Be Constructive when referencing PlanetSide 1

[Hamma]

Something needs to be said and it's time to say it.

Every time this community brings up PlanetSide 1 in an argument or statement about PlanetSide 2 you make this community less and less relevant. PlanetSide 1 was ten years ago, we now have PlanetSide 2 and this forum in particular focuses on PlanetSide 2.

PlanetSide 2 is not PlanetSide 1. We all wanted PlanetSide 2 and now that it's out we cannot stop talking about PlanetSide 1. It was a great game, in 2003. It's now 2013 and we have PlanetSide 2. Let's focus on that game and stop dwelling on the past because it's gone and as Smed said almost nobody is logged into it and it will remain that way even if it's added to the membership.

In development the Developers looked to us for Feedback from experience. Now that the game is out they still look to us but they will look to us for improvements to the EXISTING game and not constant railing about how PlanetSide 1 was better.

If you guys want this community to remain relevant you are going to have to let go of PlanetSide 1. There's lots we can learn from it but we cannot allow nostalgia to dominate the discussions about this new game PlanetSide 2

Gaming communities have been killed by this sort of non productiveness in the past and it will kill this one as well if we don't learn to let go.

EDIT: This right here is exactly what I mean:

This isn't about forgetting about Planetside 1, it's about keeping topics that have to do with Planetside 1 in the Planetside 1 forum. When the devs come along and look at the Planetside 2 forum they probably don't want to be discussing Planetside 1.
This also isn't about not taking anything from Planetside 1 because it's an old game but that just because something was in Planetside 1 it shouldn't automatically be in Planetside 2. If a feature worked in Planetside 1 then make a case as to why it should be included in Planetside 2, stating that it worked in Planetside 1 isn't an argument in on itself (in many cases anyway).

In addition..

Another thing you guys need to remember is railing on PlanetSide 1 constantly isn't going to all of a sudden reveal some massive crazy idea the PlanetSide 2 developers don't already know about. I've had the pleasure of talking to many developers of the game at length including Smed himself. Heck Malorn works on the team now and many of us read his breakdown on PlanetSide 1. There are TONS of folks working on this team that either worked on, or played PlanetSide 1 extensively.

They are all well aware of what PlanetSide 1 offered and the systems it contained. What is being brought up is not a magical solution that all of a sudden reveals itself.

I'm not asking everyone to forget the game but you have to realize that the game is not forgotten. SOE knows what was in the game and what will work in the new game. If you do think something from PS1 will work in it by all means post it, in a constructive way.

[Crator]

If you guys want this community to remain relevant you are going to have to let go of PlanetSide 1. There's lots we can learn from it but we cannot allow nostalgia to dominate the discussions about this new game PlanetSide 2.

This just silly Hamma, lot's of things we can learn from PS1 but don't bring it up so much? Why pussyfoot around it? I just don't get that.

[Hamma]

It's a new game with new systems, got an idea for improvement post it and don't prefix it with "In PlanetSide 1 X Happened" because this isn't PlanetSide 1 and if we constantly talk about it we will kill this community and SOE will take us less and less seriously.

[CrazEpharmacist]

Yes, this makes sense. Try to keep the PS1 discussion in the PS1 sub-section.

[MrBloodworth]

Every time someone brings up Diablo 2, Diablo 3 becomes less relevant.

Every time someone brings up Fable 1, Fable 3 becomes less relevant.

Every time someone brings up Civilization 3, Civ 4 becomes less relevant.

Every time someone brings up Natural selection 2, Aliens:Colonial marines becomes less relevant.

Every time we see a system in PS2 that was solved 10 years ago, PS2 becomes less relevant.

:)

Right about the time they are done putting all the session based systems in a persistent game, Planetside 2 will not be relevant.

[Crator]

Still don't agree that mentioning PS1 systems that could work in PS2 is making PS2 less relevant. Is this a forum rule now or something?

[Jennyboo]

This just silly Hamma, lot's of things we can learn from PS1 but don't bring it up so much? Why pussyfoot around it? I just don't get that.

Hamma is someone who has run this community for 10 plus year and is concerned where this community direction is going. It's not pussyfooting around it simply stating if this community keep on the same track of the one track (Planetside 1) mind then you will make our community irrelevant. Sometimes the truth is hard to hear THIS ISN'T PLANETSIDE 1 simple and to the point. Instead of dwelling on the past look to the future and how we can contribute relevant constructive idea's to make this game what we'd play for a long time. I know people have a hard time letting go but the sooner people do the sooner we can all work toward helping the devs make this a game to last the ages.

[MrBloodworth]

Your are right!

Battlefield is likely the more relateable product.


This is stupid Hamma, and you know it. You cant ask people not to compare Very Similar games that have the same name. Perhaps the designers ( Not all ) want to ignore the predecessor. But that's why they have the manufactured problems they have.

YOU CANT LOOK TO THE FUTURE WITH OUT RECOGNIZING THE PAST.

Its your ball game though.

[Tatwi]

This just silly Hamma, lot's of things we can learn from PS1 but don't bring it up so much? Why pussyfoot around it? I just don't get that.

I agree.

While there are some horrendously nonobjective Planetside zealots around here, who are quite frankly exceedingly obnoxious with their constant clamoring to display how awesome PS1 was, it would silly to ignore the lessons learned from Planetside simply due to how annoying these people are.

Planetside had some genuinely good game design concepts, artwork/aesthetic, and music/sounds. Objectively, it is important to keep these things in mind, as they are part of what makes the Planetside franchise unique in the marketplace.

Less ridiculous fanboyism and more objectivity would be very much appreciated though.

Also, it's important for SOE to apply what they have learned as an MMO company to the development of PS2. The community management tools in Everquest II are second to none in the industry and that level of detail should be applied to all of their products, especially PS2. All the content in PS2 is 100% generated by the players, so the need a very robust guild system, along with community building game play system, such as "player cities" or "guild housing" that other SOE titles had almost a decade ago.

At the end of the day, I think this sentiment that folks who bring up PS1 all the time are getting at: SOE has experience, success and some really well thought out solutions that it would be silly to ignore. There's absolutely no reason why one cannot keep plowing headlong toward the future, while also standing upon the successes of their past.

[ZoranTheBear]

I agree that people shouldn't focus so much on Planetside 1. It's had it's run.

But, I do not agree we should ignore it completely. Especially some of the mechanics that are in the the first one, which would greatly enhance the experience in Planetside 2.

It's not a bad idea to take good ideas from previous titles, and apply them to new ones. In fact it's a smart move. WoW did it with Everquest. Hell Everquest 2 did it with it's previous title. Why not here?

I believe Planetside 2 should be taking the good from other shooters(It already has too. Taking ideas from battlefield) and it's older half. And I'm with people who are on that side. I want the Lattice System, I want the resource/energy base mechanics Planetside 1 did. But I have to directly reference Planetside 2 to do so, since it's this game's prequel and best example to showcase the idea. And we must improve from the original title, not go down from it.

Once again, I agree we should stop trying to make it 100% Planetside 1 HD. But, it wouldn't hurt to have the awesome features and mechanics that the original had.
It should be building up and modernizing from the first that people loved. Not ignoring the first and taking a different turn entirely that may or may not be received well.

[Hamma]

This is stupid Hamma, and you know it. You cant ask people not to compare Very Similar games that have the same name. Perhaps the designers ( Not all ) want to ignore the predecessor. But that's why they have the manufactured problems they have.

You are entitled to think what you want. I've been doing communities for a long time and I know the tell tale signs. Do you want the developers to take our feedback seriously? Quit it with the "In PS1 we had enter and exit animations" "In PS1 we had this and this and that"

Or you can not listen to me and see the results.

[ChipMHazard]

This isn't about forgetting about Planetside 1, it's about keeping topics that have to do with Planetside 1 in the Planetside 1 forum. When the devs come along and look at the Planetside 2 forum they probably don't want to be discussing Planetside 1.
This also isn't about not taking anything from Planetside 1 because it's an old game but that just because something was in Planetside 1 it shouldn't automatically be in Planetside 2. If a feature worked in Planetside 1 then make a case as to why it should be included in Planetside 2, stating that it worked in Planetside 1 isn't an argument in on itself (in many cases anyway).
This of course doesn't mean that one shouldn't ever bring up Planetside 1 in a discussion about Planetside 2 as it can be entirely relevant to do so, but bringing up "when is Planetside 1 going free to play?" isn't relevant to a thread about cheating in Planetside 2.

I do not understand why people have a tendency to exaggerate when they read something like this thread.

[Hamma]

As always you guys are completely missing the point. I'm not asking everyone to ignore it completely, but I am honestly flat out tired of seeing it in almost every damn thread like PlanetSide 1 was gods gift to gaming and all our answers to improve PlanetSide 2 area already answered in PlanetSide 1! This is patently false.

Edit: ChipMHazard sees what I am talking about.

Maybe you guys will read what he said.. :P

[MrBloodworth]

What are the now sanctioned references we can bring up then?

And I gave up on Enter exit animations a long time ago.

[MrBloodworth]

As always you guys are completely missing the point. I'm not asking everyone to ignore it completely, but I am honestly flat out tired of seeing it in almost every damn thread like PlanetSide 1 was gods gift to gaming and all our answers to improve PlanetSide 2 area already answered in PlanetSide 1! This is patently false.

Edit: ChipMHazard sees what I am talking about.

No one says this.

However there are things in PS1.....

NVM. Carry on. You are right, Planetside 2 is a unique snowflake that was created in a vacuum to be the title it is today!

[Hamma]

Review what Chip said, that's exactly what I mean.

[CrazEpharmacist]

What are the now sanctioned references we can bring up then?

And I gave up on Enter exit animations a long time ago.

Well like ChipMhazard said, just make sure you have a good case as to why it should be implemented in PS2.

[MrBloodworth]

Well like ChimpMhazard said, just make sure you have a good case as to why it should be implemented in PS2.

Every counter is "Planetside 1 is dead".

No dice there.

[Hamma]

Every counter is "Planetside 1 is dead".

No dice there.

False.

just make sure you have a good case as to why it should be implemented in PS2

If you have a good case, nobody can argue that its a dead feature.

[Sturmhardt]

That doesn't make sense. If there is a problem or a feature that was approached in a better way 10 years ago I want to say so and I want other people to say so.

For example the voice macros. They were awesome in ps1 and they are shit in ps2, I want people to discuss stuff like that so the devs can read it and hopefully implement it to make ps2 a better game. I don't see anything wrong with that.

.sent via phone.

[ChipMHazard]

Well like ChimpMhazard said, just make sure you have a good case as to why it should be implemented in PS2.

http://travistation.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/smart-chimp-xdbbc.jpg

I say, indeed old bean!

[Rahabib]

Well I will come out and support Hamma.... to a point :)

First of all, when people just say "do it like PS1, it worked." I think the developers are well aware of what was done in PS1 and what worked. I think the devs want to make PS2 a unique gaming experience in its own right, and not just PS1 with better graphics. If you are holding on to that hope, then you are wasting your time. The devs have put a lot of time and resources in to how the game is now, they are not going to scrap large aspects of the game like re-introducing a lattice system, etc.

On a slightly related topic, I think most suggestions on this and especially on the official PS2 forums are either not practical or helpful to the discussion in anyway. Far too often people complain about something then offer up a solution that basically reads to a developer like 'This game sucks, go back and start over.' Do you honestly think a developer is going to take that seriously? Of course not. Simple solutions will gain far more traction than long, involved and drastic changes.

Now, where I disagree with Hamma is that I think that ideas are important no matter what the source. If something worked in PS1, then they should post it. If its a simple solution that PS1 addressed, then its a good one. If its a whine thread about why PS2 is not like PS1 or asks for too large of change, then it likely will not be taken seriously.

I know PS1 has a special place in a lot of your hearts. I never played it. I dont really care about it. What I do want is for PS2 to get better. If its a PS1 or COD suggestion I dont care, as long as it makes the game better. However, I have seen far too many posts that I know will never see the light of day that push off some really good discussions off the front page. The official PS2 forums are far worse. I gave up on that since everyone just complains with no real substance.

I think that Hamma, has a point, we should not just look at trying to make PS2 into PS1, but rather a unique game that more than just the hardcore PS1 gamers will like. And I think Hamma, may have been a bit strong in saying that bringing up PS1 hurts the community. It only hurts the community when people aren't being reasonable in their expectations.

[Hamma]

That doesn't make sense. If there is a problem or a feature that was approached in a better way 10 years ago I want to say so and I want other people to say so.

For example the voice macros. They were awesome in ps1 and they are shit in ps2, I want people to discuss stuff like that so the devs can read it and hopefully implement it to make ps2 a better game. I don't see anything wrong with that.

.sent via phone.

Read the previous posts.

[MrBloodworth]

I think the devs want to make PS2 a unique gaming experience in its own right, and not just PS1 with better graphics.

This is the response to everything when someone mentions the things that worked in PS1, even when adopted by the presenter for PS2.


Amazingly, people still compare Battlefield 1 with 3. I wonder why.

[Jennyboo]

This isn't about forgetting about Planetside 1, it's about keeping topics that have to do with Planetside 1 in the Planetside 1 forum. When the devs come along and look at the Planetside 2 forum they probably don't want to be discussing Planetside 1.
This also isn't about not taking anything from Planetside 1 because it's an old game but that just because something was in Planetside 1 it shouldn't automatically be in Planetside 2. If a feature worked in Planetside 1 then make a case as to why it should be included in Planetside 2, stating that it worked in Planetside 1 isn't an argument in on itself (in many cases anyway).
This of course doesn't mean that one shouldn't ever bring up Planetside 1 in a discussion about Planetside 2 as it can be entirely relevant to do so, but bringing up "when is Planetside 1 going free to play?" isn't relevant to a thread about cheating in Planetside 2.

I do not understand why people have a tendency to exaggerate when they read something like this thread.

^ ya what he said.

[ChipMHazard]

Every counter is "Planetside 1 is dead".

No dice there.

This is the exaggeration that I mentioned. I haven't seen this counter argument been used for a very long time. If someone does use it then you can simply state that, that is a fallacy.
What I have seen on numerous occasions are people who are perfectly able to make take an objective position when it comes to whether or not something from PS1 could work in PS2.

[Canaris]

that's not true Blood and you know it, I've brought up several items that were in PS1 and how they could benefit PS2 and the Dev's have been very supportive of. A well layed out topic as to why it should be there will be listened too, I think Hamma's just sick of some people doing nothing here but screaming "PS2 fail & PS1 king" arguements that go no where.

If you think something would be a boon to the game just lay it out in a respectful way rather than rant, ranting just puts people on the defensive.

[MrBloodworth]

False.



If you have a good case, nobody can argue that its a dead feature.

Do you read your own site? You yourself have done this.

"PS2 fail & PS1 king" arguements that go no where.

If you think something would be a boon to the game just lay it out in a respectful way rather than rant, ranting just puts peope on the defensive.

With this I agree. But that's the Official forums, happens less here. I AM guilty of this myself though. Sometimes, "Different for the sake of Different" is stupid. Just like "Same for the sake of Same is".

[Rahabib]

This is the response to everything when someone mentions the things that worked in PS1, even when adopted by the presenter for PS2.


Amazingly, people still compare Battlefield 1 with 3. I wonder why.
I think the idea is to be reasonable. Lattice will never happen.

[Hamma]

On a slightly related topic, I think most suggestions on this and especially on the official PS2 forums are either not practical or helpful to the discussion in anyway. Far too often people complain about something then offer up a solution that basically reads to a developer like 'This game sucks, go back and start over.' Do you honestly think a developer is going to take that seriously? Of course not. Simple solutions will gain far more traction than long, involved and drastic changes.

Excellent point.

Now, where I disagree with Hamma is that I think that ideas are important no matter what the source. If something worked in PS1, then they should post it. If its a simple solution that PS1 addressed, then its a good one. If its a whine thread about why PS2 is not like PS1 or asks for too large of change, then it likely will not be taken seriously.

I agree, with a solid reasoned case about why it should be implemented rather than just "IN PS1 This happened"

I know PS1 has a special place in a lot of your hearts. I never played it. I dont really care about it. What I do want is for PS2 to get better. If its a PS1 or COD suggestion I dont care, as long as it makes the game better. However, I have seen far too many posts that I know will never see the light of day that push off some really good discussions off the front page. The official PS2 forums are far worse. I gave up on that since everyone just complains with no real substance.

Good to have some feedback from someone who didn't play PS1 thanks for posting here. ;)

[MrBloodworth]

This is the exaggeration that I mentioned. I haven't seen this counter argument been used for a very long time. If someone does use it then you can simply state that, that is a fallacy.
What I have seen on numerous occasions are people who are perfectly able to make take an objective position when it comes to whether or not something from PS1 could work in PS2.

Read the OP. It was just done.

[Hamma]

Do you read your own site? You yourself have done this.

Have you ever posted in a thread not to argue or is that how you roll with all your responses?

[MrBloodworth]

Have you ever posted in a thread not to argue or is that how you roll with all your responses?

Yes I have.

I haven't seen this counter argument been used for a very long time. If someone does use it then you can simply state that, that is a fallacy.

Let's focus on that game and stop dwelling on the past because it's gone and as Smed said almost nobody is logged into it and it will remain that way even if it's added to the membership.

This thread is a fallacy.

[Hamma]

Taking my sentence out of context to suit your own argument. Like I said.. ;)

Read the entire thread and see what I mean rather than just reading bits and pieces to suit your own argument.

[Punker]

I can see both sides of the fence from here. And I agree that comparing PS1 to PS2 is like comparing apples to oranges.

But saying that, the majority of this community are still PS1 vets that are actively playing PS2.

Of course if a vet player spots a problem with the new game they are automatically going to offer a solution that worked from the old game, even though the two games are very different.

I don't think it's a matter of nostalgia, i think it's more of a fact that something worked, was trialed and successful and might possibly be the solution needed for the new game.

Telling your member base to forget all about the original game that bought them here, and to never compare the two could be pretty detrimental to the site.

I know the reason that the dev's visit here more than their own forums is because they value the opinions of PS1 vets (just look at Malorn's story and manifesto).

I think the comparisons are necessary, even though the games are very different, the only suggestions that are arising are those that worked for the original... I don't think i've read a thread where people are asking for BFR's to be introduced.

[ChipMHazard]

Read the OP. It was just done.

No, it wasn't. I most certainly didn't read it that way.

[Chaff]

.
....what's DAMN funny (to me)
....is that "the-Game-that-we-Shall-now-Not-Mention-by-Name" had a place called "Virtual Reality", but many vets of that game are lost in "non-Reality". I find this irony too damn funny.

I respect most of the opinions expressed on PSU. However, the "way" some people
choose to try to get their point accross makes wonder how many people here
are on Prozac, or need something like that. This is PS2 folks, deal with it.

I miss a few specific components from it's prior form. I will try not to use that title any more out of respect of this sites managements suggestions to leave the dead to RIP.
(good luck PSU mgmnt)
.

[MrBloodworth]

Taking my sentence out of context to suit your own argument. Like I said.. ;)

Read the entire thread and see what I mean rather than just reading bits and pieces to suit your own argument.

I'm sorry. Did you not type that, and how would the context of your original post make it NOT the case I describe?

Its great that Chip wrote a great post on how you SHOULD have presented your request. But you did not type that.

I agree with Chip, I disagree with you.

[Jennyboo]

This thread is a fallacy.

Arguing for the sake of arguing is a fallacy :lol:

[MrBloodworth]

No, it wasn't. I most certainly didn't read it that way.

Not sure how you can mistake the flow.

There was a contentious thread about a topic, PS1 was brought up. Hamma tells everyone PS1 is dead because smed said it was, and we should just stop talking about it.

[Hamma]

You're more interested in an argument than actual solid debate and constructive ideas. If you want to contribute to this forum then stop being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. Your ignorance on the topic is astounding, you choose to only read the pieces you want to read and not read the entire content of what I said based on later feedback from other members included into the mix.

[MrBloodworth]

Arguing for the sake of arguing is a fallacy :lol:

I don't argue for the sake of argument.

I argue because people are wrong. Including myself.

Its fine, I will refrain from bring up PS1, no matter how relevant.

[CrazEpharmacist]

Not sure how you can mistake the flow.

There was a contentious thread about a topic, PS1 was brought up. Hamma tells everyone PS1 is dead because smed said it was, and we should just stop talking about it.

You're not really offering anything constructive here. Just arguing for the sake of arguing it seems.

[maradine]

Then I say something.

Stella? No? Man.

"This worked better in PS1 because it attenuated systemic shock in the bladbity blah blah" - useful discussion point.

"When are they going to make PS1 F2P? That's what the community really wants." - not useful discussion point.

I think that's the razor here.

[MrBloodworth]

You're not really offering anything constructive here. Just arguing for the sake of arguing it seems.

What would be constructive?

I disagree with the original post, its premise and its intent.

[Hamma]

I don't argue for the sake of argument.

I argue because people are wrong. Including myself.

Its fine, I will refrain from bring up PS1, no matter how relevant.

This is not what I asked, read my original topic where I added in the quote from Chip who read what I said and recited it EXACTLY HOW I MEANT IT for people like you.

[Dragonskin]

I agree with Hamma.

I've been through several MMOs over the years. Back when Everquest 2 came out people used to compare it to Everquest 1. They were not exactly the same and even had basically a parallal universe to explain why things were different. Classes were different, races, lore, skills, abilities, level advancement... everything was basically different because it wasn't Everquest 1.

Now, Planetside 2 is king. What changes that were made.. lore, places, weaponary, classes, mechanics... it's all Planetside 2 now so constantly referring to a previous installment will not always help make changes for the better.

If we want to give feedback on how to improve the game we have to look at it from Planetside 2's perspective. Planetside 2 in not Planetside 1 with new graphics. It's a new game.

They are not going to bring back the inventory management of Planetside 1 because it doesn't fit in Planetside 2.

They aren't going to drastically change how people get access to vehicles by making people cert into them to even use them because they sold people weapons for vehicles, skins, decals, accessories... people want access to all that. So they will not lock down access to vehicles like it was in Planetside 1. Those are just examples of things that won't change that I hear a lot on this boards.

So if we want to help make Planetside 2 better we need discuss things that would be relevant to improving Planetside 2 based on the current state of the game keeping in mind that the Devs obviously have a different direction and focus for the game than Planetside 1.

[MrBloodworth]

Then I say something.

Stella? No? Man.

"This worked better in PS1 because it attenuated systemic shock in the bladbity blah blah" - useful discussion point.

"When are they going to make PS1 F2P? That's what the community really wants." - not useful discussion point.

I think that's the razor here.

I do not disagree.

[Hamma]

Then I say something.

Stella? No? Man.

"This worked better in PS1 because it attenuated systemic shock in the bladbity blah blah" - useful discussion point.

"When are they going to make PS1 F2P? That's what the community really wants." - not useful discussion point.

I think that's the razor here.

Another person capable of understanding what I mean. Thanks maradine.

[CrazEpharmacist]

What would be constructive?

I disagree with the original post, its premise and its intent.

Look, I want ps1 to be free to play and most of its features to be implemented into PS2 just as much as the next vet but we have to appreciate what Hamma is requesting here. The pS2 forums are primarily for PS2 discussion and if you want to bring up PS1 you should have a good reason for doing so. Other than that, PS1 discussion should be in PS1 sub-section, that's what it's there for.

[Hamma]

I agree with Hamma.

I've been through several MMOs over the years. Back when Everquest 2 came out people used to compare it to Everquest 1. They were not exactly the same and even had basically a parallal universe to explain why things were different. Classes were different, races, lore, skills, abilities, level advancement... everything was basically different because it wasn't Everquest 1.

Now, Planetside 2 is king. What changes that were made.. lore, places, weaponary, classes, mechanics... it's all Planetside 2 now so constantly referring to a previous installment will not always help make changes for the better.

If we want to give feedback on how to improve the game we have to look at it from Planetside 2's perspective. Planetside 2 in not Planetside 1 with new graphics. It's a new game.

They are not going to bring back the inventory management of Planetside 1 because it doesn't fit in Planetside 2.

They aren't going to drastically change how people get access to vehicles by making people cert into them to even use them because they sold people weapons for vehicles, skins, decals, accessories... people want access to all that. So they will not lock down access to vehicles like it was in Planetside 1. Those are just examples of things that won't change that I hear a lot on this boards.

So if we want to help make Planetside 2 better we need discuss things that would be relevant to improving Planetside 2 based on the current state of the game keeping in mind that the Devs obviously have a different direction and focus for the game than Planetside 1.
Excellent post!

[MrBloodworth]

Another person capable of understanding what I mean. Thanks maradine.

I understand completely what you mean. You have a horrible way of saying it. You fell into the same trap though, "Planetside is dead" is about as useful as "It should be copied from Planetside 1"

[Hamma]

You're not really offering anything constructive here. Just arguing for the sake of arguing it seems.

Glad someone else sees it.

[Rahabib]

...I don't think it's a matter of nostalgia, i think it's more of a fact that something worked, was trialed and successful and might possibly be the solution needed for the new game.

Telling your member base to forget all about the original game that bought them here, and to never compare the two could be pretty detrimental to the site.

I know the reason that the dev's visit here more than their own forums is because they value the opinions of PS1 vets (just look at Malorn's story and manifesto).

...

First off, I don't think we know if the majority of players are PS1 vets or not. I think there is a good population of PS1 players, but who really knows where all of these people come from. The game is free so that invites a whole host of populations.

Next, we have to be careful when we say that "it worked" in PS1. "It worked" is very subjective, but furthermore, "it worked" in a particular context - it may not work in PS2. "It worked" may hinge on not making one change, but lots of changes in order to make it "work" in PS2. Keep that in mind. Not to say we should forget about PS1, but we really need people to keep everything in perspective when making arguments about what to implement.

Also, I think the major reason the devs visit this site, which is the same reason I do, is that there are fewer posts here (which is a good thing) which makes finding useful thought out posts much easier to find than 1 good post on page 3 of the PS2 forums because it got bumped out with people posting how much they hate the game rather than what they like, or what would make the game even better.

[Hamma]

I understand completely what you mean. You have a horrible way of saying it. You fell into the same trap though, "Planetside is dead" is about as useful as "It should be copied from Planetside 1"

I fell into no trap, it's a valid point. We aren't getting PlanetSide 1 in a new engine ever so just give up on it already.

[Chaff]

.
....some of y'all are stupid pee-pee potty-headed doodie-faces......
.

[MrBloodworth]

Excellent post!

Of course it is, its the same premise as yours.

"Planetside 2 in not Planetside 1 with new graphics."

Witch is an egregious simplification to create a strawman when someone brings up parallels to the original title that may be useful.

[MrBloodworth]

I fell into no trap, it's a valid point. We aren't getting PlanetSide 1 in a new engine ever so just give up on it already.

Oh FFS.

I have to ask. Do you think that I, as well as many who bring up elements of Planetside 1 all want PS1 with new graphics?

[Hamma]

My patience is wearing thin with you MrBloodworth. You are wasting space on this board with your argumentative non constructive posts. I'm not the only one that is tired of it.

[CrazEpharmacist]

Excellent post!

I agree good post, and pretty much sums up this threads intentions.

[maradine]

Another person capable of understanding what I mean. Thanks maradine.

I just didn't want to see us TEARING THIS FAMILY APAAAAAAAAAAAART

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/23926764.jpg

[Kerrec]

I understand completely what you mean. You have a horrible way of saying it. You fell into the same trap though, "Planetside is dead" is about as useful as "It should be copied from Planetside 1"

So if I understand you, what Hamma meant was understood, but you went on 4 pages of "attacks" because you didn't like the way he said it?

Why didn't you just write one post stating how Hamma "should" have said it, according to you, and leave it at that?

[MrBloodworth]

My patience is wearing thin with you MrBloodworth. You are wasting space on this board with your argumentative non constructive posts. I'm not the only one that is tired of it.

Fine. I'm sorry. Carry on.

[Chaff]

.
....rubber glue infinity ?.............
.

[Baneblade]

We are all here because of PlanetSide 1... even if you never played it.

That said, Im perfectly willing to stop pushing for tried and true mechanics from PS1 if SOE stops borrowing from completely irrelevant games...like Battlefield.

[CrazEpharmacist]

I have an inkling of why this thread was made in the first place. I made a thread in the pS2 section about how Smedly wants to include PS1 access with PS2 membership. Now I think that was a reasonable post because it primarily has to do with PS2 and increased membership value. What happened though is that thread got moved into Smedlys hacker post thread for some reason and it brought all of its replies with it. So now all of a sudden PS1 started coming up in the discussion and Smedly actually replied to a few of them, and that thread kind of got derailed. My thread has since been restored though so everything is good.

[MrBloodworth]

So if I understand you, what Hamma meant was understood, but you went on 4 pages of "attacks" because you didn't like the way he said it?

Why didn't you just write one post stating how Hamma "should" have said it, according to you, and leave it at that?

Last post.

I understand his true frustration, and motivation for posting it. That's a bit different to what the claim is now.


Anyway, I'm the bad guy here for pointing it out. I have always respected him and many others in this thread, even if we don't see eye to eye, that's the nature of discussions. But I lost a big chunk of that respect for this post.

[ChipMHazard]

We are all here because of PlanetSide 1... even if you never played it.

That said, Im perfectly willing to stop pushing for tried and true mechanics from PS1 if SOE stops borrowing from completely irrelevant games...like Battlefield.

Or perhaps it would be wiser to accept a good idea no matter what its origin might be, that way no idea is discriminated against.

[Jennyboo]

I understand completely what you mean. You have a horrible way of saying it. You fell into the same trap though, "Planetside is dead" is about as useful as "It should be copied from Planetside 1"

Funny I understood completely what Hamma was saying hrm maybe because I wasn't looking to argue but be constructive and help this community grow :rolleyes:

[Bags]

that's fine I let go of both games

pity i have like $80 unspent lol

[Aaron]

This thread is good. People need to let it out.

Guys, Hamma is just looking out for the health of the community, relations with developers, and order in general. He's only trying to say that we shouldn't rain over PS2 with PS1 themed bitterness. Bringing up ideas to apply in PS2 to make a better game, however, is completely fine.

[Chaff]

.
I VOTE this thread gets moved to the PS1 section.
(asap)
.

[MrBloodworth]

Funny I understood completely what Hamma was saying hrm maybe because I wasn't looking to argue but be constructive and help this community grow :rolleyes:

I'm sorry you feel this is my motivation. Feel free to remove all my posts.

[Hamma]

I have an inkling of why this thread was made in the first place. I made a thread in the pS2 section about how Smedly wants to include PS1 access with PS2 membership. Now I think that was a reasonable post because it primarily has to do with PS2 and increased membership value. What happened though is that thread got moved into Smedlys hacker post thread for some reason and it brought all of its replies with it. So now all of a sudden PS1 started coming up in the discussion and Smedly actually replied to a few of them, and that thread kind of got derailed. My thread has since been restored though so everything is good.

Naw, it's not because of your post. It's in general. ;)

[Hamma]

Anyway, I'm the bad guy here for pointing it out. I have always respected him and many others in this thread, even if we don't see eye to eye, that's the nature of discussions. But I lost a big chunk of that respect for this post.

Awesome, losing respect for me because I posted to let go of a game that we aren't all playing anymore.

[Hamma]

Guys, Hamma is just looking out for the health of the community, relations with developers, and order in general. He's only trying to say that we shouldn't rain over PS2 with PS1 themed bitterness. Bringing up ideas to apply in PS2 to make a better game, however, is completely fine.

Exactly. Even if those ideas are from PlanetSide 1. Structure it in a way that is constructive.

[Crator]

In order to battle this as a forum mod, don't you need set rules so people understand what you are saying? If those rules are broken then the person(s) breaking them should be advised and possibly even the post they broke the rules in removed?

I have no idea if when I mention PS1 in some of my posts if it is a allowed or scorned.

EDIT: And to try and limit free speech of ideas on a discussion forums? Really? Might as well shut it down if that's the case....

[Javelin]

Something needs to be said and it's time to say it.

Every time this community brings up PlanetSide 1 in an argument or statement about PlanetSide 2 you make this community less and less relevant. PlanetSide 1 was ten years ago, we now have PlanetSide 2 and this forum in particular focuses on PlanetSide 2.

PlanetSide 2 is not PlanetSide 1. We all wanted PlanetSide 2 and now that it's out we cannot stop talking about PlanetSide 1. It was a great game, in 2003. It's now 2013 and we have PlanetSide 2. Let's focus on that game and stop dwelling on the past because it's gone and as Smed said almost nobody is logged into it and it will remain that way even if it's added to the membership.

In development the Developers looked to us for Feedback from experience. Now that the game is out they still look to us but they will look to us for improvements to the EXISTING game and not constant railing about how PlanetSide 1 was better.

If you guys want this community to remain relevant you are going to have to let go of PlanetSide 1. There's lots we can learn from it but we cannot allow nostalgia to dominate the discussions about this new game PlanetSide 2

Gaming communities have been killed by this sort of non productiveness in the past and it will kill this one as well if we don't learn to let go.




