Planetside 2 vs Dust514 gameplay Round 2

[captainkapautz]

To me, Dust immediately disqualifies itself by being console.

If it were PC, sure I'd play, but console?

No, thanks.

[FatCandy]

what a PC elitist circle jerk, I expected the blind love of PS2, but not such PC elitism, I am honestly disappointed with you guys.

[DerFurst]

I don't like Dust 514. It looks like a soulless ripoff off PS2.

Happy?

[Brusi]

I'll definitely play dust if there is keyboard + mouse support ;p

[maradine]

Originally Posted by Stew

But the point was more to compare both games gameplay the core gameplay not really all the details about the balanced of both game i found dust gameplay and caracter moovement really bad and i dont even touch the 8 bits textures on everything

the core gameplay in planetside and ttk is very great in the other hand dust514 look more like a prototype at the momment than a beta in my book the gameplay mechanics are not even alpha stage !

I would point you to section 2.iv of the NDA you reportedly signed. =D

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by SpcFarlen

Both are on different platforms. One is a persistent MMO. The other is a more classic fast passed match style of FPS. They all are rip offs of every fps out there because every fps has elements of every other fps. Its Doom reskinned, clearly.

Plus they are both in Alpha where i doubt any of us have played...

/thread

So Dust is the persistent MMO and Planetside is the fast-paced, match-style FPS in your comparison right? I mean, last time I checked Planetside 2 was about fighting over the same towers and bases over and over again with nothing ever changing, while Dust has corporate warfare to take control of planets and influence the balance of power in the EVE galaxy going for it.

Originally Posted by maradine

If they're mapping to the standard EVE skill influence model, it's a bit closer to 100%. This is about the difference you can expect between a guy that just got the skill to fly a battlecruiser and the guy who's been face-pushing in a Brutix for a year.

Who knows how meaningful the skills are. But even in EVE a character that's fairly new can still be useful as a tackler. I don't imagine any amount of skill different will prevent someone from dying if even a 1-day-old character shoots them in the face a bunch.

Originally Posted by Stew

Even 10 % more damage will make a huge difference between 2 equally skills players !

one will have mostlikely 10 % health left and the other will be dead if they start shooting at the same time !

The weapons balanced is not balanced in the same way than regular shooter and its a bad game designed choice in my opinion

Are you aware that they're aiming for ~20% difference in terms of raw ability between a veteran PS2 player and a new PS2 player?

[Phellix]

Originally Posted by FatCandy

what a PC elitist circle jerk, I expected the blind love of PS2, but not such PC elitism, I am honestly disappointed with you guys.

Oh please, if this was a forum for a CONSOLE game it'd be the same situation. Even The Game Station mentioned today that the console industry is falling behind because there's really not gonna be a new "next generation" console for awhile because there's nothing you can really upgrade that ALL major console companies are gonna have, Modern PC's blow consoles out of the water and they're becoming more and more cheap. So to that, i say HELL YEAH PC REPRESENT.

[maradine]

Originally Posted by Warborn

I don't imagine any amount of skill different will prevent someone from dying if even a 1-day-old character shoots them in the face a bunch.

True, and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I'd just be antsy if I knew the guy who's 5'd everything in the personal weapons skill tree was on the other side.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by FatCandy

what a PC elitist circle jerk, I expected the blind love of PS2, but not such PC elitism, I am honestly disappointed with you guys.

I agree that Been consoles fanboys or PC elitist is not any good for gaming ive always play on every platform Xbox360 : gears of wars , HALO , Red dead redemption etc.. Playstation 3 : Killzone 2 , Killzone 3 ,uncharted MAG , PC : metro 2033 , Skyrim , Battlefield 3 To name just few modern games ive play on every consoles /PC

Its not a PC vs Console subject and i dont even compare the graphics quality but even MAG as a better graphics quality than dust514


If anyones think those graphics arent good i do not know whats to says some games have beautiful graphics on consoles

The whole subject is more

which gameplay gunplays is better wich ones seams to have the better game mechanics TTK hit detection etc..

