Planetside's Future..

[Larington]

WTF Xaine, one of my outfitmates pointed this out and unless you've been on an alt since December you haven't been playing the game and have no idea how much has changed.

Do I wish they'd held on just three months more before launch? Yes.
Do I wish they'd kept more of Planetside 1's mechanics rather than re-inventing the wheel? Hell yes.

Do I think the developers are slacking? No, fucking hell no. These poor sods are often in on weekends to make cool stuff for the players, they are no slouches. They don't deserve that kind of abuse. The other stuff, well, my main gripes are things they couldn't have anticipated (the need for more continents so the existing ones don't feel tired too quickly, or Indarside*) or were likely out of their hands (a launch date is a business decision before it is a developer one). I suppose being on Twitter and having a list of all the devs gives me an unfair advantage, but it's been pretty clear to me that the devs are putting hard graft in.

*It's weird that, isn't it? At the same time as thinking the game could've done with more continents (maybe something computer generated algorithm type thing that is then hand crafted further in the more populous areas as time goes on) I can't help but also notice that mostly people seem to end up on Indar with a chunk of people always clustering around the crown. Planetside 2's 2fort, or de_dust, if you will.

[Sonny]

On the contrary, I'm consistently impressed by how much the developers have done in three months and how much they plan to add in the near future. The continents (and metagame) are coming soon, just hold on .

[Vashyo]

Originally Posted by Thunderhawk

What was that screen shot from?

Killzone 4 if I'm not mistaken, it's just a pipeline shooter though. :/



I personally have to agree with the OP, but I'm not gonna trash SOE though. I have great expectations from PS2, but they haven't been met barely at all yet atleast. I dont really care about 90% of the roadmap. The changes im waiting for have more to do with the gameplay changing into something else, I just don't see this happening strongly enough to make the game any more meaningful. Partly because it takes a lot of work and partly because some more casual players prolly would not like having to learn the new mechanics.


We do have some stuff on the roadmap like getting meaningful resources but how would this change the zerging or make the ground anymore important for the infantry player? I barely ever use resources, so this change will not affect me. Also continent locking...you can only do this when there isn't a three way battle going on...and PS2 is nothing BUT the three-way battle.

There's also little focus in the gameplay, strategy ends up being a mess of whack-a-mole where the map changes colors every minute. There's no clear indication on what u should do, also there's nothing stopping you from doing anything. Players actively play against the planned gameplay to artificially create focus (zerg).


I dont think we are missing a lot of vehicles/weapons, well could use some more vehicles but issue I have with weapons is that they are so samey and expensive.



Even with all these issues, I think SOE does good job. Most devs wouldn't even bother adding anything but DLC to milk more cash. Just hoping you focus on making some mechanics that add loads and loads of depth to the gameplay.

[Sturmhardt]

Originally Posted by TotalQuiki

Reading this post makes me sad. Reason is that people like you.. well thats hars. You think that a FREE game needs to do stuff for you all the time.

Actually it's not free. If you don't want to torture yourself and be a good player you gotta invest some cash. I spent 120$. I know that you don't HAVE to pay that much to have a good time, but don't confuse free2play with free.

New content. I do not thing this game needs to have any. This is FPS. People are playing Mohaa, ET, QL and many other FPS games that are very good in competitions. They play same maps, same weapons and classes and every single match that they have is a blast. Because of the game and because of the challange that other players bring.

It seems like you never got to know the strategic depth of ps1. If you did, you would see how flat ps2 is and want more strategy -but that is hard to do without more continents. They are needed to end the always ongoing senseless 3on3 stalemate that's pretty senseless and it is safe to say that 90% of the people on this forum support that view.

Oh and guys, there is no need to talk about new weapons or vehicles because everyone knows that's not the problem with ps2.

.sent via phone.

[Sledgecrushr]

Im pretty sure that continental conquest is in the six month plan. It will probably be implemented with the fourth continent.

[HiroshiChugi]

Originally Posted by Stanis

2 New continents this year.
Only 2 ?

I was hoping at some point we'd kick into high gear on continent design and get one every other month until we have at least 10!

It takes time to develope a WHOLE continent. I'm going to use another game company for an example here.

Just look at WarGaming Online's soon-to-be newest addition to their game family: World of Warships. "It takes about 3-4 months to design a single ship."-WarGaming Online.

3-4 MONTHS for a single SHIP. Now, granted they have a samller dev team than SOE, but the point is, it takes time to make these things. IMHO, SOE has been working on the new continents prior to the Tech Test. Same with their new vehicles, weapons, etc. Please don't be so narrow minded when it comes to developement time.

[SwiftRanger]

Originally Posted by Sturmhardt

Actually it's not free. If you don't want to torture yourself and be a good player you gotta invest some cash. I spent 120$. I know that you don't HAVE to pay that much to have a good time, but don't confuse free2play with free.

Haven't paid a dime but it's still a fair and enjoyable game to me. Cert prices for weapons are too high but you don't really need those weapons.

I do want to spend cash but literally that: with cash, not with CC or Paypal. European woes.

[ruskyandrei]

Originally Posted by SwiftRanger

Haven't paid a dime but it's still a fair and enjoyable game to me. Cert prices for weapons are too high but you don't really need those weapons.

I do want to spend cash but literally that: with cash, not with CC or Paypal. European woes.

