This is the kind of player-generated content I used to enjoy back in the MUSH days, and it was happening all around, every day. And it's the kind of thing that I think Trekkies want from a Star Trek game.
I can only repeat what i wrote earlier, I'd love to play a MUSH / Second Life-ish Trek game you've detailed above, filled with Rp and player content. Sounds like a great concept.
(and for the "Heck...how many fan bases can you think of that actually construct a friggin language so that they can LARP as "authentic" Klingons, for Heaven's sake?", for LotR fans luckily Tolkien did the work himself )
I actually think there's a precedent of this type of MMO (Player owns a ship and captains it, other players are crew) that worked, although it was a different environment. Yo Ho Ho Puzzle Pirates had this very setup. Someone who owned a ship could be in a crew and have close friends manning various stations on their ship. They work together plundering the high seas, but the pickup group structure was also very well implemented: You posted a notice that you were taking out X ship on a voyage from island X to island Y. People could request to join you. You get to look at their in game competencies and decide if they want them to join. If so, it was up to you to tell them what station to attend to, etc. If they didn't, you "planked" them and moved on to the next person requesting to join, etc.
To an extent, this type of setup coupled with the fanatical RPers most Trekies tend to be would probably work well. You wouldn't see numbers like the major MMOs, but the player base would be significantly more loyal and long term players. I believe it could garner enough subs or micro transactions (shudder) to make money if implemented right.
I would not play a Star Trek MMO unless it was outrageously good, and I cant see how a Star Trek MMO can ever possibly be outrageously good. Its just not good MMO material. Everyone would want to be starship captain.
I imagine that a full fledge Star Trek sandbox bridge simulator MMO with all the bells and whistles would be an extreme undertaking! To say the least. Would I encourage developers and publishers to make such a game? Yes. However I would encourage more for something NON-MMO and perhaps single player or coop with 2-6 players or so.
To make an MMO is a huge undertaking with network issues that cause lag, player to player balancing, and in general just making the game fun.
While an MMO is ambitious, a smaller game meant for single players offline or online with a small coop of players is much more realistic to succeed and be a huge hit and not a failure in about 6 months to a year after release. Further, with non-mmo's modding can bring in the community to help make the game truly great!
PS: I created an account at this site just to reply to this question.
nah .. if i play a ST game, i want to control my own ship, and certainly don't want other players as my bridge crew (and certainly i am not playing that engineer or weapons officer).
It is a disaster if you think a couple of strangers can coordinate and run a bridge without a lot of bickering and drama.
Heck, a SP RPG will be a better game for me.
For once I agree with Nari. I don't see how it would work with players trying to take the different bridge roles. I mean that could be fun with a group of friends like in almost a pen and paper type setup but trying to co-ordinate it with random MMO people would be a nightmare.
I assumed OP meant every player would be a captain and your crew would be NPCs you could have little dialogues with like SWTOR which is basically what The Mandate will be . I think this is a better idea for a single player RPG or a pen and paper RPG than an MMO.
I'm gonna have to agree with you there, but tenatively so, but do you remember Star Citizen? That game will have strangers in an MMO player together and not everyone will be the coveted captain or other high ranking officer. Star Citizen shows that there is a demand for players that what this sort of interaction of players. I for one do.
Everyone thinks such a game play would never work between strangers who have to coop in an mmo but has anyone tried it? No. I can't name any top games that have. Such a game would bring a relatively untouched type of gameplay that would appeal to many.
I still agree with you but only because pulling it off would be very difficult in a way that would be fun and for other technical reasons I believe a single player or coop with 2-6 players would be optimal for a ST Sandbox bridge simulator.
In regards to combat, because it seems alot of posters dont understand how a bridge simulator works. You are NOT going to see fast paced, "Wing-Commander" space battles.
We are literally talking about two giant Space Tubs slowly working each other's core systems down, till an opening and victory can be achieved. Now in the tactical sense, yes it will be face paced, because much like a competitive MOBA, there would be a huge emphasis on Team Work, Team Comp, and the ability to quickly relay information to support the core Ship systems.
On the outside, your going to see two vessel's barraging each other with lasers, breaking against shields and to be honest it will lack the excitement on the outside. On the inside you have a well of different specialty crew working to keep a ship alive, and furiously focusing on their perspective roles.
