Let's Focus on Real Issues

[Hamma]

I’ve seen enough negativity as of late that I felt the need to create this post.

PlanetSide Universe has always been an outlet for the community since the days I first bought it online. We’ve had good times and bad of course but I feel we have always had a pretty solid community where elitism and trolling was at a minimum.

We are now at a critical crossroads that many of you probably don’t even think about. The more negativity and attacking of the developers on this forum the less likely they are to frequent it. Not to mention they are far less likely to find anything at all useful here when they arrive.

I encourage all our users brand new and Veteran to think before they post. I’m not pretending like everything is perfect because it is not, but complaining in a thread that the devs said they would listen to the community but now they obviously aren’t because release is November 20th is not constructive and quite frankly pointless. The release date is now set in stone, there is no use in complaining about it.

Here are some examples of pointless threads and arguments that contribute nothing.
Complaining about how the water isn't deep enough.
Complaining about how PlanetSide 2 is clone of _INSERT FPS HERE_
Complaining about how X PlanetSide 1 System is not included without reasons why it should be.

We have enjoyed what is arguably the most involved development team in online gaming today. I expect everyone to respect the time they spend and if you have a point to get across make valid and calculated reasons as to why. We will begin handing out infractions to people who would rather just attack and never provide any meaningful feedback. Before the official forums we were the only outlet they had to get feedback from the community. Now I can’t help but think our feedback is becoming less and less relevant because it’s just a bunch of veterans complaining about features that won’t be implemented from PlanetSide 1. I can assure you the Developers have already read it and it doesn’t need to be rehashed for the 10,000th time.

My vision has always been a constructive community where developers, new players, and veterans were welcome to express their points without fear of attack. I am not asking everyone to pretend like there are not problems, far from it. I am asking that if you are going to post do so in a constructive contributive manner that the devs can actually use. This includes saying “Implement X feature because it worked in PlanetSide 1” instead “Implement X feature from PlanetSide 1 because it would help in Y way”

Thanks all for taking the time to read.

[Whalenator]

I'm arguably the most whiney guy on these forums but wholeheartedly agree with Hamma here.

The time for major developmental changes was months ago. I know people will say "Beta is beta", but Beta is almost over. Although it sickens me so to say that the game is just too complete for some changes, it just is. Don't count on required gunners for MBTs. Don't count on an increased TTK. Don't count on a latice system or a slow pace of combat.

This is not Planetside 1. It's a completely different game now, geared towards a completely different (Or rather, changed) audience. I played Planetside 1 since a little after launch and I can still agree that, in the context of today, this is the true successor to that great game.

[Jennyboo]

This is not Planetside 1. It's a completely different game now, geared towards a completely different (Or rather, changed) audience. I played Planetside 1 since a little after launch and I can still agree that, in the context of today, this is the true successor to that great game.


I agree 100% this isn't Planetside 1 once people start realizing that maybe the forum QQing will stop.

[whisenhunt]

Awesome post Hamma!

Just wanted to leave this here:

This is not our final product by any means, we have more passion for this game than just about anyone in the industry has for theirs. We plan to continue to improve, add and tweak the game for years, not just until launch :D

<3

[Ranik Ortega]

Yeah no...

People are complaining for a reason. Saying "focus on the real issues" when people ARE complaining about major issues is silly. If logical arguments fall on deaf ears then negativity is sure to arise and rightfully so.

The game is a giant BF3 map. It includes the absolute minimum of PS1 features. And those PS1 features missing have been argued over countless times explaining WHY they were unique and good for the game. Further many balance issues have been taken to the forums for ages and still no word or concern on them.

Combat engineering is laughable, the engineer hasn't been touched in ages. Mines are hilariously bad, claymores can actually be sprinted over for zero damage.

ES MBT's still have major balance issues and a lot of secondaries which are utter garbage and conceptually flawed. Despite having people explain why they were bad and how they could be fixed for months now.

The devs have on more than one occasion actually ignored attempts by large groups of people to bring logic and balance into the equation in the name of "fun". Even if that "fun" basically utterly complicates balance and destroys a lot of gameplay aspects.

At every step we see the game becoming easier, not better. The negativity is there for a reason.

[Carver]

Maybe create one catch-all pissed off PS1 fanboy rage thread and maybe it can all be contained in one place. And not spill over into 5 new topics per day that all complain about the same things over and over.

"You can wish in one hand, and crap in the other, and see which gets filled first."

[Hamma]

Yeah no...

People are complaining for a reason. Saying "focus on the real issues" when people ARE complaining about major issues is silly.

The game is a giant BF3 map. It includes the absolute minimum of PS1 features. And those PS1 features missing have been argued over countless times explaining WHY they were unique and good for the game.

The negativity is there for a reason.

And at this point I think the devs have seen it. Just guessing..

