Large Scale PvP

[Amphiron]

The problem with having the world as a huge battlezone is that it would require more then a super computer to register all the hits and misses. Having battlezones really would be the only way to make a MMOFPS actually work am I correct?

[Zootch]

not necessarily...

My question is if the game is heavily MMO, will this discourage people from doing anything risky for fear of losing items or massive amounts of experience?

[Grind]

Originally Posted by Zootch

not necessarily...

My question is if the game is heavily MMO, will this discourage people from doing anything risky for fear of losing items or massive amounts of experience?

It's not going to be like a hardcore MMO. Since it's a first person shooter people are going to be dieing a lot so yeah your right, nobody would do anything if there was a fear of losing gear and exp. when you died lol.

I believe what the devs have said so far about death is that you simply respawn (in about 4-5 seconds from what the videos have shown), and in an interview I read that you'll get a small armor penalty. So basically what I got from it is, when you die your armor gets some wear and tear, and I'm assuming if you die enough you'll have to go repair it and then get back into the fight (unless of course you wanted to fight with no armor lol).

I think this game will be focused more on intense and fun FPS action, while still having some RPG elements like crafting and trading. (though I don't know if crafting items has been confirmed yet)

[eclipsedmind]

i think battles are just massive and i mean massive unreal tournie matches in more complicated ways

[Grind]

yeah the battles will be big. I'm just saying you won't lose anything too important when you die. After all if you lost a bunch of exp. or something, and this being an FPS, everyone would be stuck at lvl 1 forever lol

[Zootch]

will the wear-and-tear affect the quality of protection, or do you think it will be a stale number unless it gets below, like 10%?

[eclipsedmind]

now its sounding like an mix of oblivion,unreal tournie and run and gun action its sound pretty bad with armour wear and tear it may work but it should matter one the quality of your armour like the beat aromur is alot more resistant ,the "plasma"like one is resistant to energy weapons and the large bulky metal one is resistant to bullets rather than energy weapons

[Grind]

I don't know if there are going to be different armor types (like energy based armor and stuff like that). From all the screenshots and videos I've seen the only armor is the basic armor (made of metal I guess?) so I'm assuming they won't have any added resistances to certain weapons. I'm guessing the weapons will work a lot like UT and quake as in they all do different damage and all have better or worse accuracy and different rates of fire. The only thing making you more resistant to the weapons would probably be if you have bigger armor (such as if you're an enforcer with the heaviest armor, you'll take less damage than a phantom with the lightest armor)

I don't think wear and tear will be much of a problem just because it's a simple system and should be easy to fix when you die one too many times.

About armor not working as well when it is damaged. I'm not sure if the interview said anything about the wear and tear effecting how the armor performs (I read it a while ago and I don't have time to find it right now). I guess it would be ok either way. Maybe when you die the peice of armor that took the most hits will get the most wear and tear so maybe that peice of armor will get down to 0% and then won't be able to function anymore. Then eventually if all your armor gets to 0% you don't get any armor bonus at all. That's just one way they could do it though.

[Phatal FaZe]

Sounds delicious :D

[andy24]

from what i am reading this is turning into a planetside. where the cites were safe zones and everywhere else is fairgame.

think about it... MMOFPS with a taste of RPG
also 3 arimies fighting for control

brings baks some great memoiries

[Skaterepp]

Originally Posted by Lem3nt

I think the Game Designers know what they are doing. Free all out open world PVP with guns is probly not the best thing.:*(

yes it is.... take a look at planetside.

[Grind]

Planetside wasn't a complete open world though was it? I only played it for a little bit, but I seem to remember that a battle could get full and I couldn't join it anymore. Maybe I'm thinking of something else. But still the planets where separated basically like different servers of a regular FPS, it just didn't seem like it because you traveled to those planets instead of clicking on a server name.

I hope Huxley does something similar so it seems as open world as possible.

[DeadTOm]

Originally Posted by Grind

Planetside wasn't a complete open world though was it? I only played it for a little bit, but I seem to remember that a battle could get full and I couldn't join it anymore.

