Archive

Most Anticipated Game of 2012 Finals Poll

Submissions for this form are closed.

Updated Tue, Jan 03, 2012 by Shayalyn

We've wrapped up our voting for the Most Anticipated Game of 2012. Many thanks to the thousands and thousands of gamers who took the time to vote for their favorites! Want to know who won? Of course you do. Check out your choice for Most Anticipated Game of 2012!


Voting is not working

Edit: nvm it worked after I made a comment.

i thought it was closed

Firefall must win)

Planetside 2 is gunna rock the boat, man.

I'm disappointed by your lack of research into Firefall.

'no one wants to play a FPS against NPCs'

About 2/3 of those interested in Firefall are there for the PvE open world. Not the PvP.

Also there is PvP in firefall, it's not all NPCs. While no on planetsides scale it's there and will have an eSport element to it.

Honestly I wish to hear why PS is so much better than Firefall, but to each his own. I will at least ask you to look up firefall some time after its release and then claim its better because we don't know until we have both games in our hands.

Like I mentioned, I played Planetside 1 for many many years. PS2 can only be better. eSport or not, I mentioned also that planetside 2 is going to run more tournament based play... which takes a lot more skill than just point, aim, kill... there' much more to it than that.

Of course there's PvP in firefall, but there's also NPCs. Many PvE FPS games have simply died because they just don't work. I have a feeling that Firefall may meet the same fate. Unfortunately, the lack of information on PS2 is the reason for there not being as much hype as Firefall and those that played PS mainly converse on planetside-universe.com The information IS out there... sites like these and others just aren't going to take the original game into consideration when trying to explain the game.

I think you put a lot of faith into the name sake... I'm not saying it's a bad thing to do, but claiming a sequel will be better just because the original was excellent isn't the firmest of proof. Gaming and video history is filled with many different titles that were good in their originals but failed miserably on their sequels. I'm not saying PS2 will fail like this, but taking a little salt with your enthusiasm might be advised instead of disregarding other games based on another game's history with a previous title.

As for your comment about Many PvE FPS games failing, that is true. But there are many PvE FPS games that have succeeded very well too. Borderlands, Duke Nukem, and Doom are some of the ones that come to my mind at the moment. Also, Firefall is not just a FPS PvE game... the PvP aspect of the game is also very important (there's debates that often pop up on the forums discussing just how much focus goes toward PvP over PvE and vice versa, all of which never can be settled because both have heavy influences on the game). So I have to say that sadly your reasoning on that matter does nothing to sway me towards your way of thinking. I believe Firefall will do very well for itself, and I think it will do well -because- it has PvE as well as PvP.

I have faith in the Planetside 2 devs... many of them have been working on the game for years. I don't need to go and scrounge up all the information on PS2 to prove it to you, but what they have done so far when it comes to community feedback and past experience shows that they're not going to ruin it. Maybe you didn't know this, but SoE had many games in development... one of them being The Agency which could have been comparable to Firefall. Agency was very close to being a finished product, but they decided to shut it down because they had Planetside. (There really was no reason to keep it) They shut down all the development on their games so they could focus directly on Planetside 2 and Everquest Next, that's all they have now.

This shows dedication and understanding of what they have already. I can't say much for EQ2, but I know many who still swear upon EQ1... EQN should take a turn for the better.

Anyways, what I have seen so far and taking into account all the information I've read and heard from interviews, I can greatly predict that PS2 is on the right path and WILL be better than the original. It seems to me that you're siding more with Firefall simply because you know more about it. I encourage you to look into PS2 and the original. Expect to see tons of surprises at the beginning of the year, should be some pretty epic gameplay videos in the works.

Boarderlands, Duke Nukem, and Doom are completely different games. They're not MMOFPS, they're mainly single player games with some pvp maps for online play. One of the games that comes to mind when thinking of a failed MMOFPS is Tabula Rasa. There's also APB, that failed even worse.

Tell me so I may understand, but what does Firefall bring that Planetside doesn't? I see nothing but NPCs being the difference, even when compared to the original. Tell me, does PvE do for a game that PvP doesn't? You still kill stuff... the stuff you kill is a computer with dumb AI. So tell me, why is PvE needed?

Let express the facts... PvE is NOT needed for character development. PvE is NOT needed for story development... PvE is NOT needed for good gameplay. So what is it needed for?

PvE may not be necessary when there's good PvP, but neither is PvP needed when there's good PvE. So that point means absolutely nothing to me, mate. But the fact that it is there as an option for the people which that kind of thing appeals to puts Firefall in the advantage in that regard since it actually gives the option rather then locking that option out just because it won't appeal to everyone (and neither will Planetside 2's only PvP ability appeal to everyone, people just vary too much for it to).

But I'm not trying to say Firefall will be completely superior to Planetside 2, I just take issue with the way you believe Firefall will not do well just because it has PvE as an option. I especially take issue with this given the way the original Planetside died despite being PvP only and that you're not taking that as an example that PvP only MMOFPS isn't necessarily the strongest staying power either. And I know that the original Planetside went down for multiple various reasons but still the fact that it did in fact go down despite being what it is makes your track record for PvP MMOFPS games just as tainted as the ones for PvE MMOFPS.

Either way though, I think both have great potential in their fields. Planetside 2 will do great with it's massive scale combat and Firefall will do well with everything it's try to accomplish too. And yes, I am supporting Firefall because I know a lot about it. Of course I am. That's also the same reason you're supporting Planetside 2, isn't it? So I have no freaking clue why you tried bringing that point up as it adds nothing to your argument.

Planetside never died...

And in my opion it does matter if the game has PvE... People play Online FPSs for a reason... and it's not to kill NPCs... they have single player FPS games for that. Especially with Planetside... there just simply is no room for PvE content and it's not needed. Firefall just seems to be going the same direction as other failed games... Being an RPG first and foremost before a FPS. That's where those games failed... They need to be focused on FPS more, otherwise you're left with your typical themepark MMO but with a different skin and guns instead of swords.

So left 4 dead and borderlands are failures and nobody likes to play them?
What about survival modes like CoD zombies?
Oh and these can be all done ONLINE.

Fps game are not all about PvP.

Also Firefall is a shooter first and foremost, and a MMO second.

So left 4 dead and borderlands are failures and nobody likes to play them?
What about survival modes like CoD zombies?
Oh and these can be all done ONLINE.

Fps game are not all about PvP.

Also Firefall is a shooter first and foremost, and a MMO second.

Those games have no RPG features. I wouldn't exactly classify what those games have to be RPG features. And again... those games are primarily single player games with DM type PvP maps for online play. If their online play actually had dynamics, story, and weren't time based then we could consider those.

What about RPGs? Wasnt it you who said PvE and FPS don't mix? Why are you bringing up PvP now?
And trust me borderlands in very much a RPG.
I'm sorry but what you have to say about these games does not make sense.

All these games have Co-op multiplayer and it's not a big step in gameplay to a MMO.

It's pointless trying to explain it to you... Games like Borderlands, CoD, and BF are completely different games. I'll give you examples and you should research them and see how they differ and also notice a trend because all these MMOFPS type RPGs have failed horribly... Huxley, Tabula Rasa, All Points Bulletin... I'll even throw in Fallen Earth and Global Agenda. See the theme here? Even Earthrise, which is brand new, is having a very difficult time and is forced to go F2P now.

Too much RPG and not enough FPS is IMO the reason why these games have flopped. Global Agenda is probably the only one holding on to a thread right now because it's focused more on FPS, BUT it also isn't on as large of a scale as the previously mentioned games... It's a highly instanced game.

As a gamer and fashion designer, how the game develpers making their games to deliver to the players, in overall effect, is the ultimate sequel - fun.

Fairfall tickles my fancy !

Now it is my turn to recommend that you look up more information on Firefall. The Devs have stated from day one of announcement at PAX 2011 that Firefall is first and foremost a team based shooter. Whatever RPG elements, MMO elements, open world traits, and crafting mechanics are in the game are there so long as they don't bring harm to the game as a team based shooter. If they don't work well together to make the game fun, the idea is either reworked until it does fit that overall goal or the idea is scrapped all together.

