Planetside NEXT on PC and ... ps3

[Exano]

Playing mag has seriously got me thinking. What if they launched Planetside Next on PC and Ps3? The PS3 certainly has the capacity, and the control scheme could easily be mapped out in a similar fashion.

The way MAG played it seemed like a planetside-esque game. They have huge maps, a "cert" system, and the like, putting it into an open world doesnt seem like such a far stretch. Any thoughts?

[DviddLeff]

I hope that very soon we see PC, PS3 and 360 games all playing in the same online space.

[Furret]

Two things:
1) It'd be great if they could put PlanetSide on consoles (most likely PS3 since this is Sony we're talking about) if only to get more people to know about the game. Personally, I think Planetside is a little to in-depth for the number of buttons you have on the controller, but it'd be interesting to see it happen.

2) I'm not sure if there's a difference in the abilities of a console gamer and a PC gamer. Personally, when i play COD online on my PS3, I'm raging (with my below 1.00 KDR) at the screen going "AAAUGHH IF ONLY I COULD PLUG IN MY MOUSE AND KEYBOARD", because i know if i had the mouse, i'd aim much better, and generally feel more at home. Maybe it's just a matter of what you got used to when you started gaming, but I feel that a PC gamer has much more control over their aim, and would therefore have a slight advantage over a console gamer (If they were matched against each other).

[Exano]

Two things:
1) It'd be great if they could put PlanetSide on consoles (most likely PS3 since this is Sony we're talking about) if only to get more people to know about the game. Personally, I think Planetside is a little to in-depth for the number of buttons you have on the controller, but it'd be interesting to see it happen.

2) I'm not sure if there's a difference in the abilities of a console gamer and a PC gamer. Personally, when i play COD online on my PS3, I'm raging (with my below 1.00 KDR) at the screen going "AAAUGHH IF ONLY I COULD PLUG IN MY MOUSE AND KEYBOARD", because i know if i had the mouse, i'd aim much better, and generally feel more at home. Maybe it's just a matter of what you got used to when you started gaming, but I feel that a PC gamer has much more control over their aim, and would therefore have a slight advantage over a console gamer (If they were matched against each other).

#1) I was thinking that myself too, but after sitting down with a game like mag, I don't really see why not. The shoulder buttons switch weapons, joystick moves / aims (Also clicking the joystick brings out your knife), that leaves us with one joystick button, four face buttons, four d-pad buttons and then anything that relates to the interface part of the game would either need to change or be used with the back/start buttons.

#2) Other games on PS3 have mouse and keyboard support, and I totally agree with you on this point to a certain extent, joysticks are definatly not for everybody and I definatly do prefer a mouse. OR (This is what I wouldn't like to see) They could handle it like shadowrun, with PC and 360 players playing together, and just make it so the accuracy of the guns is a bit lower than pinpoint for everyone.

[Sifer2]

If your a PC gamer mainly you shouldn't ask for this. When ever a project is not PC exclusive it means massive changes to the game to cater to the console platform. The game will be dumbed down in general. An these changes will affect the PC version cause publishers don't spend more money on PC versions of the game they just port.

Also just because MAG ran on PS3 does not mean a Planetside game as we know it could. MAG games take place on individual maps. It's essentially just Battlefield with more players. Planetside is massive continents with multiple bases. Whether the PS3 could handle that an still have graphics anywhere near MAG level is unknown.

[Furret]

So what if planetside was run LIKE individual maps.
Your character can only be on one continent at a time, so for all the game has to worry about, you're on that map, playing in that battle. When you switch to a new continent, you're effectively switching games.

Its a pretty simple concept to understand, but it's hard as hell to explain, so i'm not sure if i'm getting it accross.

MAG
was run where one game has a certain number of players, but there would be more than one game running at a time.

PlanetSide
could be run where one game server (Called Ishundar), is running a game mode where there's no time limit, kill limit, or anything, and its just a massive battle that people join in, fight, then leave. If you want to go to the battle on Hossin, you simply leave the game server Ishundar and go to the game server Hossin, where another infinite time limit, infinite kill game is being run.
The servers would have to talk to each other a bit, but people would never have to be on Hossin and Ishundar at the same time.

Anyone understand that? :huh:

[Sifer2]

I understand that what your saying would basically be inferior to the system we already have. Since your basically saying you want to give up the persistent world in favor of just having maps like literally every other FPS in existence.

Back in the early days of Planetside I seem to remember it was possible to fly from continent to continent wasn't it? Instead of needing the warp gates? That's what I expect from Planetside 2. Not a bigger game of Battlefield.

[Furret]

Hmm...
I'm not sure what you mean by the system being inferior, it would be the exact same as PlanetSide, except instead of the warp gates leading to another part of a map on the same server, they just lead to a different map on a different server. The only relations one map has with another anyway, is when you look at the map, so it wouldn't affect the game too much.

