Don't dumb down PS2

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by TAA

I disagree. What SOE has been doing is listening to their hardcore player base. That is not a recipe for success. What they should be doing is pulling in casual gamers or non-gamers and asking them how they feel about the game. I hope that they havent done a botch up job with their tutorial. So many games dont put enough effort in it, yet it is the first point of contact between gamer and game.

Once the game goes live will be a real test for them. Random people will be downloading the game to check it out because it is free and they can. They will need a full team of coders on standby to enact changes to the game based on nothing but the usage data they collect. Feedback from us will not matter one bit, and it shouldnt. They are running a business.

As for killcam, I actually love it. The COD style killcam is perfect IMO (I dont like any others I have seen). I find it fun to see exactly what someone did to kill me. No it is not appropriate for a hardcore game. How will their average consumer feel about it? I dont know. Neither do you. It sure would suck to have the ability to do it coded into the game already and lose customers because it wasnt used.

You know what would be perfect actually - put killcam as an option in the cash store. No it wouldnt be something they would do at launch. I reckon they should wait six months until all the hardcore gamers have invested significant time and money into the game and become committed, and then do it to make even more money (along with the ability to buy certs).

One problem with claiming "hardcore" is, what does hardcore mean? To many people, hardcore is people who want realism. In THAT respect maybe realism lovers are against killcam, but people who want the game to be made into an extreme realism simulator are so few in number that there is no way that all the resistance to killcam can be coming just from them. On the other hand most people think of hardcore as simply people who play 10 hours a day. That kind of hardcore is not pre-disposed against killcam.

But you admit that you don't know what the average player thinks of no killcam, so there we are. But I believe there would be more players who leave over a positional killcam being in the game than would leave because there isn't one. You don't have to be a hardcore player to want skill to matter. When you have things like 3D spotting, positional killcam and all the other skill gap compensators in the game that allow the unskilled to have a better chance against the skilled, it converts the game into one big immersion cinematic where you're just along for the ride, much like a movie. That's an extreme embellishment, I admit of course, but it is indeed a step in that direction.

CoD's killcam is better than BF3's in this respect. It replays what the killer did but doesn't show where your killer is AFTER he killed you. It's not better than no killcam, but it is much better.

As for the idea of selling killcam in the cash shop, assuming you mean a positional killcam, that would indeed by pay2win.

Originally Posted by Buggsy

It doesn't matter how squad spawning is "balanced" it destroys the concept of having a front line.

It actually enhances the concept of a front line, otherwise you have a constant stream of people walking back who are easily overwhelmed because they're not organized til they get back.

But hey, you're against jump pads and killcam(as am I), so at least you're being consistent!

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Buggsy

No FPS has proper cover and concealment modeled where infantry can quickly duck behind and shoot. PS1 with larger hitpoints and slower kill time is better because it emulates that aspect, it makes shootouts more realistic by having unrealistic high hitpoints and ability to heal while behind cover.

I always enjoyed infantry on infantry shootouts in PS1 because of that.

Teleporting from one continent to another in PS1 doesn't destroy the concept of a front line.

Qui tacet consentit, huh?

[Buggsy]

Originally Posted by NewSith

Qui tacet consentit, huh?

Where's my giant floating battleship?

2012, making the same arguments I made in 2005. Against probably the same trolls who can't see past their own noses.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by NewSith

Qui tacet consentit, huh?

Who remains silent consents(agrees), lol? Nice. Yea, respawning could be looked at as a dumbdown, or not dying in 1 hit, or vehicles appearing out of thin air(more than once, too).

But these things are necessary to make the game playable.

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Who remains silent consents(agrees), lol? Nice. Yea, respawning could be looked at as a dumbdown, or not dying in 1 hit, or vehicles appearing out of thin air(more than once, too).

But these things are necessary to make the game playable.

Same for orbital strikes for instance. Or defenders will have no advantage over attackers, because of the very same (MOBILE) respawn ability.

[Buggsy]

Originally Posted by NewSith

Same for orbital strikes for instance. Or defenders will have no advantage over attackers, because of the very same (MOBILE) respawn ability.

OS is not an asymmetric breaker, it's symmetrical; the I-win button favors neither the attackers or defenders.

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Buggsy

OS is not an asymmetric breaker, it's symmetrical; the I-win button favors neither the attackers or defenders.

You're saying it to an ams driver and an interlink farmer. I will simply not agree with you on the matter, because of the personal experience.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Buggsy

OS is not an asymmetric breaker, it's symmetrical; the I-win button favors neither the attackers or defenders.

That's not exactly true, defenders are much more likely to be indoors and thus ineligible to receive an OS compared to attackers.

[TAA]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

As for the idea of selling killcam in the cash shop, assuming you mean a positional killcam, that would indeed by pay2win.

Well I would certainly pay for a COD style killcam...

As for pay2win, I am afraid that sooner or later the game will go that way anyway. Sure if the game is popular they might stave off on it for a little bit longer, but the moment profits start to dip some meetings will be called and we might very well see pay2win being introduced. I do believe it will happen sooner or later, so really the way I look at it is that by having it done sooner they would save me time and/or money depending on what I decided to do with the game.

[Buggsy]

Originally Posted by NewSith

You're saying it to an ams driver and an interlink farmer. I will simply not agree with you on the matter, because of the personal experience.

I unsubbed about 5 years ago, I don't care how warped and screwed up the game has become these days. Probably worse than I'd ever imagined: OS, hacks and exploits. sounds fun.

Originally Posted by Stardouser

That's not exactly true, defenders are much more likely to be indoors and thus ineligible to receive an OS compared to attackers.

