I don't even think Huxley is making any pretensions of being an MMORPG, they seem quite happy with the MMOFPS label and that seems to be all they're shooting for, no pun intended.

I'm at least... curious... about Huxley. Same with PlanetSide, I've always been curious, but never curious enough to download the trial. With the plethora of FPS games that run thousands of free dedicated servers 24/7, I'm not really sure what the point would be other than potentially more players in the battle than your typical FPS currently offers. I'll wait til it's out and see what players have to say before I shell out any cash for it though.

I am, however, holding high hopes that Tabula Rasa quenches my thirst for a sci-fi MMORPG with fast action, and little or no grinding. I just hope it has some true depth to it, not just make a group, run outside, and blow shit up. Rinse, repeat. That in itself can be a grind if there's no content beyond killing mobs ad infinitum.

Here is some info from the stratics site T.R knowledge base

---

The Dev Team of TR want to push the classic “quest system” forward, taking a different direction.

Players will fight against Bane minions on so called ‘Battlefields’ which are ever-changing places where epic battles always rage on, even without the players. Bane minions may be in control of a particular strategic point on that particular territory, and players may be sent out on a mission to conquer it, throughout a branched mission.

For example:

Let’s say players must, first of all, eradicate the enemy’s vanguard, then approach a base to switch off the power generator which keeps a particular force field activated, then they finally can access that particular strategic territory and start conquering it, throughout a series of other missions.

To achieve this, it may be required to also solve a mission in a instanced area that will ultimately have an effect on the public battlefield (for example, a command centre to destroy so the enemy turrets on the battlefield are disabled)

Watch out, though, because the enemy won’t be passive while you are doing this: at the same time, they may try to raise the surveillance, sending in other troops and so on, so your actions will always determine how battle is raging on a battlefield.

Finally, the Dev Team also pointed out that, with this “open” system, they want to avoid the now abused concept of killing the “final uber-boss enemy monster” as the ultimate experience, providing instead an environment that will put players in front of alternative choices as they proceed toward the final mission objective.
In other words, monsters are not considered a barricade, but a challenge put into a broader (and far more interesting) scheme of things, where the storyline created by the Devs will hopefully take a central role.

During an interview in July 2005, Starr Long provided another excellent example:

"These battlefields have features that allow players to have an impact on the state of the battle at any time. Even instanced missions that are launched from the battlefield are linked to the battle’s status. For instance the players may get a mission to rescue a group of commandos from an enemy prison (an instanced space). When the players return to the battlefield they might see a dropship swoop in and unload those same commandos they just rescued. This will in turn give the good guys a temporary advantage. However the enemy will hopefully detect this and counter by bringing out the Boss for the level. So the players are directly triggering ebb and flow of the battle by their actions. Also there will be control points scattered across these battlefields that the AI is programmed to seek and hold. Whichever side is holding a control point gains some advantages. Again the situation on the battlefield is directly affected by players and AI events".

---

I suggest a read of the knowledge base is well worth the effort.

Stratics T.R knowledge base

Thanks _Shadowmage, I hadn't read that before. Looking forward to TR more than ever now.

One thing I'd love to see is a soundtrack composer who's part of DirectSong so we'll have the ability later to download additional sountracks for new areas, or altogether customized soundtracks such as is available for Guild Wars.

Thanks for the info. I have seen some info for Fury - but I am not a big fan of the full on PvP so I am not following it. Even though its being made in Australia.

Sure - but look at the market - 95% of people are playing fantasy MMORPG's. So if you were a developer/publisher what market would you target.

Of course they ignore the fact that producing something interesting in a different genre will make it stand out from the crowd.

I agree with you completely - but IMO the people funding these games to the tune of $10 million to $25+ million to develop just look and see that the most money is being made by fantasy MMORPG so thats all they are prepared to fund. Its a nasty catch-22 spiral.

Still there are some companies willing to break the mold, and some nice sci-fi I.P's in development - but are there really enough Trekkie fans to make that game a big hit?

I think I would prefer StarGate worlds. Now there is a game that will be kinda similar to T.R. How many worlds will they have to develop for release?

Of the 76 MMORPG games listed as being in Beta Testing or Development on this site there are 16 Sci-fi and 2 historical. So 24% non fantasy or 76% are Fantasy.

I know this thread hasn't gotten a reply for a really long time, but I'd like to give my input anyway since Huxley and Tabula Rasa are both games I've been following intently.

From what I know about the two games so far they can be summarized like this:

Huxley is primarily player skill based and PvP

Tabula Rasa is primarily character stat based and PvE

Based on that I'd choose to play Huxley over Tabula Rasa.

Huxley website list it as a MMOFPS, with some RPG aspects.  I didnt read anything about PVE just PVP

Tabula is a MMORPG,  sticky targeting not twitch based.  It will be PVE at release, but in the GDC preview they said it was diffenently going to have PVP.   It didnt say if it was consentual or FFA style, that I can remember.

So for me I am thinking Tabula,  but the proof will be in the playing