Totalbiscut gives a well rounded Critique.

[berzerkerking]

Discuss

[Hamma]

Next time post the source of the thread you are posting..

Planetside 2 Critique. What***39;s wrong with it so far? - YouTube

[Hamma]

I agree with most of his points, a great video overall.

[Nolerhn]

Thanks Hamma!

[bullet]

You could atleast link the video in your post. Here it is for you guys who have not seen it.

-Removed the video- Well played Hamma.

It seems to have been a hot topic on the main forums. Its already got multiple pages of replies last time I checked.

On topic, I think he gave a fair critque of an unfinished game. He knows its a beta and hes been a lot closer with the development of PS2 than most people. I believe his main concern is the rushed release date. At this point, it is not ready for a release and with only a month, its going to be an absolute miracle if they can polish this up and have it be well recieved by the consumers. We all accept the bugs, the lag, the performance issues, etc because we are beta testing it, but the people coming in and getting a first impression of the game will not be so forgiving.

I also agree with him that its not wise to put this out on the market with Christmas right around the corner. There are other titles that are being released that casual players will gravitate to more easily than Planetside 2.

[Timealude]

I agree with everything except for the 60 FPS thing. I know its important for competitive gameplay but it would take an act of god to run 60 FPS with a huge battle going and im talking about 40 vs 40 + tank spam plus all the explosion particles on the screen. But then again, I have no experience in programing so i might just be ignorant about this.

[Bear]

I disagree with his 60 fps assertion as well. That said, getting to 60 fps isn't hard. The question is, what are you wiling to give up to get there?

[berzerkerking]

I agree with everything except for the 60 FPS thing. I know its important for competitive gameplay but it would take an act of god to run 60 FPS with a huge battle going and im talking about 40 vs 40 + tank spam plus all the explosion particles on the screen. But then again, I have no experience in programing so i might just be ignorant about this.

That problem Is why he advocates more time in beta. Are you willing to wait, because I sure as hell am

[Timealude]

That problem Is why he advocates more time in beta. Are you willing to wait, because I sure as hell am

Im just saying is how is it possible to get 60 FPS with this scale of a game. I totally agree this game isnt ready to be released yet and the time frame they are releasing it in is bad just like TB said.

[Dagron]

I also agree with pretty much everything, specially the concerns about the release date.

So far they say the release only means we will be able to spend certs without fear of a wipe, but i think they should be less concerned about beta testers burning out due to wipes and more concerned about the tons of people who will then have access to the game and will pass judgement on it based on it's state when they first see it. I fear this could cripple the game's popularity and therefore it's population (content) for a long time, maybe permanently.

[Rivenshield]

We all just gotta be a little bit MORE patient in the next few months (even after release) so we can help SOE help us get this game right.

Meh. Maybe it's just me being sour grapes because I'm stuck in a hotel room with hotel WiFi, and will miss the grand opening, but....

We don't have sancs. We are forever doomed to fighting over the same terrain in the same direction, usually against the same enemy. We don't have logistics to speak of. There is little or no incentive for teamwork. For STRATEGY. Nevermind the ongoing performance issues.

You only get one chance to launch a game. SOE is blowing it.

[Thunderhawk]

Just my opinion....

1. No, Games don't have to run at a minimum of 60FPS to be playable.
2. No, running an i7 2600k (stock) with a GTX 580 1.5Gb and 16Gb runs the game fine on High.
3. No, Tanks don't need the gunner to be the main DPS person.
4. No, AA is fine, like was mentioned, go kill the AA with ground troops.
5. It's not Sony's fault players don't group up.
...

Couldn't be bothered to listen to the rest, felt a bit like a rant

[Captain1nsaneo]

Agree with release date, if the devs are bound to that release date then make sure that they don't sell weapons until they've finished balancing them. Decals and cosmetics are fine to sell but selling weapons that might see significant changes feels really shady to me.

Holiday release does make no sense, release the game right as cod fatigue sets in and there's nothing else coming out for maximum exposure. Learn from the film industry, check the release dates of Titanic and Avatar then realize that both were summer block busters released not in summer and both ended up as cash cows. PS2 has no need to rush as it isn't facing a console war situation as Dust doesn't deliver what PS does and its on a totally different system.

Disagree with the 60 FPS, I'm playing with between 6 and 20 fps in fights with an extreme low of 0. Still managing to find ways to get kills and exp but that's more because I know the game than there being support for low FPS players.

Game is probably half a year away from being a true gem.

I'd like some honesty about this situation, the devs have been open with us in the past about why things are the way they are and its done nothing but increase their standing with us. This silence really is worrying. (Then again they could just be in super crunch mode)

[Cosmical]

I agree with most of his points. I have absolute faith in the devs to sort this stuff out. We've seen so far theyre not precious about anything.

I do agree with the release date though, my only thought is that maybe for the game to be cost effective they need to release and start making money. Which is fine if thats the case. January is a much more appealing release time, make Planetside be 2013's go to game. Not 2012's left over.

[TheSaltySeagull]

Honestly I was surprised I found myself disagreeing with most of his points. Actually I think its better to say many of his points were not really valid as they seemed to be based on outdated info. He seemed to be unaware of the proposed metagame changes like adding cont locking and facility benefits as well as limiting sundy spam with a deployment proxy like in ps1 etc. Also the reduction of capture points was done as a response to feedback from players.

Also if you watch hammas soe live interview higby states that they intend to take intercontinental flow in the same direction of ps1. There will be no sancs but you will have just one foothold warpgate on one cont which will serve as your "home cont" that you will branch out from rather than having a foothold on every cont.

He did raise good points in regards to bugs, performance, and the release dates. But other than those 3 points I didnt find anything else he talked about to be of much value. I suppose its a better critique if you ignore all the supposed changes and look at the current build only. His points are more valid then. But IF(and this is a big if atm) SOE does get performance and bugs fixed and gets the mission system, cont locking, fac benefits, sundy proxy, and amerish up and running by launch then they will be in a good spot.