Just ask anyone who's played the game, it looks and feels like a shooter. There is no crappy dice rolling to determine if you hit and there is no auto aiming or aim assisting mechanics. It's all purely shooter mechanics right through the core. I'd recommend doing some research into the game before jumping to conclusions just because they're cherry picking a couple things from other genres to enhance the gaming experience. It might be you who is in fact surprised by what you find.

Damn, where's an Edit button when you need one? Meant to say PAX 2010, not PAX 2011.

I saw that video and it wasn't great at all. If you consider what they showed in their gameplay video "team based gameplay" then they really need to work on it. I'm sorry but killing waves/hundreds of monsters who all die so easily is fun then the game is much worse than I thought. You want real teamwork then look elsewhere... Firefall will be nothing more than a mix of your typical F2P shooter game and your typical F2P MMORPG.

Are you talking about the Aranhas?
They are a 'swarm' mob. I'm sorry but don't judge a game based on 1 kind of creature. Have a look at the thresher, they easily deal around 400+ damage with each hit and the assault has 1500 HP base.

Also there are is a lot we have yet to see.

Oh? Did you watch it through to the end where yeh see the Titan attacking the town and everyone in the town had to work together to fight it? Or how about the Chosen Invasion footage from the PAX East convention? Those are massive battle where everyone needs to work together to fight off them mobs, so it's very team based.

Also, I suggest taking at look at the PvP footage. It's very cooperative stuff, you cannot win unless you work with your team mates and communicate. In fact they got an intelligence system built into the game that lets you communicate the enemies locations to your entire team just because it's such an important aspect of the game to work together. I hear people who played it at the conventions often compare it to playing something like TF2 in that everyone needs to do their role well and work as a team or else they will lose the match.

Trust me, the game is -very- team action based.

I did watch them all the way through, as painful as they were, and it required no more teamwork than your typical FPS... A MMORPG requires more teamwork than that game. Like I said, everything dies so easily, it's a joke. You give a "boss" more health and little to no mechanics at all and it's even worse... It's boring and stale.

Are you referring to PS2 ? Boring and stale.

Then what is your idea of "teamwork"? I think we're noticing different things due to the comparison you just made between an FPS and a MMORPG... Both have very different concepts of team work.

Typically for an MMORPG, teamwork consists of a tank keeping mob focus while a DPS does damage without drawing too much attention, a healer focuses on keeping people alive through healing or on enhancing fighting ability through buffs, and some other debilitating class likely does some debuffing on the enemy. All of these with classes that are very fixed roles that don't often cross into the roles of each other.

Typically for an FPS, teamwork consists of focusing fire on targets through coordination, cutting off enemy advancement in certain locations, communicating locations of enemy targets, roaming between points to set up a field of defense, covering an ally if they're taking too many hits for the ally to recover or escape the engagement (viable in FPS's with some recovery mechanics), and running defense while someone interacts with a location or item of interest (mostly related to games like capture the flag or king of the hill). All roles of team work can typically be accomplished by any player in the game with no set class roles that are often seen.

Basically, MMORPG team work is mostly seen through actions towards each other and the enemy while FPS team work is mostly seen through player positioning and coordination of fire. Watch those videos again and take notice of when team mates focus fire on targets or engage enemies to draw fire from an ally. You'll see they do in fact have a lot of team work, just not in your typical MMORPG kind of way.

If that's all the teamwork you think MMORPG's require then you'd be mistaken... among what you said there is you have to keep in mind boss mechanics that all members must pay attention to. One bad move from a person can result in the death of everyone else. Your FPS "teamwork" is used in MMORPGs as well... do you not communicate is the same way? The difference between your beloved Firefall FPS and your typical RPG is that the fights are scripted... So while you make still make use of the same "teamwork" is is far from being the same teamwork required in a dynamic FPS such as Planetside.

No one fight will ever be the same in Planetside. One must be situationally aware at all times and adjust accordingly. You can try to predict the enemy's movement, but you'll never truly know and that's the beauty of it. This is where experience comes into play and it is a huge part of the game.