Thank you for saying that Hamma. PS2 is not PS1, and its time we get used to that. Not getting into the debate of one over the other, but the reality is they are 2 different games.

As a PS1 vet we are our own worst enemies.

[Rahabib]

We are all here because of PlanetSide 1... even if you never played it.

That said, Im perfectly willing to stop pushing for tried and true mechanics from PS1 if SOE stops borrowing from completely irrelevant games...like Battlefield.

by that same logic we are all here because of pong as well. :P

But seriously, theres nothing wrong with using PS1, ideas - but be constructive and remember the context with PS2. Also just be willing to accept that dramatic changes only will come after small changes. A complete reworking of the system will not happen. I get so sick of seeing people go on and on about a lattice system, when we can tweak a few things to make PS2 work in a similar fashion with far less intrusion to those who have invested into the current system.

Oh and I didnt like BF1-3 either. Thats not to say there wasn't at least one aspect of that game that could be used. Just not that awful recoil system we had to endure for a while :).

Remember the lock-on rocket fiasco. They removed dumb fire. dumb fire, thats all, and every one who had bought one was furious, so they had to put it back. So keep that in mind, there is a large invested audience where event the slightest tweak will cause havok.

Although I will admit, I sometimes see things SOE does and think, "a much easier tweak could have been made and will upset far fewer people." So SOE isnt perfect with their implementation either.

Also, keep posting on the roadmap but also thumb those good suggestions up. In fact even if its not perfect, thumb it up if its even slightly better than the status quo. Quantitative data (numbers) is far easier to read than qualitative data (posts).

[EVILPIG]

I'm not reading the entire thread, but Hamma is right. There are wonderful aspects of PS1 that can be referenced, just as there are great things about other games that can be brought in or influence development, but this is a different game. Did you play the Zelda series? The game evolved. PS1 had some great things about it, but it was a crappy shooter. PS2 is a good shooter. I'm happy we have the Planetside identity and lore.

[MrBloodworth]

Awesome, losing respect for me because I posted to let go of a game that we aren't all playing anymore.

No. Losing respect because I feel, in your frustration, you did exactly what you used to rail against.

Over simplification.

I do not blame you for the fatigue of seeing yet another "Ps1 did it better" post. I'm tired of them too.

But you did what every other troll has done when PS1 is brought up, constructively or not. You told us it was 10 years ago, and to stop talking about it. You should have taken a breath before posting.

I'm willing to accept this was borne out of your frustration and worry about the community.

But I argue for the sake of argument. :rolleyes: and I am apparently on my way out.

[wasdie]

I have to agree. Whenever a feature of PS1 is brought up to be added to PS2, the reasoning only goes as far as "it worked in PS1". That's really it.

That doesn't help when PS2 is really a different game at its core. You can choose to hate that game if you want, but that doesn't change the fact that PS2 is not PS1.

[Hamma]

In order to battle this as a forum mod, don't you need set rules so people understand what you are saying? If those rules are broken then the person(s) breaking them should be advised and possibly even the post they broke the rules in removed?

I have no idea if when I mention PS1 in some of my posts if it is a allowed or scorned.

EDIT: And to try and limit free speech of ideas on a discussion forums? Really? Might as well shut it down if that's the case....

You are missing the point as well. I'm asking people to be constructive - some of the posters in this thread have said it better than I ever could and I've given them the credit in my OP check it out.

[Hamma]

No. Losing respect because I feel, in your frustration, you did exactly what you used to rail against.

Over simplification.

I do not blame you for the fatigue of seeing yet another "Ps1 did it better" post. I'm tired of them too.

But you did what every other troll has done when PS1 is brought up, constructively or not. You told us it was 10 years ago, and to stop talking about it. You should have taken a breath before posting.

I'm willing to accept this was borne out of your frustration and worry about the community.

But I argue for the sake of argument. :rolleyes: and I am apparently on my way out.

Even if I did post it in frustration I recognized several people said it in the thread better than I ever could have and I've given those people the credit by editing my OP to be more clear.

[Tatwi]

My patience is wearing thin with you MrBloodworth. You are wasting space on this board with your argumentative non constructive posts. I'm not the only one that is tired of it.

Save for the fact he's right, especially about this:

I fell into no trap, it's a valid point. We aren't getting PlanetSide 1 in a new engine ever so just give up on it already.

and that part about you calling Planetside dead, thus people should stop talking about it.

Honestly, Hamma, I just do not understand how you can't see that you are doing exactly what are you telling people does not happen around here.

I think you're a great person and all, but you're not being very objective here and your original post was not written objectively either. Had Chimp not clarified what you meant to say, this thread would have looked a lot like an overbearing, "I'm taking my ball and going home" post.

I'm not being mean or argumentative here, simply rational and objective. Honestly, I don't give a damn either way, but I don't like seeing people being bullied either, and you Hamma, are being a bully toward MrBloodworth simply because he disagrees with you and you have you back up, refusing to see his point of view.

Both of you, give it a rest.

[Crator]

You are missing the point as well. I'm asking people to be constructive - some of the posters in this thread have said it better than I ever could and I've given them the credit in my OP check it out.

I'm not missing the point. I was confirming if what I thought was what point you were trying to make. That's why there's a ? symbol on the sentence. Most posts I read are constructive. If they aren't, then I ignore it (unless they are asking me a question personally). Then I might oblige with an explanation. But my question you didn't answer is, isn't that what forums rules that forum mods are supposed to take care of? Reducing nonconstructive posts?

[Chaff]

.
If you & JBoo have kids of your own, will you miss your children from PSU ?
.

[ChipMHazard]

Oy, stop calling me Chimp:/


EDIT: And to try and limit free speech of ideas on a discussion forums? Really? Might as well shut it down if that's the case....

While I know you're not actually trying to go all the way with this argument, however it's a loaded question/argument on every single forum out there. The truth is that no one has any more freedom of speech than what the admin(s) allow, we all know this. I would advice against ever trying to use that as an actual argument:p

I think this whole thing should just be seen as a misunderstanding, and while I'm glad that I was able to clarify it for some I don't really like having my post being put up in contrast, if that's the proper term to use here, to Hamma's:D

[MrBloodworth]

Even if I did post it in frustration I recognized several people said it in the thread better than I ever could have and I've given those people the credit by editing my OP to be more clear.

Thank you for finally seeing it.

I just want to clear something up though.

I do not argue for the sake of argument. I do not come to this site to troll, the OF is much better for that. I have no intention of playing PS1. I enjoy my time in PS2, and have many times praised them for the marvel they have created.

Do I need more tact in my postings, I'm quite sure this is true. But that's also a form of Fatigue as well, you may be able to relate.

Why did this post piss me off?

Become it was you, who just "trolled" everyone who HAS made constrictive comparisons to the original game. You just validated something that has been going on for a long long time.

You request that people stop posting that Ps1 was god, yet have not requested that the those in opposition to a constructive post that brings up PS1 NOT simply say "Ps1 is dead, your post is irrelevant".

Makes people like me, and others feel anything related to PS1 is allowed to be shut down, in fact, officially sanctioned to just say "Its old, your old, and you should feel bad for bring it up". Topped off with a healthy dose of "They will stop coming here".

Edit: Thank you Tatwi.

[Rahabib]

I think this conversation is done. People are just rehashing now.

[Empra]

I agree

I think people are dissapointed that PS2 lacks the same depth as PS1 but you have to remember that PS1 on release was nowhere near as deep as it ended up, you are comparing a game with almost 10 years devtime to a newly released game and it just isn't valid.

People rage about bugs and issues they have and say things along the lines of "OMG HOW HARD IS IT TO XXXX!" or "HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO XXX!? WHY AREN't YOU DOING XXXX FIRST?"

You are all entitled to your opinon just remember, unless you are qualified and educated in the development field you are talking about then you have little right to make demands regarding development. Just vote on the road map :/.

A lot of the devs MADE PS1 and I think they know already how it worked, when you spam "MAKE IT LIKE PS1" at them they are going to take you less seriously. When you make a game you have to make it relevant and accessible because you want people to play it, partly because you love it and partly because YOU NEED TO MAKE MONEY OR THE GAME WILL DIE.

PS1 does not have the accessibility and tropes that people expect from modern fps, what PS2 does is take the philosophy of PS1 and try and make a game relevant to modern times, yet retaining the soul of the original.

The reason it isn't just how you like it right now is because the business model requires ongoing development, you are making a risk when you make a game and release it for free. You put up the capital to create the game and you need to make a return to feed all those employees etc. It would of taken another year of devtime to get all the features people ask for put in.

F2P business models are the only way to compete in a saturated market.

In the current economic climate low risks are favourable and if it wasn't for this dev model it may not have been made.

I know I went on a tangent but the above highlights why PS1 is now irrelevant apart from important lessons, that the devs already know.

P.S. The PS1 f2p thing will never happen, you would have to spend more than you would make converting it into f2p and managing the servers, unfortunately it will die, though I hope someone keeps the code for the history books.

[Crator]

You are all entitled to your opinon just remember, unless you are qualified and educated in the development field you are talking about then you have little right to make demands regarding development. Just vote on the road map :/.

If that's the case these forums shouldn't exist. No need to post about and discuss things you can't possible have any influence over, right? Or perhaps just allow threads that talk about things that are already in the game or on the road map. All other threads unrealted to those other two things should not be allowed. Like you said, just use the road map...

[Assist]

Something needs to be said and it's time to say it.
It was a great game, in 2003.

Agreed. Too many PS1 fanboys here who believe their way is the only way. I try to avoid the topic because too many people get really angry over it.

[Ghoest9]

Awesome post and thread Hamma!!!!

This is a similar but different game from PS1.
We should talk about how to improve PS2 in the context of PS2.

[Hamma]

and that part about you calling Planetside dead, thus people should stop talking about it.

Please read my revisions to the OP and the entire thread with my comments. As I said (I think this is the 3rd time now) some people said it much better than I did and I gave them credit. They stated exactly what I meant.

[Punker]

Too many PS1 fanboys here

I would hope so.

The PS1 fanboys were the ones that gave this site relevance in the first place, If PSU was incorporated around december 2012 i doubt the dev's would even visit here.

[Wahooo]

I think people are dissapointed that PS2 lacks the same depth as PS1 but you have to remember that PS1 on release was nowhere near as deep as it ended up, you are comparing a game with almost 10 years devtime to a newly released game and it just isn't valid.

The rage come from this. 10 years of devtime to increase the depth of the game just dropped and ignored.

Yes Ps2 is a different game, but c'mon there is a lot of crap to this game as well. Look at all the posts about this constant 3-way that is Ti/X-road/Crown indarside.
Look at the 3 factions with faction specific weapons/specialties and try and maintain balance.
Look at the idea of a persistent world war with continental faction battles.
Look at massive scale non-instanced combined arms combat.
Look at the potential for large player co-op groups and need for communication.

There are so many aspects of the game it is near impossible to bring up and not talk about what worked AND WHAT DIDN"T in PS1.

There ARE things they seem to have looked at and learned from PS1, I think that credit is being lost a lot. The faction differences and balance is a big one. That is a HUGE task, and I think they are doing a pretty decent job. But STILL there are aspects of PS2 that ARE NOT WORKING, and they DID work in PS1. I just don't know how we are supposed to just forget about that.

[Dougnifico]

Full agreement. We can learn from PS1, but things change. PS2 needs to be the focus. Count me in for staying relevant.

[RodenyC]

I thought PS2 was/is suppose to be a sequel.Not a BF3 copy and paste clone.That's why I see most of the PS1 did it right thing to be a good thing.Because the devs need to realize that PS1 did sooooo many things better than PS2 is doing.Also letting PS1 die? Doesn't sound like a true fan to me.

[Rolfski]

Couldn't agree more with Hamma.
I joined these forums as a new player looking for a dedicated, mature place to share fresh ideas about Planetside 2, only to find myself in discussions all the time that end up into arguments why certain PS1 aspects are better.

This obsession to judge everything of this game through a PS1 scope has gotten for me to a point that I simply started visiting more the Reddit and SOE forums to look for great fresh ideas about this game. It kinda limits the potential of this forum imo, which is a shame because discussions tend to be longer on the first page here and I have the feeling devs take really good notice.

I don't mind people referring and bringing in ideas from PS1 but this should not be the only game people should look for inspiration to improve PS2.

[maradine]

I honestly hope Planetside 2 gets over run with hackers and fail as a game.I hate the game with a passion.I also can't stand Smed.Give Smed's job to TRay or Maggie.

You, my friend, are The Problem.

[Sledgecrushr]

After a heated discussion like this, I think we can all still be friends...

Planetside 2 • New Best Friend ♥ Nosedive ♥ - YouTube

[Mox]

Why should this community become irrelevant?

As long as the members of this community are paying customers of ps2/SOE we are absolutly relevant. By the way we are not some random "f2p is cool because i wont spend a dime" - kiddies. We are the older generation, the generation which have the money to spent for ps2. we are the real fans. loyal to the franchise for a decade. I myself spend already around 150 bucks for ps2 and around 500 bucks at least for ps1. Therefore i am relevant as hell! And i think this is the same for most of the veterans of this community.

I suggest that SOE should listen to the opinions of their relevant customers. We are not less relevant just because we point to a solution which was already known from ps1. By the way, Solutions which had already proved that it is working.

EDIT: the term "fanboy" was changed into "fan" because of its negative connotation. You may still find some references to the original term in the following discussion.

[Vashyo]

I do compare this game to PS1 since it's the prequel and atm, it's a much bigger game and has much more focused gameplay. First issue can't be solved until more content is added, but the second issue is something that frustrates me in PS2. Whole game is a big mess of randomness with no necessity for strategy/tactics and no feeling of victory. I only play it these days to collect certs...Cause I find no satisfaction capturing that one base that I end up capturing multiple times a day. Player numbers are dropping too, so obviously the game just doesn't have that something to keep people playing it.

[Maidere]

I understand why Hamma did start this thread but the one to blame was (surpise!) Smed yet again, who came up and said something that can be tl;dr'ed as: "LOLOLOL 2013 WHO NEEDS PS1 NOONE'S GONNA PLAY IT"

[CraazyCanuck]

*snip*

With a signature like that, why are you even on a PS2 forum? If you hate the game that much, move on to something else and save yourself the aggravation. Life is too short.

On that same note, could we just have this thread locked and move on?

[Gonefshn]

I don't think hamma is trying To tell us never to mention PS1. Simply put I think he means, "you can post a thread about systems of ps1 if it includes information and ideas for constructive implementation in PS2, just don't post your dissatisfaction with the differences all the time." He wants you all to keep conversation related to improving PS2 not crucifying the game because its not PS1. ESPECIALLY in someone else's thread that has nothing to do with PS1.

He's not trying to stop anyone from looking at PS1 for INSPIRATION. He just doesn't want the whining about how PS2 is failing because its different.

[Dragonskin]

Why should this community become irrelevant?

As long as the members of this community are paying customers of ps2/SOE we are absolutly relevant. By the way we are not some random "f2p is cool because i wont spend a dime" - kiddies. We are the older generation, the generation which have the money to spent for ps2. we are the real fanboys. loyal to the franchise for a decade. I myself spend already around 150 bucks for ps2 and around 500 bucks at least for ps1. Therefore i am relevant as hell! And i think this is the same for most of the veterans of this community.

I suggest that SOE should listen to the opinions of their relevant customers. We are not less relevant just because we point to a solution which was already known from ps1. By the way, Solutions which had already proved that it is working.

Fanboys have a funny way of being determental to new games they claim to love so passionately. Fanboys are the ones you will never please if you want to appeal to a broader audience. This is tried a true fact by now. I would be careful in labelling yourself a Fanboy.

[Hamma]

I don't think hamma is trying To tell us never to mention PS1. Simply put I think he means, "you can post a thread about systems of ps1 if it includes information and ideas for constructive implementation in PS2, just don't post your dissatisfaction with the differences all the time." He wants you all to keep conversation related to improving PS2 not crucifying the game because its not PS1. ESPECIALLY in someone else's thread that has nothing to do with PS1.

He's not trying to stop anyone from looking at PS1 for INSPIRATION. He just doesn't want the whining about how PS2 is failing because its different.

Indeed.

[QuiCKaNdDeaDLy]

Hamma when the first Infos showed up and People raised their first Concerns:
GUYS STOP ARGUING AND WAIT FOR BETA

Hamma when the Beta started and People got pissed how Bad it was:
GUYS OMG DIS IS BETA DIS IS NOT FINAL! WAIT MORE!

