Instant Seat Switching

[Zulthus]

So we noticed in the PS2 stream that you can now instantly switch seats from inside a vehicle without exposing yourself.

I personally dislike this. You should have to expose yourself and get in the proper seat to use a gun... not even a matter of enter/exit anims anymore but this just doesn't sit well with me. They're just driving the Sunderer and instantly switch to the gun to kill someone... I just don't like the idea of it.

What do you think?

[LostAlgorithm]

Do you have to get out of a van to move from being in a passenger seat to driving? Same logic can apply here.

[Hmr85]

Do you have to get out of a van to move from being in a passenger seat to driving? Same logic can apply here.

I have to agree with this. Only thing I would change is that there is a slight delay in the time it takes to swap seats. 3 or 4 seconds would do.

[Stardouser]

I think it's very inexpedient to have to get out. Especially when you know that it's a matter of stepping out of your seat and up to the turret control inside the cab, so not even lore supports this.

[Zulthus]

I think it's very inexpedient to have to get out. Especially when you know that it's a matter of stepping out of your seat and up to the turret control inside the cab, so not even lore supports this.

It depends on the vehicle however, such as the Liberator ball turret. You'd have to get out to access it.

[Virulence]

I have to agree with this. Only thing I would change is that there is a slight delay in the time it takes to swap seats. 3 or 4 seconds would do.

Small delay on firing the weapon after switching seats would probably be easier - although, to a degree, this may already be the case even if it isn't hard implemented; if you switch seats to shoot something you're probably going to use a few seconds to bring the turret around, anyway, compared to having someone actively using it, so...

[CutterJohn]

Definitely needs a time delay, both to switch and to power up the equipment, and again when you switch back.

Also, the driver should be locked into the drivers seat unless the vehicle is motionless, for both ground vehicles and aircraft.

Really its just the tanks and libs that have to worry about this. The tank driver should not be able to hop into the AA turret in case aircav shows up.. completely destroys the point of having a gunner. And I don't want to see lib pilots figuring out how to line up their turret from the cockpit, and flicking to the gunner seat, shooting, and going back, without falling.

[Zulthus]

Do you have to get out of a van to move from being in a passenger seat to driving? Same logic can apply here.

There would logically be a delay too... as I said above different vehicles have different designs.

[SKYeXile]

manually switch imo. you should have to choose in advance what locations you need guns on and be prepared for possible threads. if they dont what that, atleast have a timed delay to get into a new location.

[Death2All]

manually switch imo. you should have to choose in advance what locations you need guns

I like this. Your penalty for choosing the wrong seat should be...Well you're in the wrong seat, tough luck. Better not make that mistake in the future.

I just don't like seat changing, even with a delay on firing, or movement, or anything I still dislike it greatly. Anything that let's you switch from a gunner seat to a driver seat without being in any danger (apart from a delay in movement or firing) is lame. It always boils down to people camping around in their tanks spamming, only to switch to the driver seat and zoom away once they're in any real danger. That is boring. Please don't degenerate PS into yet another lame modern FPS manifested with the most borderline retarded mechanics to ever plague games.

[Zekeen]

Too quick will take out the tactical role of preparing for an enemy. You'd have to think ahead in PS1. Getting out, going to the next spot, and then getting back in - while under fire a lot of the time. It made you get to the gunner seat when you knew the enemy was around, instead of just sitting in the cockpit waiting for them.

I think it's fine to be done inside the vehicle, but a delay really would be the most balanced bet.

[Envenom]

Do you have to get out of a van to move from being in a passenger seat to driving? Same logic can apply here.


This. ^

[Death2All]

This. ^

Everytime I see someone arguing realism when it comes to video games I want to kill myself. Seriously. Leave behind your delusions and grandeur that realism = fun. It doesn't.

If you want ultra realism and sensible game mechanics the mirror that of reality, go play a simulation. Please stop trying to beat your non-sensible ideals into a game where there is no place for them.

Oh wait, what's what? The majority of PSU's community feels the same way as the guy who posted that? Fuck :evil:.

[SKYeXile]

Everytime I see someone arguing realism when it comes to video games I want to kill myself. Seriously. Leave behind your delusions and grandeur that realism = fun. It doesn't.

If you want ultra realism and sensible game mechanics the mirror that of reality, go play a simulation. Please stop trying to beat your non-sensible ideals into a game where there is no place for them.

Oh wait, what's what? The majority of PSU's community feels the same way as the guy who posted that? Fuck :evil:.

PSU, we like realism in our video games.

[Envenom]

Everytime I see someone arguing realism when it comes to video games I want to kill myself. Seriously. Leave behind your delusions and grandeur that realism = fun. It doesn't.

If you want ultra realism and sensible game mechanics the mirror that of reality, go play a simulation. Please stop trying to beat your non-sensible ideals into a game where there is no place for them.

Oh wait, what's what? The majority of PSU's community feels the same way as the guy who posted that? Fuck :evil:.

This has nothing to do with realism. It has to do with FUN. Think game mechanics. Why impose the extra annoying step of exiting a vehicle and then making the player re-enter. You're already in the damn thing! GAMEPLAY friend. Think about it.

[p0intman]

add it, im past the point of caring. it'll get added to the list of things ill abuse the hell out of to make people cry.

[SniperSteve]

Since it looks like they are doing away with the icons for the seats on the ground, interior seat switching looks like the way it is going to be.

I am worried delayed seat switching will result in frustration, and that instant seat switching will result in drivers hot-swapping seating to use other weapons between reloads or something of that nature. Not sure if that is a bad thing, but will probably happen.

To sum-up: I really don't care too much.

[Death2All]

This has nothing to do with realism. It has to do with FUN. Think game mechanics. Why impose the extra annoying step of exiting a vehicle and then making the player re-enter. You're already in the damn thing! GAMEPLAY friend. Think about it.

"It's not about realism it's about fun! Add a realistic mechanic because it's fun"


I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

You can twist it and rephrase it all you want, it still boils down the simple fact that you want to add realism into the game because you perceive it as fun or enjoyable.

I already gave my example of what it detracts from gameplay, you haven't said anything other than it's "fun". You've lost your credibility thanks to your subjective, narrow minded 12 year old opinion.

Either give some evidence to support your theory or go away. "becuz itz fun xD" is not an argument.

[Envenom]

"It's not about realism it's about fun! Add a realistic mechanic because it's fun"


I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

You can twist it and rephrase it all you want, it still boils down the simple fact that you want to add realism into the game because you perceive it as fun or enjoyable.

I already gave my example of what it detracts from gameplay, you haven't said anything other than it's "fun". You've lost your credibility thanks to your subjective, narrow minded 12 year old opinion.

Either give some evidence to support your theory or go away. "becuz itz fun xD" is not an argument.

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want? :)

Thanks for the snarky response :love:

[Death2All]

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want? :)

Thanks for the snarky response :love:

Thanks for not addressing any of the points I made and avoiding the discussion entirely. Since you don't have anything useful to add to the discussion other than direct responses to me, completely disregarding the thread topic I think you can go ahead and not post anymore. Thanks.


"Someone is getting the better of me? Better resort to being defensive and bring up my irrelevant Battlefield experience and throw in some emoticons to suggest that I'm not even slightly riled up! That will show him!"

