Galaxies set to launch this month

[Airlift]

Try not to own yourself Tek... Onizuka didn't mention you at all. You had the length and debate level down fairly well, 23 words and nothing about the subject of SWG, Planetside, or their comparitive value.

I'm gonna get back into this because I am equally bored, but I'm going to be extra nice so we don't offend any of our readers' sensative nature.

I just want to point out what I consider to be one of the bigger fallacies in your logic:

If PS had more content (ie: bases, weapons, strategies, stuff to fight over, etc) it would be a better game and worth the money

The above is garbage because the sentance goes on way too long for its own good. It would be a good solid statement to say:

If PS had more content (ie: bases, weapons, strategies, stuff to fight over, etc) it would be a better game

The problem is that you presume to see into the hearts and wallets of your audience. Truthfully, to someone who has a lot of money or places a relatively low importance on money in general, it takes very little to justify a $200 expenditure. To someone with very little money or who is extremely frugal, it takes a great deal to do so. Then there is the reviewer's tilt. You write a review based on your own desires and expectations (which is fine) and then sell it as objective truth (which is what will get you flamed every time). To quote the dude, "that's just like... your opinion, man." Everyone has their own opinions, preferences, expectations, etc. Most of everyone will respond negatively to being told that someone else's dissenting opinion is fact.

Whoops, that was way too long for a minor side point, but I'll leave it since we're being graded on word count

In any case, the important distinction that you are not making is that the quality of the content is at least as important to the value of the game as the quantity. That was the point I made when I dissected EQ's masses of content (which you dismissed as off topic even though you claimed I couldn't recognize your parallels [/ironic]). It is fine for you to reskin a Blackburrow gnoll and call him a Splitpaw gnoll, but don't expect me to give you much credit for the additional content.

I would take a few well done and more importantlywell balanced weapons over a drove of poorly thought out and implemented ones without hesitation.

Underlying the entire debate is this: The developers chose to take a bare-bones essentials approach to Planetside in order to deliver on Massive, sacrificing many of the grander ideas that did not fit the core focus of the game. That is not only for technical and performance reasons, but also for usability purposes. The game has enough complexity to make for a sharp but thankfully short learning curve. There is a lot of intricate relation between the equipment, guns, and vehicles that do exist. Everything has a specific purpose (except maybe the beamer...) and everything serves its purpose well.

Obviously the sacrifices that came with the game design are unacceptable to you. If you were in the beta, then you were a sucker for buying retail, and I can understand the need to lash out on the forums. If you weren't in the beta and it came as a suprise what you spent your money on, I can also sympathize with your bad purchase. The rest of us knew what we were buying into, and as such we have no compelling reason to post little tirades against the game and all the people who are satisfied with their purchase.

Just in case that wasn't extra nice, here are some smileys for you:

[TekDragon]

Airlift, first of all id like to thank you for the smiley

I think you went slightly off course though. I completely agree with your "to each their own" style of thinking when it comes to personal opinions on the value of a game (or any product). I will NEVER tell ANYONE to not buy this game. I will simply say that, in my opinion, it is not worth the money. That has always been my stance.

I believe we see eye-to-eye on that issue.

However, you forget that personal opinion is not 100% of the issue. In fact, its only a small one. The mass public opinions are far more important than any number of personal opinions.

This is why we have game reviewing sites. They play the game and test it in various ways (categories like graphics, sound, gameplay, learning curve, etc) against other games of similar genres.

When you look at PlanetSide in that regard is when you start to see my opinion. PlanetSide is, plain and simply, a half-assed attempt at a FPS. It can be seen by comparing it to other games of the same genre like Halo, Half Life, Tribes, etc.

Now, again, were not getting into personal opinions here. You may say you hate Halo. Thats fine. Personally, i hate Half-Life. But I still acknowledge that it was a groundbreaking game that offered graphics, sound, AND gameplay content.

I admit to liking PlanetSide. I thought it was kinda fun. However, i do not find it worth the money.

Airlift, you seem to think thats not a valid argument tactic. Therefore, ill try to use a parallel.

Lets say you enjoy driving convertable vehicles (any make, any model, so long as its a convertable). Lets say a good number of people enjoy driving convertables. Now lets say a high profile vehicle manufacturer came out with a 2004 model convertable.

