Instanced small team combat.

[MrVicchio]

Think Battle Grounds if you will in WoW.

A friend at worked asked me if that would be part of PS2, and I just blinked at him like he was crazy. But he made some good points about making intense combat that could be "better" on one hand then open world fighting.

Thoughts?

[Kitija]

No.

[DashRev]

Absolutely not.

[Bags]

Negatory.

[MrVicchio]

That was MY reaction too. However since he's a non-PS player never having even set foot in the original, I thought his outside thinking was worth throwing out here.

[Kitija]

I thought his outside thinking was worth throwing out .

Thats what i read there...

[Death2All]

Never ever. What sets PS apart if it's just like every other game out? Answer is nothing. You shouldn't associate yourself with that friend anymore....Unless it happens to be a very attractive female. In that case, have intercourse with her and then cease all further communication.

[MgFalcon]

The only way this could work would be for the same empire to go at a mini-game of CTF or something like that.

Take for example that in certain territories there would be an "arena" (craters maybe?) where the same number of opposing players would que into (same empire). Then BOOM! CTF, Death match (team obviously), etc. I believe this could be a great idea, it would urge friendly (by friendly I mean hate) competition inside Empires. And new rankings and what not.

A few ground rules:

-Empire specific (a VS vs. NC competition would be completely useless... go out and capture some territories from them if you really wana fight an opposing faction)
-ONLY accessible when there is no sufficient opposing force on the continent
-NO REWARDS, other than bragging rights and leaderboards
-Each continent would have it's own unique arena (i.e. Indar's arena would be CTF, while Searhus would be Death match)
-No vehicles in the arena
-Temporary color change (to distinguish teams)

I think this would be an interesting idea and could really spur on some Outfit vs. Outfit battles

[Volw]

and dilute PS massive battle experience with some piss poor 32 player game? seriously?

[krnasaur]

ok, i could maybe see a 30 per side outfit battle event once a year, other than that. no

[Hamma]

I think this should exist.

But ONLY for competitions, they did outfit wars and the like and they were rather successful but a bitch to manage because there was no game mechanic for it.

This shouldn't be something anyone can just jump into though. As mentioned above it would take away from gameplay.

[MgFalcon]

My main thoughts are always on Outfits, I've never really gave good intentions/thought for the individual player (killwhores) on a game focused on teamwork in global war.

Once a year sounds retarded, once a month would be nice though.

This still is a better idea than:
BFR's
Insta-kinfe
PvE
Destructible environments
BFR's
Getting rid of enter/exit vehicle animations

[ShowNoMercy]

Screw ALLLL instances, if you want outfit vs outfit shit make a continent where your only allegiance is to you outfit. All bases captured would belong to your outfit and your outfit would be the only ones experiencing the resource benefits from it. There you go, problem solved, we get a cont specifically for outfit fighting, massive nature is preserved, and stupid lame ass instances can stay out of PS2. Call me Henry Clay.

[Kitija]

GLobal Agenda is thataway ------->

[krnasaur]

[quote]Once a year sounds retarded, once a month would be nice though. [\quote]

once a month sounds too often, im thinking about once every year have a tournament bracket where the prize is X resources to the winning outfit.

have a platoon bracket(30v30) and a squad bracket(10v10)

[MgFalcon]

Screw ALLLL instances, if you want outfit vs outfit shit make a continent where your only allegiance is to you outfit. All bases captured would belong to your outfit and your outfit would be the only ones experiencing the resource benefits from it. There you go, problem solved, we get a cont specifically for outfit fighting, massive nature is preserved, and stupid lame ass instances can stay out of PS2. Call me Henry Clay.

Good call, Sir. I forgot this part was in the title, and thusly forgot to address this. I like your idea on Continent: Outfit... creamed my pants

[WarChimp130]

Hell no! If this game was instanced it would be awful.

[Malorn]

Worst idea since the jump-to-conclusions mat.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-KVdmpK1Q64U/TbHh8quslAI/AAAAAAAAB5o/_6Mf6-a7E-w/s1600/jump+to+conclusions+mat.jpg

Horrible idea.

[basti]

No, No, never, ever, no, nope.

And if, then ONLY for special events like outfit wars, NOT at all times!

[xcel]

I can't believe this is up for debate....NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Lonehunter]

I think this should exist...But ONLY for competitions, they did outfit wars and the like and they were rather successful
This is exactly what I was thinking. BUT... it's Planetside.

The only reason I can see putting in an instanced battleground is for squad or outfit competition. How can we achieve this ending goal in a different way? Simply coordinating between squads/outfits, scheduling, planning, and the people to "run it".

"But I don't want to get interrupted or bothered" again.... it's PLANETSIDE

What could help remedy this whole thing is something like a bi-monthly tournament that SOE could run. Do teams of 5,20,100, for different objectives and terrain. Maybe a continent or island is blocked off for a few days to run it.

I really wanna see more events in general. SOE needs to interact with the community in game, not just on forums.

[SKYeXile]

yea if you wanted instanced battles play COD or BF, this in a MMOFPS, why would you want to demassify it?

comps is fine, outfit wars was wicked fun, but i would not want to see it as a metagame or anything.

Instance battlesgrounds in everygame i have seen them in ALWAYS detracts from world pvp, the incentives to not hunt for kills and que and do instanced battles generaly reaps better rewards than open world pvp. because of xp or kills per hour, as usual people take the path of least restance to GLORY! and even if SOE can work around that mindset, any player logging into doing instanced pvp is taken away from doing world pvp.

[Volw]

any player logging into doing instanced pvp is taken away from doing world pvp.

^ this

can we close the thread now? :D:evil:

[Hamma]

wow.. :lol:

Now I know how Tool felt in the other thread.

Nobody wants Global Agenda, Nobody wants COD, BF etc.

Some of you people need to really open your eyes and READ.

It's very simple really and I'll spell it out one more time so you guys can read it this time around.

In PlanetSide, they had an "Outfit Wars" event which was a total success and a blast for those involved. But it was very hard for SOE to organize this because there was no place for it.

Something like this, which requires admin intervention would be a good idea when they do those events again.

Or keep your eyes closed and respond the same way everyone has seemed to when they don't like something the past few days. Mention some other game that is not PlanetSide and write it off.

There should NOT BE INSTANCED COMBAT that players can drop into anytime they want. That I agree, but there should be an admin method to get players into one area for an event such as Outfit Wars or Duels which they also had an event for.

[opticalshadow]

id sooner take a shot in the ass, and use stagnate water from the everglades to wash it out before trying to remove it with two rusty nails wielded by a nurse who flunked med school and currently has possibly the worst cold ive ever seen in the back of a pickup truck in the middle of a traffic jam then i would say instanced zones for small combat in a game based around the idea of open world largest scale combat in any game ever was a good idea.

Edit: to Hamma, i see what you mean, the problem is, that isnt the aim of ps, it wasnt the aim of ps1 and it isnt the aim of ps2. ps is aimed at massive scale combat. now i get there were events for this, and eventually they did have an area for this, and thats fine and all.

but if your asking me when i think it should be concidered a "feature" it says to me its everything they stated ps is not. so my answer above may seem like my eyes are closed and i dont care about new things, but thats not it, im simply addressing i think it should not be done.

outfits in PS are like platoons in the real world. they train together, they fight togehter, and both take place amogest all the other platoons. ive always felt that outfit vs outfit matches were silly, because the battelfield series offers better tools for that, with maps designed for it.if SOE designs a place for this to happen, thats taking away from features that the core game could use, they can just as easily reuse any of the conts in the game on a diffrent server to run these things and im fine with that, but dont devote resources to creating something new, until the game is out and sucessful, because everything they do that is not part of the core of what PS is, is taking away from why we are all here in the first place.

[Hamma]

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

Nevermind... :lol:

Chances are if and when they put it in nobody will know about it till they use it (for an event) anyways. :lol:

[Traak]

How about organizing it on a CoD server?