PvP in Firefall is instanced. With that said you can pretty much throw the idea of teamwork out the window. We all know how well teamwork works out in instanced PvP games. Unless you create a pre-made it's pretty much nonexistent. And even then the teamwork is very limited and the strategy never changes. Same maps, same goals, same strategy, and same old boring FPS combat. Where's the fun in that? Sadly, there isn't any. This is why Planetside is better. So go have fun in your little world fighting monsters, instanced or not, and enjoy your small scale PvP... I'll be having endless and never dull fun playing Planetside.

Pfft... You really need to check the information better. Everything you've said will apply to Firefall as well. And stop with this "my game is superior" bullshit. Both are gunna be awesome. Just please, for the love of god, check more information about what you're talking about before rushing to inaccurate assumptions based on the little effort you clearly placed into taking a look at things.

I don't need to "check" information when I am testing the game first hand.

Yes, you do. What you see in testing and where they plan on going with it are two completely different things. Especially given how limited testing is at the moment.

lol... your argument is pointless. "It may not be there now, but it may be there later" is just an excuse.

Thanks for the video link, looks interesting. Like the way they make each faction have it's own style of appeal art wise. Curious, they also have different specializations of interest too? Like one is better at air warfare, another at ground warfare, and the third at base warfare, or something of the like? Or are they all pretty much even in that regard with player armies being the ones to decide specialization in that regard?

Cool man! Thanks for the video link! Interesting how the differences work... Terran Republic sounds like my kinda guys, bullets and explosions with heavy team work is right up my alley.

That's the thing, I'm not arguing. I'm just asking that you take a better look at things when you are misjudging them based on half information. It's not a "may be there later" it's a "when it appears later", and that seems to be the biggest misconception you're making.

Not a misconception at all... show me where they say it's going to be implemented and I'll retract my statement. They haven't said such thing, but they have said that "PvP will be like this" and "PvE will be like that" So, yes... it is a "MAY be there later" idea.

I would like to say thank for sharing this great article. We can’t get this kind of information from anywhere. Essay Point , Article Point , All about Essay

Firefall shall win, GRUMZZ WILL NOT ACCEPT ANYTHING LESS FROM US!!!

Free-to-play is the future of mmo's and Firefall looks more promising than other games.

newsflash, GW2 is free-to-play as well.
and much, much more than that.

GW2 is not free to play, you must pay for the game in order to play it. If your logic is right, we may as well say that Call of Duty is a free to play title.

How can GW2 be Much, much more than "free"? Are the devs paying you to play their game?

Hey,at least our devs don't bribe us to vote. ^^

What bribe? Where is the bribe? What are we getting for voting? Explain it to me. Please. Instead of constantly posting your garbage... prove it.

I suppose he refers to all those threads where the des said "if we get to the first we'll give you the first page of the manga", and there are a lot of threads where they ask for votes. People were even using bots on the previous votation. i mean, come one... it's not such an important award, it's just a site :) i can understand if they wanted to win all the awards in a manifestation like PAX, E3, VGA ecc. but pushing so hard for a first position on TTH is quite sad.

In any case it's some sort of publicity, but i suppose that those who have never heard about Firefall probably are not interest in shooting games and they prefer RPGs, so they probably will not play it anyway.

Who was using bots to vote for what? Where is your proof?

Motivation and promotion are not bribes.

You enter a votingsite to vote and to win. Not sightseeing, strolling around the site, shooting sh.. !

You are paying for the GAME... you are NOT paying to play it... It IS Free to Play.

No doubt that Firefall can win this.

Of course! When the developers bribe the community with gifts to vote, how can they not win!

I'm sorry, but there is no way Firefall will win this.

I'm looking forward to playing Guildwars 2 and Firefall so I wish both could win, but since this is a competition for the MOST anticipated game my vote goes to Firefall.

How pathetic,bribing your own community to get votes.I lost any respect i had for Firafall devs.Sure its ok to say to your fans "Please vote for us" but bribing your own community?
Well let me tell you something,if you are so desperate to win this,i hope you win,but it won't make your crappy game any better.

Replyed for truth.

News from around the 'Net