Would you play? WW2 MMO FPS ultra realism concept.

[teddytous]

Would you play? Thought about this before. If it exists please mention, and how compareable is it?

An MMOFPS - WW2 setting - trench warfare. Mutiple servers, each representive different war "front", Northern france, russian germany, You can die any time. Dieing means you start a new char. When you log out, you toon curls up and sleeps. He can still die, so you better retreat into you lines and or hide dawm well.

Focus on ultra realism(only recovery time sped up). Someone interesting anotomical accuracy, get shot in the foot, no biggy just need a medic. Head shot instant death. Body, slow bleed out(2min to 1hour depending on wound). Lack of sleep(logged out time) leads to lower accuracy, speed, reaction time(handled through audio, lack of sleep causes delayed audio on certain "reaction" sounds, bullet fire, exposions, team signals etc)

Staying alive longer leads to less shakiness, better accuracy, etc. Aswell as better gear. Gear taken off enemy or friendly corpses as well as suppy drops. Must eat to survive. Can freeze to death.

Forced balance of sides(tricky maybe aternating recruitment scehduals, or some sort of AI fillers for underplayed side, balancing would be VERY importance, even above new content). Captured strategic zones lead to bonuses to war effort, fuel depots, air stips, etc.

Leaderboard based incentive, competing for most kills, most objectives, longest lived. etc. Capturing final objective(should be very, VERY, hard) leads to some sort of commemorative or decorative status for all surviving players on that side currently after server reset. Stacking "Rank" for survive.

New AOE teamspeak element, players physical distance in game determines volume to simulate accuracy - no way to adjust "sound effect" under voice etc to bypass sound ingame sounds over the speech.

Would you play it? Or do you think would be in poor taste, lead to people freaking out.

[Deleted]

An MMOFPS - WW2 setting - trench warfare.

The 2nd World War wasn't fought in any "trench warfare" kind of style (just saying).

OT:
No, I wouldn't play it. I've had some pretty bad experiences with MMO'ish FPS games in the past. For some reason (that I can't put my finger on) these games don't feel right. They usually try to be two things at once without doing any of those two things proper.

[Feel The Power]

A lot of this sounds like the game "Hitler and Friends" that came out a few years ago by Zynga. So, no I would not play it.

[Deleted]

I would play an FPS of it, but MMOFPS always fails for me, it's not my genre

[Frolk]

Id play it, if it was F2P
And id stop playing again after 1-2 weeks like i did with Defiance

[sinilaid]

There is a WWII mmofps called Battleground Europe.

[Deleted]

I haven't even heard about this

[Deleted]

There is a reason games have little in common with realism. Realism sucks!

[Valeron]

trench warfare was WWI, not so much in WW2

I mean it's interesting to think about but ultimately it would depend on if the game is enjoyable to play, real life warfare was not really that enjoyable

[Komati]

The 2nd World War wasn't fought in any "trench warfare" kind of style (just saying).

OT:
No, I wouldn't play it. I've had some pretty bad experiences with MMO'ish FPS games in the past. For some reason (that I can't put my finger on) these games don't feel right. They usually try to be two things at once without doing any of those two things proper.

There was actually a lot of trench warfare during WW2. If you're gonna defend a position you might as well dig trenches, and if you're gonna lay siege to a position for an extended period of time you also might as well dig some trenches. There were a lot of trenches on the east front.

OT:
Nah, the game your describing sounds kinda boring... If it was a Planetside 2 style game I'd play it though.

[Zaelkath]

New AOE teamspeak element, players physical distance in game determines volume to simulate accuracy - no way to adjust "sound effect" under voice etc to bypass sound ingame sounds over the speech.

Because I'm sure no one will use a 3rd party program for chat.

[Jomaty]

I would definitely give it a shot to see how it is. It sounds like it could be a good idea though

[Deleted]

trench warfare was WWI, not so much in WW2

I mean it's interesting to think about but ultimately it would depend on if the game is enjoyable to play, real life warfare was not really that enjoyable

Yeah, it's really funny now to see how the soldiers in the times of Napoleon or American Civil War would just stand in plain sight and shoot at eachother and be target practice for the enemy cannons. God, so fucking stupid!

[Heathy]

I've played a bit of WW2 online it seemed quite fun although its not easy to really know what to do, flying took me a bit of learning, i think you have to pay to get the most out of it though, the graphics are a bit meh, but the battles felt quite immersive when you really have no idea how many ppl are attacking you, i didn't play for long though it didn't hold my attention enough. paradrops were pretty cool though, if i had the patients i'd probably just play it to do them. it has a decent directional and sphere based local voice coms so you can easily team up with a bunch of guys dropping into a town.

[Zergin8r]

Eh.... I think the game would be ruined by hackers within hours of going live.... I mean look at Planetside 2, great game in theory, but all the people using aimbots/wallhacks/teleporting hacks make it far less fun.

[Rucati]

There's a reason realism isn't in very many games.

Oh, I got shot in the stomach? Guess I have to sit here for 30 minutes doing literally nothing while I get some bandages, and then spend another three days recovering before I can move again, and then another week before I can move at full speed. That isn't fun, and never will be.

[draykorinee]

In most ww2 games I get to kill hundreds of germans head on, most people rarely knew they'd even hit someone, Id like to see a telltale game set in WW2 that flows like a band of brothers series. As to an mmofps, no definitely not.

[Telwar]

And 60-70% of players are shunted into logistics roles, filling out paperwork and driving trucks.

[PBitt]

There was actually a lot of trench warfare during WW2. If you're gonna defend a position you might as well dig trenches, and if you're gonna lay siege to a position for an extended period of time you also might as well dig some trenches. There were a lot of trenches on the east front.

OT:
Nah, the game your describing sounds kinda boring... If it was a Planetside 2 style game I'd play it though.

Yeah, there was some trench warfare in WW2 but I think the Russians were the only ones that used it successfully against the Germans (as you said, Eastern Front). For the most part, however, technology made hiding in trenches making yourself sitting ducks.

On topic, though, I don't think that kind of realism belongs in a game. I like pretty graphics and big battles and all, but especially when it comes to something based on a real war, I don't think I like the prospect of that kind of realism, especially when it comes to people bleeding out and stuff...it might be a game but that really happened and I don't think there is anything fun in trying to recreate that in a game. And yeah, though lots of people complain about lack of realism, most people (most likely including myself) probably wouldn't be very happy with the gameplay. BF4 looks to be about as realistic as I'd ever want a game to be.

And for the record, getting shot in the foot doesn't mean you're just fine and getting shot in the head doesn't mean you die instantly. For reference there were people in WW2 that got shot in the foot and bleed to death and there are people that were shot in the head and lived.

[Zeta333]

Looseing yoru character every time you die and having to start a new one in a game thats ultrarealistic where one-three bullets can kill you will kill peoples interest very fast.