[Vancha]

A friend at worked asked me if that would be part of PS2, and I just blinked at him like he was crazy. But he made some good points about making intense combat that could be "better" on one hand then open world fighting.
While your friend evidently hasn't played Planetside if he thinks you need instances for intense combat, I would ask what these "good points" were...

I mean, you make the thread due to them, but yet you don't elaborate on what they are. Obviously people are going to reject it if you don't explain the benefits. :p

[Coreldan]

No.

[dachlatte]

i didnt read any replys but...



HELL NO! go play [enter generic fps]

[Vancha]

i didnt read any replys but...

Anytime you start a forum post with that, you can be utterly sure, with 100% certainty, that you're doing it wrong.

[dachlatte]

Anytime you start a forum post with that, you can be utterly sure, with 100% certainty, that you're doing it wrong.
any arguments to support that claim?

[Vancha]

any arguments to support that claim?
If you like.


You said...

i didnt read any replys but...



HELL NO! go play [enter generic fps]

After this...

No.
Absolutely not.
Negatory.
That was MY reaction too. However since he's a non-PS player never having even set foot in the original, I thought his outside thinking was worth throwing out here.
Thats what i read there...
Never ever. What sets PS apart if it's just like every other game out? Answer is nothing. You shouldn't associate yourself with that friend anymore....Unless it happens to be a very attractive female. In that case, have intercourse with her and then cease all further communication.
The only way this could work would be for the same empire to go at a mini-game of CTF or something like that.

Take for example that in certain territories there would be an "arena" (craters maybe?) where the same number of opposing players would que into (same empire). Then BOOM! CTF, Death match (team obviously), etc. I believe this could be a great idea, it would urge friendly (by friendly I mean hate) competition inside Empires. And new rankings and what not.

A few ground rules:

-Empire specific (a VS vs. NC competition would be completely useless... go out and capture some territories from them if you really wana fight an opposing faction)
-ONLY accessible when there is no sufficient opposing force on the continent
-NO REWARDS, other than bragging rights and leaderboards
-Each continent would have it's own unique arena (i.e. Indar's arena would be CTF, while Searhus would be Death match)
-No vehicles in the arena
-Temporary color change (to distinguish teams)

I think this would be an interesting idea and could really spur on some Outfit vs. Outfit battles
and dilute PS massive battle experience with some piss poor 32 player game? seriously?
ok, i could maybe see a 30 per side outfit battle event once a year, other than that. no
I think this should exist.

But ONLY for competitions, they did outfit wars and the like and they were rather successful but a bitch to manage because there was no game mechanic for it.

This shouldn't be something anyone can just jump into though. As mentioned above it would take away from gameplay.
My main thoughts are always on Outfits, I've never really gave good intentions/thought for the individual player (killwhores) on a game focused on teamwork in global war.

Once a year sounds retarded, once a month would be nice though.

This still is a better idea than:
BFR's
Insta-kinfe
PvE
Destructible environments
BFR's
Getting rid of enter/exit vehicle animations
Screw ALLLL instances, if you want outfit vs outfit shit make a continent where your only allegiance is to you outfit. All bases captured would belong to your outfit and your outfit would be the only ones experiencing the resource benefits from it. There you go, problem solved, we get a cont specifically for outfit fighting, massive nature is preserved, and stupid lame ass instances can stay out of PS2. Call me Henry Clay.
GLobal Agenda is thataway ------->
once a month sounds too often, im thinking about once every year have a tournament bracket where the prize is X resources to the winning outfit.

have a platoon bracket(30v30) and a squad bracket(10v10)
Good call, Sir. I forgot this part was in the title, and thusly forgot to address this. I like your idea on Continent: Outfit... creamed my pants
Hell no! If this game was instanced it would be awful.
Worst idea since the jump-to-conclusions mat.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-KVdmpK1Q64U/TbHh8quslAI/AAAAAAAAB5o/_6Mf6-a7E-w/s1600/jump+to+conclusions+mat.jpg

Horrible idea.
No, No, never, ever, no, nope.

And if, then ONLY for special events like outfit wars, NOT at all times!
I can't believe this is up for debate....NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
This is exactly what I was thinking. BUT... it's Planetside.

The only reason I can see putting in an instanced battleground is for squad or outfit competition. How can we achieve this ending goal in a different way? Simply coordinating between squads/outfits, scheduling, planning, and the people to "run it".

"But I don't want to get interrupted or bothered" again.... it's PLANETSIDE

What could help remedy this whole thing is something like a bi-monthly tournament that SOE could run. Do teams of 5,20,100, for different objectives and terrain. Maybe a continent or island is blocked off for a few days to run it.

I really wanna see more events in general. SOE needs to interact with the community in game, not just on forums.
yea if you wanted instanced battles play COD or BF, this in a MMOFPS, why would you want to demassify it?

comps is fine, outfit wars was wicked fun, but i would not want to see it as a metagame or anything.

Instance battlesgrounds in everygame i have seen them in ALWAYS detracts from world pvp, the incentives to not hunt for kills and que and do instanced battles generaly reaps better rewards than open world pvp. because of xp or kills per hour, as usual people take the path of least restance to GLORY! and even if SOE can work around that mindset, any player logging into doing instanced pvp is taken away from doing world pvp.
^ this

can we close the thread now? :D:evil:
wow.. :lol:

Now I know how Tool felt in the other thread.

Nobody wants Global Agenda, Nobody wants COD, BF etc.

Some of you people need to really open your eyes and READ.

It's very simple really and I'll spell it out one more time so you guys can read it this time around.

In PlanetSide, they had an "Outfit Wars" event which was a total success and a blast for those involved. But it was very hard for SOE to organize this because there was no place for it.

Something like this, which requires admin intervention would be a good idea when they do those events again.

Or keep your eyes closed and respond the same way everyone has seemed to when they don't like something the past few days. Mention some other game that is not PlanetSide and write it off.

There should NOT BE INSTANCED COMBAT that players can drop into anytime they want. That I agree, but there should be an admin method to get players into one area for an event such as Outfit Wars or Duels which they also had an event for.
id sooner take a shot in the ass, and use stagnate water from the everglades to wash it out before trying to remove it with two rusty nails wielded by a nurse who flunked med school and currently has possibly the worst cold ive ever seen in the back of a pickup truck in the middle of a traffic jam then i would say instanced zones for small combat in a game based around the idea of open world largest scale combat in any game ever was a good idea.

Edit: to Hamma, i see what you mean, the problem is, that isnt the aim of ps, it wasnt the aim of ps1 and it isnt the aim of ps2. ps is aimed at massive scale combat. now i get there were events for this, and eventually they did have an area for this, and thats fine and all.

but if your asking me when i think it should be concidered a "feature" it says to me its everything they stated ps is not. so my answer above may seem like my eyes are closed and i dont care about new things, but thats not it, im simply addressing i think it should not be done.

outfits in PS are like platoons in the real world. they train together, they fight togehter, and both take place amogest all the other platoons. ive always felt that outfit vs outfit matches were silly, because the battelfield series offers better tools for that, with maps designed for it.if SOE designs a place for this to happen, thats taking away from features that the core game could use, they can just as easily reuse any of the conts in the game on a diffrent server to run these things and im fine with that, but dont devote resources to creating something new, until the game is out and sucessful, because everything they do that is not part of the core of what PS is, is taking away from why we are all here in the first place.
:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

Nevermind... :lol:

Chances are if and when they put it in nobody will know about it till they use it (for an event) anyways. :lol:
How about organizing it on a CoD server?
While your friend evidently hasn't played Planetside if he thinks you need instances for intense combat, I would ask what these "good points" were...

I mean, you make the thread due to them, but yet you don't elaborate on what they are. Obviously people are going to reject it if you don't explain the benefits. :p
No.
...was said.


Perhaps you'd also like me to explain why starting a forum post with...

- "I haven't read the OP, but..."
- "I don't care what any of you say or think, but..."
- "This is a response to a different thread, but..."
- "This is a response to a different thread on a different forum, but..."
- "I'm going to type a random string of letters after the word but, but..."

