Of pressure and tension build-up

[sylphaen]

Of pressure and tension build-up

... or how everything made instant and easy is not always for the best.

DISCLAIMER: this post can easily be labeled as a "PS1 vet's lament" because it is one. Please, avoid posting before thinking; please, avoid judging before understanding.

This warning is here because too often, I see mind terrorists starting a "Vet vs. Others" or derailing a thread to start a war of sterile comments which is, as far as I'm concerned, useless and the best way to kill a debate and discussion behavior.


TEXT: During this past year, I have had the chance to discuss and share/oppose a lot of ideas with posters on PSU about Planetside as PS2 was being progressively revealed.

Before anything, I would like to thank SOE for actually creating a sequel to the concept of Planetside. Yes, it's arguable whether this sequel/reimagining has achieved to maintain the PS concept in its current state but at least, the ideal was given a second chance.

I have played with the PS2 beta and had fun with the game but surprisingly:
1. not as much as I expected to
2. without as much fun as I had in PS1

"Why is that?", I thought. Undeniably, the graphics are awesome. Undeniably, I had fun using LA and a large map to flank and shoot raws of snipers in the back. Undeniably, the gunplay is more fluid than PS2. Undeniably, it was also much faster and simpler to pick up than PS1.

Yet why haven't I been interested in playing at PS2 that much ever since I tried it ? I have been trying to understand it. NewSith might have part of the explanation when he says the gameplay feels too unlimited:
http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=47735

My other idea on the issue is that PS2 lacks tension build-up. Some of the games I have enjoyed the most in my life involved a lot of tension build-up and the most massive was in PS1.

I loved Day of Defeat for the risks it involved capturing an objective. I loved Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory for its capacity to attract all the pressure on a series of objective, one after the other (a 16 vs. 16 felt like a huge battle). Then I loved Planetside for slowly building up that flow of battle-tension whose climax was base assault.

That's what's missing to PS2. Its lacks direction, paths of tension and above all, tension build-up.

When I look at PS2, I see that:
- paths that build up tension are too diffuse
- once built-up, tension is released too fast

This has parts to do with TTK but mostly with map design. When compared to W:ET (sequential objective-based maps) or PS1 (lattice), player activity is focused all the time along/towards/between the objectives. Then, along those lines, a tension builds up where the heavy fighting takes place (a front is created !). This tension build-up slowly and very high as attackers near a final objectice and a fierce resistance becomes focused and determined to defend at all-costs. Then, as soon as the objective is taken or offense defeated, all tension is released and starts building up along another line of conflict.

In W:ET, since maps were linear with attackers vs. defenders, tension was usually moving one way (i.e. as attackers accomplished objective before time was elapsed).
In PS1, this went both ways: you took the objective or your spawn point was destroyed and pressure turned the other way.

In PS1, the tug-of-war was a lot more dynamic and I can't describe what a lot of vets call the "flow of battle". It's something you sense. However, it was not entirely random because the lattice gave rules to focus the lines of tension. It's what commanders could read to develop a strategy for their team. It's what the common player could guess to choose his vehicle/weapon set-up for this spawn. It was never too fast (entering a continent took effort) and at times could definitely be too slow (ghost hacking a continent). But it built some of the most massive and entertaining battles I played in.

This flow of battle is like the flow of a river. It flows along a river bed and merges with other flows converging towards the same objective. Pressure builds up like a water against a defensive dam which hopes to hold against it. Then something breaks and all that power is released in a grand finale ! the scattered rivers then start flowing again to the next objective. PS1 had reversing current flows but that wouldn't fit with the rivers metaphor.

Anyways, what I am trying to express is that PS2 lacks that great build-up of tension. Objectives move out too fast and no tension has even time to build-up. The frontline is spread of a dozen of hexes at all times so things are too spread out. When tension builds up, it tends to get released too fast (locked base timers). Any tension can be by-passed by going straight to an objective (foregoing any opportunity to build some action in between). Any tension can be avoided to ghost hack. etc... It's all too fast (strategic-wise, gunplay is fine imo) to properly enjoy the scale of a 2000 player game.

Changes to Zurvan were a good step in the right direction. Hopefully, more effort will be given to build a better game flow.

I hope PS2 achieves that flow of battle because to me, it was one part of the true essence of PS1. Good gunplay is nice but imo, meaningful and strategic mechanics are more important and should be the core of the game.


(Thanks for reading and my apologies for being a bit verbose. Not everyone has gifted and elegant writing.)


Edit: If I could summarize, PS2 offers no suspense because it's combat offers no story of itself.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspense)