Do planetside players have legit concerns or do they just hate to evolve?

[The noob]

Making general blanket statements about vets and formal players of Planetside 1 is a rather... stupid thing to do. Vets are not some hive-minded entity who is unwilling to accept changes to the game. Even now, there is basically no real consensus on various topics within the game. Different people are happy and unhappy about the various changes in the game.

When it comes to accepting whether or not Planetside 2 is a worthy successor to the first game, I'll put my opinion on this. As I see it, Planetside 1's goal was to take a contemporary first person shooter of that time period, and crank it up into an MMOFPS. It was largely successful in that regard, although it suffered from many issues (technical and otherwise). Planetside 2's goal is pretty much the same thing as I see it. Take a contemporary first person shooter of this time period, and crank it up into an MMOFPS, hopefully with fewer issues then the first. If first person shooters go through a major change again in the future, and a third game is made, I suspect the same thing will happen in that game.

[Crazyduckling]

Originally Posted by elfailo

If they absolutely have to imitate Battlefailed to be successful (they don't), then they can do it in a hundred ways that don't completely break the gameplay of the original game. The problem isn't that they're imitating, it's that they're imitating the worst, least transferable aspects of it. Iron sight aiming, tanks that die in 2 shots, big swaying guns and shaking screens, squad spawning, removal of inventory, and the list goes on.

1. I have never understood the problem with ironsights. Seriously. I don't understand. I dont use them, and I destroy those who do. If you don't like them, don't use them.

2. Tanks die in 2 shots only if you hit in the right position. (oh no! Planetside actually has hitboxes!)

3. Big swaying guns and shaking screens? Its called character animation, but the one shaking screen was a bit excessive when the infantry was right next to the explosions.

4. Nothing is wrong with squad spawning, especially considering it can only happen outdoors and the scale of combat is much larger, which makes it necessary.

5. There is still an inventory, just not the free-form minigame as we knew it in PS1. You will probably be able to customize the amount of ammo, nades, etc. There just isn't a grid anymore.

I'm getting tired of all these complaints.

I feel like I see this all the time:
PS1 was the best game ever. It had awesome scale but terrible game mechanics. Oh. Now they're changing the broken game mechanics? NO! We can't have that.

[cellinaire]

Well, most of the time this kinda thread tend to end up being a mess(dispite the quality of the writing) but whew....

Just sightseeing a bit here

[Toppopia]

When the people complain about iron sights, are they complaining the looks of them or the fact you have to aim down the sight to hit anything?

Becuase A) having to aim down the sights is the best thing to happen to games.

and B) I wonder when someone will make a game where bullets come out of the barrel perfectly and they go where the barrel is pointing, so if you are moving your gun sways then the bullets come out where ever you are pointing, not at weird angles like your barrel is curved, and then the recoil would be horrible so you can only fire 1-2 shots before you are aiming at the sky so that hip firing is possible but only if the barrel is pointing the right direction.

Since this is the future, do the TR get guns that can fire 2 rounds before the recoil acts on the fun? They have guns that do this, like this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94

It can fire 2 shots before the recoil kicks in so you can get 2 perfect shots off before you have to adjust for recoil, i would have loved for BF3 to do that, but then it would have been over powered, so hopefully TR get this gun

[Gandhi]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

I wonder when someone will make a game where bullets come out of the barrel perfectly and they go where the barrel is pointing,

Arma 2 does this. In fact it does a lot of cool things, like using TrackIR to control where you're looking without changing where you're aiming


Personally I don't have a problem with iron sights as long as a) the weapon isn't completely useless at close range when you're not sighted in and b) the sights aren't an iron forest that completely blocks what you're aiming at. I'm not a huge fan of how fast switching to ADS is either, but that's something I can live with. I'd rather it be a tactical choice than simply an extra button to press when you want to fire, so at medium to long range taking that extra half a second to sight in would be worth the accuracy, while at close range you're better off just shooting from the shoulder.

[Toppopia]

Originally Posted by Gandhi

Arma 2 does this. In fact it does a lot of cool things, like using TrackIR to control where you're looking without changing where you're aiming


Personally I don't have a problem with iron sights as long as a) the weapon isn't completely useless at close range when you're not sighted in and b) the sights aren't an iron forest that completely blocks what you're aiming at. I'm not a huge fan of how fast switching to ADS is either, but that's something I can live with. I'd rather it be a tactical choice than simply an extra button to press when you want to fire, so at medium to long range taking that extra half a second to sight in would be worth the accuracy, while at close range you're better off just shooting from the shoulder.

Woh!!! That is amazing. I have always seen this game and wanted to play, sure its completely realistic which i have always wanted in a game, but unless i was playing with the friends i play with in BF3 and MW3, i would probably get annoyed very fast at everything.

