MASSIVE Multiplayer Online Gaming

135 posts

Flag Post

To save some time (and questions previously answered) Im just going to copy and paste:

“Imagine a WW2 MMO, but not 8 vs 8, but 20,000 vs 20,000. We have 10 times that many players playing COD at one moment, it can work, we’d just need better tech (which we can already have).

But imagine a simulation of WW2, hundreds flying fighter planes, bombers, paratroopers, dozens of small ground battles occurring and/or one huge battle (like Normandy) 30 people in a submarine commanding it, battleships dueling it out, all during on huge battle in a map 100 actually miles in diameter (or more).

Well I was thinking having hundreds, but maybe on certain days (where there is a high amount of people online – like saturdays and sundays) have a huge battle option. Or maybe on the dates of specific battles have recreations of them (but the players collective ability still decides which side wins) and it could stop there, or maybe it can keep going and rewrite history.

There are lots of options with this, but people will work together if you make the game play work with that. COD and many other games give kill assist points to you for working together, but more complex things would be squad based systems, where you work in a small team (and get rewarded for it – i e, kill assists, helping teammates, healing them, ect) and on the huge map, maybe your objective is “Capture Omaha Beach” ect. Maybe even these objectives could be decided by a “Commander/s” who is in RTS mode and sends squads on different priority missions. The Commanders could be decided by the players skill in being commander, but I think it would be useful for the troops to be able to rate how good of a commander that said person is and having the ability to demote them if necessary.

And also, no join mid combat. By that I mean if there is a battle taking place that’s 120 vs 95, a soldier cant join the war and be placed directly in that battle (like just teleport onto the battlefield somewhere). On the other hand however, if a commander still has lets say 200 troop “tickets” at his disposal. He can send a squad or two wherever, just like in real war, mid battle soldiers can paratroop onto the field. These soldiers could of just joined the game and were spectating fora few seconds until their squad got airlifted onto a battlefield.

As Jabor said there will be no large amount of guys running out of a tiny bunker. Bunkers would have a set troop limit (a realistic limit too) and reinforcements would be paratrooped, by boats (like in Normandy) and by other means. No instaspawns.

Also game objectives can change mid combat, you can be fighting to capture a bunker and the commander can tell you to retreat and help bravo company with capturing the munitions depot. ect.

I am serious about this, I really want to develop such a game in the future, so no, I did not make this in SD on accident

Discuss! (feel free to give your own ideas as well!)

 
Flag Post

Well for starters, good luck getting together a group of 40,000 players…

And then good luck getting those 40,000 people into positions in which they’re happy. Everyone’s gonna want tanks/bombers/whatever. No one is gonna wanna be a foot soldier or anything of that nature.

I just don’t see large groups working. Even something like 50 against 50 would be hard to coordinate…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Frogmanex:

Well for starters, good luck getting together a group of 40,000 players…

And then good luck getting those 40,000 people into positions in which they’re happy. Everyone’s gonna want tanks/bombers/whatever. No one is gonna wanna be a foot soldier or anything of that nature.

I just don’t see large groups working. Even something like 50 against 50 would be hard to coordinate…

Well it is really someone preference. Since FPS are more popular, the amount of foot soldiers wont be hard to come by. And if someone wants to be a fighter pilot they can go right ahead and join a game with open slots for pilots. Also giving achievement points for all the classes (10 kill streak as soldier, 3 bombers destroyed in a row as fighter pilot, ect) would even it out and make people more enticed to play around with all the classes.

 
Flag Post

I know there have been a few games like this before. not on the scale you’re describing, of course, but similar.

For one thing, I honestly don’t think that WW2 is that good a field for the kind of game you’re describing. I think WW1 would actually be a better setting, because there was much more actual interaction (in the trench warfare). WW2 was all about sweeping campaigns that would cover massive amounts of territory over the course of a few days. WW1 would be better suited for the sort of back and forth battling that you would expect from an MMO game.

WW2 does allow for better aerial and naval combat, though, so there is some definite allure to it.

 
Flag Post

Hmmm, interesting idea, though you may be smart about the putting in SD, I don’t think the programming/designing areas will offer much.

Regardless see

M.A.G. or Massive Action Game

Anyways, a good vehicle system, several diffrent factions
Mercenarys able to be hired. A realisitc system of physics, there were way to many people in game that would simply calculate how far it is to throw a grenaide to kill an enitre team for 5 instant kills.

 
Flag Post

I think one game to consider looking at is EVE Online, which (from what I’ve heard) has a massive level of player autonomy, and a “realistic” leveling system, which means that it takes a long time as a captain before you’re able to hop into the cockpits of the bigger spaceships. It also proves that the idea of working your way up from grunt to admiral is one that works, if executed well.

 
Flag Post

Hmm, WW1 is intresting :)

I didnt want to say Sci Fi, becuase the limits would be endless. You could just spawn anywhere on the map (like in games today, where you just appear) and it would be called “teleporting”. I want it realistic, even more than COD.

btw, is MAG a BattleField 2 sequel, or a rip off (I see it looks like it is using the same engine and vechicles, hmm it is from the same main company..)

 
Flag Post

The limits would be whatever you made them to be. If your futuristic “sci-fi” society didn’t know how to teleport or ‘respawn’, then the bastards can’t respawn. It’s a gamemaker’s prerogative.

 
Flag Post

Ah, sorry, I didn’t mean looking at EVE as a setting for your game. I was more thinking about the mechanics of the EVE universe, like the player controlled economy, and the way you have to work yourself up from scratch in order to get a reputation. I think it would compare to a war game quite well.

Imagine forcing generals to influence weapon construction and budget management. That would probably be a bad idea, but the thought of it amuses me :P

 
Flag Post

It’s been done, a game called “Planetside”, people did indeed do the infantry thing, some did vehicle combat, some aerial combat, some snipers, some assault etc.

 
Flag Post
Imagine a WW2 MMO, but not 8 vs 8, but 20,000 vs 20,000. We have 10 times that many players playing COD at one moment, it can work, we’d just need better tech (which we can already have)

With CoD, its not all on one server, its 10,000+ separate servers. One of the big hurdles with having 20,000 vs 20,000 is the amount and cost of the technology. Can you imagine the lag?

I think no respawning would make it more realistic, plus add the feeling that if you die, you’re done.

Its a good idea, but I don’t think the players will be too happy about it. Being able to respawn after dying is the sort of thing players like, IMO.

 
Flag Post

As long as once I die, I can join into another game right away, I don’t mind the “one kill, you’re out” rule.

The problem then becomes that if the games are too large or require complex planning to set up… I can’t immediately join a new game, which would make me =\.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Frogmanex:

As long as once I die, I can join into another game right away, I don’t mind the “one kill, you’re out” rule.

The problem then becomes that if the games are too large or require complex planning to set up… I can’t immediately join a new game, which would make me =\.

Yea, thats why I decided there is respawning, but not just Appearing into a random place in the map.

Read on to the whole squad based spawning.

 
Flag Post

Sounds really cool. I liked the idea of the 1 time death. It really helps people like myself who DO use protection and corners.

I used to play a game with a buddy of mine called WWII Online. That was rather big. It actually srates a new German/American campaign every couple weeks and actually has an outcome at the end of each campaign. Here’s the link if you’re not familiar with it.

http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/

Anyway, it had MANY players ont he field at once. And the map was totally explorable… you chose your spawn point on your allies’ line and you could walk the entire map, or hitch a ride on a tank… just don’t get picked off by the uber amount of snipers that the game carries. But it also had planes and ships. It almost mirrors your idea… but I’m assuming your hoping for much bigger things.

My only advice would be to make sure that there are multiple games going on. I wouldn’t want to die in one game and have no others to go to because all 4,000 people are in Game Room 1. I think there does have to be a limit. Say 20 on 20? Thats rather big if you ask me. Hell… go for 50 v. 50. Great idea pmr… I really hope it works out for you.

 
Flag Post

Yea, I think there should be diffirent map sizes maybe, 20 vs 20 and 50 vs 50 liek you said, but also 100 vs 100 and 2000 vs 2000

 
Flag Post

Sounds like a great idea 20k on 20k is ridiculous but might work if you have a uber big map I am guessing Normandy to Paris would be plenty big.