...also means you can be utterly sure, with 100% certainty, that you're doing it wrong?

[dachlatte]

lots of stuff
i read the OP and my statement HELL NO! go play [enter generic fps] was in complete agreement with all the other replys.

notice anything?



Perhaps you'd also like me to explain why starting a forum post with...

please do in as much detail as possible

[Lunarchild]

please do in as much detail as possible

It's simple really. Admitting to not reading any of the replies on the topic:


Totally invalidates your opinion, regardless of what you say; and
Is the same as admitting you're a total and utter douchebag who does not care about other's opinion


As such it's generally not a smart thing to do ^^

Aside from all that, your post was totally non-constructive...

[Vancha]

my statement was in complete agreement with all the other replys.
No it wasn't...

notice anything?
You evidently still have yet to read the thread?

---------
Back on topic, a conversation from the chat room courtesy of CutterJohn.

[12:08] <CutterJohn> i don't understand what the fear of it is
[12:08] <CutterJohn> that it will distract from the game?
[12:09] <CutterJohn> even if it was a team deathmatch, it shouldn't matter
[12:09] <CutterJohn> if someone wants to play like that, by all means, go for it
[12:09] <CutterJohn> I wouldn't mind it from time to time either
[12:10] <Vancha> I'm thinking back to all the events Killa Girlz ran. They had such trouble keeping their tournaments free of griefers I think. A system to accommodate such things would be very useful.
[12:10] <CutterJohn> the game will cater to multiple playstyles, see no reason it can't cater to multiple game styles either
[12:10] <CutterJohn> it wouldn't take much. A few purpose built maps and some new logic/ui elements
[12:12] <CutterJohn> it would broaden the scope of the game and get more people playing. more playing = more paying = more good stuff for everyone!
[12:13] <Vancha> You should make these points in the thread, though your post might get drowned out by the spam of lolno posters.
[12:14] <Vancha> Or I could just copy/paste this conversaion from the point you said "I don't understand what the fear of it is".
[12:16] <CutterJohn> My guess is they think people will play it more
[12:17] <CutterJohn> and that means less people in the field
[12:17] <CutterJohn> but.. thats kind of a selfish move imo
[12:18] <CutterJohn> telling someone how to play for your own benefit
[12:18] <Vancha> Like you say, who knows? Maybe it could attract enough additional people that even if it was the kind of thing people wanted to play regularly, they'd also spend enough time in the field for battles to be even larger.

[Coreldan]

There is still a fear of some kind. Battlegrounds in WoW killed the open world PVP for the most parts.

I guess the majority might've preferred it then, but nobody bothered to do it anymore, I guess the spoonfed system of the BGs was so much more easier and u still got to kill people.

[CutterJohn]

There is still a fear of some kind. Battlegrounds in WoW killed the open world PVP for the most parts.

It was a loss for those who liked open world pvp, but a gain for those that liked the instanced combat.


PS is a pvp game. PVP only. And if you don't like open world combat, preferring a more structured environment, there is no place for you(And, it appears, you will get insulted as well).

Nobody questions that WoW has multiple options for each for pve and pvp. Theres solo content, world content, instanced raid content, open world raid content, open world pvp, instanced pvp, multiple arena ladders, even duels.

Increasing the variety of gamestyles would do nothing but benefit PS2 by reaching a broader audience. It can only 'ruin' the game if you believe so many people would play the arenas/battlegrounds that combat on the continents would suffer, especially since they can't get any fancy rewards/gear from them.

So, i suppose the question is.. If they had these arenas, and it emptied out the continents, what does that say about PS2 open world content/gameplay?

If the open world gameplay is good, people will play it.
If its not good, or not their preference, people will play the arenas more, but they'll still be playing PS and will go to the continents occasionally for a change of pace.
If its not good, or not their preference, and there are no arenas that they might try, they will simply not play PS2.

The only reason to not include it is to take no chances that something else could distract from what you view as the main focus of the game, to not offer alternatives so people are forced into that. A bit selfish, imo.

[dachlatte]

It's simple really. Admitting to not reading any of the replies on the topic:


Totally invalidates your opinion, regardless of what you say; and
Is the same as admitting you're a total and utter douchebag who does not care about other's opinion


As such it's generally not a smart thing to do ^^

Aside from all that, your post was totally non-constructive...
guilty as charged. topic caused some nerd rage i guess

[Sentrosi]

At first I was like all the others on this thread.
No
Hell No
H E Double Hockey sticks NO
No Frakin' way bro
Hamma, I just died a little inside when I read your post...

Blah blah blah

Then I thought about it a bit. I'm older so I'm granted this luxury of looking at things from a different perspective. You will too someday. And you'll have me to thank for that.

I like the idea. I don't want a weekly contest though. Think of it as a quarterly Olympiad. There are the traditional games like Capture the Flag and Rabbit (think old school T2 days). But then they add in things like Resource Runs, ANT(if they are in) races, Best Sniper, etc. The winner gets a distinctive in-game title. If it's an outfit based competition, then all members of the outfit are granted that title. The title is good only until the next competition. The only thing that comes from these competitions is bragging rights and special notations in-game. Hell, everyone in MMOs these days likes titles associated with their names. Lets bring that over to Planetside 2.

[Manitou]

I like the idea. I don't want a weekly contest though. Think of it as a quarterly Olympiad. There are the traditional games like Capture the Flag and Rabbit (think old school T2 days). But then they add in things like Resource Runs, ANT(if they are in) races, Best Sniper, etc. The winner gets a distinctive in-game title. If it's an outfit based competition, then all members of the outfit are granted that title. The title is good only until the next competition. The only thing that comes from these competitions is bragging rights and special notations in-game. Hell, everyone in MMOs these days likes titles associated with their names. Lets bring that over to Planetside 2.
Interesting line of thought...I kind of like that.

[Spark]

Add one more to the hell no never on my life side.



[12:18] <Vancha> Like you say, who knows? Maybe it could attract enough additional people that even if it was the kind of thing people wanted to play regularly, they'd also spend enough time in the field for battles to be even larger.

I have seen how this 'quick action' mode can destroy a game and it's sad how developers keep falling into the same trap (Battleground Europe is doing something similar, why splitting their already miniscule community further is mindboggling). The developers of the Natural Selection mod had the very same mindset as you (attract new players with a traditional mindless killing game mode, train them for the real thing etc), but it never works like that. The new players stick to that game mode and rarely cross over. They leech and divide the community while the main game mode gets infected with a selfish K/D obsessed mindset as that style of gameplay washes over, all while other players get fed up and quit. That's one of the major reasons why Natural Selection died and I sure as hell don't want that to happen in PS2.

[Vancha]

I have seen how this 'quick action' mode can destroy a game and it's sad how developers keep falling into the same trap (Battleground Europe is doing something similar, why splitting their already miniscule community further is mindboggling). The developers of the Natural Selection mod had the very same mindset as you (attract new players with a traditional mindless killing game mode, train them for the real thing etc), but it never works like that. The new players stick to that game mode and rarely cross over. They leech and divide the community while the main game mode gets infected with a selfish K/D obsessed mindset as that style of gameplay washes over, all while other players get fed up and quit. That's one of the major reasons why Natural Selection died and I sure as hell don't want that to happen in PS2.

Yup, adding battlegrounds and arenas in WoW really killed off raids...Oh wait.

I've never played Natural Selection, but like someone said above - if people would rather play the small game over the large one, it doesn't say much for the large one.

Besides, I don't think I specified that it would be a "traditional mindless killing game mode". What I said was said in response to people fearing that it would draw people away from the "proper fight" if it happened to be the sort of thing people could play a lot.

[Coreldan]

Yup, adding battlegrounds and arenas in WoW really killed off raids...Oh wait.

I've never played Natural Selection, but like someone said above - if people would rather play the small game over the large one, it doesn't say much for the large one.

