you died in the fall or had a long long swim ahead of you.

      Free gaming lowers the barrier and doing that invites people that will be in the game for no other reasing then to upset other people.

      Frankly I sony does it pretty well. Just charge a month and allow people to cancel right away so they are not billed again unless they decide to resubscribe and they can just game for 1 month.

      It is how I play now. I usually get tired off a game then cancel it only to come back 2-3 months later to play some more.

      As for advertising paying for an MMO, Anarchy Online has shifted to that model. It is not exactly a shining example of success.

      Oh and I not some snobbish people hater. I am old enough to remember that ALL fps online games were without password for the server. Then clans added them for their own servers. Then it became common to see more password only servers as a game got older. Now it is rare to see open servers at a games launch.

      • you can ban an account key a-la steam account keys being banned. people will feel bad when their 49.95 game key is banned for beinga doofus.
      • In case of a MMORPG-like game with significant character advancement, deleting extremely misbehaving chars could have the desired effect.
        Team-killed all the time? Oops, character gone, start at level 1 again. In the meantime, the less retarded players who started with you are level 20 and got to keep their account. Next time you shoot at them, they just whip out their much bigger guns and blow you away.
      • I concur. I belong to an online gaming unit that charges a fee, requires an application form, and has a set of guidelines for player behaviour. It keep the foolish players out. It keeps the folks who will play for a month out. I like that because I know the fella standing next to me will actually cover my back and play to win as a team. When I play COD, I have idea whether the guys around me even understand the goal of the game....

  • Battletech (Score:4, Insightful)

    by iCEBaLM ( 34905 ) on Friday December 09, 2005 @10:38PM (#14225941)
    My heart yearns for the age in which my trothkin and I shall finally carve our way through the surat scum of the Inner Sphere and take back that which is rightfully ours: Terra. Cradle of humanity.

    The honorless freebirth will be no match for our superior technology and tactics. Glorious battles could be waged on an epic scale if only FASA had not sold themselves to Those who Shall Not be Named! What a treachery that was!

    I wish it would come to pass. Battles consisting of battlemechs, elementals, aerospace fighters, infantry and more would surely call warriors together from across known space. Unfortunately it seems that Those who Shall Not be Named do not think these "intellectual properties" should be developed as the odds are against them. To those developers I have only these words: think of the victory if you should win.

    May honor sharpen your steel, warriors.

    • Re:Battletech (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Quarters ( 18322 )
      Had it done 3 years ago. It was called Multiplayer BattleTech:3025. It was finished, ready to go, then EA and Microsoft got into a head-butting match over the future of the license. So EA never published the product. It was, and still is, one of the best products I've worked on.

  • Hm. Ogre off mark. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Golpemente ( 652230 )
    The "article" paints too broad of a brush. I don't think it's entirely fair to classify all MMOFPS games together. Sure, what few MMOFPS games are out there do tie what equipment you can acquire to kills, not stats or currency - I think that's pretty much standard. In my experience MMOFPS games also give you basic team management tools - but building a good persistent squad of players depends more on the players themselves, not the game. MMORPGs have to be compared to each other by looking at their scale, s

  • It's called battlefield 2 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by InsideTheAsylum ( 836659 ) on Friday December 09, 2005 @11:31PM (#14226192)
    If you've played that game, you'd know that it almost fits into the MMOFPS genre with being able to play on a single map with 64 people. I wouldn't want to play a massive MMOFPS with 2-4000 people though some reasons:

    * Latency: Your average FPS game server will kick anyone over 200-300 ms ping because they either have some sort of a script or an active admin. An MMOFPS will be there to make money and I hardly doubt that they will be kicking paying customers off.

    * Scope: The problem with MMOs is that events are always taking place wherever you are not. You're gonna need to travel an assload of distance to get wherever the current battles are taking place. What if you die? Where will you spawn? That's a major PITA. Even if they implement "spawn anywhere your team is," it's still rather annoying to find out where you can frag the most which is the beauty of simple server hopping in FPS games.

    * Teamwork: Unless you have a dedicated clan, which most people won't have, you will simply be playing with a bunch of idiots who do everything to further their own gaming experience without any regard for the people on their team. An example of this in BF2 when nobody will ever stop to give you a ride, look at your landmines covering the road (and then punish your TK when they ignore the glaring red skulls), and then shoot you when you spawn and run halfway to grabbing the vehicle. Imagine that, but on a massive, thousand player scale. Fun, huh?

    So, for my quick fix of shooters, I'll stick to smaller (in comparrison) games and have my fun there :P.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Aye, the article is a masturbatory bit of proto-hype for a game the author knows nothing about in a genre the author has no experience in.