[Zenben]

"It's not about realism it's about fun! Add a realistic mechanic because it's fun"


I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

You can twist it and rephrase it all you want, it still boils down the simple fact that you want to add realism into the game because you perceive it as fun or enjoyable.

I already gave my example of what it detracts from gameplay, you haven't said anything other than it's "fun". You've lost your credibility thanks to your subjective, narrow minded 12 year old opinion.

Either give some evidence to support your theory or go away. "becuz itz fun xD" is not an argument.

Who are you to dictate what is fun and what is not? Maybe to him, realism IS fun. It's all subjective, dude. Grow up.

On-topic, I don't like the idea of someone pulling a tank with AA on it, locking the gunner's seat, and just instantly seat switching when they see a plane. If there is seat-switching, it should only be for non-drivers/pilots and it should have a delay.

[Zekeen]

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want? :)

Thanks for the snarky response :love:

It works well for a fast points game with racking up the kills, but it doesn't "quite" fit with Planetside. PS is a much more tactical game, and not about doing things faster, but doing things smarter and better. It's more on relying upon allies than doing it all yourself. That's why this is a hot topic. It's better to have a gunner than be a driver and jump to gunner instantly.

[Timealude]

So we noticed in the PS2 stream that you can now instantly switch seats from inside a vehicle without exposing yourself.

I personally dislike this. You should have to expose yourself and get in the proper seat to use a gun... not even a matter of enter/exit anims anymore but this just doesn't sit well with me. They're just driving the Sunderer and instantly switch to the gun to kill someone... I just don't like the idea of it.

What do you think?

wasnt this feature in ps1?

[Envenom]

Thanks for not addressing any of the points I made and avoiding the discussion entirely. Since you don't have anything useful to add to the discussion other than direct responses to me, completely disregarding the thread topic I think you can go ahead and not post anymore. Thanks.


"Someone is getting the better of me? Better resort to being defensive and bring up my irrelevant Battlefield experience and throw in some emoticons to suggest that I'm not even slightly riled up! That will show him!"

You haven't addressed MY points. How is adding the extra step of exiting a vehicle add anything to gameplay other than slowing it down and stinting the action? And how Battlefield an irrelevant experience? BF: Vehicle combat on an immense scale. They've got it nailed down friend. The proof is in the pudding; BF is one of the longest running and most successful large scale vehicular combat games in our generation. It only makes sense to draw comparisons.

Let's stop with the childish putdowns. I'm here to discuss a point, not watch you get passionate over seat switching and have an aneurysm. :lol:

[Death2All]

Who are you to dictate what is fun and what is not? Maybe to him, realism IS fun. It's all subjective, dude. Grow up.
Yeah, maybe I was being a little over zealous deciding what's fun or not, still doesn't give him an excuse to disregard the topic and spew out irrelevant garbage that doesn't pertain to anything at all in a feeble attempt to defend his ideals. I'm just asking him to provide an example of what makes it fun for him, in order to get some insight. He refused to do that thus far.


On-topic, I don't like the idea of someone pulling a tank with AA on it, locking the gunner's seat, and just instantly seat switching when they see a plane. If there is seat-switching, it should only be for non-drivers/pilots and it should have a delay.

How would you like presenting that point and then have it be completely dismissed by some tard saying "WELL VEHIKULS IN REAL LIFE CAN DO IT SO WHY COULDNT WE DO IT IN THE FUTURE DX??????" "I LEIK IT CUZ ITS FUNNNNN".


Bashing aside, I agree with your point. Assuming SOE aren't complete idiots (a pretty bold notion to assume, I know) they would implement some sort of delay onto vehicle switching. Even with that in place however, I feel like it wouldn't solve the issue, it would just make a half-assed attempt to tame the problem.

[WellWisherELF]

Instant vehicle seat switching encourages solo play and deters teamwork. This was actually a similar problem in the original Planetside. Lone wolves would intentionally disallow gunners in their tanks and instead drive it to the battlefield, get out, and then just sit in the gun seat until they died. Having the ability to instantly switch to the gun from the driver's seat will just make this practice all the more common, by players taking multi-crew vehicles and opting to drive them solo, just so they can get their own kills from manning the turret. In PS1, if you were caught in a vehicle without a gunner, you were reaver toast. But now, there is virtually no disadvantage to driving a vehicle now, as you don't have to risk jumping out of the vehicle to defend yourself.

[Zenben]

How would you like presenting that point and then have it be completely dismissed by some tard saying "WELL VEHIKULS IN REAL LIFE CAN DO IT SO WHY COULDNT WE DO IT IN THE FUTURE DX??????" "I LEIK IT CUZ ITS FUNNNNN".

When someone presents an irrational opinion (especially on the internet) I ignore it and move on. His invalid argument does not invalidate your valid argument.

[Captain1nsaneo]

It's not about realism or fun, it's about the game adhering to an internal logic.

The logic PS2 has is that your character takes up physical space. In some cases that means that switching between seats is fine. For example in a Sundy it's very likely that your character can move between positions inside the vehicle. In modern tanks you could also switch positions with out exiting the tank. However, if you think about a police car, you need to physically get out to move between the front and back seats. The reason is that there is a physical object blocking you. You can move between seats in a van but getting in and out of the driver's or gunner's seat probably takes more time than sliding along a bench.

Or listen to balance

Remember how the dev's talked about how tanks could have awesome AA or AV weapons for their gunners? Imagine switching to your AV weapon while your main gun reloaded. That whole 1 gunned tank vs 2 one-manned tanks suddenly breaks in horrible ways when the 2 one-man's can both use gunner weapons too.

[Death2All]

You haven't addressed MY points. How is adding the extra step of exiting a vehicle add anything to gameplay other than slowing it down and stinting the action?

Yeah, I did, right here:

I like this. Your penalty for choosing the wrong seat should be...Well you're in the wrong seat, tough luck. Better not make that mistake in the future.

I just don't like seat changing, even with a delay on firing, or movement, or anything I still dislike it greatly. Anything that let's you switch from a gunner seat to a driver seat without being in any danger (apart from a delay in movement or firing) is lame. It always boils down to people camping around in their tanks spamming, only to switch to the driver seat and zoom away once they're in any real danger. That is boring. Please don't degenerate PS into yet another lame modern FPS manifested with the most borderline retarded mechanics to ever plague games.


And how Battlefield an irrelevant experience? Because it doesn't pertain to anything being discussed. It's just you trying to throw some out information to enforce your point that makes no sense.

It would be like me saying "Well, I like non vehicle switching because I played PS1 since it came out". That's stupid. At least I actually gave a reason for why I liked it

Since it's apparent your reading comprehension isn't up to par today, I'll go ahead post it again for you

I like this. Your penalty for choosing the wrong seat should be...Well you're in the wrong seat, tough luck. Better not make that mistake in the future.



BF: Vehicle combat on an immense scale. They've got it nailed down friend.

Okay, if we're going to have argument like that then I guess I'll just say "Planetside combat is on a massive scale. They've got it nailed down friend"

Do you see why that sounds stupid? You're not saying why this is. You're just saying it like it's a fact.


BF is one of the longest running and most successful large scale vehicular combat games in our generation. It only makes sense to draw comparisons.


...WHY?HOW?

