Community Question: Preferred Period of History

(badman) #1

Community, over the years we’ve created multiplayer worlds set in all manner of time periods. We’ve visited World War II (Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory), near-future scenarios of several sorts (Brink, Enemy Territory: QUAKE Wars), and even flung ourselves into super-futuristic settings (DOOM 3). With so much variety, what we’d like to know from you this week is this:

What period of history is your favourite backdrop for multiplayer shooters?

Do you crave modern combat? Are pew pew laser more your thing? Do you want just a tiny sprinkling of The Future? Cast your vote in this week’s poll at the top of this post and let us know in your replies why your chosen setting ticks all the right boxes for you.

(Dthy) #2

I think any shooter set in the past has been ludicrously overdone, I’d say distant but not too far future.

(MoonOnAStick) #3

I think every period in history (past/present/future) has been done to death. Personally, I’d go for Cold War (that 50s setting looks like the only good thing in the XCOM FPS).

(tokamak) #4

I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again: Make worlds clash. Literally best of both worlds, as long as you keep them separate in factions they won’t turn into soupy chaos, instead you have even more extreme asymmetry. Quake Wars was so great in that it pitted near future technology against far more advanced tech. You can do the same with pitting modern tech against completely fantastical QIII tech.

As to answer the question, I like very very near future. Technology level TED is enough for me and enough to allow for interesting gameplay mechanics. For WO you need Indiana Jones stretches of reality to be interesting which is also great.

(Humate) #5

Cool question :slight_smile:

Dont really have a favourite.
A lot of it would depend on whether the fighting mechanics of the game, needs to reflect the period.

(Dormamu) #6

Far-future = everything is possible, everything is permitted :smiley:

(DarkangelUK) #7

I prefer modern combat, I don’t mind delving into the future if the weapons aren’t overly ridiculous. I don’t mind WW shooters but it’s my 1st choice of period.

(wolfnemesis75) #8

Far-future gets my vote. WW2 has been done to death. So have Zombies. Zombies and WW2 doubly worse. I’ll take Zombies in the future please.

(amazinglarry) #9

I went with Near-Future mostly because once anything ‘far future’ is concerned, everything has 6 layers of silver or metallic on it and it’s nauseating. The time period and story of Brink intrigues me the most, followed closely by the Strogg assimilation. So Near Future it is (although I had the most fun overall in ET).

(SebaSOFT) #10

Abvious answer, WW2 will win here because mos forum creepers here (including me) are ex-WolfET. Maybe some of this questions should go to a more etherogeneous public.

(Indloon) #11

World at War 2

Because it is interesting, dark, cagey, gory time theme.

Think how the single-player could be, your war buddy gets shoot in the face, so awfully regrettable.

(darthmob) #12

Interesting question. In my opinion it depends on the gameplay. WW2 is nice as it offers a lot of variety shooting wise. You have got powerful single shot snipers, semi automatic rifles like the garand / k43, full auto with mp40 and thompson and bigger machine guns and explosive weapons. Modern warfare on the other hand is quite boring as every weapon is essentially the same and the garand / k43 equivalents are lost.

Far future is nice because it allows all kinds of ridiculous gameplay like rocket jumping in quake, surfing in tribes or the flight mechanics in ETQW and basically any kind of weapon mechanic as well.

For me it’s a tie between WW2 and far future. :slight_smile:

(Joe999) #13

I voted “other”. Simply because it depends on the game. Wolf:ET is my all time favorite gameplay- & fun-wise, but I got countless hours worth of being remembered from the Quake Wars Beta. Brink I didn’t like. Not because of the period of history, but because gameplay was boring and monotonous, the levels looked and felt all the same.

(.Chris.) #14

Any period really as long as the game is fun. I kind of liked the sci-fi and occult elements that are present in the Wolfenstein franchise and would like to see more that, imagine an ET:QW style game with experimental weapons and vehicles set during WW2.

(Cep) #15

I don’t really have much of a preference on the period. As long as the guns shoot realistically, are balanced and the game mechanics are sound I couldn’t care less if I am using a musket or a BFG3000.

I think a mix of near future/modern day with futuristic is good because it gives us something we are all familiar with and gives dev’s and designers scope to be creative. ET:QW as others have mentioned did this very well.

(BioSnark) #16

Sleek Far Future with post-apocalyptic
or
Pre-WW2 crossed with fantasy or retro future tech.

(JackPipsam) #17

WW2, Nazis ftw :stuck_out_tongue:

(BrightIs) #18

I prefer ones where i can have a real connection with, an event I can relate to, so either present day or in the past. WW2 is the best because so many documentaries and films etc are done about it and we all have had some connection with it.

I like the idea of combining eras of weapons like in one of my previous posts, have an fps set now and base it on citizens revolting against totalitarian governments with citizens using weapons from pre modern era such as cold war, vietnam, ww2 & ww1 which they have scavenged and the governments using modern weapons.

ET Revolutions:)

(Vividor) #19

WW2 no doubt.

I have tried other games but keep returning to those games, specially for the multiplayer.

  • WW2 theme although is quite violent makes older gamers as younger gamers interest in the game.

When I saw Brink and it’s cartoon style graphics I did not even give it a try as that atmosphere said nothing to me and felt a bit for kiddies, thats the problem with sci fi and futuristic games, most of them feel like games for 14 year olds.

(YouAreGood) #20

It’s not the period what makes you like the game. Oh wait, did I said sth wrong?

The old Enemy Territory had the genuine feeling of its “story’s” times. If you feel the game is internally coherent, there should be no real difference which period you’ve picked. Off course when asked we can answer - but it’s not about the periods, it’s all about how good were the games that took “place” in given times of human kind history.

So, the question should be rather - which period is mostly underestimated? And it is a hard question… but not for us, who prefer ET-like games, not mainstream COD or other no-fun-but-killing-everything-and-unlocking-new-bull****-items-or-buying-DLC games, that just feels void. The ET, especially ET:QW style of teamplay is the selling point, and - to the point - any period you’ll fill with an amazing game will be the favorite one for masses.

:stroggtapir: Have a good day!