End the Fight - "Tours" of duty

Madfish · 2012-06-18, 01:11 PM

One of the key issues with PS is a sense of no actual progress.

What do you guys think about an end game criteria - hold X amount of territory for X time etc etc, which leads to the game finishing. Everyone who took part gets a "Tour" medal, the winning faction gets a medal and the best outfits and players also get awards.

The planet then resets for it to start all over again.

The reset would also be a great time to introduce new technology / equipment ready to go.

Thoughts? Still just doing the same thing again and again, or would it give a sense of a greater task?

Sledgecrushr · 2012-06-18, 01:16 PM

Im all for endless war with no resets or breaks. Blood for the Blood God...

Bazilx · 2012-06-18, 01:20 PM

I want a reset, I feel it would make the fighting feel more worthwhile and enjoyable.

However this has been brought up a thousand times before, I'm sure the devs have heard it and are considering it and will continue to in BETA.

CorvicM · 2012-06-18, 01:21 PM

if i recall correctly Chromehounds did something similar and it was not pretty as 95% of the people who were achievement "enthusiasts" just joined a "group" just to get said number 1 group achievement. This lead to cheating galore and all sorts of other problems because of boosting. It encourages cheating for a "medal" cause some people have to have everything. (Boosting in PS2 would be either TKing on an alt so your mains Outfit gets the base, or entire sub outfits in other factions dedicated to just taking up space in the pop limit and AFKing so their outfit can get the bases.

Note: This is just what i have seen and foresee happening. Especially if there is a bonus from an award.

capiqu · 2012-06-18, 01:28 PM

I could see this as monthly events in which outfits and people can participate in. Maybe it could be done on selected continents. Tts not a bad idea, but continues battle is what Planetside is all about and I think most would agree.

Biohazard · 2012-06-18, 01:28 PM

The war shouldn't stop until we have beaten the ignorant masses back to their footholds and starve them of resources!

kaffis · 2012-06-18, 01:28 PM

I don't need a reset to have fun.

Progress is taking every inch of ground I can during my play session. That's how I measure victory.

That my compatriots may lose it again when I log off does not detract from that, nor make my victory tomorrow when I log back on any less meaningful.

fishirboy · 2012-06-18, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by Bazilx

I want a reset, I feel it would make the fighting feel more worthwhile and enjoyable.

However this has been brought up a thousand times before, I'm sure the devs have heard it and are considering it and will continue to in BETA.

Hows does that worthwhile? Have a reset and then bam! your towers you captured are all gone because of it. I would hate that because of the no worth feel to it. Like MW3 and BF3

GhettoPrince · 2012-06-18, 01:31 PM

I heard some stuff about new planets instead of new continents. I think locking down a planet would make for a pretty cool endgame. I'd love to see some kind of space combat if they could figure out a way to do it that didn't divide the playerbase. We already have a ton of vehicles and the technology can handle it easy.

I don't know about being able to win the war, that just sounds gimmicky and stupid, but if your side can hold a piece of ground for a long time than you should totally be able to win the battle for it.

TL;DR BETABETABETABETABETABETA!

Tim · 2012-06-18, 01:32 PM

Don't think resets are needed, after all when one faction is penned in half the fun is breaking out again, wouldn't get that chance if the game reset

super pretendo · 2012-06-18, 01:32 PM

I think conquering a continent should lead to a cert training speed boost for all members of a faction. Nothing big, but something tangible to feel, and maybe medals to show as well.

Bazilx · 2012-06-18, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by fishirboy

Hows does that worthwhile? Have a reset and then bam! your towers you captured are all gone because of it. I would hate that because of the no worth feel to it. Like MW3 and BF3

I will tell you hows.

That's bound to happen with or without a reset, all the bases and resources you captured are liable to be taken back while you are sleeping. Atleast if there was a reset at the end the x amount of resources your side would have gained from those hours you held that base you captured would contribute to your victory.

As it is now, you'll just be like the tide, sweeping forward and back with no sense of purpose or accomplishment. As people are pushed back they become stronger from having to defend less territory and become more able to take back the territory you conquered which means that even if you fight better than them, the results won't be nearly as noticable as they would be if there was a score and reset system.

I believe it's mainly though a matter of preference, I won't feel like I am doing well unless I have a number telling me I am. I won't take as much pleasure out of the knowledge that technically we are doing better than them unless some arbitrary third party gives me a pat on the back once in a while, it's sad but I believe it's part of many peoples competetive psychology.

I feel it would be like playing a sport but with nobody keeping score and some hippie jerk telling me it's not about the score, it's about the pleasure of the game.

thegreekboy · 2012-06-18, 01:41 PM

All of the issues brought up here can be solved by one thing-TIME.

Make an end game, but make the game MONUMENTALLY long, my idea is each round takes 6 months to complete, and each faction earns "points" based on how many bases/tower, etc they took and how long they held each of them. That eliminates boosting, and the rounds are long enough so that noone feels like its a typical "match" in a generic fps.

Hell, I would be fine with the round time being 1 year.

Turdicus · 2012-06-18, 01:43 PM

Its not an endless war if it...ends. I don't understand why people have this need for an endgame. If you fight for three days over a base and then take it THAT is an accomplishment worth remembering. Similarly losing that battle is a big deal. Games with endings are disappointing because if they are good enough it reminds you that it is limited. No endgame makes the game feel unlimited and persistent.

Character progression is enough achievement for me. I wouldn't be opposed to a merit award system either, shiny medals earned on a "tour" that never ends is a cool concept.

CorvicM · 2012-06-18, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by thegreekboy

All of the issues brought up here can be solved by one thing-TIME.

Make an end game, but make the game MONUMENTALLY long, my idea is each round takes 6 months to complete, and each faction earns "points" based on how many bases/tower, etc they took and how long they held each of them. That eliminates boosting, and the rounds are long enough so that noone feels like its a typical "match" in a generic fps.

Hell, I would be fine with the round time being 1 year.

Sorry but my response still applies.