Besides, I don't think I specified that it would be a "traditional mindless killing game mode". What I said was said in response to people fearing that it would draw people away from the "proper fight" if it happened to be the sort of thing people could play a lot.

I don't think PVE should be the comparable thing there, as they have somewhat different playerbases too.

Battleground and arena did, however, kill open world PVP. Now, one can probably argue that in the same way as WoWs PVE and PVP, the instanced combat and "normal combat" in PS would have slightly different playerbases, but they are still a lot more similar than PVE and PVP in wow are, for comparison.

Given, I'm not OVERLY concerned in PS's case for some reason, but I still am. The reason why I probably aint so concerned is that if the game is built from the ground up for the "open PVP" like current planetside, I figure majority of focus would stay on it and this instanced system might actually just a serve for some extra population. However, I still am worried that it may have a negative impact on what this game is unique for.

[Hamma]

They did these events before and it didn't kill the game. This simply makes it so griefing asshat's can't get involved.

It doesn't even have to be an instance, it could be a hidden continent that only CSRs/Admins could get to. Just a place to hold events without getting harassed. That's all I want, no battlegrounds, instanced combat, minigames or anything. Simply a walled off area to hold events without harassment or interfering with the main game world combat.

Can't get much more clear than that. ;)

[Desoxy]

I am with Spark and Hamma (and I guess 98% of the community) on this one, as I also witnessed the death of Natural Selection to the K/D-whoring-mode.. :(

But special continents that unlock every X days for a limited amount of players and that you have to preregister your outfit to compete over (for instance) might actually be a LOT of fun down the line - once the game as been released first, of course.. :p

[Tapman]

They did these events before and it didn't kill the game. This simply makes it so griefing asshat's can't get involved.

It doesn't even have to be an instance, it could be a hidden continent that only CSRs/Admins could get to. Just a place to hold events without getting harassed. That's all I want, no battlegrounds, instanced combat, minigames or anything. Simply a walled off area to hold events without harassment or interfering with the main game world combat.

Can't get much more clear than that. ;)

My thoughts exactly, to expand:

Have a special battle island or orbital platform that you have to register/schedule events with a GM where a platoon/division/outfit (limited only by standard population limits) can challenge other groups from ANY empire in various events like ANT racing (Demolition derby anyone?) or round-based games. Let the groups have friendly matches or give it stakes via resources and obviously keep track of statistics. You then set time and usage limits so that groups can't just lock the place for their own all the time, forcing them to get back to the real fight for the majority of the time. For good measure, give each player a timer for it that runs faster when they are in game and slower when not playing. All of this would prevent griefers from running amok and allow for more control while maintaining the massive scale and minimizing the effect on the persistent world that everyone else will still be fighting over.

I had a thought that people may want to spectate the matches, but this could obviously lead to cheating and would distract more people from the main fight so I think it would be much more awesome if it had a replay system similar to Halo where people can capture the match and throw it up on the internet later for anyone to see. This would definitely have to be a side-project when compared with content development and balancing but if it could turn into something where potential customers could go through every inch of the battle of the day/week/month/year/all-time (voted by the community of course) then we would have a constant stream of new players pouring in.

This is definitely something that needs to be held off on for at least 6 months to a year after release, the community needs to have time to adjust and build itself into the persistent global war that we all are craving before you introduce something that could distract some players from the tasks at hand.

[Vancha]

Battleground and arena did, however, kill open world PVP. Now, one can probably argue that in the same way as WoWs PVE and PVP, the instanced combat and "normal combat" in PS would have slightly different playerbases, but they are still a lot more similar than PVE and PVP in wow are, for comparison.
I think that's a definite case of the larger game sucking, rather than the smaller game drawing people away. WoW didn't have open world PvP as much as it gave people the ability to fight each other and provided nowhere to do it. Dark Age of Camelot on the other hand - superb open world PvP (for it's time, anyway).

If you get away from a predefined notion of what "instanced combat" would entail (not you specifically, Cor, just "you" to readers in general), it's really kind of silly to think that there isn't a single possible way it could be implemented in a successful way. Be it duels, tournaments, PvE, races, "olympics" etc.

[Logit]

I can't believe this is up for debate....NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

:thumbsup:

[MrVicchio]

OOOOOKKKKAAAYYYY!!!

Sheesh, I didn't mean to start a pissing contest on who could say "NO" the most!

I think a special event situation, like Hamma is discussion could and WOULD work, but the effort > Payoff for SoE is beyond my ability to determine.

[Logit]

OOOOOKKKKAAAYYYY!!!

Sheesh, I didn't mean to start a pissing contest on who could say "NO" the most!

I think a special event situation, like Hamma is discussion could and WOULD work, but the effort > Payoff for SoE is beyond my ability to determine.

SOE is crying about vehicle loading animations, I'm hard pressed to find them spending the time/money on something like this.

[Manitou]

SOE is crying about vehicle loading animations, I'm hard pressed to find them spending the time/money on something like this.
I don't see them "crying" about it. I see more people on this forum crying about innovative ideas than anything. Why is everyone so fearful of something different? Don't treat ideas that think outside the original PS box as anathema. Consider, discuss, point out weaknesses and flaws, good points and strong points.

[ShowNoMercy]

Why do we need a rigid instancing structure for outfit fights? If PS devoted the time and effort into making some tournament at some interval "x" then people would play it and say "hey that was fun, i want to play that again." (after all almost everyone is used to the play style and must enjoy it somewhat because CoD MW2 sold like 5mil copies in 24hours). However, here is the caveat: Once you have people sharing the sentiment of fighting these instanced battles (game rooms), SOE might make them an all the time option. At that point we stop, look up to the sky, and yell

"Why god? why were we so stupid in calling for instanced fighting when we know that it is the plague on humanity? when we know that everybody and their fucking mother plays instanced FPS games and there is only 1 true mmofps and we just ruined it by adding instanced play and it took over and now our mmofps is a second rate shitty instanced fps that can't compete with other more popular titles on the market and is being shut down."

At which point hopefully someone will remember and say,

"why didn't we take the advice of Sh0wN0Mercy and just make ONE continent where only outfit fighting takes place? why didn't we just make ONE continent where your only allegiance is to your outfit and all bases captured provide resources solely for your outfit? Looking back it was such a good idea ,much easier to add then instanced play, and never would have released the blight that is instanced FPS play."

That all being said, can we PLEASE avoid this instanced play takes over PS2 due to public outcry bullshit that will likely happen?

[CutterJohn]

and we just ruined it by adding instanced play

Please list reasons that its inclusion would ruin the game. Be specific, and cite examples.

[Manitou]

Please list reasons that its inclusion would ruin the game. Be specific, and cite examples.
/signed

[Baneblade]

Other than for organized events, no.

[Vancha]

Other than for organized events, no.
That was constructive Sobekeus. If you hadn't gone into detail of why it was a bad idea, your post could have ended up on the same level as all the other "lolno" posts in this thread. It's a good thing you didn't do that!

[Baneblade]

That was constructive Sobekeus. If you hadn't gone into detail of why it was a bad idea, your post could have ended up on the same level as all the other "lolno" posts in this thread. It's a good thing you didn't do that!

I can be verbose when required, but I also know when it is a waste of time to say more. Kind of like replying to you.

[Kurtz]

Absolutely not.

Things that divide your interest, divide your population, outfit and more. That strains relations and makes the game a chore instead of fun. WoW was f'ing evil that way.

The first days of planetside had everyone rallying up in Sanctuary trying to get into the biggest fights on the the hottest continents. If you couldn't get in, you felt like you were missing a party. That was what was so exciting about PS1.

[Vancha]

I can be verbose when required, but I also know when it is a waste of time to say more. Kind of like replying to you.
And yet still you do...

So far there's no good objection to it, apart from people thinking it could be a better game than the actual game - who I'm fairly sure are picturing something straight out of CoD, which it needn't be anything like - so this would seem to be the ideal thread to be verbose.

[ShowNoMercy]

Please list reasons that its inclusion would ruin the game. Be specific, and cite examples.