Be constructive is what I ask. Enough raging about pointless things with no reasons to back them up. A simple request I think, I want to also welcome new players into this community and them coming in seeing a bunch of people raging doesn't bring new people in it pushes them away.

[Ranik Ortega]

And at this point I think the devs have seen it. Just guessing..

Be constructive is what I ask. Enough raging about pointless things with no reasons to back them up. A simple request I think, I want to also welcome new players into this community and them coming in seeing a bunch of people raging doesn't bring new people in it pushes them away.

And you missed the point. On the actual PS2 forums many many posters have taken so much of their time to point out logical issues and balance problems.

These have been ignored for the most part. Hence the negativity.

A person can only remain constructive for so long when they are at times being outright ignored

[whisenhunt]

And you missed the point. On the actual PS2 forums many many posters have taken so much of their time to point out logical issues and balance problems.

These have been ignored for the most part. Hence the negativity.

A person can only remain constructive for so long when they are at times being outright ignored

This will be my last post regarding this debate:

Just because someone makes a solid case for something doesn't mean it goes in the game instantly, or at all.

However being positive greatly improves the appearance of said solid case.

Being hateful or disrespectful only drives away players and takes away from the overall goal of growing our community and improving our game.

This is speaking from a players perspective, I've been a part of many passionate, hardcore gaming scenes and seen many re-launches and such of games I've loved. In the end I always find that one negative post can drive 10 people away from the community without even giving it a chance, this is good in no ones eyes.

Back to work! :groovy:

EDIT: We do read all the posts, good and bad btw.

[Ranik Ortega]

This will be my last post regarding this debate:

Just because someone makes a solid case for something doesn't mean it goes in the game instantly, or at all.

However being positive greatly improves the appearance of said solid case.

Being hateful or disrespectful only drives away players and takes away from the overall goal of growing our community and improving our game.

This is speaking from a players perspective, I've been a part of many passionate, hardcore gaming scenes and seen many re-launches and such of games I've loved. In the end I always find that one negative post can drive 10 people away from the community without even giving it a chance, this is good in no ones eyes.

Back to work! :groovy:

EDIT: We do read all the posts, good and bad btw.


Believe me on most of the issues i've tried to take a positive standpoint and use actual evidence and demonstrations in game to show the issue as objectively as possible. But sometimes it seems the points made are missed or ignored.

I don't doubt you listen and you guys are one of the most communicative Dev teams in existence. And i'm not meaning to demean your hard work or discourage you from interacting with the community. But some standing issues remain despite being around for a while and others seem like Dev decisions in spite of honest logical attempts to explain why something is probably a bad idea.

[Aaron]

Great post, Hamma. This is why you're a community leader. This place is special for both the players and the devs, and I want it to always be that way.

[Sturmhardt]

The negativity didn't come from nothing. People did not start being negative for no reason. As you can remember we all were so hyped about this game before beta, everything we have seen got our hopes up that this game could be the most awesome game of the year - but many promises did not come true.

Right now we have a huge BF3 map with tanks all over the place without ANY metagame. Base defenses are nearly impossible because of the way bases are set up and big fights are DISCOURAGED by the hex system because you can always avoid the enemy and take the easy route. Not to mention the really bad performance... it is slowly getting better, but nowhere near any state where everyone with a "normal" gaming PC can enjoy the game. All these issues have been discussed many many times, but until now nothing really changed and that can be frustrating at times, expecially when someone like Smed twitters stuff like "Haters gonna hate" to "justify" something.

But if PS2 was still deep in beta all these things would not matter. Everybody would sit back, forget the game for a few months and check it out later when it got better. But it is releasing in 18 days and after release it is gonna be a lot harder for the devs to change fundamental things about the game because there will be people who paid real money for certain ingame items/weapons that will feel cheated if the devs change a mechanic that makes the item they bought useless. Also there will not be the "Beta" label anymore, people will expect a game that is ready to release, not something that should have been in closed beta for another 3 months. I understand that the devs are under a lot of pressure at this point, because I can't imagine them to believe this early release is a good idea. There has to be some kind of pressure from above, but that does not really calm me down as a player, because I fear that after the release many devs will be pulled to EQ Next or other projects because of the same reasons PS2 is coming so early right now.

All in all I can say: Criticism is appropriate at this point. These ARE the real issues and you can't just say "Ignore the metagame, the tankspam, the not-existing big battles! Let's focus on something unimportant and not be mean to the devs anymore."

P.S. I appreciate J.Whisenhunt's input in this thread, because lately the devs didn't really post in the community forums. And I really hope it is true what he says, that the game will be improved and get better over time... and that fundamental issues will still be addressed after launch, because this game has so much potential.

[Whalenator]

Guys, they're not going to change it.
I know it was the dream game, I know you wanted a revived Planetside 1 with some bugfixes, new ideas and increased viewdistance (Hell, I wanted that too). But this game isn't that, nor will it ever be. Times have changed. The "Quiet Majority" has shifted its views to a different style of FPS, and while I resent that, I also accept it. It's reality.

SOE, like any other for-profit company, has to appeal to the highest bidder. The highest bidder happens to desire a large BF3 map with a joke of a metagame, a dumbed-down hacking system, little sense of direction, little opportunity for solo or outfit play and a completely upside-down grief system.

Anyways it's too late now, so any further complaints about how bad the game are will just be construed as whining. Suck it up, we can still swing the game towards the olden golden in smaller ways.

tl;dr I agree with Hamma on that we need to be more positive but disagree that we should lighten up on the Devs as not to 'scare them off.'

[Captain1nsaneo]

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5323/1288812773494.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/821/1288812773494.jpg/)

I' hearing two voices in my head. One says that this is needed to curb the current upswing in posts that are more of a rant then they want to admit. The other voice says that deciding what a positive post with criticism is versus a negative post can be a fine line and could lead to a slide into much heavier moderation.

Don't worry. I'm not wearing tinfoil because I think Hamma is trying to take control of something he already controls; I'm wearing tinfoil because of the aliens.

The third voice says that talking about posting negatively is actually a bigger topic at the moment than the actual negative posts. The fourth voice is giving me investment tips regarding car insurance companies.

[Hamma]

:lol:

[HolyHandGrenade]

I literally just made an account here to reply to this post.

The only FPS I've really played is BF3 (I play TF2, but that is a hat simulator, not a FPS :D ), and I must say that the PS2 beta has been A TON of fun. It has problems... yes, guns need finesse and vehicle spam is problematic, meta game can be lacking, certs seem over-priced, etc etc. Despite this, playing with the GBU clan or even just random squads has been a really aweosme experience. I think this game has an incredible amount of potential, and that the few weeks left will see changes that will fix some of these issues.

BF3 also had a slow release, but despite its problems, is still a fun game to play. Admittedly, I wasn't there at release, but I saw how the game continued to be patched (every 3 months... trololo) and balanced to improve gameplay. On top of that, I have faith that the devs here will do better than EA/DICE and NOT introduce M26 Dart glitches. Seeing as BF3 patched and changed game dynamics months and months after release... I think PS2 will sort itself out in a reasonable amount of time.

Obviously, everyone will never be happy; PS1 vets want one thing, BF3 players want another, casuals prefer this gamestyle over that one, clans want this, etc. Point is, this is Planetside 2. It's a new game, and I think it will do well, as it seems to have a solid core and an excellent F2P and not P2W model.

Enough of that; I want to close with thoughts about forums. I have sunk a over 250 hours into BF3, and check the forums there every once in a while. To be honest, I don't know why I do- they are a cesspool of flame wars, trolls, rage posts and whiners. I don't enjoy reading that, as there is no point to it, it only frustrates me. I have high hopes for PS2, and if these forums start degrading into a troll pit, it will drag the game down. Despite what people may say of 'devs don't listen to us,' I think the devs are doing an excellent job of fixing things and considering their community- THE COMMUNITY, not forum rage.

Forums have great potential to help the devs make decisions on gameplay, but they aren't going to listen to ragers and whiners, only people who see REAL changes that need to be made. I hope the forums can stop sliding into an outlet for rage and become something productive. Stay cool :cool:

[MrBloodworth]

Dude, I'm sorry. But when they reinvent the wheel just because the other, original cart had wheels. I'm going to say something.

To me, that is a real issue.

[Hamma]

The premise of the entire post is pretty simple.

If you want to complain about something do it in a constructive manner. And make it something that is actually important. BF3 clone is not useful in any way at all to anyone including SOE.

This thread is not an attempt to stop people from criticizing the game it's an attempt to make that criticism constructive.

[MrBloodworth]

Oh, I understand it. However, there are sometimes no nice way to say things. Its your site, and I try to be constructive, but some decisions are just flat out unable to be said with roses. You wont see me say its a BF3 clone, however it is heavily influenced by it, and I explain why, and why it does not fit in a game with the name Planetside.

There is a huge reinvention of the wheel going on, and different for the sake of different that I take issue with. I would not post if I did not care.

One example, spawn availability and being able to quick join back with your squad. They could have added matrixing, instead, they inflated the number of ways and locations to spawn. Why? Why not add matrixing/binding? Why mess with the logistics of troop movement, at the detriment to the logistical game, instead of using what worked? Their solution is more in line with a session based game, not a persistent one where denial of logistics should be key. Reinvention to solve problems they created. Thier solution creates a death-match with no flow in the front direction.

[Jennyboo]

Oh, I understand it. However, there are sometimes no nice way to say things. Its your site, and I try to be constructive, but some decisions are just flat out unable to be said with roses. You wont see me say its a BF3 clone, however it is heavily influenced by it, and I explain why, and why it does not fit in a game with the name Planetside.

