Reasons why PS is better then BF?

[JFPhoenix]

I don't understand it but apparently BF1942 (aka Battlefield 1942) is compared to Planetside most of the time and they consider BF1942 to be a better game?! Such as my GMR magazine which previews BF: Vietnam and states On Level with: Battlefield 1942, Better then: Planetside. When I downloaded the PS trial I thought it was more amazing then BF1942 (which I did play a lot). I even lagged out half the time in PS with my crappy 256 RAM computer and thought it was a better game. It's almost getting me to think the BF1942 is better so I don't know which game I should buy now. Why is a game that can hold 64 people on one server with fewer weapons and vehicles better then a game that can hold 1000 people on one server with more customizable soliders and much more weapons and vehicles?

[jsloan31]

i guess it's because of better looking graphics, and stuff...

but then again, GMR reviewed planetside back when it was really laggy and unbalanced (according to them :p)

[dscytherulez]

That's a very good question.

PS > All, when it comes to online play.

[scarpas]

planetside is better. /agreed. the only problem is that planetside does have some short comings, such as hackers and wierd lag issues, and it is slower paced.

[ZionsFire]

planetside is better. /agreed. the only problem is that planetside does have some short comings, such as hackers and wierd lag issues, and it is slower paced.

Ah, the results of CSHD....

[LimpBIT]

planetside has cooler guns and vehicles. BF has better vehicle handling and cooler flying.

[BlackHawk]

PS doesn't get as good reviews because it's Pay-to-Play which is unpopular with most FPS gamers. There's also a limit to the number of roles you can fill in PS at one time, whereas in other FPS games, everyone can do everything at anytime. Add in the fact that Rambo-ing won't get you as far in PS as in BF games, and a lot of twitch gamers get turned off before they even give PS a shot.

[dscytherulez]

the only problem is that planetside does have some short comings, such as hackers

You're comparing hackers in PS to BF1942?!?! :rofl:

The amount of actual cheats such as third party programs and exploits being used in PS is probably less than 1% of all that is happening in BF1942.

[JetRaiden]

That's a very good question.

PS > All, when it comes to online play.

nothing meets the experience of a massive base battle in planetside.

[Eldanesh]

You're comparing hackers in PS to BF1942?!?! :rofl:

The amount of actual cheats such as third party programs and exploits being used in PS is probably less than 1% of all that is happening in BF1942.

You are forgetting that a large portion of people who have played other online games who see someone doing well, or just a lot better than they could and automatically scream "omg h4x!!1" and send poorly-worded and just plain stupid hate tells.

My latest was for killing several people with a couple of maelstrom grenades, someone was calling me a wallhacker and saying I killed them with one grenade...

EDIT:

Ash said it best here:
http://psforums.station.sony.com/ps/board/message?board.id=psemerald&message.id=33486

[I Hate Pants]

i like both games. They're even.

[Seer]

Playing planetside is an end to end combat experience. Some people appreciate this depth, some people decry that they there are 10 minute stretches without action. Playing battlefield is not a similarly deep experience. Battlefield is a Yet Another Vehicular FPS.

[martyr]

because i play it.

[Gunslanger]

you know, a friend of mine has been trying to talk me into trying BF for the longest. my cheapass just hasn't bought it. i have never seen it. prob they only reason i haven't is becuse i'm just a cheap bastard. maybe if they had a 7 day free thing like planetside has. *sigh* i already got 2 EQ accounts and a PS account...

[gonnagetyou]

Planetside is pretty much the only game I play now. Everything else just doesn't have the same feeling of depth. I'm a sucker for big battles and other games just can't compare. Personally I feel that Planetside offers more variety, teamplay and opportunity for tactics than any other game on the market. The moments of inactivity can be a problem for twitch players, but I'm a patient mofo and I spend that time plotting my next moves. As someone who actually spent time in the military and did some combat duty, Planetside is one of the few games that actually feels like a war. I'm not saying it's realistic. It just has that feel about it.

[Rbstr]

PS is so much beter than most games i have played especialy now.

[OfaLoaf]

I only had the 7-day trial but I saw a few huge battles, and they all seemed to be 40 some people, which can also be done in BF1942. It's even in that respect.
It depends more on you personally, whether you like constant shooty-shooty-bang-bang rambo and little learning or lotsa learning, command, and teamwork.

[Rbstr]

if your useing the /who commands it only shows up to 20

[slytiger]

Well you really shouldnt compare bf42 and ps, mainly because one is designed for massive(over 500 peeps) groups to play and the other is only for max of 64. And in the world of mutiplayer, the amount of players can change the strategy and feel of the game. However, they are both new in their area of large amounts of people playing together and against eachother for the common goal. Also, bf42 is more of an quick arcade game with large numbers while ps usually involves hours to fullfill a single goal(ie cont cap). But with BF2 coming out in a year ps might suffer some drop in players because the new bf is supposed to hold even more players which might acctually dip into the relm of massive multiplayer games.

[BUGGER]

if your useing the /who commands it only shows up to 25
fixed.

If you got 25 enemys and 25 of yourself fighting at one base, theres 50 people. Plus the vehicles. Thats just enough for a decent battle....for me atleast considering i got 56k.

But ps compared to BF is a vary bad comparison. PS got thousands of players, BF got 64; ps has specific jobs, BF is free for all. The list can go on forever.