If I may propose another idea, As long as were are going with things way out of our league to make currently I would like to be a totally moldable environment. Now obviously your not going to be building bunkers during the middle of the game but small things like deploying barbed wire and land mines. Also Buildings should act a realistic as possible eg. Church gets hit by a bomb = no more church to snipe from the steeple of.

On the spawning note I suggest you do a more complex way that battlefront does you know command points and what not.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PCal:

Sounds like a great idea 20k on 20k is ridiculous but might work if you have a uber big map I am guessing Normandy to Paris would be plenty big.

If I may propose another idea, As long as were are going with things way out of our league to make currently I would like to be a totally moldable environment. Now obviously your not going to be building bunkers during the middle of the game but small things like deploying barbed wire and land mines. Also Buildings should act a realistic as possible eg. Church gets hit by a bomb = no more church to snipe from the steeple of.

On the spawning note I suggest you do a more complex way that battlefront does you know command points and what not.

Yup, I was thinking that you could set up artilerry, resupply depots, and do barbed wire and all that stuff like you said.

And yes, buildings would take realistic damage, I hate in games where i can shoot 100 rockets from an f 16 and guy hiding in a small wooden shack is protected. The damage actually would be something like Battlefield Bad Company, just more advanced.

The spawn points will be like Battlefront (star wars battlefront, I think you are referring too) just more advance version of such, not just spawning in the middle of an icon. A battleship could serve as a spawn point (until it runs out of troop tickets- you cant have all 20k players come out of one battleship you know) same with hangars (battleships send the normandy boats (ducks i think theyre called) and hangars send transport planes with paratroopers and supplies

 
Flag Post

Why not simulate the entire war, from start to finish in real time?

I am serious.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by CaptainMouse64:

Why not simulate the entire war, from start to finish in real time?

I am serious.

How?I can see 2,000 people working together in the semblance of an army, but several million? For that matter, how would you find several million people? Real time, you say, thats a couple years of virtual fighting. Would it be in one block or scattered and scheduled? And, of course, there is the question of whether this will negatively affect people. Virtual P.T.S.D? I’m scared.

EDIT: Woohoo! First post!

 
Flag Post

It could have NPC-troops playing with you. I thought about it too, and maybe about having a strategic and operational level above it. The strategic level of Marshalls and generals planning the battles and operational level people commanding the troops on the field.

 
Flag Post

I think what I would do is make an MMORPG where you could lead troops from lofty positions or fight on the front. Battles lost and won would affect the outcome of other battles. You would need a lot of NPC soldiers, but you could do it. And you could have people employed by the company controlling the overall picture. It would be awesome. If I take up a career in some sort of programming or animation (which I will), that’s what I would do.

 
Flag Post

It’s a very interesting idea the number of players is easy enough especially if the games popular enough and if u say 20k vs 20k thats gonna work wonders if people want to go solo because they dont like team work well they’ll probablly be shot in a few seconds so they’ll be forced to work together if everyone wants vehicles well then they better get on them faster lol but i personally wouldnt a lot easier to hide a person then a tank lol

you would need a server for this thing a really big one too so this might have to be pay to play but i think people would if you just showed a sample video of gameplay

 
Flag Post

Oh, another idea.
By “Realistic building damage” Maki it the Red Factions real, parts of buildings crumble.(The game did do well in that catagory). So not the Mercenaries 2 buildings that just fall down completly when air-struck.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by flashdeath30:

Oh, another idea.
By “Realistic building damage” Maki it the Red Factions real, parts of buildings crumble.(The game did do well in that catagory). So not the Mercenaries 2 buildings that just fall down completly when air-struck.

Yup, like that, you should really see BattleField Bad Company, it is just like Red Factions damage, although bad company is modern and that is sci fi.

btw, I thought mercenaries 2 was a horrible game and the dialog was so cheesy whenever he picked up ammo or got in a vehicle. Not saying its worthless, just when there are so many other good shooters out there, I don’t see the point. Rental at best.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Gryvix:

It could have NPC-troops playing with you. I thought about it too, and maybe about having a strategic and operational level above it.

Well, that would work, despite being an almighty amount of programming.

Originally posted by Gryvix:

The strategic level of Marshalls and generals planning the battles and operational level people commanding the troops on the field.

Would they be NPC’s or players? If the latter, How would they be chosen?