List of issues that can be used for comparing PS1 to PS2 when the time comes

[Stardouser]

I was looking to make a list of issues that can be individually analyzed to compare one game to the other. Feel free to have a discussion in here as well but at least try to think of points I missed. I'll start us off with some from Battlefield that seem to fit plus others I think of. I'll add any extra that are suggested.

Note that I'm making up names for the raw issues, not listing what should or should not be done. In order for this to be a complaint list, the list would have to take a certain position on these issues. Note carefully that it does not.

Gameplay

1. Time to Kill(TTK), meaning the time between when you start firing at an enemy until they die. A product of bullet damage, recoil, deviation, hit detection, etc.
2. Spotting
3. Killcam
4. Squad command tools and functions
5. Empire command tools
6. Minimap and other HUD items(separate from spotting)
7. Communication presets
8. Base layouts, distance between bases
9. Spawn system, including field spawning, base spawning and squad spawning
10. Vehicle physics
11. Vehicle repair system
12. Health and vehicle regen, if it exists
13. Capture system(ie, all hack, all proximity capture, mix, etc)
14. Outfit features related to gameplay
15. Exit animations
16. Multi-crewing of vehicles, or not
17. Bullet damage, deviation(cone of fire), recoil, etc
18. Infantry movement speed
19. Number of bases per continent
20. Foothold situation
21. Vehicle Animations
22. Aim down sight mechanic(AKA "iron sights") vs zoom
23. Capture time, especially as relates to backhacking and resecuring, will it still allow spec op missions
24.

Graphical
1. Avatar appearance
2. Effect that graphics has on player visibility(ie, game is too dark even in daytime)
3. Day/night sequence

Miscellaneous
1. Outfit features not related to gameplay
2.

[fod]

nice list stardouser

also number of bases per continent is another to add if you like

[Stardouser]

Thought of two more: Vehicle animations, and aim down sight mechanic. Now, I understand that some people think this is a list of things *I* am going to complain about. This is not true. For example, from what we know, there will be no vehicle animations and there will be aim down sight mechanic. I have no problem with those decisions, therefore, I am not going to complain about them. Instead, I'm making this list so that PS1 vets can have a checklist of things, it's all for the purpose of people who haven't played both games to be able to come to some kind of understanding of what the other wants. That doesn't mean anyone has to agree with each other, but at least we can figure out where people stand down to the microscopic issues. And if PS1 vets do want to complain about things? Well, that's what I'm doing this for, so that they can organize their voices.

A lot of this we simply don't know yet. And a lot of this may not even be complained about ever. I mean, we have every reason to believe we're getting squad command tools, if we do, what is there to complain about? But there's still reason to compare. Or, we heard about vehicles possibly getting a cert making multi-crewing optional. That may turn out to satisfy everyone, too.

And so, I know this list is still incomplete. Vehicle animations and ADS were two big ones missing.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

You're not getting vehicle animations anytime soon and iron sights are here to stay.

Get over it.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by BuzzCutPsycho

You're not getting vehicle animations anytime soon and iron sights are here to stay.

Get over it.

You might have thought the last sentence was a TL DR, it wasn't. I meant that it was missing from my list, not missing from the game; I personally do not want to see animations and I do want aim down sight mechanic. The list is a list of what the issues are, it is not a list of how the issues should be.

I simply believe in empowering the PS1 vets to organize their voice on the issues, whether I agree or not. Being a BF2 vet I know exactly what it's like to receive a false sequel.

[ringring]

Does the time to capture both disincentivise annoyance back-hacking but also allow organised behind the lines spec ops?

Does the game 'work' on several levels, as an fps, as a squad tactical shooter and on a strategic world based level?

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ringring

Does the time to capture both disincentivise annoyance back-hacking but also allow organised behind the lines spec ops?

Does the game 'work' on several levels, as an fps, as a squad tactical shooter and on a strategic world based level?

I added your first one but your second one seems too...macro. Can you break it down into specific issues?

[BuzzCutPsycho]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

You might have thought the last sentence was a TL DR, it wasn't. I meant that it was missing from my list, not missing from the game; I personally do not want to see animations and I do want aim down sight mechanic. The list is a list of what the issues are, it is not a list of how the issues should be.

