Questions from a Disgruntled Battlefield Veteran

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by YaJackWagon

Damn... that Malorn guy wrote a friggin textbook.

Well, now I'm itching to play it.

Fame and respect do not come from what you take but instead from what you give.

I do not agree with everything Malorn did write but he did share a lot of ideas and put a lot of efforts to explain them.

[Shogun]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Speaking of disgruntled BF3 vets, when Beta starts, it would be cool if some people skilled at making videos would make some video montages, but not montages of elite quickscoping, but instead, montages that show off the things BF3 players are asking for every day at Mordor. Proper squad play and the ability to have automatic in-game voip. Hell, you'll get cheers from Mordor over something as simple as the ability to custom name your squad. And in-game Outfits? that will put it over the top.

this will be impossible because recording and sharing beta footage will be a violation of the non disclosure agreement every betatester will have to approve to. nobody knows the exact details of the nda yet, but not discussing anything outside the beta forums is the main theme of every beta nda.

[Ailos]

Gonna try to throw in some points that look like they have been missed in other replies:

1. According to the latest news, anything that drastically impacts game play (e.g. scopes on rifles) will be unlocked exclusively with in-game resources. Side grades (barrel lengths or magazines that trade ROF for damage/shot) will be a split between station cash and in-game resources. Purely cosmetic stuff will be for cash only.

2. Currently, implants are the only limited-duration items in the game (i.e. they expire some time after you acquire them) but my understanding is that any implants that affect game play (such as aforementioned Darklight Vision that allows to see cloaked enemies) would be earned using in-game resources only. More cosmetic or non-impact implants would be also available with cash (there was a suggestion to have an implant for subscribers that allows them to earn the cert points faster). The only other "expirable" items are consumables, such as med-kits and grenades, which expire when you use them (duh) but it's been said that all those are also bought entirely in-game.

4. The faction-specific equipment doesn't only differ in minor capabilities. They differ quite a lot in terms of bullet damage, usable range, rates of fire and COF blooms, etc; the vehicles similarly differ in their capabilities. The difference between the two tanks in BF2142 is a good example of the kind of difference you should expect to see between empire-specific equipment in PS2. Translation: each empire has a completely different playstyle, and one will always be stronger in a specific situation, but never strong enough to overpower both of the others at the same time.

6. An implant is basically, a piece of equipment. In PS1, your inventory size and equipment slots varied with the kind of armor you were wearing, but your implants stayed the same. Not sure how this will work in PS2, but basically, that's all they are - addon equipment outside your inventory (e.g. you could have a zoom implant that removes the need for any scopes on your rifles, so you can use that weapon slot for something else). Certifications are your skills. To operate a vehicle or use a weapon, you need to "trained" to do it. Certification is that training. You can purchase them with certification points - skill points. In PS1, until BR40 was introduced, the number of certification points available was limited, so the skills you could possibly train were also limited.

8. No you've read that right. There are squad leaders and real commanders.

10. From everything I've seen, PS2 is actually going to be quite similar to BF2142, and that's a good thing IMHO.

[YaJackWagon]

Originally Posted by Ailos

4. The faction-specific equipment doesn't only differ in minor capabilities. They differ quite a lot in terms of bullet damage, usable range, rates of fire and COF blooms, etc; the vehicles similarly differ in their capabilities. The difference between the two tanks in BF2142 is a good example of the kind of difference you should expect to see between empire-specific equipment in PS2. Translation: each empire has a completely different playstyle, and one will always be stronger in a specific situation, but never strong enough to overpower both of the others at the same time.

Yeah, I was thinking of how similar the VS tank is going to be to the Nekomata.



Thanks for the clarifications, everyone. I'm pretty sure everything else will be cleared up once the beta rolls out.
This is gonna be an interesting game, to be sure.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Shogun

this will be impossible because recording and sharing beta footage will be a violation of the non disclosure agreement every betatester will have to approve to. nobody knows the exact details of the nda yet, but not discussing anything outside the beta forums is the main theme of every beta nda.

I was talking about open beta!

Isn't closed beta already happening?

And, just in case somehow, open beta still carries an NDA, then assume I'm referring to full release. Either way, I want to see it rubbed in EA's face. I'd start rubbing it in their face NOW but I think I need to wait until PS2 actually turns out a winner before I jump out on that ledge

[Ailos]

No, Beta hasn't started yet.

[Mezorin]

Fellow BF player here, will try and answer questions. BF2142 was a fantastic underrated game by the way, which was heavily inspired by Planet Side I think.


1. As far as we know, micro transactions will be for skins, camo, respawn speed ups and other sorts of things. "Power" items are exclusively bought by in game resources (so no paying 10$ for a mech let's say).


2. Again, there maybe some xp boosters or such to pay for convenience, and a subscription. But anyone who's f2p can get everything ability/item wise as a non f2p player.