I just feel that most of his critiques have been addressed by the devs or they are merely his own opinions and preferences rather than actual design flaws. For me the real question is if SOE can get everything that they said they would have in and working by launch. If they can then I will be happy and so will many other people. If they dont and the game releases as a buggy mess that has no depth then they will have a problem.

[ringring]

I disagree with his 60 fps assertion as well. That said, getting to 60 fps isn't hard. The question is, what are you wiling to give up to get there?
Me too ..... and tbh 40-60 fps somehow feels better than 100-150 fps in ps1

But, I agree with him and a lot has been said by us for a long long time.

Sanc+footholds .... I wonder if the (unspoken) issue is really the continents take long long time and SOE were simply only prepared to wait for 3 before release .. hence no proper meta-game.

[DirtyBird]

A number of the points I agree with but not all, I dont like complaining about an issue and then throwing in how it used to be in PS1.
PS2 player numbers are going to be greater that PS1 and will present different problems. Totally different, and imo the numbers are what forces the two games to be different, not to mention the size of the maps.
I expect PS2 to be harder to balance.

I dont think it will ever be completely balanced and more than likely the three empires will enjoy some time on the OP merry go round.

The release date is a worry even with the overwhelming support that the devs can do it.
Too many bugs are still in and every time they patch they seem to introduce more bugs or break stuff that was working fine.
They are busting a gut to get things right which is fantastic but I really think they need more time, even as good as they are.

I'm biased but get some 24/7 testing going as well. Solid testing not just a week of it IF it ever happens at all.

I know Higby is always pushing the fact that they are listening and making changes but man it is now just 3 weeks before release.

Look where we were 3 weeks ago and what has been done, now look what has to be done in the next 3 weeks that cannot simply be wiped at a whim like in beta.
I think there is too much.

[Brusi]

I agree...

I would love to see this mission system that they explained would be the way that planetside would resolve all macro gameplay issues.

[SpottyGekko]

I actually agree with TB almost entirely.

Almost every patch so far has brought with it some bug that would be a total disaster in a live game environment. Either that will stop magically in 3 weeks' time, or they'll stop patching after launch. Neither of those 2 scenarios are likely.

November 20 is too soon. I know they have to draw a line in the sand, else the development will never "finish" enough for launch, but given the current state of the game, another 4 weeks of beta is sorely needed.

I'm secretly hoping that the 20 November launch date is just a publicity stunt. Perhaps around 6 November, Smed will announce that due to "overwhelming community pressure" they have postponed release to 20th December. It will make them look good as dev's that REALLY listen to the players, and it will give them much needed extra time.

[Brusi]

oh yeah, i spose i kinda forgot how many times i've fallen through the floor on drop pod....

it's been happening since tech test...

Hopefully they figure that one out before next month? :)

[Nasher]

I think everyone knows the game is being rushed out early. Really, over the last month not a lot of progress has been made in the way of polishing the game.

It seems like with every new patch brings a bunch more bugs, including things that were previously fixed. Like warping/invisible/vanishing and laggy players, strange physics, instant action and respawning bugs, buggy debris and vehicle behaviour (including randomly exploding while driving over bumping ground or rolling over), weapons sometimes not doing damage etc..

At one point just after beta launched the lag and buggyness with the core game were pretty much gone, then it just seemed to fall appart a few patches later.

[Brusi]

I have to also stick up for them at this point... cause well... who the fuuhhrrr... um, basically...

Every patch has brought the game closer to the PS we know and love. These guys are listening, but if they don't open the (F2P) game up to cash shop purchases soon... they are going to devolve into everyone's worst nightmare. A heavily reduced dev team, trying to cater to the overly expectant views of the masses.

Let them get this F2P game on the road already! This will give them the breathing room they need to properly develop the vehicles and weapons that we would actually like to play with and the meta-game that we want to play!

Also... fucking hurry up and fix the fucking game, you fucks!

I never said it wasn't a fucking juggling act.

Good luck guys, love you.

[Dougnifico]

I agree with most points, especially the release date. January or February would be optimal. Launch during the dead season when people have figured out the COD 1982364 is the same game as every other one and are tired of it. Also, this means they could possibly launch with Searhus, Oshur, and even (maybe) Hossin finished. That could allow continent captures and provide that sense of ownership.

I disagree with the tanks notion. I don't see the lighting as a tank at all. Its an IFV meant for infantry support and not primary engagement. It fills a far different role and has been in beta. Players have caught on. The MBTs can stay as is.

If AA is too prevalent, maybe a slight reduction in effectiveness is needed only to get that balance. I will admit, AA is a bit overbearing right now.

VR training is a must. No questions asked. No valid counter-argument.

Performance is an issue. 60fps, idk. I can do just fine with 30. Besides, I think its 24 that is the cut off where the eye will actually start catching frames. Everything above just adds to a fluid look.

Capture mechanics I have to agree. You can do a couple wack-a-mole bases and a couple clusterfucks, but then have a staged conquest (blow up x, then capture 3 y, then capture 1 z), PS1 style CTF, and plant the bomb scenarios. Also, 12 hexes should never be controlled by 1 capture point. Flesh it out a bit.

Sunderers are a bit too common now. I say they warrant their own level of terminal. You can just pick which ones and change the flash icon to a sundy icon.

I disagree with his view on bullet drop. I can fire an M4 at 300 yards with minimal drop (some yes, much, no). You want to know how much bullet drop? Just be simple and say auraxis is like earth (sea level psi everywhere for simplicity, and 9.8ms^2 gravity) and then say rifles fire at 3000fps, pistols 800 and calculate. Its realisitic, fair, and no one has any right to bitch (I don't care about your paintballs Vanu!!!)

[GuyFawkes]

Just my opinion....