[Toppopia]

Is he using some kind of advanced equipment or is it just using a keyboard and mouse set up

[Gandhi]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

Is he using some kind of advanced equipment or is it just using a keyboard and mouse set up

Keyboard and mouse with the TrackIR system, I'm pretty sure at least. If a realistic shooter is what you're after then that's your game. There's even a pretty neat zombie survival mod that was just released called Day-Z. You play with other people in a persistent world, starting off with just a pistol. The goal is to scavenge better equipment, food, and explore while trying not to get killed by zombies or other players. The only problem with it so far is that everyone tends to shoot on sight as if it's a giant FFA, which doesn't leave much room for teamwork.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

When the people complain about iron sights, are they complaining the looks of them or the fact you have to aim down the sight to hit anything?

Becuase A) having to aim down the sights is the best thing to happen to games.

and B) I wonder when someone will make a game where bullets come out of the barrel perfectly and they go where the barrel is pointing, so if you are moving your gun sways then the bullets come out where ever you are pointing, not at weird angles like your barrel is curved, and then the recoil would be horrible so you can only fire 1-2 shots before you are aiming at the sky so that hip firing is possible but only if the barrel is pointing the right direction.

Since this is the future, do the TR get guns that can fire 2 rounds before the recoil acts on the fun? They have guns that do this, like this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94

It can fire 2 shots before the recoil kicks in so you can get 2 perfect shots off before you have to adjust for recoil, i would have loved for BF3 to do that, but then it would have been over powered, so hopefully TR get this gun

I'm pretty sure they are complaining about the aim down sight mechanic, not "iron sights". It's called "aim down sight" regardless of whether you have a scope or an iron sight.

But using aim down sight is not "imitating Battlefield". Aim down sight mechanic is simply how it's done in 99% of shooters and how it should be done, and that's that.

[Bluecewe]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

I wonder when someone will make a game where bullets come out of the barrel perfectly and they go where the barrel is pointing

As I'm sure you are aware, game worlds are rendered as many 2D polygons, giving the impression of a 3D envrionment. Thus, trajectory prediction is usually correct, but animations may not accurately reflect where the gun barrel should be pointed.

[goneglockin]

I don't like other PlanetSide players in general because they are not FPS gamers first, not by any stretch.

SOE made MMOs. I do not want to hear what an MMO company that attracts MMO gamers have to say about FPS game mechanics.

SOE and PS1 vets seem to forget what FPS gaming even is, it's infantry focused combat. Of which there was little to none in PlanetSide. I guess if you count hallway fights and tower footzergs.

Vehicleside. Everyone thinks it's so great that a couple tactical guys who tactically pull a vehicle and use tactics to tactically mow down endless waves of infantry... tactics... is the greatest thing about PlanetSide.

Well guess what? Those endless waves of infantry? Those people were your primary target audience; i.e. people who expected an FPS game. They unsubscribed in a big hurry.

They'll tell you to pull vehicles then, combined arms and all that. But think about what that actually is. It's going back to a base, getting a group together, driving across the map, and then fighting other vehicles... when all you want to do is play a game like CoD or BF3 in a massive environment. It always felt like I had to do chores in PlanetSide for it to let me get infantry fighting going. PS1 vets would just say fine we don't need you then, don't play this game... and then beg for marketing months later so they can again have a target rich squishy environment.

They're basically jerks who don't consider how the other side feels or what FPS games mean to people. It reminds me of playing outside with some of the neighborhood kids when I was young. We'd make up these games and they would try to make the games all about their amusement, and then not understand when all the other kids said screw this im going home.

To me, that's your average PS1 vet.

[goneglockin]

Originally Posted by WildVS

And yet 9 years later here it still is. Largely because people stuck it out and showed devotion to it, you get to play PS2. Suck it up man.

If you guys are going to kill it with epic whining like you did PS1 before it barely had a chance I'd rather not see it at all.

P.S.

It'd be pretty sad to see history repeat itself at this point.

[goneglockin]

Originally Posted by WildVS

If everyone agreed to everything why would SOE even participate in the collaboration here? They wanted it, need it, they are getting it and appreciating it.

So let me put this another way. Why give any weight to the few thousand players who "soldiered on" with a game that 90% of everyone else left in a year or so?

Wouldn't it cross your mind that their input does not reflect what kind of experience your average gamer is looking for?

I think PS2 is coming along just fine by the look of it, and I hope the small enclave of proud PS1 vets are given only the consideration that their segment of the demographic deserves.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by goneglockin

So let me put this another way. Why give any weight to the few thousand players who "soldiered on" with a game that 90% of everyone else left in a year or so?

Wouldn't it cross your mind that their input does not reflect what kind of experience your average gamer is looking for?

I think PS2 is coming along just fine by the look of it, and I hope the small enclave of proud PS1 vets are given only the consideration that their segment of the demographic deserves.

I am not a PS1 vet(except that I've subscribed to it recently in order to get a feel for a few things), and the only thing that turns me off about it is the things like lack of aim down sight mechanic and lack of sprint. The things we are actually complaining about here and now on this forum, which is TTK, I like that about PS1.

And a lot of Battlefield players are resisting DICE on BF3's very low TTK, so SOE should not get the idea that just because BF3 does something that it's universally accepted. There are a lot of BF players hoping that PS2 will either replace BF3 for us as a long term game we will enjoy, or at least scare DICE into going in a different direction. Or both...

[Graywolves]

This thread is awful and it makes me angry at everyone.