Fact: I play BF3, but would rather play PS1 - Page 15

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-22, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by Tialian

No map limits was included because it was to make a point about every other shooter out there that has map limits, it ruins the immersion when you get punished for going out of bounds.

Yes of course these are features of PS1, that's why we want them in PS2. I didn't go listing features of BF3 or CoD because this isn't a sequel to those games.

The point was is that those features that you want are mostly there. The ones that aren't have been explained by people who actually know what they are doing. There isn't anything you can do constructively to those discussions besides rehash old arguments.

So suggest features that were in PS1 that haven't been discussed and explained by the devs already, or you know, suggest something that is unique.

Originally Posted by Tialian

I never considered PS a sandbox, I'm sorry that you did. I also never considered PS1 "just a game," again, I'm sorry that you did. Some people have low expectations and don't mind buying the latest rehash of CoD every year, some of us would rather play a shooter that actually stands out against others and leads by example.

Yeah... I don't know what to say to this.

Tialian · 2012-04-22, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

The point was is that those features that you want are mostly there. The ones that aren't have been explained by people who actually know what they are doing. There isn't anything you can do constructively to those discussions besides rehash old arguments.

So suggest features that were in PS1 that haven't been discussed and explained by the devs already, or you know, suggest something that is unique.

So why don't you quote out some explanations. Oh, and "it will take 6 months longer" is not an excuse.

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Yeah... I don't know what to say to this.

You should probably say something like: "Man, I feel sorry for myself because I had such a narrow view of the game and wasn't lucky enough to be apart of an outfit that turned the tide of the battle."

Stardouser · 2012-04-22, 03:14 PM

Exactly how do you guys define sandbox? The simple fact that you don't have claustrophobic out of bounds, allowing you to flank, makes it sandbox compared to BF. The fact that you won't have the community subdivided into thousands of 16,32, and 64 player servers, many banning individual weapons, some banning individual tactics like getting up on rooftops, half of them banning for attacking uncaps because, instead of a strategic game, they want a duel simulator where you have to let the enemy get up and attack you first.

I don't know how you guys define sandbox but compared to Battlefield, PS1 and presumably PS2 will at least be a pristine sandy beach.

Tialian · 2012-04-22, 03:32 PM

I guess I misunderstood the term "sandbox." I thought it is how it sounds in that you have boundaries like in a sandbox but apparently it means open world. Odd term indeed.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-22, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by Tialian

So why don't you quote out some explanations. Oh, and "it will take 6 months longer" is not an excuse.

You should probably say something like: "Man, I feel sorry for myself because I had such a narrow view of the game and wasn't lucky enough to be apart of an outfit that turned the tide of the battle."

Originally Posted by Higby

You never know, man!

This is something we've talked about quite a bit in the office, but it involves a lot more than you guys may realize. It's not just making a couple dozen character animations, it involves modeling and texturing all the vehicle interiors, making all the doors separate, animated pieces of the vehicles, i.e. essentially remaking many of our current vehicles.

We definitely get that this is something that you guys love from ps1 and want in ps2. I'm on a bus with T-Ray and Elam for 5 hours today, so we'll pow wow about it a bit and see what can be done...

Is the closest quote I could find. I'll dig around a bit more for a more concrete answer to why it isn't in rather than just a simple yes or no. This was his response in the poll thread shown earlier.

Yeah I don't feel sorry for myself. I play games to have fun and had tons of fun in Planetside both in and out of an outfit. I'm not going to explain my history in Planetside to you.

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Exactly how do you guys define sandbox?

Sandbox means that it is up to the player to decide how they want to play the game. If I want to be in an outfit, that should be supported. If I want to zerg, that should be supported. If I never want to play in the company of another empire mate, that should be supported. Defining how a person should play the game in something like Planetside goes against everything that it is.

Tialian · 2012-04-22, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Is the closest quote I could find. I'll dig around a bit more for a more concrete answer to why it isn't in rather than just a simple yes or no. This was his response in the poll thread shown earlier.

I think I remember seeing that quote, and there's an issue right there. They messed up by not properly planning from the beginning. Instead of going back and making it right they just want to push forward with what they have.

That's the same thing they did with PS1 when they came out with BFR's. They keep talking about listening to the community but before the game even comes out they have this lazy mentality that they don't want to change things that are already done.

Stardouser · 2012-04-22, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Sandbox means that it is up to the player to decide how they want to play the game. If I want to be in an outfit, that should be supported. If I want to zerg, that should be supported. If I never want to play in the company of another empire mate, that should be supported. Defining how a person should play the game in something like Planetside goes against everything that it is.

Those are part of it as well. Sandbox is a term with a broad reach.

However, sandbox should never be used to say that there shouldn't be tangible benefits to playing in a squad or outfit.

The Kush · 2012-04-22, 04:13 PM

vehicle entrance/exit animations would be GREAT but certainly not NEEDED and definitely DON'T affect gameplay very much. obviously everyone wants that including myself, but like Higby said in the post before its a lot of additional work that could be put towards other things that really affect gamplay.

Crator · 2012-04-22, 07:17 PM

Pretty sure you could consider Planetside a sandbox MMO. They give the players the tools to play the game, show them how to use them, then the players make the content. This is versus a theme-park MMO like WoW, DAoC, Aion, etc, where the players are driven by quest lines. IMO, all good MMOs should have some sandbox elements in them...

Another example, and a better suited one imo, is Star Wars Galaxies. It did have a few quest lines (even more so after NGE) but it wasn't the main focus. Crafting in the game was especially sandbox due to the amount of tools and things you could do with it in-game.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-22, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by Tialian

I think I remember seeing that quote, and there's an issue right there. They messed up by not properly planning from the beginning. Instead of going back and making it right they just want to push forward with what they have.

That's the same thing they did with PS1 when they came out with BFR's. They keep talking about listening to the community but before the game even comes out they have this lazy mentality that they don't want to change things that are already done.

I think it can be noted that the devs this time around have been communicating very effectively, and have been shown to be receptive to changes and suggestions. Like Killcams and etc. And they are far from lazy. The game looks good and professional from what I've seen so far. Thats proof to me at least that they are working hard.