Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Better than sex.....
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
2013-01-13, 08:54 PM | [Ignore Me] #32 | |||
First Sergeant
|
There was also a post a year or two ago explaining that they didn't want to just remake Planetside, they wanted to "make the game their own". |
|||
|
2013-01-13, 09:12 PM | [Ignore Me] #33 | ||
Major
|
Wasn't ps1 actually built and developed by Verant Interactive, sort of a wholly owned/absorbed subsidiary?
Yeah, I doubt those guys are still around. However, I think they did a much better job balancing (at least initially) the holy trinity of infantry, ground and air. |
||
|
2013-01-13, 09:17 PM | [Ignore Me] #34 | |||
Banned
|
Oh and about balancing... it had to be much easier with only 3 empire specific MBT's. Much more common pool vehicles in PS1. EDIT: Shoot, I forgot about the ES buggies. Wish we had buggies back. They could fill a void and cut down on some of the heavy hitting vehicles. Bang bus were different too but not that much. Thinking about this. Buggies might be the needed missing link. Jack up the cost and timers on the tanks so if you needed a ride better than an ATV it might do the trick. Hmmmm... Last edited by Rockit; 2013-01-13 at 09:31 PM. |
|||
|
2013-01-13, 09:28 PM | [Ignore Me] #36 | |||
My take on it is that they feel that Planetside wasn't as successful as it could have been due to it being too slow/involved/complicated. They did their market research for PS2, both in what was popular (Battlefield), and the elements that made people love Planetside so much (most common result being "massive battles"). Unfortunately the reductionist results of their market research left out all the little things that made people love Planetside so much. Hopefully we will see the lions share of these little things return in some form or another over the course of their 5 year plan ;p |
||||
|
2013-01-13, 09:44 PM | [Ignore Me] #37 | ||
First Sergeant
|
You're right about it not fixing the whole base, but tunnels are definitely a step in the right direction (assuming they don't fuck it up terribly).
I know this is too hopefully, but what I'd love to see come out of adding tunnels is a larger embrace of indoor combat. I'd have to see what they have in mind first, but if they had a more expansive underground indoor area that would be pretty sweet. If even just for one facility type. |
||
|
2013-01-14, 05:17 AM | [Ignore Me] #42 | |||
Private
|
|
|||
|
2013-01-14, 05:59 AM | [Ignore Me] #43 | ||
Contributor General
|
More than just the tunnels they probably need to move the SCU (Amp stations and Tech Plant).
~Imaging an assault is going well and the attackers force the defenders out of the main building. In the Amp Station, tunnels or not that is game over sonce the attackers have easy access to the SCU and even if they don't immediately blow the SCU they can move a AMS into the main building and therefore be able to reinforce more quickly from the AMS than the defenders from the spawn room. Defenders can do little. SCU should be moved nearer to the spawn rooms (or spawns themselves are made destructable). |
||
|
2013-01-14, 06:25 AM | [Ignore Me] #45 | ||
Lieutenant General
|
Asked Higby by tweet if we could see the new spawnbuildings ahead of time, if the CC would move into the same building (really hope they also make the buildings centralised to outposts) and with regards to tunnels if the CC would move underground as well and what the logistical distance to travel would be from the nearest enemy Sunderer option and spawns.
No response as of yet. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|