Am I the only one that missed PS1? [Archive]

Timealude

2012-12-18, 07:08 PM

The new game is beautiful, plays great, and I don't like it as much as Planetside 1. Yes, I know its new and advanced and it has more options, etc etc.

I hate the gameplay. I find myself as infantry spending more time walking about than I ever did in PS1. Also, its all twitch "if I see you first your dead" gameplay. I miss the strategy. I know whining doesn't help, but am I alone?:mad:

Oh yeah, those 1 shot sniper kills. It gets old after the 10th time in 20 minutes. Seriously.

Crap..it was supposed to say Misses, not missed in the title :(

only thing i miss really is the VR room, the sancs and a few of the vehicles like the wrath and the phantasm.

I love the new gunplay and net code now in this game, I stopped sniping in PS1 because even if you aimed at the head or tried to pull off really skilled shots it wouldnt matter. Now I can actually do those long range sniping shots that I love doing...Do I get head shots all the time? No but it gives a sense of satisfaction when you pull them off. I also hated being about a foot or 2 away from a mag rider in PS1 and still getting ran over simply because of the netcode not reading right.

Figment

2012-12-18, 08:00 PM

You're not alone, at all.

Rivenshield

2012-12-18, 08:22 PM

My feelings are mixed on the subject.

I want my old CE arsenal back in the worst possible way. I want a sanc with a VR range that'll let me test out any cert I want -- I think that would SELL bazillions of dollars in Station Cash. I'd like empire-specific buggies for the sheer fun factor. I'd appreciate an ever-so-slightly higher TTK for infantry across the board.

I think a dynamic lattice that tied bases together -- where the enemy could cap an outpost and interrupt your assault if you didn't resecure, and where the lines on the map would swap around every so often -- would contribute to strategic gameplay.

I want the stuff in my sig, badly, and am honestly afraid for the future of the franchise if they're not implemented *soon.*

I want the best of what made PS1 great lifted into the new one.

Would I prefer to play pre-BFR Planetside with full pops over what we have now....? Yes. Yes I would, warts and all.

Take all of that however you please.

AThreatToYou

2012-12-18, 08:54 PM

I hate the gameplay. I find myself as infantry spending more time walking about than I ever did in PS1. Also, its all twitch "if I see you first your dead" gameplay. I miss the strategy. I know whining doesn't help, but am I alone?:mad:

There is just as much strategy in PS2, if not more strategy than there was in PS1. The word you should instead use is that there is less tactics: Who sees who first will generally resolve 95% of firefights, a couple times you can strafe it out and make a comeback, but most of the time you're doomed.

Strategy is your plan. Planning in PS2 is essential because there is only a few seconds to deploy tactics.

Tactics is basically how you execute your plan.

This is how I argue that PS2 puts more stress on the strategy than the tactics, because flanking is rewarded more than it was in PS1 as you can take out targets almost instantly if they don't see you. My suggestion is for you to play more as a Light Assault and do more flanking; yes this game is very boring and excessively difficult if all you're trying to do is out-twitch your opponent (which will happen a lot if you're just boots). I'm not just telling you to "learn2play", I'm trying to describe what the difference is.

PS1 had a more even balance between actual combat and setting up the combat, as the game had a longer TTK and it was easier to attack from a distance, so thus there was a longer time over which tactics could be employed (as there is a potential to see more enemies the wider your engagement window is).

In PS2, combat is a lot more twitchy and close-quarters, encouraged by open bases with cover scattered basically everywhere. High-ground rewards more headshots and a lower likelihood that the zerglings will see you unless you shoot at them. Going up to CQC is a lot more risky as the battle-lines are a lot more dynamic and it's much harder to know how many enemies are around the next corner. Playing Light Assault will make it easier for you to flank that corner and control when and where you fight the bad guys, giving you an advantage in the twitchy environment. Hope that helps.

Darkvenom

2012-12-18, 10:27 PM

I'm waiting for them to make PS1 free....theres still so much PS2 needs for my liking that i got bored with it....i still play it, but not as much as i did from tech test to release.

Ghoest9

2012-12-18, 10:30 PM

How are you spending lots of time walking?

I play lone wolf and spend very little time walking - others than the actual base approaches which involve moving from cover to cover as you try to flank.

There is almost no travel time required. and when there is you can nearly always jump on an ATV.

I think you are looking for excuses to not like it.

Xaephod

2012-12-18, 10:35 PM

I've been playing PS2 since beta obviously, and I can list the things I dearly miss from PS1

1. Tower assaults. Drop a gal full of folks on a tower, hack the door and hold it. (Oh yeah, I miss the cloaker/hacker. I HATE cloaker/snipers).

2. CE! My first pick in PS2 was obviously the Engineer. I want to lay CE and do all that fun stuff engineers do. When I use a turret (Great idea) I get sniped literally in 3 seconds. So turrets are worthless.

3. Buggys! They were fun, empire specific. They were fun to drive, gun, and shoot at.

4. Lightenings...WTF OP? I don't recall a lightening being even with a prowler, but I see lightenings solo taking out a prowler.

4. Lightenings II. I want my goddam skyguard back! Lightenings are NOT skyguards!

5. I liked BFRs! I never piloted one, but I sure loved killing them. They were awesome (I mean I liked them!)

6. Old Osher was better than battle islands but it was overrated regardless :)

7. Sancs...they were awesome, they need to come back.

8. Instant action...seriously, when your in the middle of nowhere without a ride and you got 13 minutes left on your drop..You are SOL. Redeploy I guess, but damned I miss instance action with a random location where there is action! I don't want to think that much!

There's more, but I will post as I get pissed, log off and come here to whine.

