News: Higby Tweets Customized Magriders

[Levente]

Originally Posted by Protozoan

That first pic of PS2 is really ugly also, just cause it has some fancy lighting doesn't excuse the fact that there is no detail anywhere in the whole pic I can even see more detail in skyrim and mw3 pics then I do in the ps2 pic??? You can tell what's on the ground, you can actually see items. All the PS2 pics look fuzzy and ugly... no detail, you can hardly even tell what the textures on the ground are suppost to be... The rocks are all fuzzy, the grass is fuzzy... its like i'm playing everquest... all lines and textures no detail anywhere, just bulky blocks comming off a tank with no detail....

There is more detail in these pics of gameplay, then the gameplay pic of PS2.

There is little details all over these tanks and this game is 2 years old...


Like I said, lines and textures, no detail.

I'm not trolling, I love planetside, I'm merely stating the obvious. The pics look horrible. I don't know how you can't see the difference. You have to look at the pics in fullscreen, in there largest resolution to actually see the details that I'm trying to explain, these little forum pics aren't cutting it. If I could post them full size it would be a lot clearer but idk, I'm trying to help explain what my opinion is of the graphics compared to current games. Wait for the game to launch and then you can see for yourself.

Do this, click the quote button and then act like your going to post a reply, scroll down and look at all the pics in there largest sizes you can see the difference in the quality and the images clearly. The Skyrim, MW3 and WOT pic all have awesome details and everything can clearly be seen, while Both PS2 pics are all fuzzy and ugly. If you can't see the difference, then you need glasses...

wtf do you expect man? its an MMO fps with 1000 fighting each other same time. Surely the devs must make compromises to make the performance great. i still dont understand whats ur problem with the graphics, you either blind deaf or mad. im a graphics whore i thought cryengine looked the best so far but forgelight is mileas ahead. Frostbite 2 is just crap ompared to this

[duomaxwl]

Performance > Crysis graphics.
If you want super amazing realistic graphics, go play outside.
The textures are amazing out there.

[CplVars]

Still waiting on that Prowler shot.

Edit: I'd play PS2 any day over MW3, BF3, or any other FPS even if it used the same graphics engine as PS1. Don't see why people are being whiney and bitchy over graphics.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Protozoan

The pics look horrible.

[Hamma]

Originally Posted by Protozoan

I'm not trolling, I love planetside, I'm merely stating the obvious. The pics look horrible. I don't know how you can't see the difference.

Opinion does not equal fact.

I for one have been extremely impressed with these images.

As Lev said a bit earlier on, some sacrifices need to be made in order to make an MMOFPS as it is not even remotely like a single player game or a 32 player map.

That being said, I think this looks amazing. In fact if you told me this was an MMOFPS and I had never seen it before I would be surprised. The detail is awesome considering the limitations of tons of people on screen.

[Evilmp]

READ:

Originally Posted by Higby

.. it's some art work in progress in Maya or the terrain editor, ..

[Hamma]

Well certainly this bad boy is:



We don't know about all of the others we have seen though.

Either way, my statement stands.

[Erendil]

Originally Posted by Draep

The big flaw in this line of thinking is assuming any tank should have the ability to escape a flank/rear attack. As a tank driver, the enemy should almost always be out in front of you. It won't be any easier for the vanguard or prowler, especially considering they are slower and can't hover.

The magrider actually doesn't seem entirely different from the PS1 mag. The driver can ignore his gun for the sake of better driving and can bring it to bear when the situation calls for it. At least now it will be a heavy cannon rather than a machine laser.

Huh that's interesting, because in PS1 anyway I have escaped from flank/rear attacks by enemy forces literally THOUSANDS of times, and in a Lightning of all things. And I expect it to be no different in PS2.

And I'm sorry but you're seriously delusional if you think that as a tank driver the enemy will almost always be in front of you. Don't believe me? Let me present you with a few questions:

• If you make a flanking maneuver to the right or left of an enemy position, does the enemy continue to attack you?
• If you fall back to rearm/repair, does the enemy ever try to pursue you?
• Have you ever tried to make yourself a harder target by moving in circles or a figure-8 pattern?
• Do enemy libs and Reavers make strafing runs at you from any direction other than the front of your vehicle?
• If you're chasing an injured enemy, do you suddenly break off pursuit as soon as there are any other enemies anywhere nearby but not also directly in front of you, or do you sometimes continue to chase them in an effort to get the kill?
• Have you ever tried circling around an enemy base or tower looking for targets or weaknesses in enemy defenses, or do you always drive right at them?
• Have you ever pushed into a heavily contested courtyard with enemy troops still on the walls?
• Have you ever tried intercepting or cutting off a retreating enemy by moving laterally between him and the safety of his fellow soldiers?
• Have you ever witnessed fleeing friendly forces to one side of you that are being pursued by the enemy and turned in their direction to come to their aid?

