Smedley - "Planetside 2 2.0 in September"

[Mordelicius]

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/3582el/the_way_forward/

(At long last) Planetside 2's last stand.

I'm just glad that our posts on PSU is not going to waste:

http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960702#post960702
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960687#post960687
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=58504
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960535#post960535
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960626#post960626
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960352#post960352
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960231#post960231
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960790#post960790

One thing they shouldn't ever implement is the Black Ops option. Take any pro team sports game. Allow players to switch teams on a whim. How many fans will continue to 'follow' their team and not rage quit? Some of these fans are following their teams for 10-50+ years. You want them to quit in a day? It's called a tribal affiliation. Any bonds beyond natural family is a tribe. Don't break it or players will leave, just like they leave normal FPS easily and move on to the 'new' one.

Now, your favorite players will be beating up your team. Much like your old allies are now beating up on your faction. It's absolutely inane. There's a reason why they pump out nonstop BF and COD. It's a sell and dispose model. Now they are going to copy FPS formula. Reward faction loyalty. Don't deemphasize it. Only with faction loyalty you will have the best, long term faction pvp in an MMO.

Hello PS2 players both current and hopefully the ones that have played and moved on. I want to lay out our direction moving forward for PS2.

The development team continues to work on many things at once. We have the PS4 version launching very soon here. We've had to spend time getting the codebase to merge, and yes.. that's led to some problems like we all saw with the flight controls.

I realize there are people who think that means it's all about the console versions going forward.

It isn't. We won't let it be that way because we like the PC way too much for that.

In the near term, we're adding more people to the Planetside 2 team (hopefully bringing some people back that were former team members) to help us get our development bandwidth to where we want it to be. However, we have plenty of horsepower to deliver on some amazing things this summer already.

The plan is simple - We are going to be taking Planetside 2 to where it needs to be and finally address the stuff should have already. The metagame. We will once and for all be getting the Meta to where it just has to be. That means a comprehensive change that will involve completely revamping resources, changing what territory control means and spending a lot of time giving you reasons to fight. All of this will be done in a fully transparent manner in which we actually put our internal design docs out there for your comment and feedback.

We will be moving towards a system where resources are actually going to be a fun part of the game, and you'll be able to harvest resources directly (in fact, that's how you're going to get them). and you'll be able to use them to finally get to some of the end-game things we've been wanting to do - Outfit bases on new continents (and potentially on existing ones). We're also going to be spending a lot of time to make sure capturing a facility actually matters, as well as looking at the overly-complicated capture system which can be pretty obtuse at times.

The simple problem with Planetside 2 has always been "Why are we fighting?". We intend to make the focus of the time between now and our 2.0 release in September working very hard on this core issue. We have put it off way too long, and honestly the stuff we've done up until now hasn't been enough and we know it.

The team is also committed to a much more regular update schedule on the PC. We want to be honest about only having a finite amount of resources, but a significant portion of them will be dedicated to the PC and advancing the game itself. We will absolutely be adding more resources to this team to assist in this.

We'll be making announcements about the 2.0 release in the near-term future with a lot more specifics. In addition, we have a nice surprise for you... we're also going to be adding another game mode to Planetside 2 for the first time. You can expect to be seeing that in the upcoming week on Live servers (it will be a beta of the game mode). This will actually be a game mode with a win condition! Hopefully you like it. It's meant to be the kind of thing you pop into for an hour match and then go back into the main game. Hopefully in the short term we can make it so outfits can directly compete against other outfit in this game mode. Also, we aren't charging to get into this mode. The entire reason for it is to try something new and see how we all like it as a community.

Why do this instead of just doing the Meta stuff? Simple - we are experimenting and trying something new. Before you judge, try it. It only took a small subset of the team a few weeks to put together and we hope you like it.

In the months between now and September we're going to be putting all kinds of new things into the game on a regular schedule. We're also going to be committing to doing a better job on the Roadmap. The criticism that we do a poor job updating it is something that I think is both fair and accurate and it's simply going to be done right.

So for those of you that thought Planetside 2's best days are behind it... you are going to be pleasantly surprised, but the proof has to be in what we do not in what we say.

Planetside 2 is one of our core franchises. It will be here in ten years and assuming we can make the right choices it can be 10x as big as it is right now (on the PC, not even talking about adding console users).

To those who think all we care about is the console - no, no, no. PC is our lead sku and is always going to be. We are very excited to bring PS2 to the Playstation 4. It's really fun. Our console players are every bit as important to us as our PC players, but in terms of how we develop stuff, expect the PC to be the lead sku.

Thanks for reading this, and thanks for playing Planetside 2. We're in this for the long haul and we're going to work our asses off to make sure you are too. The only way we do that is to take this game to the next level, so that's just what we're going to do.

Smed

[Babyfark McGeez]

Ahahahhahahaha.


I believe this bullshit when i see a video of it in action on the live server.

[Rivenshield]

/sees more agitprop from Smed
/resist gag reflex, read anyway
/reread again, carefully
/see nothing pertaining to intercontinental lattice, or addressing the revolving three-way ritualized clusterfuck, or actual strategy, or even a global map, or any of the things we had out of the box twelve years ago
/puts on big-company IT bullshit filter, realizes that this is the political mechanic who presided over the destruction of SWG and the bankruptcy of his own company; realizes also that this is all a bunch of exciting bullshit designed to 'build value' for potential investors so Smed can get his golden parachute after somebody snatches up the crumbs of what used to be SOE
/shrug

[Calista]

I seriously doubt they will get this all done in 4 months and the game should have been this way on November 20, 2012! I don't know about the instanced aspect being so separate from the main game though. I understand the need to try and accommodate all the arena shooter players but it just isn't the Planetside way! If you really want to go for it just instance out the hex regions. Still bucks the traditional PS style but heck at least it would be integral to the world map.

[OpolE]

Cba to read

What new planets will there be?
And I did read they were working on the metagame a bit?

