Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I really hope we don't get lots of MMOFPSs
GreenChaos
Member Posts: 2,268
When I'm not playing MMORPGs I like to play team based FPSs like TF2 (which I'm currently playing)
Now that FPSs are starting to get classes and unlockables, and MMORPGs are becoming easier to level up, I'm worried that the two game styles will start to merge.
One thing I really like about the current Team based online First Person shooters, is that they have an End and everyone has the same “gear”. This is a breath of fresh air from a never ending gear based MMORPG.
But games like BF 2124 have unlockables, so all players don't have the same “gear”. Its great to see TF2 keep the old school FPS values.
It's nice to see some merger of the game styles, but I would hate it if all future FPSs had persistent gear collection. I love having a choice of never end game, and game that ends in just a few hours.
Comments
You already have MMOGs that are FPS games. In my view, BF2, TF2, CounterStrike, and so on are all MMOGs.
Persistent worlds are just about the only thing missing from them to make them qualify on this website for an entry. Those will show up too, some day, and I suspect for a "free to play" revenue model.
oh come on lol... BF2142 is not GEAR based at all. I can kick as much ass with or without my standard kit
Even on planetside, it wasn't gear based... I still killed people with pistols and standard guns. If you have tactics and some decent skills (player) you will overpower most..
I wager you will continue to see many elements of FPS incorporated into MMORPGs and vise versa. Each will try to improve its product to appeal to as many gamers as possible
Torrential
Torrential: DAOC (Pendragon)
Awned: World of Warcraft (Lothar)
Torren: Warhammer Online (Praag)
I agree. I don't know if these will be entertaining games, but I agree that it will certainly be tried more than once to see if a large audience can be found. I'm skeptical of this, honestly, because I think that the two kinds of games (ie, character progression games, on the one hand, and player-skill games, on the other hand) really appeal to two very different types of gaming entertainment preferences, and smushing them together can lead to a disappointing result for both types of gamers at least as likely as it could lead to a product that would appeal to both. There's a pretty big difference in preference between someone who likes FPSs and someone who likes RPGs, and often there isn't much overlap in the same gamer.
Well first, there is a persistent BF2 world, sure its no MMO, you can't grind on 10 street rats or raid for an uber M-16 but the battles change the face of the map.
www.bf2combat.net/
Why wouldn't you want to see more of that type of gameplay? MMO combat is stale and dull. Stand there, whacka rat, hit a special, watch timer, rat jumps up several times and bites you in the eye...repeat until said rat is dead, then move a few steps to the next rat and repeat again. Big fun there, can't wait to log into LotR tonight for more fast paced boar killing and rock picking but I'm "role playing" in a "virtual world" I guess.
I would pit just about any popular FPS game against any MMO, no 2 MMO's released this year in terms of story, raw challenge and fun.
Tell me Bioshock or Cysis are lesser games then Vanguard or LotR's. But hey, thats my opinion. MMO's could stand to learn something from games that are actually fun and interesting to play, lord knows they sure as hell are anything but fun and interesting at this point.
There are Planetside and Word War II Online. Both MMOFPS, both fantastic games.
I would glady welcome more MMOFPS games. It's time for SOE to redeem itself with a Planetside 2.
However think about this. Guild Wars is the best match-play PvP in the MMORPG market. No question, its not even close. Its does exactly what you say is good and it sticks to its guns. Although there are some unlocks in the skills for PvP.
Anyway I think you shouldn't be so worried because what you are worried about makes bad match-play PvP games whether they are RPG or FPS. It will sort itself out.
Only for world-style PvP are any of the mechanics you mention worth much as far as quality. And then only in well deisgned games like EvE online. By this I mean there must be counter veiling forces such as attrition and economic stuff and control of zones.
While you can capture people with addictive personalities with that stuff, you can't have PvP with a large appeal if you do the stupid kind of progression/locked down strategy crap you see in say WoW arena.
In the end even many of the hardcore grinders will transfer over to quality PvP. Now a game like WoW with its low quality PvP arena can still exist and have people doing it, but that is because of the PvE side of the game. Anyone who wants actual quality play can do GvG in Guild Wars and do it with no sub.
The only reason low quality arena play like WoW's can have much action at all is because in order to play PvE and have the PvP option that is all you have as a choice. If they were purely only PvP match-play games WoW would be out of business if it tried to compete with Guild Wars.
So a game like TF2 is simply not really threatened and similarly a MMOFPS type game like TF2 would not really be threatened. If you look at Planetside it has unlocks and such but it is still accessible and the major unlocks are more about command positions. True they made a mistake with BFRs but they corrected that. And if you look at Planetside it shows that turning things into a big unlock arms race hurts PvP games, because the BFR debacle did hurt Planetside.