[FatCandy]

Originally Posted by Phellix

Oh please, if this was a forum for a CONSOLE game it'd be the same situation. Even The Game Station mentioned today that the console industry is falling behind because there's really not gonna be a new "next generation" console for awhile because there's nothing you can really upgrade that ALL major console companies are gonna have, Modern PC's blow consoles out of the water and they're becoming more and more cheap. So to that, i say HELL YEAH PC REPRESENT.

there is a difference between saying one is better than the other, and saying nothing on console's can be good

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by maradine

True, and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I'd just be antsy if I knew the guy who's 5'd everything in the personal weapons skill tree was on the other side.

Fair enough, and I hope whatever matchmaking they're doing will account for skill point totals so as to prevent this sort of thing from being a major balance issue should one team find themselves stacked with veterans versus an army of newer players.

Actually, being an FPS with a persistent element, maybe balanced for skill point totals as well as win rate or something. After all, a veteran player could still be a worse player than a new person.

[FatCandy]

Originally Posted by Stew

I agree that Been consoles fanboys or PC elitist is not any good for gaming ive always play on every platform Xbox360 : gears of wars , HALO , Red dead redemption etc.. Playstation 3 : Killzone 2 , Killzone 3 ,uncharted MAG , PC : metro 2033 , Skyrim , Battlefield 3 To name just few modern games ive play on every consoles /PC

Its not a PC vs Console subject and i dont even compare the graphics quality but even MAG as a better graphics quality than dust514

Killzone 2 Vs. Killzone 3 Graphics Comparison Video PS3 1080P FULL HD - YouTube

If anyones think those graphics arent good i do not know whats to says some games have beautiful graphics on consoles

The whole subject is more

which gameplay gunplays is better wich ones seams to have the better game mechanics TTK hit detection etc..

I honestly don't know what you are playing, (I am in the beta) but FROM THE VIDEOS *wink**wink* I don't have any complaints about the graphics.

[maradine]

Originally Posted by Warborn

Fair enough, and I hope whatever matchmaking they're doing will account for skill point totals so as to prevent this sort of thing from being a major balance issue should one team find themselves stacked with veterans versus an army of newer players.

Actually, being an FPS with a persistent element, maybe balanced for skill point totals as well as win rate or something. After all, a veteran player could still be a worse player than a new person.

Possible, and it depends entirely on how they structure matches. I'm not sure "matchmaking" in the traditional sense will be available for the important battles. If they truly intend to make DUST the ground combat resolution engine for EVE, then there are going to be an awful lot of highly stacked matches between utterly asymmetric opponents.

Maybe.

Frankly, they haven't let on to what the hell they're thinking yet

[Dloan]

Originally Posted by Warborn

I mean, last time I checked Planetside 2 was about fighting over the same towers and bases over and over again with nothing ever changing, while Dust has corporate warfare to take control of planets and influence the balance of power in the EVE galaxy going for it.

Quite. While it's arguable that PS2 will be a better shooter just on size alone, it can currently only dream of a metagame the size of EVEs, and by extension, Dust. While we're swapping bases every other night, Dust players will be fighting for galactic domination!

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Warborn

I mean, last time I checked Planetside 2 was about fighting over the same towers and bases over and over again with nothing ever changing, while Dust has corporate warfare to take control of planets and influence the balance of power in the EVE galaxy going for it.

Planetside maps isnt a map its a continents 3 continents in fact and those are like 64 EVE maps at the momments thats mean 30 to 60 eve planets for each continents and they will had more continents down the road

Also ceo of ccp talk about making 5km x 5km maps fill with only 48 players those maps will be boring as hell even a 128 players like they try to achive will be not enough to fill this space at all BF3 can be boring sometime with 64 in caspian border a 1km x 1.5 km maps with arounf 700m x 800 m of real fightable area !

so yeah planetside feature Biodome and will feature eventually caverns underground base and much more

and also maybe planets in the futur dust always talk about the futur implementation but so far ive seen the BEta map and the E3 new beta map where are all the other planets ? i dont know but ive seen so far planetside 2 continents tons of outpost base biolab and much more and also day and nigth time cycle

In planetside their is no instance dust is all about instance and matchmaking