I could go on and on, but hopefully you get the point and realize that flank and rear attacks can happen to tank crews all the time, and the frequency only increases as the battle intensifies and the number of units involved goes up. And if the Mag in PS2 isn't nimble enough to be able to strafe/turn/go in reverse to react to these situations it will be at a severe disadvantage.

This is especially true in those cases where a Mag driver goes out without a secondary gunner. Since tanks in PS2 are supposed to be combat effective with only the driver, the solo Mag tanker needs to be able to deal with threats coming from its flanks/rear using only the main cannon. Or are you suggesting that the Mag should be required to be manned by two people to be effective, even though the Vannie/Prowler only needs one?

Oh, and for the record, it has already been stated that the ]B]Prowler[/B] will be the fastest MBT, not the Mag.

[FastAndFree]

Wasn't there a picture of the Prowler in the latest PC Gamer article where it had forward-firing dual cannons mounted on the side of the hull?

[Draep]

Originally Posted by Erendil

Huh that's interesting, because in PS1 anyway I have escaped from flank/rear attacks by enemy forces literally THOUSANDS of times, and in a Lightning of all things. And I expect it to be no different in PS2.

And you're seriously delusional if you think the enemy will almost always be in front of you. Don't believe me? Let me present you with a few questions:

• If you make a flanking maneuver to the right or left of an enemy position, does the enemy continue to attack you?
• If you fall back to rearm/repair, does the enemy ever try to pursue you?
• Have you ever tried to make yourself a harder target by moving in circles or a figure-8 pattern?
• Do enemy Reavers make strafing runs at you from any direction other than the front of your vehicle?
• If you're chasing an injured enemy, do you suddenly break off pursuit as soon as there are any other enemies anywhere nearby but not also directly in front of you, or do you sometimes continue to chase them in an effort to get the kill?
• Have you never tried circling around an enemy base or tower looking for targets or weaknesses in enemy defenses, or do you always drive right at them?
• Have you ever pushed into a heavily contested courtyard with enemy troops still on the walls?
• Have you ever tried intercepting or cutting off a retreating enemy by moving laterally between him and the safety of his fellow soldiers?

I could go on and on, but hopefully you get the point and realize that flank and rear attacks happen to tank crews all the time, and the frequency only increases as the battle intensifies and the number of units involved goes up. And if the Mag in PS2 isn't nimble enough to be able to strafe/turn/go in reverse to react to these situations it will be at a severe disadvantage.

This is especially true in those cases where a Mag driver goes out without a secondary gunner. Since tanks in PS2 are supposed to be combat effective with only the driver, the solo Mag tanker needs to be able to deal with threats coming from its flanks/rear using only the main cannon. Or are you suggesting that the Mag should be required to be manned by two people to be effective, even though the Vannie/Prowler only needs one?

Oh, and for the record, it has already been stated that the ]B]Prowler[/B] will be the fastest MBT, not the Mag.

PS1 does not have vehicle directional damage, so shots to the rear are about as survivable as shots to the front. PS2 is confirmed for directional damage I think (though I couldn't prove it.)

With that being said, directional damage may certainly effect how I play the game. I may not be so cavalier with chasing damaged vehicles behind enemy lines, I may stay in battle longer for fear of exposing my rear armor etc.

I'm not saying I'll never expose my rear or flanks to the enemy because as you said, opportunities present themselves that may make this more favorable or it might just be unavoidable if you're trying to break into a courtyard with defenders on the walls.

Now that I think about it, the mag may be the most advantageous tank in this regard. Assuming it has the agility and controls to do so, the mag can circle a prowler or magrider while only exposing the strongest frontal armor. If the turning on the track tanks isn't as fast, the prowler could be getting hit in the rear by the main gun real soon. For a fixed-solo main gun to work anyway, the mag will need to turn at about the same speed as a turret.