Hamma at Release:
WTF GUYS PS1 TOOK 10 YEARS TO GET WHERE IT IS! GIVE MORE TIME

Hamma a few Months after Release:
GUYS GUYS GUYS LETS ALL FORGET ABOUT PS1 AND PRETEND IT NEVER EXISTED



:groovy:

[Bags]

lol quick

too true

[Mox]

Fanboys have a funny way of being determental to new games they claim to love so passionately. Fanboys are the ones you will never please if you want to appeal to a broader audience. This is tried a true fact by now. I would be careful in labelling yourself a Fanboy.

Well. I label you also a fanboy. If someone write over 200 comments in a forum dedicated to a certain game he is clearly a fan of the respective game imo. No offence by the way it is all about definitions. :cool:

[Javelin]

Hamma when the first Infos showed up and People raised their first Concerns:
GUYS STOP ARGUING AND WAIT FOR BETA

Hamma when the Beta started and People got pissed how Bad it was:
GUYS OMG DIS IS BETA DIS IS NOT FINAL! WAIT MORE!

Hamma at Release:
WTF GUYS PS1 TOOK 10 YEARS TO GET WHERE IT IS! GIVE MORE TIME

Hamma a few Months after Release:
GUYS GUYS GUYS LETS ALL FORGET ABOUT PS1 AND PRETEND IT NEVER EXISTED



:groovy:

Your not helping.

[Dragonskin]

Well. I label you also a fanboy. If someone write over 200 comments in a forum dedicated to a certain game he is clearly a fan of the respective game imo. No offence by the way it is all about definitions. :cool:

I am a fan of the game yes, but I'm not a fanboy. I play tons of shooters and nothing makes me more loyal to Planetside or SOE than any other shooter. I just want PS2 to do well because I am invested in it just as much as you are.

Just saying that Fanboyism is a negative thing in general.

[ChipMHazard]

Why should this community become irrelevant?

As long as the members of this community are paying customers of ps2/SOE we are absolutly relevant. By the way we are not some random "f2p is cool because i wont spend a dime" - kiddies. We are the older generation, the generation which have the money to spent for ps2. we are the real fanboys. loyal to the franchise for a decade. I myself spend already around 150 bucks for ps2 and around 500 bucks at least for ps1. Therefore i am relevant as hell! And i think this is the same for most of the veterans of this community.

I suggest that SOE should listen to the opinions of their relevant customers. We are not less relevant just because we point to a solution which was already known from ps1. By the way, Solutions which had already proved that it is working.

It would become irrelevant the day that the devs start thinking "We can't get any good feedback from there and they only rage at us when he comment there".

Oh I wouldn't go around professing ye' old entitled fanboy elitism, won't get you very far.
You know what developers have learned over the years? That those who really do whine, yet still pay, don't really have much relevance. You can't have a dialogue with them and they buy your shit anyway, so why bother.
Fanboys aren't that relevant anymore, about the only thing they are good for is when used as a defensive force.
Now customers, or anyone really, whom offer constructive criticism those can be worked with. There's a reason why companies employ other companies like Combat Testing.

I suggest that SOE listen to anyone whom might have something constructive to point out, be it negative or positive and be it from Planetside 1 or from something else. You might have noticed that they have indeed been taking ideas from the original and either implemented them or put them on the road map.
And like I have already pointed out, just because it was in Planetside 1 doesn't mean it belongs in Planetside 2. Anything that is in the game, or is to be added to the game, has to be there on its own merit. No matter which source it might stem from.

I know you ment well when writing this, that you just don't want the veterans' voices to go unheard, but the best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to stay constructive, be in a continuous dialogue with the developers, be respectful about it, don't slander them and make sure that PSU will continue to be THE place for the voice of the veterans to be heard for years to come. For how can a voice be heard if no one is listening?

Well. I label you also a fanboy. If someone write over 200 comments in a forum dedicated to a certain game he is clearly a fan of the respective game imo. No offence by the way it is all about definitions. :cool:

Then you have an alternative definition of fanboy. To take an active part in a community devoted to a certain "thing" does not a fan(boy) make. You have to be enthusiasticly devoted to something in order to be a fan(boy). As we all know, when you start adding feelings into the mix that's when one starts becoming irrational and unconstructive.

[Mox]

It would become irrelevant the day that the devs start thinking "We can't get any good feedback from there and they only rage at us when he comment there".

Oh I wouldn't go around professing ye' old entitled fanboy elitism, won't get you very far.
You know what developers have learned over the years? That those who really do whine, yet still pay, don't really have much relevance. You can't have a dialogue with them and they buy your shit anyway, so why bother.
Fanboys aren't that relevant anymore, about the only thing they are good for is when used as a defensive force.
Now customers, or anyone really, whom offer constructive criticism, that they can work with.

I suggest that SOE listen to anyone whom might have something constructive to point out, be it negative or positive and be it from Planetside 1 or from something else. You might have noticed that they have indeed been taking ideas from the original and either implemented them or put them on the road map.
And like I have already pointed out, just because it was in Planetside 1 doesn't mean it belongs in Planetside 2. Anything that is in the game, or is to be added to the game, has to be there on its own merit. No matter which source it might stem from.

I know you ment well when writing this, that you just don't want the veterans' voices to go unheard, but the best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to stay constructive, be in a continuous dialogue with the developers, be respectful and make sure that PSU will contienue to be THE place for the voice of the veterans to be heard for years to come. For how can a voice be heard if no one is listening?

I am with you. We really have to stay constructive. But pointing to a mechanic which known from ps1 is not less constructive than suggesting something totaly new and experimental. There are often good reasons to suggest a mechanic we all already know that it will work. The main problem is that the devs conseqently reject every idea that is know from ps1. Also if they have no better alternatives. By the way, i am not dogmatic. I am open for every idea. This game shouldnt be like ps1. It should be way better. But atm there are a lot of problems without a proper solution and the game is already 3 months after release. Maybe it is time to get rid of experiments and implement something wr know it will work.

[Ironside]

Ps1 will always be used by vets as their reference point when looking at ps2, the original is always used as a yardstick when looking at a successor whether it be a game, a car or whatever,That's human nature.

We all know the devs made glaring mistakes in this game, they get highlighted in these forums all the time, the biggest being the rush to early release, we can't change that now and people come here to offer criticism, solutions, ideas and even bitch but we all have one thing in common.....we care about the game and that's why we do it.

I respect bloodsworth and a handful of others, they say what they're thinking and don't sugar coat it.

Hamma by all means make your point but to try and bully someone into submission because you don't like their posts/point of view is wrong, look at your critical video you made a few weeks ago, lots of references in that about ps1.

Whether the devs like it or not ps1 did exist and did a lot of things better than this bastardized PS/BF offering and the community will point this out.

[Hamma]

lol quick

too true

If by too true you mean completely false then hellz yes.

[Bags]

If by too true you mean completely false then hellz yes.

I didn't realize that he said "Hamma at"

I thought he said "Community at..."

I don't watch your posts enough to know your opinion at each stage. :D

[ChipMHazard]

I am with you. We really have to stay constructive. But pointing to a mechanic which known from ps1 is not less constructive than suggesting something totaly new and experimental. There are often good reasons to suggest a mechanic we all already know that it will work. The main problem is that the devs conseqently reject every idea that is know from ps1. Also if they have no better alternatives. By the way, i am not dogmatic. I am open for every idea. This game shouldnt be like ps1. It should be way better. But atm there are a lot of problems without a proper solution and the game is already 3 months after release. Maybe it is time to get rid of experiments and implement something wr know it will work.

Ah, but no one, at least no one of relevance, has stated that because something was to be found in Planetside 1 it should therefore not be included in Planetside 2.
Should be noted that just because something worked in Planetside 1 doesn't mean that it will work in Planetside 2, no harm in the devs discussing and trying it out though.
Oh, they do not reject every idea that stems from Planetside 1, that's just false.
Aye, the game does still suffer from a lot of issues, some of the solutions might indeed be found in the original but make no mistake anything taken from the original and put into the sequel would be an expriment in on itself. A precedent isn't an universal constant truth.


Hamma by all means make your point but to try and bully someone into submission because you don't like their posts/point of view is wrong, look at your critical video you made a few weeks ago, lots of references in that about ps1.

Whether the devs like it or not ps1 did exist and did a lot of things better than this bastardized PS/BF offering and the community will point this out.

Not what this is about.

Aye, there will be some that point that out, there will be those who partially agree and there will be those that disagree. All of these aforementioned people make up the community here, not just one group.

[Hamma]

Another thing you guys need to remember is railing on PlanetSide 1 constantly isn't going to all of a sudden reveal some massive crazy idea the PlanetSide 2 developers don't already know about. I've had the pleasure of talking to many developers of the game at length including Smed himself. Heck Malorn works on the team now and many of us read his breakdown on PlanetSide 1. There are TONS of folks working on this team that either worked on, or played PlanetSide 1 extensively.

They are all well aware of what PlanetSide 1 offered and the systems it contained. What is being brought up is not a magical solution that all of a sudden reveals itself.

I'm not asking everyone to forget the game but you have to realize that the game is not forgotten. SOE knows what was in the game and what will work in the new game. If you do think something from PS1 will work in it by all means post it, in a constructive way.

[Mox]

Then you have an alternative definition of fanboy. To take an active part in a community devoted to a certain "thing" does not a fan(boy) make. You have to be enthusiasticly devoted to something in order to be a fan(boy). As we all know, when you start adding feelings into the mix that's when one starts becoming irrational and unconstructive.

Following my definition you are even the bigger fanboy than me or dragonskin. :eek: But Hamma still rules us all! (over 30k of comments) :D

However, for me being a fan is nothing negative. Strong commitment to a thing is positive. But to avoid further confusion and excitement i changed the term "fanboy" into "fan" which should foster less negative feelings.

[ChipMHazard]

Following my definition you are even the bigger fanboy than me or dragonskin. :eek: But Hamma still rules us all! (over 30k of comments) :D

However, for me being a fan is nothing negative. Strong commitment to a thing is positive. But to avoid further confusion and excitement i changed the term "fanboy" into "fan" which should foster less negative feelings.

Uh aye, no one here can beat him on the almighty post count.

Aye, by your definition being a fan(boy) isn't something that should be viewed as negative. Of course the definition, AFAIK, of fan is still that of someone who is enthusiastically devoted to something, well it might vary with either word but still. Of course being enthusiastic can mean anything really.
I'm afraid that the confusion might remain, although I now know what you mean.:p

[MrBloodworth]

A fan enjoys a game and can talk objectively, if not slightly biased. Vanu suck.

A Fanboy hears no wrongs, and sees no flaw in anything.

A hater comes to a forums with no other reason than to talk trash. Normally about a game they once enjoyed.

[Crator]

I'm not asking everyone to forget the game but you have to realize that the game is not forgotten. SOE knows what was in the game and what will work in the new game. If you do think something from PS1 will work in it by all means post it, in a constructive way.

It's the way you said it then that's offensive to some of the forum community. The thread title itself suggests, "Everyone, please forget PS1"...

[Dragonskin]

A fan enjoys a game and can talk objectively, if not slightly biased. Vanu suck.

A Fanboy hears no wrongs, and sees no flaw in anything.

A hater comes to a forums with no other reason than to talk trash. Normally about a game they once enjoyed.

Yea, those are pretty much how I understand the terms.

Troll is now anyones guess. The term gets thrown around so much that its lost its meaning.

[SGTHACK]

This is a mute discussion, since there is a room for PS1. For myself, I pass on threads started comparing the two games.

[Hamma]

Fine I'll rename the thread then. :rofl:

[RodenyC]

With a signature like that, why are you even on a PS2 forum? If you hate the game that much, move on to something else and save yourself the aggravation. Life is too short.

On that same note, could we just have this thread locked and move on?

Sorry thought this was a Planetside forum.Not a only Planetside 2 forum.And believe me I never would had thought that would be my signature as much as I was excited about PS2.As much as I brag to my clan mates,friends,and any gamer I know about PS2 and how it was gonna be a great game.Even letting friends use some of my old accounts so they can try out PS1 and see what PS2 would be like.And after what has happened with PS2 all I hear from people is when is PS1 going F2P? As well I have moved on.The only thing I am waiting for is PS1 F2P and while I am waiting I am playing other games that satisfy my need.

[Figment]

False.



If you have a good case, nobody can argue that its a dead feature.

Yet they do...


Hamma, as long as we're at it, can we put a ban on "this is a new game"-line of argumentation as well? Because that's even more stupid. Probably good to have a moratorium on "the new audience"-line of argumentation as well if it isn't backed up with statistics of in game players.

[Ghoest9]

Fine I'll rename the thread then. :rofl:


Im disappointed.

We need to stop using PS1 as a constant reference point.
Constructive or not.

If you cant explain a problem without referencing PS1 then you probably dont understand the problem enough to waste our time talking about it.

[Tatwi]

This is a mute discussion, since there is a room for PS1. For myself, I pass on threads started comparing the two games.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moot

1
: a deliberative assembly primarily for the administration of justice; especially : one held by the freemen of an Anglo-Saxon community
2
obsolete : argument, discussion

Moot. :groovy:

[Dragonskin]

Yet they do...


Hamma, as long as we're at it, can we put a ban on "this is a new game"-line of argumentation as well? Because that's even more stupid. Probably good to have a moratorium on "the new audience"-line of argumentation as well if it isn't backed up with statistics of in game players.

It's a new game because it's Planetside 2. New mechanics, redesigned continents, new weapons, new class system. It's the Planetside IP in a new engine with new things.


And it is a new audience... unless Smedley is lying.

"GamesBeat: How many of the people in your player base came from the original PlanetSide, do you think, and how many are brand new to Sony Online?

Smedley: I would say it’s maybe 10 percent people who played the original. Another 20 percent have played our games before. The rest are new — 70 percent of the people coming in are new to our business"


Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2012/12/12/sony-online-entertainment-chief-says-planetside-2-online-frag-game-is-a-smashing-success-interview/#135Fvu00JRl2Mr52.99

So he says roughly 70% of the people coming to Planetside 2 are new. 20% have played SOE games in general and 10% are PS1 vets.

90% of Planetside 2 population is new to Planetside. That's a new audience. Even if 30% played PS1 before.. that's 70% new audience. That's still a new audience.

[Crator]

And it is a new audience... unless Smedley is lying.

Agreed, I believe it is a new audience (majority of players). They did well using various advertisements. The real question then becomes, how is player retention? Does the new audience's view jive with the previous fan base from the older game? Things such as this should help the developer to move forward to a more prosperous future with the IP.

[Figment]

Dragonskin, it's an example of how people fail to use it to argument anything constructively in relation to what system needs to be used. Nobody argues it's a new game, however, pople are quick to make really presumptious remarks. People simply fail to use the population argument properly, because they simply state there are new people. But most people that mention it instantly start drawing conclusions (that happen to support their side of the argument as some sort of statistical fact that makes any opposition to it moot).

Based on what? Wishful thinking?


1. New game doesn't mean everything NEEDS to be different. The best combination of systems must be used. PS2 being a "new game" isn't an argument to NOT use a PS1 system. Yet this is frequently used as such.

If we look at the CoD series, each new game uses almost the exact same rules and mechanics. The same can be said for the early C&C games and spin-off games like Dune2000, or the first games in the Commandoes series. So no, a new game does NOT mean new mechanics.

2. When a new audience is mentioned, it is usualy followed by a dozen or so random assumptions about "new playerbase WANTING different things". Patently false statement that isn't backed up by any surveys and is based entirely on assumptions. And considering the huge drop in PS2 playerbase, one cannot argue the current systems that were "designed for what the new playerbase wants" actually worked to achieve that. Without even contesting that this is what they wanted. And EVEN IF it would be what they wanted ahead of time, that doesn't mean it's what they actually want or the game needs.

The "new playerbase" is used completely wrong in argumentation and is never backed up by any evidence. In contrast, if you bring up evidence of the contrary with actual surveys, your surveys are always questioned and assumed non-representative. Not having surveys to reference at all however, is considered "fact" by these same people.

Another thing is that people assume that x% is new to the game means that those x% want something entirely different from PS1 players and that they have completely different demands and perspectives. Which I'd like to see you or Smedley back up such statements with facts. In fact, I'd say that even the PS1 crowd is diverse.




But just because they're new, doesn't mean they have a good idea of what they need or want, or that they wouldn't want PS1 mechanics or systems. Especially not since this is a new gaming experience to them. I'm even doubtful if they have expectations on subsystems of the game prior to entering the game, beyond having been promised it will have a massive scale.

[NotTheMomma]

Hamma's right. And, I'll raise him one and say that this forum is a virtual wake for Planetside 1, day after day. As a former hardcore Shadowbane guild & nation leader, I understand. But, SOE needs to put PS1 in the ground so that people can get through the grieving process and move on.