/bow

Wahooo

2012-12-18, 11:37 PM

6. Old Osher was better than battle islands but it was overrated regardless :)

Makes me wonder if this is actually a good analogy to the whole PS1 v PS2 argument. Old oshur is missed and lamented more for the memories of what PS1 WAS and the fact that the battle islands represent the bending and the irreversible damage to the game.

PS1, overrated? Maybe. But I miss the things about it that were better put together than PS2 is currently.

I remain cynically hopeful. I see the potential that PS2 could become a game I enjoy more than PS1, but I remain cynical that SOE will actually succeed at that.

BTW I liked sniping in PS1 more than sniping in any other game ever. Epic shots in PS2? meh not really it either feels like luck (yes I headshotted a heavy running diagonally to me) or easymode lol headshots on the unawares. PS1? two shots on the spastic guy surging in light armor across the CY... hells yeah!

bpostal

2012-12-19, 12:21 AM

With PS2 in it's current state, I'd much rather play Planetside if both were f2p.

Roderick

2012-12-19, 12:26 AM

I'm waiting for them to make PS1 free....theres still so much PS2 needs for my liking that i got bored with it....i still play it, but not as much as i did from tech test to release.

I am in a similar boat. I have had no desire to stay logged on for more than a half hour most days. I find very little similar to PlanetSide 1 in this version except for a few legacy names that were ported over.

Using this brand new engine to remake PlanetSide 1 would have been awesome. Right now as it stands for me, this development was someone's bad idea to mesh in Battlefield and Call of Duty aspects to appeal to that fan base more and bring them over to this game.

At this rate, I do not see this game lasting one quarter of the time PlanetSide 1 did. I feel the Devs need to plan out their next steps carefully. If they release another continent that mirrors the same crap as the current three with a different skin, I foresee a sizable exodus of players and early server mergers.

duomaxwl

2012-12-19, 12:42 AM

I want my Phantasm.

Hmr85

2012-12-19, 02:23 AM

Yes, I do miss PS1.

Canaris

2012-12-19, 02:28 AM

I don't miss PS1 gunplay but I do miss most of the rest

Vashyo

2012-12-19, 02:36 AM

I miss it...

and because I've played it, it's ruined PS2 for me :(

ringring

2012-12-19, 05:19 AM

There is next to no strategy in PS2 and yes PS1 is a big miss.

Qwan

2012-12-19, 06:48 AM

I guess its safe to say alot of us miss our PS1 game play. I miss the fact that BR and CR ment something. They could give me BR 100 tomorrow in PS2 and it doesnt mean shit.

I miss the fact that I could move around certs in PS1, in PS2 the 100 certs I spent for 6 more 20mm rounds for my sundy (I should have read closer my fault) cannon are gone for ever WAISTED.

I miss my gen bust, and base drains and nanite buggys, fights in the tight confined hallways, thumpers, my VS max with the unique ability to use jump jets, I miss my AMS cloaking ability, My gale drops, which by the way are completly useless in PS2, you drop on a base, and half of you die when you hit the ground. I miss my sanctuary, I miss cont locks, and water, WTF happened to water, I think I found a small stream on Amerish :confused:, now if you get to close to the edge of continent, your out of bounds you have ten seconds. Hey maybe I just want to take my lib and just fly out over the water and just hang there and take in the view, and smoke a damn cig.

But I cant stop playing because I know the devs are doing everything they can to make this game better. Would I play PS1 if they made it free, hell yea I would even if its to log on and take my mag over some water just to sit there, and smoke my cig, and take in the view.

Strategy is dead in PS2, you can not defend a base, because when you think you got all exits and entrances coverered, you realise that you dont have enough people to cover all the damn holes. Even planning an attack on a base can not be done, unless you have an army and everything has to go perfect, but there is one way Follow the zerg and hope that there reading there chat box.

PS2 is a slug fest, and it will always come down to who has the biggest force, tactics and strategy have no say, and all you have to do is look at the pop on a continent. Most days I just go to the crown and farm certs, because at the moment its just fun doing so, but soon even that will get old.

Bags

2012-12-19, 07:54 AM

the only thing PS2 does better than PS1 is graphic quality

i can't think of a single thing I like more about PS2.

worse base design
worse balance
worse faction differentials
worse design on all vehicles, armor and guns
worse XP incentives (if that was possible...)
worse metagame
worse leadership abilities
worse UI
worse chat features
worse voice macros
worse voice acting (if that was possible...)
worse teamwork
worse payment structure
worse # of continents
worse performance
worse hacking
worse role fleshing out (ie cloakers being forced to snipe and not much else)
worse new player experience (again... wasn't sure this was possible)
worse XP sharing
worse TTK/gunplay (but this is the only thing on the list that's opinion)
worse specialization
worse vehicle spam
worse music

ETC etc etc

And before you write me off as "lel bitter vet LEL XD REDDIT #1 LOL LEl" I have some friends who are new to the game (PS as a whole) and they think PS1 is a lot better in most of those categories from what they've heard / seen on youtube.

ps2 is so far dumbed down. best KD I could manage in PS1 is like 5 - 6/1. In PS2 I've gotten like 16 deaths in my last 1k kills. that's a KD of 62.5 in a vehicle! just lol

Sturmhardt

2012-12-19, 08:07 AM

Yeah.. except from graphics and gunplay PS2 is a step back in pretty much every aspect, you are not alone...

belch

2012-12-19, 08:16 AM

Initially, I was regretting that I'd never gotten into PS1. I think I was playing JO at the time...which I loved...but anyways...

At this point, I'm kind of glad I didn't play it. I'm not in a position to agree, or disagree, with what was better about PS1. I do know that I am having a good time in PS2. I get killed frequently enough that I have to stay on my toes. I have run into some occasional shadiness, but really...it is a much rarer event than I have experienced in other shooters.