Yes, the battles could fill up but that was at 150 people to each army, so a full battle meant 350 players in the same battle. It was awesome. Plain old FPS has never been the same for me since. That was what, 5 years ago?
I don't see how they could do it without some kind of player cap on the battles. The more players duking it out together, the harder the server (or farm in this case) would have to work and they've only got so much umph to them. The wisest thing to do is estimate what the maximum load could be then put the cap well below that so when the cap is reached it's still well within the server's capabilities to keep the battle running smoothly.
A lot of advances have been made in the industry since Planetside so it's entirely possible that the devs could make that cap quite a bit higher for Huxley. There will have to be a cap and that's fine with me because I'd rather have a 400 player battle that runs smoothly than a 1000 player battle that jumps and clips like hell.

[Grind]

Originally Posted by DeadTOm

Yes, the battles could fill up but that was at 150 people to each army, so a full battle meant 350 players in the same battle. It was awesome. Plain old FPS has never been the same for me since. That was what, 5 years ago?
I don't see how they could do it without some kind of player cap on the battles. The more players duking it out together, the harder the server (or farm in this case) would have to work and they've only got so much umph to them. The wisest thing to do is estimate what the maximum load could be then put the cap well below that so when the cap is reached it's still well within the server's capabilities to keep the battle running smoothly.
A lot of advances have been made in the industry since Planetside so it's entirely possible that the devs could make that cap quite a bit higher for Huxley. There will have to be a cap and that's fine with me because I'd rather have a 400 player battle that runs smoothly than a 1000 player battle that jumps and clips like hell.

Webzen did say that they experimented with a lot of different numbers of players. And that they could go over 100 vs 100 battles but they found that 100 vs 100 was the most fun.

I'm sure they have the technology to do much more since there are already MMORPGs that have WAY bigger battles.

[DeadTOm]

I remember reading that. 100 vs 100 would be fun. I suppose it all depends on the size of the battle field. In PS you had the entire continent to battle on even though the battles tended to take place only in certain key areas. But when the cap was reached it locked the whole continent. Well at first they were continents, after the Aftershock expansion the continents became planets all by them selves but anyway...
If you've got a massive number of players battling it out in a relatively small space it would just be crowded and frustratingly chaotic with players doing little more than dying almost immediately after spawning.
Regarding the comparison to MMORPG's, that's a whole different ball game. I don't think you'll ever see those kinds of numbers in an FPS because RPG's are a much less chaotic and much slower paced than FPS's. Sure there is a lot for the server to keep track of but not at the same frantic pace that it would with an FPS battle. But still, point taken. It wouldn't surprise me to see the cap moved higher later on down the road in some form of expansion or something.
While I certainly miss PS in it's glory days, Huxley appears as though it will be it's own game and I'm excited to see how it turns out. Perhaps they'll get it right and we'll finally get what we're looking for in an MMOFPS.

[molly]

Originally Posted by Zootch

not necessarily...

My question is if the game is heavily MMO, will this discourage people from doing anything risky for fear of losing items or massive amounts of experience?

I'd rather have significant penalties for losing. Otherwise it takes the flavor out of winning, and death is pointless (like in most mmos). "Oh shit died, be back in five mins." But since it's a mmofps and you're going to die more often than a mmorpg, penalty should be for losing the battle, not so much for individual deaths.

[Decent_xVICIOUSx]

Well in the huxley beta vids the battles looked pretty intense people had sum skills and i didnt see very many spots for campers snipers etc... so close combat is a must

[Uxmal]

I have seen a few ingame videos of Huxley and it seems to have the same fast paced gameplay that planetside had when it was all three factions fighting for the same base. It looked to me like it gets your adrenalin flowing like a good FPS, but to top it off its a MMOFPS so you know there is always going to be SOMETHING happening somewhere.

WoW = MMORPG
Huxley = MMOFPS

cant be compared and also WoW isnt a great MMORPG it just launched at the right time when there was nothing out there to counter it + working for GAME UK it was funny to see how many parents buying it for their 12 year olds compared to what did EQ2 for instance.

Btw Buzzcutpsycho you the same as in Pside?