...If PS devoted the time and effort into making some tournament at some interval "x" then people would play it and say "hey that was fun, i want to play that again." (after all almost everyone is used to the play style and must enjoy it somewhat because CoD MW2 sold like 5mil copies in 24hours). However, here is the caveat: Once you have people sharing the sentiment of fighting these instanced battles (game rooms), SOE might make them an all the time option...

Maybe from that quote you didn't gather that if paying customers want more instanced play, (which is what everyone is used to) they will likely get it. They will not want to pay for a sub if they are restricted to only doing instanced battles every so often (however long that so often is, it won't be enough). Sony will undoubtedly give out greater access under the banner of "they want it, we already have it, lets just make it more available". At which point, the rift between the instanced players and MMO players widens. Whether we like it or not, the MMO nature of this game dictates that we have a large player base for meaningful combat to exist. We can't afford to have people getting distracted on instanced play trying to live out CoD in PS2. PS2 can not compete with titles like CoD MW3 and BF3, so why even bother? Beside instance play get booooring, they come out with a new CoD every year, PS1 is 8 years old and still going. big title FPS's can keep the instanced play, we can keep the MMO - nuff said.

So now it is on you, what is wrong with one continent devoted to outfit fighting? It allows for outfit vs outfit combat while at the same time preserving the MMO soul of PS.

[Manitou]

Maybe from that quote you didn't gather that if paying customers want more instanced play, (which is what everyone is used to) they will likely get it. They will not want to pay for a sub if they are restricted to only doing instanced battles every so often (however long that so often is, it won't be enough). Sony will undoubtedly give out greater access under the banner of "they want it, we already have it, lets just make it more available". At which point, the rift between the instanced players and MMO players widens. Whether we like it or not, the MMO nature of this game dictates that we have a large player base for meaningful combat to exist. We can't afford to have people getting distracted on instanced play trying to live out CoD in PS2. PS2 can not compete with titles like CoD MW3 and BF3, so why even bother? Beside instance play get booooring, they come out with a new CoD every year, PS1 is 8 years old and still going. big title FPS's can keep the instanced play, we can keep the MMO - nuff said.

So now it is on you, what is wrong with one continent devoted to outfit fighting? It allows for outfit vs outfit combat while at the same time preserving the MMO soul of PS.
I can chime in here a bit as an outfit leader.

I would actually prefer a scheduled event so that I can coordinate my team. This coordination would involve tactical practice, team selection, scheduling show-times, load-outs and other details.

Kinetic battle is great and it is one of the beautiful aspects of PS. But what if we look at these events as "icing on the cake" rather than the inclusive battles?

I would love to have something that is separate and closed that would allow for even multiple outfits in alliances to join in against other alliances from the different factions. This is cutting edge! To have the possibility to enter a battlefield where three different factions with equally numbered outfits come together in epic gladiator-type combat to the death or for capture and hold, or even some type of capture the flag. This incorporates some of the best points of a number of games out there.

[CutterJohn]

Maybe from that quote you didn't gather that if paying customers want more instanced play, (which is what everyone is used to) they will likely get it. They will not want to pay for a sub if they are restricted to only doing instanced battles every so often (however long that so often is, it won't be enough). Sony will undoubtedly give out greater access under the banner of "they want it, we already have it, lets just make it more available". At which point, the rift between the instanced players and MMO players widens.

A rift is different servers. Different empires. Different expansions. These things separate the players. Something in the game, thats a choice of where to go, how to play, is not very much of a rift.

Whether we like it or not, the MMO nature of this game dictates that we have a large player base for meaningful combat to exist. We can't afford to have people getting distracted on instanced play trying to live out CoD in PS2. PS2 can not compete with titles like CoD MW3 and BF3, so why even bother? Beside instance play get booooring, they come out with a new CoD every year, PS1 is 8 years old and still going. big title FPS's can keep the instanced play, we can keep the MMO - nuff said.

The open world combat needs a significant population. The arena.. much less. So your claim of sacrifice is only true for the people that prefer the open world aspects. Someone who doesn't, benefits. People that want a change of pace for the night benefit as well. The game benefits from grabbing up additional subs of people for whom the basic version isn't reason enough to play.


As for competing with cod and bf3, no, it won't be up to their standards. But its an additional style of gameplay you get to do with your PS friends. Don't even have to log out, just go have a couple matches. If you get bf3 or cod, you get a match based pvp and a sp campaign. If you get PS you could get match based pvp and open world faction pvp.

So now it is on you, what is wrong with one continent devoted to outfit fighting? It allows for outfit vs outfit combat while at the same time preserving the MMO soul of PS.

That rather leaves people not in outfits out in the cold, now doesn't it?

And what do you think a continent with a small population cap is? Its pretty much an arena match..


You are correct when you say a PS arena match system would not hold up to BF3 or CoDs. Which is why your fears are unfounded. Very few people would play that, and that alone, because PSs true defining feature is its massive battlefields with huge armies. What it is is an optional extra to serve as a change of pace and additional content, something players can do with their friends in the spirit of competition.

Unless its better than BF3 and CoD. In which case nobody has a right to complain about anything.. Two awesome games in one? Where can I sign up.

[Kietharr]

Absolutely not, instancing is killing the industry. The very idea of an instance runs counter to the idea of a persistent world.

[Infektion]

Think Battle Grounds if you will in WoW.

A friend at worked asked me if that would be part of PS2, and I just blinked at him like he was crazy. But he made some good points about making intense combat that could be "better" on one hand then open world fighting.

Thoughts?

you and your friend need to go back to WoW... seriously, if PS followed WAR's footsteps for listening to the stupid whiny carebear community then PS is DOOMED within a year. War Hammer Online was supposed to be an all out PVP game with no instances... then the pedophiles came out and started complaining and suggesting and since good gaming ideas are out numbered by the sheer size of ignorant carebears, then it's hard to win and get a game out that doesn't require a pacifier and diaper to control. That being said.... ASHERON'S CALL FOR THE WIN!!!!!!! 2001 - GOLDEN YEAR! PvP - The way it's meant to be played.

[headcrab13]

Worst idea since the jump-to-conclusions mat.

It's just a prototype, mind you.

[Malorn]

I suppose I can provide reasons why this idea is terrible. Probably already been touched on, but...


1) Planetside is about the huge persistent world and epic battles. Its not sating your epeen with outfit wars. Its easy enough to set up outfit challenges and contribute to that persisent world at the same time.

2) It splits the player base. If you have some people in instanced combat you have that many people not out in the persistent world which makes the battles in the peristent world far less epic.

Far better for the outfits to do their little epeen comparisons on real continents.

[ShowNoMercy]

A rift is different servers. Different empires. Different expansions. These things separate the players. Something in the game, thats a choice of where to go, how to play, is not very much of a rift.

there is a rift between what i said and what you comprehended.


That rather leaves people not in outfits out in the cold, now doesn't it?

And what do you think a continent with a small population cap is? Its pretty much an arena match.

No and I never said small pop cap or implied anything about the pop cap being less than normal.

Individuals without an outfit could go out there in a squad, I am not sure if I mentioned it in this thread, but I have discussed this idea before and mentioned allegiance to outfit and/or squad in order to not alienate non-outfit players and also encourage players with no outfit to team up and join one.

The continent would be very free form similar to eve's 0.0 which gave me the idea. O and don't give me some BS about how it would cause inter-empire tension, tournament style instances would encourage the same this.

Final decision: strict, regulated, rigid instance tournament structure or free form, persistent, open outfit controlled cont?

[opticalshadow]

Why is everyone so fearful of something different? .

because planetside worked, it worked great. alot of the problems with ps was the tech limitation and bad moves by soe. they have a chance at making a new game, and every step of the way they try to tweak what worked, what went right, instead of what went wrong.

ideas liek this are so oposed because thats not what planetside was, and its not the point of the game, soe is borrowing ideas from other game, inspired by them, and ideas liek this take that to the level of coping them. most of us dont want this as a feature because its missing the whole point of planetside, and every feature they work on thats outside the point of the game, takes away the things they could be working on.

some of us have been paying ps since its release, we know why it failed, we know what has worked in the past, we played all the little events, and we play today knowing what the game needs, what it lacks, and i can promise you the number one thing the game lacks is game modes to use less people.