Maybe it helps that I came to this game without any expectations, either way. For you PS1 vets that are disappointed, I feel for you. I pretty much left the BF series as I lost faith with the devs direction for the series. So, I think I can relate somewhat. But, I'd petition you to stick it out. The devs seem to be much more responsive to player requests in this game. They haven't already announced the PS3 beta, pretty much signalling the end of work on the current game. From a gamers perspective, it gets a lot worse than what we have in PS2.

Just my .02

Darkvenom

2012-12-19, 08:56 AM

Sony likes 10 year plans so I would imagine it will get somewhat better with time, but there is so much little things and content from PS1 that worked great. I miss Reks and hacking and holding control consoles with a timer for those last minute cloaker saves, LLU runs, miss cloakers and engineers being more meaningful, bases with better defense, a true skyguard that scares the shit out of air, buggies, sancs, meaningful BR and getting CR when you actually lead a squad and not just use cert points to get it. Like everyone else has said there are so many things and it still feels like a Battlefield clone to me.

Calisai

2012-12-19, 09:23 AM

I miss having actual objectives. They need to hurry up with the extra conts so we can lock them and knock factions off em. Right now it feels like a frag-fest. No real reason to work on grabbing territory other than picking a fight.

I also miss the longer TTK fights. I'm adapting to the new twitch fights, but I don't find them as rewarding.

I miss being able to walk up a hill without having problems. It seems like they want to control the flow of vehicles and battle so much using terrain that it is annoying. I try and flank the battle as an infantry.. and can't because of all the cliffs and canyons and stuff stopping me. What is with all the damn paths that lead up a cliff that you can't make it up the last friggin 10 feet. Spend 5 minutes working your way up... and can't make the top because of a 6 foot jump. Can't an infantry climb a bit?

I feel like if I want to footzerg, I either need to take the roads (and get run over by tanks) or use LA so I can actually get places.

Aaron

2012-12-19, 09:45 AM

Qwan

2012-12-19, 10:01 AM

Guys, I think the game needs time. I'm sure the devs realize that PS2 lacks the depth of play that the original possessed and are working on it. Meta-game is right up there on their priority list along with optimization and bugs.

After the 4th cont is finished, I'm hoping they can start working on the bases.

Your right Aaron... Your right, that is one thing PS2 will have in common with PS1, its gonna take time to get things balanced out. PS1 started out very unbalanced, but over time they got it close to right. But I just have to add on more thing I miss........

WHY THE FUCK CANT THE PLATOON LEADER WRITE ON THE DAMN MAP.

In PS1 you could write on the map so that the damn PLT could get a general Idea of the route, and the base to be attacked. I was told they didnt add it because users were writing penises on the map, then just turn off the damn graphics. Is it to much to ask to be able to write on the map so that your Platoon can see the route and plan of attack.

:mad: ok.. ok.. let me calm down. :) who do I have to talk to to get them to maybe consider adding this feature back in.

Rolfski

2012-12-19, 10:03 AM

Qwan

2012-12-19, 10:09 AM

Please, not another one of these tiring PS2-should-be-more-like-PS1 discussions. Do a search on this dead-horse-beaten topic please before starting one. No reason to start over the exact same boring discussion every week.

How many times of copy-paste discussions does it take for you people to understand that many PS1 features will be added over time? As has always been the plan of the devs.

O god not another one of these "Im tired of hearing the same thread over again" comments. Im so tired of reading someone post the same cut and pasts comment on a post they dont like. There so boring and take up space, then they always end it with a sentence that have no truth at all. :doh:

RodenyC

2012-12-19, 10:13 AM

The game needs time
I swear I'm gonna lose it if I hear this one more time.First it was "the game is in alpha it can change." Then it was "The game is in beta they'll fix it." Now it's "the game needs time"Don't get me wrong I wasn't expecting PS2 to be perfect but for fuck sake it could had been decent at the release.The devs listen to the community? No they fucking don't.What the hell have they changed? We as a community have been saying since CLOSED FUCKING BETA that shit needs to be changed.Yet what do they do? They go with a month after beta release.A month?!?! What the hell were they thinking? Why would you want to release a F2P game around the Call of Duty Release?God how stupid was that? Then we get the excuses.The game needs time? No the game needs people to go to SOE and slap some fucking sense into the Devs and fucking Smed.Make them actually read these forums because even though they say they do I truly don't believe they don't.They just say what we want to hear.I'm tired of the BS.Really tired.I had such high hopes.Such high hopes for this game.But ever since I've played the close beta I wanna punch my screen in.Same when I see some post about a dev saying blah blah needs time blah blah we listen to the community blah blah blah crap.No you had time and you didn't use it like you were suppose to.I doubt I'm the only one who wouldn't had been upset if they released it in Dec. Am I?

/end rage rant

Crator

2012-12-19, 10:18 AM

^ The amount of technical issues (crashing and optimizing for lower end systems) took up way too much of the devs time during beta imo. On top of that they signed documents that are bound to law which stated they must release on a specific date.

Back on topic though, yes, I do miss PS1.

Qwan

2012-12-19, 10:31 AM

I swear I'm gonna lose it if I hear this one more time.First it was "the game is in alpha it can change." Then it was "The game is in beta they'll fix it." Now it's "the game needs time"Don't get me wrong I wasn't expecting PS2 to be perfect but for fuck sake it could had been decent at the release.The devs listen to the community? No they fucking don't.What the hell have they changed? We as a community have been saying since CLOSED FUCKING BETA that shit needs to be changed.Yet what do they do? They go with a month after beta release.A month?!?! What the hell were they thinking? Why would you want to release a F2P game around the Call of Duty Release?God how stupid was that? Then we get the excuses.The game needs time? No the game needs people to go to SOE and slap some fucking sense into the Devs and fucking Smed.Make them actually read these forums because even though they say they do I truly don't believe they don't.They just say what we want to hear.I'm tired of the BS.Really tired.I had such high hopes.Such high hopes for this game.But ever since I've played the close beta I wanna punch my screen in.Same when I see some post about a dev saying blah blah needs time blah blah we listen to the community blah blah blah crap.No you had time and you didn't use it like you were suppose to.I doubt I'm the only one who wouldn't had been upset if they released it in Dec. Am I?

