Netease Planning World’s First Crowd-Designed FPS Game?

Last week, I wrote about Netease’s new mystery FPS based on the fascinating teaser page the company had put up. Yesterday, that page was updated, and while the new version hasn’t answered any questions about the game’s engine, it suggests something even more interesting: Netease seems to be crowdsourcing the game’s design.

The new page asks players “How else can you play an FPS?” and then presents them with a eight this-or-that voting options, each relating to a particular element of gameplay design. The percent of votes each option has accrued is prominently displayed, and while the site doesn’t explicitly say so, it certainly implies that the higher-voted options will be implemented into the game.

If Netease really plans to abide by these votes — we’ve contacted the company for comment — then I believe this will be the world’s first FPS from a major development studio to crowd-source such huge aspects of its game design. It’s a bold move, and one that likely means we won’t be seeing this game anytime soon, as based on these questions it seems like the game must be in a very early phase of development.

So what choices are gamers being given, and what are they choosing so far? The page has only been up for a day, but it appears to have already attracted thousands of votes, resulting in these choices:

Aim-assist vs. pure skill: Here, 83.69 percent of respondents so far have voted for having some degree of aim-assist to make shooting more precise. This shouldn’t come as much of a surprise as many modern shooters including Call of Duty and Battlefield have aim-assist mechanisms so that aiming is not 100 percent manual.

Progressive characters vs. static characters: Here, players are pretty torn, with 45.67 percent voting for progressive characters that can be leveled-up, specialized, and personalized, and 54.32 percent voting for static characters whose only differences are their external appearances (which makes the game fairer in multiplayer matches).

Responsive maps vs. static maps: Players overwhelmingly (89.09 percent) prefer responsive maps that may change over the course of gameplay (for example, a hole gets blown in a wall or a building collapses).

Story-based single player vs. arcade-style single player: When asked whether they preferred a single player mode with characters and a story or an arcade-style single player mode that just focuses on fun carnage, voters so far definitely prefer the game to tell a story (87.71 percent).

Large-scale battles vs. small-scale battles: Do players want Battlefield style engagements, with huge maps, vehicles, and long range engagements, or Call of Duty style smaller maps that are more focused on speed and foot battles? Voters so far prefer the former (82.74 percent).

Varied actions vs. traditional actions: Players have thus far indicated that they’d prefer playable characters to have varied actions (running, crouching, walking, creeping, assassinations, etc.), rather than have a game with fewer actions that’s more focused on pure speed and skill (83.9 percent to 16.09 percent).

Character classes vs. All-around warriors: Voters are split on whether they want different character classes with different skill sets (for example, a medic whose stats are geared towards healing, a heavy whose stats are geared towards causing maximum damage, etc.) or characters who are equally capable of doing anything so long as they have the right equipment, with the former option thus far garnering 46.98 percent of the vote and the latter 53.01 percent of it.

Upgradeable guns vs. standard weapons: Having ‘standard’ guns that can’t be upgraded ensures fairness and emphasizes the differences between each weapon, but so far gamers still prefer weapons that can be modded and upgraded, with 83.73 percent of respondents voting for that option.