Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Caution: contains nuts.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2012-08-12, 06:06 PM | [Ignore Me] #61 | ||
Private
|
Cool write up but I'd have to disagree with the Pay to Win expansions. In my opinion they weren't that bad and they didn't make you super overpowered and completely unbeatable (after a good patch).
|
||
|
2012-08-12, 07:54 PM | [Ignore Me] #62 | ||
First Lieutenant
|
Excellent post. PS1 suffered from "power creep." New content was almost always overpowered. The BFR's, Galaxy Gunship, Phant. IMO the GG breaks tank gameplay when it's around. I still long for the balanced slow orb Lasher of old. Why they ruined a good gun I will never know, all it needed was 5 more in the clip. :/
|
||
|
2012-08-12, 08:05 PM | [Ignore Me] #63 | ||
Sergeant Major
|
Well, since PS2 is F2P.... no worry on that really.
They drop new content, just drop the cert points to unlock it. To keep their player base, they'll HAVE to keep things balanced. If they add something that everyone suddenly certs into and starts abusing, then it'll get nerfed :P They need to keep their player count up Last edited by RoninOni; 2012-08-12 at 08:06 PM. |
||
|
2012-10-25, 10:27 AM | [Ignore Me] #64 | ||
Banned
|
I think the lattice system was an idea created by the beta community, not necessarily by the SOE design team. Wasn't it named the "Matrix system" on the beta forums?
The moral of the story in this thread? Im not sure. Don't use the live servers as testing grounds? |
||
|
2012-10-25, 10:44 AM | [Ignore Me] #65 | ||
Master Sergeant
|
For me the poor coding was a massive death wish too. I always remember people telling me that the current Devs had very little ability to change the game; couldn't edit terrain or bases for example. It did badly for lag too, and there were some persistent bugs that just could not be got rid of.
The terminal bug anyone? It made me chuckle attacking a base stairwell to see the VS/TR running at me in PJ's and going "yep, term bug". And the white terrain glitch, that haunted almost my whole time playing. After about 6 hours suddenly you'd see a patch of terrain gone white and thought "here we go". You had to restart as soon as you saw it because it meant the game was going to crash in the next few minutes. PAIN IN THE ASS. Personally, PlanetSide 1 as I knew it ended when Markov merged with Emerald and as Fig said, it killed Werner dead. Prior to that, Werner was a kind of community. After years of playing you pretty much recognized everybody on the whole server on all 3 empires, and all the outfits too. Werner had the TR zerg too, 40% population. Once it merged, all those kind of things vanished/changed. But the point in all this is what I've been saying a lot; PlanetSide 1 worked. Despite ALL the hurdles outlined in Fig's post it was still able to maintain a playable population for 9 years, because the game worked.. But it never managed to take off because of all the things in Fig's post. What happens if you give it that? What happens if you give it a HD facelift? A lucrative marketing campagne? Get it in all the stores, on steam, in all the magazines, fix all the gamebreaking bugs, give it a massive dev team for monthly content development, give it a F2P model, fix the excessive lag, make sure the gaming world over knows and is talking about the only MMOFPS that exists? These were all the things that needed "fixing" in PlanetSide 1. Not some shoddy false idea that the core mechanics were flawed/unappealing. |
||
|
2012-10-25, 10:50 AM | [Ignore Me] #66 | ||
Contributor General
|
Having looked at those subscription figures again there is one notable thing that I don't think anyone has commented on.
It is, at release or just after the subscription peaked at 60k. They stayed steady(ish) for a while and as Figgy said the decline really kicked in at the introduction of BFR's and the release of WOW. But, the peak was only 60K! For the only MOFPS on the market! Why was this? Did people not know about it? Was there no or little marketing? This implies that the same game launched differently and better would have gained a much greater player base and no one would be talking about relative failure. Or, the other explanation is that a player base of 60k is the natual limit for an MMOFPS, I doubt anyone seriously would believe that. On the 'why people quit' thing. I would also say that the game was not stable at all. I know many game up because they crashed all the time, even 1 year after launch when I joined it did this. |
||
|
2012-10-25, 11:03 AM | [Ignore Me] #67 | |||
Sergeant Major
|
Some changes probably were needed - more exciting gunplay, for example - and some are probably a good idea - like replacing armour with shields. But the core gameplay of PS1 was solid in most respects, and just needed tweaking and building on - not scrapping and replacing. |
|||
|
2012-10-25, 11:59 AM | [Ignore Me] #68 | ||||||
Major
|
Fantastic post, I agree with about 98% of it. I'll try to tease out what bugs me or I disagree with.
The normal argument about the bending was that it put the global lattice going through Oshur with the BI rather than Searhus which changed the way you could attack various conts making empire movement more constrained. Also SG's being bound to tech wasn't a problem. Reavers are also bound to tech and you could always bring either back from sanc. Nailed it. ----- And other posts: Bundles weren't a problem. Unless you liked buying all 3 ATVs for 2 certs apiece. There's 'specialization' and then there's 'no one ever expects to see this vehicle because the certs are better spent elsewhere sunderer'. Also lower pops at that point meant that you couldn't afford to have as much specialization as you could with larger pops.
Definitely agree with the need for a beta server. SPAMMYLASHERNOOBS AWAY! (good days) Devs please take note about the beta server. Everyone started at around Br11 or so with plenty of certs so that they could actually test the changes. (that was later bumped up to starting at 20)
For months.
__________________
By hook or by crook, we will. |
||||||
|
2012-10-25, 12:05 PM | [Ignore Me] #70 | ||
Major
|
I don't believe the game was a failure based purely on developmental missteps. Did it help the matter as the game progressed? Probably not.
In my opinion, this FPS game didn't have wide acclaim like others simply for one reason: the cost of admission and the cost to continually play. FPS games as a subscription-based game model was sure to only appeal to a select few, while others with a one time fee are guaranteed to have a wide distribution if it's fun (e.g., moh, cod and BF franchise). The developers, in their desperation, tried things that they hoped would help, that really didn't, but could you blame them? |
||
|
2012-11-28, 10:51 AM | [Ignore Me] #74 | ||
Private
|
Bravo sir an excellent post!!
one of my pet hates at the moment are people in PS2 who quote the failure of PS1 as an example of vital missing game mechanics i cant help thinking the cert system was far superior in PS1 for player longevity and intimacy with your character curbing the PS2 venting to... "its good, but no where near as good as PS1 for game play and community" Last edited by Binkus; 2012-11-28 at 11:18 AM. |
||
|
2012-11-28, 12:35 PM | [Ignore Me] #75 | ||
Lieutenant Colonel
|
56k modem lag and hacks hurt thre pop more than anything else.
But BFRs also drove people away over time. Many players found them frustrating to deal with - until later when they got the nerf hammer.
__________________
Wherever you went - Here you are. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|