PDA

View Full Version : MMOFPS?


pingu2
08-14-08, 09:43 AM
was thinking today how much I used to love Planetside and wondering if there are any MMOFPS coming along soon.. I know that Huxley is in beta at the moment, but the battles there are only 60v60 max .. does anyone know of a FPS game in development with more epic PVP (say 200v200)?

even with the bugs that planetside had, it was still an amazing experience at times when you got in a close battle with 100+ players per side that raged over a continent for hours.. even with such large numbers, 1 player could make a difference by doing the right thing at the right time.. such a shame that it didnt't get the support it needed and faded away..

|MaguS|
08-14-08, 09:54 AM
Sony has a new game in development for the PS3 (MAG) but other then that I don't see any other MMOFPS in the works. Don't know what the genre never took off.

Tr1cK
08-14-08, 09:56 AM
200v200 seems pretty insane for any FPS, much less a MMO one.

nemecb
08-14-08, 11:35 AM
Don't know what the genre never took off.
Assuming you meant "Don't know why...";)

It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, given today's internet situation to do an FPS as an MMO. WoW gets away with having as many players as it does because it can do some creative things to reduce the amount of updates that actually get sent, but many of those things don't work for an FPS where you need more accurate player positions and such. Even MAG, from what I understand, is going to be a bunch of smaller battles happening at the same time on the same map, but separate so you won't actually ever have all 200+ players in the same place at the same time.

Bman212121
08-14-08, 11:43 AM
Don't forget about Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising. If I'm not mistaken that game had the ability to have 150 players on a server. As long as everyone isn't in the same area it should be doable.


But developer and publisher NovaLogic throws in a lot of new features to differentiate Joint Operations from the competition, and some of these features are quite innovative and exciting. There's the fact that the game can support up to 150 players per server, which is significantly greater than what the Battlefield games can support.


http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/jointoperations/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=tabs&tag=tabs;reviews

CaptNKILL
08-14-08, 12:02 PM
Assuming you meant "Don't know why...";)

It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, given today's internet situation to do an FPS as an MMO. WoW gets away with having as many players as it does because it can do some creative things to reduce the amount of updates that actually get sent, but many of those things don't work for an FPS where you need more accurate player positions and such. Even MAG, from what I understand, is going to be a bunch of smaller battles happening at the same time on the same map, but separate so you won't actually ever have all 200+ players in the same place at the same time.

The only way I can see an FPS being able to handle 200+ players in the same place at the same time on the same server would be if the net code was only as complex as the old Half-Life code.

I played TFC, HL DM, Firearms and CS with 24-32 players on a 24.6k dialup connection back in 2000 with no real problems.

Whatever is being done in modern games over the internet will never work with hundreds of players.

Kaguya
08-14-08, 12:08 PM
Huxley (http://www.huxleygame.com/) is still slated to come out sometime this year and it's touted as an MMOFPS - though not sure if they'll have 200v200 matches.

pingu2
08-14-08, 12:27 PM
The only way I can see an FPS being able to handle 200+ players in the same place at the same time on the same server would be if the net code was only as complex as the old Half-Life code.

I played TFC, HL DM, Firearms and CS with 24-32 players on a 24.6k dialup connection back in 2000 with no real problems.

Whatever is being done in modern games over the internet will never work with hundreds of players.

well Planetside (just about) managed it and surely things have moved on in the last 4 years? I don't really thing there is much more data that needs to be sent in "modern games" than in CS..

Huxley is still slated to come out sometime this year and it's touted as an MMOFPS - though not sure if they'll have 200v200 matches.

I did mention Huxley in my original post - as far as i know the largest battles are 60v60.. still it could be a step up in terms of making more epic pvp battles...

hadn't heard of MAG but it does look interesting - pity it's PS3, surely this is something a PC can handle better...

Kaguya
08-14-08, 12:33 PM
well Planetside (just about) managed it and surely things have moved on in the last 4 years? I don't really thing there is much more data that needs to be sent in "modern games" than in CS..



I did mention Huxley in my original post - as far as i know the largest battles are 60v60.. still it could be a step up in terms of making more epic pvp battles...

hadn't heard of MAG but it does look interesting - pity it's PS3, surely this is something a PC can handle better...

I think we'll need to see games like Huxley and MAG succeed before any others will come. Standard Multiplayer FPS's are cheap for devs because they don't have to host the servers... but large epic battles require them to pony up money for giant servers with the capacity to calculate 400 simultaneous headshots (should that ever happen). That could be quite a feat.

CaptNKILL
08-14-08, 12:43 PM
well Planetside (just about) managed it and surely things have moved on in the last 4 years? I don't really thing there is much more data that needs to be sent in "modern games" than in CS..


Older games like Half-Life and Planetside supported dialup. Most newer games are unplayable with dialup.

That's what I meant...

An older style of netcode would be required for something like this to work. I don't hear of many (any?) people playing CoD4 or TF2 on dialup, yet older games that were still fairly complex worked fine on even a poor dialup connection.

Tr1cK
08-14-08, 12:48 PM
I'm really anxious for Huxley.

nemecb
08-14-08, 12:50 PM
I always wonder how well those old games actually worked though. Maybe everybody just tolerated the problems because it was the best they could do.:)

CaptNKILL
08-14-08, 12:55 PM
I always wonder how well those old games actually worked though. Maybe everybody just tolerated the problems because it was the best they could do.:)

I don't know. Half-Life mods (not so much the standard deathmatch) had some pretty smooth netcode from what I remember, and I didn't get cable internet until 2001 or 2002.

nV`andrew
08-14-08, 01:29 PM
Aw I miss Planetside, that game was a lot of fun.
What happened to that spy vs. mercenaries MMO ''The Agency'' or whateveR?

jeffmd
08-14-08, 02:30 PM
MMOFPS are very possible.. but you generaly need to embrace the requirements current FPS games hold dear.. and kick those with high pings!

Why planetside ultimatly failed (I loved the game lots.. but it also pissed me off to no end)

... 3 factions with each faction having access to vastly unique weapons, some involving lockon targeting which removes skill.

... The server system is made by the good ole makers of everquest, which was very robust against lag and thus didn't have the sharp response FPS games need. It also had poor collision detection because EQ didn't have any (The infamous monsters walking through walls problems was caused because the server dosnt see walls, instead it is supposed to stuck to pathing routes which guides the mob around virtual walls).

... pricing, 15 bucks a month is hard to swallow for FPS fans, the only reason EQ and WoW managed to keep people playing that long is they added new content. That didn't happen with planetside as much as it should have.

... The need to gain experience and level up in order to gain access to weapons and armor types. Its one thing to open access to elite weapons through killing, but imagin not gaining access to the rocket launcher in Unreal untill you killed 30 people? Or not being able to pickup armor shards untill youve killed ANOTHER 30 after that?

... ultimate scaled its gameplay around the fact people would be lagged, rather then getting rid of people who lagged.