So again looking at it, in more of a competitive MOBA sense:
"Roles"
Captain: Literally yells or gives command orders through in game console. As well as having special commands and abilities other crew can not access normally without Captains permission.
Engineer: I put this second because this is essential the "Carry" Role. Where every system is fed back to the engineer, who has to focus on repairing all core systems, from engines to weapons (Support Class).
Weapons Officer: Physically Aim's respective weapons from in game systems, (A direct Combat Class).
Navigation: Manually flies the ship, with special abilities granted at the permission of captain, as well as being a limited combat role.
Tactical Officer: This will double as research as well, giving the the ability to truely "Communicate" with the Captain, and relay import tactical information as received. The Tactical officer can be a debuff/buff role, by gathering tactical information to more effectivly defend or destroy a ship.
A way to work it is that players early on in their advancement stage would be limited to serving on ships and crews, who in turn have an incentive to recruit players to their bridge crew as even a newer player is far better than the standard bridge crew officers. The crew would have access to diffirent skills which complement the overall missions. There would be a huge focus on away missions, and in between flying to places players can engage in a miriad of social activities - crafting, or training, using he holo-deck.
Obviously everyone wants to be a captain, which is the goal of players. And you can pilot a ship without an AI bridge crew, but you'll miss out on the bonuses. Inevitably there will be greater and greater rewards and incentives to pay for highly skilled bridge crew...even if some of them are captains in their own right.
The only problem you'd face is the fact that players won't immidietly be the captain of their own crew, and have that be something they have to earn. Which, with today's instant gratification audience would be hard to do.
I'm gonna have to agree with you there, but tenatively so, but do you remember Star Citizen? That game will have strangers in an MMO player together and not everyone will be the coveted captain or other high ranking officer. Star Citizen shows that there is a demand for players that what this sort of interaction of players. I for one do.
Everyone thinks such a game play would never work between strangers who have to coop in an mmo but has anyone tried it? No. I can't name any top games that have. Such a game would bring a relatively untouched type of gameplay that would appeal to many.
I still agree with you but only because pulling it off would be very difficult in a way that would be fun and for other technical reasons I believe a single player or coop with 2-6 players would be optimal for a ST Sandbox bridge simulator.
The way I understood Star Citizen every one has their own ship a Star Trek game on the other hand would be a military chain of command (because that is what Star Trek uses) It's not everybody does their own thing and you maybe co-operate to take down the bad guy. It's the captain is completely in charge. You follow every order he or she gives. Which could be a fun game if the captain was a friend or a decent person but would be a nightmare if either you got a total douchebag as captain or a crew who didn't want to follow orders.
Yes, not only am I interested but I actualy played it. There is (or was, not sure if it's around anymore) a game called StarQuest Online by Castle Thorne Software. It was pretty much what you described. It was an amazingly ambitious game for such a small design team and did some really novel, interesting and cool things.
Some of the things it did worked really great....and I had some fun playing it for a few months.
However, it was an incredibly buggy game (even by todays standatrd) with a tiny community....pretty unbalanced factions (more because of the demographics of the veteran players then due to anything mechanical).... some bad community drama.... a horribly dated engine.... and some criticaly disasterous design choices that really knee-capped it's future.
It was one of those games that had ratings in some aspects that were 10's and others that were 1's. What it did well, was really great....like the interactive play between the different bridge stations and crew responsabilities on the ship. What it did bad, was absolutely abysmal.
Still worth checking out, if only to see something that is really very, very different from todays typical fare.
I'm gonna have to agree with you there, but tenatively so, but do you remember Star Citizen? That game will have strangers in an MMO player together and not everyone will be the coveted captain or other high ranking officer. Star Citizen shows that there is a demand for players that what this sort of interaction of players. I for one do.
Everyone thinks such a game play would never work between strangers who have to coop in an mmo but has anyone tried it? No. I can't name any top games that have. Such a game would bring a relatively untouched type of gameplay that would appeal to many.
I still agree with you but only because pulling it off would be very difficult in a way that would be fun and for other technical reasons I believe a single player or coop with 2-6 players would be optimal for a ST Sandbox bridge simulator.
