An article I came across I thought some of you guys and gals might enjoy :)
"
Five games you love that should go MMO
Forget the tedious grinding and throw out the goblins. These would be the coolest online games ever made
MMOs. They're all about crap, F-key combat and spending three weeks making a pair of socks, aren't they? Not so, actually. Massively multiplayer, connected gaming holds the potential for so much more than the generic, life-sucking dragon-troubling that we've all seen far too much of by now.
With MMOFPS Huxley on the way, MAG announced at E3 and online cops and robbers sim APB coming too, we're finally starting to see the true variety of fun that the MMO approach can bring about. Inspired by said games, we've had a look at which existing franchises would benefit from a massive number of multiple players and detailed our plans for exactly how we'd make them work. Read on, and get those credit cards ready for your inevitable subscriptions. We'll keep them reasonable, honestly we will.
Why would it be good?
An online Zelda game wouldn't just be a damnably fine experience. It would also solve all of the franchise's problems in one fell swoop.
How would it work?
Beautifully. Think about the set-up of Hyrule as it exists right now. Multiple races with unique abilities, characteristics and territory. Ancient mystical artifacts (read: Loot) scattered about the place as if there's been an explosion in a Holy Grail factory. A whole kingdom perpetually on the verge of geological collapse due to the sheer number of caves and dungeons riddling its make-up. And this MMO-perfect tapestry is lavished upon a single hero on a rigidly linear story path? Wasteful, Nintendo, very wasteful.
Above: Imagine if every one of these people was a real, live player.
Let's have an immense and detailed Hyrule which we can explore indefinitely from the perspective of a self-created Goron, Zora, Fairy or Human. Let's turn the franchise's obsession with dungeon-crawling into an advantage by packing Hyrule with single-player and co-op instances set in said caves of puzzly death. Let's get rid of those walking signpost NPCs and repetetitive fetch quests and replace them with real, living allies and dynamic adventures. Let's have online play give the Zelda franchise the tooth-rattling shake-up it needs, and enjoy the full potential of Hyrule's richness in a way that a single-player adventure can only hint at.
By all means keep the dungeons and temples, but give us tons more - with multiple levels of quest objectives in each - and keep expanding the world through DLC. Fill the towns and cities with real people on their own, specific sub-quests. Give us puzzles which require a partner or a party to solve. Hell, even make partnering up a part of the puzzles by having some tasks require a specific combination of race-based character abilities. That would be a very Nintendo way of doing things. It would only take a few tweaks to the game's design to reinvent Zelda as an MMO, so stubborn series diehards wouldn't need fear abandonment, and the co-operative angle would fit Nintendo's philosophy down to the ground.
The more we think about this, the more it seems like the best idea we've ever had in our lives. If the next Zelda game turns out to be just yet another better-looking facsimile of its predecessors, we're going to be printing this page off and stapling it to Iwata's forehead, the first opportunity we get.
Will it ever happen?
Not with friend codes, a lack of Wii hard drive and Nintendo's policy of safe-bet similarity in its Hyrule-based games. But a more online-focused Nintendo would make this one sing.
Why would it be good?
We don't want the Half-Life 2 saga to end, which is a bit of a bugger given that the impending Episode 3 is going to be the last part. Half-Life 3 is years away, so we're going to need another way of extending our stay in the H-L universe while we wait.
The deeply textured backdrop of Half-Life 2, coupled with how much of a hoot H-L2: Deathmatch is, means that an MMOFPS could be a staggeringly exciting way of continuing.
How would it work?
We'd set it before Half-Life 2 - mainly because we don't know how Episode 3 ends yet - with the player taking the role of a Human or Combine foot soldier as the occupation of Earth continues. The game world would cover City 17, the outlying countryside and notable locations such as the coast and Ravenholme, but every area would be heavily fleshed out from the linear pathways available in the original H-L2.
Above: The finale of Episode 2 would have been devastatingly good in multiplayer. Go on, tell us we're wrong.
Both factions would have their own set of PvP and PvE missions, which would be written as side-stories and prequels to the main H-L2 campaign, filling it out with the details of the resistance which the player didn't get to see as Gordon. Valve could produce a truly epic account of what happened on Earth during Gordon's absence with regular updates to this game.
The Humans and Combine would have asymmetrical character classes and buffs reflecting whichever side they fight for. As a rule, the Combine would have better armour and tech, but the Humans would be quicker, and better at stealth and guerilla tactics. Both sides would naturally have their own safe areas of the map (Combine citadels or resistance hideouts) where missions could be picked up and parties formed.
We'd make a few changes to the traditional levelling system though. With real-time FPS combat forming the bones of the game, character progression would have to be based around skill as much as play-time, otherwise gameplay would become very frustrating indeed for new players. Thus, we would angle the EXP dispensing more towards things like shot accuracy, headshot percentage, damage taken and percentage of enemies killed in a mission, rather than simple grinding. Level-up perks would include things like equipment and attribute bonuses, as well as the number of team-mates recruitable for missions, which would in turn give access to the larger-scale, higher-level battles later in the game. Of course, gravity guns and HEV suits woudn't be unlocked until very late on...
Will it ever happen?
Steam has grown into a brilliantly connected community over the last few years, so Valve has clearly got a good basis to build upon. Though the MMOFPS is a largely untested genre so far, Sony's Planetside excepted, so we might have to see how games like Huxley and MAG fare before we see Valve take the plunge with it's biggest franchise.
Why would it be good?