[Xaine]

Respectfully, Planetside 1 had a meta game. An overall stratergy and a reason to fight on a grander scale.

There is NOTHING even remotely close to any of that in Planetside 2.

We didn't play PS1 all those years for the amazing graphics, or gunplay, or dated UI. It was the meta game that made PS1 great.

PS2 has none of it.

I can't see a reason why PS2 doesn't have it. Honestly, it boggles my mind.

Either the devs haven't thought of it, they can't put it in, or don't want to.

Pick one of the above reasons, they're all pathetic.

After 4 months, we should have something.

[Hamma]

It's a new game because it's Planetside 2. New mechanics, redesigned continents, new weapons, new class system. It's the Planetside IP in a new engine with new things.


And it is a new audience... unless Smedley is lying.

"GamesBeat: How many of the people in your player base came from the original PlanetSide, do you think, and how many are brand new to Sony Online?

Smedley: I would say it’s maybe 10 percent people who played the original. Another 20 percent have played our games before. The rest are new — 70 percent of the people coming in are new to our business"


Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2012/12/12/sony-online-entertainment-chief-says-planetside-2-online-frag-game-is-a-smashing-success-interview/#135Fvu00JRl2Mr52.99

So he says roughly 70% of the people coming to Planetside 2 are new. 20% have played SOE games in general and 10% are PS1 vets.

90% of Planetside 2 population is new to Planetside. That's a new audience. Even if 30% played PS1 before.. that's 70% new audience. That's still a new audience.

Interesting - hadn't seen that!

[Hamma]

Respectfully, Planetside 1 had a meta game. An overall stratergy and a reason to fight on a grander scale.

There is NOTHING even remotely close to any of that in Planetside 2.

We didn't play PS1 all those years for the amazing graphics, or gunplay, or dated UI. It was the meta game that made PS1 great.

PS2 has none of it.

I can't see a reason why PS2 doesn't have it. Honestly, it boggles my mind.

Either the devs haven't thought of it, they can't put it in, or don't want to.

Pick one of the above reasons, they're all pathetic.

After 4 months, we should have something.

Nobody can dispute this, not even me. Why we haven't seen a higher priority on this I'll never understand.

[camycamera]

the only time that PS1 should be brought up in the PS2 subsection would be for suggestions for PS2 of things that worked in PS1, and that how they could be implemented into PS2; how it would work. i hate it when i see threads that say"where are the BFRs? they were in PS1, so why aren't they in PS2?" (jokes, but you know what i mean; it has been mentioned time and time again in this thread)

[bpostal]

...but you have to realize that the game is not forgotten...

I think we all know what you're talking about on an intellectual level, but on a personal, and rather more emotional level, it feels like it(Planetside) has been.

This is especially true on the official forums and redditside, where a vast majority of players have no knowledge of Planetside and it's systems.

[Xaine]

Nobody can dispute this, not even me. Why we haven't seen a higher priority on this I'll never understand.

Well this is the point, isn't it.

I'm not sure you can blame people for comparing the game to PS1 when they're leaving out MAJOR features that made people play the game for 10 years.

Honestly, if there was one thing I thought they'd take from PS1 into PS2, it was the meta game. It was completely set in my mind that they wouldn't be (arrogant, dumb - insert your own adjective here. I'm trying to think of a less aggressive one, but...) to leave out the one thing that really made Planetside good.

Honestly, it blows my mind.

I don't think they've even said anything about it, either?

[Chaff]

.
We ALL should be locked up in a mental ward somewhere....all this over a game ? Amusing. Or as Spock would say, "fascinating".

That's my analogy - Star Trek (the original series). The special effects we're abysmal, the props & sets were sometimes below Land of The Lost & Sleestacks.....

MY Point ? IF you grew up with the origianl Star Trek series ..... you were destined to forever love Scotty, O'Houra, Bones, Spock, Kirk, Capt Pike,......

A huge percentage of PS1 vets want KIrk & Spock back ..... even if they both live to be 150 .... and have Grampa nutsacks that hang to their ankles. It's nostalgia, loyalty, & the power of first-Love.

Remeber your first real girlfriend ? Especially if it was YOU who broke up .... only later to delude yourself into thinking you regreted it ?
There was a reason you broke up with her. It's too easy to forget the negatives ..... after you leave .... the nostalgia & positives remain. For the most part, it's good that life is this way. In PS2 discussions, it can induce hair pulling when not put in check.
.

the origianl Star Trek series - This is PS1
.

[Rahabib]

Well this is the point, isn't it.

I'm not sure you can blame people for comparing the game to PS1 when they're leaving out MAJOR features that made people play the game for 10 years.

Honestly, if there was one thing I thought they'd take from PS1 into PS2, it was the meta game. It was completely set in my mind that they wouldn't be (arrogant, dumb - insert your own adjective here. I'm trying to think of a less aggressive one, but...) to leave out the one thing that really made Planetside good.

Honestly, it blows my mind.

I don't think they've even said anything about it, either?

Theres not many who will dispute the lack of metagame elements. However, they know we want more - harping on what PS1 had isnt helping. Instead we need to layout what we (reasonably) expect and then we need to band together to accomplish that. If you ask for lattice, it aint happening, move on - thats what Hamma is getting at. If you want the shop to change out all its weapons for something else, it aint happening.

Make a well thought out post of the issues and what you would like to see happen. If you have already dont that, well good. Its a shame the community doesn't come together more on well fleshed out solutions.

Beyond that, theres nothing else you can do. The devs are listening, they just may not like what some people are saying. I know I have been ignored on both forums, it happens to everyone.

[Xaine]

Theres not many who will dispute the lack of metagame elements. However, they know we want more - harping on what PS1 had isnt helping. Instead we need to layout what we (reasonably) expect and then we need to band together to accomplish that. If you ask for lattice, it aint happening, move on - thats what Hamma is getting at. If you want the shop to change out all its weapons for something else, it aint happening.

Make a well thought out post of the issues and what you would like to see happen. If you have already dont that, well good. Its a shame the community doesn't come together more on well fleshed out solutions.

Beyond that, theres nothing else you can do. The devs are listening, they just may not like what some people are saying. I know I have been ignored on both forums, it happens to everyone.

Planetside 2 is supposed to be the evolution of Planetside 1.

When Planetside 2 lacks a feature that made Planetside 1 the great game it was, I think we're entitled to a bit of harping.

I don't think the devs are listening. Or if they are, its very selective. Its not as if the lack of a meta is a small, underground issue that they may not know about. Its the one thing dragging the game down at the moment.

People have been SCREAMING for a reason to fight since last year.

Not only has nothing been done, but I haven't seen a reply on the matter either.

So the whole community interaction "we're listening to you" is fantastic when it suits them, but this very old, very tired, very dead horse has been flogged for a while now with no comment on it.

Apparently new helmets are more important.

Again, blows my mind.

[ChipMHazard]

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/411477/scrubs-evil-eye-scene-o.gif
Besides making constructive posts about the metagame, or lack thereof, we of course need to keep riding their asses about it.
Make it impossible for them to even try and ignore us lads!

[Rahabib]

...
I don't think the devs are listening. Or if they are, its very selective. ...
you are right. it is selective. If they like listening to cool jazz, make your music cool and jazzy if you want to be heard. Man I am on a role with the analogies today :) My point is, I think a lot of people and threads will get more attention if they just change the tone a bit. Certainly don't give up though.

edit: FYI trying to be constructive and thought out hasn't worked for me either, but railing isn't going to help. T-Ray already said he ignores whining.

[Rahabib]

Besides making constructive posts about the metagame, or lack thereof, we of course need to keep riding their asses about it.
Make it impossible for them to even try and ignore us lads!
exactly. keep posting your concerns. try new avenues (get a twitter account?) band together with some solid DOABLE solutions.

[ChipMHazard]

you are right. it is selective. If they like listening to cool jazz, make your music cool and jazzy if you want to be heard. Man I am on a role with the analogies today :) My point is, I think a lot of people and threads will get more attention if they just change the tone a bit.

I would be careful around those, an analogy ønce bit my sister. Nø realli! She was Karving her initials on it with the sharpened end of an interspace tøøthbrush given her by Svenge... I, uhm, lost my train of thought.

Ah, yes. It's all in the delivery::p

[Mietz]

Well, enjoy your echo chamber then.

[ChipMHazard]

Well, enjoy your echo chamber then.

Oh I do. Only way to get an intelligent conversation nowadays.

[Xaine]

Besides making constructive posts about the metagame, or lack thereof, we of course need to keep riding their asses about it.
Make it impossible for them to even try and ignore us lads!


you are right. it is selective. If they like listening to cool jazz, make your music cool and jazzy if you want to be heard. Man I am on a role with the analogies today :) My point is, I think a lot of people and threads will get more attention if they just change the tone a bit.

I and several other people have made constructive threads on the meta game, both here and on the official forums. My Jazz was silky smooth and beautifully written.

However, when you and many other people makes these posts and the issues aren't acknowledged, addressed, acted or even commented upon by the people you're directing them at...

Its probably going to make you less likely to think 'Oh well, even though they're ignoring the glaring issue at hand, i'm sure there is a perfectly reasonable and logical explanation why after four months and several nicely worded posts later, nothing has been said or done. '

I think you may understand why people are less likely to be nice about it almost half a year later. :)

[ChipMHazard]

I think you may understand why people are less likely to be nice about it almost half a year later. :)

Heh, aye that I do.

[Babyfark McGeez]

I agree that discussions about "planetside 1 going F2P" should be held in the appropriate forum (likewise sorry if i contributed to derailing the "hacking" thread in that manner), and that just saying "PS1 was way better" is not constructive.

BUT if this supposed to be about ideas for Planetside 2 that draw inspiration from the prequel, then i can only disagree. Remember how we drew comparisions to PS1 for numerous issues with PS2 that actually got considered and implemented (improving base defense and sundy deploy radius are just two that come up my mind right now).
Enter/Exit animations, Sanctuaries and alike are the same thing basically, an idea to increase the immersion drawing inspiration from the prequel.

Guess what i want to say is keep it open minded on here, if someone derails a thread then just say so and slap'em.

[Rahabib]

I and several other people have made constructive threads on the meta game, both here and on the official forums. My Jazz was silky smooth and beautifully written.
...
I think you may understand why people are less likely to be nice about it almost half a year later. :)

anyone else have Yanni playing in their heads right now? no?! uh me either...

anyway, I certainly understand the frustration. I have been down that road many times with other games. I can say they are listening a bit more than others, but I do acknowledge the fact they have been silent on the glaring metagame issues.

However, I have yet to see anything specific other than continent locks and home continents - which IMO is not really the metagame. They have said they will do both at some point (locks in the road map). Resources they have said they are changing, but they haven't said to what. That in my opinion is the major contributer to metagame that is missing. Right now your battles are meaningless because they do nothing to hinder the opponent.

But that a topic for another thread (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=873182#post873182)

[Babyfark McGeez]

After skimming through the pages a bit more i must wonder what the fuss is even about lol.
Sounds like simple cases of derailing and rageposts that bothered you there, which i didn't really see that often on here. I can only recall one or two guys who were absolutely not constructive with their threads, and everyone could see that.

[Death2All]

Hamma, you're under the impression that everyone who brings up PS1 in a discussion always does so in a way that's immature, irrational or unnecessary. That's not the case. I lurk these boards quite frequently and more often than not the ones who are being immature, irrational and unecessary are the ones defending Planetside 2.

The point of this point isn't whether or not PS1 is better than PS2 or vice versa, that is neither here or there. The point is, is that you have the wrong impression when people bring up points or criticisms about PS2 in contrast to PS1.

You changed the thread's title, which is good, however I only think you did it because you realized you were wrong in first place. I understand that PS2 saved your asses. It generated a lot more traffic to the website than ever before. I'm sure you don't want bickering on the forums amongst PS1 vets vs PS2 players on your board, as you feel it gives a bad impression. However, I think putting a cap on what's allowed to be discussed and what's not allowed to be discussed gives off an even worse impression. You've been increasingly more dictator-like since the release of PS2.

The temporary removal of polls, the banning of players who don't say things that you quite appreciate. I understand that you're the admin of this site and of course, you can do whatever you like. But I think for the sake of website (it being the most popular one, save for the official website) you're better off letting people discuss whatever they want, for better or worse.

Once more to reiterate, I understand the gripe that you should make a constructive point when referencing PS1, however, I don't think this was ever an issue. I think you should instead do a better job at moderating the people who instantly dismiss anyone who references PS1. That's the bigger issue. Time and time again I've seen well written, constructive posts regarding PS1 only to be shot down non-PS1 vets. "LOL TAKE OFF UR ROSE TINTED GLASSES YOU FUCKING BITTER VET, GO PLAY YOUR DEAD GAME".

Seriously

[CrazEpharmacist]

Once more to reiterate, I understand the gripe that you should make a constructive point when referencing PS1, however, I don't think this was ever an issue. I think you should instead do a better job at moderating the people who instantly dismiss anyone who references PS1. That's the bigger issue. Time and time again I've seen well written, constructive posts regarding PS1 only to be shot down non-PS1 vets. "LOL TAKE OFF UR ROSE TINTED GLASSES YOU FUCKING BITTER VET, GO PLAY YOUR DEAD GAME".

Seriously

This is accurate. Great post good sir. Saw you on PS1 the other night if I'm not mistaken.

[Hamma]

I did not change the threads title because I felt I was wrong. I changed it because everyone is bitching and of course not reading my thread anyway they would rather just assume I don't want people to talk about PlanetSide 1 at all and live in a world where they pretend the developers don't know what PlanetSide 1 was and designed the new game in a vacuum.

Your entire post proves you have no clue what my intentions are and only read what you wanted to read.

[Hamma]

I understand that PS2 saved your asses. It generated a lot more traffic to the website than ever before

Saved my ass from what exactly? Lots of free time? :lol:

The temporary removal of polls, the banning of players who don't say things that you quite appreciate. I understand that you're the admin of this site and of course, you can do whatever you like. But I think for the sake of website (it being the most popular one, save for the official website) you're better off letting people discuss whatever they want, for better or worse.

I don't ban people for saying things I don't agree with, I ban them for being idiots.

I think you should instead do a better job at moderating the people who instantly dismiss anyone who references PS1. That's the bigger issue.

We will have new moderator nominations soon.

[CrazEpharmacist]

Saved my ass from what exactly? Lots of free time? :lol:



I don't ban people for saying things I don't agree with, I ban them for being idiots.



We will have new moderator nominations soon.

Good stuff but he definitely is right about the bitter PS1 vet comments. I have seen this type response here, official forums, and on reddit many times.

[xWarMachine]

typically I just lurk on this site, and post regularly on the official forums..

I must say this thread is the best troll thread I have seen in some time... 10/10

First time poster and last time poster. I guess ill continue to waste my breath discussing what is best for the game on the official forum since we are so policed here.

As a side note creating discussions like this furnishes no new ideas for PS2 nor is it constructive in any manner toward the improvement of PS2.

cheers

[Hamma]

Typical response from an Enclave member. Enjoy the more heavily policed official forums. ;)

[Crator]

I did not change the threads title because I felt I was wrong. I changed it because everyone is bitching and of course not reading my thread anyway they would rather just assume I don't want people to talk about PlanetSide 1 at all and live in a world where they pretend the developers don't know what PlanetSide 1 was and designed the new game in a vacuum.

Your entire post proves you have no clue what my intentions are and only read what you wanted to read.

Honestly, just admit you were pissed off when you wrote the OP and didn't construct your words properly. Or you really do want people to not mention PS1 at all. In which case doesn't make much sense because there are plenty of good mechanics from PS1 that could be done in PS2.

Original thread title: Time to let go of PlanetSide 1

References in OP that says to stop talking about PS1:

Every time this community brings up PlanetSide 1 in an argument or statement about PlanetSide 2 you make this community less and less relevant. PlanetSide 1 was ten years ago, we now have PlanetSide 2 and this forum in particular focuses on PlanetSide 2.

In this sentence every single time someone mentions PS1 this site is less relevant. How does it make it less relevant? There are plenty of great references to PS1 mechanics when talking about PS2. Typically posts referencing PS1 are mentioning mechanics that worked due to population density which is relevant in both PS1 and PS2.

PlanetSide 2 is not PlanetSide 1. We all wanted PlanetSide 2 and now that it's out we cannot stop talking about PlanetSide 1. It was a great game, in 2003. It's now 2013 and we have PlanetSide 2. Let's focus on that game and stop dwelling on the past because it's gone and as Smed said almost nobody is logged into it and it will remain that way even if it's added to the membership.