3. Infiltrators will depend on whether you are sniping or being a traditional infiltrator. Snipers have limited cloaks similar to what you might be used to in BF2142, while the close quarter cloakers (ie ninjas) will play out more like TF2 spies, in theory. Keep in mind people will likely have dark light (read: cloaker squishing mode), and BF style spot keys.


4. This one is kind of complicated. Yes, there are faction specific vehicles (namely the fighter craft and main battle tanks). There are also common pool vehicles as well (Galaxy, Liberator, Flash ATV, Lightning tank, sunderer to name a few). Whether or not you can capture an enemy's tank via hacking is up in the air, but for now assume you cannot.

In this game, you have vehicle and air terminals in major facilities that you can go and order up a vehicle. The vehicle then poofs into existance as nanite magic happens. So if you feel like flying a liberator bomber you just go order up, although it will cost you in resources. This is heads and shoulders beyond BF3 because people aren't camping out the jet spawn, they just order up a vehicle and go. You also invest points in these vehicles to make them better/side grade them, so for instance the lightning tank can vary between being a BF style LAV-25 or an LAV-AD depending on what gun you slap onto it. Customizability is the name of the game here, with less vehicles than part 1 but more variable roles for each one.


5. Speculation here, but as far as we know conquering territory produces you resources. The top shelf tank and air craft upgrades will likely cost you resources. Getting your team these resources and denying the enemy resources is going to be a major part of strategy.


6. From what I can tell, implants will be consumable temporary buffs. They've been kinda mum on these implants, but they will be in game resource bought only.


7. MAX: Mechanical Armored eXoskeleton. Essentially its a powered armored suit blurs the line between infantry and vehicle. They have very heavy armor (heavy enough you must use tank buster guns on them), and very heavy firepower for their size, but are very slow and require infantry support. Indoors they are great for taking point as 'tank', and outdoors their AV or AA firepower can put out a lot of hurt on vehicles.


8. For all intents and purposes, a full on outfit commander will be like a Battlefield commander, minus the retards you put up with on a pub (ideally). They can set missions, objectives, and will even how cert-able abilities to help their troops out. Squad leaders will be similar to how BF2142 squad leaders work: they will have helpful abilities that again they must spec for, but can help lead men into battle and provide respawn abilities.

It is worth noting that the in game mission system to give orders will have a "Twitter" like setup where you can choose to follow commanders and they can give you missions. The CPU will also have the ability to direct troops, so even dumb ass "pubbers" will be inclined to try to do something useful. You may get something along the lines of "Capture Bomanzi base" or "clear the air space around this hex" or "revive 10 people at the front".

9. Hacking in PlanetSide 2 is sort of mum right now, but in PlanetSide 1 doing a base "hack" was the ultimate objective in taking over a base or a tower. Think like capturing an MCOM but it takes longer and in the guts of a defensible structure. Hackers could also do other things they could spec into (like jacking vehicles, opening doors, debuffing vehicles/bases/etc) but again those are up in the air for PS2.


10. This is a difficult question to answer straight up without you having played the game in its prime, because honestly its difficult to compare a true MMOFPS experience to "conventional" FPS games.

The best way I think of Planet Side 2 is in reality it is an RTS/FPS hybrid. Your commanders are running the show like a BF2142 commander, but all the little troops on the ground and vehicles are players. As a Joe Average grunt, you are in one of those epic BF3 or Modern Warfare 3 "cutscenes", except the cutscenes are real, all the vehicles and troops on the ground are your fellow players (Brothers and Sisters in arms if you are in an outfit), and when you die you don't get a reload screen and a Patton quote, the battle continues to rage onwards.

Battlefield 3 bugs me for one major reason as a game: most of the players there are wimps. You get a group of little pissy douche bags on most of the clan servers who have a 42% quit rate who will cut and run or team swap when their precious K/D might get scratched, and things get tough. You can bet that mister 'elite' BF3 or MW3 player will run when that game won't look pretty in their youtube montage, or they cannot maintain a 3/1 KD due to stacked teams.In contrast, Planet Side actively encourages grit and epic last stands. You may lose a base, or a continent, but it will still be the stuff of legends.

[YaJackWagon]

Originally Posted by Ailos

No, Beta hasn't started yet.

Heh. "SOON"
Eh, Stardouser?

[Stardouser]

All this talk of commanders makes me wonder something. OK, so I know commanders get to issue missions/attack orders etc...do you actually get to see icons of troops as they move?

Originally Posted by YaJackWagon

Heh. "SOON"
Eh, Stardouser?

Indeed!

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

All this talk of commanders makes me wonder something. OK, so I know commanders get to issue missions/attack orders etc...do you actually get to see icons of troops as they move?

People from your squad (10) and platoon (3 squads including yours) are identified with numbers on your minimap so yes, you know where they are and if they move. You can also see friendly soldiers as green dots on the minimap.