1. No, Games don't have to run at a minimum of 60FPS to be playable.
2. No, running an i7 2600k (stock) with a GTX 580 1.5Gb and 16Gb runs the game fine on High.
3. No, Tanks don't need the gunner to be the main DPS person.
4. No, AA is fine, like was mentioned, go kill the AA with ground troops.
5. It's not Sony's fault players don't group up.
...

Couldn't be bothered to listen to the rest, felt a bit like a rant

Agree on most of this. I'm happy if the game dosen't dip below 30fps, 60fps is a dream, but I'm a realist and your average Joe, I dont play professionally I have a normal job. If they can stabilize the game to be above 30fps with the amount of people the game is capable of, they will have achieved the improbable.
I'm running the game with an [email protected],4gb ram and a geforce gtx 460 and since last patch I'm getting 60-70 fps in warpgate and dropping to 25fps near large bases, so its not that far away even on my old system.
The one thing I do agree with him on is the need for the game to offer direction and the really poor way they have implemented this so far. There isnt even scope within the chat to enable anyone to direct anything ad hoc. The mission system, once hailed as the core 'thing' about the game isn't even there.
I also wish they would mix up the capture mechanics as well. Right now I think they just expect 2000 people to converge on the crown and make the bases to suit.

[RobUK]

Does anyone know if there will be a Test Server that we can get on after the game releases? I'd be very interested in helping the devs to test new/patched stuff before pushing it live. We had a Test Server with Planetside 1 and I think I spent half my life on that thing.

Planetside 2 will be in development for years to come. I'd really like to help them out.

[Mox]

Almost totaly agree with TB. Only his ideas about increasing the number of capture points per base are bullshit.

[EVILoHOMER]

I agree with him, right now the Lightning is useless, you just get in a MBT because it is essentially a one person tank and you can switch seats so easily. MBTs should have the main cannon on the passenger seat and you should have to get out of the vehicle in order to switch seats.

[Crator]

A number of the points I agree with but not all, I dont like complaining about an issue and then throwing in how it used to be in PS1.
PS2 player numbers are going to be greater that PS1 and will present different problems. Totally different, and imo the numbers are what forces the two games to be different, not to mention the size of the maps.
I expect PS2 to be harder to balance.

Why is there animosity when someone says the way it worked in PS1? It was the predecessor to the this game, and the way the 1st one did it typically did a better job at certain things. It's a critique that should warrant an answer that explains why they did it like they did in PS2, but alas they remain fairly quite on why. Couldn't be because they don't know, or didn't plan to run into said issue, right?

It's interesting you mention how PS1 and PS2 are different, nay, totally different. Then you go on to relate this major difference to the map sizes and how it relates to population caps. PS1 maps were WAY bigger then PS2 maps. Major key design flaw you say?

Size does matter! (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=47575&highlight=size+matter)

[Tatwi]

I agree with most of his points, a great video overall.

As I watched it, I thought to myself, "here's a guy who's either managed to cram in a lot of play time or who has read a lot threads in the forums", because he nailed the most important things we've all been talking about. Perhaps he summarized what his researchers gave him, maybe he actually came to these conclusions himself. Either way, he nailed it. That's all that matters.

[Tatwi]

Higby replies on Redditside: (http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/126j4s/totalbiscuits_ps2_critique/)

Many of the issues brought up here are and have been big focuses for the team for a while. Specifically, things like better ways to find good fights, meaningful and fun metagame goals, bug fixing, polish and optimization have been our main focus for the last couple months.

Many of you have seen the consistent gains we've made on performance over the last few months. It's not an overnight thing, it takes a lot of hard work to get a 1% increase, but we're making significant progress every patch.

I'm sure you've also seen the progress made on fixing the top bugs affecting the community... we try to nail as many quality of life issues as we can with every patch, and we're moving more and more people over to pure bug fixing mode as we come down the final stretch towards launch.

Some metagame goals will be in at launch (actually in the next two weeks, fingers crossed), but they'll continue to get cooler and more robust as new continents get added, and new functionality gets added.

It'd take 10 years to get everything the team and the community wants in this game, and hopefully with your support in 10 years we'll still be adding to PlanetSide 2. The simple fact is we can't wait 10 years to ship the game. Our goal is to ship a great game that we can continue to grow and enhance for years to come and we have a plan that lets us do that. We've got a lot of work left to do to get there, but I'm confident we're on the right path.


----------


We'll get numbers put in outfit tags, just sent that over to the UI team.

Planetside 2 is all about team coordination and communication, large scale coordinated fights are the best gameplay experience you can have in PS2 IMO, so despite being able to killwhore out some faster XP, I'm always more interested in playing with my outfit, personally. I hear you though, and we've got big plans for outfit recognition, advancement, building, ownership, etc. Can't wait to get to work on that stuff.


---------

It's certainly more of a challenge to make sweeping changes to game mechanics once it's launched. That said, we're committed to improving the game before and after launch, that will mean making changes and large scale updates and feature additions post-launch.

--------

Those issues with instant action should be 100% resolved (except the use more often one). The system has gone through a bit of an overhaul lately. If there are still issues with it, I don't know about them.

--------

Q: Whatever happened to the mission system you guys were talking about? Did it get postponed like the weather system?
A: Not at all. Many aspects of it are in the game right now, such as hotspots and the reinforcement requests (part of squad leadership skill tree).



A quick copy and paste for ye!

FYI: Las0m = Higby

[Stardouser]

Aircraft are not that easy to fly and have a high timer/resource cost. Blaming AA is wrong, unless you're a dedicated pilot anyway.

But he's right about the single player mentality, it's pilots wanting to attack one at a time.

[SturmovikDrakon]

A quick copy and paste for ye!

FYI: Las0m = Higby

Thanks for that but HOLY CRAP
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mahgdw0z9u1r3ay4do1_400.gif

[Fab]

wow... so the mission system is pretty much already in... I feel "a bit" disapointed. Like flipping my fucking desk disapointed.

Also, nothing on the AA / Air balance??? Really?? loosing a vehicle in 3 seconds against a MAX or a turret is totally fine.. I mean COMON!
I put all my cert points in a reaver, and i have got the lev 3 armor, also fire suppression, and I still can't help my squad attack anywhere! I die in a few seconds.