Pretend its the first convertable vehicle to have this new engine with a high HP (not insanely high, just 50-75 higher than the usual engine size). People are excited about it. Now, lets pretend that this vehicle manufacturer made this 2004 vehicle with the following (in parenthesis are the parallels to PS):

-Convertable (FPS)
-Brand new engine (MM aspect)
-2002 Body style (graphics)
-Sub-average sound system (in game sounds)
-No power steering, no air conditioning, no traction control, no fog lights, cloth seats, etc etc (lack of any comparable content like HL, Tribes, or even Halo has)

Now, lets pretend that this vehicle manufacturer charged 250 thousand dollars for this car (roughly 4 times the amount of other convertables).

Would you buy it? No. Of course not. 250 thousand is alot of money. Its prepostrous to blow that much money.

However, the ratios and comparisons were all valid when comparig the situation above to PS. You may not think $200 is much, but i personally dont believe in spending FOUR times as much for a game that offers me LESS overall enjoyment than a $50 game.

[Onizuka]

HAMMA pleas help, tek is bashing me even though hes ignoring me...... how does he manage to do this. please, do something with the ignore feature!

[Grunt]

Tekdragon: So if CONTENT is king, why the hell was / is Tetris so popular? There's tons of games available that aren't necessarily based on content. It just so happens that an RPG IS based on content.

Oh wait a minute.... Planetside isn't an RPG and SWG is? Hmmm, that would mean that SWG is SUPPOSED to have more content huh?

[TekDragon]

Your an idiot. Period.

Tetris had tons of content. It had a SIX block types, a high score system, variable speed and difficulty levels, and a good control scheme. When you consider the fact that Tetris was one of the first releases for the original gameboy and was a puzzle game... Tetris rocked ass on content, graphics, and gameplay.

RPGs back in the day also had content. Yes. They have very varying levels of content and its all compared differently. The original Zelda games, FF games, and Ultima games for the NES were all great games. They had excellent content, graphics, and gameplay for their times. Some RPGs released back then sucked mad dick. Crystallis for example.

Now, this isnt 1985. Is it? No. Its 2003. Therefore in order to judge PlanetSide we have to judge it with other games in similar categories.

Im pretty sure anyone with 5 IQ points to rub together would understand that comparing PlanetSide's content to Tetris's content is a futile endeavor. Ill make a special case for you, though

---------------------------------------

Now, about comparing PS to recent MMORPGs. It can be done. Easily. Your problem is your being close minded about it.

You think that because I point ot the 1000s of hours the SWG team spent on "tailoring" and "fishing" amd the RPG content.. that I belive PlanetSide should have tailoring and fishing and fucking gardening.

STOP BEING AN IDIOT

Your not earning *ANY* points by pointing out that PS is not an RPG. We all know that.

My comparisons of "content" are simply parallels of cost vs product. I look at what the development teams of SWG, AC, AO, and UO did. I see how much work they spent in doing AI scripting, economies, balanced levels/classes, quests, 1000s of items, player housing, player towns, etc, etc, etc.

Then I look at the PS content: 5 bases, 3 unique weapons per empire, 2 unique vehicles per empire.
THEN I look at the PS gameplay: spawn, rush base, die, repeat till cap base, start over.

First of all, the content took about 1/100 the time/effort as the SWG and UO team did. It probly took about 1/10 the effort of the Halo team.

Second of all, the gameplay is exactly the same as if I were playing in a Tribes "domination" match on a 64 player server.

[DISCLAIMER: the above was an understatement. A 64 player server in Tribes in a good mod has way more action, content, and fun-factor. The above was simply for a general gaming comparison]

The question is not: "Why would I pay $200 for PlanetSide?".

The question is: "Why would Sony charge $200 for PlanetSide".

The first question is a personal one, open to personal opinions and preferences.
The second question is a broader, more professional one. Try focusing on it, instead of attacking me personally.

[TekDragon]

BTW: Powerflux i put you on ignore until this thread debate is done with or it moves to page 5. Your pic is b0rking up the thread. Nothin personal man.

[Airlift]

However, you forget that personal opinion is not 100% of the issue. In fact, its only a small one. The mass public opinions are far more important than any number of personal opinions.

This is why we have game reviewing sites. They play the game and test it in various ways (categories like graphics, sound, gameplay, learning curve, etc) against other games of similar genres.

When you look at PlanetSide in that regard is when you start to see my opinion. PlanetSide is, plain and simply, a half-assed attempt at a FPS. It can be seen by comparing it to other games of the same genre like Halo, Half Life, Tribes, etc.