What makes it so successful? Explain to me how it's better. Give some examples.

Jesus, fuck.

[Death2All]

When someone presents an irrational opinion (especially on the internet) I ignore it and move on. His invalid argument does not invalidate your valid argument.

I can't let that stigma perpetuate, otherwise more and more people catch wind to that ideal and latch onto it because they're idiots. You've got to make a point on shutting down idiots, otherwise your community degenerates to the likes of Call of Duty or some other awful community.

[Zekeen]

I can't let that stigma perpetuate, otherwise more and more people catch wind to that ideal and latch onto it because they're idiots. You've got to make a point on shutting down idiots, otherwise your community degenerates to the likes of Call of Duty or some other awful community.

You need to calm down man. I'm all for the anti-modern speed gamer mentality, but you seem to being overboard and a bit on the flaming war.

You're also creating a few stigmas yourself there.

I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

False stigmas start cause of people like you, autism isn't mental retardation, and I'm sure a LOT of people around here have it in some form, it varies. It makes em smarter, not dumber and ignorant, so if you could not be too ignorant or insulting to things you don't know, it'd be appreciated.

[ShadoViper]

Instant vehicle seat switching encourages solo play and deters teamwork. This was actually a similar problem in the original Planetside. Lone wolves would intentionally disallow gunners in their tanks and instead drive it to the battlefield, get out, and then just sit in the gun seat until they died. Having the ability to instantly switch to the gun from the driver's seat will just make this practice all the more common, by players taking multi-crew vehicles and opting to drive them solo, just so they can get their own kills from manning the turret. In PS1, if you were caught in a vehicle without a gunner, you were reaver toast. But now, there is virtually no disadvantage to driving a vehicle now, as you don't have to risk jumping out of the vehicle to defend yourself.

Hm.. i actually agree with you about this (not that that's a bad thing) I just told myself i would reserve final judgement in the beta. But.. when i re-read this it really makes me start to hate what it can do to game play. I have seen things like this transpire in other games myself. For example, I really don't like how some games allow you to Solo it and say, take out an enemy helicopter by switching to your second seat quickly and use the AA gun even though he caught you off guard.

But i guess we will see how it plays in Beta.

[Zenben]

I can't let that stigma perpetuate, otherwise more and more people catch wind to that ideal and latch onto it because they're idiots. You've got to make a point on shutting down idiots, otherwise your community degenerates to the likes of Call of Duty or some other awful community.

This community is a little different than other communities. I don't think many communities are as passionate about their interest as this one. The majority of people on PSU are intelligent, logical people. Now for the incoming F2P crowd, I'm a little worried, but still hopeful.

[Envenom]

...WHY?HOW?

What makes it so successful? Explain to me how it's better. Give some examples.

Jesus, fuck.[/QUOTE]

Are you retarded? It's the second most popular shooter on earth second only to CoD. Are you living under a rock?

[Captain1nsaneo]

This community is a little different than other communities. I don't think many communities are as passionate about their interest as this one. The majority of people on PSU are intelligent, logical people. Now for the incoming F2P crowd, I'm a little worried, but still hopeful.

Don't worry, the official forum normally sucks up most of the degenerates. I feel bad for the official mods though. Forumside ain't a nice place to be.

[Purple]

i would be willing to accept that gunners (with the exception of the lib) can swich guns without getting out, if the driver of the vehicle needs to get out and walk to a gunning position to gun.

[Zenben]

Don't worry, the official forum normally sucks up most of the degenerates. I feel bad for the official mods though. Forumside ain't a nice place to be.

That's a good point. Maybe we'll be able to keep PSU our little secret, away from the F2P zerg. Though I don't know how well that would bode for the site as far as growth is concerned.

[Death2All]

False stigmas start cause of people like you, autism isn't mental retardation, and I'm sure a LOT of people around here have it in some form, it varies. It makes em smarter, not dumber and ignorant, so if you could not be too ignorant or insulting to things you don't know, it'd be appreciated.

Okay, I agree. I definitely throw the word "autism" around a lot in a deliberate attempt to hurt people's feelings and for that I apologize. I should definitely tone that down, especially on this board. Being on various boards and general cesspool atmosphere of the internet will turn you into a desensitized, slighted person over time as evident by me.

You need to calm down man. I'm all for the anti-modern speed gamer mentality, but you seem to being overboard and a bit on the flaming war.

Am I taking this way too seriously and going overboard like a huge nerd? Yes, definitely. But at the same time, I'm going to see some stupid, shitty ideal fester and perpetuate then simply grit my teeth and smile as if nothing ever happened.

I guess I have some compulsion within me that lets stuff like that go. Is it hurtful, necessary and probably pathetic? Yeah.

Am I going to change? Probably not, but I'll do my best do not go overboard in the future.



Sigh... Case and point:



Are you retarded? It's the second most popular shooter on earth second only to CoD. Are you living under a rock?


I guess I'll need to put on my hipster glasses to address this post

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cdPm9fHZV0w/TPgamtQgWMI/AAAAAAAAAyA/BXQUEVnLF0k/s1600/il_fullxfull.98869789.jpg

Since when does being popular = good? Just because a lot of people partake in it doesn't necessarily mean it's good, especially since good is a relevant and subjective term. What you perceive as good isn't exactly what others think as well.

McDonalds is the most popular restaurant on the planet. So by your logic, it must be the best restaurant on the planet, right?

Wrong. You can't use some subjective based opinion like that as the entire basis of your argument. That's auti-...Erm, dumb.

[Envenom]

According to the votes the community seems pretty torn on this idea. From the looks of the footage shown, auto seat switching is IN, at least for now. For those that prefer to exit the vehicle first, by all means, live your dreams. :)

[Zekeen]

I'm just going to go ahead and derail the flame war before the apocolyptic solar flare hits.

Rather than holding Planetside to BF or COD, which are fast match type games, many of you need to understand that patience, planning, and working together is what made Planetside 1 great. Just cause the gameplay is similar doesn't make it better or worse to merge them.

That said, Planetside 2 is trying to adjust to missing elements and problematic features of Planetside 1. One of which was the long time it took to take to battle and get around. Planetside 2 is aiming to be much faster, but it's not getting rid of the elements that made Planetside 1 great. Patience might be less needed, but it still exists, especially with the fact that vehicles won't be dumped as much due to their cost. There will be a lot of low down time for operations, just like in the original. What I'm trying to get at with all this, however, is the game just isn't twitchy, even with the new changes to it.

Now, the big thing you guys need to look at, and all of you, is compromise and placement. Right now PS2 does NOT have exit and enter animations like PS1 had. It probably will, in time. So, it does NOT need a system that relies on it, requiring the exit and enter, until the animations are added in. And even then, it should be based on the vehicle if exit and enter is a good plan for it.

So for now, right now, at this stage, a timed delay for switching would be best. No risking the outside dangers to change, but not so instant you can run two roles at one time. They gave the tank gun to the drivers so that should be good enough. A timed delay will keep it tactical, but not cause too much of a delay. It'll keep it both real and fun until more complex systems are added in.

[CutterJohn]

Rather than holding Planetside to BF or COD, which are fast match type games, many of you need to understand that patience, planning, and working together is what made Planetside 1 great. Just cause the gameplay is similar doesn't make it better or worse to merge them.