Also the "yeah just go kill the AA with ground troups" argument is so stupid I feel like banging my head on a wall! the max can kill me 500 meters away, or at least hurt me so badly i cannot even get close! But to kill the MAX with inf you need to get close, like 50 meters.
Being a buster max doesnt require any skill! flying does. I used a skyguard the other day for the first time, and I had a 15 kill streak! these days, having a 5 kill streak with a Reaver (or scythe or mossy) is nearly a miracle!

[berzerkerking]

wow... so the mission system is pretty much already in... I feel "a bit" disapointed. Like flipping my fucking desk disapointed.

Also, nothing on the AA / Air balance??? Really?? loosing a vehicle in 3 seconds against a MAX or a turret is totally fine.. I mean COMON!
I put all my cert points in a reaver, and i have got the lev 3 armor, also fire suppression, and I still can't help my squad attack anywhere! I die in a few seconds.

Also the "yeah just go kill the AA with ground troups" argument is so stupid I feel like banging my head on a wall! the max can kill me 500 meters away, or at least hurt me so badly i cannot even get close! But to kill the MAX with inf you need to get close, like 50 meters.
Being a buster max doesnt require any skill! flying does. I used a skyguard the other day for the first time, and I had a 15 kill streak! these days, having a 5 kill streak with a Reaver (or scythe or mossy) is nearly a miracle!
He did mention that towards the end of the vid

[Miir]

In my opinion. SOE needs to keep the game in beta but move to the open beta phase.

Along with that they should open it up so you can start purchasing things with station cash for your account. Anything you purchase just gets linked to your account. So if they need to do anymore character wipes it's a minor inconvenience because you already have all the items purchased.

This way the game can stay in an unfinished state a little longer and get where it needs to be before release and we start supporting it by purchasing items. This will also allow them to test out the cash shop a bit before it goes live.

We all want this game to be the best it can be but I understand they need to start making some money. So why not do both? Keep it in beta and make money? Like Minecraft or a kickstart?

[Zeta]

Lord and Master TB has spoken!


Where's your god now?


100% on issues

[MacXXcaM]

I fully agree with TB. He manages to express things I just had a bad feeling about. That man knows what he's talking about.

[Dagron]

It'd take 10 years to get everything the team and the community wants in this game, and hopefully with your support in 10 years we'll still be adding to PlanetSide 2. The simple fact is we can't wait 10 years to ship the game. Our goal is to ship a great game that we can continue to grow and enhance for years to come and we have a plan that lets us do that. We've got a lot of work left to do to get there, but I'm confident we're on the right path.

One thing is not being able to put everything we want before launch, another is launching the game in a state that will make it look like it was rushed because the company was running out of money.

I'm not one of those who kept screaming that the sky was falling every other day throughout beta, but that's because i was working under the assumption the devs had time to do everything properly. The problem now is that i don't see how it's possible for them to do all the basic stuff that's still not implemented in such a short time: launch a new continent, fix all the imbalance issues, fix all the old bugs AND the new ones that are coming, not to mention creating and testing the whole meta-game which so far is only an idea, all of that in just under 4 weeks. I really wish to be pleasantly surprised by then, but i don't have much hope i will.

[Hamma]

The only thing I am not in full agreement on is the FPS thing :lol:

[Beerbeer]

You have to look at it this from both sides.

They probably have a lot of money invested and need to start recouping some of those costs. On the flip side, though, release a poor product and the amount of potential revenue won't be as large as it could be. So it's a delicate balancing act, but time is their number one enemy.

His comments in regards to other game releases doesn't affect me as I stopped buying into the CoD franchise after they removed dedicated servers and I never played battlefield much. His statements almost infers that this game cannot compete. Maybe he's right or maybe he's wrong, but I'm sure the devs BELIEVES it can and that's why they're releasing it during the blockbuster time I guess. I don't think any company goes into a release thinking it's a failure: high hopes and large ambitions is what drives them.

Even if "the masses" initially migrate to CoD et. al., I think if ps2 can weather the storm (and maybe the other games start to falter out of pure repetitive boredom), AND the bug fixes and game play enhancements are quick to come post launch, word of mouth might tilt things back into planetside's favor. That is, if it is indeed launched November 20th.

[bjorntju1]

I actually do agree on the FPS thing. If the game runs on 30 FPS I also get worse at the game. 50-60 FPS is a must for me to enjoy the game. I have an I5 3570K with an GTX 580 in SLi and am getting around 35/40 FPS in big fights. That is a fairly high end PC so I can imagine other people having even more problems with the game. I think it is incredibly stupid to release the game in less than a month seeing the game in its current state. They need to focus all their manpower on optimizing the game, more content can come later, optimizing is more important imo. They also NEED to put a tutorial in the game, not a screen with some text the moment you log on for the first time. But an actual tutorial guiding you through the basics of the game.

I find it weird that they said they will only release the game when it was actually finished, with it isn't right now. I'd rather have them release the game early next year with most of the bugs fixed and the game more optimized, than do it next month, this is a F2P game and if new people are going to play this game and it runs like shit, they will probably play it for 5 minutes and never look at it again. First impressions are everything for a F2P title and I don't belive they can fix the game in less than a month. Also not to forget november is a very busy month with Halo 4, CoD: BO2, AC III(well, the very end of october for that game) and Far Cry 3 coming out. And I probably forgot some other titles.

I know they need to make money, but I think they will make more money off this game by releasing it in a way better state later, than releasing it next month.

I actually enjoy the game when it plays smoothly, but the problem is that it is really sporadic that I can play the game smoothly. I am not playing the game much anymore because of the performance issues. If those issues are fixed the game becomes way more fun to play for me and I bet allot more others.