[Rivenshield]

Cba to read

What new planets will there be?
And I did read they were working on the metagame a bit?

Not in the strategic-gameplay sense that we mean it.

Nor is there mention of a fucking USER'S MANUAL. This while there are weekly threads complaining how hard it is for new players and while pops continue to decline.

[Mordelicius]

It's a 180 degree turn around from their old positions for sure where they flat out and out right say that redeployside is not even a big deal :huh: (do I have to dig up that stream VOD?)

Or when they don't think basic 'meta' or logistic is not even essential. Instead, they throw around psychobabble terms like 'moment-to-moment gameplay' as if they have never pvped in an RvR MMO before. They act as if you give 2000 players guns/weapons/vehicles in a huge continent and they will just shoot each other down and be happy with it.

Fill up a beach with people. Give them unlimited water balloons. How long the fight last before they get bored of it? Ten minutes? Twenty minutes? You can only get so much diminishing-return satisfaction on pelting someone with a water balloon or a snowball. Now if you add some mechanics like shooting it down a hole for points or stealing balloons for points or rules like balancing it on your head for transport, players will play longer. 'Moment to moment gameplay' (why make a large-scale, 100% PvP MMOFPS when all you think of is ADHD centric gameplay?)

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/2vs5gl/ama_david_carey_former_ps2_producer/cokj75b

:doh:

[Ghoest9]

I think this is great news.

[Mordelicius]

New gamemode (what ever that means) out next after the delay. I'm guessing at best a continent wide Royal Rumble-type of last man standing elimination mode. At worst, small scale team deathmatch maps.

Anyway, not coming back until they fix the resource/redeploy/base values. Anxious how they can make it by September. If they want it to release it by that time, they have to fill everyone in using the Roadmap Wishlist very soon.

Surely they aren't going to implement it to the PTS without any community critique/feedback. Consider how the PS2 devs have few experience if any on other RvR PvP MMOs.

Also consider, PS2's first real competition has their Open World already planned out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6vXfTEvDVM

[p0intman]

Smed's post is bullshit because in order to do what he says he wants, he'll have to fix base design to not be total shit.

And that will naturally lead to battle flow.

Battle flow will lead to meta working better.

LOOOOOLLLL at Smed.

[Mordelicius]

They ought to release the details of the PS2 2.0 overhaul so it can be critiqued asap.

Funny, Smedley just casually announced Forgelight 2 engine. Seamless continents?

[Calista]

It's going to take more than a new engine or console platform to save this game. It simply needs a better/bigger reason to play. Needs to provide a better sense of reward and achievement and especially since it is going to consoles it has to do this in much more quicker fashion.

It is a different type game entirely but I recall once they said DCUO revenue ratio was something like 80% consoles to 20% PC's or 70/30. Something like that I don't recall exactly but you get the drift. In short if it weren't for consoles that game would likely have been long gone by now and the same is going to hold true for PS2.

[p0intman]

They ought to release the details of the PS2 2.0 overhaul so it can be critiqued asap.

Funny, Smedley just casually announced Forgelight 2 engine. Seamless continents?


are they porting everything over to FL2? where was that announcement?

[Mordelicius]

are they porting everything over to FL2? where was that announcement?

http://www.reddit.com/r/h1z1/comments/396gs4/h1z1s_future/

Our goal remains to have a massive world. We're doing that with Forgelight 2, which has been in development for quite a while now. We'll be able to show stuff to you soon, but needless to say we're super excited by what we're seeing. It's truly going to give us the 16,000 square kilometer world we've been waiting for. We want the world of H1Z1 to truly be a world. One where you can build your own cities and settlements, or take over one if you can hold it.

http://np.reddit.com/r/h1z1/comments/396gs4/h1z1s_future/cs10zfh
will it impact development of the other games? Absolutely, but only in a positive way. We've had an engine team separate from the game teams for a long time now. Not ready to announce what it's going to mean for PS2 but good things for sure.
PS2 is now second fiddle, so H1Z1 gets the first dibs, we get the crumbs lol. But isn't that what I predicted with H1Z1 cannibalizing PS2? http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=58093


@Calista

That's the misnomer. DCUO is PvE-centric. Planetside is hardcore PvP (players won't stick long at current 'farm mode' condition). That's why we keep saying not to release PS2 on PS4 at this current state, yet they relent on doing so. Console players are used to beating up hapless NPCs, where they always win easily.

In PS2, they will just die, die and die. Check this video of PvE game-reviewer Angry Joe getting wrecked so hard because he brought a newbie army. Look at his frustration. He couldn't even kill anyone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kIt6AOvdsg

[bpostal]

Porting PS2 into FL2 would be a massive waste of time imo. It's his comment We want the world of H1Z1 to truly be a world. One where you can build your own cities and settlements, or take over one if you can hold it. that annoys me because it sounds like I've heard that before...and here we are.

Console, PC, it doesn't matter. The average gamer in general isn't used to the absolute raping you'll get when you first hop into the game. If these new console players come in with the same mentality they have when they play the smaller, round based games then PS2 on PS4 is going to fail. In no other game can you throw balance out the window by dropping a platoon into the mix. Battlefield doesn't let you go from 64v64 to 64v128 at the drop of a hat.

[RykerStruvian]

I was speaking to a friend of mine who was in GOLD with me when pump actions came out for PS2. He said that the same thing is happening/happened in H1Z1? Or rather, he said it was worse because people can drive up to you, get out of their cars instantly, then OHK with a pump action?

Supposedly the same weapon dev who did the pump actions in PS2 did the same thing for H1Z1? Or at least, Smedley let it happen? At least in this instance, it seems the same things that happened in PS2 are repeating in H1Z1...that is what I'm getting at.

[Mordelicius]

Porting PS2 into FL2 would be a massive waste of time imo. It's his comment that annoys me because it sounds like I've heard that before...and here we are.

