Murphy's Law: If FFOW doesn't sell well with ded servers it will justy other companies not to attempt the route -- costly and risky.

I love Trauma/Kaos, but they have a huge advertising / exposure issue on the consoles. On the other hand there were a couple million DC players, and maybe 300k-500k who knew who Trauma was, and millions of STARVING BF players, so here is to hoping they are a surprise retail success.

It's a really big issue, one I've even mentioned a few times myself on their community forums. It seems like the interest in this type of game is very low for the console crowd, and that puts them in a dangerous position, considering how much of their development costs are going into making sure that this game works well on all platforms.

The result? Well, we have a game that a lot of PC players are very interested in--but they're scared that it will be "dumbed down" to console standards, and if it actually is (probably the biggest fear in this area I've heard communicated by PC gamers is with advanced vehicle controls) they risk wasting that effort, since it looks like it may well flop on the console side.

A huge investment, in dedicated servers, game design, and time spent making this game work on consoles.. that may well be a wasted effort. Regardless, I'll keep pimping it here to the best of my abilities. People on their forums have asked, "Who is your target audience?"--there is no right answer--but it's definitely the PC crowd that is showing interest.

A multiplayer game with this level of variety and complexity in gameplay design has never really been attempted on consoles--and KAOS may find out why--the hard way :/

I think KAOS may have done best to go PC first, and then FFOW2 go multiplatform. The reason being there is a huge, hungry BF/DC community and with BF3 years off, BFBC a little different, and QuakeWars different altogether they could have snagged 500k or so sales (BF42 was over 4M and BF2 like around 2M).

A tight focus on the PC, then riding that sucess and word of mouth to the consoles could have done them wonders. Right now, with the glut of HUGE FPS, especially ones with important MP elements (Halo, CoD, TF, Haze, QW, etc) they will still have a tough time going in early 2008.

There is still a lot of interest in the BF community, at least it seems so from where I'm sitting. While I'm not all that active is said community anymore, I still keep my ear to the ground, and there are definitely some BF players ready to move on to something new.. and many of them seem to have their eyes set on FFOW.

It probably won't find the level of success that BF2 did, but it has the potential to become a serious contender still in the multiplayer arena. Especially in that demographic, the one focused on class based infantry and vehicle combat.

One thing I feel is missing is a chain of command. But we'll see how it all works out in the end. I'm hoping for the best here. I do agree though, that in this market, they have an up hill battle to fight.

For what it's worth, I think ETQW is going to flop hard on 360. I hope FFOW doesn't suffer the same fate. They're putting a lot more effort into the console versions of their game than Splashdamage is.

ETQW may flop, but it may not do really hot on the PC side either.

I do think BF2, as is, would have done well on the 360. BF2MC is a travesty IMO.

I think it takes a very good "smart" and complex game to do well on a console. Until a smart/complex game is actually brought over that is, you know, good to begin with these 2nd tier titles just dirty the well and discourage real effort.

My experience has been the average DC or BF2 gamer isn't more into complex games or more savvy than a console gamer (seeing people struggle to get into Teamspeak or use their freaking ingame radios is a prime example), and DC was super easy to pick up and just play. I think a faithful translation -- on time and not years later -- cand o well on the consoles of these sorts.

But they need the branding push and need not appear to be dumbed down and all the other baggage.

I'd have to disagree. I've never seen that sort of level of variety in gameplay in a console game (speaking of BF2) and I really don't see how some of the more advanced functions, from movement, to commander controls, would translate well to a gamepad scheme. A direct port of BF2 would likely be a mess.

And even if it worked I'm not sure it would wind up being popular with a console audience, simply because the learning curve represented by BF2 is pretty great, compared to something like Halo.

I'm just not sure that audience was ready for that level of variety in a class based shooter. That's why BF2MC actually received some moderate success, simply because it was sort of "dumbed down." As much as I personally dislike BF2MC, I think that it may have been a good idea for DICE to sort of ease people into their style of gameplay.. and I doubt that Bad Company will represent the level of variety seen in BF2 either.

It's not that I don't think that level of depth is possible, despite the controller barrier, I'm just not sure the audience is ready to accept that. That will be KAOS's greatest challenge. Creating something accessible enough that people won't be turned off on day one, but deep enough to serve even the most dedicated gamers.

That, and marketing. THQ needs to put some marketing muscle behind this product.

With intuitive interfaces you can adapt the idea. e.g. take how BF1942 had used the Function keys (F1-F12) for ingame commands, and BF2 distilled those down to Q with a rotational election menu.

Make it slightly more context sensative and tada! You may need to compromise some minor elements in user input for control (firing, nades, jump, crough, etc).

As for commander mode, that would need to be redesigned in the sense of input wise being distinct. That would take some hurdles.

But my arguement is you can do a classic shooter controls + voice chat + vehciles + Q menu and then trim the "excess" and have the core experience -- WITHOUT turning the game into BF2MC.See, and that is the problem: A stereotype that console gamers are dumbed down gamers.

