Planetside 2 on Playstation 4 in 2013?

[jsnipy]

Originally Posted by Valkar

It would be. Its free to play for us so why not console players? They could manage their membership via the usual SOE account page and have that as an app on the conolse itself easily enough.

They would obviously pay any fees for online gaming as a whole like XBox membership if they wanted to but for the game itself and to play for free and its built in as standard, that would be a great selling point for your console.

Think about it, here is a brand now leading gaming console and on top of that we have this huge online FPS Shooter you can play absolutely free of charge when you buy it! Boom sales roll in!

If they were confident people will burn through station cash you might be correct. The console alone makes little if no margin for them.

[NewSith]

We're all just guinea pigs for devs to test the game mechanics, the game is a PS4 title, not a PC one, didn't you realise by now?

/jk

[Babyfark McGeez]

Originally Posted by Valkar

Would this work?

Yes, definetely (and i'd be actually a bit surprised if this would not be a shipping title for the playstation 4. And if not in its - hopefully soon - full tactical Planetside-Glory then atleast some kind of shallow console-fitting husk like the current state of PS2).

Originally Posted by Valkar

I know many PC gamers are very protective and hate the idea of sharing a game with console players but change can be for the better and Sony already tried this format with DC online right?

No, i cannot imagine sony would go that way. PS2 on the PS4, yes, but on seperate servers. Everything else would be business suicide (or atleast a questionable concept to have your brandnew console and its players being contested by PC players).

Originally Posted by Hamma

I hope not.

But why? As i tried to point out it would be HIGHLY unlikely for sony to go in direct competition with the PC crowd, so to us it really doesn't matter apart from the "Brand" becoming more popular in general. And that doesn't sound all too wrong.
Considering that all this probably will not be of any concern to us i may refer to this guy here:

Originally Posted by Gortha

Who cares?

BUT now i just hope we didn't have to endure this rushed release because the game has to be in a certain state when the PS4 hits the stores...or that the dumbification of the franchise is because the long-term target audience is 6 year olds with gamepads instead of hands (gotta love me some consolero clichees). If we pc guys have to suffer because of these console guys there will be raaaaggeeeee. and quuuiiiiiiit.

If not, i refer to "Gortha" again.

[ringring]

Early on, when Higby first start engaging with PS1 players and on PSU forums he often pooh-pooh the thought that PS2 would go onto a console.

However, I think after a cryptical intervention from Smed he suddenly stopped.

My opinion is that they want to put it on a console if they can and if they did it would be a very good thing.

There's no reason why the code base for the PC and the console has to be exactly the same.

And there's no reason why PC and console players have to exist on the same server, I think there will be plenty population to go around.

[Dkamanus]

I wouldn't mind as long as PS4 players had the option to plug in a keyboard and a mouse, and had no aim assist for controllers (which is what seemed to have killed the cross between PC and XBOX for Halo 2 multiplayer).

[Valkar]

Yeah I do imagine the new console might be a huge leap ahead in terms of tech and memory so the console may no longer be lagging behind as us PC Gamers might like to think or admit.

Personally given the right deployment and as long as it does not limit the game then I would be happy for this to happen to see Planetside become a real success that is truely ground breaking.

My early thoughts were that Dust was almost like a dry run for Sony, giving the conception a dry run through another company to see how it works before going for it themselves full throttle.

It would certainly explain why they would design a brand new engine, limit the game and make it as simple as they have compared to PS1, help release another F2F FPS game of a similar genre on their own console and launch PS2 they way they have so far.

For me the pieces of the puzzle are slowly unfolding and I imagine it is at the back of Sonys mind as a possible route to take. Logisitically it might be daunting but its certainly not impossible and the rewards they would take from it could be epic.

[Rockit]

Problem with consoles is they never change much over the years while PC's are getting updates by leaps and bounds. We will be stuck with 2013 console technology limitations in 2020. And an A10 is not near where a gaming PC in 2013 needs to be but for consoles sure it is a major step up from the 2005 architecture they are used to. Also, WTF Sony going with AMD while Xbox is Intel. I already know who the winner on that score is.

