MMOFPS Games The Next Big Thing? 80
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.
Lag? (Score:1)
Re:Lag? (Score:2)
Re:Lag? (Score:2)
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.
Not really... (Score:1)
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
Re:Not really... (Score:2)
Re:Not really... (Score:1)
Re:Not really... (Score:2)
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
Re:Not really... (Score:1)
Re:Not really... (Score:2)
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'
Re:Lag? (Score:2)
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.
Re:Lag? (Score:1)
Re:Lag? (Score:2)
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
Re:Sure (Score:2)
Back in 'Nam, you think people were running around with rocket launchers? How about in our current Iraqi war? You think people are jumping over cars with shotguns? No. They're hiding behind rocks and cars and trading fire. That's how wars are fought.
People who complain because they get sniped are pathetic. It's like calling somebody a 'shotgun bitch' or a 'rocket whore' simply because they use a certain weapon.
Please. If it's in the game then it's fair. Unless it's s
Re:Sure (Score:2)
Back in 'Nam, you think people respawned? Campers don't matter for real humans. Once they're dead, they really don't care if the person who killed them was there for one day or for five years. The problem with camping (especially spawncamping) is that the offensive team keeps going for the same point - or just tries to defend their spawnpoint - and the game becomes a war of attrition. Most human wars last century were wars of attrition
Re:Sure (Score:2)
Most team objective games specificly require camping to complete the objective -- Eg, defend your {flag | command point | bomb site }
In deathmatch, camping just tells them where to avoid until they out-stock you. While annoying in some maps (Cant forget thresh whoring MH for
Re:Sure (Score:1, Troll)
1) The game's levels were poorly designed and you should find a better game or map.
2) Your team has lost. Get a drink while your tickets get punched and do better next round, you whinny little goat.
Private Servers (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:Private Servers (Score:1)
Re:Private Servers (Score:2)
Yes! (Score:2)
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!).
Re:Yes! (Score:1)
Re:Yes! (Score:2)
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
Re:Yes! (Score:2)
Yes, I'm bitter.
Re:Yes! (Score:1)
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)
Re:Planetside rocks (Score:3, Insightful)
Sheesh
Re:Planetside rocks (Score:2)
Neocron anyone? (Score:1)
Re:Neocron anyone? (Score:1)
Re:Neocron anyone? (Score:2)
Where Half-Life 1 and its mods (Counterstrike
You see that in little details like the impossibility to shoot semi-covered opponents, where Half-Life would have let you shoot, simulated the path of the bu
Re:Neocron anyone? (Score:2)
And this goes back to my main lesson with any game involving competition with other players:
If its not fair, its not fun. If you win, and you have a handicap, that is no context for success. If you lose because of a handicap, you know that as well. ITS NOT FUN
Essentials (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:Essentials (Score:2)
Re:Essentials (Score:1)
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)
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
A few comments (Score:2)
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
Re:A few comments (Score:2)
Thank you.
Re:Essentials (Score:2)
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)
http://www.bf2combat.net/ [bf2combat.net]
Re:Essentials (Score:2)
Re:Essentials (Score:2, Informative)
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
Re:Essentials (Score:2)
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
My thoughts (Score:1)
Re:My thoughts (Score:1)
MMOFPS Pricing idea (Score:1)
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)
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.
Re:Free gaming has a problem (Score:1)
Make kicks painful - the MMORPG variant (Score:2)
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.
Re:Free gaming has a problem (Score:1)
Battletech (Score:4, Insightful)
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)
Hm. Ogre off mark. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's called battlefield 2 (Score:4, Insightful)
* 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
Re: (Score:1)
Re:It's called battlefield 2 (Score:2)
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
Re:It's called battlefield 2 (Score:1)
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)
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.
Progression Lacking (Score:1)
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
Re:Progression Lacking (Score:2)
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
Re:Progression Lacking (Score:2)
Re:Progression Lacking (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Community. (Score:2)
few want a glorified chat interface forever, do they?
Just dont remove the skill.. (Score:2)
What
GTA: MMO (Score:2)
Re:GTA: MMO (Score:2)
an mmo based on real cars, would own the sales charts.
Capture the Flag! (Score:2)
Re:Capture the Flag! (Score:1)
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
Vendetta Online (Score:1)
It will take a while (Score:2, Interesting)
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
Re:It will take a while (Score:2)
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
Re:It will take a while (Score:1)