[Arkanor]

The only thing I am not in full agreement on is the FPS thing :lol:

I don't know, I've been pretty disappointed with the performance. I can push 60, but not all the time, and this is running on an SSD, OC'd 920, and a 690GTX with all power saving modes disabled. It doesn't look like it's bad because there's not enough power, but all my indications say that that power just isn't being used. When I have 35FPS because my GPU utilization is sitting at 40% and the CPU isn't near maxed, that's a problem, because adding power doesn't fix it.

I as always would disagree on the point of tanks. I paid for it, I want to drive it and make it do things. There simply are not enough operations to do in a videogame tank to justify 2 people unless you make driving or gunning a lot harder. I think a decent solution for the lightning is more speed and lower cost (relative to the MBT). Right now resources are so abundant it's trivial to pull the biggest thing at the station.

[ringring]

I don't know, I've been pretty disappointed with the performance. I can push 60, but not all the time, and this is running on an SSD, OC'd 920, and a 690GTX with all power saving modes disabled. It doesn't look like it's bad because there's not enough power, but all my indications say that that power just isn't being used. When I have 35FPS because my GPU utilization is sitting at 40% and the CPU isn't near maxed, that's a problem, because adding power doesn't fix it.

I as always would disagree on the point of tanks. I paid for it, I want to drive it and make it do things. There simply are not enough operations to do in a videogame tank to justify 2 people unless you make driving or gunning a lot harder. I think a decent solution for the lightning is more speed and lower cost (relative to the MBT). Right now resources are so abundant it's trivial to pull the biggest thing at the station.

The game is CPU intensive atm, it doesn't use your 690 as it should or is intended to.

I have a 560 1Gb and I get 100-110 in empty areas limited by GPU but around 30 is big fights limited by CPU.

As far as tanks go. I prefer driving PS2 tanks to PS1 prowler but not PS1 magrider. I recognise that tanking is better in PS1, I mean skillwise because of the seperation of tasks of driving and gunning. So my preference is a PS1 magrider concept, gunner gets the big beast while driver gets the little dog.

[Rolfski]

I prefer Hamma's video/critique because it focuses on the main issue most PS1 vets don't care about but actually being the one that's most crucial for the success of this game: new players not running away

[Beerbeer]

While their intentions were good in regards to "simplification," I think they got it wrong. They gutted character depth but gave little thought to the clunky interface, menu system, maps, bases, base capture mechanics and other components that are meant to usher people into battle. It's all very confusing and overwhelming at first.

It should have been the other way around.

Because character development and character customization abilities is one of the primary reasons people stick around for a long time.

[Whiteagle]

Meh. Maybe it's just me being sour grapes because I'm stuck in a hotel room with hotel WiFi, and will miss the grand opening, but....

We don't have sancs. We are forever doomed to fighting over the same terrain in the same direction, usually against the same enemy. We don't have logistics to speak of. There is little or no incentive for teamwork. For STRATEGY. Nevermind the ongoing performance issues.

You only get one chance to launch a game. SOE is blowing it.
Indeed, I actually find myself agreeing with people calling this an Alpha, because NONE of the meta-game or intercontinental mechanics have been introduced yet...

Honestly I was surprised I found myself disagreeing with most of his points. Actually I think its better to say many of his points were not really valid as they seemed to be based on outdated info. He seemed to be unaware of the proposed metagame changes like adding cont locking and facility benefits as well as limiting sundy spam with a deployment proxy like in ps1 etc. Also the reduction of capture points was done as a response to feedback from players.

Also if you watch hammas soe live interview higby states that they intend to take intercontinental flow in the same direction of ps1. There will be no sancs but you will have just one foothold warpgate on one cont which will serve as your "home cont" that you will branch out from rather than having a foothold on every cont.

So... figure one then...
Figure one isn't good people...

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j65/Whiteagle/ContinentDiagram.png
I agree with him, right now the Lightning is useless, you just get in a MBT because it is essentially a one person tank and you can switch seats so easily. MBTs should have the main cannon on the passenger seat and you should have to get out of the vehicle in order to switch seats.
Indeed, what is the point of the one-man light tank if you can solo a MAIN BATTLE TANK!

The Prowler certainly isn't a Bolo, that's for sure...

wow... so the mission system is pretty much already in... I feel "a bit" disapointed. Like flipping my fucking desk disapointed.
Indeed, if all we're getting are two graphics on the map screen, then it IS a pretty big disappointment.

[Arkanor]

The game is CPU intensive atm, it doesn't use your 690 as it should or is intended to.

I have a 560 1Gb and I get 100-110 in empty areas limited by GPU but around 30 is big fights limited by CPU.


People say that but it uses the CPU, but I check my CPU util during those spots where the framerate dips down and it's at about 40-50% as well. It looks like it's on all cores, but I have a lot more headroom there that the game does not touch at all.

[DirtyBird]

...It's a critique that should warrant an answer that explains why they did it like they did in PS2, but alas they remain fairly quite on why. Couldn't be because they don't know, or didn't plan to run into said issue, right?...


tbh imo I think there are some people with blinkers on in regard to the game and wanting it more like PS1 that it wouldn't matter what was explained to them so I guess they might think why bother?

Thankfully those ppl who are upset that PS2 is not a clone of PS1 will be able to play PS1 (for free!) and enjoy it as it is and those playing PS2 can enjoy their new game of choice. :D

[Whiteagle]

tbh imo I think there are some people with blinkers on in regard to the game and wanting it more like PS1 that it wouldn't matter what was explained to them so I guess they might think why bother?

Thankfully those ppl who are upset that PS2 is not a clone of PS1 will be able to play PS1 (for free!) and enjoy it as it is and those playing PS2 can enjoy their new game of choice. :D
Until Battlefield: Unlimited the MMO comes out next fall...

[TheSaltySeagull]

So... figure one then...
Figure one isn't good people...


Actually its not any of those. They wont change footholds until they have more than 3 conts in. When all 6 currently planned conts are in it will look more like 3 home conts with branching warpgates that connect to the three neutral conts which is a similar flow to ps1.