The lure of goal based progression is large. It gives people something to do and can easily be used to addict some people. However generallly such things are overall destructive when you have to deal with PvP stuff in a large user environment. You can't have 70% of a population be invalidated or your MMOFPS just an FPS again.
As far as MMOFPS that are PvE yeah sure could easily happen, but then again who cares?
I was coming from the FPS point of view, saying I don't want persistent rewards tainting my FPS fun.
I want to have two separate games styles, one is short and to the point, one is never ending, buy I don’t want to mix the two. Ending up with diluted MMORPGs and FPS's with string you along rewards.
FPS and MMORPG fans don't really mix all that well. Take a good look at Tabula Rasa if you want proof.
However, there have been some pretty solid FPSRPGs over the years. System Shock 2, Deus Ex, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. serve as good examples FPS games that are actually improved by adding RPG elements. Personally, I'd like to see S.T.A.L.K.E.R. done as a persistent world MMOFPS.
Unlocks and gear upgrades haven't really hurt multiplayer FPS games either. Counter-Strike allows the winning team to buy the best gear as well as restock their ammo and armor which hasn't stopped it from being surprisingly well balanced. BF2142 may have unlocks, but participating in squads has more effect on your kill / death ratio than the gear you're carrying. That last one also goes for Planetside. Even TF2's character classes balance out despite their wildly different weapon load outs and abilities.
It isn't the RPG elements that make a crappy online shooter. More often than not, shooters go bad when the weapons are unbalanced or just don't feel "right." This problem is usually compounded with broken level design which can kill any game regardless of genre.
Personally I would like to see more MMOFPS games, but if the focus is PVP then you have to make the game end and restart at some point. Passing control points between factions like a joint in Planetside just made the game feel pointless and lame which is why I stopped playing. That and the fact that I spent more time walking / riding than fighting.
I can't wait till Huxley is released... I miss playing PlanetSide, but not a game I would go back to.
Futilez - Mature MMORPG Community
Correcting people since birth.
I much prefer controlling my character and the gameplay of an FPS. Imagine if you had DEUS EX in an MMO setup where players could hang out and just do missions or engage into PVP... wait.. neocron does that.. but the point is, it's great and appeals to other people. I understand the level system wouldn't work well. I am pretty good at FPS shooters and it's my favorit genre but it would suck that I could get destroyed by a really low skilled player just because his gear completely dominates me.
However, nothing stops the MMOFPS to have other skills that requires levels. Crafting... Hacking... Mission access... mission Gear... vehicul access....
Something that could be considered is. if you wish to keep the game fair, then you want to keep the gear consistent in PVP. The best thing is to have a power limit.. So during PVE, you can carry the super guns and do some extremely brutal damage and tank like a bear but on a pvp battlefield, you are limited to millitary issued weapons where things are kept in balance.
As for MMOFPSs.. I have to admit, having a certain love for both FPSs and MMOs, I find nothing cooler than watching the two mix.
Now I agree that MMO's as we see them today are kind of dull, I never understood why they would just have rats walking in a 10 feet area unless they're running after you. I would love to see an MMO with a real eco system where not only plants die and grow, but also monsters hibernate, and and move in a more realistic manner, meaning you'd have to hunt your prey. This would be the new grind, instead of killing 50 boars, you'd just have to hunt 2 or so, it would take you as much time but it would be more realistic and you'd maybe have tracking so you can see where they might be. Also I'd like to see some animals migrate when the temp changes, and there be storms, and floods and quakes. I think Dark and Light has some of these things, but I read it was a really bad game (guess the new company put to much on its plate). One thing I do like is in Archlord where there is a bounty system which is kind of neat. When you're a higher level you can go pick up bounties. I think some of the fun of a game should be finding your prey, not just "go here and you'll see them by the big red tree" . Maybe the quest will say "last time I saw boars was around *** area, and you use your tracking skills to find it and kill it.
I do think there can be a good mix of MMO and FPS, it just will take time for companies to get it right. I hear Planetside is ok, but it has its problems too. I'm not sure if Huxley will be good or not. One game that does sound interesting is APB also by Webzen.
I really wouldn't call BF2, TF2 and Counterstrike MMOG's. When I think of an MMOG, I think of a world, not just maps that you have to login to. Its a world that you can run around in, it may have load screens but those are just to go from one area to another. The games you mentioned are just online FPS'.
Exactly, people don't seem to understand the point of why fps's like BF2, 2142, CoD4 have unlockables.
