Fact: I play BF3, but would rather play PS1 - Page 9

Xaine · 2012-04-14, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

Well, the first step is to read it...

Don't be silly. Why would he want to do that.

Zulthus · 2012-04-14, 08:54 PM

According to some people on this thread, animations are just polish that we don't need. All we need is fun gameplay and balance. Right?

Alright, then let's get the game out earlier and forget about:

-Reloading animations
-Walking animations
-Door animations
-Projectile animations

Because they're all just fuckin' icing on the cake, right? We don't need any of those to have a fun, balanced game. Visuals don't matter at all1!!1

Put vehicle animations in. I hate to be a dick but I cannot believe the statement that it would take 6 more months of development to add it in. At least make it an expansion later down the road. Immersion is very important in games.

Tialian · 2012-04-14, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

I don't think EVE has ever rolled back its expansions. The only difference between an expansion and an update is that you usually have to pay for an expansion. Eve's expansions have always been significant enough to be called more then an update. And some have come under flak but they still went with them.

Without vehicle entry/exit animations it would be exactly where its at. In its death throes, with PS2 about to come and finish it off.

I didn't play Eve much so I can't talk much about it, I just know they didn't have any official expansions that had to be bought.

I'd say without vehicle enter/exit animations I wouldn't have played PlanetSide long. The big reason for this is my first memory of PlanetSide was walking out of the spawn area in the sanctuary and seeing a Galaxy land while several players ran up to it and hopped inside. The moment wouldn't have been memorable if the players had just disappeared.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-14, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

According to some people on this thread, animations are just polish that we don't need. All we need is fun gameplay and balance. Right?

Alright, then let's get the game out earlier and forget about:

-Reloading animations
-Walking animations
-Door animations
-Projectile animations

Because they're all just fuckin' icing on the cake, right? We don't need any of those to have a fun, balanced game. Visuals don't matter at all1!!1

.

Im going to be dense for the hell of it too.

JHendy · 2012-04-14, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

PS1 tried to update their game, it was called Core Combat and BFR's. But bittervets like you bitched and moaned at them because they didn't fit in with your idea of fun. Bittervets killed PS1.

You told me to stop being a dick a few posts ago, for no good reason. And yet here you are being an impertinent, childish asshole to someone who is treating you with total civility.

Practise what you preach, please.

Zulthus · 2012-04-14, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Im going to be dense for the hell of it too.

You damn well know that's the truth. You're saying immersion is just polish. So I'm simply showing you what you're saying.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-14, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

You damn well know that's the truth. You're saying immersion is just polish. So I'm simply showing you what you're saying.

You'd be right if all those things that you said we should ignore were not already in the game. The game is immersive as much as it is with or without entry/exit animations. Would it be nice to have it? Sure. Does that mean the game will die if it doesn't? No. That's why I call it polish.

The game is in alpha with deadlines it needs to reach before beta. There are issues like lag and how the vehicles actually handle that could be focused on. And you'd rather have shiny things before you've even played the game.

Players spend much more time using guns. You see those animations hundreds of times a play session. If they weren't there you'd know something was wrong. Not so with vehicle animations.

RodenyC · 2012-04-14, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

PS1 tried to update their game, it was called Core Combat and BFR's. But bittervets like you bitched and moaned at them because they didn't fit in with your idea of fun. Bittervets killed PS1.

And here yall are again threatening to quit a F2P game before it's even in beta.

Uh no the reason people bitched about BFRs was because they were overpowered as hell.So yeah vets didn't kill PS1.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-14, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by JHendy

You told me to stop being a dick a few posts ago, for no good reason. And yet here you are being an impertinent, childish asshole to someone who is treating you with total civility.

Practise what you preach, please.

Yup, I apologize. Bittervets just get me sometimes.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-14, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by RodenyC

Uh no the reason people bitched about BFRs was because they were overpowered as hell.So yeah vets didn't kill PS1.

Yup. So why didnt the community come back when BFR's got toned down?

