Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Adopt a base!
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2012-01-02, 08:19 PM | [Ignore Me] #31 | |||
First Sergeant
|
I'm a little worried about the squad spawning and lack of AMS, though when I hear that the squad spawn would require a leader with the appropriate skills I was pretty relieved in that regard. It seems that this focus on more instant action and no down time in PS2, while good from a "kill kill kill" standpoint, does detract a little from the whole feel of logistical, supply line driven gameplay that could be found in PS1. I quite enjoyed that about the original. I'm really hoping for a cool implementation of field artillery. The flail never really cut it IMO. artillery shouldn't be spammable so much as a support weapon, requiring others to spot for you or some similar mechanic. I feel this would help add a lot of depth without necessarily forcing anyone into something to complex, as I think it is a pretty niche weapon as far as the desire to operate them goes. Finally I'd say that considering what the Devs have said about kind of working in reverse in comparison to CCP, in there creation of the big sandbox EVE followed by the more focused FPS (Dust 514,) my hunch is PS2 will be more simplistic at launch, and then gain a lot of depth and "sand..boxi..ness" as their post release development moves forward. I'm really excited to see what will happen. |
|||
|
2012-01-02, 10:41 PM | [Ignore Me] #32 | ||
Banned
|
Perhaps in the market aspect, certainly not the combat.
But who wants to play Accounting in Space? You could do that in real life, though not in space, for real and worthwhile money. You could then spend a tiny fraction of that real money to buy PLEX and make billions in game in a matter of seconds. |
||
|
2012-01-03, 04:24 AM | [Ignore Me] #33 | |||
Sergeant Major
|
|
|||
|
2012-01-03, 11:51 AM | [Ignore Me] #35 | |||
easy mode to attract noobs and casuals, and deep deep depth for those who like to adjust everything to their playstyle. just don´t take out depth totally just to get more players in. that will only generate shorttime players and do more damage than good. |
||||
|
2012-01-03, 12:47 PM | [Ignore Me] #36 | |||
Sergeant Major
|
|
|||
|
2012-01-03, 01:17 PM | [Ignore Me] #37 | |||
First Sergeant
|
They won't want to load into a galaxy and do a coordinated hot drop to take out the gen. They want to own noobz and then teabag them afterwards. The open world, sandboxy nature of PS2 won't be a good match I think. Having said that, am I overgeneralizing? Probably. Also, who knows maybe it will be a good thing. Cannon Fodder anyone? |
|||
|
2012-01-03, 02:06 PM | [Ignore Me] #38 | ||
Staff Sergeant
|
I don't understand this distinction between "Planetside players" and "COD and BF players." I'm pretty sure the majority of Planetside players just wanted to shoot people in a large setting, which was precisely why you had the zerg. People wanted "The Good Fight," and its the reason why gen dropping a contested base was so unpopular, despite the fact that usually it would have been the easiest way to "win".
I feel like the most vocal part of the PSU community is really a very unique subsection of the Planetside player-base. Its mainly comprised of the outfit leaders and officers of large, organized outfits. You'd kind of have to have had that experience to be so enthusiastic about the franchise after all these years. But coming from someone who was part of the zerg for many years, I hope they do simplify the game somewhat. This isn't an issue of whether Planetside was too complex or not. It's an issue of too much downtime between the "Good Fight." Last edited by CuddlyChud; 2012-01-03 at 02:07 PM. |
||
|
2012-01-03, 05:51 PM | [Ignore Me] #39 | ||
PSU Staff
Wiki Ninja |
I'm a bit worried about the spawn system too. Of course it's too early to make any conclusions until beta, but seems like we'll be playing a lot of whack-a-mole at facilities. You could kill off 99% of the players attacking, but then you have one squad leader left hiding in the trees, and then have 30+ squadmates HART in on his location. One that respawned runs off into another group of trees and the cycles repeats. At least with an AMS, you could defend much easier, and sending tanks to cut the AMS resupply routes were effective.
Again, too early to really complain, but I certainly have concerns over the system as I understand it now. I wouldn't worry about the lack of ANTs. I think the new resource system will add far far more depth than the silly ANTs of PS1. |
||
|
2012-01-03, 06:46 PM | [Ignore Me] #40 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I'm not a huge fan of the spawn system as we know it either. Higby said somewhere that there is a cool down so it's "not the primary spawning method" or some such, which has me hopeful. Maybe if it's a once every 10 minutes type of thing, I could get behind that.
I'm wondering if we will see the Galaxy replace the AMS as the primary form of field spawning (along with the Sunderer as someone previously speculated perhaps) which IMO would be pretty cool. It's a big ol' target so it would require a lot of defense on the part of the spawning army, but might also be pretty hardy. |
||
|
2012-01-03, 07:57 PM | [Ignore Me] #42 | |||
First Sergeant
|
I assume by "planetside players" people mean those who favor a more complex shooter such as tribes or quake as opposed to a fast paced reflex shooter like unreal tournament. |
|||
|
2012-01-03, 08:16 PM | [Ignore Me] #44 | ||
Sergeant Major
|
Trying to figure out how Quake has any more depth than Unreal, but it has been a long ass time. Tribes was more complex in that aiming worth a damn and remaining mobile and airborne a majority of the time required a lot of practice.
I'm with Sky though. Planetside 2 sounds like it's going to play a bit like Halo: Combat Evolved, only built for today's tech, and with a crap ton of weapon and vehicle modifications, essentially what "skill trees" seem to boil down to. I even remember making jokes about the VS being the Covenant way back in the day. |
||
|
2012-01-04, 01:27 AM | [Ignore Me] #45 | |||
Brigadier General
|
The games have always shared similarities, but considering when they were both under development, it's certainly more coincidence than any kind of ripoff. I've always felt like Halo:CE was a little more polished and Planetside was a little more deep (MMO factor aside). Now that PS2 will have a lot of the polish, both graphically and for things like vehicle physics, I feel like Planetsides star will shine a lot brighter than ever before. Bring em in with the pretty eye candy, keep em playing for years with the depth of gameplay. Comparing Planetside to anything, aside from general FPS similarities, is kind of hard to do with any accuracy. About the most you can compare are individual elements, like pacing, or style. Even with the inclusion of jump packs, I don't see Planetside 2 attracting a lot of Tribes die hards who wouldn't have played it anyways. Even back in the days of surgile, Planetside has never been a fast paced twitch game. Things like Battlefield and Halo (gameplay and style wise) are probably going to be some of the biggest potential sources of new players, aside from the general random players we get from it being F2P. I think you can have depth and simplicity in ****** if you do it right. Make sure that some of the core gameplay mechanics are simple and straightforward to pick up. Having similarities to other popular shooters will go a long way towards helping. Then also include huge layers of depth that you can pick up that give you personally a bit of an edge, but more importantly, give your empire a huge edge. Simplistic games are easy to pick up casually, but never go anywhere, so they get boring fast and people move on, leaving the game to wither away. Deep games can really immerse you, but take forever to become any good and can leave new players with a skill gap that is almost impossible to close with the veterans, which destroys any chances of having new blood join a community, causing the game to stagnate and die. A really well balanced game should include elements of both, where the insanely high skill ceiling never prevents new players from being valuable, while enticing them to play as much as possible to get the most out of their experience. You shouldn't punish new players for not having put in 4000 hours, just give them enough reward to keep it interesting. Focus too much on either simplicity or depth alone, and the game will die fast. There is no reason that you can't put a lot of effort into both at once though, and I think that's the only way that we can hope to maintain interest in the game, although F2P will go along ways towards alleviating population problems as well. |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|