[Whiteagle]

Actually its not any of those. They wont change footholds until they have more than 3 conts in. When all 6 currently planned conts are in it will look more like 3 home conts with branching warpgates that connect to the three neutral conts which is a similar flow to ps1.
So they are going to launch with Figure 3 then...

Better, but then they aren't putting their supposed metagame features until AFTER launch...

[TheSaltySeagull]

So they are going to launch with Figure 3 then...

Better, but then they aren't putting their supposed metagame features until AFTER launch...

The "meta game" changes they are working on now are cont locking and facility benefits which supposedly will be in at launch. Facility will offer benefits to all outposts connected to them such as tech plants enabling the use of MBTs like in ps1.

The cont locking with work something like if one faction pushes the other two back and locks them in their warpgates they will recieve some benefit as a reward for doing so similar to how owning conts in ps1 gave you benefits.

They are also considering bringing back "back hacking" on certain bases to allow for behind the lines play depending on how pop distribution works with 3 conts up and running.

[Whiteagle]

The "meta game" changes they are working on now are cont locking and facility benefits which supposedly will be in at launch. Facility will offer benefits to all outposts connected to them such as tech plants enabling the use of MBTs like in ps1.

The cont locking with work something like if one faction pushes the other two back and locks them in their warpgates they will recieve some benefit as a reward for doing so similar to how owning conts in ps1 gave you benefits.
You do realise that's actually going to be WORST, right?
It will be Esamir's debut all over again, each faction will only lock ONE Continent because it will be easier to simply focus all of their forces in one place...

They are also considering bringing back "back hacking" on certain bases to allow for behind the lines play depending on how pop distribution works with 3 conts up and running.
This is slightly good news, but I doubt it's going to work well at all...

[TheSaltySeagull]

You do realise that's actually going to be WORST, right?
It will be Esamir's debut all over again, each faction will only lock ONE Continent because it will be easier to simply focus all of their forces in one place...


This was a change being done because people wanted it. People wanted an end game to work towards and in fact TB mentions that desire in his video. The players demanded cont locking so the devs are putting in cont locking.

But I dont think your complaint is valid. Cont "squatting" as higby put it is no longer a valid option because certs are xp based. You have to actually go and get into a fight. Sitting on a cont you locked is detrimental to your own character progression so you will have to move on to the next fight.

This is going to give players an overall objective to work towards and a tangible reward for completing it. Which is what players have been asking for. However the way you advance your character is by taking part in combat so that provides an incentive for people to engage in fights rather than just sitting on territory they already own.

[Toppopia]

wow... so the mission system is pretty much already in... I feel "a bit" disapointed. Like flipping my fucking desk disapointed.


I must have been out of the loop, what is this mission system i have seen mentioned a few times in this thread?

[Bittermen]

It seems you understand that you can edit your post yet you still double post.

wtf duke.

[Toppopia]

The mission system is like a 'CR5' thing but not. It allows players to place, who certify in commanding, a waypoint for the 'zerg' to follow and if they do, it gains you and the zerg more EXP.

Oh right, the funny symbols. I understand now. Hmm.. if thats all they have planned for the foreseeable future, then thats not good. I am hoping for like a drop down menu where you can select a mission then a icon shows up to show the active mission and such. It would help guide the newbies easier instead of them fumbling about randomly.

[IMMentat]

I agree with all of the points made.

I would also add one in that fixed/building spawnpoints are far to weak against a co-ordinated attack.
2 shielded doors on a ground floor room smaller than my living room (subjectivley) that is easily separated from the facility it is supposed to protect/service (usually by people on the roof or tanks waiting at 90 degree angles form the doorshields), does not make for a good choice of defensive/co-ordination position.


IMO main bases need more fixed spawns but built in the style of towers similar to those in PS1 (2-3 floors with internal stairs, keep the current door-shield on the ground floors but allow doors/windows/balconies facing other directions on upper floors to make them defensible).

External facilities could be linked to a jump-pad or trench/bunker system to reduce the inevitability of 2+ sunderers with escort moving in and denying any access to the "courtyard" by simply spamming 2 doors with AI/tank rounds and putting a couple of people on the roof. Early on those tanks are almost unstopable when supported, especially when flash and sunderer are the only vehicles to counter with much of the time (usually spawned from the opposite side of the courtyard to the spawnroom).

[Whiteagle]

This was a change being done because people wanted it. People wanted an end game to work towards and in fact TB mentions that desire in his video. The players demanded cont locking so the devs are putting in cont locking.

But I dont think your complaint is valid. Cont "squatting" as higby put it is no longer a valid option because certs are xp based. You have to actually go and get into a fight. Sitting on a cont you locked is detrimental to your own character progression so you will have to move on to the next fight.

This is going to give players an overall objective to work towards and a tangible reward for completing it. Which is what players have been asking for. However the way you advance your character is by taking part in combat so that provides an incentive for people to engage in fights rather than just sitting on territory they already own.
Except people will still squat on the same territory... just to farm kills instead of Resources...

Look at the Crown, every time we TR hold it, we're getting our damn asses kicked because there are so many damn Crown Clowns sitting their farming XP...

It's going to end up with everyone on ONE Continent, the Continent their Faction is winning, because otherwise you're trapped in your Warpgate.

It's stupid to introduce Continent locking when you only have THREE Continents for your THREE Factions, simple as that.

The mission system is like a 'CR5' thing but not. It allows players to place, who certify in commanding, a waypoint for the 'zerg' to follow and if they do, it gains you and the zerg more EXP.
No, its what you get for the second level of Squad Leader 1...

And that only gives you those "Shield" and "Explosion" icons to place on the map.
It's quite literally worthless...

[TheSaltySeagull]

Except people will still squat on the same territory... just to farm kills instead of Resources...

Look at the Crown, every time we TR hold it, we're getting our damn asses kicked because there are so many damn Crown Clowns sitting their farming XP...

It's going to end up with everyone on ONE Continent, the Continent their Faction is winning, because otherwise you're trapped in your Warpgate.