/end rage rant

LMFAO :rofl: this reminds me of the gamefly commercial, just be greatful you didnt buy the game. Or you would be in Gamestop throwing the display threw the window. :lol:

belch

2012-12-19, 10:42 AM

Captain1nsaneo

2012-12-19, 11:24 AM

Well, I can certainly see how much better PS1 must have been to have inculcated within its playerbase a deeper understanding of long term strategy and the strata of warfare...

sheesh

Or is that some undiscovered tenet of Clausewitz or Sun Tzu...the 'hold your breath and make a scene' gambit?

Relax man. It's a video game. If you find yourself literally about to lose it, then yes...you have lost it.

Eh, it's a combination of ps1 vets being jaded from years of promises with little action and the deep seated loyalty to the game that makes us over react. Due to our collective past with SOE and its handling of planetside we've learned that only by yelling really loudly can we get anything even remotely glanced at. This obviously isn't healthy for either side and this dev team seems to really want to be connected to the community for better or worse so it shouldn't be needed. But the team has an uphill fight on its hands as unless we hear them talk like "We know X is missing/unbalanced." rather than "We need time to develop the game." we're probably going to keep yelling as we don't think they actually know about the issue despite whatever they say.

Also the talk about "They'll fix this latter on, they have to as it's too obvious a problem for them to not know about." doesn't sit well with me. The reason for this is in the few times I've had the privilege/opportunity to put questions to Mr. Higby he seemed to be ignorant of issues that I considered as obvious as an elephant in a bathtub. I imagine this is mainly due to him having to deal with a hundred man team and trying to keep them all functioning as human beings which is harder than making any game. Do the devs actually know about the current gameplay problems besides bugs and crash reports? I don't know, I haven't seen anything indicating they have.

The devs and community seem to be on different pages and due to that communication problem we default to the standard method of trying to get a point across. Namely being excessively loud and with exaggerated flailings.

belch

2012-12-19, 12:02 PM

I can, and do, understand. Even being fairly new to the series, I can identify some things that could use some tweaking and fixing. Maybe you're right...the devs might not be seeing the same things that we do as players. At the same time, it seems there is a lot of plain old banter...whining, for lack of a better term...that is based solely and wholly on a player wanting his preferred 'insert class/weapon/vehicle/aircraft' to reign supreme with little threat. Not exactly constructive, and definitely not making it any easier for the real issues to be identified, much less fixed.

Like I posted earlier, I can sympathize. However, those who find themselves posting only angry, loud and spiteful posts should take a look at what they appear like from an outside observers POV. Several posts have made me think that if I was a dev, I would never listen to this irrationally, incoherently angry person.

p0intman

2012-12-19, 06:20 PM

strategy being repeatedly nerfed into the ground in ps2 is its major downside. im pretty sure that if ps1 goes free to play soon, the majority of PG will jump back to that and say to hell with ps2.
I can, and do, understand. Even being fairly new to the series, I can identify some things that could use some tweaking and fixing. Maybe you're right...the devs might not be seeing the same things that we do as players.

This might be borderline breaking PG's circle of trust, but I do know for a fact that some devs do see what players see. We've had them on mumble with us and in squad with us since launch. I know Arclegger was running around post launch with his own squad on Connery. Higby played with us in Beta, and he knows how typical players see things. So, it isn't that they don't see what we see. Suggesting they see different things is almost absurd.

Its that they want different things for the game than we do. Its unfortunate, but I'm pretty much OK with letting this franchise murder itself like this.

sylphaen

2012-12-19, 06:43 PM

Its unfortunate, but I'm pretty much OK with letting this franchise murder itself like this.

Yet who will still dare taking the risks to create a decent MMOFPS if PS2 fails ?

It's still unknown if Blizzard is still on their MMOFPS project and if they will have enough know-how to make it work out.

SOE has 10+ years of experience with their MMOFPS and yet important aspects are missing in PS2. Will Blizzard pull off with their PS-like game the same polish they created with WoW when they evolved the Everquest-like games?

The future holds our answer.

p0intman

2012-12-19, 06:45 PM

Yet who will still dare taking the risks to create a decent MMOFPS if PS2 fails ?

It's still unknown if Blizzard is still on their MMOFPS project and if they will have enough know-how to make it work out.

SOE has 10+ years of experience with their MMOFPS and yet important aspects are missing in PS2. Will Blizzard pull off with their PS-like game the same polish they created with WoW when they evolved the Everquest-like games?

The future holds our answer.
fun tidbit: I'm considering starting up a PG squad on a Day-z server somewhere. that might legitimately be my alternative for a while til smed breaks down and makes ps1 free. At least instead of being camped by tanks and libs, ill be camped by zombies and no-skill idiots who cant kill anything that returns fire~ /sarcasm

Wahooo

2012-12-19, 06:57 PM

Its that they want different things for the game than we do. Its unfortunate, but I'm pretty much OK with letting this franchise murder itself like this.

See there is a difference between what people WANT and what will WORK. There is a LOT of stuff people want. Hell some people simply want a graphics update of PS1 and that is all. That is absurd of course it WILL be a different game and that should be fine. IF those different mechanics WORKED.

As I posted in another thread the frustrating part, the reason these threads are constantly being created is the poor attempts at re-inventing the wheel. They aren't complete changes in the game, it is trying to do the same thing, just with some kind of unique spin. The problem is, this change for change sake often doesn't make sense.