Also consider that terrain is going to apparently play a large factor and the hover vehicles won't have to worry about mud or ice.

Finally, you may have a point that the magrider isn't as combat effective as the other tanks when solo, but I guess we'll have to see. With the above factors, I am under the impression that this is balanced.

[FastAndFree]

Originally Posted by FastAndFree

Wasn't there a picture of the Prowler in the latest PC Gamer article where it had forward-firing dual cannons mounted on the side of the hull?

Found it but I can only see the Google thumbnail at work, so can't doublecheck if I remembered correctly about the cannons

[SniperSteve]

Gameplay > Graphics.

I want to battle with thousands of other players, not feel like stopping ever few moments to take screenshots of the flowers my tank is running over.

If you want a combat situation with ultra pretty graphics, play MW3/BF3. If you want a war with thousands, play PlanetSide. Let's not forget our priorities, people.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by SniperSteve

Gameplay > Graphics.

I want to battle with thousands of other players, not feel like stopping ever few moments to take screenshots of the flowers my tank is running over.

If you want a combat situation with ultra pretty graphics, play MW3/BF3. If you want a war with thousands, play PlanetSide. Let's not forget our priorities, people.

MW3 is ugly.

[Protozoan]

Your arguing with me over nothing, you just said they needed to make sacrifices in the graphics to hold 1000+ people in an area, but you all keep saying the screenshots look 10x better. I was stating that people were all like WOW awesome looking magriders, but they aren't, I was comparing them to current mmos, like world of tanks and ff14. You still wanted to argue, I was merely stating that the graphics are crap and the pics aren't awesome. I understand they need to make sacrifices but when I first saw the screenshots they were crap so I said it, get over it. I said the graphics look like a free-to-play game and they do. They look like pics taken from 5+ years ago but you all think they are awesome. I was merely stating that they look horrible... all fuzzy and blurry, the rocks are blurry, the squares coming off the corners of the lightning are blurry, the details on the tanks are blurry. So why is everyone saying they're awesome??? Maybe compared to PS1... I said that I didn't want to look at those graphics for 5 year, that was a personal statement, we cant make those anymore? PS2 isn't going to be made by the graphics or whether its free-to-play or if your best friend doesn't want to play it..., PS2 will be made from the gameplay, this was proven in PS1 when you couldn't play to save your life from all the lag. If you wouldn't jump to conclusions and actually try to hear me out... You guys are all trying to cut me down to size and dis all over me, but I didn't insult any of you, but you feel the need to insult me and say I'm on crack and I'm retarded... How about you stick to the topic next time...

If you would of actually taken the time to read the post from the beginning you would of seen that I stating performance > graphics... and that "I" didn't like the screenshots cause they didn't look good; they weren't crisp enough. But your fanboy rage went into effect and had to dis all over me cause I wanted to state an opinion. The opinion was that compared to the games that are currently being released the screen is not awesome, It looks like a free-to-play game and that I would rather pay for better quality. You just said it was true lol. I know they need to make sacrifices... but the reason the game wasn't released in March was cause they used a new graphics engine, not very much graphics.... I'm stating that the graphics don't look all that hot.... If we can't have a conversation about a game WTF are the forums for??? We are just suppost to agree with everything everyone says and act like a bunch of tools?

Yes I read, "When I send out screenshots or pics unless I say otherwise or it's some art work in progress in Maya or the terrain editor, it's always 100% in the runtime game client no photoshop no trickery. I'm not doing a bunch of trickery in these shots except by flying to get certain camera angles - 100% legit game screens, that means sometimes theres temp assets, proxy objects, etc in them, but I trust you guys to look past that."

This is no excuse to send out crappy looking screens and you want someone to think your game in good. I also wasn't comparing just the magriders screen, it was also the lightning screen. Which didn't apply to that statement, because the lightning SS was uploaded to joystiq and not PSU.

[FastAndFree]

Originally Posted by Protozoan

Your arguing with me over nothing, you just said they needed to make sacrifices in the graphics to hold 1000+ people in an area, but you all keep saying the screenshots look 10x better. I was stating that people were all like WOW awesome looking magriders, but they aren't, I was comparing them to current mmos, like world of tanks

What.

edit
For the record, I read your entire post. Yet this is still all I have to say