Unless:
You could fly between continents. I didn't start playing PlanetSide until late 2005 or early 2006, so I know nothing of the early days ('01?) and the glory days ('03-'04?). I came in and BFR's were standard, though they were definitely a bad idea. Anyway, enough reminiscing :cry: my idea wouldn't work at all with flying between continents. And I do think that needs to be re-established in PSNext.

[DviddLeff]

You could never fly between continents.

As it is PS is played on separate servers, as the continents each have their own so I believe.

Few things to consider:

Global Agenda has 16 players per map, but each map is linked via hexes and influences those around it (someone this is classed as an MMO).

Dust 514, the console MMOFPS in the EVE universe is going to be tied into EVE, where the console gamers are the grunts controlling the planets, while the EVE players control space itself, each working together to help the other to succeed.

I do not see why anything in PS would not work on a console, except perhaps the text chat system.

[Furret]

You could never fly between continents.
Dust 514, the console MMOFPS in the EVE universe is going to be tied into EVE, where the console gamers are the grunts controlling the planets, while the EVE players control space itself, each working together to help the other to succeed.

Nothing to do with you Dvidd, but thats a fucking awesome idea =D

And when you think about the reasons why you couldn't put it on console, the text chat system hardly comes to mind =p.

Though it is a valid point.

Possible Solutions
-A 'chat button' that would bring up a keyboard where you type in your message, and then choose which chat you want to send it.

-A button equivalent for the tab key in PS, where you'd use the R/L stick to control a mouse/pointer of some sort to go to a chat window, select which chat, and then type in your message.

-Voice chat (Most likely a bad idea, especially if you're going to have tons of people in one battle.)
[Possible Solutions]
~You only hear people in your immediate area, your squad, your squad leader, your platoon, your platoon leader, and the highest ranking commanders.
~Generally, you'll hear the voice chat of people around you. If a squad member talks, the volume of general voice chat is taken down to a level that is barely audible, while you hear your squad member clearly. If a platoon member then decides to say something at the same time, you hear the platoon member clearly, the squad member softly, and the general voice chat is muted. Then Squad leader, Platoon leader, and highest ranking commanders would follow that pattern.
~However, it would have to be set so that if the High Command, platoon member, and general voice were all talking, it wouldn't have them talking at the same time, while lowering the volume/muting the ones in between, it would have to lower the volume of the next highest 'voice activation level (VAL)' that is being used.
~This system would have to be customizable, so that you could set the priorities, and mute things entirely. For instance, you're in a squad, and also working with a friend who is in a different squad, but doesn't want to merge squads or make a platoon. You also don't want to hear the meaningless chit-chat between random empire members, and the High Command's wife is on her period, so he's pissed off as well. You simply set the High Command and general chat on mute, then (from the bottom up) [Name of Friend], Squad, Squad leader. Obviously, for this to work, you'd have to be able to have specific people count as a VAL. You would also be able to set two or three groups at the same VAL.
~The last flaw I can think of would be when players don't have microphones. They would have no way of communicating with other players unless there was a text chat system in place. Therefore, voice chat would only be a convenience instead of a solution.

Now after all that, I still haven't really solved the problem raised in the previous reply.

Which was what exactly? =p

[DviddLeff]

Remember that these days you can plug a keyboard into a console using USB; just requires the game to support it.

What about PS would require dumbing down to make it work on a console?

[Furret]

HAH! I knew you should be able to plug a keyboard in.
So then yeah.
For text chat at least, you should just plug a keyboard in and type like that.

[Sifer2]

Remember that these days you can plug a keyboard into a console using USB; just requires the game to support it.

What about PS would require dumbing down to make it work on a console?


Well for one the current gen consoles are already a fair bit behind current PC technology available. So if you put it on PS3 or 360 you gimp it out of the gate an insure it probably wont be taking advantage of new technology to put the most massive numbers of players on screen possible. That is unless the PC version is different. Which usually just doesn't happen cause its easier for them to build at low console levels an just port.

Secondly a Gamepad it isn't a Keyboard an Mouse. Multiplat games almost without exception are made with the Gamepad in mind since trying to play a really fast paced type PC shooter with a Gamepad is frustrating an difficult. You will get weapons that are far easier to aim an probably movement speeds far slower so auto aim has no trouble keeping up.

Thirdly you will probably get slower patches an support. Consoles have a certification process to go through an more limited hard drive space 360 especially. If its only PS3 it might not be as much an issue but if its 360 too yeah the patching will be severely gimped. Honestly man I just don't know what to tell you except there is generally a reason there are hundreds of MMO's on PC an few on consoles. It doesn't fit the platform too well.