Here you say let's focus on PS2 instead of talking about PS1. Most of the time people are talking about PS2 but use references to PS1 to depict scenarios that you see in both PS1 and PS2.

[Hamma]

I'm saying the site becomes less relevant because we all know, and the devs all know the systems if PlanetSide 1 already why rail on them constantly.

Honestly, just admit you were pissed off when you wrote the OP and didn't construct your words properly. Or you really do want people to not mention PS1 at all. In which case doesn't make much sense because there are plenty of good mechanics from PS1 that could be done in PS2.

I will admit I suck at communicating what I mean often times, Just ask Jennyboo. ;)

[ChipMHazard]

Hamma, you're under the impression that everyone who brings up PS1 in a discussion always does so in a way that's immature, irrational or unnecessary. That's not the case. I lurk these boards quite frequently and more often than not the ones who are being immature, irrational and unecessary are the ones defending Planetside 2.

The point of this point isn't whether or not PS1 is better than PS2 or vice versa, that is neither here or there. The point is, is that you have the wrong impression when people bring up points or criticisms about PS2 in contrast to PS1.

You changed the thread's title, which is good, however I only think you did it because you realized you were wrong in first place. I understand that PS2 saved your asses. It generated a lot more traffic to the website than ever before. I'm sure you don't want bickering on the forums amongst PS1 vets vs PS2 players on your board, as you feel it gives a bad impression. However, I think putting a cap on what's allowed to be discussed and what's not allowed to be discussed gives off an even worse impression. You've been increasingly more dictator-like since the release of PS2.

The temporary removal of polls, the banning of players who don't say things that you quite appreciate. I understand that you're the admin of this site and of course, you can do whatever you like. But I think for the sake of website (it being the most popular one, save for the official website) you're better off letting people discuss whatever they want, for better or worse.

Once more to reiterate, I understand the gripe that you should make a constructive point when referencing PS1, however, I don't think this was ever an issue. I think you should instead do a better job at moderating the people who instantly dismiss anyone who references PS1. That's the bigger issue. Time and time again I've seen well written, constructive posts regarding PS1 only to be shot down non-PS1 vets. "LOL TAKE OFF UR ROSE TINTED GLASSES YOU FUCKING BITTER VET, GO PLAY YOUR DEAD GAME".

Seriously

So you claim that Hamma is claiming that everyone who posts PS1 related topics are immature yet you have the audacity to claim that it is more often those who post to "defend" planetside 2 that are immature.

If that was what he ment when he wrote the OP then I would agree, I do not think that is the case so I do not agree. Most who bring up features found in PS1 do so constructively. If I can see that with my lowish activity then I see no reason as to why Hamma would think any differently. Still a reminder to those who do not seem able to do constructively can indeed do more damage than good.

Are you really going to call out Hamma as being a sellout? Really? If there are any fights between PS1 vets and new PS2 players then it is mostly certainly because of people who share your sentiment or be it reverse.
I do find it interesting that you have the gaul to claim that Hamma's supposed censorship is an act of dictatorship while offering your own actual dictatorial view in the last part of your post on censorship of anyone who "[...]instantly dismiss anyone who references PS1." The sheer hypocrisy.
The thread isn't about what people can or cannot write, but how people should and should not write what they want to write. Want to write something about a feature from PS1 being what's needed for PS2? Then do so without just making the claim that it should be there just because it was from PS1. The PS2 forum isn't about PS1 per se, a certain amount of comparison and contrasting is inevitable.

Again, not what this thread is about. Also why have a PS1 forum if everyone is just going to post PS1 topics in the PS2 forum? Subsections are there for a reason.

Hypocrisy. Also if someone tries to shoot down a constructive post about something from PS1 that could be added to PS2 in order to improve it then by all means tell them. If you do not indulge them then there is little they can do to derail it further without having a mod take notice.

And for the love of Pete... Stop it with the vet vs non-vet rubbish, are you trying to start a civil war? If there is one thing I do so detest it's an us and them mentality. I fail to see why this can't simply be a Planetside community, period.

To reiterate, this thread isn't about not allowing people to post about PS1 and everything that entails. It's about some people being unconstructive when making comparisons, suggestions etc. Do you feel like you're being unjustly focused on in regards to posting PS1 related topics? Fair enough, I can see why you would. In hindsight the thread might have been better recieved if Hamma had made it clear that being constructive is something we must all strive to be at all times... Well as often as possible, and especiallly when it comes to treating our guests with respect. You don't have to agree with someone, it would be boring if that was the case, but you do have to respect them.

[Jennyboo]

I will admit I suck at communicating what I mean often times, Just ask Jennyboo. ;)

^ This

[BlazingSun]

Planetside 1 had me entertained for at least 3 years. Planetside 2 failed to keep my interest for even 3 months (much less in fact). So much about "which game is/was better?".

That being said, referencing PS1 seems to be pretty pointless, because:

a) The devs don't have much experience with the first game (if at all) to begin with. (A "I played and loved Planetside 1" probably translates to a BR10 character with 500 kills at best. You think you know the game? You don't.)
b) They didn't really implement the elements and ideas that made PS1 a good game and made some grave design mistakes, some of which are very unlikely that they will undertake the effort of fully correcting them (like the bad base designs etc.). The best you can now hope for are some half-baked correction attempts like the tunnels in techplants - a bad attempt by the way. The game will have to be renamed Prostheses 2 in the near future.

PS1 holds the solution to quite a few problems of PS2; You keep referencing to that and end up with ... something different which still doesn't work. So why bother?

Sorry for sounding a bit harsh. :groovy:

[Hamma]

The thread isn't about what people can or cannot write, but how people should and should not write what they want to write. Want to write something about a feature from PS1 being what's needed for PS2? Then do so without just making the claim that it should be there just because it was from PS1. The PS2 forum isn't about PS1 per se, a certain amount of comparison and contrasting is inevitable.

Thank you, again. :D

[Hamma]

^ This

See! She will also tell you that I never admit I'm wrong even when I am. :lol:

[Death2All]

I did not change the threads title because I felt I was wrong. I changed it because everyone is bitching and of course not reading my thread anyway they would rather just assume I don't want people to talk about PlanetSide 1 at all and live in a world where they pretend the developers don't know what PlanetSide 1 was and designed the new game in a vacuum.
.

I think there's more truth to that sentiment than you and a lot of others would like to admit.


Saved my ass from what exactly? Lots of free time? :lol:

Saved your asses in the sense that it brought a lot more traffic to the site, gave you guy's a lot more opportunities (going to SOE, etc.)



I don't ban people for saying things I don't agree with, I ban them for being idiots. But what exactly do you construe as "being idiots"? Is it saying something you don't necessarily agree with? I know that I consider some people idiots when they have a different way of thinking than I do, even thought in actuality they might be an intelligent person.

I think that "banning people for being idiots" is exactly what's wrong with some of the moderation on this board. There's a few people in particular I can think of who were "PS2 nay sayers" who are now banned. I've yet to see some of the most frequent off topic, non-constructive and general douchebag posters banned off this board.

/tinfoil hat off


But seriously, if anything, PS1 discussion, constructive or not would probably steer the game in a better direction than it's currently headed now.

[Jennyboo]

See! She will also tell you that I never admit I'm wrong even when I am. :lol:

^ this

[ChipMHazard]

Planetside 1 had me entertained for at least 3 years. Planetside 2 failed to keep my interest for even 3 months (much less in fact). So much about "which game is/was better?".

That being said, referencing PS1 seems to be pretty pointless, because:

a) The devs don't have much experience with the first game (if at all) to begin with. (A "I played and loved Planetside 1" probably translates to a BR10 character with 500 kills at best. You think you know the game? You don't.)
b) They didn't really implement the elements and ideas that made PS1 a good game and made some grave design mistakes, some of which are very unlikely that they will undertake the effort of fully correcting them (like the bad base designs etc.). The best you can now hope for are some half-baked correction attempts like the tunnels in techplants - a bad attempt by the way. The game will have to be renamed Prostheses 2 in the near future.

PS1 holds the solution to quite a few problems of PS2; You keep referencing to that and end up with ... something different which still doesn't work. So why bother?

Sorry for sounding a bit harsh. :groovy:

I do so very much hope you're wrong in this respect. I hope that SOE is able to concede their design choices and start testing out the many, many great ideas that have been posted by our vets.
I would be lying if I didn't feel like the devs are just skirting around the actual issues and instead adding in what they know that they can do... Playing it safe as it were.
I do hope that they are working on many community ideas like revamped base designs, metagaming, better definition of vehicle roles, more infantry friendly maps etc. I doesn't seem likely that I will be rejoining players ingame until after the current road map has run its course.


I think that "banning people for being idiots" is exactly what's wrong with some of the moderation on this board. There's a few people in particular I can think of who were "PS2 nay sayers" who are now banned. I've yet to see some of the most frequent off topic, non-constructive and general douchebag posters banned off this board.

/tinfoil hat off

But seriously, if anything, PS1 discussion, constructive or not would probably steer the game in a better direction than it's currently headed now.

Since when is banning people for being "idiots" a bad thing. Bear in mind that I define idiots as people who posts only to cause trouble, who are locked into making certain trolling posts/threads and people who are rude and insulting for no apparent reason. Perhaps you should check how they posted their messages, I doubt it was because they were PS2 nay sayers. I'm a PS2 nay sayer and the only thing that's going to get be a ban is my incessant unconstructive nature when it comes to posting joke threads. I know how to word my criticism. Want a better example? Take Figment, sorry Figment, you would be hard pressed to find a more articulate PS2 critic. I may not agree with a lot of his points, although I have come to agree with more of them over time, but I've always respected his way of stating his points.

Strange thing to state since there's plenty of Planetside 1 discussion going on. The community can't force the developers to do anything, only advice. And advice it does.

[Baneblade]

I think SOE has made it abundantly clear that the best features of PS1 are not welcome in PS2. So in my mind we either accept that as reality or we move on.

[ChipMHazard]

I think SOE has made it abundantly clear that the best features of PS1 are not welcome in PS2. So in my mind we either accept that as reality or we move on.

Be a cold day indeed when people should accept that an mmo can no longer be improved. I will be looking at the post-roadmap plans myself.

[Death2All]

So you claim that Hamma is claiming that everyone who posts PS1 related topics are immature yet you have the audacity to claim that it is more often those who post to "defend" planetside 2 that are immature. Yes.

Are you really going to call out Hamma as being a sellout? Really?

You're jumping to your own conclusions. I never accused him of being a sell out. I do however think that he's not going to bite the hand that feeds. PS2 generated a lot more traffic and activity to the site, naturally he's not going to bash the game. Any criticism is usually very light or cited from another source.

I do find it interesting that you have the gaul to claim that Hamma's supposed censorship is an act of dictatorship while offering your own actual dictatorial view in the last part of your post on censorship of anyone who "[...]instantly dismiss anyone who references PS1." The sheer hypocrisy.

Nothing about my post implied that. If anything, it was supporting Hamma's post, only from a different angle. That the off topic, non-constructive PS2 posting should be dealt with the same as the (for the most part non-existent) off topic, non-constructive PS1 posting.


The thread isn't about what people can or cannot write, but how people should and should not write what they want to write. Want to write something about a feature from PS1 being what's needed for PS2? Then do so without just making the claim that it should be there just because it was from PS1.

But that doesn't happen though. As I said in my post:

Hamma, you're under the impression that everyone who brings up PS1 in a discussion always does so in a way that's immature, irrational or unnecessary. That's not the case. I lurk these boards quite frequently and more often than not the ones who are being immature, irrational and unecessary are the ones defending Planetside 2.

The point of this point isn't whether or not PS1 is better than PS2 or vice versa, that is neither here or there. The point is, is that you have the wrong impression when people bring up points or criticisms about PS2 in contrast to PS1.

I said that it's more than likely the players that defend PS2 that are non-constructive ones, not the PS1 posters.

Again, not what this thread is about. Also why have a PS1 forum if everyone is just going to post PS1 topics in the PS2 forum? Subsections are there for a reason.

They do.

Just because a thread says that "X mechanic worked in Planetside 1 and it should implemented in PS2, here's why:" Doesn't mean it's a PS1 thread. It's still discussing Planetside 2, it's just comparing and contrasting from the two games.

Instead of addressing the point, like a sensible person, you jump to your own conclusions and assume that because someone brings up PS1 and how it functioned better in a paticular area, mechanic, etc. that they must hate PS2. How dare they have the audacity to criticize such a perfect game.

That's the fucking problem.

Hypocrisy. Also if someone tries to shoot down a constructive post about something from PS1 that could be added to PS2 in order to improve it then by all means tell them. If you do not indulge them then there is little they can do to derail it further without having a mod take notice.

Unfrotunately that doesn't happen. Here's what does:

Someone makes a thread comparing and contrasting PS1 and PS2.

Legions of angry PS2 fanboys jump in the thread making off topic, non-constructive posts an insults to the OP for being a bitter vet

The flaming and bashing gets so bad to the point that Hamma has to scold the community for "being idiots" then locks the thread.

That's how nearly every PS1 vs PS2 contrast thread ends up. And it's usually the PS2 players that derail the threads, yet it's the PS1 players that get the blame.




And for the love of Pete... Stop it with the vet vs non-vet rubbish, are you trying to start a civil war? If there is one thing I do so detest it's an us and them mentality. I fail to see why this can't simply be a Planetside community, period.

The problem is Planetside 1 players trying to inform people who've never played the game how it worked. They don't understand how or why the feature would work because they never played the game. Instead of addressing the point they simply dismiss it because "PS1 is dead, that mechanic must have sucked! It shouldn't be in this game!"

Any well thought out argument is drowned out by screams of protest. It's hard to get your point across to people who don't want to hear. And that's the dilemma that exists on this board.

[Death2All]

Since when is banning people for being "idiots" a bad thing. Bear in mind that I define idiots as people who posts only to cause trouble, who are locked into making certain trolling posts/threads and people who are rude and insulting for no apparent reason.

There's nothing wrong with it in that respect. People who post that way should be swiftly banned. But who is posting like that? No one. The people who are getting banned are the ones that Hamma deems "idiots" based on his own beliefs.

The point of the post was "What criteria does someone need to fit in order to be an idiot in Hamma's eyes" not "OMG DON'T BAN PEOPLE"



Perhaps you should check how they posted their messages, I doubt it was because they were PS2 nay sayers.

Regardless of what they may have said, they were met with even or worse opposition on the opposite end. Why were those people not banned if they too were just as nasty and foul as OP? How come only the OP was banned for being "non constructive" when people in the thread were acting just the same or worse? Is it because he defended PS1? Is it because he was "being an idiot"?

It's like playing a game with a kid on the playground constantly changes the rules because he isn't winning.

[Hamma]

Saved your asses in the sense that it brought a lot more traffic to the site, gave you guy's a lot more opportunities (going to SOE, etc.)

This isn't about me. I run this for the community not for opportunity for myself. I get satisfaction out of the community and interacting with them.

[ChipMHazard]

Yes.

You're jumping to your own conclusions. I never accused him of being a sell out. I do however think that he's not going to bite the hand that feeds. PS2 generated a lot more traffic and activity to the site, naturally he's not going to bash the game. Any criticism is usually very light or cited from another source.

Nothing about my post implied that. If anything, it was supporting Hamma's post, only from a different angle. That the off topic, non-constructive PS2 posting should be dealt with the same as the (for the most part non-existent) off topic, non-constructive PS1 posting.


But that doesn't happen though. As I said in my post:

I said that it's more than likely the players that defend PS2 that are non-constructive ones, not the PS1 posters.

They do.

Just because a thread says that "X mechanic worked in Planetside 1 and it should implemented in PS2, here's why:" Doesn't mean it's a PS1 thread. It's still discussing Planetside 2, it's just comparing and contrasting from the two games.

Instead of addressing the point, like a sensible person, you jump to your own conclusions and assume that because someone brings up PS1 and how it functioned better in a paticular area, mechanic, etc. that they must hate PS2. How dare they have the audacity to criticize such a perfect game.

That's the fucking problem.

Unfrotunately that doesn't happen. Here's what does:

Someone makes a thread comparing and contrasting PS1 and PS2.

Legions of angry PS2 fanboys jump in the thread making off topic, non-constructive posts an insults to the OP for being a bitter vet

The flaming and bashing gets so bad to the point that Hamma has to scold the community for "being idiots" then locks the thread.

That's how nearly every PS1 vs PS2 contrast thread ends up. And it's usually the PS2 players that derail the threads, yet it's the PS1 players that get the blame.


The problem is Planetside 1 players trying to inform people who've never played the game how it worked. They don't understand how or why the feature would work because they never played the game. Instead of addressing the point they simply dismiss it because "PS1 is dead, that mechanic must have sucked! It shouldn't be in this game!"