Take the Galaxy for example. Remember back pre-Alpha the suggestion of no land based AMS, only the Galaxy? The suggestions about AMS's? And squad spawning? The PS1 vets complained NOT because it was different (well some did) but because it was not a good mechanic, or good change for the game. The Devs pushed on and look what happened a month into Beta they saw what we were saying. This is the frustrating part. Taking a bunch of play time and whining and bitching by the players to finally see what WE have said was not going to work a LONG time ago.

p0intman

2012-12-19, 07:01 PM

See there is a difference between what people WANT and what will WORK. There is a LOT of stuff people want. Hell some people simply want a graphics update of PS1 and that is all. That is absurd of course it WILL be a different game and that should be fine. IF those different mechanics WORKED.

As I posted in another thread the frustrating part, the reason these threads are constantly being created is the poor attempts at re-inventing the wheel. They aren't complete changes in the game, it is trying to do the same thing, just with some kind of unique spin. The problem is, this change for change sake often doesn't make sense.

Take the Galaxy for example. Remember back pre-Alpha the suggestion of no land based AMS, only the Galaxy? The suggestions about AMS's? And squad spawning? The PS1 vets complained NOT because it was different (well some did) but because it was not a good mechanic, or good change for the game. The Devs pushed on and look what happened a month into Beta they saw what we were saying. This is the frustrating part. Taking a bunch of play time and whining and bitching by the players to finally see what WE have said was not going to work a LONG time ago.
you preached to the choir.

Captain1nsaneo

2012-12-19, 09:13 PM

This might be borderline breaking PG's circle of trust, but I do know for a fact that some devs do see what players see. We've had them on mumble with us and in squad with us since launch. I know Arclegger was running around post launch with his own squad on Connery. Higby played with us in Beta, and he knows how typical players see things. So, it isn't that they don't see what we see. Suggesting they see different things is almost absurd.

Its that they want different things for the game than we do. Its unfortunate, but I'm pretty much OK with letting this franchise murder itself like this.

I've had the pleasure of playing with a dev or two and they do see problems but often the problem isn't in their area and they have no say over it. That's why I default to looking to their chief and seeing what he thinks is important. However, I really don't have any idea what they are aiming for in their game. I don't know what they're prioritizing, what mechanics they're aiming to promote or make key, or what experience they're trying to craft. I can think of 4 or 5 things that could be core but are pretty stubby right now. The only thing that's fully developed is the technical side in supporting a huge number of players per server with beautiful graphics. But that's a tech demo, not a game mechanic.

See there is a difference between what people WANT and what will WORK. There is a LOT of stuff people want. Hell some people simply want a graphics update of PS1 and that is all. That is absurd of course it WILL be a different game and that should be fine. IF those different mechanics WORKED.

As I posted in another thread the frustrating part, the reason these threads are constantly being created is the poor attempts at re-inventing the wheel. They aren't complete changes in the game, it is trying to do the same thing, just with some kind of unique spin. The problem is, this change for change sake often doesn't make sense.

Take the Galaxy for example. Remember back pre-Alpha the suggestion of no land based AMS, only the Galaxy? The suggestions about AMS's? And squad spawning? The PS1 vets complained NOT because it was different (well some did) but because it was not a good mechanic, or good change for the game. The Devs pushed on and look what happened a month into Beta they saw what we were saying. This is the frustrating part. Taking a bunch of play time and whining and bitching by the players to finally see what WE have said was not going to work a LONG time ago.

Took a lot of those words right out of my mouth. The "Reinvent the wheel" problem has been in my mind ever since we got the announcement. I really don't want them to have to relearn old lessons so they can spend their limited time on working on new ideas without having to repeat mistakes. The gal being the only mobile spawn point really was the most obvious example of this. However, my optimistic bits want to remind me that for every problem that the community called there were also a ton of posts that were absolutely stupid.

Beerbeer

2012-12-19, 09:21 PM

I think the biggest problem is they tried to simplify classes to "attract" the cod/bf crowd, but neglected the critical point of entry in regards to simplicity and general attractiveness. They thought, "oh, we'll make a class system like those games and those players will come...we'll simplify things."

Such great thinking.

Forget the fact that maybe those "other" players, if given a chance, would actually LIKE the customization ability, like we did? They thought one simple change would do wonders, but put no effort into how new players would first perceive and interact with the game. The burden of entry was and is too high. Everything is too damn complicated and not explained for crap. Pure genius.

They also forgot about the fact that vehicles are non-existent or are at least not as predominant as this game. What a rude awakening trying to fight like those popular games only to get one-shot into oblivion.

Rolfski

2012-12-20, 12:23 AM

O god not another one of these "Im tired of hearing the same thread over again" comments. Im so tired of reading someone post the same cut and pasts comment on a post they dont like. There so boring and take up space, then they always end it with a sentence that have no truth at all. :doh:Well, it's quite telling that the I'm-getting-bored-over-the-same-discussions-over-and-over-again statements are getting bored in itself, isn't it? But feel free to keep entertaining yourself, complaining over the same issues week after week. Or maybe do as a lot of PS1 veterans in my outfit are doing: Just enjoy the game as it is now and have a little faith in the devs and the future of this game.

Wahooo

2012-12-20, 12:32 AM

have a little faith in the devs and the future of this game.

Because with their track record so far this is obviously called for.

EVILoHOMER

2012-12-20, 01:47 AM

Qwan

2012-12-20, 05:46 AM

Well, it's quite telling that the I'm-getting-bored-over-the-same-discussions-over-and-over-again statements are getting bored in itself, isn't it? But feel free to keep entertaining yourself, complaining over the same issues week after week. Or maybe do as a lot of PS1 veterans in my outfit are doing: Just enjoy the game as it is now and have a little faith in the devs and the future of this game.