[Furret]

Perhaps they could make it for the next generation of consoles? And advertise it when the new consoles first come out. Everyone would be looking for games, since there wouldn't be many on the console, so they'd see planetside and think "Looks like fun, I'll buy it" Then they play it and they're hooked.
And Sony is bound to make a computer and try and sell it as a PlayStation 4 or something, so PSN could work for PS4, and we'd just have to see what happens with Xbox 720.

No those arent the real names, but you guys understand

[Exano]

Well for one the current gen consoles are already a fair bit behind current PC technology available. So if you put it on PS3 or 360 you gimp it out of the gate an insure it probably wont be taking advantage of new technology to put the most massive numbers of players on screen possible. That is unless the PC version is different. Which usually just doesn't happen cause its easier for them to build at low console levels an just port.

Secondly a Gamepad it isn't a Keyboard an Mouse. Multiplat games almost without exception are made with the Gamepad in mind since trying to play a really fast paced type PC shooter with a Gamepad is frustrating an difficult. You will get weapons that are far easier to aim an probably movement speeds far slower so auto aim has no trouble keeping up.

Thirdly you will probably get slower patches an support. Consoles have a certification process to go through an more limited hard drive space 360 especially. If its only PS3 it might not be as much an issue but if its 360 too yeah the patching will be severely gimped. Honestly man I just don't know what to tell you except there is generally a reason there are hundreds of MMO's on PC an few on consoles. It doesn't fit the platform too well.

#1) Alright, lets tackle these one at a time =D Are current gen consoles far behind modern PC's? Take a look at the PS3's specs...theyre pretty nice. Just because a game is on a console doesn't mean it has to be gimped off the bat, i'm no sure what your inferring. The graphics might be toned down a bit on the console rather than the PC, but is that a real big deal? The players on the screen is more how the online play is handeled...with the amount of players in MAG Sony proved they could provide very stable servers with multiple thousands of people at a given time. I'm sure it wouldn't be a stretch to push it further. Population locks were in the original PS, too..but population locks were for two reasons. #1 was lag, but #2 was zerging. Putting the highest possible amount of people on the screen at one time sounds incredible, but in practice they all have guns, they're all shooting, and its insane chaos with pretty much insta death. Just because we can doesnt mean we will, unless base fights are conducted very differently.

#2) Thats not true, at all. There is support for any USB Keyboard/Mouse by the PS3, but its up to the game to allow it. Just because a game has joypad controls doesn't gimp it for PC or vice versa. Its just a different way to play the game. I give you MAG, absolutely no auto-aim. PS has not and will not have auto aim, for PC or for console, I don't see why it would at least.

#3)Sony = SoE. Microsoft's Xbox Live component doesnt provide support for more than 24(? Its higher than 20, below 30) players, its not the console that can't handle it, its Microsoft's service. On any multi platform game that is shared (IE PC players playing with the PS3 players) the patches will be the same for either. There are also hundreds of MMO's and very few MMOFPS's...I don't know what to tell you man :P But if there is an MMO that will work on a console, an MMOFPS is just about as good as it'll get.

[Furret]

You'd think Sony would put their own game on their own console...

[Sifer2]

Exano I respect you trying to defend the PS3 an all. An yeah its not THAT outdated but still definitely behind what affordable PC's can currently do. As a owner of a newer PC it would obviously upset me if I am forced to play a new Planetside that is less awesome than it could have been just because they wanted to scale it down to work on PS3 too. Which they WILL have to don't kid yourself there.

I mean just compare MAG to Planetside which is 7 years older. Planetside is a much larger world an originally I think offered more players at a time including all 3 factions battling at once. Compared to MAG which like I said is just Battlefield with more players. I mean if it takes a console 7 years just to do Battlefield with lots of players then how can you think it wont be gimping Planetside 2?

Think of what Planetside 2 COULD be NOW. 7 years later exclusive to PC an designed to take full advantage of the platform. It would blow MAG out of the water an be a FPS unlike any other to date. I mean if you only have a PS3 I could see why it might be in your best interest to encourage them making Planetside 2 for it. But its also a bit selfish to want that too since your only holding the game back from what it could be.

[Furret]

What makes you think MAG is the most the PS3 can handle.
My experience with MAG consists of watching about two youtube videos on it, though i can already tell its not nearly as huge as planetside.

I'd hate for this to turn into an argument about whether or not the ps3 can handle a new planetside, because then i couldn't participate, seeing as i have close to no experience with PS3 other than rock band and COD4

Though, we also can't look at the PS3 as the platform that PS will be run on.
I can guaruntee, sony will come out with a 'PS4' of sorts that match or beat the capacity of whatever computer you have now. Unless you spent $2000+ on it of course. PSN isnt coming out for a while, so there's plenty of time for technology advances, and for fast technology to become cheap, so who knows what the capacity of the 'PS4' will be.

