Okay, y'all win

[bpostal]

For...fuck? Months? It seems like the few that still frequent this forum have been overly pessimistic about the direction this game has been going. It's one of the reasons I haven't been checking/commenting here.

Today, I've read these Q&A comments (http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/37sb7t/qa_from_todays_twitch_live_stream/) from a twitch stream about the new Conquest mode (https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/pts-update-5-28-conquest.226689/#post-3193351). From what I've been reading since the initial announcement this just seems so completely backwards from the direction this game should be taking. It's devolving in front of my eyes.

I'm with you now. Any semblance of Planetside seems to soon be downplayed from this game in order to curry favor from their soon to be PS4 playerbase.

I no longer trust that these people have any idea what they're doing with this IP and I no longer have any semblance of hope that we'll see PS2 live up to its potential. At least I'll have the memories of the last couple years.

Fuck. What a waste.

[ringring]

To me it just looks like they're flailing around, trying anything in the hope that it works. There are parts of the game that is pretty solid but without that something extra it's like a bacon sandwich without the bacon.

I don't know what the point was that it when wrong. Was it the original concept? Was it the choice of FTP rather than subscription? Was is the concept of the game as a 'service' rather than a 'product'? Did Matt and the rest actually know what they were doing? Or was it simply that it was too expensive to create something with the magic of the original combined with the technical excellence* of it's successor.

* yes excellence, apart from just after every update.

[Calista]

Smed said recently they are targeting 45 minute play sessions in all their games now. I guess its about the time it would take to eat a bag of Doritos while drinking a Mountain Dew :lol: It wouldn't surprise me if they decided to turn EQN into a MOBA and only release it on consoles or maybe some sort of "free to play" mobile money grab.

[bpostal]

Having a play session target length for something like PS2 just seems retarded.

[Calista]

Well he doesn't specifically mention Planetside when he refers to "some games", It seems uncanny the timing of this new game mode which has a relatively short time win condition. I can almost see the game in the future consisting entirely of these type game modes. Time will tell I guess.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-days-of-the-wow-style-mmo-are-over-h1z1-boss-s/1100-6426943/

http://www.reddit.com/r/EQ2/comments/34feop/my_comments_regarding_wow_style_mmos/

[bpostal]

I could see targeting a raid or instance in the next EQ game for 45 min but it just doesn't make sense to do that for a game like PS2 unless they got rid of live play all together and remade the game into Battlefield: Auraxis.

[Babyfark McGeez]

It seems they are still desperately trying to turn the niche concept of Planetside into some big dudebro gamer thing - with the predicted results of a shite game that's a mockery of its original IP.

Instead of embracing the unique aspects and working towards having a dedicated (niche) audience these assclowns fell for the common big studio trap of "Only ALL the money is good" thinking. Which, considering the obvious limitations this particular studio has, is especially fucking stupid. And even worse, they are killing off the concept of "MMOFPS" for good in the process.

Thanks a lot smed.

[ringring]

I noticed Malorn was having a rant the other day on the new game mode and specifically (as far as I could make out) on the new lattice concept. His point was that it made the game more complex where simplicity should be the goal.

[bpostal]

It seems they are still desperately trying to turn the niche concept of Planetside into some big dudebro gamer thing - with the predicted results of a shite game that's a mockery of its original IP.

Instead of embracing the unique aspects and working towards having a dedicated (niche) audience these assclowns fell for the common big studio trap of "Only ALL the money is good" thinking. Which, considering the obvious limitations this particular studio has, is especially fucking stupid. And even worse, they are killing off the concept of "MMOFPS" for good in the process.

Thanks a lot smed.

They're blazing a trail in the wrong direction, that's for sure. It just doesn't make sense to pare an MMOFPS down to just another ho hum FPS. We've already got semi-regular releases of Battlefield and COD for that kinda shit.

I noticed Malorn was having a rant the other day on the new game mode and specifically (as far as I could make out) on the new lattice concept. His point was that it made the game more complex where simplicity should be the goal.

I must have missed that. I'd have thought he'd be in favor of the new 'hexice' system. Odd to see him favoring even more simplicity when it comes to the higher level strategy.

[ringring]

I must have missed that. I'd have thought he'd be in favor of the new 'hexice' system. Odd to see him favoring even more simplicity when it comes to the higher level strategy.
Well as I've been banging on about for years, complexity is not the same as depth as simplicity is not the same a shallowness.

I've always said make the game simple and allow the players to add depth and I believe that's exactly what planetside 1 did in the lattice.

[bpostal]

Well as I've been banging on about for years, complexity is not the same as depth as simplicity is not the same a shallowness.

I've always said make the game simple and allow the players to add depth and I believe that's exactly what planetside 1 did in the lattice.

To be fair, starting simple and adding more elements had been the plan since the very beginning from what I recall.

The hex system allowed for rampant low intensity/ghost capping and broke up good fights as people would trickle away in different directions once bases did get capped due to the high amount of potential bases to assault because of the adjacency rules.

The lattice system, imo, suffers from high base density on certain continents (Primarily Indar) and overly diverse base design when it comes to how defensible certain bases are. Some are designed to be run over, some are designed to be held.
Defensible bases should be placed at key locations in the lattice and it can be difficult and time consuming to shift them about due to the highly customized (and hand drawn) aspect of the conts.