I've spent almost 400$ on PS2 so far, and I'm from Europe, what woes are you on about ?

EDIT: I assume you mean that we don't get the game card things ? What's wrong with PP or CC though ?

[Satanam]

It's sad that some people really left the game because "it's moving slow". They should try some other games like...
-RaiderZ. All they do is hotfix, "new horses" (old horses with new skins) for cash and events like Christmas that were already done at the korean version. Well, in this case, it was all about the game publisher PWE, so I'm not gonna say anything about the devs;
-MechWarrior Online is now a bit too much focused on cash shop too, and now they don't do so much for the gameplay itself. Anyway, they keep it up, but a bit slow;
-Crysis 2 was left by devs after the high-res texture pack and dx11 pack, they did change some stuff for multiplayer, fixed some stuff, but well... Once people started talking about Crysis 3, there's nothing new for Crysis 2. I can say it was a great game and I paid for the DVD Special Edition with platinum dogtag, but it'll die soon;
-Blacklight: Retribution is really turning into "P2W" even though people say "if you need to pay cash to get a tiny advantage instead of a big advantage, it's not P2W at all", but it is. A less worse P2W than other games, but still. They released new maps, new game styles, etc., but anyway they don't have one of the best gameplay focus for both cash shoppers and F2P guys. For example, if you wanna get the best of repairing, you NEED to pay for that. You can't buy the hero with GP, only with ZEN (cash);
-Battlefield 3... I won't even say more than what T-Ray said.

By the way, I used "the not so worse" games' progress as examples. I'm not using them as examples to shame on their dev. team, I still like Crysis 2 and MechWarrior Online, the other ones I just stopped playing because I didn't feel like it was fitting my "needs" (I mean, I just don't like the genre and theme that much). There was some really good stuff for their dev. teams and I won't say any of these games suck, I'm just saying PlanetSide 2 has a better progress than these other games that I used to play. The best part of PlanetSide 2 is that it's really free to play as it should be, as you just really need to use SC if you wanna get cosmetic stuff or boosts.
This is fair for both cash shoppers like me, and the ones who never paid a cent for PS2. I don't mind if they don't pay for SC because they're kids, or just because they don't want to. All I know is that they just need "skill" to kill me. You know... Control the weapon recoil, "predict" when your enemy will be almost out of bullets and desperately try to get cover, etc. All that basic stuff.

In short: YES, we have nice progress at PlanetSide 2 and the basis of this game is way more than nice as it is. I believe most people still try to ask too much from devs because they're afraid that PS2 die for being left in the dark like so many other games, or just because they know the devs are capable of doing so much that they believe they could do even more.

[Drednok]

Spoiled little rich kid bitches

[ruskyandrei]

Originally Posted by Satanam

All I know is that they just need "skill" to kill me. You know... Control the weapon recoil, "predict" when your enemy will be almost out of bullets and desperately try to get cover, etc. All that basic stuff.

... unless they're cheating :P

[VSMars]

Which vehicles are we missing? Let's see.

Land vehicles:

* IFVs. Sunderer is more of an APC, really.
* Tracked (or for us Vanu, maglift) APCs
* Amphibious APCs
* LAVs (though one should be added soon, it looks like)
* Combat Engineering vehicles: Bridgelayers, minecleaners, ...
* Self-propelled Artillery - mortars, howitzers, rockets, SAM batteries
* Drones: Combat, mine-clearing, scout
* Walkers/Mechs

Air vehicles:

* Air superiority fighters (non-VTOL)
* Strategic bombers
* AWACS
* Cargo lifters (capable of transporting and air-dropping MBTs, APCs and IFVs)
* UAVs: Combat, recon
* Tank/ammo refuelling aircraft (could be a cert option for the cargo lifters)
* Strategic missiles/ICBMs
* Orbital weapons (we should get one soon, it seems)
* Stealth aircraft

Water vehicles:

* All of them, from aircraft careers to one-man mini-subs.

[Satanam]

Originally Posted by ruskyandrei

... unless they're cheating :P

Hahaha, yeah in this case you need a bit more than that.

[ruskyandrei]

Originally Posted by VSMars

Which vehicles are we missing? Let's see.

Land vehicles:

* IFVs. Sunderer is more of an APC, really.
* Tracked (or for us Vanu, maglift) APCs
* Amphibious APCs
* LAVs (though one should be added soon, it looks like)
* Combat Engineering vehicles: Bridgelayers, minecleaners, ...
* Self-propelled Artillery - mortars, howitzers, rockets, SAM batteries
* Drones: Combat, mine-clearing, scout
* Walkers/Mechs

Air vehicles:

* Air superiority fighters (non-VTOL)
* Strategic bombers
* AWACS
* Cargo lifters (capable of transporting and air-dropping MBTs, APCs and IFVs)
* UAVs: Combat, recon
* Tank/ammo refuelling aircraft (could be a cert option for the cargo lifters)
* Strategic missiles/ICBMs
* Orbital weapons (we should get one soon, it seems)
* Stealth aircraft

Water vehicles:

* All of them, from aircraft careers to one-man mini-subs.

I guess the problem is we want PlanetSide, while they are making BattlefieldSide.

[Hamma]

I think we have plenty of threads like this and honestly I'm getting tired of them. We don't need to rehash the same threads multiple times a week under multiple people.