A few things that Matt Higby needs to realize - Page 6

Pozidriv · 2012-05-29, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by LONGFELLA KOJ

If you were to show me a screen shot of any of the last modern FPS that have come out in the last 3 years I couldn't tell you which was which due to the fact they all look like the same dam game. MW,CoD etc.

Except Borderlands.

I say just use the standard answer the people who don't really give a shit use. "Just let them make the game and we'll see what happens". That way if it sucks, you can just do what you always do in 2 months and go buy the next greatest game ever at Gamestop. Oh and don't forget to trade in this one for $5 dollars off!

.

Nick · 2012-05-29, 01:03 PM

John Smedley LOVES Battlefield 3. This will fall on deaf ears.

DviddLeff · 2012-05-29, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by LONGFELLA KOJ

It's quite humorous that you're a PSU moderator. You seem like you dispise Planetside.

Just a view from outside lookin in bro.

He's just saying it like it was - PS was flawed. The PS2 devs are doing everything they can to fix those flaws.

I played PS for a long, long time; running a successful outfit for years before we finally left the game due to the flaws. 15 minute uncontested base hacks, 2 loading screens before getting to a fight, interfarms, aging netcode and archaic game play all contributed, and all the more so once development practically stopped after the first 2 years.

I've played FPS games since their beginnings and you know what, I like iron sights, I like quick knife, I like head shots and I like single button grenade throws.

What I do not prefer is arena play - just like Quake, Unreal and later day CoD games where its just run around and kill people with no real objectives. Battlefield has been my go to franchise since the first (and hell, I saw the potential in the concept playing Codename Eagle) because it gives you those objectives, and as it has evolved I have liked every iteration. PS has scale going for it, but it should not stick to the old mechanical constraints of a game made almost a decade ago.

Pozidriv · 2012-05-29, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Nick

John Smedley LOVES Battlefield 3. This will fall on deaf ears.

I have seen more enthusiasm for Tribes: Ascend from the devs than BF3. Also can i get something to back that up? Most people from Mordor (Old BF fans) want bigger maps and the action spread out and here it seems you want a BF3 meatgrinder? I say no to Metro 24/7 Conquest 10000 ticket spamfest. Spread out those 2k people.

roguy · 2012-05-29, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by WildVS

:r ofl: WUT?

My time here is done. Good luck guys.

Originally Posted by WildVS

You would logically draw the conclusion that higher pop equals larger battles, but they appear to be desiring to break this game down along lengthy fronts to dilute the battles to encourage using the mission system to give CoD/BF guys a more familiar experience.

So the COD/BF guys are getting a more familiar experience because of the spread out battles or the mission system? Because those 2 games had neither. Like I said, you simply don't have a clue, so don't let the door hit you in the butt.

Purple · 2012-05-29, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Biohazard

I'm sorry, but the gunplay mechanics of a shooter is the first thing that stand out to me, and I honestly don't think that Planetside2 even remotely resembles Call of Duty, at all. CoD's gunplay is; close quarters, very low TTK, run-and-gun, arcade, hit scan. The most prominent parts being run-and-gun, hit scan. Where as PS2 looks to be; favoring medium to long range, moderate TTK, aim-down-the-sights, tactical, ballistically-simulated. I say PS2 is tactical, in that I feel that when one runs into a room it will require a small bit of planning, and you will do it to accomplish an objective rather than for the kills. Verses in CoD, where I could play it almost on reflex and muscle memory, usually with kills in mind.

What dose "the gunplay of PS2 shown so far looks awfully like CoD" mean?

i think he means we can look down the scope to aim?

Originally Posted by WildVS

Since the release of WOW the average life span of an MMO is 1 year. PS2 will do nothing to increase that average.

ya thats just not true. you shouldent make up numbers to help your argument. 57% of people who do that get struck by lightning.

Guild Wars
EVE
Free Realms
World of Tanks (just older then a year but it still growing strong)

i could make the list longer but i dont want to wast my time anymore then i already am.

Nick · 2012-05-29, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Pozidriv

I have seen more enthusiasm for Tribes: Ascend from the devs than BF3. Also can i get something to back that up?

9 minutes in

Neurotoxin · 2012-05-29, 01:14 PM

Closed Beta is the time to figure this stuff out. I appreciate the OP, but any issues with balance and pacing and features and soldier longevity will be worked out during Closed Beta.