[Vancha]

because planetside worked, it worked great. alot of the problems with ps was the tech limitation and bad moves by soe. they have a chance at making a new game, and every step of the way they try to tweak what worked, what went right, instead of what went wrong.

ideas liek this are so oposed because thats not what planetside was, and its not the point of the game, soe is borrowing ideas from other game, inspired by them, and ideas liek this take that to the level of coping them. most of us dont want this as a feature because its missing the whole point of planetside, and every feature they work on thats outside the point of the game, takes away the things they could be working on.

some of us have been paying ps since its release, we know why it failed, we know what has worked in the past, we played all the little events, and we play today knowing what the game needs, what it lacks, and i can promise you the number one thing the game lacks is game modes to use less people.

:doh:


2) It splits the player base. If you have some people in instanced combat you have that many people not out in the persistent world which makes the battles in the peristent world far less epic.
What if it drew additional people to the game, resulting in more people out in the persistent world than there would have been?

[DashRev]

What if it drew additional people to the game, resulting in more people out in the persistent world than there would have been?

What if it made PS2 deposit $15 into your high-yield savings account every month? It doesn't, and it won't.

Feature 1 doesn't magically make people come play feature 2. Instances and open-world mechanics are dichotomous. They are competing aspects of the same game that draw on the same pool of players. Adding instances will negatively impact the availability in non-instanced content.

It happened with PvP in WoW, it happened with PvE in DAoC, it happens every time it is made an option. Some people want the fastest, most accessible gameplay regardless of its quality.

[Headrattle]

I wouldn't be opposed to an open training facility where you can mess around like that. Take the vehicle training area and allow people to fight in that area in order to train. But I doubt this will happen since they took sancs away and won't be able to coordinate like we could before anyway.

However...

You aren't always forced to play on the front lines. Continents are big, there are a lot of areas where smaller skirmishes take place and yet goals are needed. So why have instances? Just seems redundant and taking away from the actual gameplay.

[Manitou]

some of us have been paying ps since its release, we know why it failed, we know what has worked in the past, we played all the little events, and we play today knowing what the game needs, what it lacks, and i can promise you the number one thing the game lacks is game modes to use less people.
I was there from alpha until BFRs, then did short stints afterwards. I don't think this will hurt the game at all.

[Azren]

Think Battle Grounds if you will in WoW.

A friend at worked asked me if that would be part of PS2, and I just blinked at him like he was crazy. But he made some good points about making intense combat that could be "better" on one hand then open world fighting.

Thoughts?

After lengthly consideration I had to come to the following conclusion; Hell no!

Instances go against everything MMO stands for.

[CidHighwind]

he's a non-PS player never having even set foot in the original

That's his problem.

[MrVicchio]

Pros:
Scripted/Measured goals that must be achieved to "win".
Controlled number of combatants allowing for balancing
Good for shorter period of play for those that don't have the time to "find the fight" as it were.

Cons:
Takes people away from "The war".
Repetition, SoE would have to take valuable time away from creating the real content to making "instanced" events
Doesn't fit in with the PS "universe"

[Bags]

What if it made PS2 deposit $15 into your high-yield savings account every month? It doesn't, and it won't.

Feature 1 doesn't magically make people come play feature 2. Instances and open-world mechanics are dichotomous. They are competing aspects of the same game that draw on the same pool of players. Adding instances will negatively impact the availability in non-instanced content.

It happened with PvP in WoW, it happened with PvE in DAoC, it happens every time it is made an option. Some people want the fastest, most accessible gameplay regardless of its quality.

This^infinity

Anyone who thinks this won't segregate the community and lower the size of large scale fights is wrong.

Not to mention sony will never implement this as a normal feature since planetside's big thing is FIGHTS WITH THOUSANDS OF PLAYERS, not 30 vs 30.

[xcel]

Look we can sit here and argue pointlessly about it all day, but the fact is that instancing goes against the main vision of the game, which is: no instancing. For the love of god, one of the first things that Higby said during the community address was that there is NO INSTANCING...I mean...what more do you people need? Hoping for even a little instancing gameplay is wishful thinking AT BEST because the whole game is designed to be without instancing...the simple solution for people that like match based gameplay is to just pick up another game....

seriously...the people on this forum sometimes.......................................

[Baneblade]

And yet still you do...

So far there's no good objection to it, apart from people thinking it could be a better game than the actual game - who I'm fairly sure are picturing something straight out of CoD, which it needn't be anything like - so this would seem to be the ideal thread to be verbose.

I have nothing more to say about it. I wouldn't wake the sleeping dragon.

[InternetZombie]

Why dont we use the VR training for this kind of stuff?

Allow people to go into VR and set up whatever game types and things they want but since it's VR there are no rewards. All your doing by joining these VR events is wasting your time (and probably having fun).

Why not even let an Outfit go into VR and set up something like a base assult so they can co-ordinate unique stratagies and the like without any real consequences (or benifits) of learning these stratagies out on the unforgiving battlefield?

Basicly I guess waht I'm saying is why not give us a sandbox to do whatever we want in with VR training.

[Malorn]

Pros:
Scripted/Measured goals that must be achieved to "win".
Controlled number of combatants allowing for balancing
Good for shorter period of play for those that don't have the time to "find the fight" as it were.
There are already measured goals to "win" in PlanetSide. Gain territory, take it away, etc. Not really a "pro" for instanced combat.

"controlled number" for balancing is rather pointless. Wars shift constantly back and forth. How outfits adapt to being outnumbered and how outfits adapt to having more personnel than needed to accomplish a task are important organizational and tactical skills in Planetside.

If they fix the pacing issue and make it easy to "get to the fight" then this isn't a pro anymore. In fact if they dont have it easy to get to the fight I would say they have failed and should not ship until they do. This shouldn't be a pro for instanced combat.

"even teams" is about the only thing that you gain from instanced combat, and if that's really important to you and a persistent world isn't, then there's plenty of 16v16 games out there for you to play. You don't have to play one of the only games that offers a persistent world and massive combat.

Cons:
Takes people away from "The war".
Repetition, SoE would have to take valuable time away from creating the real content to making "instanced" events
Doesn't fit in with the PS "universe"

These are huge cons, and I'll add another.

If you are doing outfit vs outfit, that's 2 sides. There are 3 sides in Planetside, which means if you take 16-30+ people out of an empire and you do that for two empires (or the same empire) then you are handicapping those empires in "The War" and the empire that isn't participating in the instance got indirectly buffed because you just took 30-60 opponents away from them. It causes imbalance.


There is absolutely no need for instanced combat in PS2 and it would be disastrous for the game if it did. You need look no further than Warhammer Online, where Mythic mixed RvR with instanced battlegrounds. The RvR became spotty at best. World PvP in WoW died once battlegrounds came into existence. You can't have instanced combat and persistent world combat in the same game and have both be successful. They're competing for the same playerbase, and the nature of open persistent world requires as many people as possible to be successful. You take people away from that you may as well kill the game now and call PS2 a watered down Battlefield competitor. The persistent open world and massive battles is what makes Planetside Planetside.

[Vancha]

What if it made PS2 deposit $15 into your high-yield savings account every month? It doesn't, and it won't.

Feature 1 doesn't magically make people come play feature 2. Instances and open-world mechanics are dichotomous. They are competing aspects of the same game that draw on the same pool of players. Adding instances will negatively impact the availability in non-instanced content.

It happened with PvP in WoW, it happened with PvE in DAoC, it happens every time it is made an option. Some people want the fastest, most accessible gameplay regardless of its quality.

And again, people seem to be jumping to the conclusion of CoD gameplay (plus, I already explained what happened with PvP in WoW. What the hell?).