What made Planetside great is different for many people. Please preface these statements with 'For me'.

[Death2All]

So for now, right now, at this stage, a timed delay for switching would be best. No risking the outside dangers to change, but not so instant you can run two roles at one time. They gave the tank gun to the drivers so that should be good enough. A timed delay will keep it tactical, but not cause too much of a delay. It'll keep it both real and fun until more complex systems are added in.

If this is at the very least they could possibly do I would be somewhat contempt, although it doesn't really solve the issue. It merely dances around it and offers a half-assed solution to the problem.

[Toppopia]

If this is at the very least they could possibly do I would be somewhat contempt, although it doesn't really solve the issue. It merely dances around it and offers a half-assed solution to the problem.

Maybe they will do a better fix when vehicle animations get added, which would be after release. And a delay in switching would get players used to the animation idea and delays when they finally release animations.

[Zekeen]

What made Planetside great is different for many people. Please preface these statements with 'For me'.

Patience - Exit and Enter animations, getting a team together to hit from another angle in a transport, spending time to get a bigger vehicle or Galaxy from a further location

Planning - Working with your outfit to confuse and deviate the enemy, getting an organized squad ready to break through an enemy advance, having a good CR 5 (when not a terrible one) lead the entire empire to victory to the day, laying traps and organizing a defense force at a base for an incoming assault

Teamwork - There was no such thing as a lonewolf in Planetside. You were always fighting alongside your brothers and sisters in arms.

Patience, Planning, and Teamwork were prevalent in Planetside. Maybe I can say "patience for me", but teamwork and planning took time and were what drew EVERYONE in, without question, even if some was slower than others. So I don't think I was out of line saying it was what EVERYONE liked. Those that didn't probably didn't hang around long in Planetside.

If this is at the very least they could possibly do I would be somewhat contempt, although it doesn't really solve the issue. It merely dances around it and offers a half-assed solution to the problem.

It's like how vehicles have a start up time instead of exit and enter animations right now. It'll take em 6 months to add that in they said, so I'm fine with having a compromise for now.

[Virulence]

There's doesn't seem to be a very big market for FPS players that love patience, planning, and mandated teamwork. Not many players are the type of person that want to take the time to contribute to forward repair and respawn logistic efforts, or spend 10-15 minutes traveling across a continent to finally get where the action is.

They're going to have features in like this that cater to a more 'casual' audience. Probably just going to have to deal with it and make sure they maintain/preserve a rich strategy metagame, which is probably what will really satisfy hardcore players.

[Zenben]

There's doesn't seem to be a very big market for FPS players that love patience, planning, and mandated teamwork. Not many players are the type of person that want to take the time to contribute to forward repair and respawn logistic efforts, or spend 10-15 minutes traveling across a continent to finally get where the action is.

They're going to have features in like this that cater to a more 'casual' audience. Probably just going to have to deal with it and make sure they maintain/preserve a rich strategy metagame, which is probably what will really satisfy hardcore players.

Most FPS players have never experienced a game like Planetside before, frankly because no such game exists. Hopefully, together with the SOE marketing team, we can show them what they have been missing :love:

[Mechzz]

What made Planetside great is different for many people. Please preface these statements with 'For me'.

This.
I've said in other posts that if PS2 wants to thrive it needs to cater to a wide range of play styles, ranging from "wanna kill, wanna kill now!" to "hmmm. what can I plot by way of black ops tonight" to "I'm a general, now underlings, attack over there!"

If you don't want seat switching don't use it. I haven't seen the most recent vids yet, but the night ops vid and my common sense tell me that a stationary tank is a dead tank. The advantage of switching will not be overpowerful.

[Grimster]

I think you should have to get out and manually switch. I get it that they won't have animations for entering a vehicle but keep the spots you have to be at to enter a specific position.

I also am still against letting the driver control the main gun of a tank.

I really loved the team work you could have in PS1 where you as the driver could completely focus on handling the vehicle while your mate could focus on wreaking havoc with the big gun. :)

Me and my brother played like that quite often taking turns on who were driving etc. :)

[SKYeXile]

Are you retarded? It's the second most popular shooter on earth second only to CoD. Are you living under a rock?

no, that would be halo, last time i checked you had to get out to change seats.

[Xaine]

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want? :)

Thanks for the snarky response :love:

Out of interest, have you actually played Planetside. Ever?

Just because it works in Battlefield (which i agree, it does) doesn't mean it will work in Planetside. Shall we throw in quick knife from CoD as well? Swords from Halo?

I don't want it because i hate the idea of someone driving around in a tank, killling other tanks. Sees an aircraft, switches to the AA gun instantly, kills the aircraft, goes back to killing tanks and driving again.

The retarded hopping between gunner and driving position has no place in any game. Ever. Its horrific.

[Notser]

Switching quickly is only a issue if the secondary gunner position is as powerful as some of the interviews have said, someone who is good at the game could play the role of two players with a main cannon/tow missile and switch back before they've reloaded. Also the aa thing is a issue, they could just make it where the weapon's targeting and controls have a boot up phase when initially entering the position.

[Graywolves]

I think if someone's going to be provided a strong AV and a strong AI/AA they should at least have to treat it like they're switching a weapon instead of instantaneously manning the next gun.


As far as exit/re-enter vs delayed switching - I'd be happy either way.

[Xyntech]

I voted for:

"I do not want instant seat switching, however you can switch inside with a time delay."

But only because I feel like it would make internal logic in certain vehicles like the Sunderer and MBT''s.

That being said, I think the delay should be significant. Significant like: Take the planned vehicle start up timer, then double, triple or quadruple it. That's how long a player has to wait every time they want to switch between seats without getting out of the vehicle.

The idea being that if some asshat wants to drive a tank solo, they're going to get eaten alive by aircraft before they have a chance to start firing their AA gun, and possibly blown up by a tank before they can switch back to the driver seat.

I wouldn't have this ever be possible in a Liberator because it would just be too weird, but I'm also somewhat leaning towards no vehicles have the option at all. Never if it can be too easily abused, otherwise, I'd consider it.

[Red Beard]

I voted for:

"I do not want instant seat switching, however you can switch inside with a time delay."

But only because I feel like it would make internal logic in certain vehicles like the Sunderer and MBT''s.

That being said, I think the delay should be significant. Significant like: Take the planned vehicle start up timer, then double, triple or quadruple it. That's how long a player has to wait every time they want to switch between seats without getting out of the vehicle.

The idea being that if some asshat wants to drive a tank solo, they're going to get eaten alive by aircraft before they have a chance to start firing their AA gun, and possibly blown up by a tank before they can switch back to the driver seat.

I wouldn't have this ever be possible in a Liberator because it would just be too weird, but I'm also somewhat leaning towards no vehicles have the option at all. Never if it can be too easily abused, otherwise, I'd consider it.

Yeah they should at least have a considerable delay to the point that you're significantly disadvantaged if you don't want to have a gunner (if not having to get out entirely).

[Zekeen]

Yeah they should at least have a considerable delay to the point that you're significantly disadvantaged if you don't want to have a gunner (if not having to get out entirely).

The big thing with the instant switching and the need for a delay, is that the delay would boost up the need for teamwork. I don't care who you are, if you don't like teamwork you're playing the wrong game.