And I cant believe i'm actually counting on Sony to completely overdo a fucking CONSOLE.
But whatever

[Sifer2]

How do I know MAG is the most the PS3 can handle? I don't. However considering its completely exclusive to that console one would think it was built entirely with its hardware in mind an to take maximum use of it. Thus its reasonable to assume the PS3 can't handle much more than MAG without having to majorly tone down the graphics or get bad frames per second.

An as I said MAG doesn't even offer the size an depth of the original Planetside. So to think that making Planetside 2 a console game an porting it to PC wont really hold it back is not being reasonable. Which is how it works. You don't build for PC an then port to console since that's way more difficult. So if its multiplat it will not be as good that's all their is to it really.

Saying there could be a PS4 is silly is there has been no info on the existence of one. An the funny thing was a videogame analyst on a show I watched the other day was saying if there is it will probably cost 800 dollars. Dunno about you but I could build a nice new PC for that. I am not trying to troll consoles please don't misunderstand me. I just want Planetside 2 to be the most awesome game possible taking FPS genre to the next level. An I know that can only happen if its built for PC.

[Furret]

You're probably right actually.
The consoles are kinda becoming computers anyway, with internet and everything.
Really, i think the only difference between consoles and computers (in the near future) will be slightly less processing power/graphics/sound quality and a difference in the way you control your character (WASD/Mouse vs Joysticks)

Perhaps a separate version for the consoles and PC?

Combining the PC and consoles is a good idea, but I'll agree with on this; PlanetSide isn't the best game to do it with.

[Baneblade]

The allure of PS was never the graphics. Even in 2003.

[Hamma]

If they consolize any MMOFPS they will have one less subscriber.

Conzolizing games is the single most destructive thing to gaming during this day in age. We have features that have been part of PC games for years going to the wayside because companies focus on console first which lacks the features of the PC platform.

[Baneblade]

Only a dumb developer does that though since consoles can do all the functions a PC does as far as gameplay is concerned.

I'm not a console lover btw.

[Hamma]

Going to have to disagree there consoles are far more limited in terms of Controls and UI. I've seen variety of instances where that crap makes the PC version limited also because companies would rather rake in easy cash from console users than spend time on quality game development.

[Baneblade]

Actually, it was demonstrated that the gamepad alone has more practical control functionality than mouse and board.

[DviddLeff]

Which game was it where PC players could fight those on the consoles?

Pretty sure that ended up with PC users cleaning up due to the superior accuracy of the mouse alone.

[Vancha]

Actually, it was demonstrated that the gamepad alone has more practical control functionality than mouse and board.

I have at least 96 keys on my keyboard available for gaming (excluded some like capslock and windows keys), add to that the 3 buttons equivalent to triggers on my mouse, the button on the side of it and the fact that the mouse is far better as a camera control in FPS...

Do you have a link to this demonstration you spoke of? The only thing I can think of that a console controller has over a mouse is the ability to control strength (pushing slightly on the joystick/triggers can act differently to pushing all the way). Though thinking about the aircraft in PS, a mouse could do that too...

[Baneblade]

I have at least 96 keys on my keyboard available for gaming

So you actually use every single one of those 96 keys in your practical keymaps?

And why haven't you hacked your capslock or windows keys yet?

[Hamma]

And demonstrated by whom?

I'm sorry but thats a crock. :lol:

Sounds more like an opinion of someone as opposed to a fact. It is a limited interface and games designed specifically for it or with it in mind end up shitty on the PC plain and simple.

[Vancha]

So you actually use every single one of those 96 keys in your practical keymaps?
No.

And why haven't you hacked your capslock or windows keys yet?

So you actually use every single one of those 96 keys in your practical keymaps?
No.

Thinking about planetside though...

Foward/Back/Strafe-left/Strafe-right
Jump
Crouch
Fire
Alternate fire
Enter vehicle+Use terminal
Character screen
Squad screen
Map screen
Implant screen
Outfit screen
Inventory
Pistol 1
Pistol 2
Rifle 1
Rifle 2
Knife
Implant 1
Implant 2
Implant 3
Medkit
Zoom

That's what I can remember off the top of my head from having played 2 years ago. I think you'd have trouble fitting that onto a console controller.

Now consider that there was the chat window which used forward slash or enter, along with the keys you needed to say what you wanted to say. Add to that the three different voice-command menus that were navigated by keypress...

