what if bad company 3 or BF4 or call of duty sequel were an open world FPS RPG ?

think about it.... OPEN WORLD free roam fps rpg hybrid, an inventory system, squad mates like in DA origins who can be commmanded etc. and a non linear storyline and non linear gameplay etc !! thoughts ?? military fps genre needs new life!!

think about it.... OPEN WORLD free roam fps rpg hybrid, an inventory system, squad mates like in DA origins who can be commmanded etc. and a non linear storyline and non linear gameplay etc !! thoughts ?? military fps genre needs new life!!

poovannaorcbane

The result would be this.

The console shooter fans would freak out. Since this type of game could not exist on consoles (due to restrictions put on by XBL and PSN) all of the CoD freaks would lose it. It would be incredibly stupid for long time fans to not be able to play the game, they would be outraged. Also, consider the fact that the game just wouldn't have the same feel as shooter fans are used to, they want to pick a server and shoot things, not spend hours figuring out inventory and crap.

Maybe if a new IP came out attempting this it would succeed, but not as a sequel game.

First I would rather have the RPG elements ditched. I cant think of a single fps whose "RPG" elements did not detract from the shooting aspect.

Second, I am not sure CoD would work like that. Battlefield could work better, but even that, would be best without any of this RPG wannabe mumbo jumbo. And a lot of storytelling is something I do NOT want in an fps, especially considering the horribly low standards of storytelling within the gaming industry (adventure games aside). Either way, in the end it dephends on the execution.

Adding dungeon-crawler elements remove any neccesity for depth in gunplay. It's the reason why so many flock towards the tasteless "modern military shooters" as the sole act of leveling up draws a sense of betterment, despite there lacking all substance in gunplay. So what is it you want? A good FPS or a good dungeon-crawler? You can't have both.

I always hoped that BF3 single player would be far more open than it was, imagine having multiple objectives in a city scape, being able to choose to infiltrate a small base in order to take a tank. Making a shortcut through a building using explosives. Or just picking any building to snipe enemies and if you don't kill them quick enough, a small team is dispatched via chopper or streets. All that would be hard to direct and implement though. You'd probably need some squad commands etc.

In terms of RPG type mechanics well I assume you would look at something like Stalker, being able to get bandages, food, ammo, weapons, vests. You could add vehicle things as well. I'd change it from stalker though. For example I would make it so you are basically the only survivor left in your squad and the zone is far too hot for anybody to extract you. But you can make short calls to HQ for updates and advice, but if you stay on too long more enemies come so you need to move, or set traps. You might get assistance from civilians or they might lead you into an ambush. You could find squad mates along the way. Maybe even make tough decisions like taking injured squads or leaving them.

Hmm the more I think about it, it certainly could work really well. I don't think it will happen anytime soon because the audience rather likes the scripted linear ride.

I wouldn't mind seeing Battlefield having an open world campaign like Arma 2 where it's a possibility to lose an objective and still play on.

Probably more applicable to a Battlefield type game. Call of Duty is a linear corridor shooter that will never change, Activision make far too much money from it.

The idea itself is sound though :)