The crown and esamir are two different things. Esamir squatting was the result of NC being able to use a pop advantage to overrun the cont and then sit there because they gained auraxium passively from the controlled bases. When auraxium was changed to be xp based(and then removed for certs) this behavior ceased because there was no longer a benefit to sitting on a cont with no enemies to kill for xp.

The crown is popular for the exact opposite reason. Its central location and easy to defend terrain means there is always a battle there and it easy to farm kills on it. Its a place where you are assured action and lots of kills.

In the situation of cont locking where one faction pushes the others back to warpgate the other factions have the option to abandon that cont and fight elsewhere(they may even be forced to because they devs are considering making it so the other factions cant even spawn into a locked cont for x amount of time). Thus the faction that locked the cont must follow them onto a new cont or sit on the locked on where they get no kills and thus no certs and no advancement.

Since everything is xp based now there is no point in sitting on territory unless that territory is contested(like the crown) and empty territory that has no opposition(like esamir on release) ends up being both boring and meaningless because you get no certs from it.

It's stupid to introduce Continent locking when you only have THREE Continents for your THREE Factions, simple as that.


Indeed the system would work better with more conts but again this was a change brought on by the community not the devs. PS1 vets wanted a metagame with cont locking. If this does blow up its not the devs fault its the players. The same thing as AA being "op" and to easy to access when after the character wipe people cried all over that they had to have default AA access now they complain that there is to much AA. That was a player made problem. Players ask for stuff then when the devs give it to them the players suddenly realize that is wasn't such a good idea.

[ringring]

This was a change being done because people wanted it. People wanted an end game to work towards and in fact TB mentions that desire in his video. The players demanded cont locking so the devs are putting in cont locking.

But I dont think your complaint is valid. Cont "squatting" as higby put it is no longer a valid option because certs are xp based. You have to actually go and get into a fight. Sitting on a cont you locked is detrimental to your own character progression so you will have to move on to the next fight.

This is going to give players an overall objective to work towards and a tangible reward for completing it. Which is what players have been asking for. However the way you advance your character is by taking part in combat so that provides an incentive for people to engage in fights rather than just sitting on territory they already own.
Of course people wanted cont locking, but we also realised it couldn't be done with just 3 conts.

But the meta game also includes base benefits, I'd expect those in before launch.

[Qwan]

I agree with 80% of what he said. The thing is; It IS going to be what they want it to be and honestly I'm okay with this now. I know they are going to add more logistics and I KNOW the 'suits' (smed's bosses) are forcing the release date.


We all just gotta be a little bit MORE patient in the next few months (even after release) so we can help SOE help us get this game right.

Hey Duke, I just wanted to add to this, me being a PS1 vet, I know how Planetside works. When it first came out there were so many issues and we as gamers grew with the game, worked threw the bugs and patches, and watched it grow. Now there making PS2 geared more toward the modern gamer which is cool, but will they understand that this isnt a FPS this is a FPSMMO, this aint BF or CoD, its gonna take more than one patch to get it write and that this game will evole over time. The question is will this new genre of gamer be patient enough. Regardless of what the dev do or tweek, or change im gonna be a fan, and show my support. :groovy:

[Whiteagle]

The crown is popular for the exact opposite reason. Its central location and easy to defend terrain means there is always a battle there and it easy to farm kills on it. Its a place where you are assured action and lots of kills.

In the situation of cont locking where one faction pushes the others back to warpgate the other factions have the option to abandon that cont and fight elsewhere(they may even be forced to because they devs are considering making it so the other factions cant even spawn into a locked cont for x amount of time). Thus the faction that locked the cont must follow them onto a new cont or sit on the locked on where they get no kills and thus no certs and no advancement.

Since everything is xp based now there is no point in sitting on territory unless that territory is contested(like the crown) and empty territory that has no opposition(like esamir on release) ends up being both boring and meaningless because you get no certs from it.
Alright, where will the easiest place to farm kills be after a Faction Locks a Continent?

Answer, the other Faction's Warpgates.

Face it, once a Warpgate reopens, the people streaming out of it are going to the easiest source of kills.

Indeed the system would work better with more conts but again this was a change brought on by the community not the devs. PS1 vets wanted a metagame with cont locking. If this does blow up its not the devs fault its the players. The same thing as AA being "op" and to easy to access when after the character wipe people cried all over that they had to have default AA access now they complain that there is to much AA. That was a player made problem. Players ask for stuff then when the devs give it to them the players suddenly realize that is wasn't such a good idea.
...Which further underscores why this game is coming out TOO DAMN EARLY!
We don't HAVE the full game yet, we just have the COMBAT MECHANICS FOR said game.

We need at least four interconnected Continents, instead of three three-way maps!
http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j65/Whiteagle/ContinentDiagram.png

[Canaris]

I'm just glad to see a game critic give a balanced and accurate review of the beta in the run up to release.
To many game critics these days are sucking on the corporate tits of game companies because they're afraid if they tell the truth of a game & give a bad review they'll get locked out of getting behind the scenes access. Which I'm sure is the case and people(game designers/companies) can be extremely petty.
"Oh he gave Diablo 3 a bad review well he'll never get another bit of information from us and we should ostracize him because the universe knows we can't make a bad game" :rolleyes:

Which is probably the biggest problem with gaming today, companies churning out shit getting wrapped in tin foil by a supposed independent game reviewer and called "Gold"

Have to agree with a lot of what TB has said there and I hope he keeps up this level of involvement. I also really want PS2 to be a great game.

[Qwan]

Alot of people are forgetting that this is not a FPS its a FPSMMO, it may have some feel of some of the popular FPS's but like any MMO its gonna need tweeks and stuff. This is how I approach PS2 when I look at it, i log in and go to killing, if the game play is really bad and i start to get frustrated, i actually pinpoint whats making the game difficult, and send up my little reports and log out till the next patch. We have to drop this fix it now attitude, and face the facts that its gonna take time, Ill never say that PS2 sucks and is a horrible game, but I will post and leave comments stating what I see is wrong. Its kind of like voting if you have never sent up a report or posted an issue then you will never be heard. I think everyone should post there thoughts and let the devs know what we want.