Also, mouse+keyboard gives you the ability to be holding 5 keys and 3 mouse-buttons at once, while still being able to look around. I can be strafing sideways, moving foward, crouching, reloading my gun, firing and use a medpack without needing to move my fingers to different buttons/keys (W+A+Ctrl+R+Mouse 1+Mouse 4). Granted, not a situation that will come up all too often, but still... ;)

[DviddLeff]

I reckon you can fit all the controls onto a console, just not fast typing unless the console owner has a keyboard.

Don't forget that all the menus can feed into one another; there's no reason the Character, Squad, Map, Implant, Outfit and even the Inventory cant all come off one key press combined with a direction.

[Vancha]

With that system, I'm guessing implants and weapons would work the same way? Considering you need one thumb to look around and the other thumb to move around, that leaves you with four buttons available on the top of the controller. One to fire, one to crouch, one to jump and one left for zoom, medkits, implants, weapons...plus whatever functions I forgot to include (change ammo button, MAX ability/deploy/cloak button, squad/platoon/outfit invite and kick commands, bailing etc.)

Console controllers have come a long way, but I they they have a little further to go before they can cope with Planetside.

[DviddLeff]

Im thinking of the D pad on the PS3; use it as a weapons select/implant system and just have all the info panels come up when you press select.

[Vancha]

So that means you either have to stop moving, or stop being able to look around in order to switch on an implant or take out a weapon.

[Furret]

Vancha: Also, mouse+keyboard gives you the ability to be holding 5 keys and 3 mouse-buttons at once, while still being able to look around. I can be strafing sideways, moving forward, crouching, reloading my gun, firing and use a medpack without needing to move my fingers to different buttons/keys (W+A+Ctrl+R+Mouse 1+Mouse 4). Granted, not a situation that will come up all too often, but still...

too lazy to quote...

umm, I'd like to see you reload a gun and fire it at the same time :p

Anyway, I think if a company made a game for both console and PC, they'd have to design it for PC then dumb it down for console, because PC has so many more options. I think in a standard keymapping, there would be 27 keyboard buttons, and probably 9 mouse buttons (left click/right click/scroll up/scroll down/mouse wheel click/two left side buttons/two right side buttons)

That's a total of 36 possible key presses (one button at a time)

For a console *pulls out PS3 controller*, you have (From Left to Right) L2, L1, DPad left/up/down/right, left stick N/NE/E/SE/S/SW/W/NW and L3, select, start, right stick N/NE/E/SE/S/SW/W/NW and R3, Square, Triangle, X, O, R2, R1.
Total of 30 possible button presses.
Unfortunately, 16 of those are null and void, because you'd be using them to move and aim.

Now we're down to 14.

However, if we look at the list vancha posted, lets try to map each action with a button press or button combination.

Foward/Back/Strafe-left/Strafe-right -=- Left control stick
Move vision -=- Right control stick
Jump -=- X
Crouch -=- Circle
Fire -=- R2
Alternate fire -=- Triangle
Enter vehicle+Use terminal (G) -=- Square
Character screen -=- L3 + Right Stick N
Squad screen -=- L3 + Right Stick NE
Map screen -=- L3 + Right Stick E
Implant screen -=- L3 + Right Stick SE
Outfit screen -=- L3 + Right Stick S
Inventory -=- L3 + Right Stick SW
(Space for 2 more screens -=- L3 + Right Stick W/NW)
Weapon 1 -=- DPad Up
Weapon 2 -=- DPad Right
Weapon 3 -=- DPad Down
Weapon 4 -=- DPad Left
Weapon 5 (Melee) -=- R1
Medkit -=- L1
F1-F8 -=- R3 + N/NE/E/SE/S/SW/W/NW
Zoom -=- L2

The Medkit would not be placed in the F1-8 section of the HUD

Also, all of the screens (Character Screen - Inventory) could be accessed from hitting start, then scrolling through the options.

[Sifer2]

They wouldn't have you pressing L3 for all that they would have you hit start to bring up a menu with all that stuff on it an then you would have to scroll through it. An then us PC crowd would get to complain about the slow cumbersome console interface they went with like we do with most ports these days.

Inventory would be simplified too I imagine no more drag an dropping an trying to cram lots of goodies in there. Would be something simpler an more dumbed down. Honestly unless they made two different versions of Planetside Next I see no way they could pull it off without really pissing off the PC players.

[Furret]

not necessarily.
Why couldn't the game be designed where you can change the button layout. It would come with an Xbox Layout, a PS3 Layout, and a PC Layout.

And why couldn't you use the controller as a mouse-ish. Click L1 to select an item, hold L1 to drag and drop. R1 opens up a menu for drop/destroy/etc.

