Will PS 2 succeed at launch?

PredatorFour · 2012-09-16, 08:25 AM

When planetside was released in 03 it struggled because of no widespread broadband connection and wasnt as popular as it shouldve been. It was ahead of its time.

The concern is; is this next incarnation ahead of its time also ??

Alot of people it seems are struggling to get in because of the system requirements. They`ve set the bar high and it looks great on good systems, but how much of the playerbase will have them good systems to make it run/look good? How many years before the majority of the playerbase will have these systems as standard?

Is this going to be a similiar outcome to what happened with the original? /discuss

Sledgecrushr · 2012-09-16, 08:50 AM

I think there is a chance that this game could influence the entire pc industry in a good way. Ps2 in my opinion is already that good.

Syphus · 2012-09-16, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by PredatorFour

When planetside was released in 03 it struggled because of no widespread broadband connection and wasnt as popular as it shouldve been. It was ahead of its time.

The concern is; is this next incarnation ahead of its time also ??

Alot of people it seems are struggling to get in because of the system requirements. They`ve set the bar high and it looks great on good systems, but how much of the playerbase will have them good systems to make it run/look good? How many years before the majority of the playerbase will have these systems as standard?

Is this going to be a similiar outcome to what happened with the original? /discuss

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

There you go, so no I don't think that's really an issue.

SpottyGekko · 2012-09-16, 11:20 AM

At high gfx settings the game looks absolutely amazing

At lower settings it just looks very good

I'd guess that PS2 will be totally playable on average PC's that are used to play current games. That was not so much the case with PS1.

But poor internet access was a much bigger factor when PS1 launched imho. Nowadays the average MMO gamer has a very good internet connection with vastly more bandwidth available than in 2003.

Drakkonan · 2012-09-16, 11:42 AM

I'd like to say yes, but it's looking more and more like a soft launch (if it hasn't already reached that status), which means bad things for release. Everyone who's even heard of the game has had a chance to play it and already formed their opinions despite the game being unfinished. Its only saving grace is that it's free-to-play.

I'd like to see them close beta for a month or two. Start advertising, and then release the game.

Falrond · 2012-09-16, 11:57 AM

With proper advertising, it could absolutely get off to a great launch =)
Having it on steam really helps this alot, which as far as I have heard it will be?

I have a half year old 1000$ laptop, and I can run it on low settings with between 30-50 fps, dipping to 20-30 in the big battles. So many people on the PC platform which this game aims at should be able to play this game =)

Dagron · 2012-09-16, 01:22 PM

My PC is ancient, i have to set everything to low and i still love it. People want their game to be beautiful, but it's not a deal breaker for most. Yes we want Auraxis to look good, but we're not here for the view, we're here to fight a war.

Tatwi · 2012-09-16, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by Syphus

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

There you go, so no I don't think that's really an issue.

So the fact that 56% of Steam gamers have a dual core or single core system that won't have a hope in hell of running the game at decent frame rates isn't really an issue? And how many of those quad core or better that make up the remaining 44% are older Core 2s and AMDs that also run the game at unacceptable frame rates?

I have a 2.33GHz Core 2 Quad with a GTS450 and 6GB of DDR2 667MHz RAM. This is more powerful than an XBox 360, which also uses the Direct3D api. I can play PS2 great when no one is around (works better on high settings than on low, believe it or not...), but in a Planetside scale battle, 0 to 20 FPS with hitching galore makes the game unplayable at any graphical setting, due to the combat calculations that are going on. While I can play at those low frame rates, it's an unfun lesson in futility to do so and given the huge volume of games out there, why would people stick around for that kind of mess when they can play something else that runs better?

Graphically the game works well, but combat wise it requires a good Core i5 processor. It can't be played on any of the consoles at all and the majority of PCs won't be able to play it as intended at acceptable frame rates. How does this not make PS2 a niche game in the making?

Timealude · 2012-09-16, 04:30 PM

Its hard to say right now. There are still alot of people not in the beta, despite there being tons of keys they gave out, for people to judge the game simply because its constantly changing...Hell we might not even be looking at the same game now as we will when they release. From what I have played it has potential and that is a good start with another continent as well as other things this game should be a home run.

selmu · 2012-09-16, 04:39 PM

Well i dont know what kind of pc you need to roll planetside 2. I roll bf 3 in ultra with 40-50 fps, and cant roll ps 2 with more than 10 fps.

Good idea, good game, shitty engine and very poor progamation. Those developers lately they just forgot how to make pc games, everything is shitty cpu bound. The UI is incredible bad, it consumes alot of your cpu never saw such bad job like that.
It will suced for those living in near the servers. They really need much optimization.

Timealude · 2012-09-16, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by selmu

Well i dont know what kind of pc you need to roll planetside 2. I roll bf 3 in ultra with 40-50 fps, and cant roll ps 2 with more than 10 fps.

Good idea, good game, shitty engine and very poor progamation. Those developers lately they just forgot how to make pc games, everything is shitty cpu bound. The UI is incredible bad, it consumes alot of your cpu never saw such bad job like that.
It will suced for those living in near the servers. They really need much optimization.

I have an I5 and live no where near san deigo and i run at 30-40 on high in big battles.

JawsOfLife · 2012-09-16, 05:37 PM

Well the steam stats show why Sony decided to go with PhysX on Nvidia gpus. 9/10 of the top most used discrete graphics cards are nVidia (which is actually a staggeringly large number).

AThreatToYou · 2012-09-16, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Tatwi

Graphically the game works well, but combat wise it requires a good Core i5 processor.

FALSE

30+ constant frames on AMD Phenom II X4. What the game requires is a quad-core processor, however.
AMD processors will have no trouble running PS2 due to it using all available cores. Yes, finally! Your hex-core and octa-core processors will finally be used by a good game!

Tatwi · 2012-09-16, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

FALSE

30+ constant frames on AMD Phenom II X4. What the game requires is a quad-core processor, however.
AMD processors will have no trouble running PS2 due to it using all available cores. Yes, finally! Your hex-core and octa-core processors will finally be used by a good game!

So the hundreds of beta testers on the beta tech support forums with quad phenom IIs are wrong, because you say so. Gotcha.

Morsong · 2012-09-16, 06:52 PM

I have thought about this as well, and I think that Planetside 2 is going to be a hell of a lot more popular than PS1. Most users finally do have a good enough of a broadband connection, but now the main concern is with peoples pcs. Are they powerful enough? Here's my take on it:

Back when PS1 came out buying a new computer and good upgrades was quite expensive. It still is but it isn't as expensive as it was. I still haven't played PS2 because I need to upgrade my mobo, cpu, and ram, maybe even my gpu. But you know what? Hardware is a lot cheaper nowadays than it was, and I think that will be in favor of people who need to upgrade to play.

Plus PS2 is f2p. I think it'll stay quite nicely with people.