[Rolfski]

Originally Posted by Hamma

I hope not.

That's an odd response from someone who wants the PS2 community to grow and made a lot of noise to improve the new player experience to a new kind of audience.

Originally Posted by Valkar

What disadvantage is that sorry? You mean for the interface of a keyboard and mouse andall the controls? I think it would be possible for them and some console gamers would certainly hold their own. The control system is not too far from CoD and BF3 vehicles so the capability is there.

If they have not thought about this yet (unlikely I know) then they are missing a trick.

There's a reason console shooters have auto aim. Microsoft tested out combined PC/XBOX PvP shooting years a ago and ditched it for unbalances.

[james]

Possibly but i don't see much success for this game on consoles. Its to much a time sink for most console players.

[Boomzor]

The vast majority of the casual console crowd would get face raped by the moderately skilled PC players on a cross platform server, unless they implement some form of aiming aid or artificial mouse deceleration. At least in infantry combat.

[conspiracy tinfoil hat /on]

However, it certainly would explain some of the less than stellar design choices (especially regarding the UI).
Controllers are actually somewhat useful when it comes to vehicle combat (flight in particular) which could possibly explain yet another design direction we're hearing TONS of lamenting about on the forums.

[conspiracy tinfoil hat /off]

[Qwan]

I dont see that happening, I think they are going to stick with a popular console brand to bring out PS4. I mean if they were going to use PS2 as a launch pad they would have to make two separate entitys of the same thing. Because console players couldnt play on the same server as PC, we would have the advantage, exspecially when it comes to reflex controls.

I also dont think its worth the time, the mentality of most console players play till the next new thing comes out. PS2 is a designed to be a long term game, were most console players will jump on the next new band wagon as soon as they get a chance. I mean if SOE puts all this time into building a server for console and they all jump to the next installment of CoD black opps then its a waist of time.

[Kerrec]

- FPS Console vs. FPS PC has been trialed by Microsoft, I believe. It was a disaster for the console players.

- BF3 has a 3 system release. PC, Xbox 360, PlayStation 3. As a PC player, I often got the impression that I was playing a game that was ported from console to PC. But whatever... That being said, by far the WORST fact that resulted from having the same game on 3 systems was the patching. Right now, I'll log onto PS2 and see some minor quick patch download and install. That's great, that showcases the power of the PC. That kind of thing doesn't happen once you've got a multi-system game, because the patches have to be submitted for approval, which takes time and costs money. So everyone has to wait several months for MONSTER patches that make all kinds of huge changes at once. Bad for balance and removes the power and flexibility of the PC as a platform.

[PurpleOtter]

It's just SOE providing us with a "target rich environment"....

[Memeotis]

I'm all for it. Vehicle gameplay is much more enjoyable on console, and the infantry gameplay might also benefit because it is more difficult to aim on a console, meaning that the battles on console would be marginally more close-quarters.

What appeals to me the most is that fact that every PS4 is going to be the same performance wise, both in terms of actual processing power, but also the standardized controller. With everyone on an even playing field, this game would become so much better. Unfortunately not everyone understand that yet..

Originally Posted by Dkamanus

I wouldn't mind as long as PS4 players had the option to plug in a keyboard and a mouse, and had no aim assist for controllers (which is what seemed to have killed the cross between PC and XBOX for Halo 2 multiplayer).

Also, people view the console as being restricted (lack of easy access to keyboard for typing, fixed hardware, etc), but don't realize that the console can also shine in areas where PCs cannot. For me, this game - with its heavy focus on teamwork - screams split-screen support. I know it's improbable, but if it was to be implemented it would of course have to be restricted in the sense that your friends can only play if their character is on the same server and are the same faction as you.

So yeah. That's my case for PS2 on console. And let's not forget, there're are little to no hackers on console.

[maradine]

Originally Posted by Memeotis

So yeah. That's my case for PS2 on console. And let's not forget, there're are little to no hackers on console.

I've spent some quality time at XBL's policy enforcement HQ. There's more than you'd expect.