        I, however, have played WW2OL, and it demonstrates (among many other instructive lessons in software design) why MMOFPS is not a good idea. The online FPSs that are popular are all high-speed high-adrenaline, shoot-move-shoot-die-respawn-move-shoot 30 minute extravaganzas. A MMO environment can't sustain that. If you want persistant worlds and 2000-4000 people online (I
    • BF2 isn't a MMOFPS, never will be. Planetside and wwiiol are both high number battles, it all depends what you want from a game. Unfortunately most gamers these days crave the latest graphics and graphic effects.

      For improved gaming numbers players need to take a hit on graphics to get what they want. Take nothing away from developers who push the MMOFPS boundary they create games that are currently niche market, but will soon extend into a larger market as more and more look for games that are not like y

  • The issue. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MeanderingMind ( 884641 ) on Friday December 09, 2005 @11:38PM (#14226222) Homepage Journal
    The biggest issue as I see it for any MMOFPS is to avoid boredom. FPSs generally cater to people who want action, lots of it, and all the time. The word "active" best describes the state of the player. In the small maps of Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, CounterStrike, Unreal Tournament and Halo, whether you are moving or stationary there's always that chance that you'll suddenly need to blast the crap out of someone.

    In a large world, that becomes more difficult. If you happen to be in the middle of nowhere, it's hard to be on edge. If you know the frontline of a huge battle is miles and miles away from the base you are defending, are you really going to say, "I'm sure glad I paid $X a month to sit here and rot."

    As long as the game mechanic throws the players into the action consistantly, it can work incredibly well. It would be tricky, but doable.
  • As a lover of the MMO scene, a player of Planetside, and a player of numerous MMORPG's...

    The biggest problem of Planetside is the lack of progression. Aside from the standard kill/death tally system, the lackluster award system, and the pathetic level system, the game plays like a standard FPS. They might as well have made a basic FPS game. All three progression systems exist in the the standard FPS scene. Kill/death ratio is kept via server counters, awards are stored by servers and clans, and the level

    • What the MMOFPS scene needs is a more progressive environment to catch, and keep, the interest of the players that are currently igoring the whole genre. Until they can develop this I'll gladly take the '+3 battleaxes of dorkdom' - the equipment itself being a type of progression.

      Planetside does not have mobs and they do not drop rare but powerful items you require for success.

      Planetside does have a level system, but right out of the gate you can use the most powerful weapons and most of the vehicles in the

      • You might want to investigate Battlefield 2. It isn't fully persistent, but the games does carry stats and you can get a LOT of points for not being a great twitch gamer.
      • Well you backed up everything I just stated... The game lacks any sort of commitment. You don't have to be good at the game; you don't have to play a lot; in fact you don't even really have to try and your pretty well on par with everyone else. Game such as these seem to give support to the notion that lack of commitment, and by that I'm also including and putting emphasis on progression, breeds an apathy towards the games themselves. The question I must ask you is why would the average gamer switch off a

  • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • The problem with most MMOFPS games is theres no individual skill to them. FPS players like to be challenged and improve, when you remove that it really removes the point of playing. Just look at all the people still playing cs1.6 because of how much more random/un-skilled cs:source is. And 1.6 is bad enough as is at lowering the skill gap.

    What /WOULD/ be nice from a FPS(or any game) would be persistance/reputation. Right now I could be as lame as I want, cheat, whatever, and worst case all I have to do is g
  • Wake me up when they make MMOGTA
  • I think a massive game of capture the flag could be awesome.
    • You know, I was thinking of something similar. I agree with an earlier comment that unless you have a system which allows for the player to be constantly immersed in action, your MMOFPS will inevitably fail. There also needs to be some element of strategy or goal-based gameplay, otherwise you lose interest.

      I imagine that you have everyone in the world divided into two teams. When you sign up, you're able to evaluate both teams, view their win/loss history, relative numbers and other current stats, and th
  • These guys [vendetta-online.com] have been doing this next big thing for a while now.

  • It will take a while (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Phae ( 920315 )
    There are a lot of problems when thinking about making an MMOFPS.

    First, you're appealing to very different demographics. I know when I play MMORPGs, I consistently come across (relatively) older (and mature) people, including married couples. Additionally, pretty much anyone is capable of doing well, regardless of reflexes and hand-eye coordination.

    The appeal of an FPS is to a much younger crowd. If any of you have played FPS games online, you know that it's not uncommon to have many pre-pubescent kids pl
    • the solution is quite simply expressed by the following:

      Create a MMOFPS that appeals not only to the twitch crowd, but to those who lack reflexes.

      Many old martial arts masters and military veterans rely on their reflexes, but also on their knowledge of countering & strategy. So, to say "twitch style gaming" or more appropriately titled "reflex style gaming" is only for the young, is simply wrong. I am willing to bet anyone ~50 years of age or younger appreciates their reflexes, and as long as its appeal
    • world war 2 online had an average age of 30 on both sides. There are many who are 50+ who play from both sexes in the game.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Close