I give up. I'm stuck in an endless cycle of...

"It'd pull people away from the game!"
"Why?"
"*enter CoD gameplay equivalent of instanced combat*"
"What if it was nothing like that?"
"Look at X game!"
"That happened because of Y"
"...It'd pull people away from the game!"

All I'll say is, both SOE-run events (think EVE ATs) and accommodation for player-run events (killaXgirlz tournaments) would be nothing but a boon for PS2.

[Bags]

And again, people seem to be jumping to the conclusion of CoD gameplay (plus, I already explained what happened with PvP in WoW. What the hell?).

I give up. I'm stuck in an endless cycle of...

"It'd pull people away from the game!"
"Why?"
"*enter CoD gameplay equivalent of instanced combat*"
"What if it was nothing like that?"
"Look at X game!"
"That happened because of Y"
"...It'd pull people away from the game!"

All I'll say is, both SOE-run events (think EVE ATs) and accommodation for player-run events (killaXgirlz tournaments) would be nothing but a boon for PS2.

You know it's funny, the guy you quoted didn't mention call of duty. Instanced combat will draw players away from non-instanced combat.

[Azren]

Honestly I dislike instances in any MMO game. They are nothing, but a fast and simple way to make fast progression, and are abused as such.

Someone came up with the idea to use instances for outfit battles. Care to explain how an outfit devoted to tank driving will ever defeat an outfit devoted for air cav? Because that is what the devs are aiming for; outfits for specific roles.

There is one way something like this could work: Have it in VR area, with no rewards whatsoever. If you could set up a tower assault for example, that would be a nice way to test some tactics before trying them out for real.

[Vancha]

You know it's funny, the guy you quoted didn't mention call of duty. Instanced combat will draw players away from non-instanced combat.

No, but he did use the examples of WoW and DAoC, as well as saying the instanced and non-instanced were dichotomous, so he was obviously thinking of something similar enough that it could draw players away from the big fight.

Though I suppose you're right, he was more of the "Look at X game!" and thus you followed with the "...It'd pull people away from the game!" as in my example. Now we need someone to mention Call of Duty, and the sequence is complete.

[Bags]

Call of Duty.

[Vancha]

Thank you. :groovy:

[exLupo]

They did these events before and it didn't kill the game. This simply makes it so griefing asshat's can't get involved.

EVE holds regular Alliance Tournaments. Off in a segregated segment of space with set rules and bla bla bla. The point being, EVE has a place and a time for inter-alliance one-upmanship that, intentionally, has no impact on the rest of the game. It exists and has merit and does not harm world PvP.

Done in the right way and for the right reasons, team v team combat can enrich the play experience with no ill effect. Bad in one place does not equal bad in all places.

A PS analogue would be either formal SOE events -or- an Outfit v Outfit closed engagement arena. If it's based on a sign-up list or some kind of time limiting rotation, SOE could even broadcast it. I know I'd get down on some PlanetSide.tv.

[DashRev]

No, but he did use the examples of WoW and DAoC, as well as saying the instanced and non-instanced were dichotomous, so he was obviously thinking of something similar enough that it could draw players away from the big fight.

Though I suppose you're right, he was more of the "Look at X game!" and thus you followed with the "...It'd pull people away from the game!" as in my example. Now we need someone to mention Call of Duty, and the sequence is complete.

I cited examples of games where the original existed without an instance-based alternative, that alternative was then added, and the original gameplay style suffered for it.

Instances draw players away from the primary open-world gameplay. That really is the only argument I should need. The stated goal of PS2 is total war on a massive scale consisting of thousands of players. Anything that explicitly interferes with that goal has no place in PS2.

It makes no difference what you're doing in those instances, whether it be "duels, tournaments, PvE, races, or Olympics" it still creates their own segregated little bubble where players are separated from the overall game.

Its unfortunate that you expose yourself to griefers that way, but to be honest I sympathize more with them than with you. They're the ones coming along and saying, "Hey, Jackass, there's a war going on and we're underpopped on Hossin because you pulled two squads to go race ANTs around on Oshur.

PlanetSide is not laden with mini-games and instanced honor-duels for a reason; that is not what the game is about.

[Vancha]

Hey now, you did "Look at X game!" and "...It'd pull people away from the game!" in the same post. That's cheating.

I cited examples of games where the original existed without an instance-based alternative, that alternative was then added, and the original gameplay style suffered for it.
No, you cited examples of games where the instance-based alternative was either better (WoW) or required (I assume you were referring to ToA?)


Instances draw players away from the primary open-world gameplay. That really is the only argument I should need. The stated goal of PS2 is total war on a massive scale consisting of thousands of players. Anything that explicitly interferes with that goal has no place in PS2.

It makes no difference what you're doing in those instances, whether it be "duels, tournaments, PvE, races, or Olympics" it still creates their own segregated little bubble where players are separated from the overall game.

Its unfortunate that you expose yourself to griefers that way, but to be honest I sympathize more with them than with you. They're the ones coming along and saying, "Hey, Jackass, there's a war going on and we're underpopped on Hossin because you pulled two squads to go race ANTs around on Oshur.

PlanetSide is not laden with mini-games and instanced honor-duels for a reason; that is not what the game is about.
It's a good thing SOE haven't stated any intention to turn PS2 into a sandbox game, otherwise everything you just said would directly contradict SOE's plans for PS2 (or perhaps I should say "design philosophy".)

Oh...

[Zulthus]

Sandbox really doesn't have anything to do with instancing. It means open-world gameplay, not 15x15 feet zone gameplay with 8 players.

[Vancha]

Sandbox really doesn't have anything to do with instancing. It means open-world gameplay, not 15x15 feet zone gameplay with 8 players.

Sandbox does however means having the freedom to do what you'd like within the limits of gameplay, whether it be duels in a tower or having ANT races on Oshur. The idea that anything other than participating in the huge battles should be automatically dismissed would make PS2 even more restrictive than the original.

[Goku]

I think there is a place for such a feature in the game.

You could have Outfit vs Outfit fighting areas for say 1 squad up to a platoon. This would be good for training to settling disputes over who is the better outfit. The area would be perfect for events such as Outfit Wars. I would love to see this done yearly for instance.

I wouldn't even mind allowing a single outfit to do this. If you want to do training for certain tactics. Have 1 squad stay your empire then another can morph to another doing the battle.

This would of been great even in PS. I know there is people who think it will take away from the game population, but I do not think it will be that major. First there will be plenty of pop going on the real maps as that is what the game is made for. Just allow the players who want to do at certain times allowed to do so. Make sure there is no rewards for instanced fighting as well. That will make sure it does not become a true alternative to playing the game.

EDIT: Reading this thread there are many people concerned about this taking away from the real fights going on in game. Well perhaps putting a limiters on doing instanced fighting will help. Only allow outfits to actually do the instanced fighting along with possibly merging squads with allied ones. This keeps randoms from forming a squad to even there being a randomized placers for randoms to do the fighting. Make these instanced fighting limited to only a couple matches a day per player (account)/outfit. This bars outfits from doing this too much or people continually joining other outfits to keep doing instanced matches. There should be a cost attached onto actually during these matches. If Outfit points are still in game and there are other options to spend points on it will make Outfits be more considerate on what they spend points on. This is on top off putting a limiter on how many instanced fights can be going on at one time in order to bar too many players doing it at once. Not sure of what a current hard cap could be, but high enough to accommodate a good amount of outfits though low enough to not take away from the actual game play.

[Tigersmith]

GLobal Agenda is thataway ------->

Yep this sums it up, no instances please. even for small team combat. go on the test server if u wanna play small teams haha

[DashRev]

No, you cited examples of games where the instance-based alternative was either better (WoW) or required (I assume you were referring to ToA?)

It's a good thing SOE haven't stated any intention to turn PS2 into a sandbox game, otherwise everything you just said would directly contradict SOE's plans for PS2 (or perhaps I should say "design philosophy".)

