Editor’s note: Trevor has some pretty cool ideas on how to spice up multiplayer shooters. His last scenario, using snipers to illustrate his point, is particularly clever. Has anyone seen any semblance of these ideas in any shooters out there? -Shoe
Deathmatch. Team Deathmatch. Capture the Flag. How many online FPSes have we played where these are the only modes?
Let’s face it — over 10+ years, no one has tried to reinvent the wheel, instead just being satisfied with the stock game modes that are in almost every shooter. Maybe the developers think they don’t need to, but I feel that the typical game types are starting to get stale. Titles like Killzone 2 and Fat Princess are on the right track, but they are not changing any of the base modes, just spicing them up (or in Killzone 2’s case, tying them together).
What we need is a revolution in multiplayer FPSes, something that changes our idea of what a competitive shooter is. I have several new ideas that could jump start this revolution.
Dig in and defend:
This game mode would require the ability to alter terrain, if not significantly, then enough to do things such as dig holes and make piles of dirt for cover. One team is king of the hill, and they have five minutes before the match starts to dig in and create cover, choke points, and other tools to defend the objective behind them. Each player can also spend some of his limited “command points” to summon objects like tanks, wall slabs, or even bigger things like a warehouse that might require the team to pool their points together to buy.
Half the fun in this mode would be to build a good fort to defend the objective with. Players could also choose to spend their command points on weapons, though all would start out with the basics (pistol, knife, weak long-range rifle, etc.).
The attacking team would have the same amount of command points but could only use them on guns, making them more well-equipped than the defending team to make up for their tactical disadvantage. If the defenders win, they stay as defenders. If the attackers win, they become the defenders and the defenders become the attackers. I can imagine unlimited scenarios where you never see or build the same fort twice, allowing for infinite replayability (in theory).
Change the benefits for “leveling up”:
Most games with levels or ranks either give you benefits (like new weapons and perks) or none at all. I propose that we balance these a little by giving up some of the bonuses we get from leveling up in games such as Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and instead get rewards that are convenient but don’t impact your skill or stats.
For example, instead of unlocking each of your guns over a long period of time in COD, everybody would unlock all of them by level 20 (out of 55). Once you reach level 20, however, your benefits would come in a different form that is just for convenience, like shortened respawn timers. This would even the playing field and make you, a level 23, stand a much better chance against “UBERnubKILLING_jediLORD” who is level 55 with 70 prestige.
Dynamic weather and day/night cycles:
This may not seem like a huge change, but it really can be. For example, let’s say you are an elite sniper who knows all the best sniping spots on the map. You also know that if you are in a certain position, no one can see you because of the glare from the rising sun. You now have a huge tactical advantage, but you have to remember to run away when the sun has fully risen, or you will be really exposed.
This would also add a whole new strategy when the sun sets. Should I put on my night vision goggles whose glow can be seen by enemies, or should I sneak around and rely on my radar to stealthily knife people? Dynamic timing can add a whole new dimension of strategy to multiplayer shooters.
Now listen up, developers! I beg you to use any of my ideas. You have my permission. I don’t care if you made a gazillion dollars on them — I just want to play them. Now get to it!