Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Perhaps it is the $12.99/month for no new content w/o an expansion, and the same type of gameplay over...and over...and over again. Planetside was fun for a month, but got tiring as it just became a zerg-fest with very little coordination. And for the money you were paying you got absolutely no new content from the game unless you bought an expansion. Plus the inaccuracy of the weapons in Planetside made BF2's cone of fire look tight.

You also forget there is no way to "win" an MMO, no matter what your team cannot win. Sure they can lock down a continent, but they will never truly beat the other team. Meanwhile in the BF series part of the game is winning the map.

Please tell me what you will gain from BF3 being a MMOFPS?

all your complaints have more to do with the execution of the MMOFPS genre and SOE's clear failures. Consider a round of Karkand a skirmish. a War the scale of WW2 had thousands of skirmishes across dozens of locations... win some lose some. It would be no different in an MMOFPS based on BF2 and it was no different in Planetside. if Karkand, Mashtuur, Sharqi, Warlord, Jalalabad and 5 other massive maps were combined into one massive "Iraq" map and each one was its own command point where once one team locked down that point they got the benefits of, say a sea-port or an airfield, or an armor factory... they could use the assets of that city to help win the overall battle-de-jour in the Iraq map.


Pretty much every game you play more than once is repetative, basically. Karkand got repetative the first day I got the game... same with all the other maps.

If they were compiled into a persistent world where land was battled for and the front-lines of the war moved day-to-day... thats epic.

if the concept is lost on you and you dwell in the execution of past attempts, you need to shake off the cobwebs and try to get a little more positive of an outlook.

Cheers.

The future of games is much more than 32 on 32 2-sided deathmatch on small maps like Karkand.

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Imagine how laggy it will be. How many times it will crash. how many bugs there will be. All the hacks that will come out for it. Stats padding will somehow be created.

Too many problems EA apparently can't fix, so why start something new when they havn't finished something already started?

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

errrrr can we just get bf2 sorted first guys eh?

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

any reason for that objection or do you just fear the "MMO" label?

Perhaps it is the $12.99/month for no new content w/o an expansion, and the same type of gameplay over...and over...and over again. Planetside was fun for a month, but got tiring as it just became a zerg-fest with very little coordination. And for the money you were paying you got absolutely no new content from the game unless you bought an expansion. Plus the inaccuracy of the weapons in Planetside made BF2's cone of fire look tight.

You also forget there is no way to "win" an MMO, no matter what your team cannot win. Sure they can lock down a continent, but they will never truly beat the other team. Meanwhile in the BF series part of the game is winning the map.

Please tell me what you will gain from BF3 being a MMOFPS?

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

WWIIonline tried this and failed miserably... But thats all you can expect from backyard Dev's.. Huxley is an upcoming MMOFPS, but it uses the unreal 3 engine, So i am a little reserved about it but, Like you, I have always had that same dream, it just hasn't happened yet... GTA MMOFPS is also something i wanna see, but i fear it will be 5 years or so before we see anything like that..Oh well

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Oh God, please no

any reason for that objection or do you just fear the "MMO" label?

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Oh God, please no

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

The should just remake BF1942 but 500x better and bigger
100 different vehicals
100's of different weapons
1000's of other items
That would be the best game ever.
only need like 3 maps, a map of western europe, the pacific and russia

and make it with as good of grafics as the BF1942 intro movie(almost crysis)
that would sell like furbys

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

I guess I would have to pony up the $$ if this ever happend, I would like to see it start back in WW2 though, and fight for control of eroupe and eventually add the pacific, the WW3 option would be a close second followed by a 2142 type war, but maybe not that far into the future something like 2042.

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Would you pay $10/month to play it? That's the hurdle that most people struggle with. The server farms and hardware maintenance on a system that big cost a fair amount of money and any game with "MMO" in the name generally have some form of subscription fees.

I know I'd pay it, I have in the past.

BzA
BR20 CR5
Retired Leader of GOTR
VS: Emerald

I miss it so...