The way I understood Star Citizen every one has their own ship a Star Trek game on the other hand would be a military chain of command (because that is what Star Trek uses) It's not everybody does their own thing and you maybe co-operate to take down the bad guy. It's the captain is completely in charge. You follow every order he or she gives. Which could be a fun game if the captain was a friend or a decent person but would be a nightmare if either you got a total douchebag as captain or a crew who didn't want to follow orders.
This is the key problem. Players are not military officers. It would be drama and chaos when the tactical officer want to do his own thing, and the captain is yelling at him. This kind of military co-op just does not work in entertainment products.
And this is assuming you can actually get a couple of players to play your subordinate when most just want to be the captain.
STO has this aspect right. Just make everyone a captain.
Originally posted by iridescence Originally posted by Beatnik59 Here's the thing about Star Trek fans though...they are fanatical roleplayers. They, quite literally, would be so grateful just to be in a StarFleet uniform, they wouldn't even care about being the captain of the ship. Heck...how many fan bases can you think of that actually construct a friggin language so that they can LARP as "authentic" Klingons, for Heaven's sake? I think the problem here for a lot of us is that we are so wedded to this thought that we have to make it like a competition, or like a PvP or PvE combat simulator...mainly because that's all our MMOs have been about. But I think this is the wrong way to approach a Star Trek game like the one we're describing. What Trekkies are hungry for aren't battles, necessarily, but to wear the pointed ears, put on the uniform, go through the Klingon rite of MajQa, have intrigue with the Tal'Shiar and generally just play dress up and make believe. And the reason I know this is because they already do. ..
Yeah, But you're still gonna have to deal with the random group finder putting you under the command of "Captain Pwnsurface" for the next 3 hours which would make it hard to roleplay. I don't see a starship bridge Star Trek MMO working very well but maybe it's a utopian setting that I can actually see a PVE sandbox working without feeling forced or anti-lore. Why would you have a ton of PVP in a Star Trek game unless maybe it was a border region?
Great post Beat; I think RP'n some star trek would actually be a blast.
ROFL Iridescence, I can picture captain kirk calling spock a noob, or booting him from the group when a better geared scientist (data) logged in.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I'm gonna have to agree with you there, but tenatively so, but do you remember Star Citizen? That game will have strangers in an MMO player together and not everyone will be the coveted captain or other high ranking officer. Star Citizen shows that there is a demand for players that what this sort of interaction of players. I for one do.
Everyone thinks such a game play would never work between strangers who have to coop in an mmo but has anyone tried it? No. I can't name any top games that have. Such a game would bring a relatively untouched type of gameplay that would appeal to many.
I still agree with you but only because pulling it off would be very difficult in a way that would be fun and for other technical reasons I believe a single player or coop with 2-6 players would be optimal for a ST Sandbox bridge simulator.
The way I understood Star Citizen every one has their own ship a Star Trek game on the other hand would be a military chain of command (because that is what Star Trek uses) It's not everybody does their own thing and you maybe co-operate to take down the bad guy. It's the captain is completely in charge. You follow every order he or she gives. Which could be a fun game if the captain was a friend or a decent person but would be a nightmare if either you got a total douchebag as captain or a crew who didn't want to follow orders.
This is the key problem. Players are not military officers. It would be drama and chaos when the tactical officer want to do his own thing, and the captain is yelling at him. This kind of military co-op just does not work in entertainment products.
And this is assuming you can actually get a couple of players to play your subordinate when most just want to be the captain.
STO has this aspect right. Just make everyone a captain.
To work well, this sort of game would have to be Guild based. So not the sort of thing you'd likely enjoy, Nari.... more for the sort of folks who do organized raids or like to RP in MUDS/MUSH's or do EVE corps or sandbox players, etc. An entirely different sort of game from your preferences.
Not the biggest segment of the market but I'm sure enough to support a game if the budget isn't crazy. I suspect it would likely be indie, though it would need to be one of the larger, better funded ones. They'd probably not be able to get the actual Star Trek IP, so it'd have to be vaguely Star Trek-like.
While playing the Captain could be fun.... I actualy think most people would NOT want to do it. Just like most people don't really want to be a raid leader or guild officer.... and if it's anything similar to my experience in the much smaller StarQuest Online, it's not a position where you really get much "action"... you spend most of your time trying to coordinate the actions of the other members of your time and give general direction, you are not really doing anything hands on yourself. In that game, the most fun positions in combat are Helm and the Weapons Officer, in exploration it's the Sensors Officer.