It might not be as easy to do the decimator trick, but the game should be dumbed down for the consoles, but in a way that doesnt effect the PCs

[2coolforu]

Console ported games
- Black Ops (Horrible stuttering, restrictive servers, massive CPU load issues, no patch support, no technical support, no care about the PC Platform, Lack of customisation in graphics settings
- Modern Warfare 2 (Horrible issues, No dedi-servers, No developer care *Comes with inbuilt mouse and keyboard support*, obvious punch in the nads to pc gamers)
- Bad Company 2 (Performance issues involving dual gpu and quad core systems, huge CPU usage for no reason etc etc)
- Crysis 2 (Graphics reduced over Crysis 1, no technical improvements, development stale)

On all, lack of customisable servers, serious restrictions on number of players (18 max on MW2/Black Ops, 32 max on Bad Company 2 compared to 64 on exactly the same games that were done properly for PC. Graphics don't stress powerful PC GPU's, bad company Frames per second are generally 160-200 on all settings maxed.

Non-Console ports
- ARMA 2 OA (Uses multigpu efficiently, utilizes multicore CPU's efficiently, complex ai, huge mod support, regular development, regular patches, fully customisable servers, dedicated modding community, regular good mods, very high end graphics, massively customisable settings, trackir support, peripheals support, Field of view modification, proper multimonitor support, anti aliasing, 100's of players in a server)

- Empire Total War (No units limit, dedicated community, state of the art graphics, complex gameplay, et cetera et cetera)

Consoles are the average tech from 2005, a good gaming PC is high end tech from 2010. There isn't a competition here, PC's have more power, more freedom, more software, cleverer software, they play at far higher resolutions with far higher graphics, they handle more players and more complex control systems and more complex games.

There's a reason professional competitive gaming isn't nearly as massive on consoles as on the PC, it's because the level of skill is nowhere near that of the PC as there is less control (5000+ DPI mouse, on the fly sensitivity, antighosted keyboards, hotkeys etc etc - far, far, far superior to a controller) and far more 'stuff' can be put on. How do you go about doing a 1GB patch for a console game which runs it off the disk? How do you get a console gamer on the 360 to pay 5 quid a month just to get access to the internet, then another monthly sub for internet providers and then a $15 sub to an MMOFPS.

Anyway I digress, consoles will always be less powerful than a Desktop and anyone who says otherwise is demonstrably wrong in the highest degree. If you put Planetside on console there will be no feasible way it will remain the way it is with 500 players in a single area duelling it out. Those consoles struggle to run MW2 at 30 FPS with 18 players, a game a substandard PC of today can run on far higher settings at higher resolutions with the horrible performance issues at 100 FPS.

If the game goes to console it will be severely disabled, if not killed.

Here's a few problems I foresee

i) VOIP, it was horribly laggy and unreliable in Planetside 1. How are console gamers going to work as a team online, if we have the 5000 or so people logged in at any one time all screaming in voip in global the game will just die, and they can't type very quick so they'll just end up being soloers and turning the game into a ghost town like it is now where the pops are so low the vast majority of people speak different languages. Not only that but it would take a while for a PS3 player to open up a dialogue box then type /invite xyzplayername, hell it would be near impossible for them to have hotkeys or even ask in broadcast for gunners or ask for a tank to stop to gun. Is this the kind of gameplay we want?

ii) Teamwork - There was a competition in BFBC2 to unlock a new map, whomever completed the most team actions on a format unlocked the map for that format, the target was 64 million team actions (around that amount anyway). PC dominated, with fewer players we unlocked the map in a matter of days and had over double the team actions of the nearest console (which was the PS3 funnily enough) it was such an embarrasment that they just unlocked the map for everyone.

iii) Skill - It's undeniable that PC Gamers will have an advantage, the keyboard mouse setup is just better for gaming. Pure and simple. Not only that but they run at higher FPS, higher fidelity and higher resolution, all this puts them at an advantage. PC Gamers will also be more easily able to enter into squads and function as a team given the abilities they have (Teamspeak 3, Ventrilo, Text communication)

Believe it or not Microsoft tried PC/360 cross-console play (why wouldn't they, both formats are theirs, it would be beneficial for them to combine them and make the 360 online experience better by having more people) they trialled it by having a selection of console players play a selection ofPC players. The PC players dominated them in a murderfest, it was a massacrel. So they tried it again with the cream of the crop of console gamers, and a random selection of PC Gamers. Once again the console 360 players were dominated. It was so extreme it forced them to abandon the project. It's cited all over the interwebz (not the best source I know) but here's a source from a programmer/computer engineer + builder who was present and heard about it from his sources

http://www.rahulsood.com/2010/07/console-gamers-get-killed-against-pc.ht

[Hamma]

Interesting post well thought out I agree 100%

[Raymac]

2coolforu, that was a very thorough explanation, and I certainly agree. Frankly, it's hard not to.

On the other hand, while I'm not a huge fan of console ports, they don't really bother me that much. In my extremely humble and non-expert opinion, I don't feel it is an extreme drop off with the current generation of consoles. I mean, it's not like it's dropping down to the Atari 2600, right?