OS is symmetrical.

[Irish]

Originally Posted by Buggsy

Where's my giant floating battleship?

2012, making the same arguments I made in 2005. Against probably the same trolls who can't see past their own noses.

so buggsy, .....can you just not play ps2, and go on your merry way?

..instead of assuming everyone who doesn't share your opinion proves your elite status in this world, cant you have your opinion and not troll the forums with your obvious arrogance and narcissism.

if i had to pick you out of a line up, based on how you convey your opinions, i would choose the 50 something guy who has been allowed to be self absorbed and condescending the majority of his life who is so far spiraled out of reality that they resort to hardcore gaming due to the detachment it creates from simple human interaction.

[Buggsy]

Originally Posted by Irish

so buggsy, .....can you just not play ps2, and go on your merry way?

..instead of assuming everyone who doesn't share your opinion proves your elite status in this world, cant you have your opinion and not troll the forums with your obvious arrogance and narcissism.

if i had to pick you out of a line up, based on how you convey your opinions, i would choose the 50 something guy who has been allowed to be self absorbed and condescending the majority of his life who is so far spiraled out of reality that they resort to hardcore gaming due to the detachment it creates from simple human interaction.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make, but your not suppose to give the gamer everything they want. It's why:

In the game of Monopoly every place isn't boardwalk

In the game of Battleship every peg doesn't have a ship

In the game of cards every card isn't an ace of ******

In the game of Chess every piece isn't the queen.

In the game of Stratego every piece isn't a 1.

You get it? No, probably not.

[ITOS]

After seeing footage of PS1 I have too say that the devs are just destroying what could have been a great predecessor to PS2. If they keep dumbing down PS1 I won't play it. No subscription money from me! In PS2 you have to fly in a huge Gal to set up a spawn and everyone can see it. Even when landed the enemy is over it in seconds so you actually have to pull you shit together and defend your spawn. That is tactics! But in PS1 you apparently have these small cars that are invisible when deployed and that just takes away all the strategy in setting up a spawn. You just roll up and deploy and maybe put sown some mines. Which reminds me: How can they be so stupid that they allow for up to 20 mines per character? Not to mention other deployables! In PS2 you actually have to coordinate with you team mates when you want to set up a mine field or base defence but in PS1 it looks like you can do that all by your self and everyone can do it too! As everyone can cert anything and just run around and heal and repair themselves. That is bullshit! In PS2 I know that if I take out a squads medic they actually loose the ability to heal or if I take out their AV guy I can then roll vehicles against the rest. That is strategy but the devs are removing all that in PS1 just so that people can run around and feel like Rambo. I love PS2 and want PS1 to be equally good but PS1 won't survive long like that. I also hear that they are going to add an immobile artillery piece that someone has too sit and pull the trigger in while your friends are out pointing at things you can't see. Big whoop-de-do in the strategy department there /sarcasm. How is it better than what we have now? You still point at a target but now at least you don't have a guy who have to spend his time shooting at clouds while his friends have fun at the front line. The only thing PS1 has going for it is that main tanks require gunners now but I hear they might add single seat versions of them if pops continues to drop.


Disclaimer: This post is sarcastic, highly exaggerated and mainly for laughs.

[Buggsy]

Originally Posted by ITOS

After seeing footage of PS1 I have too say that the devs are just destroying what could have been a great predecessor to PS2. If they keep dumbing down PS1 I won't play it. No subscription money from me! In PS2 you have to fly in a huge Gal to set up a spawn and everyone can see it. Even when landed the enemy is over it in seconds so you actually have to pull you shit together and defend your spawn. That is tactics! But in PS1 you apparently have these small cars that are invisible when deployed and that just takes away all the strategy in setting up a spawn. You just roll up and deploy and maybe put sown some mines. Which reminds me: How can they be so stupid that they allow for up to 20 mines per character? Not to mention other deployables! In PS2 you actually have to coordinate with you team mates when you want to set up a mine field or base defence but in PS1 it looks like you can do that all by your self and everyone can do it too! As everyone can cert anything and just run around and heal and repair themselves. That is bullshit! In PS2 I know that if I take out a squads medic they actually loose the ability to heal or if I take out their AV guy I can then roll vehicles against the rest. That is strategy but the devs are removing all that in PS1 just so that people can run around and feel like Rambo. I love PS2 and want PS1 to be equally good but PS1 won't survive long like that. I also hear that they are going to add an immobile artillery piece that someone has too sit and pull the trigger in while your friends are out pointing at things you can't see. Big whoop-de-do in the strategy department there /sarcasm. How is it better than what we have now? You still point at a target but now at least you don't have a guy who have to spend his time shooting at clouds while his friends have fun at the front line. The only thing PS1 has going for it is that main tanks require gunners now but I hear they might add single seat versions of them if pops continues to drop.


Disclaimer: This post is sarcastic, highly exaggerated and mainly for laughs.

The AMS had a cloak for a damn good reason: it was the best way to balance infantry vs. vehicles without totally nerfing vehicles like in Battlefield 2/3 games.

AMS = Infantry, it was their spawn point. And no the solution isn't to have COD random spawning.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Buggsy

The AMS had a cloak for a damn good reason: it was the best way to balance infantry vs. vehicles without totally nerfing vehicles like in Battlefield 2/3 games.

AMS = Infantry, it was their spawn point. And no the solution isn't to have COD random spawning.

Vehicles weren't nerfed in BF2, they were full rape machines.

As for BF3, vehicles were nerfed to cater to CoD infantry focus players.

What CoD game mode has random spawning that you are referring to?