Is SOE trying to force the game into a predictable pattern?

VioletZero · 2012-03-27, 10:27 PM

To spin off of the many threads surrounding the sanctuary debate, I think there's a bigger issue here that needs to be looked at. Which is the possibility that SOE is trying to force the game into a predictable pattern.

The reason you would do this is because it makes the game accessible for newcomers. It's sort of like how comic books are scary for new readers because development happened when they weren't around and they would feel very alienated in a world that evolved without them.

My friend has repeatedly said that he isn't into EVE Online because the game is too developed. Personally I think the history in EVE Online makes the game all the richer.

When the game is in a predictable pattern, it also makes it much easier to design around. And much easier to "jump into."

Here I am saying: NO! Please don't do this. There are other ways to make your game accessible than forcing the game into a predictable pattern. Let the game evolve and form its personality. That's what makes MMOs unique. Don't make this "Larger scale Battlefield."

Stardouser · 2012-03-27, 10:31 PM

Newcomers don't stay newcomers for very long, but the noobifications that are inflicted upon the game never go away even long after they stop being noobs.

CutterJohn · 2012-03-27, 10:56 PM

What do you mean by a predictable pattern?

VioletZero · 2012-03-27, 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

What do you mean by a predictable pattern?

What I mean is that they won't let the game's content evolve beyond what it is when the content launches. Every day it will be a pattern of take whatever objectives are closest to you. There won't be a greater sense of scale or purpose because the game won't let you actually change the environment around you much.

If players are allowed to change the environment around them, newcomers might be scared off.

CutterJohn · 2012-03-27, 11:04 PM

They've hinted at being able to drop in towers and whatnot in the future. And they've also said they have a great many plans for continued development past release.

Stardouser · 2012-03-27, 11:08 PM

Just out of curiosity, did SOE change PS1 over time as much as they did Everquest?

Sirisian · 2012-03-27, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

What I mean is that they won't let the game's content evolve beyond what it is when the content launches. Every day it will be a pattern of take whatever objectives are closest to you. There won't be a greater sense of scale or purpose because the game won't let you actually change the environment around you much.

You described PS1. At its core Planetside 1/2 is an FPS. Players are expected to be able to jump into the game almost casually. That is expecting a normal person to play for 5 hours might be unreasonable.

When you say keeping things "predictable" I view it as keeping the action always on. That is you never really have a faction completely taking a continent and pushing people off of it. It's an FPS where you join and take territory in a never-ending war. It's SOE's job to make it not feel repetitive by giving players choices. PS1 got predictable for that very reason when you started seeing the same battle over and over. I'm hopeful that PS2 will create more of those epic fights that one remembers.

Speaking of content though SOE will have to add content. New vehicles, weapons, implants, game features to keep things interesting. That's a given.

SKYeXile · 2012-03-27, 11:14 PM

wouldn't touch eve since it takes 6 months or so to break into the game, even then you're still never going to have all the skill points a veteran player would. I think its retarded actually that SOE are using the offline levelling system, thank god its not all done via time though.

Warborn · 2012-03-27, 11:23 PM

EVE's skill system is actually pretty genius. There are only so many skills that benefit you in a given ship, so a veteran player who's been playing forever doesn't have an absurd advantage, because only a few months or a year at most of skills benefit him in any given ship. And for that, what do you get? No grind. You just play and the leveling happens on its own.

As for the original issue, I think they want the game to appeal to as many people as possible. They want to make a hit and redefine the genre. So they will make the game accessible and user-friendly. I don't think that means keeping the game from having any degree of variation within it based on player actions, though. I think the game being made totally static in practice is simply to keep things simpler for them. They aren't trying to make a really deep, crazy game like EVE where there's a big sandbox world and players define so much of what happens. They just want to make a really fun, cool shooter that lots of people can enjoy.

Stew · 2012-03-27, 11:44 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Newcomers don't stay newcomers for very long, but the noobifications that are inflicted upon the game never go away even long after they stop being noobs.

No need to noobified the game No need to let down the game it just need a decent learning curve and a well done training thats explain step by step the thing to do and how it worl for new comers wihout been to complex or to stupid !

A good training and suport always help people to not feel lost !

thats make people quit when they feel lost !

this game NEED the players based at all cost

I DONT WANT A PS1 game whith a very little player based especially that ps1 was 300 players only now it will be like 1000 to 2000 so yeah the game have to be full of players so ...

VioletZero · 2012-03-27, 11:52 PM

No, NOT at all cost. Otherwise it would be an iPhone game.

The game needs to be a quality MMO too. Not just a shooter. Otherwise you might as well just get any of the other hundreds of shooters out there.

Stardouser · 2012-03-27, 11:59 PM

The only thing I would say about people not getting lost is streamlining the system of being able to spawn near the action faster...ie, being able to spawn at your choice of controlled territory. I'm sure many will disagree with me on that.

Other than that though,we don't need 3D spotting or killcam, or many other noobifications that don't go away when the noobs stop being noobs.

Brusi · 2012-03-28, 12:33 AM

Also i agree with Warborn on the Eve offline training system...

Originally Posted by Warborn

EVE's skill system is actually pretty genius.

...but for a different reason. It made you feel like you were advancing in the game, even if you had taken a break and were playing another game more.

If you are paying for premium that you are getting no use out of by not playing the game relentlessly, you are more likely to cancel your sub.

Re: Violets concerns that the MMO soul of PS is being stripped from PS2...

Originally Posted by VioletZero

The game needs to be a quality MMO too. Not just a shooter. Otherwise you might as well just get any of the other hundreds of shooters out there.

It's sad that we are losing so many of the MMO elements, such as freeform inventory's, animations and possibly even looting... However i am still optimistic that these guys are serious about reinventing the genre that they basically created.

If for example, things like the new outfit owned and deployed outposts/towers and other sandbox style elements will be the new staple of the MMOFPS, why not?! I mean, there are still plenty of MMO's out there now that make you choose a class/race combo, and that doesn't mean that the other elements of these MMO's can't make them successful.

Hopefully they are actually on the right track with tempting in the FPS gamers first and adding more and more MMO'ish stuff once they have a large player base and a stable monthly F2P conversion rate.

IronMole · 2012-03-28, 12:33 AM

PS2 is BF3.5.

VioletZero · 2012-03-28, 12:39 AM

It's sad that we are losing so many of the MMO elements, such as freeform inventory's, animations and possibly even looting... However i am still optimistic that these guys are serious about reinventing the genre that they basically created.

Those aren't MMO elements. This is just streamlining. Which, I think is fine. Less time with needless micromanagement you know?

MMOs are about the bigger picture. How your actions affect everyone in the world around you.

A true loss of an MMO element was how they decided to have three sanctuaries per continent. Meaning every continent will be self contained(Makes the game world smaller) and will be forced into a cycle. There will be no bigger picture because the only thing that will matter is the battle for hexes. There will be no campaigns or anything interesting happening because of how they decided to design the continents. Which I think was of full intent because this way, it's always simple to get into a fight quickly.

But I feel as though this misses the point of Planetside as a whole. Planetside is an FPS about the bigger picture and PS2 is focusing too much on the smaller picture. Don't get me wrong, the smaller picture is important. But not at the cost of the MMO aspect.

You might as well just have a bunch of instanced maps that vaguely affect each other.