While PC's are clearly better, the consoles arn't that bad. It's like instead of being in a hot tub with 5 beautiful blondes, you are just in a hot tub with 2 beautiful blondes. So sad.

While the game will have to be adjusted (dumbed down) to conform with consoles, there is an upside with that. In a game like Planetside, the more people that play the game the better. So if it gets that console-PC-gaming-event marketing power behind it, I think the game will gain in players much more than it would lose players who are walking away from massive battles because it "feels like a port".

So, while I'd prefer it to stay PC only, it's not the end of the world if its for PS3 too. If they capture the same grandeur, then I'll play.

[2coolforu]

It's always nice to have more people in the game but with Planetside the old numbers of 50,000/75,000/100,000 (That's the range I see the max pops cited as) were maintained from about july/october 2003 to early 2005 and during that time it seemed plenty to me. There are only so many continents on the map ^_^.

The biggest battles I saw were multiple pop lock + several empire locks and I'd say that's about the top limit for playernumbers. You don't want everything locked and you want at least 1-2 Major fights with some special ops/tactical squad combat going on in another 2 continents. Obviously they can put more servers up but its a matter of is it worth getting the extra 25000 subscribers from PS3 who will probably move on to CoD Modern Warfare 3 or the next title released and paying the price of a dumbed down game - or having a full PC version with no dual production and all the trouble of porting it and making it work + playtesting and getting reliable PC Gamers who are less fickle and tend not to flow to the next IGN 10/10 game of the month.

Anyway wouldn't the millions of dollars it would cost cross-developing the game be better spent on some bad-ass TV ads or a huge ad campaign? Maybe even spend that money reinvigorating Planetside 1, hell its good enough to be a good taster for Planetside Next, it just needs more players (and the BR cap moved back down to 25 at least) that would be a good marketing campaign.

If anything SOE is trying to hinder advertisement, searching Planetside Next brings up thousands of results on news. Looking on Twitter I see journalists sending Smedley messages asking if he wants an interview/article put up on Kotaku and many other sites. A lot of the hardcore gamers that are in the PC Gaming media remember Planetside and love it, just look at Rock Paper Shotgun, PC Gamer hell theres a huge list of gaming media that loved Planetside. I remember PC Gamer giving Planetside near monthly advertising, they even made a trial for it complete with an installation disk and then did some brilliant, well written articles about how awesome and revolutionary the game was.

[basti]

So that means you either have to stop moving, or stop being able to look around in order to switch on an implant or take out a weapon.

Welcome to Console commands. Just check the countless FPS games on them, they all got the same issue.
but im pretty sure SOE wont do cross platform playing. They could have done that for DCUO, it would have much better potetial to not fail at that. A FPS is like RTS games on consoles: You cant do cross platform with them, console players wouldnt stand a chance.

[Infektion]

I hope that very soon we see PC, PS3 and 360 games all playing in the same online space.


Sorry, but that's just completely unfair, for PS3 and 360 owners. Reason being is that i'm using a keyboard/mouse, and your head is on my sights. It's just really unfair if you think about it. No way controller will have the speed and accuracy of real-time twitch gaming.

[Grimster]

Well as far as FPS games goes I doubt we will see that unless mice become a standard equipment for consoles which honestly imho kind of kills the purpose with consoles from my perspective.

For exampel I want to get Black Ops so badly but my PC is probably not going to be able to run it properly and I don't want to buy it to my Xbox since FPS games just don't feel the same way on a console as it does on a PC. :)

[Traak]

You could never fly between continents.


I have seen it done when poplock was in effect. Before the Bending of the Game Out of Shape, that is.

[Traak]

Oh, and I utterly despise gayme controllers.

Mouse and keyboard, probably buy a stick set for flying if I ever defile myself by being a pilot in PS.

In real life, I'm very ground-oriented, very tall, very heavy, and very much enjoy moving heavy objects. Strangely, I'm not a chubby-chaser. I just don't dig piloting anything airborne. I love the mouse and keyboard, and have even used two mice at once to fine-tune aim with two hands. Try that if you really want to try something different and have gigantic gobs of buttons to use, PLUS the keyboard. Set one mouse for very low responsiveness laterally, the other for very low responsiveness vertically. :) I still prefer one mouse and one keyboard, however.

And yes, to make a PC game retarded enough the average drooling console gamer can make the tough choice between his rubber teething rattle and the the dumbed-down game ruins it for the PC.

Two words: Deus Ex. One of the best games of all time for PC, Deus Ex sequel was among the worst in history, because it was designed for all platforms.

However, as I said in a separate post, being able to hop on via a good smartphone and play PS would be great, IMHO, but there are probably gobs of disadvantages to that that I just haven't thought of.