To this I say if you can't say it constructive then don't say it at all ;) that's my golden rule hence why I don't post often :p for fear of putting my foot in my mouth.

[Hamma]

If you explain it then this post shouldn't matter to much to you. :D

[MrBloodworth]

It matters, because I get tired of posting my "credentials", stating what I do like, just to get to where I think things are misguided.

Some of your recent responses to people have been marginalizing what people are saying as if they are some tin foil hat wearing user. I think that does a disservice.

Just like when Higby tweeted that "People think you can just copy paste PS1 into PS2. #Nothowitworks" That's both insulting, not what people are saying or asking for. And quite frankly, just side stepping the constructive criticism. Its a disingenuous response, hes smarter than that.

My inner cynic wants to know why its so easy to do that with things like Capture mechanics ( Stand here with other randoms ) from another title, instead of adding hacking, an entire play-style and really awesome thing. But that's not even the point, nor the discussion, and it makes me just as bad in that conversation as he is.

[Qwan]

Well I never really felt like I was gripping or QQing, I guess you could say my only problem with the development of this game is that a lot of the mechanic issues like ams deployment, base capture, and stuff like that were solved in PS1. Seems like they made things harder for themselves. IMO

[Rolfski]

Good point from the OP. I think the biggest problem is that people are just overly impatient. They want all the thrills from PS1 implemented yesterday. I firmly believe they eventually will get their thrills but in a different way and over time.

Does the current game for me sometimes feels like an over-the-top BF3 conquest mode with limitless tickets? Absolutely, but I'm already having tons of fun.
Will I be playing a much deeper and way more strategic game within a year? 100% sure about that. Why? You can read it here (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=49676)

[GuyFawkes]

Good point from the OP. I think the biggest problem is that people are just overly impatient. They want all the thrills from PS1 implemented yesterday. I firmly believe they eventually will get their thrills but in a different way and over time.



I liken the scenario to a nest of starlings and a cuckoo laid an egg in the nest. The cuckoo is the noisiest and demands food all the time, but mother starling has decided to feed all the chicks evenly, not just one. The cuckoo gets noisier and noisier, the mother hears it, but still feeds them all the same.

[MrBloodworth]

Good point from the OP. I think the biggest problem is that people are just overly impatient. They want all the thrills from PS1 implemented yesterday. I firmly believe they eventually will get their thrills but in a different way and over time.

Where have I heard that before?

[VaderShake]

I liken the scenario to a nest of starlings and a cuckoo laid an egg in the nest. The cuckoo is the noisiest and demands food all the time, but mother starling has decided to feed all the chicks evenly, not just one. The cuckoo gets noisier and noisier, the mother hears it, but still feeds them all the same.

I was the mother cuckoo I know which chick I would be launching out of that nest first.....:lol:

[GuyFawkes]

I was the mother cuckoo I know which chick I would be launching out of that nest first.....:lol:

Indeed

I'll use a quote from The Abyss

"We all see what we want to see. Coffey looks and sees Russians. He sees hate and fear. You have to look with better eyes than that."

[LONGFELLA KOJ]

Where have I heard that before?


They say the same thing when you get married. :)

[artifice]

I am tired of seeing the constant whining. Planetside 2 is not Planetside 1, deal with it already.

[sylphaen]

I am tired of seeing the constant whining. Planetside 2 is not Planetside 1, deal with it already.

@artifice: While you may feel that you stand on the other spectrum of the debate and defend the "right cause", I believe you may have missed the intent/meaning of Hamma's post.

@everyone: IMO, Hamma has made a wonderful post about being constructive on a forum. If you read it closely, he said many things in his OP in a very tactful way.

In essence, there are very simple rules that help everyone:
- if it's not constructive, do not post it.
- if it spreads negativity, do not post it.
- if it does not add value, do not post it.
- if it is already being discussed, do not start a new thread.
- if the thread is not helpful, avoid it and let it die.
- etc...

Of course, we all do our share of mistakes and Hamma's post was very understanding of that. PSU is not about to go TR totalitarian, he is kindly asking to help us keep the forums relevant for both devs and users.

He never said to stop voicing opinions or constructive criticism but to maintain a decent quality of feedback; if some do not understand his concerns or respect his efforts to keep offering a great spot on the internet to share about Planetside, maybe PSU is not their kind of community.

Quality is a community effort and PSU has great members. Let's keep this place a place where we want to stay, participate and enjoy sharing ideas.

Cheers everyone !
:)

[Malorn]

Everyone working on PS2 cares deeply about the game and wants to make an awesome experience for you and millions of others.

