Instanced small team combat.

[ShowNoMercy]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Please list reasons that its inclusion would ruin the game. Be specific, and cite examples.

Originally Posted by ShowNoMercy

...If PS devoted the time and effort into making some tournament at some interval "x" then people would play it and say "hey that was fun, i want to play that again." (after all almost everyone is used to the play style and must enjoy it somewhat because CoD MW2 sold like 5mil copies in 24hours). However, here is the caveat: Once you have people sharing the sentiment of fighting these instanced battles (game rooms), SOE might make them an all the time option...

Maybe from that quote you didn't gather that if paying customers want more instanced play, (which is what everyone is used to) they will likely get it. They will not want to pay for a sub if they are restricted to only doing instanced battles every so often (however long that so often is, it won't be enough). Sony will undoubtedly give out greater access under the banner of "they want it, we already have it, lets just make it more available". At which point, the rift between the instanced players and MMO players widens. Whether we like it or not, the MMO nature of this game dictates that we have a large player base for meaningful combat to exist. We can't afford to have people getting distracted on instanced play trying to live out CoD in PS2. PS2 can not compete with titles like CoD MW3 and BF3, so why even bother? Beside instance play get booooring, they come out with a new CoD every year, PS1 is 8 years old and still going. big title FPS's can keep the instanced play, we can keep the MMO - nuff said.

So now it is on you, what is wrong with one continent devoted to outfit fighting? It allows for outfit vs outfit combat while at the same time preserving the MMO soul of PS.

[Manitou]

Originally Posted by ShowNoMercy

Maybe from that quote you didn't gather that if paying customers want more instanced play, (which is what everyone is used to) they will likely get it. They will not want to pay for a sub if they are restricted to only doing instanced battles every so often (however long that so often is, it won't be enough). Sony will undoubtedly give out greater access under the banner of "they want it, we already have it, lets just make it more available". At which point, the rift between the instanced players and MMO players widens. Whether we like it or not, the MMO nature of this game dictates that we have a large player base for meaningful combat to exist. We can't afford to have people getting distracted on instanced play trying to live out CoD in PS2. PS2 can not compete with titles like CoD MW3 and BF3, so why even bother? Beside instance play get booooring, they come out with a new CoD every year, PS1 is 8 years old and still going. big title FPS's can keep the instanced play, we can keep the MMO - nuff said.

So now it is on you, what is wrong with one continent devoted to outfit fighting? It allows for outfit vs outfit combat while at the same time preserving the MMO soul of PS.

I can chime in here a bit as an outfit leader.

I would actually prefer a scheduled event so that I can coordinate my team. This coordination would involve tactical practice, team selection, scheduling show-times, load-outs and other details.

Kinetic battle is great and it is one of the beautiful aspects of PS. But what if we look at these events as "icing on the cake" rather than the inclusive battles?

I would love to have something that is separate and closed that would allow for even multiple outfits in alliances to join in against other alliances from the different factions. This is cutting edge! To have the possibility to enter a battlefield where three different factions with equally numbered outfits come together in epic gladiator-type combat to the death or for capture and hold, or even some type of capture the flag. This incorporates some of the best points of a number of games out there.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by ShowNoMercy

Maybe from that quote you didn't gather that if paying customers want more instanced play, (which is what everyone is used to) they will likely get it. They will not want to pay for a sub if they are restricted to only doing instanced battles every so often (however long that so often is, it won't be enough). Sony will undoubtedly give out greater access under the banner of "they want it, we already have it, lets just make it more available". At which point, the rift between the instanced players and MMO players widens.

A rift is different servers. Different empires. Different expansions. These things separate the players. Something in the game, thats a choice of where to go, how to play, is not very much of a rift.

Whether we like it or not, the MMO nature of this game dictates that we have a large player base for meaningful combat to exist. We can't afford to have people getting distracted on instanced play trying to live out CoD in PS2. PS2 can not compete with titles like CoD MW3 and BF3, so why even bother? Beside instance play get booooring, they come out with a new CoD every year, PS1 is 8 years old and still going. big title FPS's can keep the instanced play, we can keep the MMO - nuff said.

The open world combat needs a significant population. The arena.. much less. So your claim of sacrifice is only true for the people that prefer the open world aspects. Someone who doesn't, benefits. People that want a change of pace for the night benefit as well. The game benefits from grabbing up additional subs of people for whom the basic version isn't reason enough to play.


As for competing with cod and bf3, no, it won't be up to their standards. But its an additional style of gameplay you get to do with your PS friends. Don't even have to log out, just go have a couple matches. If you get bf3 or cod, you get a match based pvp and a sp campaign. If you get PS you could get match based pvp and open world faction pvp.

So now it is on you, what is wrong with one continent devoted to outfit fighting? It allows for outfit vs outfit combat while at the same time preserving the MMO soul of PS.

That rather leaves people not in outfits out in the cold, now doesn't it?

And what do you think a continent with a small population cap is? Its pretty much an arena match..


You are correct when you say a PS arena match system would not hold up to BF3 or CoDs. Which is why your fears are unfounded. Very few people would play that, and that alone, because PSs true defining feature is its massive battlefields with huge armies. What it is is an optional extra to serve as a change of pace and additional content, something players can do with their friends in the spirit of competition.

Unless its better than BF3 and CoD. In which case nobody has a right to complain about anything.. Two awesome games in one? Where can I sign up.

[Kietharr]

Absolutely not, instancing is killing the industry. The very idea of an instance runs counter to the idea of a persistent world.

[Infektion]

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Think Battle Grounds if you will in WoW.

A friend at worked asked me if that would be part of PS2, and I just blinked at him like he was crazy. But he made some good points about making intense combat that could be "better" on one hand then open world fighting.