Oh...

As someone (I assume) who is familiar with the RvR of DAoC, how you can honestly think Battlegrounds were "better" than open-world PvP in WoW is beyond me. Blizzard didn't add BGs because PvP wasn't fun, they added them for convenience. Players could now just sit in their capital city and wait in a queue instead of flying out to one of the PvP hotspots. In theory, they worked as a type of "Instant Action" button.

As for DAoC, I was actually referencing the actual instances, as ToA was just zoned content. As in, the simplistic single-group instances that were used to level and entirely emptied out Darkness Falls of levelers and removed any need for the Finns and Redcaps groups. You would zone in, complete the objective (either kill X number of mobs, kill the named mob, or clear the instance) zone out, reset, and repeat. You never saw another player in PvE again.

And finally, just like Zulthus said, "sandbox" does not mean "throw every conceivable feature into the game just because not having them might be considered restrictive."

Instances, in any form, just do not fit with what PlanetSide means; it is a massively multiplayer, open-world, persistent battlefield. Every one of those defining characteristics would be diminished by the addition of instanced content.

[Vancha]

As someone (I assume) who is familiar with the RvR of DAoC, how you can honestly think Battlegrounds were "better" than open-world PvP in WoW is beyond me. Blizzard didn't add BGs because PvP wasn't fun, they added them for convenience. Players could now just sit in their capital city and wait in a queue instead of flying out to one of the PvP hotspots. In theory, they worked as a type of "Instant Action" button.
I think BGs were better than open-world PvP in WoW because I played DAoC. Open world PvP in WoW was terrible. Worse than terrible. It wasn't accommodated at all (a development failure).


As for DAoC, I was actually referencing the actual instances, as ToA was just zoned content. As in, the simplistic single-group instances that were used to level and entirely emptied out Darkness Falls of levelers and removed any need for the Finns and Redcaps groups. You would zone in, complete the objective (either kill X number of mobs, kill the named mob, or clear the instance) zone out, reset, and repeat. You never saw another player in PvE again.
I started DAoC after instances already existed, but you're basically pointing to another development failure. The benefit to doing instances was so great that it wasn't worth doing it any other way.


And finally, just like Zulthus said, "sandbox" does not mean "throw every conceivable feature into the game just because not having them might be considered restrictive."
And if you read his post, then you also read my reply. My objection was to your notion that there's only one style of gameplay anyone should ever participate in in Planetside.



Instances, in any form, just do not fit with what PlanetSide means; it is a massively multiplayer, open-world, persistent battlefield. Every one of those defining characteristics would be diminished by the addition of instanced content.
Then what were continents? What of the battles that happened when people were trying to open up new continents? If a squad of a VS outfit went to a new continent to hack a base and a squad of a TR outfit went to resecure it (and did so), how was that any different?

When people went to empty continents to mess around with ANT races or tournaments, or when outfits went to practice drills, did you notice their absence (before the game was practically dead)? Would them having an instance to do those in really have been any different?

[Goku]

Yep this sums it up, no instances please. even for small team combat. go on the test server if u wanna play small teams haha

Way too much of a crusade against some type of instance that isn't meant for primary game play. There is NO reason not to have some kind of battle area for outfits on opposing sides wanting to face each other. If people want to do this more often then other modes then oh well. Why should you force them to do only the huge zerg fight if they want something more coordinated every now and then?

[DashRev]

I think BGs were better than open-world PvP in WoW because I played DAoC. Open world PvP in WoW was terrible. Worse than terrible. It wasn't accommodated at all (a development failure).

I started DAoC after instances already existed, but you're basically pointing to another development failure. The benefit to doing instances was so great that it wasn't worth doing it any other way.

And if you read his post, then you also read my reply. My objection was to your notion that there's only one style of gameplay anyone should ever participate in in Planetside.

Then what were continents? What of the battles that happened when people were trying to open up new continents? If a squad of a VS outfit went to a new continent to hack a base and a squad of a TR outfit went to resecure it (and did so), how was that any different?

When people went to empty continents to mess around with ANT races or tournaments, or when outfits went to practice drills, did you notice their absence (before the game was practically dead)? Would them having an instance to do those in really have been any different?

To start, in an ideal world, how do you propose instances fit into PlanetSide? If the two are perfectly balanced, do you see 50% of players participating in open-world combat and 50% in instances at any given time? 70%/30%? How do developers strike this balance? You've replied to every example given that it was just a poor implementation of instances. To me that suggests that finding that flawless balance is much more difficult than you give it credit. Why would it be any easier for SOE? Can you even find an example of it working perfectly?

As for your "sandbox" rationale, where do we draw the line? You're a really ardent supporter of instancing. What happens when we find a really ardent supporter of PvE raiding? Of an in-game auction house? Of space battles? Of submarine warfare? Of Minecraft-style terrain manipulation? Or any other fringe feature?

The reality is, game development is not a magical, infinite machine. You don't simply input ideas and output quality gaming. These things take resources, namely money and production time. The more elements you try to squeeze into a game, the more resources it requires to make a quality game. In practice, the best games are made by realistic developers. These developers take a core set of concepts, and spend years hammering them out to make a balanced, polished, and complete game.

PlanetSide, and its sequel, have a stated focus. The game exists around a massively multiplayer, open-world, persistent battlefield featuring hundreds if not thousands of players vying for territory control. Any feature first needs to be tested against this statement; will this idea further our goal in delivering these concepts in a quality game.

Instancing does not further the stated design goals of the PlanetSide universe.

[CutterJohn]

Yep this sums it up, no instances please. even for small team combat. go on the test server if u wanna play small teams haha

You realize that using the test server like this makes it functionally identical to an instance, don't you?

:rofl:

Well, I guess we figured out that its just the name that trips people up. Instance bad, test server good.

[Vancha]

To start, in an ideal world, how do you propose instances fit into PlanetSide? If the two are perfectly balanced, do you see 50% of players participating in open-world combat and 50% in instances at any given time? 70%/30%? How do developers strike this balance? You've replied to every example given that it was just a poor implementation of instances. To me that suggests that finding that flawless balance is much more difficult than you give it credit. Why would it be any easier for SOE? Can you even find an example of it working perfectly?
98/2%? I'm not asking for anything more than a room with a lock.

Though yes, if SOE implemented instances with zero development of open-world combat (WoW) or gave people a 500% xp bonus (DAoC) I'd fully expect instances to become the most popular place in the game.

As far as where instances could fit into PS2, I'll have to get back to you on that one, seeing as I have yet to play the game. :p

As for your "sandbox" rationale, where do we draw the line? You're a really ardent supporter of instancing. What happens when we find a really ardent supporter of PvE raiding? Of an in-game auction house? Of space battles? Of submarine warfare? Of Minecraft-style terrain manipulation? Or any other fringe feature?
I hate instancing. I'm just enjoying the debate.

I wouldn't be opposed to PVE, space battles, submarine warfare or map building if they were somehow implemented correctly. In fact, if PvE were implemented, instances are where it could happen.



The reality is, game development is not a magical, infinite machine. You don't simply input ideas and output quality gaming. These things take resources, namely money and production time. The more elements you try to squeeze into a game, the more resources it requires to make a quality game. In practice, the best games are made by realistic developers. These developers take a core set of concepts, and spend years hammering them out to make a balanced, polished, and complete game.

Instancing does not further the stated design goals of the PlanetSide universe.
I don't expect to see instances, PvE or additional planets anywhere near release, but if they decide to go down the EVE route of constantly updating their game, who knows what we could see or where we could be 8 years down the road.

[Dreamcast]

No......


Only place where this should be possible is the Virtual training......if it is still in the game then there should be virtual training for squads to test out tactics or whatever, there outfits can get together and compete if they want.

[knaggsy]

Please please please no instances other than those used for VR training.

The only other way I would want them is for outfit vs outfit fights for example for events which have no effect on the PS2 map or game but its like a mini-game within the game outfits can play against each other for pride and glory.