Mouse, keyboard, and that computer that is the reason I have shabbola car are gaming, to me. Not some dorkadelic controller so Stephen Hawking can play the game too.

[MgFalcon]

PS3 could never work, please read this... http://robertsinclaire.com/2009/04/11/fps-console-vs-pc/

[Hamma]

Pretty elaborate article.

[demise14]

http://www.destructoid.com/all-future-soe-mmos-to-hit-consoles-also-everquest-3-106558.phtml

Quite possible...

[Alrix]

i like the idea of having the game on PC and PS3, but because planetside is pretty dependent on densely populated servers, unless they can play together (like i believe Final Fantasy 11 did) i don't think it would be a good idea.

[Valverde]

I hope that very soon we see PC, PS3 and 360 games all playing in the same online space.

We already do. With Final Fantasy Online or PSO/PSU.

[Valverde]

Not trying to be a buzzkill at all but as far as these articles go unless I see it stated on SOE's website or their MMO Subtitles I usually don't believe it.

Now on the flip side. Is this possible... Heck yeah. Think about it this way. Most of All the current working( as of 2011) and future working MMOs all list PS3 gameplay. Example: DCUO, the Agency, Everquest 3, I believe Everquest 1 is on console as well but I can't remember. So is it far off that they would make all future MMOs on console, No.

Now as far as Xbox 360.... Since SOE is owned by Sony, I highly doubt it. The PS3 and the PS2 have enough of a market to not worry about 360 viewers. Plus the idea that Microsoft and Sony would work together other then with building computers is slim to none. Plus that I know of the PS2 is still the top console on the market to date. Many places have listed this information from IGN, Joystick, Gametrailers, G4 and so on.

In the end I can see all future MMOs of SOE going to console. But with one warning, believe nothing unless you see it listed on their sites, because like all contracts people lie to lure you in.

[Hamma]

I just hope PS is not among those with a Console variant.

[Warruz]

The issue i have always had with multi platform games especially ones that you are in the same world(Pc playing with Ps3) is one always holds the other back for one reason or another. Be it Graphics or expansions or limitations by the console. I mean hell look at something simple like TF2 they had all these issues pushing updates on one console and then the other console has no problem while the PC obviously would and did have no issues.

[Valverde]

The issue i have always had with multi platform games especially ones that you are in the same world(Pc playing with Ps3) is one always holds the other back for one reason or another. Be it Graphics or expansions or limitations by the console. I mean hell look at something simple like TF2 they had all these issues pushing updates on one console and then the other console has no problem while the PC obviously would and did have no issues.

Yeah that is true. I know Microsoft has there stuff usually written in C++/C/C# with most of it concentrated on C#. But that I know of and as fair as I have heard the PS3 since it is fundamentally Linux only is written in two of those languages which is a plus in editing code or debugging. But I completely agree with you there is always something they can't do as far as patches because it is on a console.

[TRex]

My concern is that they dont make the requirements to play ps:n too high on the pc , I simply can't afford it at this time. My pc runs most games ,ps included fine. In this respect I just hope soe dosn't shoot themselves in the foot by making it too advanced .
I remember ps1 in 2003/4 and there was such a variety of experience in the game, dependant upon fps, bugs,connection speed etc before you even entered the whole balance issues, game developement, and lack of character progression started to really kick in.
A lot of these have been addressed with merits , the windows patch and so on , albeit at the cost of server merging over time.
I don't have a PS3 , and I hope there isnt a port for it for ps:n , but in many ways I hope they take some pages from Blizzards book and make the game accessible to more by not making it too next:gen .
Original ps dosen't have great graphics , but it still does the job. Re-skin it , new engine , advertisement , more variety and developement would make me happy for now.

[Valverde]

My concern is that they dont make the requirements to play ps:n too high on the pc , I simply can't afford it at this time. My pc runs most games ,ps included fine. In this respect I just hope soe dosn't shoot themselves in the foot by making it too advanced .
I remember ps1 in 2003/4 and there was such a variety of experience in the game, dependant upon fps, bugs,connection speed etc before you even entered the whole balance issues, game developement, and lack of character progression started to really kick in.
A lot of these have been addressed with merits , the windows patch and so on , albeit at the cost of server merging over time.
I don't have a PS3 , and I hope there isnt a port for it for ps:n , but in many ways I hope they take some pages from Blizzards book and make the game accessible to more by not making it too next:gen .
Original ps dosen't have great graphics , but it still does the job. Re-skin it , new engine , advertisement , more variety and developement would make me happy for now.

The truth is they need to redo the station launcher, also on many of the mmo patch screens they need to not force Internet Explore. I do not use it and never will so the fact it loads it drives me nuts.