You can't bring mass opinions to play here, because the mass opinion does not agree with you. The vast majority of the published reviews rate the game very highly. That was one of my first problems with your anti-ps rants, that you claimed professional reviewers must be biased by preferential treatment because they did not share your disappointment with the game. It isn't that you had negative things to say about the game (I have plenty myself), The trouble is that you weren't leaving room for the possibility that your experience and feelings towards the game were actually in the minority.

One thing I would like to see is a point by point comparison between what you consider to be the content of Halo versus the content of Planetside. I'm glad you brought that one up, because I'm fairly familiar with Halo and it's got roughly the same amount of content, only with a single-player slant rather than being an online-only game.

Now, on to your car comparison. I personally would not pay $250,000 for any car. On the other hand, if I brought home $250,000 in a week, I would buy the car if I felt even the slightest whim to do so. Cranking your numbers back to the scale of the game, there are a whole lot of gamers who clear $200 in a week easily. You could do that waiting tables.

Sorry to jump around in your post, but there is one more thing I want to touch on:

I admit to liking PlanetSide. I thought it was kinda fun. However, i do not find it worth the money.

Airlift, you seem to think thats not a valid argument tactic.

You've got me all wrong. It is completely valid, and I'm saying it is the only argument you have to stand on. It's fine for you to not think the game is worth it, or even to hate it (as surely some players did -- not that you did, but someone has to hate it). It is fine for you to keep posting your opinions about it. We leave fine behind when you make wild assumptions about the underpinnings of the game to support your argument. So let's just agree that none of us knows about the storage, server requirements, bandwidth, and netcode of PS or any of the games we've been comparing it to. We can only speak with authority about our opinions and about the experience of playing the game itself.

fair?

[simba]

Originally posted by Airlift
Suck it, Trebeck.
I answered his points directly and he chose to pretend like I avoided them.

woah, insulting me for having an opinion, not that I know wot trebeck is but im pretty sure its an insult.

so sorry 4 the opinion air.

[Airlift]

Simba, did you even read the post you quoted and claimed to agree 100% with? It was full of insult directly to me.

[simba]

yeah I read it, and agreed

[Airlift]

Good, then you understand why I think you can suck it. Suck it long, suck it hard.

[simba]

**quote**

I just like how no one can ever tell me why PS deserves a $50
box price and $13 a month besides the following:

1. Duh, they made thier own engine! Thats like.. incredible! Game developers should get, like, mad extra props for that!
2. Five bases and a handful of crap weapons qualifies as "extreme" content that obviously took up many years worth of coding to put in.
3. YOU SUCK!


yeah, sounds more like ur the insulter.

[simba]

Originally posted by Hamma
This thread isnt breaking any rules.

And why did you bump it?

I think ive seen a few other that u closed that wasnt breaking any rules.
dunno why I bumped it, wanted to say wot I think.

gonna sleep some now air.

[Airlift]

GG leaving all the insulting shit out this time. Too bad it's still in the original post and the post where you quoted it...

couldent agree with u more. And I dont really know how u can call the "weapons" in the game weapons coz they dont look like weapons, they dont shoot like weapons and so on.

Now then, in case you still don't see where I'm the insulted, let me repeat it for you:

Robot im not talkin about you. Im speakin to that spam/flamer Airlift. Your a little bitch.

Maybe the broken english threw you off. He's not saying that I have a little bitch. He's saying that I am a little bitch. Further, he calls me a spammer and a flamer. Then, if you look back on the top of that quote, you will see how ironic he felt my post was, then he goes on to say why... which includes three arguments that I NEVER FUCKING MADE, JACKASSES. I didn't say shit about the technical hurdles or how cool it was that PS uses its own engine. I never made a peep to indicate that I thought of five bases as a lot of bases. And I never tried to say that the amount that Tek sucks has anything to do with the quality or value of the game.

Try comprehending what you read next time, then think about it for a while before you quote it.

[TekDragon]

Originally posted by Airlift
Simba, did you even read the post you quoted and claimed to agree 100% with? It was full of insult directly to me.

Originally posted by simba
yeah I read it, and agreed

Originally posted by Airlift
Good, then you understand why I think you can suck it. Suck it long, suck it hard.

Originally posted by Airlift
Maybe the broken english threw you off. He's not saying that I have a little bitch. He's saying that I am a little bitch.

*insert dying from laughter smiley here*

Its true!! Its so true!!

*wipes tears from eyes*