Console, PC, it doesn't matter. The average gamer in general isn't used to the absolute raping you'll get when you first hop into the game. If these new console players come in with the same mentality they have when they play the smaller, round based games then PS2 on PS4 is going to fail. In no other game can you throw balance out the window by dropping a platoon into the mix. Battlefield doesn't let you go from 64v64 to 64v128 at the drop of a hat.
PC players are more resilient due to longer history of PC players with MMO. Consoles are what, single player mostly and multiplayer at most.

ex: I hear GTA V Online is 20 players at most per map. PS2 is 2000 per map, 6000 per server initially.

MMO RvR PvP is fairly brutal too. One factor is the number of stackable players. It's not uncommon for 50-100+ players facing just 5 players. And those five will quit or switch.

I remember an old MMO where I literally just picked up like 3-4 players before an event and we got railroaded by 50+ high geared, high lvl players. Our faction was decimated because after closed beta, players sniffed out that the strongest players will be on one of the sides, so most players switch. The next week, I scraped about 8-10. After several months, we had equal numbers with rest of the other factions.

[bpostal]

PC players are more resilient due to longer history of PC players with MMO. Consoles are what, single player mostly and multiplayer at most.

ex: I hear GTA V Online is 20 players at most per map. PS2 is 2000 per map, 6000 per server initially.

MMO RvR PvP is fairly brutal too. One factor is the number of stackable players. It's not uncommon for 50-100+ players facing just 5 players. And those five will quit or switch.

I remember an old MMO where I literally just picked up like 3-4 players before an event and we got railroaded by 50+ high geared, high lvl players. Our faction was decimated because after closed beta, players sniffed out that the strongest players will be on one of the sides, so most players switch. The next week, I scraped about 8-10. After several months, we had equal numbers with rest of the other factions.

Sure, we've got a longer history (and more experience with) getting fucked but the new age (millennial) group of gamers has been spoon fed EZ wins since they've started. It's that same age group that PS2 is focusing on now that is adverse to getting their shit pushed in. My guess is that they'll give up on the game within their first hour because 'muh skillz should == immediate killstreak'

[Calista]

I don't know about dying too fast but what I was getting at was the duration of a typical play session. I feel they are on the right track with this conquest mode but they need to be running it on BI style/sized "maps". The core issue is persistence. A typical console player will have no appreciation or patience for it. If there is no win or lose banner in less than 30 minute intervals PS2 will not attract much of a lasting audience.

[Babyfark McGeez]

There you are hitting the core issue with this game and "professional" game development in general, Calista.
Due to several factors (Payment model, production costs, greed, idiocy) the vast majority of (non-indie) games are aimed at the "average joe", the lowest common denominator. That "attract the dudebro" mantra seems to have taken over every aspect, making games lose everything that made them unique in the process and turning companies and players alike into cynical adversaries.

With less producion costs and maybe a different monetization method PS2 could have been a profit making unique shooter that would have not been for everyone. But for a dedicated niche audience. But nope, it has to be "all the money" from "everyone", sacrificing creativity and yet another ip in the name of a narrow business view.

Gawd, i need to stop coming to here lol. I bet my post history makes me sound like a bitter twat by now. :p

ALL SMEDS FAULT! ;)

[Calista]

There was no need for this game to attempt 2000 players per continent at launch. If they felt they had that capability then great, put it in the back pocket for a later day. Start the game off smaller with say like 512 on smaller maps would still have dwarfed any other FPS. How much resources have been applied to optimization fixes? A ton, of which could have been allocated elsewhere to improving core gameplay. I lost count of how many "all hands on deck" code freezes happened due to performance issues. Also being free to play it needed to reach as large an audience as possible but in the process of trying to push this 2000 player agenda alienated all but those with high performance PC's. They eventually backed down that pop number to 1200 or so I think but it seems too little too late.

I just hope that the dream of MMOFPS doesn't die with this game. It isn't easy to do but SOE/DGC had a great shot at it and just blew it on so many fronts. I hope by some miracle it takes off on the consoles because at this point that is the only hope.

[Mordelicius]

It's a matter of player retention.

PvE and small scale Multiplayer is designed like a race. The reward is at the end. Most of the time is all about killing.

PvP MMO, as PS2 should have been, is designed like a dance. The reward is in the middle and all over.

But as it is, PS2 is all about farming and killing. These new console players are used to PvE and Multiplayer shooter and they won't get their reward because they will just keep dying.

As opposed to a true PvP where it's all about player interaction (the dance), and not necessarily about just about the result.

ex:

- Liberators swooping riskily and dangerously to tank bust a Sundy spawn.
- Infiltrator sneaking out of spawn to kill 1 or 2 players to get to the capture point. As the point is flipping, get flanked by a heavy assault.

or in my case
- Rushing a Sunderer to the front amid the crossfiring to break a stalemate, to establish a forward spawn point for attacker (one of the reasons why I dislike the No Deploy Zone immensely; it's implemented by devs who don't even play the game. They don't understand this. Here I am, rushing and risking my Sundy with low probability of survival. If I succeed, there's this stupid circle blocking my deploy button. What's their 'official' reason? Equidistance between offense/defense. Inane reason. Impractical and concocted from graphs and ether imagination not actual gameplay and analysis.)

As it is, at the current PS2 version, none of these examples matter because there's no rewards/consequences. It's all about the killing and farming for the Directives.

Does it matter if that Sundy spawn dies to the Liberator?
Does it matter if that Capture point flipped
Does it matter if my Sundy sticks and I manage to spawn players close to the capture point?

Atm, no. That's the gameplay they promote. One has to wait 'til September for the PS2 2.0 and that 3 months detached from the PS4 launch.

A PvPer would enjoy the dance as is, but these console players conditioned to enjoy just the result, won't get it. Hence, they will be the first to leave.

[Vashyo]

Good post from Smed there, just hope he can make it happen.

if we could finally get some longer lasting effects on capturing/losing bases and get rid of the constant 3way randomness on every continent I'm gonna be happy.