[Xyntech]

It's not like solo players wont have options. I'm all for that. Some things should be more restricted to team play though.

[Attackmack]

This has nothing to do with realism. It has to do with FUN. Think game mechanics. Why impose the extra annoying step of exiting a vehicle and then making the player re-enter. You're already in the damn thing! GAMEPLAY friend. Think about it.


Well maybe to force people to think and plan a little before takeoff.
Force them to make sure the gal os properly manned if the plan is to gunship.

But since this game is only about the actual fighting its natural they remove such a function that would keep you an extra minute(s) away from the gunplay...

Im honestly worried this game will act out like a neverending round of any current FPS. And it will get boring very very quick...

I wish and hope they will prove me wrong tho.

[EVILoHOMER]

I want it because it's seamless and fluid, having to get out and switch seats is annoying.

[Mechzz]

Well maybe to force people to think and plan a little before takeoff.
Force them to make sure the gal os properly manned if the plan is to gunship.

But since this game is only about the actual fighting its natural they remove such a function that would keep you an extra minute(s) away from the gunplay...

Im honestly worried this game will act out like a neverending round of any current FPS. And it will get boring very very quick...

I wish and hope they will prove me wrong tho.

Forcing people to do something that they may not feel adds to their game experience is a good shortcut to making those people stop playing the game.

If I rush onto a Gal and get in the wrong seat by mistake, I'll be happy to be able to move to an up-front seat, away from the back where the smelly Maxes sit during the flight :)

[Graywolves]

where the smelly Maxes sit during the flight :)

They're not smelling until during and after the fight.

[Gandhi]

What I don't want to see is solo MBTs where the driver can instantly switch to an AA turret whenever an aircraft shows up. Obviously you have the disadvantage of being a sitting duck when you do this, but I don't think that's a big enough trade off for the extra versatility you get out of the deal. It's not like your MBT was going to pull some crazy evasive maneuvers anyway. I will begrudgingly accept solo MBTs if it comes down to it, but this really is going too far. IMO if you want to drive your MBT solo you don't get to have AA or AI, simple as that.

Other places I don't mind the seat switching. Like if two passengers in a Galaxy want to switch gunner positions mid flight, I can live with that.

Aside from that it just feels wrong. I shouldn't be able to teleport instantly to different positions in a vehicle. And it's not a matter of realism, it's a matter of basic common sense. Things like this tend to stick out like a sore thumb, you get the feeling that you're not really in a vehicle, just in a different game mode. That's why I'll dearly miss the entry/exit animations too, they meshed vehicle with infantry gameplay and reinforced the feeling of getting into an actual vehicle rather than just an instant transition to "vehicle mode".

It's a feeling that's hard to put into words, but I can't be the only one who has it.

[Mechzz]

Off topic, but will they give us 3pv during Gal flights or let us see the hold where we're sitting so we can TK each other for the window seats?

Maybe Gal pilots could cert in letting the passengers shoot each other?

[Graywolves]

May Gal pilots could cert in letting the passengers shoot each other?

I think this is the most important question ever asked. We should be able to dump the bodies too.

[kadrin]

Off topic, but will they give us 3pv during Gal flights or let us see the hold where we're sitting so we can TK each other for the window seats?

I would love to be able to sit inside the Galaxy and look out a window/viewport as it flew. I wouldn't force that on everyone, let them do their 3rd person if they want, but it would remind me so much of the awesome Paradrops in WWIIOnline.

WWII Online - Paratroopers - YouTube

Game was pretty godawful, but man it had some cool stuff in it.

[Noivad]

I voted NO to seat changing.

1. Door Animination will come in the future.
2. Don't need yellow circles on the ground to show me where a door is that I can plainly see.
3. Seat changing detracts from the Orginal Planetside Concept.
3. I never got into the wrong door once I learned them. Get into the wrong door enough times and you will learn them too.
4. There are two types of vehicles in PS1 and should be in PS2 to keep the orginal game concept alive.

A} Solo vehicles where one person could drive and shoot at the same time.

B}Team Vehicles where it took at least two people up to 6 people to shoot the guns on it depending on the vehicle type.

5. Each empire had them. Some where common pool. Some were Empire Specfic. Some were purely support role, and some were purely assult role. There were people who played every one of them. Some people drove ams and ants because they liked too or wanted to. Some people did only repair work with the Loadstar. Some Gal Pilots never got the GG. I even had Gal pilots who did nothing else, and with PS2 certing trees for gals so extensive, it looks like thats what some Gals pilots will do in PS2 as well.

6. What was different in PS1, that we are not seeing in PS2 is the varations of different game play. Not everone liked everything, but there were a lot of people doing them. Even anting. What some people thought boring, but was exciting to as an example was when you were the one who got one in on a base that was about to go neutral, with the CY packed full of the enemy. Some Outfits specialized in it.

A lot of people hated to play cloaker, but that did not stop a lot of people from playing them. To some it was fun other s not.

What one persons fun is - is another persons demise.

Thats what made Planetside Unique. There was something for everyone, on a scale bigger then any other game. I can still get into a slow day on planetside that is bigger then most of the other FPS game out there.

Solo players, team players, Suport Players and Assult players all had a place in the game.

Seat switching is solo playing in a team vehicle. Plain and simple. Keep the solo playing types in their own solo type vehicles and let the team players have their team vehicles. please.

And if a solo player does take out a team vehicle, Geting in and out of seat is not so much to ask for getting the advantage of a bigger team gun/armored vehicle for keeping PS2 in the concept mode of the Orginal Planetside.

It worked in PS1 and it will work in PS2. :evil:

[Mastachief]

Instant seat switching is retarded and bad thing to add to planetside. It had been previously mentioned by higby that there would be a delay however there was no delay last night.

/disappointed in callofbattleside2

[sylphaen]

I'm against seat switching being so easy and riskless. At least, solo-driving/gunning a vehicle in PS1 required some foresight to set-up at the right location and man the guns before you start getting shot at.

The silver lining I see is that we had instant exits in all vehicles from that video even though in the sutomization menus, a vehicle module for instant bails was available. Most likely, things are not final and instant switching or entry/exit is only for testing purposes or due to functions not being ready yet.

I am for exiting the vehicle to switch guns because it creates a small time window where there is a chance to be ambushed by soldiers rather than the usual "vehicle or AV only" kills. It also prevents people from changing seats during a battle too liberally; or at least, it involves risk for doing so.

As a last point for this argument, if I push this seat switching idea to absurd levels: what about allowing Aircav to instantly switch their guns from AA to AV or vice-versa ? It would save a trip to the equipment terminals to re-equip your aircav vehicle and speed-up the game !

[Canaris]

I've no problem with seat changing as long as it has a delay

[JHendy]

...WHY?HOW?

What makes it so successful? Explain to me how it's better. Give some examples.

Jesus, fuck.

Are you retarded? It's the second most popular shooter on earth second only to CoD. Are you living under a rock?

I don't see your point.

Battlefield is a fast paced session based shooter. You can't import Battlefield mechanics like this one into Planetside without significantly increasing its pace, and there are a lot of people here who appreciate Planetside's slower, cognitive pace.

What's right for Battlefield isn't always what's right for Planetside.