Any well thought out argument is drowned out by screams of protest. It's hard to get your point across to people who don't want to hear. And that's the dilemma that exists on this board.

I see....

Well that constitues a sell out in my book, and that is also a completely faulty claim to make. Hamma has never bashed the game? Apparently we have very different ideas as to what constitutes light criticism.

Oh it very much did. Don't want him to censor one group, then don't ask him to censor another. If we both can agree that both such situations should be avoided equally then I guess that will do.

Oh it most certainly does.

Why don't you just prove your generalization then.

PS1 centered threads are mostly relegated to the PS1 forum.

There's nothing wrong with that, it's also not what this thread is about.

How dare you sir! I never once claimed that to be the case. Being critical of PS2 and hating it are two vastly different things. Something which you should know!

You live in a very selective dimension, only picking up when something happens that goes against your grain. Are you going to claim that there has never been a thread where those that you refer to as vets have "attacked" someone else for making a suggestion that they did not agree with?
I have seen both situations take place in the past, none more often than the other. And really, don't make yourself or any percieved group out as being victims and being falsely accused.
I do believe that most PS1 vs PS2 threads, those that act as nothing more than a direct comparison and subsequently to bash on one of them, end up badly because they are pointless and only serve to divide a community.

So are you once again making a general and sweeping generalization based on nothing? Yes there have been those who have done this, then again there have also been people who were adamant about anything and everything Battlefield related being bad, period. It's funny when it comes down to fools/angry people, they can be found on all sides of a discussion. Not just one.

That's a dilemma that you percieve to be here and it's not something that I can, on most occasions, agree with.

There's nothing wrong with it in that respect. People who post that way should be swiftly banned. But who is posting like that? No one. The people who are getting banned are the ones that Hamma deems "idiots" based on his own beliefs.

The point of the post was "What criteria does someone need to fit in order to be an idiot in Hamma's eyes" not "OMG DON'T BAN PEOPLE"

Regardless of what they may have said, they were met with even or worse opposition on the opposite end. Why were those people not banned if they too were just as nasty and foul as OP? How come only the OP was banned for being "non constructive" when people in the thread were acting just the same or worse? Is it because he defended PS1? Is it because he was "being an idiot"?

It's like playing a game with a kid on the playground constantly changes the rules because he isn't winning.

No one? Have you not seen the posts where people bash each other, insult each other or the devs, demand a dev be fired etc.
Or another mod, depending on how it works here. Of course it's subjective, but his standards aren't as skewed as you make them out to be. Are you seriously under the impression that Hamma is banning people just because he doesn't agree with them?

Oh, stop being an apologist for those who have been banned. If they resorted to insults, slander, profanity etc. Then that was their choice, no one else's. Do you know that those who are guilty of the same, yet who were not nay sayers, haven't been banned?
If someone who starts a thread just to start a fight gets banned then perhaps that's because they started said thread just for that reason. Perhaps it was because they had already accumulated warnings beforehand? Perhaps those who weren't "nay sayers" didn't have as many or any warning beforehand. Did you strike up a conversation with all the involved parties?
There are so many possibilities yet you jumped to the possible conclusion that it's because they preferred PS1. Astounding.

No, it's not. Only those who percieve it as being such. One thing that I have noticed throughout my years on different forums. Those who get banned/warnings far too often start a self-destructive cycle, blaming everyone but themselves for what happened to them.

There are few things as self-destructive as when a person or a group makes themselves out to be the victim, as everything suddenly turns against them.

[ShockFC]

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps/posts/list.m?topic_id=88000027880

I'm just going to leave this here. Post date: 7/12/2011

"How can such a great community of people ruin the sequel of the game that brought us together? The answer to this question is simple: Planetside 2 will NOT be the same as Planetside 1. The Planetside community, i assure you all, will ruin this game if they continue down this track."

Called it.

[Assist]

Unfrotunately that doesn't happen. Here's what does:

Someone makes a thread comparing and contrasting PS1 and PS2.

Legions of angry PS2 fanboys jump in the thread making off topic, non-constructive posts an insults to the OP for being a bitter vet

The flaming and bashing gets so bad to the point that Hamma has to scold the community for "being idiots" then locks the thread.

That's how nearly every PS1 vs PS2 contrast thread ends up. And it's usually the PS2 players that derail the threads, yet it's the PS1 players that get the blame.


I don't agree with your assessment of this at all. All the constructive PS1 posts that reference PS2 are well received on PSU and even on the official forums.
Read through this thread and you see the PS1 vets coming out with attacks on PS2 and anyone who defends PS2. This thread alone proves you wrong, without even having to go to the other threads. There's even someone who brought in the developers experience in PS1, come on.. I mean really?

There's a difference between being a bitter vet and being one of the angry vets who go out of their way to throw a tantrum about every single thing the PS2 dev's do. What they don't realize is that 95% of the people here are PS1 vets, just the really angry ones seem to think they're special and deserve special treatment. The problem is not people who mention PS1, the problem is people who mention PS1 as strictly being better because they said so :P~! Who cares if they feel PS1 is better, that doesn't help PS2 become better in any way.

[Sturmhardt]

Read the previous posts.

I did. Your point?

.sent via phone.

[Death2All]

Who cares if they feel PS1 is better, that doesn't help PS2 become better in any way.

How does that make any sense? PS1 and PS2 are very similar in the sense that they're both MMOFPS games with three factions fighting over territory. The only difference between the the two games are there mechanics. PS1 players try to point out these mechanics and explain how they would work well with PS2, as PS1 had similar issues, then said mechanics were implmented into the games.

It's more of a "listen to your elders" sort of thing than it is "PS2 IS SHIT PS1 IS BETTER" like you make it out to be.

Why wouldn't you want feedback and listen to someone who has played a similar game. It's not like most of the proposed mechanics would endanger the game any way. Most mechanics proposed are there to improve the meta game, not make it play like a shooter from 2003. Unfortunately no one can see past someone praising PS1 and goes off to bash them and dismiss their point.

[Zeta]

lol all I heard on YouTube and facebook today was how Hamma HATES ps1.

Now I see where the thread came from.

[Figment]

Guys, do be fair to Hamma, he didn't say don't compare to PS1, he said to just argument it properly and not just nostalgise.

What pissed people off though Hamma, is that you adressed only one side of the debate. If we have to explain to people how something worked in PS1 like D2A said, you get ridiculed. I have never seen any mod action taken on this ignorance based behaviour, ever. Instead, you are called out by your opposition that doesn't like to think of themselves as inexperienced and therefore ignorant noobs; they instead demand a position of equal authority in the discussion based on nothing at all. Their arguments are incomplete, false and usualy based entirely on speculation, bias to what they know is in game now and more of that. Especially if they exploit the current system. What happens is they usualy start abusing the person with the audacity to request change and the "mere mentioning of PS1" has become a stick for them to hit you with by default.


Similarly, I have never seen mod action taken to anyone who used the term "bittervet".

I have never seen mod action taken against people who use insulting l2p arguments when one complains about spawncamping or other problematic features of PS2.

I have never seen mod action taken to someone who says "Go back to ps1" or "Go make your own game then".

I have never seen a mod step in as arbiter in discussions to tell PS2 fanboys to stop posting about the current design and think along with future design (and why this would be good or bad or how a suggestion could be improved) instead of trolling and derailing the thread by repeating information everyone knows and people actually have the issue with.


Those people are the ones I at least can't take serious in too many debates. Why do I then reference PS1? Because those issues had been solved! Most of the time I will also point out the minor issues that remained in PS1 and how that could be solved. Especially considering the context of PS2 with its bigger playercount per map.

But what happens next? You will get called out on "just wanting PS1.5" or "just wanting PS1". And again, I have yet to see any mod adres that trolling behaviour.


And by adressing I mean calling out that behaviour as unwanted. Usualy they come in by the time a thread has turned to flames from both sides and they just lock or tell people to get back on topic. The behaviour itself - As far as I'm aware at least - isn't really adressed. Excuse me if it is adressed in private, but it seems as acceptable behaviour in public.








Ps: As for devs not having a lot of experience playing ps1, on a command level I can't say I see any evidence of such for the design team as a whole. It is imperative that player experience is passed on to all devs. Remniscing on how things worked in ps1 can be a good way to illustrate alternate mechanics and any issues that had in order to create a better and more complete perspective of the mechanic. Nobody who played ps1 knows everything about te game since we all had our specialisms. But often I even miss some of the basic common sense, that doesn't inspire me with the confidence that they know or that if a member of the design team is aware, that this knowledge has been transfered to the appropriate people or if it has been attempted, that this knowledge transfer was succesfully completed.

Hence I don't think it is wise to put a moratorium on experiences from the past. However, it could be an idea to create a player feedback subforum for PS1 experiences on certain types of gameplay to reflect on which elements helped to create certain flows. Not quite plain ps1 discussion, so to speak.

[Pella]

Thought i would leave this here.

PS1 is dead. And will never come back. Remeber the good times and move on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqxy_xtPPpA

[BlazingSun]

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps/posts/list.m?topic_id=88000027880

I'm just going to leave this here. Post date: 7/12/2011

"How can such a great community of people ruin the sequel of the game that brought us together? The answer to this question is simple: Planetside 2 will NOT be the same as Planetside 1. The Planetside community, i assure you all, will ruin this game if they continue down this track."

Called it.

What exactly is there to ruin?? The game is downright boring 90% of the time.

[Assist]

It's more of a "listen to your elders" sort of thing than it is "PS2 IS SHIT PS1 IS BETTER" like you make it out to be.

Once again I disagree, most of the PS1 > PS2 posts are exactly as the second part of your statement reads. You raelly think Hamma posted this out of the blue? I think you should read these posts rather than the name of the person who posted them.
Why you seem to think PS1 angry vets are 'elders' compared to the rest of us I don't understand. I played PS1 on release, I know what the game was and in my own opinion I know why it failed to retain even 15% of it's player base after one year. Your opinion on this is completely different and you seem to think that because an individual stuck with a dead game for 7 years they should have a more valued opinion than the rest of us. You know what I think about the guy who still uses the 8-track tape? I think he's loony and opinions on MP3's are just a little bit irrelevant. But that's my opinion, and you have your own opinion, the difference is that you think your opinion should matter more than mine and I don't feel that way.

[Figment]

I played PS1 on release, I know what the game was and in my own opinion I know why it failed to retain even 15% of it's player base after one year.

That's interesting of you to say, since the player populace didn't start to decline till 1.5 years in (Core Combat expansion and its Flail spam opening weeks, Juli 2004) and the absolute drop in population took 1.75 years (Aftershock Expansion and its OP BFRs. nov 2004) to set in, followed by World of Warcraft release and a stop on marketing. The population didn't reach 15% till 2 years later (march-may 2005), where it had been steadily rising since launch (may 2003) up till the release of Core Combat.



Just saying... Calender maths isn't that hard.


As for the rest of your post, first prove this new tech is actually better and not a flashy form of telegraph where we already have email.

[ChipMHazard]

As for the rest of your post, first prove this new tech is actually better and not a flashy form of telegraph where we already have email.

He doesn't have to prove anything in that respect when it's his opinion on the matter of game quality. That's the thing about opinions, everyone has one and they are all valid.
Personally I think that PS1 is better balanced, features better metagaming and I would like to see underground bases again. I don't see PS2 being so much inferior as much as I do incomplete, I guess that in some ways that could be viewed as being the same thíng.

[Assist]

That's interesting of you to say, since the player populace didn't start to decline till 1.5 years in (Core Combat expansion and its Flail spam opening weeks, Juli 2004) and the absolute drop in population took 1.75 years (Aftershock Expansion and its OP BFRs. nov 2004) to set in, followed by World of Warcraft release and a stop on marketing. The population didn't reach 15% till 2 years later (march-may 2005), where it had been steadily rising since launch (may 2003) up till the release of Core Combat.



Just saying... Calender maths isn't that hard.


As for the rest of your post, first prove this new tech is actually better and not a flashy form of telegraph where we already have email.

Game release May 03? Core Combat released Oct. 03 ? That would be not even 6 months, not quite the 1.5 years you stated (must be those Calender maths). Going just by outfit #'s PS1 lost almost 70% subs in those 5 months. Regardless, 15% after your estimated 2 years is bad for an MMO during a time when MMO's were growing population at ridiculous rates.

I also don't know how you want to judge the tech as better, what measurement would you like to use? One faction has more players than PS1 ever had subs at one time. My guess is revenue has surpassed PS1 already. Graphics are better, more player, more value, what would you like to use as a measurement? Nostalgia? I'd say the new tech is without a doubt better, unless you preferred PS1 combat to PS2. The problem is elements of the game are missing, and we know that and more importantly they know that. It's just a matter of time until some of those additions are put in. I'd rather have the game as it is now than wait another year play. If some players would rather they waited, well, they can always wait on their own.

[Hamma]

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps/posts/list.m?topic_id=88000027880

I'm just going to leave this here. Post date: 7/12/2011

"How can such a great community of people ruin the sequel of the game that brought us together? The answer to this question is simple: Planetside 2 will NOT be the same as Planetside 1. The Planetside community, i assure you all, will ruin this game if they continue down this track."

Called it.

You haven't called anything, the game is far from ruined.

[Kerrec]

I am one of the "newbs" to Planetside. If you can call someone with 6+ days played a newb. Even if I play 1000 hours of PS2, I'll still be pigeonholed into the newb category because I never played PS1. Not to say I haven't read up about PS1 when faced with "you don't know anything" arguments.

That being said, I don't really care where ideas come from. I have played so many different kinds of games, that some things PS1 vets claim as "the great solutions" of PS1 are just not new ideas to me. Even though I've never played PS1, the different options, strategies and whatnot are STILL part of my gaming experiences. I just never played THAT game that put those ideas in THAT combination.

I have opinions. They are often opposite to other people's opinions. And I really lose respect when the only reply I get to my point of view, is "You don't have enough experience, hence your opinion is worthless." If my opinion was really out to lunch, it would be EASY to point out the error in a way that leaves no room to argue without resorting to such garbage replies. But people still resort to "you don't know sh!t" instead. To me, that just means they don't like being challenged on their points of view and want me to go away. Too bad for them.

So yeah, Hamma is saying enough with the "PS1 is all the justification that is needed" arguments. Conversations that devolve into "you've never played PS1 so go away" or "you're a PS1 fanboy and you just want PS1.5" is pure noise that is drowning out the signal. I agree with him that this kind of nonsense devalues all the work he's put into this community. I applaud him for trying to put a stop to it. And I'll do my best to follow his standard.

There are a few SIGNIFICANT things about PS2 that should be accounted for in any gameplay suggestion:

1) PS2 is a Free to Play game. 3 characters per account, and an individual can make infinite accounts to get around any kind of restriction. Any kind of restriction that forces players to switch accounts to do what they want will just piss off players instead of improve the game.
2) PS2 makes it's money from microtransactions. Things have been bought, and new game mechanics forcing a player to permanently choose between one thing he's bought and another thing he's bought will never happen. Same as flat out removing something that has been in the game and purchased by players.
3) A server can have 6000 players on it. 2000 per continent. It is unlikely, but feasible that a large portion of those 2000 players MAY end up in one area. This is NOT good. The game NEEDS those players to be more spread out over a larger area.

[Tatwi]

"My guess" - Figment's case closed. Assist, you can guess all you like until you're blue in the face, but it would be appreciated if you would stop attacking people (in this thread and others) who don't reside within your particular interpretation of reality. It seems as though anyone who does not kiss your ass and blindly agrees with you ends up being a target of your attempts to invalidate their perspective. It's childish, annoying, and entirely unhelpful. Give it a rest.

[Satanam]

This topic should have been created before, it's too late to go against the PS1 massive quotes. Seems like some guys need to show off that they played PlanetSide by telling how PlanetSide 2 should work. There's a reply from a guy at PlanetSide 2 forum who bi*ched on the other guy, because he didn't play PlanetSide and was trying to suggest something. That was funny because you could see how stupid he was, but it was also sad because an unkind community can keep away some new players.
Well, I believe sometimes it's good to give suggestions based on PlanetSide or any other game, as almost nothing is created without a base and we can easily see it on games and movies. But if we focus on PlanetSide as it's "the ultimate base" for the future of PlanetSide 2, we'll be playing PlanetSide with better textures and higher details.
I mean, the factions and details for each faction's exclusive characters/vehicles/guns are based on what we can see in PlanetSide (better designed because of the technology we have nowadays), but it shouldn't work (and I'm glad it doesn't) exactly like PlanetSide.
Let PlanetSide 2 grow up, let it evolve based on old concepts that worked, and mix it with new concepts that would probably work.