PS1 you got to fight 1vs1 on a continent in many cases where the battle moved in more predictable strategic/tactical patterns. Here it still is just one side getting the shortest stick randomly and the progress is random, there just isn't that epic feel when the map has only changed slightly or even not at all after coming back to play the next day. PS2 there is no major sense of victory since everything happens fast and easy, nobody is going to be excited capturing the same base for the third time during the same day. It's just a grind to get better gear so you can keep grinding.

[Mordelicius]

Good post from Smed there, just hope he can make it happen.
.

First, they have to postpone the erroneous new Gamemode. It will separate off 600 players away from the main game, making it even worse than the 2 WDS debacles :huh:. The WDS events were essentially a gamemode within the game.

Not to mention the gamemode itself is so lackluster in inspiration and enthusiasm. They could have at least release a vehicle-only gamemode/continent instead: http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=58451

They can sell a lot of vehicle cosmetics and weapons and market it as a Mad Max-like fights.

[Canaris]

..... I'll believe it when I see it until then I'm betting on a PS-CU or PS-NGE :stupid:

[Rivenshield]

PS-NGE

/retch

[p0intman]

Porting PS2 into FL2 would be a massive waste of time imo. It's his comment that annoys me because it sounds like I've heard that before...and here we are.

Console, PC, it doesn't matter. The average gamer in general isn't used to the absolute raping you'll get when you first hop into the game. If these new console players come in with the same mentality they have when they play the smaller, round based games then PS2 on PS4 is going to fail. In no other game can you throw balance out the window by dropping a platoon into the mix. Battlefield doesn't let you go from 64v64 to 64v128 at the drop of a hat.

What I find funny as shit is that PS1 was better balanced, and it mattered infinitely more if your outfit and platoon could adapt to situations and come up with creative solutions with the tools given to you. PS2 has so few of those tools and options available and it creates so many more problems for the game. The learning curve for ps1 wasn't as bad because it had a decent tutorial and generally pointed you in the right direction. You'd still get buttfucked to hell by a decent group of players but it wasn't nearly as harsh. At the same time, it counted more on your personal skill level than your battle rank.

Battle rank and gear available matters more in PS2 than it does in PS1.

Sad.

[Warborn]

PS1 was an abomination of bad balance and worthless ideas. Many of the vehicles were useless, many weapons were essentially worthless, and everyone gravitated to cookie-cutter loadouts. Reavers/mossies in particular were hilariously imbalanced, being one-man murder machines in a game where tanks had a dedicated driver, plus they doubled as the ideal form of transport, and made galaxies next to worthless. As a game, PS2 is far better designed than PS1 ever was.

And the notion that skill mattered more in PS1 is similarly a laugh. The game didn't even have headshots, and weapons were amazingly primitive. It takes far more FPS skill to be successful in PS2 than in PS1. You do not know what you're talking about if you think BR and gear are what matters in PS2.

As for the blops criticisms, there's nothing about allowing players to switch on a whim in the roadmap description. It says that if pop becomes "heavily skewed" you may be prompted to temporarily switch to the underdog side. It will likely be random, and it will be contingent upon population imbalance. People won't be able to simply hop around sides as it suits them. I also don't believe you're correct in assuming that people will somehow leave the game if they play more than one side. Plenty of people have characters on two or three factions. Many outfits do cross-faction ops, where they play another empire for a day or a weekend every so often. This doesn't break down some hypothetical tribal affiliation (I expect most people don't really give a shit about their empire as a coherent team, only their outfit) but rather keeps the game fresh for longer.

[ringring]

PS1 was an abomination of bad balance and worthless ideas. Many of the vehicles were useless, many weapons were essentially worthless, and everyone gravitated to cookie-cutter loadouts. Reavers/mossies in particular were hilariously imbalanced, being one-man murder machines in a game where tanks had a dedicated driver, plus they doubled as the ideal form of transport, and made galaxies next to worthless. As a game, PS2 is far better designed than PS1 ever was.

And the notion that skill mattered more in PS1 is similarly a laugh. The game didn't even have headshots, and weapons were amazingly primitive. It takes far more FPS skill to be successful in PS2 than in PS1. You do not know what you're talking about if you think BR and gear are what matters in PS2.

As for the blops criticisms, there's nothing about allowing players to switch on a whim in the roadmap description. It says that if pop becomes "heavily skewed" you may be prompted to temporarily switch to the underdog side. It will likely be random, and it will be contingent upon population imbalance. People won't be able to simply hop around sides as it suits them. I also don't believe you're correct in assuming that people will somehow leave the game if they play more than one side. Plenty of people have characters on two or three factions. Many outfits do cross-faction ops, where they play another empire for a day or a weekend every so often. This doesn't break down some hypothetical tribal affiliation (I expect most people don't really give a shit about their empire as a coherent team, only their outfit) but rather keeps the game fresh for longer.

I think you very wrong about skill in ps2, certainly I found it very much easier to get kills in PS2 than I did in ps1. And I got many kill streaks both as infantry, max and as a tank driver that were greater than any I got in Ps1. When I got 64 kills as a max in 20 minutes I realised it was stupid.

There were quite a few people in ps1 that I could just not kill, not so in ps2.

There are features in ps2 that flatten out the skill gradient put there purposely in order to encourage the greater number.
base design, headshots, quick ttk all flatten out the gradient
Base design - open with few chokepoints, easy to for vehicles to spam
Headshots and ttk - run around like a blue arsed fly and sooner or later you'll come up behind someone, aim shoot and that's a kill, start running again.

[p0intman]

PS1 was an abomination of bad balance and worthless ideas. Many of the vehicles were useless, many weapons were essentially worthless, and everyone gravitated to cookie-cutter loadouts. Reavers/mossies in particular were hilariously imbalanced, being one-man murder machines in a game where tanks had a dedicated driver, plus they doubled as the ideal form of transport, and made galaxies next to worthless. As a game, PS2 is far better designed than PS1 ever was.