Matt Higby's a smart fella, but he isn't the entire team or the entire project, and I'm sure the combined knowledge and understanding of games possessed by the entire PS2 team helped shaped decisions that have led to where the game is at now. The entire team knows that Closed Beta is where the balancing begins, I'm sure they are going to be ready for drastic changes to be made.

maradine · 2012-05-29, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by roguy

You're also being guilty of nostalgia.
Wolfeinstein -> Doom: No innovation whatsoever.
Doom -> Duke 3D: interactive environments maybe? Nothing else.
Duke -> Quake: 3d graphics and mouselook.
Quake -> UT: Secondary firing modes and that's it.

Wow.

Leaving the topic of nostalgia to the side for a moment (on that point, I agree with you) let's address the evolutionary assertion.

Wolf to Doom? Introduction of the core weapon mix that drove FPS design for a decade, pseudo 3D based on z-height, arbitrary level geometry. It was a quantum leap at the time, and playing both back to back still illustrates that easily.

Doom to Duke? mouselook (not counting in marathon in this context). Level design with viable alternate routes. LAN play standard. For those of us on actually on networks at the time, that was a huge deal. The birth of "professional gaming".

Duke to Quake? The death of sprites, Trent Reznor, QuakeC, the birth of the modding scene. Rocket jumping and grenade spam. Thresh and celebrity gamers. Ferraris. Truly the hair metal of the genre.

Quake to UT? You speak like secondary fire modes wasn't a big deal. Also, the introduction of the vertical as a heavily leaned upon level element, alternate level physics (who wasn't just blown away by dm-hyperblast?). Game mechanic mutation intrinsic to engine. Oh, and instagib.

The industry hasn't exactly been sitting on its ass.

Pozidriv · 2012-05-29, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Nick

9 minutes in

PlanetSide 2 - Developer Q&A Session - With John Smedley & Matt Higby - 7.8.11 - YouTube

Oh wow... "When BF3 launches" kinda like me, i was super stoked for BF3 but instead of BF i got CoD. So that comment alone is hardly enough to convince Smed is having a boner over BF3. Also he pretty much stated that he will just jump ship back to PS because it's better.

Ieyasu · 2012-05-29, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by Pozidriv

Oh wow... "When BF3 launches" kinda like me, i was super stoked for BF3 but instead of BF i got CoD. So that comment alone is hardly enough to convince Smed is having a boner over BF3. Also he pretty much stated that he will just jump ship back to PS because it's better.

he does say around 1 minute in that hes a really big BF2 and Bad Company player and likes their spawn system.

Pozidriv · 2012-05-29, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Ieyasu

he does say around 1 minute in that hes a really big BF2 and Bad Company player and likes their spawn system.

BF2 and BF:BC1 were good games, BC1 was the best BF game on nextgen consoles IMO. (barring BF:MC ofcourse)

Nick · 2012-05-29, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Pozidriv

I have seen more enthusiasm for Tribes: Ascend from the devs than BF3. Also can i get something to back that up? Most people from Mordor (Old BF fans) want bigger maps and the action spread out and here it seems you want a BF3 meatgrinder? I say no to Metro 24/7 Conquest 10000 ticket spamfest. Spread out those 2k people.

Originally Posted by Ieyasu

he does say around 1 minute in that hes a really big BF2 and Bad Company player and likes their spawn system.

Originally Posted by Pozidriv

Oh wow... "When BF3 launches" kinda like me, i was super stoked for BF3 but instead of BF i got CoD. So that comment alone is hardly enough to convince Smed is having a boner over BF3. Also he pretty much stated that he will just jump ship back to PS because it's better.

He will jump ship back to PS because it's like BF:BC2/BF3. Do you see him playing Planetside 1?

Pozidriv · 2012-05-29, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by Nick

Look at the reply below ya. Also, he will jump ship back to PS because it's like BF:BC2/BF3. Do you see him playing Planetside 1?

I even replied to the reply below me. Still doesn't prove PS2 will be BF3, also why not PS1? PS1 is a great game with flaws, kinda like BF3 it's a nice game it's just not BF.

Btw, why would you just ship to another game is like the one you like? CoD does CoD best, you don't make a better CoD by being something else than CoD.

Also, there nothing wrong if PS2 has some BC and BF2 blood innit.

Elude · 2012-05-29, 01:34 PM

Call of duty does indeed have some pretty fucking terrible gameplay in my opinion but so did PS1, in fact if you wanna know the truth I actually thought it was much worse than call of duties.

If it were not for the persistence and large scale battles I would of passed up PS1 in a heart beat, so long as PS2 stays true to this I am sold!