[Hmr85]

I voted instant seat changing with a timer. Only because enter and exit animations are not in atm. I believe it was said they where gonna put them in at a later date? "Don't quote me on that". If the enter/exit animations ever do show up then the instant seat changing needs to go.

[Mastachief]

...WHY?HOW?

What makes it so successful? Explain to me how it's better. Give some examples.

Jesus, fuck.

Are you retarded? It's the second most popular shooter on earth second only to CoD. Are you living under a rock?


Having un-protected sex is very popular, doesn't mean its a good idea. BF is popular because it's simple and stupid/casual people like simple this is why consoles and so popular.


Now how many times do we see a round based fps games get a new iteration?

Every 1-2 years i would say is the average time frame.

I would hope planetside2 lasts for 10 years or more. Making it just a big copy of BF/cod will make it last just as long as a BF/cod does (1year, or even less if you look at the current one).

Because of the manic nature of the round based fps game it will not allow people to play for hours up-on hours and develop those close links to team mates and enemies alike. There needs to be downtime/break in the action, kills need to be hard won and battles need to be memorable not just 4 clusterfucks every 10minutes.

[Brusi]

No fucking way for air vehicles.

Doing so for MBT's also removes the last scrapings of teamwork that they have. Instead of having a convoy of fully manned MBT's with gunners on the AA cannons, simply pull twice the tanks with AA cannons on them and switch as the threat of aircraft arises.

It's bullshit.

At least if you get out of the tank to switch, there is a window of vulnerability. If vehicle seat switching is implemented, I would go so far as to put a 30sec cooldown on weapons fire after switching seats!

Can't argue with the concept of climbing from one seat to another in a bangbus or tank really though. I just think it detracts from the gameplay and teamwork elements.

[Hmr85]

No fucking way for air vehicles.

Doing so for MBT's also removes the last scrapings of teamwork that they have. Instead of having a convoy of fully manned MBT's with gunners on the AA cannons, simply pull twice the tanks with AA cannons on them and switch as the threat of aircraft arises.

It's bullshit.

At least if you get out of the tank to switch, there is a window of vulnerability. If vehicle seat switching is implemented, I would go so far as to put a 30sec cooldown on weapons fire after switching seats!

Can't argue with the concept of climbing from one seat to another in a bangbus or tank really though. I just think it detracts from the gameplay and teamwork elements.

I don't disagree with this at all. But as of right now it appears seat switching is in. One of the best things they could do to help eleviate the problem is the timer.

Will use this as a example. For me to move from the passenger seat to the gunner position in the back of a MRAP in full battle gear it takes about 8 to 9 seconds with a additional second or two charge the weapon. This is assuming I don't have a bunch of shit in my way. The MRAP is pretty much the equivalent of the Bang bus in PS2.

[MrBloodworth]

So we noticed in the PS2 stream that you can now instantly switch seats from inside a vehicle without exposing yourself.

I was going to come and post this.

This is a horrible idea. Its also completely Cheap, and makes the game look/feel cheap. Please stop adding stuff like this.

This is Planetside, a war game, not a session based shooter.

[MrBloodworth]

Instant vehicle seat switching encourages solo play and deters teamwork.


^ This.

[Brusi]

^ This.

^ This.

[Dairian]

If we allow seat switching there will be a bunch of Heavy armor sunderers, which have the most survivability in the game, running around looking for easy kills. The original planetside had this perfected. I also think you should have to pick a seat like in the original. Not just walk up and poof you in the vehicle. I loved having to run around the Gal looking for an empty seat. It brought immersion just like the animations we will miss in PS2. Sometimes new is just not better.

[Kebabanimali]

Im fine with instant switching it has workked well in Battlefield games i'v previously played and with the 1 man tanks i dont see it as a problem.

[MrBloodworth]

Im fine with instant switching it has workked well in Battlefield games i'v previously played and with the 1 man tanks i dont see it as a problem.

This isn't Battlefield. It works there because its a session based shooter. This is a war game.

[SoNaR]

Guessing some people got owned by seat switchers in battlefield....

[Kran De Loy]

Havn't read the whole thread yet, gonna be off for the rest of the day I think and I've got to get to work.

PLEASE DEAR GOD NO INSTANT SEAT CHANGING.

There are many reasons, but the most solid one I can come up with right now is that it would damage teamwork. Solo MBT is already a sore spot with me, for them to be able to switch seats at all is like a kick in the nuts.

[Troscus]

If you can switch in a vehicle, then you're the only one in there. So, either you fire the gun and not move (life expectancy of 3 seconds) or you drive and get no where near as many kills. Seems fair to me, what's a whole 0.5 seconds? To make that an even WORSE idea?

[Brusi]

^ This.

Guessing some people got owned by seat switchers in battlefield....

Guessing some people actually enjoyed playing the original Planetside...

Don't be a spaz man, 2000 players on a map with zero elements of forced teamwork is a step backwards. Don't get me wrong, i totally believe you could just loose everyone into a single room with an inflatable hammer each and you would still see elements of teamwork, you just wouldn't see much depth to it.

The idea that a solo player can spawn a vehicle to be powerful against armor and air at the same time goes directly against what they were trying to develop with the infantry class system.

[Gandhi]

So, either you fire the gun and not move (life expectancy of 3 seconds) or you drive and get no where near as many kills. Seems fair to me, what's a whole 0.5 seconds? To make that an even WORSE idea?
Tanks aren't built to evade fire, so if your life expectancy is 3 seconds when sitting still it'll be 4 or 5 seconds when moving. What a huge difference eh?

[Troscus]

Tanks aren't built to evade fire, so if your life expectancy is 3 seconds when sitting still it'll be 4 or 5 seconds when moving. What a huge difference eh?

To be fair, Magriders seem designed with "dodge shit" in mind. Besides, I'll bet that TTK goes up when someone's playing the second fiddle and taking potshots at anyone coming at you.

[Gandhi]

Besides, I'll bet that TTK goes up when someone's playing the second fiddle and taking potshots at anyone coming at you.
I'm sure it will, but I still don't think it's enough to justify the added versatility for a one man vehicle. Even in a Magrider it means I could try to evade the first volley, instantly switch to the AA gun and take out the Reaver before he finishes unloading the second salvo. That's huge, and it shouldn't be possible without a gunner.

[SoNaR]

tbh I don't care either way, I can see why people don't want it to be instant seat switching, but does it really effect game play that much? If someone wants to go solo and get themselves killed, then I say let them, but if they can go solo and do well... then why punish them by adding a delay or making them get out before they can change seats?

[MrBloodworth]

does it really effect game play that much?

Yes. It also feels really cheap, not tactics wise ( it does ) but solidity and connection to the game wise.

[LordReaver]

Do you have to get out of a van to move from being in a passenger seat to driving? Same logic can apply here.
Have you ever actually tried switching seats in a real vehicle? Easier said than done most of the time. In real life you are more likely to see people get out and walk around to the other seat.

That being said... It's a game, you can't put realism into everything, otherwise the game wouldn't work at all. Each empire would have nuclear capabilities, meaning there would either be no fighting at all, or everything would be a wasteland.

[SoNaR]

Yes. It also feels really cheap, not tactics wise ( it does ) but solidity and connection to the game wise.