And the notion that skill mattered more in PS1 is similarly a laugh. The game didn't even have headshots, and weapons were amazingly primitive. It takes far more FPS skill to be successful in PS2 than in PS1. You do not know what you're talking about if you think BR and gear are what matters in PS2.

No, you're just bad at PS1 it appears. Personal skill mattered far more in 1 than it does in 2. Sure, there are some setups in PS2 that take far more skill than they did in PS1, but those are the exception and not the rule. What weapons were useless in PS1? They all had their uses if you knew what you were doing and planned/played accordingly.

Pound for pound, setups in PS1 were far more situational and usually could be tailored to every specific fight if you wanted to go that far. PS2 relies far more on large numbers to accomplish anything than it does the personal skill and teamwork of any given unit.

Again, if you knew what you were doing, armor was HIGHLY useful in PS1 even and especially with the dedicated driver and dedicated gunner. Organization - actual organization, not just hopping into a platoon - mattered infinitely more than it ever will in PS2. I should know that, given the company I've kept and the types of shit I've pulled off with others.

Lastly, once more pound for pound in comparison, BR matters more in PS2 than it does in PS1. You take one newbie to PS2 and put them into a training squad and they might be fit for moving into more tactical gameplay after a month of grinding and getting familiar with the game. Minimum of a month, at best. Take that same newbie, put them into a squad in PS1 that wanted to train people and I could have them effectively contributing in a meaningful way to every single fight after a week on average. The barrier to being useful in PS2 is higher due to how weapon unlocks work and how BR grinds work. The barrier to being useful in PS1 was lower simply because there were more ways to meaningfully contribute to an empire's wider tactical work at a lower level, that would meaningfully help someone advance in BR and unlock more certs.

[ZephyrBurst]

Ehhh, with September closing in on us in 2 months and no design docs put up like Smed said there would be, I don't think this is happening by the date he mentioned. Though it feels like the devs have been super quiet lately, other than the PS4 launch. Who knows, maybe there's a surprise, but I'm not holding my breath.

I still love this game though. I'd be playing it more, but life/projects have me doing other things.

[Mordelicius]

It's not even on the wishlist yet. At least put the design document out so players can critique it.

Or else they release something totally incomplete again (like the two WDS events)..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jqOeGm1j-w

[Traak]

How about adding about twenty staffers who do nothing but ban hackers? Oh, wait, that would affect a lot of you all, now wouldn't it?

[ringring]

How about adding about twenty staffers who do nothing but ban hackers? Oh, wait, that would affect a lot of you all, now wouldn't it?
lol :)

[p0intman]

How about adding about twenty staffers who do nothing but ban hackers? Oh, wait, that would affect a lot of you all, now wouldn't it?

https://media.giphy.com/media/DYuiOl0UN9KJq/giphy.gif

[Calista]

The should start considering when to sunset this game and move on to something else. From what I hear the pops on PS4 aren't great (PC either for that matter) and folks are calling for server merges already. This can't be good. They could fix bugs and maybe tweak performance but the lofty goal of getting the PS4 version's content to PC level surely won't help. It hasn't for the PC. They need to revive that Sturm und Drang game Smed alluded to a while back and just punt on PS2, I am sad to say but it just feels like a lost cause for Planetside at this point.

[p0intman]

The should start considering when to sunset this game and move on to something else. From what I hear the pops on PS4 aren't great (PC either for that matter) and folks are calling for server merges already. This can't be good. They could fix bugs and maybe tweak performance but the lofty goal of getting the PS4 version's content to PC level surely won't help. It hasn't for the PC. They need to revive that Sturm und Drang game Smed alluded to a while back and just punt on PS2, I am sad to say but it just feels like a lost cause for Planetside at this point.

it wouldn't be shit if they had been at least faithful to the original.

[bpostal]

it wouldn't be shit if they had been at least faithful to the original.

Hey now, at least the names for some of the stuff are similar!

[TheBTron]

The game I think is just in a maintenance mode now. You will get little patches and stuff added to the store but I think it is what it is. Day Break will try and get what ever money they can from PS2 the next few year and then shut it down.

[Mordelicius]

My guess is they will either announce a PS2 X-Box port or post the Planetside 2 2.0 design documents next.

Whichever comes first is anyone's guess..

[Mordelicius]

PS2 2.0 Update from the official forum: https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/2015-update.231548/

Hey Everyone,

If you don’t know me, I'm Luke Sigmund, Lead Designer of PlanetSide 2. We’ve seen how excited some of you are for more information about upcoming content and we’re just as excited to share it. We wanted to take some time and fill you in on where the team is taking the game and give a little insight into the future.

As a team, we've spent the last couple weeks discussing and determining the direction of the game moving forward and adjusting our 2015 Roadmap. We started by examining what the game is now and where we and you all would like it to go.

Through the process of several team meetings, we came to the conclusion that we want to put tools in your hands to create gameplay experiences that have a variety of strategies and moment-to-moment tactics. Letting players affect gameplay is a huge component of PlanetSide 2 and we intend to double down on that moving forward.

Our biggest step will be the introduction of a player placed construction system. Using a new vehicle, the ANT, you will be able to hunt down and collect a new resource out in the world. After you collect enough you can travel to an area of your choice, deploy your ANT, then interact with its terminal to deduct the new resource and place a structure. Our first set of structures are planned to be medium sized base turret towers, with more to come as we start gathering suggestions from you and playing with the system. This is just an overview, and we have a lot more details that will be posted in the roadmap section of the forums really soon.

Throughout the rest of the year you will also start seeing adjustments, improvements, and additions to current mechanics and features, kind of like we've been doing for instant action and spawning rules. We will mainly be targeting features that we are eager to make better like continent capture, leadership tools, and implants. With the overall goal of making these systems fit in with the direction of giving you tools to play how you want.

Like I said, this update is just to give you all an idea of where we are headed. This is a journey for all of us so we are all excited about the plan and hope you are too. We look forward to all of your feedback and thoughts on upcoming systems and appreciate all of your passion and support for PlanetSide 2

Kinda backwards and unituitive. There is no point in protecting/attacking valueless facilities.