The reason why i perfer PS over BF is mainly because i dont ever have to switch servers (on a main menu screen), the world is always populated somewhere and there is always something to do.

[JetRaiden]

it says results trunicated TO 25 people, doesnt mean theres ONLY 25 people there. its just the limit it can reach.

[TheRegurgitator]

I love PS.

My friend says that it sucks. He confuses me by saying that Tribes 2 is still his favorite game and has more teamwork that PS. That is a load of bullshit. They actually have squads and platoons in Planetside. I'm not really comparing it to BF1942, but it's similar.

[JFPhoenix]

Also noted that one of my friends who was in my clan played PS for a long time but switched to Battlefield or America's Army. He said that PS never updates and the gameplay is buggy. I played PS for a long time (I repeated the trial a lot) and even with my laggy computer I seldom saw any type of glitch, or bug in the game and I know that the devs seem to be updating a lot more now. If PS was reviewed again I think it might have a better reveiw now that most of the bugs have been fixed.

[Onizuka-GTO]

Well i've been playing BF1942 desert combat mod. its only one i play.

And mostly because i like the Artillary, they got Scuds, Cruise Missiles, Mortar-black tube thingys, Rocket Trucks/MLR (My favourite) Bradleys/BMPS (<-Fav), the assorted Humvee types, the desert buggy, and the two manned helicopter (Hind is the best!)

Mainly I love the Artillary, Its just fantastic, that you could just park in a safe spot, call for a barrage have a good spotter and watch in glee as you let loose 35 missiles that spams a enemy base to death.

In P.S they lack the different types, and only CC people can use the Flail, and you can't check with a spotter with a remote view...
Though compared to P.S Airpower on Desert combat and BF in genera lare too over powered..... :(

[slytiger]

Thats another place where battlefield will beat ps, the variety of mods etc... PS really only gives the player one type of combat while in bf there are as many types of combat as there are mods. One reason why DC was so popular, and still is, is because of the demand for a modern combat game using the techniques of bf42 and bfv. Sadly in that way bf42 will always beat ps.

[Electrofreak]

Who needs mods when you have a Dev team continually giving you patches, upgrades, new gameplay items and the like every couple weeks. Hell, next week we get 4 new vehicle variants that should add a whole new level of strategy to the game.

I haven't played BF, but my brother has, (hell, he owns it, I could hop on any time if i wanted) and he says it sucks compared to PSide. Thats enough for me, I consider my brother to be pretty good at judging games.

If you really are into the massive battlefields/maps, a persistant state world with more in-depth objectives besides just seeing how many kills you can get, I would say nothing can beat PlanetSide. If I just wanted to get online and frag people all day I would buy UT2K4 or something. But I don't. I want to fight for that base cap, so that I can bring down their capitol dome and dominate the continent! I want to fight hard to push the VS out of Gunuku so that we can capture the continent. Thats what I really enjoy about PlanetSide.

[Onizuka-GTO]

It's just that there isn't much or big artillery weapon systems,
:( I saw some pictures of s90 BRAVEHEART 155mm Self-Propelled Howitzer and Multi-Launch Rocket systems, they are so cool.
And they are fun to use in Desert combat.
Why can't we have them in Planetside?
It would be beautiful to see a waterfall of smoke trails as you see 12-35 rockets screaming over you from behind friendly lines, to pound into the enemy as you retreat or push forward.

[oddfish]

It's just that there isn't much or big artillery weapon systems,
:( I saw some pictures of s90 BRAVEHEART 155mm Self-Propelled Howitzer and Multi-Launch Rocket systems, they are so cool.
And they are fun to use in Desert combat.
Why can't we have them in Planetside?
It would be beautiful to see a waterfall of smoke trails as you see 12-35 rockets screaming over you from behind friendly lines, to pound into the enemy as you retreat or push forward.

i dunno. i think that Artillery itself won't bring much, it's what results from the existence of temporary artillery positions. read my thread. oogenblagen.

[RF-Oneself]

bf vietnam and the rest are fun online games that can be best played at L.A.N parties and such. It gets to crazy when you play on the internet.

[DeadTeddy]

BF42 and PS are both multiplayer only (those bots in BF are too dumb), very big, lots of veichles, and rather large maps.

planetside's biggest asset is the massive battles, which are definately amazing and something only PS can deliver. it has way more problems though:
1)system specs
2)monthly fee
3)it's size is only used in prime time, yet in BF if there are less people playing they just join less servers but those servers are full. no wandering around looking for a fight.
4)you have to walk half a KM sometimes after you die.
5)the veichles are great but require certs. you can't just hop into whatever you want.
6)the problem in all FPS games is that planes IRL are too powerful, so the devs need to limit them. in BF they put 1-5 amazing planes for each team. in PS they can't do that so they made sucky planes instead. this is BF42's biggest asset.
7)veichles are boring to drive. when I got the BF42 demo I spent 5 hours driving the jeep around on a LAN server I set up especially for that. my friend doesn't have the system specs to play online but he spent enough hours single player to fly under the bridges perfectly. in BF driving anything except the ATV's is boring, and they suck for combat.
8)too slow.

I love planetside, but when you can only play a game at prime time, the fastest way into battle is to get dropped 200 meters away which in itself takes 2-6 minutes, without guaranty of a real battle, without being able to loot enemy weapons without the right certs, not being to steal a car easily, having to walk half the time and so on, it definately hurts the score of a game.