Ufff it's probably a very good idea for hardcore gamers... but i'm afraid that 6 hours a week players as me wouldn't like this... we would be in great disadvantage.

In Bf2 the unlocks give you more tools to play, but it doesn't give you so much advantage over players without unlocks. With a MMORPH that would change dramaticly (sorry, i'm native spanish).

You really wouldnt be at any disadvantage the way I see it.

Your first few "levels" come pretty quick. You'd have 10 cert points to spend before you know it. You could get an aircraft certification, a land vehicle certification and a couple weapon certifications and you could be a very formitable enemy.

Besides, as you go, your progress is saved on their servers so you are always building on your past experience.

Its an awesome system that EA/Dice could springboard off of.


I think its really cool that so many people enjoy the concept.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

You clearly never played Planetside.

As a player gains battlefield experience from killing enemies, destroying vehicles and capturing bases, they increase in "Battle Rank". Each new "Battle Rank" is rewarded with a single "Certification point". You can spend your certification points on additional weapon groups and armor configurations. ALso, you can spend cert points on vehicles.

Say, I'm Battle Rank 6. That means I've got 2 cert points from when I started and 6 additional ones. 8 cert points. I could spend 3 on Heavy armor if I want to be a ground-pounder, 2 on a light vehicle certification and 3 more on Heavy Assault (weapons).

The combat interface does not change as you "level up", nor does your accuracy, hit points or anything else like that. If you spend cert points on Sniping, you get access to the sniper rifle, if you spend cert points on armor, you get access to heavy battle tanks, if you spend cert points on medium assault, you get access to an array of assault rifles and like weapons.

You dont get to spend points in "accuracy" of build up atributes like "Agility" and "Strength". The combat and character development is pure FPS learning curve. A level 1 newb with tight FPS skills has every chance of killing a level 20, his choice of weapons is just narrower. It's basically just like BF2 but in a persistent world with maps that are 10 times as big with teams of 300 instead of 32.

Holy crap! I was thinking that this thing could be too addictive with no actual reason. But this actually sounds extremely awesome!

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Ufff it's probably a very good idea for hardcore gamers... but i'm afraid that 6 hours a week players as me wouldn't like this... we would be in great disadvantage.

In Bf2 the unlocks give you more tools to play, but it doesn't give you so much advantage over players without unlocks. With a MMORPH that would change dramaticly (sorry, i'm native spanish).

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

That sounds so bad ***. I want it now!

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Sorry but I don't want to see that or think about that. BF series is my favourite FPS series and I don't want them to make my accuracy, skill,...etc. depend on some stupid skill points.

You clearly never played Planetside.

As a player gains battlefield experience from killing enemies, destroying vehicles and capturing bases, they increase in "Battle Rank". Each new "Battle Rank" is rewarded with a single "Certification point". You can spend your certification points on additional weapon groups and armor configurations. ALso, you can spend cert points on vehicles.

Say, I'm Battle Rank 6. That means I've got 2 cert points from when I started and 6 additional ones. 8 cert points. I could spend 3 on Heavy armor if I want to be a ground-pounder, 2 on a light vehicle certification and 3 more on Heavy Assault (weapons).

The combat interface does not change as you "level up", nor does your accuracy, hit points or anything else like that. If you spend cert points on Sniping, you get access to the sniper rifle, if you spend cert points on armor, you get access to heavy battle tanks, if you spend cert points on medium assault, you get access to an array of assault rifles and like weapons.

You dont get to spend points in "accuracy" of build up atributes like "Agility" and "Strength". The combat and character development is pure FPS learning curve. A level 1 newb with tight FPS skills has every chance of killing a level 20, his choice of weapons is just narrower. It's basically just like BF2 but in a persistent world with maps that are 10 times as big with teams of 300 instead of 32.

Re: Battlefield 3, the MMOFPS.

Would we have to raid to get phat lewtz? Anyhow, World of Starcraft is going to be the closest thing you're looking for.