Im just picking with you Rolf, Im just saying you cant just walk into a room with a bunch of old people talking and tell us to change the subject. Were having a whin setion, if you like please input whins with us, and well all whin together. :groovy: But you also gotta realise this is how devs work, if you complain about somthing once, they may not notice, but if its plastered all over a sight that you know they go to get imput, they may put more thought into changing somthing into the right direction. This is why you see alot of the same things in differrent threads, its not really whining its saying hey, there are alot of people who want this, could you guys at least think about making this change. They designed PS2 and alot of the problems there having, we PS1 vets had to deal with threw PS1 launch. Were just a little upset with the fact that they fixed a problem back in PS1 but for some reason they didnt learn from that lesson, so now were going threw it again.

Qwan

2012-12-20, 06:11 AM

Planetside had a better flow to it and it was a better game for its day than Planetside 2 is. The problem with Planetside now is it is so dated, if they just created the same game on a new engine with updated physics then I'd prefer it. I went back to playing it for a month in 2010 and had a blast, I would have kept playing it but there was hardly any one around.

MAX Units were actually fun to use too.

Yea I agree there with you HOMER, my entire outfit had a PS1 Weekend in like april 2011, it was a blast, we had alot of fun, there wasnt as many fights as we wanted, but it was fun when we did find them. If you would like to check it out its on Youtube, TNGC planetside.

For me when the layout of PS2 was put out, I didnt like it, the class system, cert system, but I can understand why they did it. The gaming community has changed, I mean if they just built the game around just what we liked they wouldnt have a bigger audience they would just have use, and there is no growth in that. So they had to design PS2 with some of the old, and with (IMO) alot of the new. The class system is a BF/CoD hybrid system (this is new), the free to play concepts :rolleyes:, the cert system was a hydrid as well, but these systems were implemented to draw in a newer gamer who is used to these types of mechanics in a FPS. Now for us vets who are used to PS1 they added stuff like familier bases, continents, vehicles and weapons. I think there is more to come in the future, and alot is going to be PS1 based ideas and mechanics I believe. I think the buggy as well as MAX ability's like the TR lock down, If you look at the lower legs of the TR MAX they have the spikes for it. The VS MAX, temp rocket boost, look at the back of the VS MAX, those look like booster rockets. I do think there is alot more to come. But being as the game requires alot of thinking and the interface is a little over whelming I think there feeding the new guys a little at a time.

Rolfski

2012-12-20, 12:59 PM

Im just picking with you Rolf, Im just saying you cant just walk into a room with a bunch of old people talking and tell us to change the subject. Were having a whin setion, if you like please input whins with us, and well all whin together. :groovy: But you also gotta realise this is how devs work, if you complain about somthing once, they may not notice, but if its plastered all over a sight that you know they go to get imput, they may put more thought into changing somthing into the right direction. This is why you see alot of the same things in differrent threads, its not really whining its saying hey, there are alot of people who want this, could you guys at least think about making this change. They designed PS2 and alot of the problems there having, we PS1 vets had to deal with threw PS1 launch. Were just a little upset with the fact that they fixed a problem back in PS1 but for some reason they didnt learn from that lesson, so now were going threw it again.
Well, I could start a new thread every week:"The new player experience sucks!" It would always be a guaranteed discussion with a lot of people complaining, because it does suck. But guess what? There's no need to restart this discussion over and over again because SOE knows it, they acknowledge it and they will change it.

Same goes for this discussion. Feel free to keep complaining if that keeps you happy but it's not that SOE isn't aware of all this and therefore you must repeat yourselves.

Also, many of these complainers just keep failing to see that SOE had complete different goals in mind with PS 2: Designing a PS 1.5 just wouldn't have worked. This game is designed as a massive, persistent multiplayer shooter at it's core with additional strategy added on top of it at a later stage. Targeted initially at the casual fps crowd.
It is NOT designed as a geeky, hardcore, MMO strategy game in a shooter format. Targeted at the hardcore crowd only.

If you keep this in mind than suddenly it becomes a lot more sensible why many PS1 elements haven't initially made it into this game.

Naj

2012-12-20, 10:04 PM

I've more or less stopped playing PS2 already. Every time I log in I look at the map for a few seconds, go 'eh' and log out. I feel like a dunce for buying a 6 month sub but I guess everyone makes bad purchases at some point.

I'd love it if they made PS1 F2P though. That one free month they gave everyone right before tech-test was a blast.

Wahooo

2012-12-20, 10:28 PM

Also, many of these complainers just keep failing to see that SOE had complete different goals in mind with PS 2: Designing a PS 1.5 just wouldn't have worked. This game is designed as a massive, persistent multiplayer shooter at it's core with additional strategy added on top of it at a later stage. Targeted initially at the casual fps crowd.

Um... that is no different than PS1. It would seem they have the same goals.

The complaint is: "with additional strategy added on top of it"
Doesn't exist and the model from PS1 is a good one so why ignore it?

I said this in another thread but a lot of PS1 vets know and understand and are not actually complaining that simply a graphics update would be good enough. When PS2 was first announced 2+ years ago BEFORE we knew anything about what the game would be like, there were tons of threads popping up like
"DON"T KEEP THIS IN GAME"
"Biggest mistakes of PS1"
"The things from PS1 we DON"T want to see"

Now, since Beta you don't find those threads because... well we know what isn't there and other than BFR's there really isn't much that was bad with PS1 that we can realistically be afraid will somehow find its way into PS2.
What we do see, however is a lot of GOOD from PS1 that headscratchingly is not in this game. Not everything, not the SAME game with updated graphics, we just look and say... "hey this was part of what made PS1 awesome and it would fit really well in this game... why isn't it in there?"

So you can keep getting offended at these threads, but it is part natural order, people not being able to let go of the past, and their memories are clouded and they remember the good more than the bad, and part simply criticizing issues with the current game from a proper frame of reference. It is only natural that ANYTHING part 2 is compared to the original. When the good parts of the original are left off we are sad, or confused or angry and when something new reminds us of that we tell others who we feel will share our pain. Planetside Universe is the natural place for that lamenting.

