Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: NC: Not Cool
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
2012-07-10, 03:49 PM | [Ignore Me] #46 | ||
*Golf Clap*
Right on. If you were in an armour outfit in PS1 you will remember that the synergy created by a good MBT (Main battle tank) crew far outweighed the effectiveness of a pair of Lightning drivers. Planetside 2 should be able facilitating cool stuff to happen when people get together to accomplish more than they would be able to when working independently. This is a design philosophy that I am putting onto the game. What use is a dedicated vehicle VOIP channel if all the guy you're talking to has is a crappy little pea shooter. He is a glorified spotter at that point. Why have a multi-person crewed vehicle if it won't increase your combat effectiveness? Sounds a whole lot like the failed design philosophy of the TR in PS1 which was to increase the number of gunners while decreasing the potency of weapons. The raider wasn't awesome, the prowler could just as easily have had a weapon toggle for the gunner between the mains and the MG. If you can't include the option of assigning primary weapons to a dedicated driver you are essentially just adding a passenger seat to the MBT that will serve little to no purpose other having backup for when you get to your destination, get out of the tank and cap that point you drove them to. Last edited by Soothsayer; 2012-07-10 at 03:50 PM. |
|||
|
2012-07-10, 03:50 PM | [Ignore Me] #47 | |||
First Lieutenant
|
|
|||
|
2012-07-10, 03:50 PM | [Ignore Me] #48 | ||
First Sergeant
|
But making things fun is, and if that means making it harder then that is the route that should be taken. But still, this is just my opinion, I do not think it should be implemented if the majority disagree with it.
Although I could just say the opposite: Making things easier just to make things easier is not good design. It's a ridiculous observation of my position. |
||
|
2012-07-10, 03:52 PM | [Ignore Me] #50 | |||
Corporal
|
|
|||
|
2012-07-10, 03:56 PM | [Ignore Me] #51 | |||
First Lieutenant
|
It all boils down to what the devs are after and how they view life, in a way. Are the making games cause they hope to "make it big" and each have a Ferrarri and a beach house, or are they making games because they love games and want to make something they can be proud of? I realise the devs need to make a profit, and they have to make concessions in order to make a living. By all means, I support this. I intend to subcribe to PS2 for the sake of supporting it long term, if nothing else. I like F2P as an option, but if everybody does that, no more games. They NEED money, and I WANT them to have money. But Higby doesn't need a Porsche. Know what I mean? It's like the difference between having a wife and having a prostitute. And too many people take the prostitute route. This is all OffTopic, to an extent though. We're talking about tanks, not Higby's delusions of convertibles Last edited by vVRedOctoberVv; 2012-07-10 at 03:57 PM. |
|||
|
2012-07-10, 03:57 PM | [Ignore Me] #52 | ||
First Sergeant
|
Damn people.. It's such a simple solution.
Driver gets control of gun. Driver has option of letting another player control gun. Done.. Everybody is happy and problem is solved. Do keep in mind, that if only the driver gets the primary gun on the MBT, nobody will ever mount the secondary gun. They will just go get another MBT and have two primary guns.
__________________
|
||
|
2012-07-10, 03:57 PM | [Ignore Me] #53 | ||
Major
|
I personally found all the new shooters lacking in map design, not in shooting mechanics. Seemed like every part of the maps now are designed to funnel you towards the enemy.
Also, they've gotten boring because no one's pushed the limits recently. Battle's started getting bigger and more exciting starting with Tribes and Battlefield 1942 but now they've completely flat-lined with BF3 and COD. Very excited about the persistence, map size and player count Planetside is bringing back to the table, this time with more functional mechanics. Couldn't care less if driving/firing requires one seat or two, and not sure why BF3/CoD needs to be included in the discussion of such. |
||
|
2012-07-10, 04:00 PM | [Ignore Me] #55 | ||
First Lieutenant
|
Mostly mentioned from the standpoint that this is the crowd SOE is trying so hard to draw into their game. As someone pointed out earlier, it is inevitable, unavoidable.... perhaps even necessary (shudder). But I don't have to like it
|
||
|
2012-07-10, 04:00 PM | [Ignore Me] #56 | |||
Second Lieutenant
|
I've played enough PS1 to know that the tank mechanics lead to a lot of frustration. As much fun as it can be, it often ended up getting me killed because a gunner couldn't see the target right in front of the tank, nor could he hit it when aiming. For the rest of your post you're just assuming the kind of games I like. Of which you're completely incorrect on. The separate driver and gunner game mechanics have a lot core issues when it comes to communication. When a game needs to appeal to a much larger audience than the first, they need to make some changes that will appeal to a broader audience. They have to do this without alienating the original audience or they will end up pissing off both groups, kind of like Red Orchestra 2 did. Here they are making a pretty big change because they've noted the problems with it. They've realized that it won't work well on a larger scale geared to a wider audience. Game mechanics that rely that heavily on direct communication have way more problems to the average players. |
|||
|
2012-07-10, 04:02 PM | [Ignore Me] #57 | ||
Corporal
|
Too much easiness kills the game.
Too much hardness kills the game. Too much players kills the game. Too less players kills the game. We already had enough games to figure that having two seats in tanks like in reality is not too hard, it improves the game and the teamplay and let players having some good times and good meetings (also bad sometimes) etc. |
||
|
2012-07-10, 04:08 PM | [Ignore Me] #59 | |||
Second Lieutenant
|
The only thing that Planetside 2 really has going for it compared to other FPSs is the scale. This was an issue in 2003 and it's going to be an issue in 2012. The game being F2P is going to help a bit, but there is still far more games on the market competing for a slice. It's harder to keep players interested in a genre that constantly has new games and new competition being released on a yearly basis. So it's in SOE's best interest to follow the standard conventions and play to its strengths. As I said before, the ability to have both a driver and a gunner would be a great cert. I just don't want that to be the base gameplay of the MBTs. I would prefer the base gameplay to be a single driver/gunner with the ability to cert for a separate driver gunner. There are a lot of advantages to having a separate driver and gunner. If you do the certs right, there could be even more. Even Battlefield 3 has a "cert" for the tank which allows a 3rd player to man a laser sight in the tank. He does nothing else but paints targets. I see people use that all of the time because of the advantage it gives them in battle. PS2 could follow something like that and it would be fine. |
|||
|
2012-07-10, 04:15 PM | [Ignore Me] #60 | |||
Staff Sergeant
|
Last edited by SgtExo; 2012-07-10 at 04:17 PM. |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|