[Dragonskin]

I'm just glad to see a game critic give a balanced and accurate review of the beta in the run up to release.
To many game critics these days are sucking on the corporate tits of game companies because they're afraid if they tell the truth of a game & give a bad review they'll get locked out of getting behind the scenes access. Which I'm sure is the case and people(game designers/companies) can be extremely petty.
"Oh he gave Diablo 3 a bad review well he'll never get another bit of information from us and we should ostracize him because the universe knows we can't make a bad game" :rolleyes:

Which is probably the biggest problem with gaming today, companies churning out shit getting wrapped in tin foil by a supposed independent game reviewer and called "Gold"

Have to agree with a lot of what TB has said there and I hope he keeps up this level of involvement. I also really want PS2 to be a great game.

I also agree with a lot of what TB said in the vid. This game is not ready and will not be ready with less than a month to go before launch. The game is fun though and I can't wait to see this thing released so I can have a character that won't get wiped, but it needs to bake for a couple months longer.

TB made a vid talking about why critics give the ratings they do and a lot of it has to do with what you mentioned. Game companies will play dirty if you don't praise every piece of crap they poop out. Which in turn hurts the critics.. so instead of the common myth that people assume they do big payoffs.. companies actually just stop allowing you access to do early reveiws which then can hurt the critics cash flow because they will lose fans/site hits/sells.

Alot of people are forgetting that this is not a FPS its a FPSMMO, it may have some feel of some of the popular FPS's but like any MMO its gonna need tweeks and stuff. This is how I approach PS2 when I look at it, i log in and go to killing, if the game play is really bad and i start to get frustrated, i actually pinpoint whats making the game difficult, and send up my little reports and log out till the next patch. We have to drop this fix it now attitude, and face the facts that its gonna take time, Ill never say that PS2 sucks and is a horrible game, but I will post and leave comments stating what I see is wrong. Its kind of like voting if you have never sent up a report or posted an issue then you will never be heard. I think everyone should post there thoughts and let the devs know what we want.

I disagree. Customers need to stop rolling over and taking nut shots because publisher want to make a quick buck. This game is F2P... meaning their cash flow comes entirely on the want of people to actually buy crap. If the game doesn't work right out of the gate then no one will buy crap. No one buys crap then even if it is F2P it can still sink.

MMOs need to stop being excused because they are MMOs. They need to instead be held to some kind of quality control standard so that customer don't end up being taken advantage of.

Yes, games will continue to improve.. but that is true for all games... MMO or not.. these days as all games are played online for the most part and receive updates. That doesn't mean that they should continue to release things in a poor state. That is the wrong state of mind.

[TheSaltySeagull]

Alright, where will the easiest place to farm kills be after a Faction Locks a Continent?

Answer, the other Faction's Warpgates.

Face it, once a Warpgate reopens, the people streaming out of it are going to the easiest source of kills.


What we learned from ps1 is that after a cont is locked the winning faction generally moves on to another cont rather than sitting on the same cont. Even with only 3 conts that still provides options on where to fight. The opportunity to farm a warpgate was also there in ps1 but did not happen often. Both parties often just moved on to a different cont.

The more likely case is that all three factions will flock to the same cont in order to create larger fights that give more opportunity for advancement rather than each seclude to their own cont where they will face little opposition. Depending on how population balance is one faction might be able to lock one cont with its over flow but generally the conts will remain contested. Even with two conts we already see this happening where the majority of the population seems to keep on indar and esamir has a general lower pop. People are going to go to where the fight is. This is why the crown is popular now and why cyssor was popular in ps1.

Simply put sitting on a locked cont staring at a warpgate hoping for somebody to come through does not provide the same opportunity as actively seeking a new fight on another cont.

[Whiteagle]

Simply put sitting on a locked cont staring at a warpgate hoping for somebody to come through does not provide the same opportunity as actively seeking a new fight on another cont.
Yes, but it's also not as safe a bet...

Think about it, if you go to Esamir, and one Faction has already claimed the single Tech Plant to roll MBTs all over everything else...

Are you really going to want to deal with that or just wait for some idiot to walk out of a freshly unlocked Warpgate?
Chances are, you aren't going to hold any ground, let alone capture Territory, so why bother throwing yourself into the Meat-grinder when YOU could do the Grinding.

[EVILoHOMER]

My FPS has gotten worse, I now get lots of stutter when I didn't in early beta.

[GuyFawkes]

I fully agree with TB. He manages to express things I just had a bad feeling about. That man knows what he's talking about.

Or he knows to say what everyone wants to hear. He echoes a lot of opinion already expressed, but his carried more weight due to simple notoriety. Not knocking the guy, just trying to look at this critique from a neutral standpoint if I knew nothing about TB or PS2.
He makes some reasonable points and opinions, and after watching a recent interview it appears most of them the devs are aware of.
The main concern, and which was reinforced with a similar effort by Hamma, is that of helping a new player to shoe horn into the game.
I watched a recent video with commentary by BuzzCutPsycho about outfits where he said that he is constantly recruiting new player because players will stop playing eventually. An outfit that closes recruitment is a dying outfit.
Likewise a game that only caters to the hardened faithful is destined for the same fate. After performance this should be number 2 on the list.
Metagame is important for the long term, but secondary to getting people through the door in the first place.
The release date does seem a little soon, but on reflection I get the feeling that if they had said december 20th, people would say no it should be January 20th. If the had said Jan 20th, people would say no, it would be better to move it back to february.
The actual core of the game is pretty stable, metagame can always be incorporated but isn't necessary to get people hooked on day 1. A lot of the bugs are very minor. Faction balances are pretty reasonable overall.
I feel on the basic level of playability they are 90% of the way there.