Babyfark McGeez

2012-12-21, 09:26 AM

Yeah PS2 got boring quickly, i allready forget to log in once a day to keep my passive certgain up.

It also got a bit old to re-state the known problems / lack of important features most of us agree with over and over again in the hopes the devs see it and / or use common sense instead of trial and error in their approach.

And when you think too much about it, PS2 really can feel more like a tech demo to show off what the forgelight engine can do then an actual standalone game (like someone mentioned earlier).
And that's an impression they should try to avoid imo. :p

Beerbeer

2012-12-21, 11:07 AM

Ps2's vehicle-heavy content just gets boring, faster. I have no desire to play infantry in this game at all as I don't enjoy getting spawn camped or one-shot from a one-man vehicle. The alternative? Get in a vehicle! Cripes. There's no variety in content. You cannot choose on a whim to comfortably play infantry or vehicles, it's very lopsided.

Ps1 had a much better vehicle/infantry mix than this game. I'm not sure what game they are trying to model this after? It's like they took the worst elements of ps1, bf3 and cod and mashed them together into this game.

Rolfski

2012-12-21, 03:48 PM

Um... that is no different than PS1. It would seem they have the same goals. I dare to differ, PS1 fps mechanics were not good, even for it's time. It was not a true fps at it's core, like BF/CS/COD where at the time. It's the other mechanics they wanted to make a difference with.

The complaint is: "with additional strategy added on top of it"
Doesn't exist.... You forgot to quote "at a later stage".

....What we do see, however is a lot of GOOD from PS1 that headscratchingly is not in this game. Not everything, not the SAME game with updated graphics, we just look and say... "hey this was part of what made PS1 awesome and it would fit really well in this game... why isn't it in there?"

Some of you guys have a tunnel vision, really: You keep circling around the same question over and over again while refusing to listen to answers that have been given many, many times. Let me, once again, try to help you with the answer but it will probably get lost in the "tunnel". Therefore, forgive me the capitals, I can't think of anything else to prevent it from being lost in this "tunnel".
Why is PS1 feature XYZ not in this game?

It probably won't work
As said above, this is a different game with different goals, targeted at a different audience from a different gaming generation.
Which means that many of the strategy elements PS1 vets seem so drooling about, probably wouldn't work if copy-pasted into PS2.
Some questionable examples below [insert endless discussion]. The fact that they are questionable is reason enough for not having them implemented in this game atm, imo:

Lattice system. The current hex system could use more focus but a 1 to 1 copy of the lattice system seems like a bad idea with so many players on a single continent. Too tight and limited and it feels "old" as well compared to more "modern" hex system.
Class system. The modern fps crowd is used to the power and flexibility to play any role right of the bat at any time. And they are are used to playing classes. PS1 system is not better in this regard.
Gunner/driver seats. As a BF3 player (= target audience PS2) I would hate such a system, enough said.
Ant runs/ pure logistics roles. This might work for a MMO crowd, not so much for a fps audience. Most fps people want to be empowered to pilot something that can fight back.

It will be added later
Wake up guys, forget the PS1 format. This game was made around a whole new philosophy and business model. They're giving us a bare bones shooter for us to mold into a game as hardcore and big as we want, as long as we're throwing Smedbucks at it. Check my signature if you want to know more about how this works. It basically means that if we want feature XYZ, we will get it at some point.

So you can keep getting offended at these threads, but it is part natural order, people not being able to let go of the past, and their memories are clouded and they remember the good more than the bad, and part simply criticizing issues with the current game from a proper frame of reference. It is only natural that ANYTHING part 2 is compared to the original. When the good parts of the original are left off we are sad, or confused or angry and when something new reminds us of that we tell others who we feel will share our pain. Planetside Universe is the natural place for that lamenting.
I'm not offended, I can actually appreciate the spirit and passion many of these PS1 vets have for their beloved game. But the same discussion over and over again does get annoying, I must admit.
However, there's light at the end of the tunnel (vision). Since launch these "nostalgic whinings" have become far less frequent. Almost as if many of these disappointed vets have started to judge this game on its own merits :)

Hamma

2012-12-21, 04:15 PM

There's still lots of mechanics that could come from PS1 to PS2 and work. There's plenty that won't either.. nobody wants the TTK and COF model of PS1 but PS1 vets.

Rolfski

2012-12-21, 04:49 PM

There's still lots of mechanics that could come from PS1 to PS2 and work.Yup, so these make a good chance of being added later to the game in some form.

Bags

2012-12-21, 08:05 PM

There's still lots of mechanics that could come from PS1 to PS2 and work. There's plenty that won't either.. nobody wants the TTK and COF model of PS1 but PS1 vets.

And a couple of my friends.

But I'm sure you know everyone's opinion? ;)

Yup, so these make a good chance of being added later to the game in some form.

as long as it isn't dead by then

artifice

2012-12-21, 09:22 PM

PS1 fanboys are agitated again. If you don't like PS2, don't play it.

SGTHACK

2012-12-21, 09:53 PM

I find myself defending warpgates all of the time. One faction will show up and loose all of their stuff to AA and tank rounds from with in the shield. Then they retreat and it goes on and on. If one joins a zerg it is like being with an ant colony. I hope it gets better.....

PredatorFour

2012-12-22, 10:47 AM

PS1 fanboys are agitated again. If you don't like PS2, don't play it.

You sir are a troll posting that in this thread. Just couldnt resist could you ? lol.

I miss ps 1, it was superior in not only the meta game but for having FUN.

I enjoy ps 2 i really do but theres issues here that would be sorted if it were a true sequel to the original and not a new game by itself.