[Figment]

He doesn't have to prove anything in that respect when it's his opinion on the matter of game quality. That's the thing about opinions, everyone has one and they are all valid.

That's the thing, if he just likes something better and states his reasons, I couldn't agree more.

Thing is, there's a claim of antiquation of PS1 systems due to being a decade old. I find that hypocritical, because the current systems aren't new systems, they're just different design choices that haven't really been used in a MMOFPS yet. They're untested on this scale, but that doesn't mean they're actually new systems or design choices. The problem is that it shows in gameplay problems why those design choices wern't made in 2001-2003, as they were available then as well as options.

Hence I'm questioning that claim and would like to see some evidence of this supposed antiquation. In fact, when I compare design elements, the "new" systems seem more antiquated and conservative to me and horseshoed in.

Don't forget, the MMOFPS genre is still being pioneered. So anything applied from (traditional/conservative) multiplayer FPS games is actually a form of conservatism. Even if you could argue retaining PS1 stuff is also a form of conservatism, the PS1 systems were actually a progressive mixture of evolutions of RTS and FPS game mechanics. The gameplay that's copied now from "modern games" seems primarily based on quite traditional FPS design vision.

Personally I think that PS1 is better balanced, features better metagaming and I would like to see underground bases again. I don't see PS2 being so much inferior as much as I do incomplete, I guess that in some ways that could be viewed as being the same thíng.

I can agree with that, I think the game hasn't lived up to its potential (virtually at all yet) and that this is primarily due to not learning from PS1 and evolving the systems, but starting from scratch and radicaly reinventing the wheel and forcing it into a square, because the other games are squares.

I mean, Far Cry 2 pushed the envelope of solo player FPS gaming in a lot of ways, things that PS1 already did with several free roaming open worlds (!). PS1 did things no game had ever even dared dream off and it had more ambition than technology could chew at times. But is PS2 beyond enlarging the scale really evolving the genre and ambitious in evolving things? PS2 is a bit of a mix-match of hit and miss design and perhaps too preoccupied with matching solo-mini multiplayer games to be really as ambitious to push the envelope and screw FPS gaming conventions as much as the original Verant team did. :/ Don't get me wrong, PS2's engine and graphics push the envelope by miles, but as of yet I don't have the same feeling about the gameplay and it just feels unrefined and a step back, rather than forwards in that respect.

That's why PS1 remains such a source of ideas.


@Assist: October '03. Not '04, you're right on that one. However, it didn't lose the amount of pop you suggested (it lost around 10% pop then) and the pop was quite stable after the Flails had been nerfed. In fact, people started to come back prior to the bending.

And you honestly can't compare it to other MMO's. Different genres of games attract different playerbases, not to mention marketing efforts of other games being much better. In fact, one could argue that being one of the only FPS games (if not the only one from a rather unknown developer, Verant) on a monthly subscription was a much bigger issue than gameplay. And not actually selling in European stores where everyone else got their games and learned about the existence of games might have had something to do with not getting wild amounts of players in as well.

Most people never heard of it, so how could they ever flock to it?

You're not being fair and rather closeminded to the existence of external factors to the game. Pinning everything on core gameplay is just weak. Besides, the marketing effort this time around was far more encompassing and far more internationally oriented and viralled on youtube. Youtube was in its infancy during PS1. In fact, I'm not even sure how often I saw a Youtube video at that point since my connection had been a 4k modem for a long time. In fact... I know off players who tried to play PS1 with a 4k modem...

Your comparison is extremely unfair and I'd like you to at least admit that.





As for elements missing, it's more than that. Why? Because we're talking about the presence of substitute systems. Some can't be helped due to graphical demands, but some are simply a choice for a different gameplay flow.

A central building with a clear perimeter, or a group of buildings with no clear perimeter are the different design philosophies for bases. Things like that are conscious design choices and were based on wanting to do away with epic choke point holds, which is to a point quite understandable as it could get really messy with all the "300" last stands.

However, they went too far and that's a design comparison that isn't a simple 1-2 fix.

[Figment]

I am one of the "newbs" to Planetside. If you can call someone with 6+ days played a newb. Even if I play 1000 hours of PS2, I'll still be pigeonholed into the newb category because I never played PS1. Not to say I haven't read up about PS1 when faced with "you don't know anything" arguments.

Kerrec, 6+ days is a drop of water on a hot plate for a game with a learning curve as big as PS's. It's really, really, very little. You know how many people got on the highests command chat in PS1 after years of grinding CEP and were just making the shittiest calls ever just because they thought they got it, but in reality were just going to ruin the entire campaign?

Loads more than you can imagine...



We get it, you don't like being called an inexperienced newbee just because you're an older gamer. BUT YOU ARE. SORRY. Accept it and move on.

The problem is rather than doing that, you regularly make extremely presumptious argumentations and often maintain a position that has been proven wrong a decade before you even tried to make the assertion. You just don't know that and you can't know that. And why? Because you use assumptions instead of experience.

I personally lose respect for people who can't admit that they're not knowledgeable of everything if they're new to something. I mean, if I told an electrician "you can't know things better than me, I've got a few hours of wiring experience", he'd look at me funny too and I'd look like an utter tool.


I mean, take your current stance:

1) PS2 is a Free to Play game. 3 characters per account, and an individual can make infinite accounts to get around any kind of restriction. Any kind of restriction that forces players to switch accounts to do what they want will just piss off players instead of improve the game.
2) PS2 makes it's money from microtransactions. Things have been bought, and new game mechanics forcing a player to permanently choose between one thing he's bought and another thing he's bought will never happen. Same as flat out removing something that has been in the game and purchased by players.
3) A server can have 6000 players on it. 2000 per continent. It is unlikely, but feasible that a large portion of those 2000 players MAY end up in one area. This is NOT good. The game NEEDS those players to be more spread out over a larger area.

1. Wrong.

Account restrictions can be circumvented, but account character progress cannot. There is no reason to switch account, instead, there's more reason to stay on your account's characters and NOT switch accounts because it has significantly more progression.

2. Wrong again.

World of Tanks is entirely microtransaction related as well and removal and replacement of products and readjustments of costs have been extremely regular occurances. If you give significant warning beforehand and compensate players plenty, they'll easily accept any changes. In fact, items to be replaced were extremely popular to get BECAUSE they were being replaced. Why? Because the compensation was very lucrative for players.

We're talking about gold purchased tanks like the Type-59, the T-34 tier reduction (nerf) and turning into a gold tank while being replaced by another tank, the KV-2 being split from the KV-1, the Pershing being lowered a tier to make room for the M46 Patton, the KV-3 and IS-4 moving a tier up, a dozen or so French tanks having all their stats changed entirely (for the worse) and the list goes on. Players simply got their money back, an extra tank, or some other digital commodity and SOE can easily do the same by resetting cert points and station cash on a weapon that's adjusted or replaced.

How does the game do? It is currently one of, if not the most successful and moneymaking f2p game in the world.

3. Which doesn't preclude the notion that they need to be guided. They need more options than in PS1, certainly, but not per se "this" many options. Especially not when you consider that the continent count will increase over time and more two-ways will start to occur.

[Assist]

"My guess" - Figment's case closed. Assist, you can guess all you like until you're blue in the face, but it would be appreciated if you would stop attacking people (in this thread and others) who don't reside within your particular interpretation of reality. It seems as though anyone who does not kiss your ass and blindly agrees with you ends up being a target of your attempts to invalidate their perspective. It's childish, annoying, and entirely unhelpful. Give it a rest.

What? How did I attack anyone? Post was about people being constructive when referencing Planetside1. Guy posted that he believes it's Planetside 2 players who ruin these threads. I disagreed. Figment posted numbers he believed about PS1, I disagreed and responded. You posted that I should stop posting because it's childish, annoying, and entirely unhelpful.

Because I said 'my guess', based on statements from the CEO of the company who runs the game, suddenly I'm being childish, annoying, and entirely unhelpful? Thanks for proving my point about Planetside 1 vets who feel their opinion is more important and should drowned out the opinions of everyone else.

[ChipMHazard]

That's the thing, if he just likes something better and states his reasons, I couldn't agree more.

Thing is, there's a claim of antiquation of PS1 systems due to being a decade old. I find that hypocritical, because the current systems aren't new systems, they're just different design choices that haven't really been used in a MMOFPS yet. They're untested on this scale, but that doesn't mean they're actually new systems or design choices. The problem is that it shows in gameplay problems why those design choices wern't made in 2001-2003, as they were available then as well as options.

Hence I'm questioning that claim and would like to see some evidence of this supposed antiquation. In fact, when I compare design elements, the "new" systems seem more antiquated and conservative to me and horseshoed in.

Don't forget, the MMOFPS genre is still being pioneered. So anything applied from (traditional/conservative) multiplayer FPS games is actually a form of conservatism. Even if you could argue retaining PS1 stuff is also a form of conservatism, the PS1 systems were actually a progressive mixture of evolutions of RTS and FPS game mechanics. The gameplay that's copied now from "modern games" seems primarily based on quite traditional FPS design vision.

I can agree with that, I think the game hasn't lived up to its potential (virtually at all yet) and that this is primarily due to not learning from PS1 and evolving the systems, but starting from scratch and radicaly reinventing the wheel and forcing it into a square, because the other games are squares.

I mean, Far Cry 2 pushed the envelope of solo player FPS gaming in a lot of ways, things that PS1 already did with several free roaming open worlds (!). PS1 did things no game had ever even dared dream off and it had more ambition than technology could chew at times. But is PS2 beyond enlarging the scale really evolving the genre and ambitious in evolving things? PS2 is a bit of a mix-match of hit and miss design and perhaps too preoccupied with matching solo-mini multiplayer games to be really as ambitious to push the envelope and screw FPS gaming conventions as much as the original Verant team did. :/ Don't get me wrong, PS2's engine and graphics push the envelope by miles, but as of yet I don't have the same feeling about the gameplay and it just feels unrefined and a step back, rather than forwards in that respect.

That's why PS1 remains such a source of ideas.

As for elements missing, it's more than that. Why? Because we're talking about the presence of substitute systems. Some can't be helped due to graphical demands, but some are simply a choice for a different gameplay flow.

A central building with a clear perimeter, or a group of buildings with no clear perimeter are the different design philosophies for bases. Things like that are conscious design choices and were based on wanting to do away with epic choke point holds, which is to a point quite understandable as it could get really messy with all the "300" last stands.

However, they went too far and that's a design comparison that isn't a simple 1-2 fix.

Fair enough. To me, having to prove something infers that it is either true or false, might not be the proper definition though so I won't press the point further.

Well I do agree that just because a concept is percieved as being old doesn't meant that it's antiquated or out of date. Most gameplay mechanics/features etc. are old, weathered and worn. I don't think that they choose the new direction just because PS1 was old but because they wanted to do something different, for whatever reason... Be it because they percieved the new generation as not wanting the old system or something else, well we can only speculate.

You can question his opinion all you want, that's part of what makes it an discussion after all:p The evidence that you desire is his view on the matter. There are after all people who view letters as being antiquated and those who still swear by them. Probably not a very good analogy. How about... Most people would probably view the old FPS RPGs as being antiquated, like the old Might and Magic games, when compared to RPG's like Skyrim. But there were many who loved Legend of Grimrock. I most certainly don't believe that gamers suddenly become unable to appreciate a system just because it's "old" or it's more complicated, for example the inventory system didn't hurt Deus Ex Human Revolution at all.
There are probably many today who would view the old school inventory system as being outdated and those like me who positivity loves fiddling with inventory tetris.
You can certainly make a case as to what benefits different systems provide, but prove? I don't see that happening, except in some very obvious cases where something just doesn't fit into the gameplay.
Anyway I do agree that, for the most part, game mechanics don't become outdated. Out of style perhaps, but not outdated.
(In this regard I define out of style as meaning something that isn't popular and outdated as meaning something that is obsolete.)

If you define conversative in terms of doing with what is the most popular/"safe" option then yes I would agree. Of course it's harder to make that claim with MMOFPS' since that's a niche market, unless you also count FPS' with a focus on multiplayer.

Well that's certainly one view on the matter. While I most certainly agree that PS2 is far from complete. I agree that there are certainly features of PS1 that could have been expanded upon instead of replaced, like MBT crew requirements. I do also believe that there are things that are better left where they are, like the class system. Of course that's just based on my own preferences.
Obviously it's the most obvious choice considering it's the only precedent to be found. What I would generally speaking think they need more of is ambition when it comes to designing things like the resource system, base capture mechanics, as examples.

Again I would certainly agree that I've seen a lack of ambition when it comes design choices. I would be lying if I didn't agree that PS2 does feel unrefined and it doesn't give anywhere near the same sense of planetary warfare that PS1 did.

Indeed it does. It is afterall the only precedent to be found.

Aye indeed they are, which also serves as part of the problem when it comes to wanting certain changes made. While it can certainly be frustating to see, there are certain changes that the devs are adamant about keeping, for various reasons such as not wanting scare away players with sweeping changes to systems already in place. Like for example I don't like how every vehicle and aircraft in the game are able to fill so many different roles, I however don't expect them to change it because of how much time players have already spent using them. Won't stop me from wanting the change though and who knows perhaps the devs will open up to such a change at some point.

I agree about base their choice in base designs, there are only so many smaller changes that one can make to a preexisting design before having to remake it more thoroughly. In that respect I do like the design ideas that you, and others, have put forth in various threads. I am also looking forward to seeing the new interlink facility. Hopefully good feedback from that might spur them into making larger changes.

But yeah, this is hugely offtopic:p

[Kerrec]

Kerrec, 6+ days is a drop of water on a hot plate for a game with a learning curve as big as PS's. It's really, really, very little. You know how many people got on the highests command chat in PS1 after years of grinding CEP and were just making the shittiest calls ever just because they thought they got it, but in reality were just going to ruin the entire campaign?

Loads more than you can imagine...



We get it, you don't like being called an inexperienced newbee just because you're an older gamer. BUT YOU ARE. SORRY. Accept it and move on.

The problem is rather than doing that, you regularly make extremely presumptious argumentations and often maintain a position that has been proven wrong a decade before you even tried to make the assertion. You just don't know that and you can't know that. And why? Because you use assumptions instead of experience.

I personally lose respect for people who can't admit that they're not knowledgeable of everything if they're new to something. I mean, if I told an electrician "you can't know things better than me, I've got a few hours of wiring experience", he'd look at me funny too and I'd look like an utter tool.


I mean, take your current stance:



1. Wrong.

Account restrictions can be circumvented, but account character progress cannot. There is no reason to switch account, instead, there's more reason to stay on your account's characters and NOT switch accounts because it has significantly more progression.

2. Wrong again.

World of Tanks is entirely microtransaction related as well and removal and replacement of products and readjustments of costs have been extremely regular occurances. If you give significant warning beforehand and compensate players plenty, they'll easily accept any changes. In fact, items to be replaced were extremely popular to get BECAUSE they were being replaced. Why? Because the compensation was very lucrative for players.

We're talking about gold purchased tanks like the Type-59, the T-34 tier reduction (nerf) and turning into a gold tank while being replaced by another tank, the KV-2 being split from the KV-1, the Pershing being lowered a tier to make room for the M46 Patton, the KV-3 and IS-4 moving a tier up, a dozen or so French tanks having all their stats changed entirely (for the worse) and the list goes on. Players simply got their money back, an extra tank, or some other digital commodity and SOE can easily do the same by resetting cert points and station cash on a weapon that's adjusted or replaced.

How does the game do? It is currently one of, if not the most successful and moneymaking f2p game in the world.

3. Which doesn't preclude the notion that they need to be guided. They need more options than in PS1, certainly, but not per se "this" many options. Especially not when you consider that the continent count will increase over time and more two-ways will start to occur.

Case in point.

AND as much as I'd like to argue your opinions, it would be derailing this thread. I went out of my way to not single out anyone and touch the issues I felt needed commenting that were relevant to the topic.

Quote what I wrote in a new thread and I'll discuss. But I'm not going to be baited into derailing this one.

[Figment]

Case in point.

Eh we all know I've called you out on that the most. But even if you don't like it, doesn't mean it can't be true. We're simply not all equals in this world on every subject and dismissing something out of hand even though one knows it to be fact can be equally aggravating. ;)

AND as much as I'd like to argue your opinions, it would be derailing this thread. I went out of my way to not single out anyone and touch the issues I felt needed commenting that were relevant to the topic.

Quote what I wrote in a new thread and I'll discuss. But I'm not going to be baited into derailing this one.

Fair enough and quite right, getting to the point of derailment. Focus a new thread on your assertions? I guess the experience thing is an agree to disagree thing anyway.