What are the core features that must not change?

DviddLeff · 2009-09-30, 05:50 PM

While answering the servey I had in my mind a few things that I could not let change about PS; the main things that PS offers that make it what it is and make it unique.

These were:

1. Multiplayer battles with 100+ on either side.
2. FPS controls
3. A levelling system that merely gives players more options, not artificially makes them stronger and do more damage. This allows everyone to play together, no matter their experience.

That is it, everything else can change as far as I am concerned but those three features make PS unique and appealing.

Thoughts?

Any other really important main features that I missed?

Firefly · 2009-09-30, 06:46 PM

Really, the engine needs an update, flight mechanics need to be more realistic, weapon balance needs to SERIOUSLY be looked at, and they need a bigger development team. They also need a Customer Support department with in-game appealing system, a means of reporting bugs and providing feedback.

Everything else, really, can stay the same (aside from ditching those idiotic BFRs, or at least making them despawn if they enter a base courtyard).

Mag-Mower · 2009-09-30, 07:55 PM

I really hope they dont add AI. AI could completley take the fun out of it, unless it was in a form such as animals or something.

Ghryphen · 2009-09-30, 08:26 PM

I think having competent AI hold a base after it has been secured would help some of stupid the ghost hacking. Maybe AI that spawns once a base is secured and does not respawn once killed, something to slow down back hacks and lone hackers.

Hamma · 2009-09-30, 09:43 PM

That wouldn't be such a bad thing, it's too easy to retake an entire continent when nobody is watching and sway the entire battle.

It is VERY important that it stay to the core and be a real MMO FPS. All of these other games coming out are simply fancy game browsers because they require you to find and participate in essentially instanced battles.

Now PS had instanced areas but these were continents you could freely roam around. If they move away from that, that would be a disaster for what PlanetSide is.

Mag-Mower · 2009-09-30, 11:40 PM

As far as stopping ghost hacks, I think a different type of turret system could be used. Make it so there are turrets that dont need an operator, kind of like the big wall turrets, but not as powerful. Place those around the base, make them in a way that would slow a ghost hack, but not make it completely impossible. Just thought of the idea, needs to be thought out a bit more, but it might be an interesting solution.

ANaKeR · 2009-11-12, 02:18 PM

grief system

This was implemented well in my opinion. It allowed you to do a little friendly fire but prevented high griefers from continuously killing friendlies. It gives incentive to learn how to use your weapons in a way that reduces friendly fire.

Sifer2 · 2009-11-13, 05:00 PM

I agree with the OP though I would be a little more lenient on the third point. I wouldn't be completely opposed to leveling up letting you get some power increasing stuff. Though it should definitely not be anything like WoW an similar games were a few levels above an opponent an they stand no chance. New players should still be able to take on Vets straight out of training.

As for AI I think having like Robot sentries that patrol an defend bases would be improvement. Since we know that asking players to stand around an defend the bases they have taken simply doesn't work since its boring an very time consuming an the enemy will probably just avoid it an hit an empty base instead. So having some sentries there that make it very tough for only one or two players to take over a base an alert the enemy in advance so they can respond would be helpful.

Furret · 2009-11-14, 08:52 AM

I'm thinking if you had Combat Engineers build them [robots] (Max 5 per base, 2 per tower) and can be built as soon as you own or have hacked the CC. You can set them to either guard the CC, spawns, gen room, patrol the base, patrol the CY, or patrol the base walls.

Once destroyed, they [robots] dont respawn unless a Combat Engineer builds another one. They can either be controlled remotely (would be fun to have five Engies sittin in the gen battling with their toy robots) or set as AI, automatically attack all enemies (even cloakers) but have a very small range. Maybe even an option to set them as a cloaker one (uses infrared technology so all invisible objects appear, but shortend range, or normal vision (can see longer distances but not cloaked or invisible objects).

It would definitely change the game, and ghost hacks would have to be more powerful and would have to happen much more quickly.

EmperorNortonII · 2010-01-14, 07:57 PM

Combined arms- the big thing about Planetside that I loved while I played was the necessity of armor, infantry, and air power. Oh! I love the AMS- hunting those from a Reaver was always a challenge.

MasterChief096 · 2010-01-22, 09:52 PM

Much like most, I just want the same certification system.

I think PlanetSide also really nailed damage well. You don't die right away like Arma 2 or Americas Army 2 or Rainbow Six, but it doesn't take 80 years to die like Section 8/Global Agenda. I love the balance of time it takes to kill someone and what not.

Also the large battles. Keep them.

Furret · 2010-01-24, 01:18 PM

the only problem with the damage, was there was only one amount of damage you could do.
Headshots NEED to be in the game, so that good snipers would be able to kill one shot, instead of having to hit twice. Maybe, if you're wearing armor with a helmet, different guns might need 2 or 3 headshots to kill, but headshots need to be a factor. If SOE wants to be lazy, they can have toe shots and chest shots equal the same damage, but leg/arm shots should also do less damage, that's just logical

DviddLeff · 2010-01-24, 06:31 PM

In the next one at the very least I want head shots to count double damage, and vehicles to have one weak spot (likely rear armour).

Sifer2 · 2010-01-25, 08:06 PM

I think it will be interesting to see how they handle damage honestly. Whether they will keep it like the first or try to make it more of a tag your dead type of shooter similar to CS or COD.

An if they do keep the damage like before but add headshots then it will be interesting to see if the headshots break the gameplay like they do in so many games. Since I mean lets face it aiming for the head has never been all that hard an if your doing 500% or more damage for hitting the head it can quickly throw balance out the window. Hell even double damage can be bad.

Maybe if the weapons are still not pinpoint accurate an shooting for the head is risky since half your shots may fly over the head it will be balanced.

DviddLeff · 2010-01-26, 02:06 PM

As it is its very much a situation where if you have HA at close quarters, you win, whereas if head shots mattered then those that are skilful with more standard weapons who can aim for the head, or get the drop on their enemies then they can have much more of a balanced experience.

I believe this got much worse when rexo got a buff which basically meant that it took everything longer to kill them; but more so for those weapons that did less damage, making them even more ineffective than the HA weapons that do a lot of damage quickly.