When providing feedback, it really helps to try to capture the actual problem. What is the underlying issue? How is it affecting your play? And of course what are some ideas you might have on solving it? Lots of forum posts everywhere focus on solutions and don't identify the problem very well. One of the first things you learn in school is that the key to solving problems is first identifying and understanding them. Ideas for solutions help and can generate other ideas, but if the actual problem isn't listed it's already dead in the water. Also, solutions needs to be fit into the game vision, long-term plan, and schedule, so it may take some time before you see results. Because there isn't a response or an immediate change doesn't mean folks aren't listening.

To give an example on a common hot topic...the lattice, or lack thereof. The problem is not that there isn't a lattice (that's a proposed solution that does not fit well into the game design); the problems are that its hard to find a fight, hard to corral players, hard for players to guide other players, and easy to get lost and confused. There are many solutions to those problems, and better ones than a lattice. They will be solved in a way that fits with the longer term game plan and vision. What helps is if players identify those problems and provide examples of how it is affecting their play. Then offering up ideas for solutions is a great way to inspire new ideas. But don't get attached to any specific solution as there are many ways to solve any problem and the best ones may yet to be invented. Instead of drilling in on the lattice which is something that has been repeatedly said doesn't fit and isn't where the team wants the game to go, try new ideas. Explore the problem more, and see other ways we can make finding a fight better, create more fights, understand the tools and information players need.

I'll parrot Smed and cite Henry Ford,

"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."

When you describe the problem - a need for faster transportation - it helps us arrive at a race car solution. And it's a bit of a waste of time rat-holing on why we want to give you something better than faster horses. The common context for communication is the underlying problems. Focusing on that context is how you stay constructive and really help out the dev team and help make PS2 better.

Being negative just bums us out and isn't helpful. Everyone here has great intentions and is working hard to make you a great game you will play for the next decade. Help us do that by taking the time to think about the issue constructively, the root causes, and giving that feedback. You dont' even need to suggest solutions. Clarifying the problem is a huge help in and of itself.

[ringring]

Nicely put Malorn.

[nowefall]

I just can't help at this point that the game isn't going to change much. A few weeks until launch only helps but increases my fears for this game. I also just don't understand why SOE couldn't simply have gone with the formula used in Plantside 1 instead of reshaping everything, and making Planetside 2 a shadow of it's former self.

[HolyHandGrenade]

I would like to point out a small point that has been missed on occasion and may have caused some drama... '2.'

This is Planetside 2, not Planetside 1/Next. It is a different game.

Obviously, the original spawned a tight knit group of veterans who loved that game and are very passionate about the series. I think that is awesome.

However, again, this is a new game. The dynamics are changed, and are tailored to a much wider audience; I also think that is awesome. PC gamers from many, many genres/series are going to be drawn into this game. I think that the number of players is going to be FAR greater than that of the original, as this is F2P, looks gorgeous, plays well IMO, is fun, and is really different than any other game out there.

I don't mean to step on anyone's toes; this is simply how I understand what is going on. I can from being on the forums that many people are passionate about this game and want to see it do well; in keeping with Hamma's original topic, I would offer the suggestion that the best way to express that passion is positively, rather than negatively. :D

[Livefire]

Everyone working on PS2 cares deeply about the game and wants to make an awesome experience for you and millions of others.

When providing feedback, it really helps to try to capture the actual problem. What is the underlying issue? How is it affecting your play? And of course what are some ideas you might have on solving it? Lots of forum posts everywhere focus on solutions and don't identify the problem very well. One of the first things you learn in school is that the key to solving problems is first identifying and understanding them. Ideas for solutions help and can generate other ideas, but if the actual problem isn't listed it's already dead in the water. Also, solutions needs to be fit into the game vision, long-term plan, and schedule, so it may take some time before you see results. Because there isn't a response or an immediate change doesn't mean folks aren't listening.

To give an example on a common hot topic...the lattice, or lack thereof. The problem is not that there isn't a lattice (that's a proposed solution that does not fit well into the game design); the problems are that its hard to find a fight, hard to corral players, hard for players to guide other players, and easy to get lost and confused. There are many solutions to those problems, and better ones than a lattice. They will be solved in a way that fits with the longer term game plan and vision. What helps is if players identify those problems and provide examples of how it is affecting their play. Then offering up ideas for solutions is a great way to inspire new ideas. But don't get attached to any specific solution as there are many ways to solve any problem and the best ones may yet to be invented. Instead of drilling in on the lattice which is something that has been repeatedly said doesn't fit and isn't where the team wants the game to go, try new ideas. Explore the problem more, and see other ways we can make finding a fight better, create more fights, understand the tools and information players need.

I'll parrot Smed and cite Henry Ford,

"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."

When you describe the problem - a need for faster transportation - it helps us arrive at a race car solution. And it's a bit of a waste of time rat-holing on why we want to give you something better than faster horses. The common context for communication is the underlying problems. Focusing on that context is how you stay constructive and really help out the dev team and help make PS2 better.