1) New ANT Vehicle to procure resources.
2) Use resources to construct new defense structures
3) To defend bases that have practically ZERO worth (much less attack a heavily defended base that yield you the same)

It's the equivalent of a missile defense system to defend an empty barren desert. Aren't those reserved for high value targets that need clear protection like the White House, Congress, Pentagon, Statue of Liberty etc.

Should be:
1) Implement Resources 2.0 or at least bring back the old one for the meantime.
2) Give Bases meaning, value and importance (so players will actually attack, defend, fight and contest for it).
3) *then add the new defense structures.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960702#post960702

[ringring]

The thing that gets me is that by the time you have got your ant, harvested your resources and then drive to the base to defend it will have already been long captured because turn over of bases is so easy in ps2.

At lest that's my impression of how things will turn out, I couldn't say how the devs expect it to work.

[Crator]

I don't know what they are doing but they aren't painting the whole picture of what they are thinking.

I'm not happy the resource revamp isn't going in. That was really going to give the game a better, more layered, dynamic. ANTs becoming transformers is not a horrible idea but it needs to be done right. But turrets? Really? We have enough turrets in the game already I think... I want it to transform in to a router!

Also, what's this about? --> New Capture UI (https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/new-capture-ui.231278/)... Not sure many noticed it, but it's not just a UI change they want to do. They wanted to change capture mechanics with it. And I don't see how the proposed change makes the UI more intuitive as they are claiming.

[Rivenshield]

/yawn

No Battle Islands that we saw preview videos for over a year ago. Neither of the two continents that were being created over a year ago. No global map at the warpgate, so I can't look and see where the good fights are without bouncing around between continents; hence zero strategy. Oh, and somewhere along the way for some reason I lost the ability to see where the medics were if I was dead and the ability to see which bloody continent the alert was on, both of represent steps bass-ackwards.

Meanwhile, the pop on Connery is so low we can't even get a pop lock on a Friday night. But hey! we're gonna get ANT's that make... towers!

Shit.

[Calista]

I don't think they are making enough money to do any really substantive changes to the game so it's probably gonna limp along with relatively cheap to implement gimmicks towards a gradual end. If the PS4 version were a big hit you might have seen some re-growth through re-hires on the dev team but that hasn't happened. And as usual there are a lot of titles coming out in 2-3 months so I guess we shall see how PS2 weathers the storm. I would love to see an explosion of interest in the game and it grow beyond the scope of comprehension but they kinda missed a chance on the console so far and it really dampened the prospects of hope going forward.

[Mordelicius]

PS2 being made fun of in the front page of Reddit

https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/3kq2z3/planetside_2_in_a_nutshell/

And the complaints are the same: game has no battle flow, bases have no value and fights mean nothing, especially with no basic resource meta.

But they are adding structures first (why fortify/fight for bases with no value?). Whos' going to assault a heavily fortified major facility that has no value?

https://twitter.com/planetside2/status/645005042030903296

https://twitter.com/planetside2/status/645004188146139136

[OpolE]

Now that Smedley's gone can we assume this September update promise has gone to shit?

[Calista]

And the complaints are the same: game has no battle flow, bases have no value and fights mean nothing, especially with no basic resource meta.

But they are adding structures first (why fortify/fight for bases with no value?). Whos' going to assault a heavily fortified major facility that has no value?



This game has FAR too many facilities as it is! It's basically just a conglomeration of CoD or maybe BF sized maps hodgepodged together into a glorified TDM with little to no combined arms due to structures jammed close together. It's not a bad game it's just VERY shallow except for the depth of crap in the cash shop. I was so looking forward to a new Planetside only to be woefully disappointed with what they decided to do with this franchise. Makes me want to :cry: every time I think about it.

[Canaris]

Can you dig what the team is working on this afternoon?

Another gimmick that will fail along with all the other useless gimmicks of Planetside 2, if it's not an proper intercontinental warfare and another load of continents then it's the wrong thing to be working on.

[Crator]

Another gimmick that will fail along with all the other useless gimmicks of Planetside 2, if it's not an proper intercontinental warfare and another load of continents then it's the wrong thing to be working on.

This sounds promising but currently just hope.

New Victory Conditions PC/PS4 (https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/new-victory-conditions-pc-ps4.233467/)

Capturing continents will use a new “Victory Points” system that represents a faction’s overall progress toward locking down a continent. Alert wins will no longer immediately lock a continent. Alerts, Territory Control, and new condition types (like linking one warp gate to another) will factor into a faction’s current Victory Points.

[Calista]

This sounds promising but currently just hope.

Are there enough players now for more than just one continent of decent fights?

[OpolE]

ITS OCTOBER! WHERES THE FEKKING UPDATE!

Broken promises throughout PS2 again deja vu

[Mordelicius]

ITS OCTOBER! WHERES THE FEKKING UPDATE!

Broken promises throughout PS2 again deja vu

They cancelled Smedley's 2.0 mandate since he's no longer there. Unfortunate, b/c he's pretty much eschewed hubris and based much of the 2.0 outlined update on our feedback. That's right, he's essentially acknowledging players understand pvp dynamics more than the developers. And why not? The majority of the PS2 team are PvE-centric players.

Their new focus is on base-building, which again begs the question: what's the value of those buildings in the first place?

Batman, the Dark Knight, isn't going to camp a far-and-out empty warehouse in middle of the desert, fortify it with the latest defensive gears and gizmos while staking out the Joker to pounce.

At the same time the Joker isn't going to waste his biological gases and destructive bombs on empty building in the middle of the desert. The Joker's going to pick a high-value target in the city and it's up to Batman to interdict his movements there (not in the desert).

Is it still not clicking that the buildings/facilities need to have importance first?

But yeah, RIP 2.0

80s - Imagination - Just an Illusion 1982

[Calista]

Took 'em 3 years but I hear sanctuaries are coming back.