My bad.

I simply believe in empowering the PS1 vets to organize their voice on the issues, whether I agree or not. Being a BF2 vet I know exactly what it's like to receive a false sequel.

Yes. Let's "empower" an undeserving few thousand nostalgic people stuck in 2003 so that their voice is some how louder than the millions of other FPS players here in 2012. If PS2 is going to succeed it needs to ensure that the "veterans" of PS1 remain the minority and the modern FPS player is the majority. A lot of original PS1 players are fucking morons and just as responsible as SoE for the downfall of that game.

Before BFRs of course.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by BuzzCutPsycho

My bad.




Yes. Let's "empower" an undeserving few thousand nostalgic people stuck in 2003 so that their voice is some how louder than the millions of other FPS players here in 2012. If PS2 is going to succeed it needs to ensure that the "veterans" of PS1 remain the minority and the modern FPS player is the majority. A lot of original PS1 players are fucking morons and just as responsible as SoE for the downfall of that game.

Before BFRs of course.

Here's the thing. A lot of new players, given the chance to actually see something they've never seen before, might stand with the vets. In BAttlefield for example, I mean NO ONE likes the extreme random deviation of BAttlefield 2. Including BF2 vets. But, BF3 has castrated squad mechanics, even people who started playing with BF3 are apt to sympathize with the BF2 vets. They aren't going to crusade about it, but they sympathize, and admit that it would probably be better the way BF2 did it.

And that's why the PS1 vets need a voice. The new players at least need to understand what they missed that existed before PS2. They may still decide that the new way is better, but they may not. I myself have decided that hate for ADS mechanic is just plain wrong...but I'm nearly on the fence with vehicle animations. Ultimately I don't like the idea of animations, but I'm quickly running out of energy with which to argue against them. That's just two examples.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

The only thing PS1 had that they would of missed out on was the large scale operations and sense of being just another cog in a bigger war machine.

PS2 seems to already have that. Remember that in terms of a shooter PS1 was no gem, it was actually a turd. If PS2 sticks to the one thing good about PS1 (scope and size) it'll be fine even if it doesn't have dismounting animations or whatever the topic of the week to bitch about is.

[Destroyeron]

You like making lists hmm stardouser?

[RodenyC]

Originally Posted by BuzzCutPsycho

Yes. Let's "empower" an undeserving few thousand nostalgic people stuck in 2003 so that their voice is some how louder than the millions of other FPS players here in 2012. If PS2 is going to succeed it needs to ensure that the "veterans" of PS1 remain the minority and the modern FPS player is the majority. A lot of original PS1 players are fucking morons and just as responsible as SoE for the downfall of that game.

Before BFRs of course.

I believe the opposite.The only people who would know better than the Devs about planetside are the PS Vets.They should be a majority to an extent.Modern FPS players cause things like the horrible killcam in almost every game showing where a player is,the horrible 3d spotting in BF3 and the easy learning curve. If PS2 wanted to be another FPS with bigger scale then why call it a sequel to Planetside? Just rename it and it boom.This is a sequel to Planetside.Planetside vets know what should be in a Planetside game.Just how BF2 vets knew what BF3 should had been.There is a difference in being a good game and a popular game.And the way you say it your going for a popular game.

[Malorn]

The vet feedback's value is ensuring that the game still feels like Planetside and retains some of the unique elements of an MMOFPS.

Things like aim-down-sights and removal of exit animations don't affect that.

The list at the top seemed more like a complaint/concern list.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Malorn

The vet feedback's value is ensuring that the game still feels like Planetside and retains some of the unique elements of an MMOFPS.

Things like aim-down-sights and removal of exit animations don't affect that.

The list at the top seemed more like a complaint/concern list.

It is a list of every possible issue by which it can be compared. Which isn't done yet since no one is contributing points. Where in the list do I say that any of the issues should be done one way or another? That's kind of required for it to be a complaint or concern list.

For example, if I amend #2, Spotting, to say "Spotting - we must not have 3D spotting!" then that makes it a complaint.

[Malorn]

Comparing concerns/changes on a item-by-item basis is not useful. It's how the changes interact with each other to create the experience they are going for.

A better approach would be to list the goals of PS2 and how they are delivering on those goals.