Being negative just bums us out and isn't helpful. Everyone here has great intentions and is working hard to make you a great game you will play for the next decade. Help us do that by taking the time to think about the issue constructively, the root causes, and giving that feedback. You dont' even need to suggest solutions. Clarifying the problem is a huge help in and of itself.

Ok look, we do not want to be negative but we are the customers and we know what we want and what we want to spend are money on and we are trying to tell you.

In fact using the PS community's creativeness we have made this as simple for you as possible, go here http://planetside-tracker.com/issues/ and work your way down the list, #1 and #2 are obviously the most important and then build stuff on top of that after you finish the list. Then we actually have a game that works and is mostly balanced.

If you continue to go around the problems and around the known solutions that have worked in the past and the community wants so bad then it only tells us one thing. That there is a white board in the back of your office that every one has had to read that Smed has drawn a business plan on that says something like this. BF3 = these $$$ massive profits last year and the investors/board of directors wants PS2 to be like this and that, and not this, and it has to be out by this date no exceptions. With a small note from Smed on the bottom that says: Work with and give the small financially insignificant PS community anything they want except something that would violate or interfere with the original demanded game design drawn above.

[ixx]

Totally agree here.
The whole PS2 beta experiance has been fantastic. The amount of time Matt and devs have commited to the community is astonishing. It's the first beta i've partipiated in that i feel part of the development process and constructive feedback is listened to.

So stop your complaining - and look at what an amazing game this is!

I played PS1 for 4+ years and initially wanted more PS1 with new shinny DX11 graphics. After playing the beta since it was opened up to PS1 vetarens, I'm happy the game is different and replects more modern fps game mechanics. I'm totally confident that Matt and devs are 110% behind making this a once in a generation game.

What else is there like PS2 - nothing !

You have my money - Alpha Squad + membership - :)
bring on 20-11 !

[Sturmhardt]

Okay so one of the real issues: is cross continental warfare going to be in before the launch? I remember Higby saying it will be in some video a few weeks ago...

[Crator]

Okay so one of the real issues: is cross continental warfare going to be in before the launch? I remember Higby saying it will be in some video a few weeks ago...

I haven't heard anything new about this lately. Was there any new news about it?

[Dagron]

Okay so one of the real issues: is cross continental warfare going to be in before the launch? I remember Higby saying it will be in some video a few weeks ago...
I haven't heard anything new about this lately. Was there any new news about it?

What do you mean by cross continental warfare? Locking continents, etc? If so, i don't think so... they said it takes more than 3 continents for that to work.

[Hamma]

That stuff is coming we just don't have any ETAs on any of it.

[Kyonye]

If this isn't 'Murica, I don't know what is.

[Rodel]

I think this is the best game ever made.

A lot of the guys I play with will have coniptions every time the developers change something and its just amazing that so many people jump into a Beta and whine about it acting like a Beta. There is no other game like PS2 and I have a lot of fun playing.

I dare somebody to show me a better MMOFPS.

[MrBloodworth]

the problems are that its hard to find a fight, hard to corral players, hard for players to guide other players, and easy to get lost and confused.

This is 100% because, BY DESIGN, fights are short and favor steamrolling and spawn camping.

There is not enough time to recognize a fight, mount and organize a response, and execute that response. There is only time to zerg and die over and over again until mass on point wins out.

[Rodel]

This is 100% because, BY DESIGN, fights are short and favor steamrolling and spawn camping.

There is not enough time to recognize a fight, mount and organize a response, and execute that response. There is only time to zerg and die over and over again until mass on point wins out.

I dissagree...

The reason why I believe a lot of people have this opinion is because the fights are so dynamic that they constantly evolving and require insight and intuition to understand. I often can see where the fight is going to be and am able to move my outfit to counter. Some times that's difflicult and I relly on active scouting to determine enemy movement. But the point is that the meta game is actually a challenge to master (I don't claim to be a master) and if you suck at it you won't relize it...

[MrBloodworth]

lol, no.

[Chaff]

Sometimes, the whining, ranting, and crying seems enough to make me want to NOT claim my roots as a PS1 vet. Not a very good player, but nonetheless I loved PS1 for 2 years...then,...the monotony drove me to boredom.

I loved the teamwork & comraderie PS1 rewarded. If the devs can make that a primary presence in PS2 I can't complain about the other elements that the market of younger players seem to want. PS1 is gone and dead. Hopefully, the devs have similar memories, preferences, and feeling to the vets that keep chiming in 'round here.

The more I play PS2 in Beta, the more comfortable I get. The more comfortable I get the more I like it. PS1 vets should keep putting in input. Many need to filter their nostalgia driven whining. Like it or not, it ain't never gonna be PS1.

btw. PS1 got BORING. Adjacency. Isn't that essentially a lattice system ? A horse of a different color.