Oh come on! GTA already has a free-form mission structure, a hugely explorable open-world environment and some brilliantly anarchic multiplayer. Let's take all of that and go massive!
How would it work?
GTA-style versions of around ten major US cities would be spread over the servers. Liberty City, San Andreas and Vice City would naturally be included and players could create either a criminal or police enforcement character. The main focus of the game would follow the model of the offline titles with PvE missions progressing your character's career path, but the MMO nature of the game would allow the creation of gangs or SWAT teams for co-op missions. EXP and money earned would provide access to higher-level weaponry and vehicles, and cash could also be used to trick out your safe house or police station, depending on which character faction you chose to use.
Above: Now imagine if every one of these people was a real, live player...
As the game progressed, your choice of branching story missions would eventually lead to the option of joining one of your city's major crime syndicates or police divisions, in turn leading to new selections of specific high-level missions and even alliances with players in other crime families or police divisions on huge, joint-operation heists or raids.
It would be possible for criminals to defect to different gangs, or even cities, but there would be a pay-off through the need to stump up bribes in order to stay alive, as well as a drop in character status after the move. Cops would be able to put in for transfer, but would recieve a drop in rank afterwards.
And then of course there would be the PvP servers, which would host parallel versions of all of the game's cities set up for cops vs. criminals raids, large-scale variations on GTA IV's multiplayer modes, and of course that lovely, lovely free-for-all GTA carnage. Sound fun? Of course it does.
Will it ever happen?
It's very, very likely. Rockstar boss Sam Houser has professed a love for the idea several times lately, and GTA IV's sizable multiplayer component and upcoming DLC for the 360 could well be interpretated as Rockstar's first steps towards a persistent GTA world. The similar sounding APB from Realtime Worlds could steal some of GTA's online thunder, but the strength of the brand would be certain to pull in the players regardless.
Why would it be good?
Because zombies are brilliant, blowing bits off zombies is even better, and no game has yet properly managed to evoke the spectacle of a world-wide zombie holocaust.
How would it work?
There's no obvious point in the Resident Evil timeline where an MMO could fit, so the game would have to sit outside of the main canon. It wouldn't matter though, because the sheer bloody spectacle would more than make up for a lack of continuity.
Like the GTA MMO, the game would be spread over different fictional cities, only this time around they'd be scattered across a planet in the grip of the T-virus. Humans would be holed up in fortified city areas and would travel through zombified danger zones in order to carry out co-op missions in the vein of Resi 4 and 5. Tasks could include supply runs, rescue and escort missions, assaults on surviving Umbrella labs and plain old-fashioned zombie culling, with the usual equipment and EXP bonuses available as reward. Imagine Resident Evil: Outbreak but on an immense, interconnected, persistent scale. And actually good.
Above: This is what we're after, but much bigger and better. Keep the giant bugs though.
A player's increasing EXP would pay off in terms of an extended health bar, better maneuvrability and aiming, and the ability to buy better weapons, equipment and even vehicles. To add an interesting twist and maintain the survival horror flavour, the EXP earned for each mission would be split evenly between however many team members tackled it, implementing a powerful risk/reward system for players willing to stack the odds against themselves in smaller groups.
The ultimate end-game goal would be to travel to one of a few completely safe, walled-off cities in each country, completing various high-level missions along the way. To make the run through the zombie plagued wilderness would require very high EXP levels, tight, co-operative play, a convoy of well-armoured transport and a lot of firepower. Stop-offs at various human outposts on the way would be possible, but it would still be one hell of a challenge.
Will it ever happen?
Probably not. Outbreak, Capcom's last foray into online Resi, ended in miserable, server-emptying disaster, and a game on the sort of scale we're talking about, although in a totally different league from that effort, would need a pretty chunky investment to get off the ground.
Please Capcom? It would work, we promise.
Why would it be good?
Because Pokémon has been set up as an MMO since the start. It's just been offline and for one player only.
How would it work?
This would be the last Pokémon game anyone would ever need. The basic game mechanics would be the same as ever, except that all of the NPC Pokémon trainers would be other players, and the scale of the game would be immense. You'd get to choose from one of a number of world regions to start in and traverse it as usual, catching, training, trading and levelling your Pokémon with a heavy emphasis on PvP. Gym Leader battles and Pokémon League challenges would still be against computer-controlled opponents, but once completed, the rest of the world's regions - each with their own selection of Pokémon - would become accessible for exploration. Co-operative play could even lead to multi-trainer team battles.
Above: Pokémon rival battles would be much more satisfying against human opponents
An online Pokémon has vast scope. The multiple regions would make it by far the biggest game yet, and the expandablity afforded by a persistent online environment would allow new Pokémon and scenarios to be dropped in whenever Nintendo wanted to.
Subscription fees would mean we could finally say goodbye to buying two new games every couple of years. Towns could be made into genuine Pokémon trainer communities, with meeting places to arrange fights and share information on rare sightings. Big cities could even have colosseums where players could watch live battles between others and make bets on the outcome. And if Ninty integrated regular special events, like they do with the online tournaments in Mario Kart Wii, Pokéfans the world over could quite happily live in this game for the rest of their lives.
Will it ever happen?
With Animal Crossing going online, a mic finally appearing for the Wii and rumours of Nintendo already having recieved a pitch for a Pokémon MMO, this one is inevitable at some point (provided that hard drive turns up). When that point will be though, is anyone's guess."
Source: http://www.gamesradar.com/f/five-games-you-love-that-should-go-mmo/a-20080806151359653033