You aren't supposed to log into a game of CoD4 and say..."wow I just hit level 55, guess I'm done!" The unlocks/ranks/levels are simply added features to the game. The point of those games is still the same as it was back when we used to play Quake, frag people. I hated nothing more than back when someone in Planetside would ask what they are supposed to do now that they are BR20 CR5. Hello? You're supposed to frag people...first person shooter. Those levels and unlocks are just fun side accomplishments to pick up while you play the game rather than only ever having the one single goal of just being on top of the scoreboard all the time.
Like this guy said, those unlocks don't give you any real advantage over a good twitch gamer. They simply give you more options. I can play Planetside with a BR6 character and walk all over BR25s. I can start a new account on Call of Duty 4 and stomp level 55's all day long with just the starting weapons. These games are still about "skill" and not even close to being dependent on what unlocks you have. Don't even get me started on 2142...but I'm just borderline ranting...FPS's just happen to be my preferred genre and it's simply irksome when people misunderstand what the point of unlocks and levels are in that genre when compared to RPG's.
Someone mentioned though here that FPS gamers and RPG'rs don't usually mix. I think you underestimate the difference between PC and console gamers. Myself and the people I know are just PC gamers. RTS/FPS/RPG...whatever, if a game kicks ass we play it. I may prefer my FPS's again these days since most modern mmorpg's all seem to belong on a Nintendo and will virtually pat my back and hold my hand if something so horrible as an in game death occurs, but that doesn't mean I wont play this genre again when a game designed for someone over the age of 8 is finally released. 10 years maybe?
Planetside - all player skill (lvl 1 routinely kills lvl 30), persistant characters. Experience levels get you different weapons, not better weapons.
It also has up to 1,000 (only one time) in one battle. The other games max out at 64.
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
It was nice of the developers to patch a game that old, but overall I felt that the patch really missed the point of the game. I would, in fact, compare it to the NGE patch in many ways. Fortunately, hacked servers do exist, but they're hard to run under Vista or XP.
The graphics update was nice, but I miss most of the features. Removing the research feature and my skill tree was really unnecessary, and I think updating the difficulty to 'retarded monkey can beat this' was a bad move. I don't mind that the patch that removed weapons degridation, I think everyone agreed that it was a bad feature (even the original developers thought it might not work too well) but overall, the patch took a once great game and made it solidly mediocre.
Lets face it, not a banner year for ANY sort of games. Crysis is a pretty tech demo, but when my 8800 GTX craps out on a game, there were programming difficulties. The only solid winner for PC games this year was a frikkin' expansion pack.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
There's no reason that a game cannot be both an MMORPG and and MMOFPS.
A game could easily have all the elements of a persistent world, varied character advancement and customization, and large server populations on the one hand, and use an FPS-style combat system on the other hand.
As technology, network speeds etc. improve, this will be a welcome and inevitable result.
AoC is a start. Let's hope it lives up to even a fraction of its hype.
I, for one, think that SWG would have been a far better game if its combat system was true FPS, at least for the ranged part. In fact, SOE had all the tools they needed to make it that way: Planetside. PS would have made a perfect backbone for and SW MMORPG. Use the FPS combat system, the vehicles, the aircraft, and layer on top of that Star Wars aesthetics, a richer character progression system, PVE, crafting, and more robust social aspects, and you would have had yourself one hell of and MMORPGFPS.
____________________________________________
im to lazy too use grammar or punctuation good
I know that I prefer RPGs over FPSs because they don't have twitch combat. They let me play my character with his skills and abilities. This trend in the industry to turn out MMOFPSs is depressing to me. There's a reason why I hardly ever play console games and now they're trying so hard to blend the market.
I'm not about the purity of it. I just don't like twitch. It's a very unforgiving play style and it gives me headaches. I want to be able to think about different options during combat without being penalized for not being fast enough on the draw. I want my character to matter, not how fast I can mash buttons or how low my ping rate is.
Certainly there is room on the market for MMOFPSs, but it seems like they're trying to do away with or marginalizing avatar skills in many of the upcoming games altogether and going for pure twitch. They're trying to break the console monopoly at the cost of bastardizing RPGs or removing them altogether.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
I agree with this as it is my personal preference as well.
To me an RPG is not a game based on twitch, it's based on my character's skills. I am the puppet master in terms of deciding what I want my character to try to do at any given time, but whether my character succeeds is based on his skills rather than my reflexes, in my mind, in an RPG. A system that relies on twitch reflexes primarily is an FPS, whether it is a shooter or not (Dark Messiah was a SP swords and scorcery FPS), even if you have some character customization aspects that are borrowed from the RPG genre.
I think there could be room in the market for these kinds of games, but I do think that there are a lot of people who like RPGs but not FPSs (while as someone else posted, there are people who like both genres).