If you have command ranks, you are able to do a "reveal friendlies" that will flash the location of all friendlies on your map. So you more or less know where the zerg is and what's the trend.

In PS1, there is no formal mission system though. At most, you can mark location with waypoints or draw things on the map but that is only shared with squad and platoon members.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by sylphaen

People from your squad (10) and platoon (3 squads including yours) are identified with numbers on your minimap so yes, you know where they are and if they move. You can also see friendly soldiers as green dots on the minimap.

If you have command ranks, you are able to do a "reveal friendlies" that will flash the location of all friendlies on your map. So you more or less know where the zerg is and what's the trend.

In PS1, there is no formal mission system though. At most, you can mark location with waypoints or draw things on the map but that is only shared with squad and platoon members.

Someday when we get space battles, I definitely want to see videos of commanders watching friendlies or enemies approaching into firing range in a way that reminds you of the Death Star about to attack Yavin 4...or something like it for land battles.

[Capt Mytre]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Speaking of disgruntled BF3 vets, when Beta starts, it would be cool if some people skilled at making videos would make some video montages, but not montages of elite quickscoping, but instead, montages that show off the things BF3 players are asking for every day at Mordor. Proper squad play and the ability to have automatic in-game voip. Hell, you'll get cheers from Mordor over something as simple as the ability to custom name your squad. And in-game Outfits? that will put it over the top.

Already thinking about of a video based around the BF vet to Planetside 2 transition.

Something like this for the intro:

"Are you a disgruntled Battlefield Veteran?" BF3 in game player nods head.

"Were you disappointed by DICE's failure at making an actual Battlefield game?" BF3 player nodes head more vigorously.

"Would you like to the game that Battlefield SHOULD have been?" Player nods head even more vigorously.

"...and last of all, would you like to play it for FREE?" BF3 player has a spaz attack.

"Welcome... to Planetside 2"

[Coreldan]

I disagree. Battlefield 3 shouldn't have been Planetside 2, it wouldnt have been battlefield anymore then!

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Coreldan

I disagree. Battlefield 3 shouldn't have been Planetside 2, it wouldnt have been battlefield anymore then!

BF3 already isn't Battlefield, it's CoD with permanent vehicles now.

Just like PS2 isn't going to be PS1, it's going to be PS1 with a big touch of Battlefield and CoD.

The key for BF is, it could have been something vastly different from both BF2 and BF3 and pleased everyone, but it wasn't, it was BF3, and that only pleases CoD fans.

PS2 still has hope. It can still be different from PS1 yet only take from BF and CoD those things which will allow the game to please everyone. But if it goes too far in easy mode casualizations like killcam(I KNOW this is not currently planned to be a problem, just listing it as an example), 3D spotting and other stuff, that's certainly not going to endear it to Mordor.

[Coreldan]

The game would not be succesful if it would be stuck with features that we had in 2003. Modern features are not "lol pleasing CoD casuals", it's being up to date.

Sure, some things may be too CoD like, but you also have to remember that we're talking one of the most succesful franchises in the gaming industry ever. They would be fucking stupid to cater to some minority, who doesnt want modern features to their game.

Many maps of Battlefield 3 are still very much Battlefield. There are some that remind me more of CoD, but variety is good, you arnt forced to play these maps, but they also draw in more customers. I personally think BF3 is the best shooter platform I've ever seen. It's incredible how well made it is in few parts. It has some very fucking annoying problems too (spawning and killcam overriding menus being my biggest gripes), though, but if I can have Planetside with many of the features that make BF3 amazing, I'm all up for it.

It's hilarious how taking a killcam that has nonexistant impact on a game would kill the fun for fe. BF fans according to you. I rather not have it either, but trying to blame that it makes for a signifigantly worse game is IMO ridicilous. That said, I only play on Hardcore servers so I dont have to deal with killcams, I guess the game is so battlefield for me now

Most of the "stupid not BF like features" can be turned off by the server even if it's a normal server and not a hardcore server. Wonder why don't most of the servers do that and see it as a true BF instead of CoD wannabe? I guess majority ended up preferring the other way around.

This might come off a bit harsh for some parts, but I'm just quite pissed at people who have some infinite nostalgy contact lenses. And we see the same effect on Planetside as well as games like APB and BF. I'm personally pretty sure that I could go back on a full BF1942 server and not enjoy it anymore as much as I do BF3 for the most parts. Same goes for APB, the RTW-era game was fucking shit and now that the game has been altered to actually not fail the first months, people start going all nostalgic how the first game was better, even if there was like a total of 1k people playing it..

For me, I personally played Planetside more like "despite of the horrible gunplay and many other horrible mechanics" cos the scale and nature of the game was otherwise so unique and you couldnt really get it elsewhere. If I can have the scale and nature with proper modern non-shitty mechanics, I'm pretty close to heaven personally