I resent that and it is something that turns me AWAY from consoles. The console market is big enough now -- it is huge -- that the rules that applied to the SNES generation need not apply anymore. Snagging 1% marketshare now is about 2x the size from 10 years ago. Moms game, kiddies game, middle aged men game, and yet serious gamers game on consoles.

But I could be wrong.

Console gamers may still be clinging to the 007 / Quake style game mechanics where more thoughtful & tactical gameplay with more user controlled input isn't welcomed in the same way the same sense of depth, input, and higher learning curve is on the PC side. Maybe the PC's continued evolution in team orientation as seen in the strength of games like TF, CS, DoD, RtCW, BF, CoD, and so forth is a "PC" only interest. Maybe the idea of teamwork, and notably classes to distinguish roles and add variety and up the learning curve and longevity, are not as interesting as the 1980s style, "one style of play to master and replay over and over and over". Maybe a smattering of vehicles that lack strong "feedback" and lack the fine grained control and steep (yet rewarding learning curve) is enough for console gamers.

I would hope not. I would hope that there are console gamers who don't like this stereotype and want to see more "not dumbed down" games on the consoles.

Of course a number of great PC games have been thought too complex as well. Which is a problem with FPS when they actually require more detailed world interaction.

But now that I think about it, you may be right in looking at the market and looking at the FPS coming to the consoles only a couple are trying to delve into even class combat (CoD4, TF2 come to mind) and the former has been knocked by a lot of console gamers about classes, without giving it a chance, and TF2 seems underhyped on the consoles considering its impressive legacy and variety. And neither is anywhere near as complex as a "Battlefield Sandbox" with air, land, and sea vehicles and huge maps, command structures, etc.

But CoD4 may be the game to push gamers over the edge: more complex FPS. Lets hope it is designed well.

Pesonally, on FFOW, a DC knockoff would have been nice in some ways. DC was uber approachable, but had a high learning curve in mastering tactics, strategy, and user control. It rewarded you for practice. But the game was really approachable, and very action oriented. The pace was unrelenting.

Nice to hear FFOW has that in common. I guess I am just hesitant on drones when I really preferred the "see your enemey" fast action of DC.

Hey I'd love to be wrong--and lets see if the market can prove me wrong by supporting a game like FFOW. I think that in general, people are afraid to market a class based shooter, with the emphasis on cross class dependency and team play to the console market. I give a lot of credit to KAOS for trying to do just that.

Even COD4's classes don't necessarily represent the level of class dependency that BF style games do. There is no medic kit, no engineers, etc. I think one of the first games to actually take a shot at this was Shadowrun, and I applaud their effort, even though the execution was horribly sloppy.

I just think that BF2MC, as much as I loath that game, may have been onto something. Instead of just throwing that group of gamers head first into something that's well established in the PC market, DICE is sort of.. easing them into it. There may be something to that.

Accessibility is going to be key here. Appealing to both the average gamer, and the more dedicated FPS crowd, is going to be the key to their success. They have to create a game that PC gamers don't feel is being held back in any way by its console cousin, while simultaneously creating a console game that works, as a console game. I think that's a difficult task for any developer.

In a way, BF2MC tested the waters for other developers, and on some level I think that proved to be a successful experiment. Many people enjoy the game--mostly people who weren't already enjoying BF2 when it came out. Now that they've established the basics of class team play, maybe it's time for someone to take it to the next level.

Enter KAOS. They're heads are in the right places.. so hopefully the appeal of such a game, and such large scale combat, finds a home in a console audience.

If their 32 player servers are stable they could make a dent and stand out, especially with vehicles. Basically for all the CoD4 gamers who go, "What? 32 players and vehicles?! I gotta try this now too!"

Multiplay i31's on stage demo can be found at the two following sources:

You can click Here and find a flash stream of the presentation--but first you have to "Order by game" and then pick presentation, and then "Frontlines."

And alternatively, you can download the entire 38 minute demo Here.

It's about 20 minutes of campaign footage, which looks relatively interesting for a game that primarily focuses on multiplayer. And then he demos a few different items affiliated with different rolls in a multiplayer map. I must say, the EMP roll looks like it could be very interesting. As a bit of a bonus, there's a montage of MP footage at the end of the presentation.

Good stuff, lots of good info. Looks far more "arcadey" than BF2--but still very promising. And remember, 32 players on Xbox 360! Dedicated servers!

Let the mods begin!http://www.russianassault.org/forum/index.php?topi...

New screen..



Full size: http://www.frontlineswar.com/images/news/BT_FFOW_M...

..and no.. I won't stop.

I like the use of elevation in that screen shot. I am just going to have to try the drones to see how they work because just that shot raises a ton of questions... I see potential infantry combat being compromised :|

Watch the video presentation I posted on this same page. Drones aren't invincible. There are plenty ways to counter them, and a whole roll that's dedicated to anti-drone/anti-vehicle tech. Plus, the first level drones, aren't even that great in comparison to the level-3 drones.

Hey Mitch, nice to cya here. :) There are some huge DC/Trauma(Kaos) fans here! I would say we are all fairly excited about a spiritual followup to DC, and FFOW looks really nice. The fact you guys are using dedicated servers is exciting news.

Question: Can we disable drones if we want a more traditional infantry battle?

How is customization in FFOW handled? Are you guys going for a refined experience (ala TF2) or more of a "wide open, let users turn all sorts of crazy stuff on/off" (ala Halo 3)? Or somewhere in-between?

I know Grift and I are very interested in FFOW and how it pans out and what concepts you have adopted and what new innovations you introduce, especially in regards to UI and how you translate a deep, large scale team/class oriented shooter to the console space.

Good luck and thanks for dropping in!

Hey Mitch, good to see you here! We always appreciate the presence of a developer, and what that brings to the community. You'll find we're pretty dedicated to the console user base here, so there may not be as much attention for FFOW as say, Halo, but I think you'll find that people appreciate the attention.

I know you guys must be busy, being into the testing phases of FFOW right now. I hope all the versions are coming along nicely. I'm one of the few PC gamers here, but there's a lot of room for vehicle heavy, class based shooters on consoles right now--especially when you consider the truly unique aspect of dedicated server support and a 32 player environment.

So welcome, and as Ace already noted, good luck!

That screen looks awesome.

Hey Mitch :). Welcome to our forums.

Oh, and one more thing.. I hope you guys are planning on releasing a console demo along with the release in January. Not many people even know who/what KAOS is, at least among the smaller console communities. You guys need as much exposure as you can generate. There's not a lot of people who have much experience with the likes of Desert Combat, or even Battlefield in those communities (including this one) and Trauma/KAOS won't even show up on their radar.

I think you guys have an uphill battle ahead. When you're capable of generating media attention, you should do it.. including.. media. Wouldn't hurt to see THQ push this thing harder too. Sites like Gamersyde should be receiving media updates. There's an obvious need for bigger sites to get the goods when it comes to preview coverage, but we haven't even seen much of that since the GFW preview months ago.

I think that's why it's important that we wish you good luck. I'm really looking forward to this games development, and have been following it closely. As a member of the BF community it's a bit easier to get excited about though, and I see a lot more interest out of those folks in general.

Exposure is going to be key. KAOS and THQ made a wise decision holding off until January I think.. but you still need to get your name out there. People need to see the dynamic gameplay in action, and hopefully get the oppertunity to experience the variety of gameplay options themselves in a playable demo at some point.

To add what Grift has said, I think you guys should seriously use larger forums that people leech from (GAF, B3D... to a degree IGN and Gamespot) and use it as another avenue to build exposure for your games. BUT it must be genuine. e.g. on B3D it would be discussing your experience with the HW -- you could give a great survey of online technology and what routes you have taken. Experience with UE3 is always nice to share about (not recent issues; more about tools, how it helps smaller devs, etc). I have seen a number of developers build good will and recognition through earnest interaction with the community at large.

Btw, hire a really, really, REALLY good screen shot artist. Have frequent media updates. Have a solid stream of meaningful information. Use video docs as a way to focus on individual features, isolate them, explore how they add to the game, and tie back into the larger premise.

Talking about how you are pushing the platforms (in realistic terms) and what makes you uniqe and valuable is important.

Since FFOW is probably following the Circle of Death (Rock-Paper-Scissors) gameplay, a number of "in-game" docs would be great. Maybe layout the circle:

Infantry < APC < Tank < Helo < Anti-Air < Infantry

Then show a well done gameplay video. But not just any gameplay, but done in a cinematic way -- nice angles and "cut aways" for when you chatter with your chain of command as well as cutting away from ground action to the air and back, etc.

Do a series of these, but with each one do a different trend. Almost mini-movies, but showing off how the gameplay dynamics of FFOW work.

I think people have a problem grasping the concept at times, so deliver it in an easy to consume package in terms of marketing :)

Heck, showing some scenes with 24+ infantry on screen in a huge firefight would go a long way!

Good luck guys! Frank & Co. gave me one of my Top 3 gaming experiences ever in DC, so I really am hoping you guys can recapture the magic. :)

Man i'm kinda sad:
My PC is so crap it has trouble with Pong at the moment....

So no Frontlines for me

Btw. Welcome to the forums Mitch.

And with dedicated server support!

I'll be in NZ when it comes out....

Welcome Mitch!

Have to say I really enjoyed the trailer. However, until then it hadn't really been on my radar and it certainly isn't on that of most of my console owning friends. A pre-release demo would go a long way I think, especially if you can sell the dedicated servers/minimal lag in addition to the gameplay.

The Bioshock hype train took a massive jump in speed from nowhere after the demo shipped so the same can happen again if the gameplay merits it.