Keep It Simple Stupid (K.I.S.S.)

[Traak]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

Some people require a deeper aspect of warfare to find it interesting.

Such as?

[Bags]

Trenches. Ba dum tsssh.

[Lonehunter]

Originally Posted by Grimster

Well the chinese publisher of Planetside:Next The9 said in a interview that Planetside:Next would have all of its all features(almost) that Planetside did.

Then it seems to me like they shoulda just fixed the first game instead of creating a whole new game with same attributes.

But the original is pretty screwed, maybe we just need a fresh start with better developement

[Bags]

I imagine they won't be keeping the BR 40 cap and other obvious balance issues.

[Vancha]

I largely agree, and tried to express a similar sentiment in the CE thread (I'm terrible at explaining myself.)

A lot of the ideas I see being thrown around here come from brilliant concepts or mental scenarios, but end up becoming incredibly convoluted or clunky when transferred from mind to forum.

[wolfkrone]

OMG Naval units, with different ships for different days of the week, and you can paint them too!

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by Traak

Such as?

More than just the rush in, die, respawn, rush in again. Yes, PS has more than that, but not much. Every fight ultimately ends up the same way assuming there is an actual fight.

[Timantium]

Originally Posted by Lonehunter187

Then it seems to me like they shoulda just fixed the first game instead of creating a whole new game with same attributes.

But the original is pretty screwed, maybe we just need a fresh start with better developement

This is what I really would like to see, rework the first game to solve the MAJOR issues:

1. network performance
2. modern graphics
3. system integrity (anti-hacking)

If all they do is this, then it would be worth it to play (for me). In order to appeal to a larger audience, I agree they need to adapt it to current FPS and MMO trends. However, I do not want to adapt it so much that it loses the elements that made it so special in the first place.

That would be like taking a classic Corvette and adding modern ground effects and trim to it... (I don't care how many more people would buy one with automatic transmission, it's a friggin Corvette, it needs a clutch).

Originally Posted by Raymac

Now we've expanded from Captain Buzzkill to Club Buzzkill?

Sounds like an excellent outfit name <Club Buzzkill> Who wants in?

[Bags]

I'm already in Fun Overload, sorry.

[Traak]

Originally Posted by Bags

Trenches. Ba dum tsssh.

That made me laugh!

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Timantium

This is what I really would like to see, rework the first game to solve the MAJOR issues:

1. network performance
2. modern graphics
3. system integrity (anti-hacking)

I'd say the bland, uninspired, and claustrophobic infantry combat areas that are pretty much one massive choke point after another is a major problem, if not the biggest one. The field combat for vehicles is great. Needs some work in the vehicle representation department, but other than that its wonderful. The infantry aspects of the game are woefully inadequate and need a complete redesign of bases, areas around bases, and base interiors.

Everything else is secondary to that consideration imo.

[Highwind]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

I'd say the bland, uninspired, and claustrophobic infantry combat areas that are pretty much one massive choke point after another is a major problem, if not the biggest one. The field combat for vehicles is great. Needs some work in the vehicle representation department, but other than that its wonderful. The infantry aspects of the game are woefully inadequate and need a complete redesign of bases, areas around bases, and base interiors.

Everything else is secondary to that consideration imo.

I think everyone would agree that the core gameplay is critical to the games success, but I think its just as important to implement solid interface features right from the start. Simple gameplay doesn't mean it should avoid depth in other aspects of the game. Like for example they really need to be full fledged stat tracking and score keeping page both in game and online in my opinion. Things along these lines were too simple when planetside launched, with your profile page barely showing your total kill count and spec.
These features were improved years later when the merit system came but the data was always only from that point forward.

Having systems in place to chart progress can be just as important to players as those who desire overarching war-like strategy from the core game. Although I have no doubt "stat tracking" will exist if for no other reason they to spark achievement milestones I could see how calling for a "simpler planetside" could be extended to effectively dumb down the game as a whole, when all it really needs is an "advanced stats" or "additional" button.

Freedom to play your soldier how you wanted, when you wanted was one of the best parts of planetside. I see PSN as a great opportunity to both preserve that core seed of gameplay most people are talking about while at the same time expanding the tools and interfaces that allow that to happen in a smooth and fulfilling way. Focusing in on the one piece of the game is ignoring all that it could be in the big picture. Remembering that PSN will be compared to your Battlefield 2-3 and your Black Ops and Halos, whether you like it on not, so every part of the game deserves the best polish it can get. Nothing is secondary to making a great game as a whole the way I see it.

[Bags]

Stat tracking is not a deep gameplay mechanic. (I'm not against it)

[Traak]

I would like to see PS become even more complex than it is now. A game that actually heavily rewarded actually reading the instructions.

[Daala]

I can get my ass handed to me and still want to play original PS.

If they can pull that off, Next will probably last 8 years again.