I like the PASSION of the PS1 vets who come across as polemic ranters. I really do. However, they detract from their impact for change when it's so full of piss, vinegar, or plain ol' crying. Enough negative smoke in and around the message.....style matters. I want a better game than what I see now. I see a half FULL scenario. I do not lose my mind over the half EMPTY element. The devs, Higby, Smed, T-Ray,....SOE....I was SURPRISED when I heard PS2 was coming out. I thought PS1 would fade into online gaming folklore. I'm happy there's "something" based on the original. Things had to change. Decisions had to be made. Move on. Trust me, if I was on the PS2 dev team, I'd have a LOT of changes/tweaks I'd want to see implemented as soon as reasonably possible.

I'm looking for a lot of tweaks. Change needs to be a constant. It's a balancing act that I don't envy. The devs can't seem to win. The players that aren't satisfied seem to squeek the loudest while those that are essentially content just quietly play on. I hate "the squeeky wheel gets the grease" mentality that some companies give to major complainers. This is the best dev group....Top-to-bottom that I think the gaming industry may ever see. If we serve to kill that off - we are to blame - and in the end, we were our own enemy. Don't kill PS2. It's whatever we get, or nada.

I'm gonna hang with PS2 for quite a while. I'm open minded. Also, I'm a big fan of many who may read this and think I don't like their input. I don't have to agree or like the tone to respect the message. Still, delivery is important. Those that choose to ignore this fact....well, we're pretty much left little choice but to dismiss their input simply because they come across as "ranters". ....some may say I contradict myslef here, but methinks not.

Those who let the flame element be their priority prove to the sensible masses that they simply are about themselves, not the game. I'm glad the voices of reason are telling them to chill (but not STFU).

I agree with DukeNukems general ideal of upping the cert XP by 10%-20%......with a substantial gain for those in a squad. The more hotly contested the fight - the more XP/cert % gain for either side. It sucks to lose, but a fiecely contested defense against massive odds is satisfying. Winning with the Pop in your favor often is too easy. DEFENDING when the odds are against you can be extremely rewarding. A great fight is always rewarding. Obviously better if you prevail.

I suspect that SOE will find their current Station $$$ conversion rate tier will keep purchases low. I hope they see fit to make playerr $$$$$'s go farther.....it'll keep more players coming back each month. There's a fine line here, and some of the prices they show seem woefully out-of-touch with the F2P public. If they want young players to spend money, the price exchange into Station Ca$h has to reflect the fact that many young people have a tough time making ends meet in this global economy. Besides, many 18 year olds prefer to $pend their money on weed and women. I'm too old & brain-dead for that shit.

[Tatwi]

Am I allowed to complain that the VS seem to think that the magrider is actually some kind of "magrifle"? I am so sick of seeing them use that "tank" as nothing more than an avatar replacement, because they are so terrible they can't handle infantry on infantry encounters... Nothing like being at a meaningless outpost that is camped by 20 fail magrifles and one guy who actually has the balls to be the infantry dude... It doesn't help that the prowler is too weak and has to work (at least) twice as hard to do the same damage - this adds to the annoyance of the magrifle...

So very, very sick of the magrifles camping spawn rooms at outpouts. Also, unless you have a huge zerg going on, good luck keeping a sundy around with every VS "running" around in a magrifle as though it was a stupid over powered infantry unit. It's been like this for the whole beta and I am about ready to throw up or give up. I may do both, actually.

So apart from that, Hamma, I tend to agree with you that the game isn't perfect, but it's pretty darned good too. The main issue with the magrifle isn't the tank, it's the lazy jerks who just want easy mode all the time who take advantage of it's idiot proof aiming, high damage, and loads of hit points... People suck.

[Hamma]

Seems like a legit complaint.

[DviddLeff]

Spawns have to be camped to win a base if there is any kind of defence. The Mag is the best thing the VS have to do the job when it is equipped with the VPC plain and simple.

Every empire does it with their tanks. The real problem is that we have no other way to stop spawning - we need spawn control units on all spawn points.

[Srixun]

Real issues! Israel and hamas! Go! :p

[Buggsy]

Complaining about how X PlanetSide 1 System is not included without reasons why it should be.

Let's talk about real issues about PS2.

I cannot defend anywhere against 10:1 odds without 20 landmines, 10 spitfires, 10 motion detectors, and a cloaked AMS. In fact nobody defends, players just roll around with the zerg and cap undefended bases. 20 attackers sit outside aiming at the spawn doors while the 2 defenders in the spawn room shoots out the doors, base is capped, I leave 2 claymores inside the spawn room and then redeploy somewhere else, then the zerg rolls on. This is a typical non AMP-Tech-Bio base battle.