RodenyC · 2012-04-14, 09:14 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Yup. So why didnt the community come back when BFR's got toned down?

Why would I comeback to a game that gave me a bad taste.If anything SOE ruined PS1.Lack of updates,OP BFRS.I wasn't shock when people didn't come back.

Tialian · 2012-04-14, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Yup. So why didnt the community come back when BFR's got toned down?

Because they didn't belong in the game in the first place. It was dumb to have a BFR that could be driven and gunned by one person vs a much smaller tank that required two people.

Not to mention BFR's ruined base fights because they could jump on walls and/or easily spam people on top of them. And lets not forget if you were a sniper and a BFR walked by you - good luck making your shot.

Stardouser · 2012-04-14, 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

They do. Its quite bad. http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=38481

Bittervets will be bittervets.

The OP there referenced a lot of quotes against iron sights but some of them were all over the place. Many said they are realistic, and yet at least one said they make the game "more accessible". Those are polar opposites in most cases. What it boils down to is, should you be able to run around at full speed getting full accuracy? If someone's answer is yes, then would they object to PS2 being more like tribes with everyone having a jetpack and skiing? If not, why? Tribes-style gameplay seems like the ultimate destination of this issue.

I am loathe to go against the vets on something like this, because the same thing happens to Battlefield 2 vets. Sometimes individual features aren't the problem, BF3 for example has been made way too fast paced by the overall preponderance of changes. One or two changes would not have upset BF2 vets too much. And so, while I sympathize with the vets on the vehicle animations, and for that reason I will admit that ultimately I can tolerate vehicle animations, I have to say, aim down sight is the gold standard now, both for the industry and in the minds of shooter players. Just to give you an example, BF2 allowed, in its early days, people to jump and prone in midair, and fire their weapon while this was going on, it's called dolphin diving. This was crusaded against until it was stopped and in BF3 it's completely impossible to do, DICE put in a prone mechanic that stops it butt-cold. People in the BF3/MW3 communities will be no more interested in people strafe-running like Quake and getting full hipfire accuracy while strafing than they want dolphin diving to come back.

ArmedZealot · 2012-04-14, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by Tialian

Because they didn't belong in the game in the first place. It was dumb to have a BFR that could be driven and gunned by one person vs a much smaller tank that required two people.

Not to mention BFR's ruined base fights because they could jump on walls and/or easily spam people on top of them. And lets not forget if you were a sniper and a BFR walked by you - good luck making your shot.

Who are you to say what doesn't belong in a sci-fi MMO? BFR's weren't ok but OS's that could kill you without you knowing as soon as you spawned at an AMS were?

They could come up with a valid backtory reason to not have entry/exit animations. Like deconstruction/reconstruction in the cockpit or even just simple teleportation like Tribes:Ascend does. It's sci-fi, fiction is a tool to be used in such things. And that's all you'd need for immersion.

Neksar · 2012-04-14, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Who are you to say what doesn't belong in a sci-fi MMO? BFR's weren't ok but OS's that could kill you without you knowing as soon as you spawned at an AMS were?

They could come up with a valid backtory reason to not have entry/exit animations. Like deconstruction/reconstruction in the cockpit or even just simple teleportation like Tribes:Ascend does. It's sci-fi, fiction is a tool to be used in such things. And that's all you'd need for immersion.

You misspelled 'handwaving'.

You're also confusing immersion with verisimilitude. Just because everything makes sense within the context of a universe does not make it engrossing and engaging as Planetside 1 was. Enter/exit animations were things that gave a sense of scale to the battles, just as driving a tank without gunning it did. Players were part of a larger army, and there was something magical about 'saddling up' that added to the buildup before a big fight.

In fact, that may be why vehicle animations aren't being added - the developers are focusing on making sure that players always have something to shoot at, to the point where they're trying to create a persistent-world arena shooter, which makes no friggin' sense. I have a feeling that, because of shorter TTKs, the world in PS2 will feel much smaller, because their new philosophy seems to be "Time that is not spent shooting is time that is dumb!"