You'd also want alot of different things to do besides ship combat, like exploration, away missions, crafting, etc.... really the whole sandbox experience. It really wouldn't be a game for solo'ers or people operating outside a guild... I'm sure there is stuff they could do, like taking out smaller warp-shuttles, mining, and ground missions on colony planets, etc.... but mostly it would be a guild based game for the real meat and potatoes.... I wouldn't see PUGs working out for the ship based stuff.
To work well, this sort of game would have to be Guild based. So not the sort of thing you'd likely enjoy, Nari.... more for the sort of folks who do organized raids or like to RP in MUDS/MUSH's or do EVE corps or sandbox players, etc. An entirely different sort of game from your preferences.
Not the biggest segment of the market but I'm sure enough to support a game if the budget isn't crazy. I suspect it would likely be indie, though it would need to be one of the larger, better funded ones. They'd probably not be able to get the actual Star Trek IP, so it'd have to be vaguely Star Trek-like.
No ... just the logistic component (getting the whole guild to show up) is horrifying to me.
I am sure some want to bother with this kind of things. If they can find enough players, more power to them. But count me out. Plus, i do not think there is enough of a market to fund any sort of decent MMO. A text MUSH ... sure. But that is a tiny segment.
I'm gonna have to agree with you there, but tenatively so, but do you remember Star Citizen? That game will have strangers in an MMO player together and not everyone will be the coveted captain or other high ranking officer. Star Citizen shows that there is a demand for players that what this sort of interaction of players. I for one do.
Everyone thinks such a game play would never work between strangers who have to coop in an mmo but has anyone tried it? No. I can't name any top games that have. Such a game would bring a relatively untouched type of gameplay that would appeal to many.
I still agree with you but only because pulling it off would be very difficult in a way that would be fun and for other technical reasons I believe a single player or coop with 2-6 players would be optimal for a ST Sandbox bridge simulator.
The way I understood Star Citizen every one has their own ship a Star Trek game on the other hand would be a military chain of command (because that is what Star Trek uses) It's not everybody does their own thing and you maybe co-operate to take down the bad guy. It's the captain is completely in charge. You follow every order he or she gives. Which could be a fun game if the captain was a friend or a decent person but would be a nightmare if either you got a total douchebag as captain or a crew who didn't want to follow orders.
This is the key problem. Players are not military officers. It would be drama and chaos when the tactical officer want to do his own thing, and the captain is yelling at him. This kind of military co-op just does not work in entertainment products.
And this is assuming you can actually get a couple of players to play your subordinate when most just want to be the captain.
STO has this aspect right. Just make everyone a captain.
What Gaming World are you living in? Players in Counterstrike are not SWAT members but they play tactics out like they were. Thats the point of video games, and especially RPG's. Your dont need actual experiance with being a military officer to fly a space ship in a star trek game, its not THAT much of a simulator.
What Gaming World are you living in? Players in Counterstrike are not SWAT members but they play tactics out like they were. Thats the point of video games, and especially RPG's. Your dont need actual experiance with being a military officer to fly a space ship in a star trek game, its not THAT much of a simulator.
Lol ... "they play tactics" ... you mean zerging and running around as they wish. And if a "SWAT" leader tries to tell them what to do, you think they will actually follow orders like a SWAT team?
It is not the technical stuff .. it is the following orders. A "player" cap would not be very fun if everything he ask a tactical officer to do is met with drama and "i dun care ..i do it my way".
It is never about complexity. It is about working together. If you believe a random group can work together and follow orders, be my guest ... invest in such a game. I will pass.
Comments
I can only repeat what i wrote earlier, I'd love to play a MUSH / Second Life-ish Trek game you've detailed above, filled with Rp and player content. Sounds like a great concept.