Pehaps with a bit more practise you will be able to up your kills with all the extra gear options just like the rest of us have.
At the OP, I completely agree. Ilike my PvP evenly matched. All players have access to the same gear options. No unlocks. Nothing like that.
Can you imagine a game of football where one team has a larger goal? What difference would it really make if one sides goal was 3 inches bigger than the others?
I'm personally not intrested in competative actifivities that are unsportsmanlike. I think the unlock brigade have lost the plot. I think their priority is replayability over fair competiton.
When it comes to MMOfps' however I want more. I really enjoyed Planetside.
BF2, BF2142, Counter Strike, and etc. are not MMOG's, they are Multiplayer and online but are not massive...not yet that is. They are Just OG's, MMO's are games where players can login in online and be at one location in a virtual world, with no player restriction, unlike those shooters. 16, 32, and above arent very massive, to what it could be. I think Planetside, lets more then 100 Players be at one location, and the lag isn't that bad. Huxley, I think are attempting to get more then 500 players in 1 area. But seeing in game video's, it just seems like a rip of Unreal Tournament, with a limited player base.
I was ready to disagree with the thread because of the title but after reading, I agree with his points.
I'm not too much of a fan of unlockables either. To the people saying unlockables don't make a difference - well, yes they do. Sure there are many, many times when you (or me, or anyone) has beaten another player who is using a better unlock, while you use only the default gun. That doesn't necessarily mean they make no difference though. Many times, "unlocks" are simply nothing more than a better version of a previous weapon. In Battlefield 2, I think of the G36E as an M16 that is more accurate and does more damage. The L96 does the same damage as an M95, but is more accurate. Let's say two players face off, both have the same health, both shoot each other in the same spot in the chest, but one has an M16 and the other the unlockable G36E. The one with the G36E may kill the other one and survive with low HP, simply because his burst did more damage than his enemy's inferior version of the weapon. In that case, the unlockable made all the difference, even if it did only make him survive by 9 HP.
That said, the unlockables in BF2 don't bother me too much, because for the most part, they don't make TOO much of a huge difference. BF2142 however, I hear you can unlock entirely new equipment, like grenade packs and stamina boost and heavy armor. In my opinion that's getting a little obnoxious. Now instead of a player with an M16 vs a player with a G36E, it's a player with a bunch of "buffs" vs a new player with none. In this case, I agree with the OP. I don't want that trend to continue. I don't want games to allow more and more, and more, and more unlocks. It makes the gap between new and vet players even bigger, and less fun for them. I stopped liking the BF series at BF2142, but what's next then? If they make a "BF3142" for example, looking at the increase in unlockable stuff from the BF2>BF2142 jump, it seems there'd be a lot more in the next one.. It may not be fun for someone if they start playing a new game, and are constantly killed by players who use: unlocked cloaking armor, unlocked speed boots, unlocked tactical shields, unlocked infrared vision goggles (cant hide from them), unlocked sniper rifles.. etc. It wouldn't be fun if you are being beaten because they have played longer than you and have more unlocks - that's why I don't like MMORPGs actually - I don't like being beaten by someone's level or gear
. Having them all accessible, but you can only choose certain ones, is a completely different story. Being able to choose cloak armor, OR infrared goggles for example, may be viable.
THAT said, I think unlocks can work if they aren't overdone. I also am looking forward to more MMOFPS games if they don't overdo the unlockable stuff aspect. If I'm to be beaten by a player, I want to be beaten by the player, not by his gear. I don't think BF2 overdid unlocks. I think BF2142 however, is almost crossing the line, if not already crossing it. The key is moderation. Sure, give players a little extra incentive to do better and reward them with a gun that is a little more accurate or does 5% more damage than the other one or something. But don't overdo it. If an MMOFPS concentrates more on unlocking gear, instead of on balanced, player-skill-based combat, then it's no longer an MMOFPS -- It's an MMORPG
BF2142 unlocks do not change that much of your character and seriously, those unlocks are not long to get. EACH weapons have a downside and good... I personaly use the Voss LR since it's loaded with ammo and accurate in burst.. however, it's the weakest assault gun and the reload times are horrible... enough to get you killed with ease.
The extra stamina is not that EXTRA... and seriously, it keeps the game interesting. It's fun to rank up you know
I really wouldn't call BF2, TF2 and Counterstrike MMOG's. When I think of an MMOG, I think of a world, not just maps that you have to login to. Its a world that you can run around in, it may have load screens but those are just to go from one area to another. The games you mentioned are just online FPS'.
Agreed. Also, the limited amount of players those games have at one time do not come close to "massive". They are multi-player online, not MMO.