End Game: Pros and Cons

Gelnika · 2012-03-09, 08:09 PM

There's been talk of a potential end-game in some other threads but it's all been pretty disparate so far. Let's do some definition of terms:

The 'end-game', as I see it, would be the end of recurrent 'cycles' of the game. The game would end at a specific time and the factions would be granted bonuses based on how much territory they control. A game could last for example a month or three months, the entirety of the efforts in the game's timeline is all leading up to the end of the game, and a rush to capture as many points as possible before the timer expires.

In my opinion, this would give players a greater sense of purpose, as there is a more concrete objective and a time in which to complete it by rather than a never-ending war.

Any takers?

Synapses · 2012-03-09, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by Gelnika

There's been talk of a potential end-game in some other threads but it's all been pretty disparate so far. Let's do some definition of terms:

The 'end-game', as I see it, would be the end of recurrent 'cycles' of the game. The game would end at a specific time and the factions would be granted bonuses based on how much territory they control. A game could last for example a month or three months, the entirety of the efforts in the game's timeline is all leading up to the end of the game, and a rush to capture as many points as possible before the timer expires.

In my opinion, this would give players a greater sense of purpose, as there is a more concrete objective and a time in which to complete it by rather than a never-ending war.

Any takers?

There is a similar idea to what your talking about in WWII Online and it works great, but I still think it wouldnt really fit Planetside because this war never ends, ever... Its constantly on going and in lore there may be cease fires for one reason or another but its still a war, that never ends.

Also if it ended up playing anything like Planetside, at that last minute youd see all the stealthers of one empire start scattering to take all the bases with no fighting going on, and thus it would become kind of unfair. It would uneven the main battles as well because one soldier is going to go to X base to get it back from that stealther who is probably hidding down the way anyways and same with another soldier leaving the battle to go to Y base. Just dont think it would work out for Planetside.

DayOne · 2012-03-09, 08:12 PM

Bags · 2012-03-09, 08:15 PM

No, If I want rounds I will play BF3. TF2. MW, etc. IF I want a persistent game I play PS2.

SgtMAD · 2012-03-09, 08:16 PM

you are missing the point of the game,

IT NEVER ENDS

Crator · 2012-03-09, 08:16 PM

I'm going to hold my judgement until I see what the devs have come up with. There's a whole lot of great ideas already in other threads on this subject and everyone should keep them coming. I agree, PS1 did get stale after a while when I first started playing it. Of course, after playing it for so long it has grown on me and I love everything about it.

How I see it, PS1 was a game you fall in love with pretty quick (this, for me, was when there was massive populations). After a while it game play gets stale, but then if you keep at it and learn all the in-and-outs (especially strategy and how other players work inside the game) you get sucked in for good.

SUBARU · 2012-03-09, 08:19 PM

End game is when you uninstall it.

texico · 2012-03-09, 08:21 PM

I think an End Game would be good as a statistic - it's recorded as a statistic on the PS2's statistics website that an empire has capped the whole of Auraxis and the date/time. In this way, it's a neat little statistic that everyone would be aiming for, and bragging rights for the empire that's reached End-Game the most number of times. You'd be able to say that NC are the best empire on X server

You could milk it too, by maybe setting off fireworks from all bases once End Game is reached.

However, I DON'T think the game should reset. It should still be persistent. It doesn't need to reset either, because holding an empire at their sanctuary is completely impossible once it's been achieved. It should just be an official statistic that all bases have been capped and then the game goes on as normal.

As for a proper benefit, access to all of the enemy's equipment is probably all you need. That'd be a massive incentive and give a sense of achievement and reward once you do cap all continents, and you get to use them against that enemy until they've capped the whole of one continent back.

Death2All · 2012-03-09, 08:22 PM

A winning condition sort of negates the purpose of a persistent game, don't you think?

Granted PS1 had a winning condition where it was announced everyday on the login screen which empire "won" for that day. Victor of course being whichever empire owned the most territory. But that was all, it wasn't in anyway obtrusive or annoying, just something to glance at while logging on.

People already have an incentive to try to capture as most territory as possible, it's called resources.

Crator · 2012-03-09, 08:23 PM

"End Game", it's just the wrong word to use here....

**Higby** · 2012-03-09, 08:23 PM

What do you guys think of the idea of a weekend type event like that? During the week it's your standard persistent PlanetSide experience, during the weekend there are win conditions and you can sort of play "matches" which reset when someone "wins" or at midnight or something?

Maybe there are different servers you can play on that are set up like that?

NOTE: I have no idea if that'd work from our point of view, I'd have to think about it, so please consider this just me contributing to the conversation rather than an actual idea about something being added to the game.

DayOne · 2012-03-09, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by Higby

What do you guys think of the idea of a weekend type event like that? During the week it's your standard persistent PlanetSide experience, during the weekend there are win conditions and you can sort of play "matches" which reset at midnight or something?

Maybe there are different servers you can play on that are set up like that?

NOTE: I have no idea if that'd work from our point of view, I'd have to think about it, so please consider this just me contributing to the conversation rather than an actual idea about something being added to the game.

I hate to do this to you higby but:

Duddy · 2012-03-09, 08:26 PM

The problem with "End Game" and "Persistence" is that together they make, what I would consider to be, an oxymoron.

Your traditional MMORPG has an "End Game" because usually you are progressing through some sort of timeline that has a finite end point. In WoW this is when you hit 85 and you start doing what they quite rightly call "End Game Content". You do this content and then at some point it resets and you do it again. You keep doing this because there is no further progression to be had, and you've reached the limit of the game (so to speak).

To me, Persistence implies that there is an ever on-going and existing state. So having something that exists, is completed and then resets would not appear to constitute an on-going and existing state.

Furthermore the reason the end game exists, is that in order to be able to play with everyone else you had to reach the end of the "grind".

In Planetside, there is no clear end game. There is a limit to progression, by that of certs and battle rank, but the main focus of the game (capturing territory) is a never ending struggle. The closest PS1 reached was by Sanctuary locking the other empires, but that didn't induce a win state or a reset by extension. It just meant that you were currently dominating that never ending struggle.

I appreciate the desire for something that can be labelled "End Game", it implies reaching a plateau, the "promised land" of the game content.

But that's just the thing, in Planetside you don't need to reach a plateau to play. The game is constantly accessible to everyone, all the time.

And that is why I don't think we don't need an "End Game"

Death2All · 2012-03-09, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Higby

What do you guys think of the idea of a weekend type event like that? During the week it's your standard persistent PlanetSide experience, during the weekend there are win conditions and you can sort of play "matches" which reset when someone "wins" or at midnight or something?

Maybe there are different servers you can play on that are set up like that?

NOTE: I have no idea if that'd work from our point of view, I'd have to think about it, so please consider this just me contributing to the conversation rather than an actual idea about something being added to the game.

I think a lot of people are opposed to the idea of a winning condition because Planetside is supposed to be built so much around it's persistent nature. It just seems wrong to add a winning condition to a game that you're not supposed to win at. My two cents anyways.

Skitrel · 2012-03-09, 08:28 PM

End game isn't a bad idea really. A monthly cycle would promote goals, it would give outfits targets and competitiveness, it would give players something to aim for individually too. Essentially a monthly (or tri monthly) end game would work as a kind of competitive season. This would be nothing but good for the game and it's future longevity, just as proper competitive seasons have done for every other game you see them in.