View Full Version : Whatever happened to....
JetRaiden
2004-06-09, 06:20 PM
Outfit Base ownership? Wasnt that supposed to go on Public test around the time of capitol buildings? or even before that? Wtf happened?
Rbstr
2004-06-09, 06:25 PM
dono, they even enable the Main consols once by accident remember?
NoSurrender
2004-06-09, 07:29 PM
back burner, but u could ask at ask the devs.
KIAsan
2004-06-09, 07:50 PM
Last I heard it was dead.
Baneblade
2004-06-09, 09:27 PM
It was a good concept that Smokejumper couldnt make worth doing even if Twist gave him all his notes...
Hamma
2004-06-09, 09:34 PM
It was moved so they could do other things, it's been asked on previous ATD's
Indecisive
2004-06-10, 02:03 AM
wtf happened to twist btw.
JetRaiden
2004-06-10, 02:44 PM
wtf happened to twist btw.
who knows. Im pretty sure hes still on the team, but he doesnt post much because hes working on the game (I guess) so if anything its a good thing. T-Ray, Smoke, and Spork do enough posting for the whole team.
TheN00b
2004-06-10, 02:57 PM
who knows. Im pretty sure hes still on the team, but he doesnt post much because hes working on the game (I guess) so if anything its a good thing. T-Ray, Smoke, and Spork do enough posting for the whole team.
I wish they did :(. Somehow, they never manage to reply to some of the most well-thought out posts on the Official Forums.
Lartnev
2004-06-10, 03:00 PM
Just because they don't reply, doesn't mean they haven't taken it in :)
(well, that's the official line anyways)
EarlyDawn
2004-06-10, 03:13 PM
Outfit Base Ownership is the only feature that comes to mind that would have added any real depth to the game, other then the upcomming merit commendations.
I understand the devs have a vision for the game, and months worth of design documents for new features, but it would really make a difference if the devs would at least LOOK INTO features the community suggests, requests, and even designs.
The perfect example is Hayoo's stuff. It would add depth, a functional command structure, empower infantry with emplacements and when combined with merit commendations and outfit base ownership, would make it seem like a real war. Not even a sign of looking into it.
The Devs need to stop freelancing and listening to the community as far as new features go.
Lartnev
2004-06-10, 04:24 PM
The Devs need to stop freelancing and listening to the community as far as new features go.
I'm pretty sure they do.
EarlyDawn
2004-06-10, 05:01 PM
Not really. Nobody wanted the LLU, nobody really wanted Core Combat in the form it was presented. Nobody ASKED for Capitols / Continental Domination, although that one worked out for the better.
And tell me, all this time where were all the improvements that everybody has been asking for? Medic improvements, expanded engineer abilities, Outfit Base Ownership, Medals / Character development (Getting around to that now, took them enough), a grid system (I'd imagine a relatively easy change, yet it took forever).
I could keep going.
Onizuka-GTO
2004-06-10, 05:14 PM
i kind of agree.
Maybe its a male pride thing, but they just don't seem to want to admit that some of the gamers have good ideas, and that they should take some of them and put it in.
Baneblade
2004-06-11, 04:18 AM
It's easy to be the one painting the picture, but then oyu suddenly have people looking over your shoulder and suggesting a different brush stroke or color. Then the painting is no longer yours.
Lartnev
2004-06-11, 04:59 AM
People wanted the LLU because they wanted another way of capping bases besides hack and hold.
People wanted artillery, and advantages (especially the force gates) from the modules provide, both came from Core Combat.
Players wanted capitols because they wanted more tangeable goals to attacking a continent, Continental dominion and broadcast warpgates helped to make capitols worth taking down aside from continent lock.
BUGGER
2004-06-12, 01:41 AM
The dev's have to stick to their engine. soome stuff might not even be able to be implemented.
And really, you have to look into it if we would really use it throughout planetside's life. Think of using a horn on a car or turning off the headlights. It would be kool, but would we always use it? Would we nerf the JH? Remember, we must use everything and not make them unuseful. Implememnting vehicles already is doing that. No one uses the old Deliverer anymore. No one uses the Sunderer. No one uses the basilik. You got to think of what it might take away.
SecondRaven
2004-06-12, 01:41 AM
Bah it will come out someday
EarlyDawn
2004-06-12, 12:22 PM
It's easy to be the one painting the picture, but then oyu suddenly have people looking over your shoulder and suggesting a different brush stroke or color. Then the painting is no longer yours.Poor anology. The difference is, we're paying them to paint a picture that we like, and that suits us. That just further reinforces that it's a pride thing.
Were that the case, they wouldn't ask for our advice at all.
People wanted the LLU because they wanted another way of capping bases besides hack and hold.
People wanted artillery, and advantages (especially the force gates) from the modules provide, both came from Core Combat.
Players wanted capitols because they wanted more tangeable goals to attacking a continent, Continental dominion and broadcast warpgates helped to make capitols worth taking down aside from continent lock.I understand that, but most of those features were given to us unsolicited when there were things most would have probably wanted first, or in a roundabout way.
Baneblade
2004-06-12, 02:56 PM
We are not paying them to paint us a picture, we are paying them for the picture they already painted, hopefully they will paint some newer and better ones eventually.
If that isn't how you see it, unplug your keyboard and take a break from life.
FatalLight
2004-06-12, 04:40 PM
Back to outfit base ownership- u know its even in the manual on planetside.com? Theres also the thing when you double click on a base it says unclaimed which im guessing is saying unclaimed by an outfit. They did all this stuff n are quiting the idea??
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.