Thoughts?

you and your friend need to go back to WoW... seriously, if PS followed WAR's footsteps for listening to the stupid whiny carebear community then PS is DOOMED within a year. War Hammer Online was supposed to be an all out PVP game with no instances... then the pedophiles came out and started complaining and suggesting and since good gaming ideas are out numbered by the sheer size of ignorant carebears, then it's hard to win and get a game out that doesn't require a pacifier and diaper to control. That being said.... ASHERON'S CALL FOR THE WIN!!!!!!! 2001 - GOLDEN YEAR! PvP - The way it's meant to be played.

[headcrab13]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Worst idea since the jump-to-conclusions mat.

It's just a prototype, mind you.

[Malorn]

I suppose I can provide reasons why this idea is terrible. Probably already been touched on, but...


1) Planetside is about the huge persistent world and epic battles. Its not sating your epeen with outfit wars. Its easy enough to set up outfit challenges and contribute to that persisent world at the same time.

2) It splits the player base. If you have some people in instanced combat you have that many people not out in the persistent world which makes the battles in the peristent world far less epic.

Far better for the outfits to do their little epeen comparisons on real continents.

[ShowNoMercy]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

A rift is different servers. Different empires. Different expansions. These things separate the players. Something in the game, thats a choice of where to go, how to play, is not very much of a rift.

there is a rift between what i said and what you comprehended.

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

That rather leaves people not in outfits out in the cold, now doesn't it?

And what do you think a continent with a small population cap is? Its pretty much an arena match.

No and I never said small pop cap or implied anything about the pop cap being less than normal.

Individuals without an outfit could go out there in a squad, I am not sure if I mentioned it in this thread, but I have discussed this idea before and mentioned allegiance to outfit and/or squad in order to not alienate non-outfit players and also encourage players with no outfit to team up and join one.

The continent would be very free form similar to eve's 0.0 which gave me the idea. O and don't give me some BS about how it would cause inter-empire tension, tournament style instances would encourage the same this.

Final decision: strict, regulated, rigid instance tournament structure or free form, persistent, open outfit controlled cont?

[opticalshadow]

Originally Posted by Manitou

Why is everyone so fearful of something different? .

because planetside worked, it worked great. alot of the problems with ps was the tech limitation and bad moves by soe. they have a chance at making a new game, and every step of the way they try to tweak what worked, what went right, instead of what went wrong.

ideas liek this are so oposed because thats not what planetside was, and its not the point of the game, soe is borrowing ideas from other game, inspired by them, and ideas liek this take that to the level of coping them. most of us dont want this as a feature because its missing the whole point of planetside, and every feature they work on thats outside the point of the game, takes away the things they could be working on.

some of us have been paying ps since its release, we know why it failed, we know what has worked in the past, we played all the little events, and we play today knowing what the game needs, what it lacks, and i can promise you the number one thing the game lacks is game modes to use less people.

[Vancha]

Originally Posted by opticalshadow

because planetside worked, it worked great. alot of the problems with ps was the tech limitation and bad moves by soe. they have a chance at making a new game, and every step of the way they try to tweak what worked, what went right, instead of what went wrong.

ideas liek this are so oposed because thats not what planetside was, and its not the point of the game, soe is borrowing ideas from other game, inspired by them, and ideas liek this take that to the level of coping them. most of us dont want this as a feature because its missing the whole point of planetside, and every feature they work on thats outside the point of the game, takes away the things they could be working on.

some of us have been paying ps since its release, we know why it failed, we know what has worked in the past, we played all the little events, and we play today knowing what the game needs, what it lacks, and i can promise you the number one thing the game lacks is game modes to use less people.

Originally Posted by Malorn

2) It splits the player base. If you have some people in instanced combat you have that many people not out in the persistent world which makes the battles in the peristent world far less epic.

What if it drew additional people to the game, resulting in more people out in the persistent world than there would have been?

[DashRev]

Originally Posted by Vancha

What if it drew additional people to the game, resulting in more people out in the persistent world than there would have been?

What if it made PS2 deposit $15 into your high-yield savings account every month? It doesn't, and it won't.

Feature 1 doesn't magically make people come play feature 2. Instances and open-world mechanics are dichotomous. They are competing aspects of the same game that draw on the same pool of players. Adding instances will negatively impact the availability in non-instanced content.

It happened with PvP in WoW, it happened with PvE in DAoC, it happens every time it is made an option. Some people want the fastest, most accessible gameplay regardless of its quality.

[Headrattle]

I wouldn't be opposed to an open training facility where you can mess around like that. Take the vehicle training area and allow people to fight in that area in order to train. But I doubt this will happen since they took sancs away and won't be able to coordinate like we could before anyway.

However...

You aren't always forced to play on the front lines. Continents are big, there are a lot of areas where smaller skirmishes take place and yet goals are needed. So why have instances? Just seems redundant and taking away from the actual gameplay.

[Manitou]

Originally Posted by opticalshadow

some of us have been paying ps since its release, we know why it failed, we know what has worked in the past, we played all the little events, and we play today knowing what the game needs, what it lacks, and i can promise you the number one thing the game lacks is game modes to use less people.

I was there from alpha until BFRs, then did short stints afterwards. I don't think this will hurt the game at all.

[Azren]

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Think Battle Grounds if you will in WoW.

A friend at worked asked me if that would be part of PS2, and I just blinked at him like he was crazy. But he made some good points about making intense combat that could be "better" on one hand then open world fighting.

Thoughts?

After lengthly consideration I had to come to the following conclusion; Hell no!

Instances go against everything MMO stands for.

[CidHighwind]

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

he's a non-PS player never having even set foot in the original

That's his problem.