(and for the "Heck...how many fan bases can you think of that actually construct a friggin language so that they can LARP as "authentic" Klingons, for Heaven's sake?", for LotR fans luckily Tolkien did the work himself
)
I actually think there's a precedent of this type of MMO (Player owns a ship and captains it, other players are crew) that worked, although it was a different environment. Yo Ho Ho Puzzle Pirates had this very setup. Someone who owned a ship could be in a crew and have close friends manning various stations on their ship. They work together plundering the high seas, but the pickup group structure was also very well implemented: You posted a notice that you were taking out X ship on a voyage from island X to island Y. People could request to join you. You get to look at their in game competencies and decide if they want them to join. If so, it was up to you to tell them what station to attend to, etc. If they didn't, you "planked" them and moved on to the next person requesting to join, etc.
To an extent, this type of setup coupled with the fanatical RPers most Trekies tend to be would probably work well. You wouldn't see numbers like the major MMOs, but the player base would be significantly more loyal and long term players. I believe it could garner enough subs or micro transactions (shudder) to make money if implemented right.
I imagine that a full fledge Star Trek sandbox bridge simulator MMO with all the bells and whistles would be an extreme undertaking! To say the least. Would I encourage developers and publishers to make such a game? Yes. However I would encourage more for something NON-MMO and perhaps single player or coop with 2-6 players or so.
To make an MMO is a huge undertaking with network issues that cause lag, player to player balancing, and in general just making the game fun.
While an MMO is ambitious, a smaller game meant for single players offline or online with a small coop of players is much more realistic to succeed and be a huge hit and not a failure in about 6 months to a year after release. Further, with non-mmo's modding can bring in the community to help make the game truly great!
PS: I created an account at this site just to reply to this question.
I'm gonna have to agree with you there, but tenatively so, but do you remember Star Citizen? That game will have strangers in an MMO player together and not everyone will be the coveted captain or other high ranking officer. Star Citizen shows that there is a demand for players that what this sort of interaction of players. I for one do.
Everyone thinks such a game play would never work between strangers who have to coop in an mmo but has anyone tried it? No. I can't name any top games that have. Such a game would bring a relatively untouched type of gameplay that would appeal to many.
I still agree with you but only because pulling it off would be very difficult in a way that would be fun and for other technical reasons I believe a single player or coop with 2-6 players would be optimal for a ST Sandbox bridge simulator.
In regards to combat, because it seems alot of posters dont understand how a bridge simulator works. You are NOT going to see fast paced, "Wing-Commander" space battles.
We are literally talking about two giant Space Tubs slowly working each other's core systems down, till an opening and victory can be achieved. Now in the tactical sense, yes it will be face paced, because much like a competitive MOBA, there would be a huge emphasis on Team Work, Team Comp, and the ability to quickly relay information to support the core Ship systems.
On the outside, your going to see two vessel's barraging each other with lasers, breaking against shields and to be honest it will lack the excitement on the outside. On the inside you have a well of different specialty crew working to keep a ship alive, and furiously focusing on their perspective roles.
So again looking at it, in more of a competitive MOBA sense:
"Roles"
Captain: Literally yells or gives command orders through in game console. As well as having special commands and abilities other crew can not access normally without Captains permission.
Engineer: I put this second because this is essential the "Carry" Role. Where every system is fed back to the engineer, who has to focus on repairing all core systems, from engines to weapons (Support Class).
Weapons Officer: Physically Aim's respective weapons from in game systems, (A direct Combat Class).
Navigation: Manually flies the ship, with special abilities granted at the permission of captain, as well as being a limited combat role.
Tactical Officer: This will double as research as well, giving the the ability to truely "Communicate" with the Captain, and relay import tactical information as received. The Tactical officer can be a debuff/buff role, by gathering tactical information to more effectivly defend or destroy a ship.
A way to work it is that players early on in their advancement stage would be limited to serving on ships and crews, who in turn have an incentive to recruit players to their bridge crew as even a newer player is far better than the standard bridge crew officers. The crew would have access to diffirent skills which complement the overall missions. There would be a huge focus on away missions, and in between flying to places players can engage in a miriad of social activities - crafting, or training, using he holo-deck.
Obviously everyone wants to be a captain, which is the goal of players. And you can pilot a ship without an AI bridge crew, but you'll miss out on the bonuses. Inevitably there will be greater and greater rewards and incentives to pay for highly skilled bridge crew...even if some of them are captains in their own right.
The only problem you'd face is the fact that players won't immidietly be the captain of their own crew, and have that be something they have to earn. Which, with today's instant gratification audience would be hard to do.