How is it cheap when you get one of "those gunners" who can't hit a thing so you decide to ditch them and go solo because you will most certainly do better without them? :P

edit: everyone talks about teamwork, but what if your team is a bunch of mindless/spamming zerglings? In some cases going solo and seat switching might be a better option than having passengers.

[MrBloodworth]

How is it cheap when you get one of "those gunners" who can't hit a thing so you decide to ditch them and go solo because you will most certainly do better without them? :P

That's what squad level Vehicle locks were for.

[basti]

Get away from instant seat switching. It WILL destroy vehicle gameplay, and you WILL see people getting a tank by themself and just switch whenever AIR comes along.

Arguments like "but then you are a sitting duck" dont work, trust me, ive seen it. Movment does not protect you from taking hits, but bullets at the attack do.

[Lonehunter]

I've known about being able to switch seats for a while now but just hadn't thought about since I hadn't seen it in combat. I understand why they put in the mechanic, but I just don't think it fits with PS2.

To me it seems they are trying to ditch the requirement of more then 1 person in a vehicle to make it effective. Yes they can have a second gunner, yes they can can add things later like certs fort a dedicated gunner but the fact is the general population can SOLO in a Tank, Sunderer, Flash, Lightning, Mosquito-Reaver-Scythe, Liberator (has a nose cannon), The Galaxy the is the only vehicle without a pilot operated weapon (that we know of anyway).

I understand they want more people to have access to these things but the game is focused so much on cooperation I'm really surprised there aren't more vehicles that require a small crew to operate.

[maradine]

I'm encouraged that only 34.4% of the forum population wanted Luke and Han to die in that Tie Fighter ambush.

That's right. I went there.

[Shlomoshun]

voted for instant switching. None of my PS1 'Moments' involved seat switching, so taking out that system and putting in a more streamlined version is fine.

[Raymac]

I don't like the instant switching at all. IF it is in the final game, I'd only like to see it between passengers, but the driver of the vehicle should need to get out if they want to change seats, and even then there should be a delay because people will get very good at instantly getting out and in to vehicles. It really decreases the incentive to bring a gunner with you when you can take the gunner seat instantly like that.

[Masahiko]

With how easily they shot down the the Air Cav and the Lib, i think that a felay is a must for vehicles. As that demo seemed to show there wasnt as much of a trade off as would be expected.

[maradine]

It really decreases the incentive to bring a gunner with you when you can take the gunner seat instantly like that.

Except, you know, in the exceedingly rare situations where you're dealing with two different kinds of threats at once.

[Xyntech]

How about only allowing swapping between gunner and passenger positions as Raymac suggest, and on top of that, only in the Sunderer and Galaxy (no liberator swapping).

In fact seriously, just get rid of it entirely. Way more problems than it's worth.

If you want to switch positions, get out of the vehicle and switch.

[Hamma]

Here's what you guys have to understand about the design of the system.

You cannot pick what seat you get in when you get in a vehicle. There are no specific mount points like in PS1. As a result if you get in first you drive, second second gun etc etc etc. The design of the game at the moment does not allow you to get out and pick another seat.

This is why it is the way it is.

A delay of some sort before you can control the gun or drivers seat in whatever vehicle you switch in may be a good compromise.

[MrBloodworth]

That doesn't make me feel better Hamma. Its a step backwards.

[Hamma]

Well it is what it is.. You guys are all going to have to come to terms with the fact PlanetSide 2 is a modern shooter and will compete with and have similar features to modern shooters so it can be successful.

Otherwise what do we end up with? Another niche shooter that dies a painful death.

[Envenom]

Well it is what it is.. You guys are all going to have to come to terms with the fact PlanetSide 2 is a modern shooter and will compete with and have similar features to modern shooters so it can be successful.

Otherwise what do we end up with? Another niche shooter that dies a painful death.

Finally. Thank you.

[Zekeen]

A delay makes sense for closed vehicles anyways. It won't make sense for things like a Liberator, but for a Sunderer or Galaxy, it makes sense.

Besides, why complain on the get out-get in function when we don't even have the base for it, which is enter exit animations. We're all still waiting for them to do it, but we told them we can wait, if Beta hurries up :D

So no one needs to feel we're going backwards. Even if a few features step backwards, we're leaping forward in others. So long as we get there and it's fun for all of us Vets and even some new guys, it's great!

[MrBloodworth]

Well it is what it is.. You guys are all going to have to come to terms with the fact PlanetSide 2 is a modern shooter and will compete with and have similar features to modern shooters so it can be successful.

Otherwise what do we end up with? Another niche shooter that dies a painful death.

Hold up. When did it become a requirement to do it this way? Its a step backwards in terms of MODERN. You are telling me, that an unfinished feature, Entering and exiting vehicles, is forward thinking? PS1, and many other games have fully realized seat positions, animations, and no instant switching.

Or do you mean this is how some other popular games do it, so its OK? This is not a point you can hand wave with "Modern shooter". Similar features or not. This is, as in other games that do it is 100% cost cutting and game speed up design. NO other reason. Finishing the feature fully, realizing positions and animations will not instantly make the entire game niche.

HALO, has Animations and positions. (http://youtu.be/3ByPvJmXbVE?t=1m27s) Is HALO not modern?

[Gonefshn]

I would love no seat switching but reading this whole thread I knew what I was going to say.

If you can't switch seats and a mass audience jumps in this game your going to have an even larger group of people arguing that not having it is a missing feature. Our PS1 ideas will be outmatched by those who will see it as a basic and expected shooter mechanic.

I can even see the delay serving to frustrate many many people with arguments like this. "When I am attacked by an aircraft and try to switch seats to my AA cannon it delays me and I get killed! That's not fair!" Sure that sounds stupid to us because we have played PS1 or demand a more punishing experience but to most shooter fans those arguments are valid points. They never want to feel helpless even if it is there own damn fault because of decisions they made.

Hamma has it right, PS2 needs to bring in this audience to be as huge as it needs to be. Old and new, niche and massive need to be married and sacrifices need to be made. sad but true.

[maradine]

Maybe the feature is finished, and it's actually how they want it. Perish the thought.

[Xyntech]

Well it is what it is.. You guys are all going to have to come to terms with the fact PlanetSide 2 is a modern shooter and will compete with and have similar features to modern shooters so it can be successful.

Otherwise what do we end up with? Another niche shooter that dies a painful death.

I'd think it would still be possible to have locational entry points, even without entry animations.

But if they are going to have the system, may as well at least add delays.

I'd like to see a delay before you can use any system you switch to. Switching would still be instant (if you couldn't pick which seat to enter into, you shouldn't have a time penalty before you can switch to another), but it would take a certain amount of time after switching before you could drive the vehicle or use a gunner turret.

This down time would at least give an aircraft a few seconds to get some shots in or to high tail it out of there. A stationary tank isn't a sitting duck, but a stationary tank that can't even shoot back can be.

[Razicator]

I can even see the delay serving to frustrate many many people with arguments like this. "When I am attacked by an aircraft and try to switch seats to my AA cannon it delays me and I get killed! That's not fair!" Sure that sounds stupid to us because we have played PS1 or demand a more punishing experience but to most shooter fans those arguments are valid points. They never want to feel helpless even if it is there own damn fault because of decisions they made.

