MMO Firefly

Firefly Reborn as Online Universe on Wired News (thanks Shacknews) has word that Firefly, the late lamented science fiction television series, is going to be making a return in the form of an MMORPG from Multiverse. The official announcement is expected tomorrow, but in the meantime, Wired is wired with some details on the game, which may be released as soon as 2008. Here's a bit:
What made the show special was the wry, often self-deprecating humor of its characters, from the captain with the checkered past to the unwittingly sexy engineer, the dull hunk of a mercenary with a girl's name, and the mysterious young woman passenger with special gifts.

The online version will move away from those central characters -- after all, there's only one Mal Reynolds. In an MMORPG, "everybody has to have their own story," says Multiverse co-founder and executive producer Corey Bridges.

"Television series can be really good properties to turn into MMOs, because when you make a TV series, not only do you need great characters, but you need to create a full, rich, compelling place," Bridges says. "If you're doing science fiction, you have to really think it out and create an incredibly rich environment that is compelling in its own right, and worth exploring and going back to week after week. That's what Joss Whedon did with Firefly."

The universe of Firefly and its spinoff film, Serenity, featured everything from Old West-style towns to futuristic urban environments, gritty spaceships and pastoral retreats -- freedom fighters, oppressive government agents, smugglers, outlaws, mercenaries, trader, townsfolk, futuristic geishas and a race of corrupted humans known as the Reavers.

Bringing those environments and character types to life as an online game will be a challenge: Multiverse is not a game developer, but rather a platform provider whose product is still in beta. Instead of making the game itself, the company will hire a development team that will craft the virtual galaxy using Multiverse tools.

"We want to find someone who wants to do something unique and fun and interesting, not just a re-skin of World of Warcraft or Star Wars Galaxies," Bridges says.

Because the underlying technology is already in place, "I feel confident that we'll see something the public can play sometime in 2008," he adds.
View : : :
26.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 8, 2006, 00:36
PHJF
 
26.
Re: No subject Dec 8, 2006, 00:36
Dec 8, 2006, 00:36
 PHJF
 
Firefly and Serenity are fucking stupendous. I love the idea of being a cowboy on the fringe of colonized space; it's so much more down-to-earth (no pun intended) than abstract, over-the-top renditions of near-future space travel which tend to overpopulate the entertainment world. Aside from that, however, Whedon's creation was a not-so-rousing success because of the masterfully designed and acted characters; not something translatable to a lifeless MMO.

The saving grace on this project would have to be in its handling of the colonized/anarch relations. Then reavers of course would further intensify the whole thing. If they can make it into an ongoing PVP-centric battle between outlaws and the alliance complete with robust capitol ships and planetary raiding/attacks, it could end up being a good game. In my opinion, then, reavers would serve as the neutral attack-everybody "race" that is completely NPC.

Transforming Joss Whedon's cult classic into a game is nothing short of a heavy undertaking. While hopes could rage into delusions of an MMO actually worth playing, the scales are weighted against any developer crazy enough to tackle such a mammoth undertaking. If you need any evidence of how difficult it is to turn something so grand and so beloved into a worth-playing product, take a look at the failure that is Galaxies.

------
"Oh how awful. Did he at least die peacefully? To shreds you say. Well, how's his wife holding up? To shreds you say."
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Avatar 17251
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
2.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
3.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
4.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
5.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
6.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
7.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
41.
Dec 11, 2006Dec 11 2006
8.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
9.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
10.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
36.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
11.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
13.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
14.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
21.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
15.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
16.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
17.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
31.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
32.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
33.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
18.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
19.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
20.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
22.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
23.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
24.
Dec 7, 2006Dec 7 2006
25.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
 26.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
   Re: No subject
27.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
28.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
     Re: No subject
37.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
      Re: No subject
29.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
30.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
     Re: No subject
38.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
     Re: No subject
35.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
39.
Dec 8, 2006Dec 8 2006
40.
Dec 10, 2006Dec 10 2006