The way I understood Star Citizen every one has their own ship a Star Trek game on the other hand would be a military chain of command (because that is what Star Trek uses) It's not everybody does their own thing and you maybe co-operate to take down the bad guy. It's the captain is completely in charge. You follow every order he or she gives. Which could be a fun game if the captain was a friend or a decent person but would be a nightmare if either you got a total douchebag as captain or a crew who didn't want to follow orders.
Yes, not only am I interested but I actualy played it. There is (or was, not sure if it's around anymore) a game called StarQuest Online by Castle Thorne Software. It was pretty much what you described. It was an amazingly ambitious game for such a small design team and did some really novel, interesting and cool things.
Some of the things it did worked really great....and I had some fun playing it for a few months.
However, it was an incredibly buggy game (even by todays standatrd) with a tiny community....pretty unbalanced factions (more because of the demographics of the veteran players then due to anything mechanical).... some bad community drama.... a horribly dated engine.... and some criticaly disasterous design choices that really knee-capped it's future.
It was one of those games that had ratings in some aspects that were 10's and others that were 1's. What it did well, was really great....like the interactive play between the different bridge stations and crew responsabilities on the ship. What it did bad, was absolutely abysmal.
Still worth checking out, if only to see something that is really very, very different from todays typical fare.
This is the key problem. Players are not military officers. It would be drama and chaos when the tactical officer want to do his own thing, and the captain is yelling at him. This kind of military co-op just does not work in entertainment products.
And this is assuming you can actually get a couple of players to play your subordinate when most just want to be the captain.
STO has this aspect right. Just make everyone a captain.
Great post Beat; I think RP'n some star trek would actually be a blast.
ROFL Iridescence, I can picture captain kirk calling spock a noob, or booting him from the group when a better geared scientist (data) logged in.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
To work well, this sort of game would have to be Guild based. So not the sort of thing you'd likely enjoy, Nari.... more for the sort of folks who do organized raids or like to RP in MUDS/MUSH's or do EVE corps or sandbox players, etc. An entirely different sort of game from your preferences.
Not the biggest segment of the market but I'm sure enough to support a game if the budget isn't crazy. I suspect it would likely be indie, though it would need to be one of the larger, better funded ones. They'd probably not be able to get the actual Star Trek IP, so it'd have to be vaguely Star Trek-like.
While playing the Captain could be fun.... I actualy think most people would NOT want to do it. Just like most people don't really want to be a raid leader or guild officer.... and if it's anything similar to my experience in the much smaller StarQuest Online, it's not a position where you really get much "action"... you spend most of your time trying to coordinate the actions of the other members of your time and give general direction, you are not really doing anything hands on yourself. In that game, the most fun positions in combat are Helm and the Weapons Officer, in exploration it's the Sensors Officer.
You'd also want alot of different things to do besides ship combat, like exploration, away missions, crafting, etc.... really the whole sandbox experience. It really wouldn't be a game for solo'ers or people operating outside a guild... I'm sure there is stuff they could do, like taking out smaller warp-shuttles, mining, and ground missions on colony planets, etc.... but mostly it would be a guild based game for the real meat and potatoes.... I wouldn't see PUGs working out for the ship based stuff.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
No ... just the logistic component (getting the whole guild to show up) is horrifying to me.
I am sure some want to bother with this kind of things. If they can find enough players, more power to them. But count me out. Plus, i do not think there is enough of a market to fund any sort of decent MMO. A text MUSH ... sure. But that is a tiny segment.
What Gaming World are you living in? Players in Counterstrike are not SWAT members but they play tactics out like they were. Thats the point of video games, and especially RPG's. Your dont need actual experiance with being a military officer to fly a space ship in a star trek game, its not THAT much of a simulator.
Lol ... "they play tactics" ... you mean zerging and running around as they wish. And if a "SWAT" leader tries to tell them what to do, you think they will actually follow orders like a SWAT team?
It is not the technical stuff .. it is the following orders. A "player" cap would not be very fun if everything he ask a tactical officer to do is met with drama and "i dun care ..i do it my way".
It is never about complexity. It is about working together. If you believe a random group can work together and follow orders, be my guest ... invest in such a game. I will pass.