[p0intman]

Took 'em 3 years but I hear sanctuaries are coming back.

not that it matters, but source or stfu

[Mordelicius]

not that it matters, but source or stfu

https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/3o4x3d/ask_the_new_executive_creative_director_almost/cvu42cx

1) Short term goals is to address early retention, late game malaise, and revenue. The later might set off alarm bells, but, guys & gals, it is an amazing game that we are providing for free and we need to provide more compelling opportunities to spend money. This is simply a fact of life so the game gets the support it needs.
2) We are going to try a few things that I think will actually help a lot, though they are fairly straight forward. First, I want to surface achievements more. Make goals more clearly apparent to new players so the "Welcome to Planetside" effect does not deter them so quickly. Second, we're actually going to add a lobby to the game, so when you enter, it isn't disorienting and throwing you into the frying pan, causing you to go through all these load screens to get were you really wanted to go, etc. I can't wait to share more details on how we will be implementing that. I hope you like it. As a Planetside fan myself, I think it is super cool.
Ermahgerd Nerd!
3) Yates? hmmm. That should be self evident.

Now they say 'retention'. I've been saying this since launch. Dec. 2012
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showpost.php?p=868000&postcount=29

Faction balance first before promotions.

Gameplay balance first before promotions.

They may lure in alot of new players but all these imbalances will simply enfuriate them.

Faction balance - Overpowered Vanu camps Esamir so they can spam overpowered Magriders. NC and TR leaves for Indar. whoever is losing that fight goes to Amerish. So you got a 3 different faction concentrated on 3 different continents. Then, all 3 factions will switch continents for easy capping on empty bases, rinse and repeat.

Gameplay balance - Air units need to be nerfed or be more expensive. I've never used air units before because I prefer infantry, but these units get too much kills and advantage.

Small/Medium base spawn rooms needs retooling to allow infantry to get out and not get farmed by air or mechanized units as soon as they step out. Give them 3 double-width doors. Open up the roof with shields so players shoot the hoovering aircraft right above the room while their nose is pointing just outside the door.

They can grab all the players they can with these promos but they will simply leave once they realise the game balance is out of whack.


Planetside 2 is 3 barrels leaking water (players). Instead of patching the holes, they focused on pouring in more on the top with their errant promos.

Also, told them that the new measures aren't nearly enough to tide attrition.
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960702#post960702
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960687#post960687

They don't like PvP and they don't listen to PvPers.
Their attitude is We-are-the-developers-therefore-we-got-this.
Developers (who mainly play PvE games) attempting a 100% PvP MMOFPS game while blatantly ignoring PvPers.
The last time I played on PTS, the Devs were testing out the game demo for the PS4 crowd. They parked the offensive spawn Sunderer in the worst possible spots in the tech plant. So, that's a dead giveaway these guys never assaulted a tech plant before. If I hadn't put a correct spawn, the fight would have gone nowhere b/c they are simply getting picked off piecemeal as soon as they spawn.

[Mordelicius]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/3popa8/facilitycontinent_benefit_changes_coming_to_pts/


Amp Station Benefit
Amp station will give facility turrets the ability to fire three times as long before overheating; it also gives facility turrets the ability to auto repair at a rate of 0 to full in three minutes.
Bio Lab Benefit
Biolab benefit will act just like Implant Regen 2 while in friendly territory (huge heal buff) and will over ride implant regen 1 & 2 while active (no stacking). Implant 3 & 4 effects will over ride the Bio Lab benefit at all times. MAX's are not healed by Biolab benefit.
Hossin Benefit
MAX cost reduction has been removed, Hossin will now provide vehicle/aircraft repairs at friendly ammo towers/pads.
Note;
We are still on the fence about whether or not these changes will make in to Live in next week’s planned victory condition update

Interesting start (many say this reflects PS1?) especially with the new Victory Conditions. Hopefully (eventually) they can put forth a more robust system of interrelated facility benefits. I suggested: http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=960702#post960702

Instead they can implement something that can help the overall longevity of faction warfare

Example: last year I've suggested Stolen Tech Cert lines ( I can't seem to find the post...)

A player can use an enemy faction's gear so long as they are certed in that particular branch AND your faction is holding the appropriate facilities

Requirement: NC controls 3 Indar Biolabs + 1 Tech Plant + NC player has certed into VS Max Stolen Tech Cert tree
Temporary Benefit: NC Player in Indar can pull VS Maxes (with NC color scheme) as long as the requirements are met.

Requirement: NC in Indar controls 3 Tech plant + 1 Amp station + NC player certed into TR MBT Stolen Tech tree
Temporary Benefit : NC player in Indar can pull NC colored Prowlers as long as the requirements are met.

Many base combinations can be tied to a specific Empire-Specific Stolen Tech lines. (If the Devs wish, they can use a more complex system of allowing blueprints/components carried/installed to and from facilities).

What's the value of the Stolen Tech Tree?
- High level Cert sink (totally separate from owning other Empire characters)
- Giving bases meaning and benefits.
- Players will queue to beneficial continent so they can pull a stolen tech gear. PS2 Devs like continental queue since it gives priority to premium members.
- Rewards faction loyalist. Before, all players are encouraged to use all 3 factions so SOE (DBG) can sell their gear 3x. But what about a one-empire-only players (such as myself). We can invest on the Stolen Tech cert lines.

An NC loyalist can fully cert towards any Vanu or TR Stolen Tech Cert trees. This is a much better alternative to just destroying any semblance of faction identity and any faction-based warfare derived from it.

In summary: Want access to enemy faction empire specific gears? Cert into Stolen Tech trees and capture pertinent bases.

[Calista]

I think what they need to do for the future they are already doing. Slender down PS2 and put more into the future game which was mentioned in a Reddit post. Pretty sure I know what it is and if so then yea good call.