I know it's not your opinion, but perish the thought of a team-based game, where you need multiple people per vehicle rather than a one man killing machine!

[Oryon22]

Seat switching as is, is stupid. If you need to switch seats, do this:

1. Put it in park.
2. Open hatch, exit.
3. Open other hatch, enter.
4. Profit.

At least give the opposition a chance to counter. The TTK is way too short to allow Sunderbus drivers to suddenly teleport to the gunner seat and take out a pesky aircraft.

[Zekeen]

Seat switching as is, is stupid. If you need to switch seats, do this:

1. Put it in park.
2. Open hatch, exit.
3. Open other hatch, enter.
4. Profit.

At least give the opposition a chance to counter. The TTK is way too short to allow Sunderbus drivers to suddenly teleport to the gunner seat and take out a pesky aircraft.

A delay is the closest you can get at this time. Until they get enter and exit animations in, this is impossible.

[Oryon22]

A delay is the closest you can get at this time. Until they get enter and exit animations in, this is impossible.

The lack of enter/exit animations never bugged me until I saw the seat "hotswapping" in the live stream. It's too easy. There needs to be a delay, but it should come from exiting and re-entering the vehicle.

[Gandhi]

Well it is what it is.. You guys are all going to have to come to terms with the fact PlanetSide 2 is a modern shooter and will compete with and have similar features to modern shooters so it can be successful.

Otherwise what do we end up with? Another niche shooter that dies a painful death.
Who decides what features a modern shooter needs to have to be successful? The industry is full of failed titles that tried to copy mechanics from the two big franchises, especially when they're at odds with the rest of the game.

Beta is a golden opportunity to gauge people's reactions to novel mechanics. Make people exit the vehicle to switch seats, if everyone complains it's easy as pie to change it back and you get some "listening to the community" cred in the process. If everyone likes it hey, you just scored some "innovated the genre" cred.

I mean I appreciate what you're saying, and lots of the modern changes we've seen will make this game better, but some things just don't fit. This, IMO, is one of them.

[Hamma]

As you said that will be where Beta comes in. :D

[Xyntech]

As you said that will be where Beta comes in. :D

Beta better be soon. Not because of how impatient I am, but because it's getting ridiculous how often I'm having to say something similar to that.

[Zulthus]

Seriously. Just because Battlefield has instant seat switching doesn't mean it's good. Making PS2's entry design like their's is a STEP BACKWARDS.

PS1 made in 2003 had a much more fleshed out vehicle mechanic than any battlefield to date. You got to pick the seat you wanted to get in from the start by entering at its location. BF is just get in and mash F(x) to get the seat before someone else does.

If anything, putting in locational entry points is more MODERN than BF3.

[Raymac]

Well it is what it is.. You guys are all going to have to come to terms with the fact PlanetSide 2 is a modern shooter and will compete with and have similar features to modern shooters so it can be successful.

Otherwise what do we end up with? Another niche shooter that dies a painful death.

You're preaching to the choir with me. I just don't see how not being able to select which seat you want to enter is a "feature of a modern shooter". It sounds like an incomplete feature.

Also, as much as I've advocated letting the drivers of tanks control the main guns, I still don't like being able to switch seats instantly. I mean Kevm0 just showed us how you can effectively solo around with a Sunderer, a freaking transport vehicle. Although I like tank drivers controlling the main gun, I guess this is where I draw the line. I really hope they remove allowing the driver to switch seats.

[PoisonTaco]

I'm okay with it so long as it's not in combat. Put it on the 10-15 second delay like the auto-repair.

[Xyntech]

I'm okay with it so long as it's not in combat. Put it on the 10-15 second delay like the auto-repair.

Like you can't switch seats for 10 - 15 seconds after taking damage? Or like it takes 10 - 15 seconds to switch seats at all times?

[Lonehunter]

Here's what you guys have to understand about the design of the system. You cannot pick what seat you get in when you get in a vehicle. There are no specific mount points like in PS1

That's a pretty big detail to me, especially in vehicles that have multiple gunner seats. So if I want to gun a Sunderer and want the AA turret assigned to Slot 2 it will automatically put me in slot 1 and I have to switch to 2? If I want to tailgun a lib but the "bomber" seat is the primary gunner seat it assigns me to that and I have to switch?

This isn't just matching "modern" FPSs, it's using a mechanic that they have never had a need to fully optimize. In any other shooter you just take what ever gunner slot is left, there's a little more thought process involved in PS.

Just because it's a popular "Modern FPS" mechanic doesn't mean it can't be improved, we're talking about the most unique MMO in the world in my opinion, come on...

[Death2All]

I would love no seat switching but reading this whole thread I knew what I was going to say.

If you can't switch seats and a mass audience jumps in this game your going to have an even larger group of people arguing that not having it is a missing feature. Our PS1 ideas will be outmatched by those who will see it as a basic and expected shooter mechanic.

I can even see the delay serving to frustrate many many people with arguments like this. "When I am attacked by an aircraft and try to switch seats to my AA cannon it delays me and I get killed! That's not fair!" Sure that sounds stupid to us because we have played PS1 or demand a more punishing experience but to most shooter fans those arguments are valid points. They never want to feel helpless even if it is there own damn fault because of decisions they made.

Hamma has it right, PS2 needs to bring in this audience to be as huge as it needs to be. Old and new, niche and massive need to be married and sacrifices need to be made. sad but true.

Right, so let's forsake balanced game design to appeal to 12 year olds that will leave the game at the drop of a hat once Call of Duty 14 comes out.

Trying to attract a crowd from another game by borrowing features or mechanics only leaves people yearning for that game. I understand that you have to make sacrifices or add in modern features of a game to keep it current but this one in particular is just stupid and should not be in the game.

[Xyntech]

Where are the people who used to flame anyone who compared Planetside to Halo?

There's a modern game with modern vehicle entry animations. ;)

[Toppopia]

Where are the people who used to flame anyone who compared Planetside to Halo?

There's a modern game with modern vehicle entry animations. ;)

If we wait a year or so, then i think we will have animations by then, so all we need to do is wait....

....

....

[Blackwolf]

Do you have to get out of a van to move from being in a passenger seat to driving? Same logic can apply here.

A van isn't a combat vehicle specifically designed to take hits like a tank. So yes I think it should be a lot easier to do since chances are the combat vehicles are designed specifically with this in mind, where as a van is not.

Also I find it amusing when anti-realistic people get uppity because someone makes a comment that boarders on the realism argument. Realistic game-play has limits and laws. Making a game that ignores "realism" means you could just as easily argue for a game where walls don't stop you from going through them. This game is meant to be played on a tactical level, as such things like seat switching should come into consideration as a viable mechanic. But limit the mechanic, as in no "instant seat switching", particularly while the vehicle is moving and you are the driver.

Some of us understand that the real world is a great reference when something comes into question like this. Because unlike video games, which typically ignore realism, the world is balanced and unbiased.

[Immigrant]

I would welcome few seconds delay when switching however I'm against having to exit vehicle, that both annoying and not realistic.

[Zulthus]

I'm glad to see the majority of people do not want to be able to switch seats instantly. Hopefully they take that into consideration.

[Zulthus]

I'm bumping this due to the thread that popped up recently; hopefully this shows people the majority do not want instant seat switching.