This combination seems to be a good compromise between the two. There's not quite so much freedom from the hex that you'll see 1-2 stalker infils at every adjoining base and with only the major facilities linked via lattice there's always a subobjective to push to that keeps most everyone on track.

[Calista]

Been reading a lot lately and I see it is generally accepted now that MOBA's are MMO's. The gaming world is in bad shape I tell ya. So for that matter I reckon CoD is an MMO. I think I will just go back to single player linear games and hope things get better with multiplayer as for now it appears to be going to shit.

[bpostal]

If you're going to play a single player game, don't forget to pay your ISP. They require internet access to function now.

[libbmaster]

To me it just looks like they're flailing around, trying anything in the hope that it works. There are parts of the game that is pretty solid but without that something extra it's like a bacon sandwich without the bacon.

I don't know what the point was that it when wrong. Was it the original concept? Was it the choice of FTP rather than subscription? Was is the concept of the game as a 'service' rather than a 'product'? Did Matt and the rest actually know what they were doing? Or was it simply that it was too expensive to create something with the magic of the original combined with the technical excellence* of it's successor.

* yes excellence, apart from just after every update.


For the record, I think the free to play model was never the problem.

In fact, I could say that about most of the stuff you mentioned.

Poor leadership (or misguided leadership, depending on your views) is what I would point to. They just seemed to jump around with ideas and goals and strategies: there never seemed to be real engagement.

And I'd like to give my sympathies to OP. I'm much the same as you: I avoided this site like the plague because of the caustic tone but now, regardless of my opinion on said tone, the facts people are using are indisputable.

[Rivenshield]

I noticed Malorn was having a rant the other day on the new game mode and specifically (as far as I could make out) on the new lattice concept. His point was that it made the game more complex where simplicity should be the goal.

Where was this? On Reddit? You gotta link? He's as close to a high priest as the bittervet community has.

BTW, when are the dumb bastards going to come out with a downloadable user's guide? When are we going to get a global map so I can see who's fighting who where? When do we get the inter continental lattice and the battle islands they showcased LAST BLOODY YEAR?

/looks forlorn

[ringring]

Where was this? On Reddit? You gotta link? He's as close to a high priest as the bittervet community has.

BTW, when are the dumb bastards going to come out with a downloadable user's guide? When are we going to get a global map so I can see who's fighting who where? When do we get the inter continental lattice and the battle islands they showcased LAST BLOODY YEAR?

/looks forlorn

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/37p9wi/conquest_the_new_gamemode_is_entirely_dull_and/crr4ziz

[bpostal]

I hadn't seen that, thanks for the link.

He makes a point about the hybrid system having the fundamental flaw of the original hex system, that fights disperse amongst all adjacent bases almost as soon as they start to heat up.

The crux of the issue is base density. Bases provide hard spawns but they're not close enough to create one large fight, they create two smaller fights. AMSes push forward, get blown up and then the attack is stalled. You get that back and forth until someone gets a strong foothold and only then can the battle begin in earnest.

Disagree that the additional complexity is a bad thing. New players shouldn't have to worry too much about watching the map to see if they've been back hacked. That's what the SLs and PLs should be doing. These same SLs and PLs that need something more than 'put attack marker down and rush AMSes to the point'.
You really want to add complexity? Hex bases capture via a timer. Lattice bases capture via LLU.
We need more than 'throw bodies at the point until victory' and adding objectives to hold can be only a good time IMO.

[p0intman]

For...fuck? Months? It seems like the few that still frequent this forum have been overly pessimistic about the direction this game has been going. It's one of the reasons I haven't been checking/commenting here.

Today, I've read these Q&A comments (http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/37sb7t/qa_from_todays_twitch_live_stream/) from a twitch stream about the new Conquest mode (https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/pts-update-5-28-conquest.226689/#post-3193351). From what I've been reading since the initial announcement this just seems so completely backwards from the direction this game should be taking. It's devolving in front of my eyes.

I'm with you now. Any semblance of Planetside seems to soon be downplayed from this game in order to curry favor from their soon to be PS4 playerbase.

I no longer trust that these people have any idea what they're doing with this IP and I no longer have any semblance of hope that we'll see PS2 live up to its potential. At least I'll have the memories of the last couple years.

Fuck. What a waste.

it took you long enough...

Welcome to the club.

[RykerStruvian]

You can't deny that the revenue which can be generated by the PS4's release will hurt PS2. To put it simple, if the PS2 on the PS4 fails, PS2 will die for sure. However, if it catches on and people actually like it, the amount of revenue would exceed anything the PC audience would be able to offer.

I wish we had some financials to look over as I suspect PC customers pay more per person vs. a console player. However, there are more console players than PC players, so the per person dollar amount might be exceeded by the sheer number of PS4 users, even if those users are more keen to pay less per person. Another thing to consider is that there does seem to be a trend of console users, who are just now finding out about PS2, are actually transitioning from the PS4 to PC. Some PS2 users are moving to the PS4 as well, but I haven't seen a lot of people do this.

If I remember correctly, Smedley mentioned in a recent post (last four months) that PS2 had just begun to return a profit. If PS2 had been bleeding without a return of any kind after 66-months of development (18-months prebeta, 48-months postbeta), that means PS2 has been a moneypit for 5.5 years, or around 5. Not surprising layoffs would come from something like this.