Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: REEEEECOLLA!!!
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
View Poll Results: Do you like the idea of "speeding up" the game | |||
Yes | 48 | 22.22% | |
No | 76 | 35.19% | |
Too early to have an opinion | 85 | 39.35% | |
I don't care either way | 7 | 3.24% | |
Voters: 216. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2012-05-20, 09:30 AM | [Ignore Me] #211 | ||
Captain
|
the idea that organizing ppl in an RPG is like organizing a bunch of twitch monkeys in an FPS is a friggin joke,you have two different types of player there and the playstyle demands and the experiences in game are totally different.
actually I can't wait to see all these "experts' that have zero experience with large groups of FPS players get friggin steamrolled by outfits that have been playing together for almost a decade now and easily slip into the rolls needed in a squad/platoon to get the job done. now all you wanna-be's go back to talking about shit that you have no clue about. |
||
|
2012-05-20, 10:41 AM | [Ignore Me] #212 | |||||
First Lieutenant
|
|
|||||
|
2012-05-20, 10:57 AM | [Ignore Me] #214 | ||
First Lieutenant
|
But who did?
If you're talking about me, then in no way am I saying I'm an expert of all things PS1, far from it. I just don't think it's fair OR constructive by some people to just plain out dismiss any kind of opinion just because the guy who stated it hasn't played PS1 before. |
||
|
2012-05-20, 11:15 AM | [Ignore Me] #215 | |||
First Sergeant
|
"PS2 is quicker than PS1, is this good or bad?" If a player didn't play PS1, that player can't offer an opinion based on experience. I certainly hope so. |
|||
|
2012-05-20, 11:15 AM | [Ignore Me] #216 | |||
Captain
|
ahhh yes we can if the opinion has been proven wrong repeatedly by our own in-game experiences |
|||
|
2012-05-20, 12:12 PM | [Ignore Me] #217 | ||||
First Lieutenant
|
I mearly stated that PS1 isn't/wasn't the only game with big teamplay. And me being confrontational could be explained by the fact that I was argueing this issue the past page and a half and when you come along and skim in then I'll sure as hell think that you are directing it at me.
When did we start argueing about specific details? |
||||
|
2012-05-20, 12:29 PM | [Ignore Me] #218 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I am with Wild that there is a fine line you have to find with damage to health that I am sure they will work on through out beta. If people die to quick then it is all about who shot first, but if they have to much health it becomes all about who has more numbers and you see everyone running around like they are super soldiers instead playing tactically. That is what vehicles and Maxes are for IMO. If they hit the right spot in the middle then I feel it is allot more competitive. If you shot first your not necessarily going to go down, you have a chance of turning and outgunning you opponent. You should also be able to take out several other people if you out shoot them, apposed to games with high health like halo where the only way your winning two on one is if they are awful (in a strait up gun fight).
|
||
|
2012-05-20, 12:30 PM | [Ignore Me] #219 | |||
Colonel
|
I have said for years that WW2 Online's game world size but with Battlefield gameplay and vehicle/infantry speed would be the best game ever. I stand by that. Imagine flying 5 miles in 10 Blackhawks to assault an enemy base or city? just to be clear, you don't have to travel 5 miles after every spawn, WW2 OL lets you set up forward bases right outside an enemy base/town. And when I say, add BF gameplay to WW2 OL I also mean put in squad spawning and other things. Naturally there would have to a lot more details to the game world than WW2 OL has but that's the general idea. Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-05-20 at 12:32 PM. |
|||
|
2012-05-20, 12:41 PM | [Ignore Me] #220 | |||
First Lieutenant
|
My point was soley the stated opinion that PS1 had the best teamplay of ANY game, which by definiton means more then just FPSes. And you are calling me confrontational. |
|||
|
2012-05-20, 12:49 PM | [Ignore Me] #221 | |||
Colonel
|
And to be honest, I think there's room(in terms of marketplace demand) for SOE to do both. After PS2 is successful, they should use PS2 as a base, and (and I hate to use this word but) reskin it as a modern theme game. The infantry combat wouldn't even need to change much, although the game world would have to be completely different and modern looking, with cities and everything, and replace the PS aircraft with F16s, A10s, Blackhawks and Apaches. And since we're talking about game speed here...IF SOE was to make a modern themed MMOFPS, would you expect PS2 and my imaginary MMOFPS to have the same game pace? Or would one be slower than the other? |
|||
|
2012-05-20, 12:57 PM | [Ignore Me] #222 | |||
First Lieutenant
|
I was getting tired having to explain my point, because people misunderstood it and apparently didn't want to listen. He said modern graphics, not modern setting per se. |
|||
|
2012-05-20, 12:59 PM | [Ignore Me] #223 | ||
Colonel
|
I've been thinking about MMOFPS as a game concept since before there even was a Battlefield, starting back in at least 1998 when I was playing Novalogic's F22 Raptor and Delta Force, and when people back then were saying "oh I wish we had an integrated battlefield"(meaning tanks, infantry and jets in the same game). I actually had hundreds of posts on WW2 OL's boards during its development time. It just never turned out to be fun.
Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-05-20 at 01:00 PM. |
||
|
2012-05-20, 01:10 PM | [Ignore Me] #225 | |||
Colonel
|
Though I will say, I do think future theme justifies slowing the pace and TTK a bit, shields and all, you know? As I say, SOE should also make a modern theme MMOFPS(and half the work is done by reusing as much as they can from PS2!): PS2 would be their moderate TTK/pace game and the modern theme one could be their CoD/BF3 paced game. |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|