-Tank spam would be sorted by having dedicated driver/gunner teams ( which was the most funnest part of ps 1 for me) you could give both driver and gunner same xp for each kill. (could also add this to the buggies too which were ace)

-Decent AA for infantry/vehicles would stop airside as it currently is. Would also bring back more hate tells which i miss personally;)

-Combat engineering would drastically help the infantry to deal with enemy vehicles in the field and in bases. Hell even jammers would be a MASSIVE help .... Jammers ?!?!

Could probably come up with more but there`s no point.

Crator

2012-12-22, 10:54 AM

PS1 fanboys are agitated again. If you don't like PS2, don't play it.

You sir are a troll posting that in this thread. Just couldnt resist could you ? lol.

This is what was typically spouted at vets on the PS2 forums during beta and after release. There's not too many vets that post there anymore now though so don't see it too much anymore...

Wahooo

2012-12-22, 06:40 PM

It will be added later :)

SOE doesn't have the best track record in making major changes to their games that actually improve them. Adding tactical play is major. We're at the very least going to be cynical about this.

I'm judging it on its own merit. BORING AS FUCK WITH 60-70% of one empire choosing their own continent to ghost cap and avoid fighting. Caused by the lack of strategy. Not just the PS1 vets bored by this. They are going to need to do something if the game is going to make it to "later".

Rolfski

2012-12-22, 07:43 PM

SOE doesn't have the best track record in making major changes to their games that actually improve them.This is one of the major thought mistakes I see many PS 1 veterans make every time. The business model has changed completely and many of you guys just don't seem to realize this. So let me spell it out loud for you once again:

To earn them any money on this game SOE needs to keep us engaged
Only then they will earn their money back. This is not your average shooter that makes its profit in the first weeks after release before moving on to the next one. It's F2P, they need a constant rate for us to throw Smedbucks at it to become successful and this will only happen if they keep the game fresh.

Xaephod

2012-12-23, 12:41 AM

I am glad to see that many of you agree with me. As far back as a couple of years ago when PS2 was just rumor, I was saying to my outfit that all SOE needs to do it just remake PS1 with a new engine, it would be amazing because it wasn't the graphics that made the game last 10 years, it was the gameplay. Even with a small amount of people on, it was fun and there was a lot do to. Each class was necessary. Each vehicle had its special abilities and having a large tank/air battle was just awesome.

In PS2, it feels like BF3 with a Planetside theme. I knew SOE was going to make it completely different, and as great as the game looks, the core of the game, the same thing that makes PS1 fun makes PS2 less fun.

The last month of PS1 when it was packed with more people than I have seen in years was the most fun I've had online in a long long time, period! More fun than I ever had in WOW, more fun than EQ, DAOC, or any of the pvp games I have played over the many many years (All the way back to MUDS).

Listen, I don't have a solution. I'm just here to bitch and whine, its like therapy. But at least I'm not alone, and in that I know that my gripe is legitimate.

Thanks guys, its nice to see everyone here.

GhostofMachas (So damned close to air defender gold! :( )
Xaephod
PriestofSyrinx

p.s. See ya in PS2...and if we can get 100 folks to play PS1, let me know...I still pay the subscription.

Captain1nsaneo

2012-12-23, 01:47 AM

If you don't like PS2, don't play it.

What's reaching my ears is that people are doing just that. It's not good news and it should be aggressively worked on. Eve has been around for quite a while and managed to grow rather than shrink and there's no reason that PS2 can't do so as well seeing as it's the only mmofps out there like eve is the only mmoships.

Mox

2012-12-23, 02:10 AM

Ps1 was great but its time is over. It will never get the number of players to be fun again.
My hopes lie in the future of ps2. Now ps2 is already fun but it dont offer enough to hold me longer than one or two months more.

Electrofreak

2012-12-23, 09:43 AM

Things I miss about PS1:

The XP system. See signature.
Defensible bases and towers. A lot of PS1 combat occurred inside buildings. Whether it was a tower or the back door of a base, it created choke points that made bases defensible. And there was always that oh shi- moment when a MAX crash hit that doorway your outfit was holding down.
Hacking. Doors that had to be hacked provided defenders with a way to slow down the attacking force. It took several seconds to hack open a door or a control panel, and if you got shot, it was interrupted.
Minefields. A couple mines wouldn't blow up your tank, but you were more likely to hit them because people could deploy multiples.
Boomers, instead of C4. I know they're essentially the same thing, I just hate it being called C4. This is the freakin' future, damnit!
Assault Buggies. Death traps, but fun as hell to drive and gun. If you were skilled, you could wrack up some good kills!
Activated implants and the stamina system. You had to make trade-offs when you picked your implants, and a degree of skill was needed to use your implants without running out of stamina and leaving your character moving at a snail's pace.
The VR area. You could practice your flying (which was albiet much simpler) or test out different weapons, vehicles, and armor without having to spend certification points on it first.
The classless system. You could customize the role of your character; if you wanted to be sniper and still carry a rocket launcher, you could. This really only became a problem after SOE increased the battle ranks and everyone started carrying the same all-purpose loadouts.
Driver/gunner tanks. If you wanted to roll an MBT, you had to commit TWO players to operate it, as the driver only drove. This circles back to the XP system as XP was shared, so the driver got XP for his gunner's kills.
No killboards, K/D stats whoring. It's out of control and has no real bearing upon skill.
Unusual weapons. I LOVED the Rocklet Rifle. It wasn't a great weapon overall (took a full clip to kill someone) but it was versatile and compact. Then you had low-damage AoE weapons like the Thumper and Radiator that worked well for area denial, shotgun pistols, machine pistols useable by any faction, camera-guided rockets (which were admittedly exploited), energy lash weapons, etc. It was much more interesting than the array of carbines and rifles in PS2 now.

There's a lot I like about PS2, but there's a lot that could be made better by using elements from PS1.