If I had a cloaked AMS I could put it 100 meters away from base the zerg is rolling into. If I had 20 landmines and 10 spitfires I could put them in areas that tanks/infantry can camp the spawn. And I could certainly use 10 motion detectors, at the very least to get the enemy to shoot at them so I can hear where they are at.

[TheStigma]

I'm arguably the most whiney guy on these forums but wholeheartedly agree with Hamma here.

The time for major developmental changes was months ago. I know people will say "Beta is beta", but Beta is almost over. Although it sickens me so to say that the game is just too complete for some changes, it just is. Don't count on required gunners for MBTs. Don't count on an increased TTK. Don't count on a latice system or a slow pace of combat.

This is not Planetside 1. It's a completely different game now, geared towards a completely different (Or rather, changed) audience. I played Planetside 1 since a little after launch and I can still agree that, in the context of today, this is the true successor to that great game.

Actually, regarding the gunners on MBT - Higby himself (in one of his streams detailing patch changes) said that it was a goal to eventually allow some sort of cert sidegrade for tanks that would allow dedicated gunners of some sort to tanks. Because this would obviously be non-mandatory there would be higher tier main-guns to use under that type of configuration to make up for the extra crew required. He did say that this was something they had planned for later though - so its not worth hoping for at launch (or realistically probably not within the first few months either) but it does give some hope that they haven't just said "oh well, too late now" for implementing those kinds of wishes from the community.

-Stigma

[Eyeklops]

Putting aside "bugs", the biggest issue I have with PS2 right now is that the main feature, "zergs collide", does not happen enough. Can't tell you how often I zone into a continent where the two larger empires are dominating over the third smaller empire and not engaging each other. Then after the third (small) empire is WG locked, it still takes hours before the main fight begins. If they don't get this issue fixed, I foresee a slow population exodus starting after a few months.


The other thing I will say, and you can take it however you want:

PS2 gunplay is modeled after BF3 gunplay, and nobody does BF3 gunplay better than DICE. Sorry, hate to say it but..well, go play PS2, then BF3, it will be VERY obvious. This is nothing personal against the PS2 devs but there are many mechanics taken from BF3 and implemented improperly, or lacking the right amount of detail, and the incoming BF3 players WILL NOTICE THIS. Fix grenades, fix recoil, and FFS kick teleporting HPB's.

I played BF3 last night and it became readily apparent (after mounting a 3.4X sight) that PS2 gunplay has a long way to go.

I loved Planetside 1, and I want to love Planetside 2, but it just isn't happening, and sadly, most of my outfit feels the same way.

[Tatwi]

Putting aside "bugs", the biggest issue I have with PS2 right now is that the main feature, "zergs collide", does not happen enough. Can't tell you how often I zone into a continent where the two larger empires are dominating over the third smaller empire and not engaging each other. Then after the third (small) empire is WG locked, it still takes hours before the main fight begins. If they don't get this issue fixed, I foresee a slow population exodus starting after a few months.

Indeed. This annoyed me in beta, when the NC and VS seemed to refuse to fight anyone other than the TR, pre-wipe. Sadly, it IS impossible to stop two entire faction zergs as they roll up the opposite sides of the map, especially when your faction has less pop than either of them.

This is another example of the problem being with the players and not the game though. The bottom line: People take the easy way out and people don't really want to be challenged, they just want to "win".

[Eyeklops]

Indeed. This annoyed me in beta, when the NC and VS seemed to refuse to fight anyone other than the TR, pre-wipe. Sadly, it IS impossible to stop two entire faction zergs as they roll up the opposite sides of the map, especially when your faction has less pop than either of them.

This is another example of the problem being with the players and not the game though. The bottom line: People take the easy way out and people don't really want to be challenged, they just want to "win".

The removal of "base defense" experience points made this problem worse. Prior to the aforementioned change, when the enemy zerg was starting an attack on a base, some defender zerglins would flock there in hopes of getting a "base defense" bonus against the first wave of attackers. Now with the "tug-o-war" mechanics, most of the zergites feel it's more lucrative to quickly steamroll undefended bases as opposed to defending established territory. So what we end up with is two zergs that have no desire to fight each other because they can grind EXP faster if they don't.

I am pretty sure it has been said many times on this forum, but a mission system would really help create proper fights. The dev team has made major strides in providing tactical information on the main map, the problem is zerglings rarely read the map. This is where the mission system is supposed to step in and provide incentive (exp bonus?) to go attack/defend based upon input from other experienced players.

Higby said it best, "ships passing in the night", and that's what we have right now. Two zergs passing each other, going to where the other just came from, in order to re-plant the empires flag and collect empty exp.

[TheBladeRoden]

Indeed perhaps the fastest way for everyone to get XP would be for every empire to rapidly ghost-conquer a continent each. Then say the TR would abandon their continent so that the NC can ghost-conquer that, and said TR would move to the continent the VS had just abandoned. And the Circle of Cert Farming goeth on!