[OpolE]

Whens this fekking september ANT ready? Sept 2016? TOSSERS

[Calista]

DBG I implore and expect better of you in this next game. You know the limitations in engine technology, please do not push it and expect micro-transactions to fund it further. We would much rather pay monthly for a game that is truly inspiring albeit limiting, though thought invoking. Challenge us and we will respond with dollars!

[SArais]

Sanctuaries huh? Better keep going and overhaul the entire system.

Let's make planetside 2 like planetside 1. Because what we had/have is the wrong direction.

[Xaine]

As has been mentioned in this thread several times, make it more like Planetside 1.

I'm not quite sure how the design for Planetside 2 got into a place where it needs a 'complete' overhaul, but then again, the development and general design direction if Planetside 2 has always been a complete and utter fucking clown car - so no shocks there I suppose.

It's always blown my mind how SoE/Daybreak could take such a fantastic game, years ahead of it's time - and then with more money, better technology and larger dev team, somehow turn it's sequel into such an unmitigated disaster.

The engine is fine, the moment to moment gameplay is great, the art is great - the game design is some of the worst I've ever seen.

Amazing how a game that people can play for free, with such high development cost and time invested - can have so few people playing it.

[Mordelicius]

Whens this fekking september ANT ready? Sept 2016? TOSSERS
The ANT is out on PTS. In its current iteration, it's nothing but Harasser fodder. The classic cert pinata (that's not to mention aircraft vultures).

Tanks are slow but it's sturdy and hits hard.
Sunderers are slow too with medium weapons, but are bulky enough to survive.

ANTs however won't be able to exist for long in the battlefield. I noticed resources spawn behind the frontlines. Even so these things will be hunted down easily. Even with escorts, how do you prevent harassers/tanks from hitting these things? Heck, stealth Flash should be able to ambush them).

It has to be:
1) the sturdiest of all ground vehicles (barring deployed/shielded Sundy)
2) the weakest-hitting of all vehicles (including the Flash)
3) given 3 sidegrade options:
- extra Armor
- Turbo (5 second speed boost)
- Radar
It's up to the players whether they want avoidance (radar), escape (turbo), or survivability (extra armor).

I doubt they will give this thing stealth. It would me it consequently overpowered.

One thing they have to prevent is the advent of Battle ANTs. Hence, it shouldn't be able to scratch anything more than light armor.

They didn't heed my warning against Battle Sundies. I suggested, weapon damage should be halved/disabled when deployed and armor/shield doubled and allowed to be repairable. That's why I prompted it. Being an exclusive Sundy driver/spawner, I knew the exact weakness and strength of these things.

I remember fighting the old NUC when the Harassers got nerfed. They tried the Battle Sundy spam immediately that same day. I just sniped and broke apart their formation with a Spear Turret from a tower. I waited until they are separated, before I shouted "NUC Sundies incoming N NE NW". And I believe this was before the series of Sundy buffs. They just hunted them down and tore them up. Still believe to this day that NUC broke up b/c of the Harassers and TR Max nerfs.

SOE/DBG ignored our warnings about ZOE and Harassers, both disastrous to game balance and population. They finally listened with the Valkyrie release (was it that bad? They buffed it incrementally).

The ANT has to fit in the battlefied (I don't mean combat-wise but survivability-wise). I used to roll Scout Radar Flash. I run in straight to the enemy lines and hide behind the rocks. Every enemy within 100m radius is lighted up. I just say "clear" and the rest will follow suit because enemies are hightlighted.

When they released the Harassers, Scout Radar Flash lost its niche. All that is left for Flashes are the Stealth Ambushers. One has to pick Stealth or Radar. If I pick stealth so I don't get fodderized by the Harassers, its moot because there's no radar. ANTs, I dont' see how it will survive long enough.

[ringring]

Do you think a relatively weak ant will force cooperation and by that I mean troop of 1 ant plus protection in the form a harrassers and/or battle sundies?

I suspect it will depend on the reward at the end of it. If the base that can be built at the end of all all this is powerful and not easily knocked-out then maybe outfits will think the end result is worth the effort.

[Mordelicius]

Do you think a relatively weak ant will force cooperation and by that I mean troop of 1 ant plus protection in the form a harrassers and/or battle sundies?

I suspect it will depend on the reward at the end of it. If the base that can be built at the end of all all this is powerful and not easily knocked-out then maybe outfits will think the end result is worth the effort.
In my opinion, it is relatively moot to escort a weak ANT. High value targets will always be priority. In the case of Sunderers, players suicide just to take it out. That's why the Sundy was (eventually, finally and thankfully ) buffed so it could stand a chance surviving all these attacks (I've lost count how many 'buff Sundy spawn' post I had before they listened).

You do realize how difficult it is to keep Sundy alive during battles, right? I know this very well because I always guarded my Sundy. I know every trick they use, including underhanded ones using alts to drop friendly mines in conjunction with enemy c4/grenade/rocket rush and many other chicanery such as deploying a friendly Sundy out of place to block others from placing at any apt hiding/parking spot (via friendly Sundy no-deploy zone).

Hence I suggested putting nametags on Sunderers, so players can report these ***holes. Apparently, they just recently implemented that one too.

Secondly, I really doubt they would release all the new Base-building systems all at once. Hence they got 3 choices:

1) Release a weak ANT. It will buffed anyway. If the airborne Valkyrie was initially widely lampooned as a flying cert pinata, then the ANT is the grounded version where everyone essentially can take a pot shot at with it having little to no defense/resistance.

2) Release a buffed ANT (as I suggested) and adjust/nerf it later if necessary once they release the rest of the base-building components.

3) Release the ANT and the whole Base-building meta in one go 10-12 months later. Highly unlikely.

Lastly, I think a proper ANT escort should include at least one Repair Sundy and a Harasser to scout ahead of the destination. Plus 1 tank or combat harasser. Even with those, how do you stop 3 determined tanks/harrassers from focus-firing on the ANT/Repair Sundy? That repair Sundy won't last. And these guys would gladly exchange kills as long as the ANT goes down, no different to what would happen to a Sunderer spawn.