"Speeding it up"

[goneglockin]

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

Because you're obviously looking for something just like that.

Fast twitchbased shooter with no ADS (as far as I know).

That is pretty much what you described this whole time.

Except for the whole Ascend part where you fly around like superman. Not to my tastes. Prefer to keep it mostly ground based, fast enough to move while shooting and at least present a moving target to whoever is shooting at you. No rocket jumping arena stuff.

[goneglockin]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Hmmm...if you don't like Tribes, have you been supporting us in the fight against jump pads? I wasn't paying attention to who all was posting there.

I have mixed feelings about the jump pads... BUT since they are pads in a fixed location that send you in a fixed direction, and they aren't everywhere, and you can't just do this anywhere at anytime, I'm fine with them.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

I think "relaxed" is a poor choice of words here. I would argue the opposite.

How could it be the opposite? Firing weapons that are so accurate you can strafe, that's the very definition of relaxed, at least as far as the weapons themselves go.

Or, I suppose you could look at this another way: You're just transferring the importance from aiming skill to body movement. That's why I mentioned prone diving above, if people wanted the game to be like that, they wouldn't go insane at the idea of prone because a lot of people don't want to have the enemy avoiding their shots with dolphin diving.

Originally Posted by goneglockin

I have mixed feelings about the jump pads... BUT since they are pads in a fixed location that send you in a fixed direction, and they aren't everywhere, and you can't just do this anywhere at anytime, I'm fine with them.

Thus far we have only seen a detailed battle at a base. It's entirely possible that there will be jump pad equivalents in other areas. For example : I don't know what they are called, but some arcade games have those things on the ground that when you drive over them they boost your speed. I can just imagine that we might have that on roads or whatever in order to shorten the ground travel time, and definitely that would be bad.

[captainkapautz]

Originally Posted by goneglockin

Now THAT sounds like a good time!

Wait so let me get this straight, you want the game to feel and play like an old-school FPS like Doom/Quake/etc. yet keep the strategy, tactics and long TTK from PS1?
Do you want some hitscan weapons with that as well?

[ArmedZealot]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

You're just transferring the importance from aiming skill to body movement.

Is it really that hard, or far fetched to have both?

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

Wait so let me get this straight, you want the game to feel and play like an old-school FPS like Doom/Quake/etc. yet keep the strategy, tactics and long TTK from PS1?
Do you want some hitscan weapons with that as well?

PS2 weapons are hitscan... All but the snipers I think, but I am probably wrong.

[The Kush]

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

You are saying it, you are saying that PS1 is/was the only game with "proper" teamwork/teamplay.

I'd really like to know what makes PS1 superior to any other game that involves working together in a team.


Edit: Just read Xyntechs post and in scale I'd like to name EvE, yes it ain't a shooter, shouldn't matter, has bigger scale in teamwork/teamplay than PS1.

Lol kid quit putting words in my mouth. Please quote where I said PS is the only game with "proper" teamwork. I said you can't compare BF/CoD/Halo teamwork to PS teamwork. I never said it didnt exist. I am simply saying the amount of teamwork and type of teamwork involved is not duplicated in those games.

And I never said anything about wow or EVE or Everquest or anything so once again your learning a valuable lesson don't put words in someone's mouth.

EDIT: to answer your question about superiority the answer is one word, scale. It's easy to coordinate 6 guys now lets see you step up and do that with 50. It's rather amusing that you have convinced yourself a small team requires the same amount of teamwork as a large one.

[Pyreal]

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

Doesn't really matter, since the game isn't meant to be just for PS1-players.

I didn't make myself clear. If you haven't played PS1 you have no point of reference to say whether or not this Speeding up is detrimental to the core gameplay of PlanetSide.

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

You know, you CAN assess a situation without standing around in the open, and if by assess you mean if you're getting shot at, well there really isn't much to assess and react strategically, except getting the fuck into cover.

I said react to an opponent. Obviously, standing in the open isn't reacting. Again, I didn't make myself clear. Or maybe it's intentional on your part, at any rate, this is the scenario I don't want: you die before you are even allowed to seek cover.

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

You also do not take away any "learned skill element", unless you mean skills learned from PS1, bcause you will just learn new skills appropriate to the new environment, like moving with cover, sneak approaching places, etc.

No. I meant learning to counter class and fit combinations. If there is no window (or ability to create that window) in which to execute a strategy, strategy will have no place in PS2.

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

Let's call a ***** a ***** here, you seem to make PS1-players out to be some kind of strategic übermensch, which is just plain wrong.

If you remember, a majority of the common footzerg was pretty much the epitom of derp.

But if you count throwing enough bodies at the enemy until he suffocates as a strategy, then I am more then willing to bet that PS2 will not disappoint in that.

You assessment of my statements are wholly inaccurate.

A ***** is a still a shovel, however, every cognac is a brandy, but not all brandies are a cognac.

[Sledgecrushr]

From what I have seen in some of the videos the ttk isnt all that bad, you really have to absorb a half dozen good shots before you go down.

[captainkapautz]

@ArmedZealot

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

PS2 weapons are hitscan... All but the snipers I think, but I am probably wrong.

No, no, no, all weapons that fire bullets, i.e. not VS PewPewLaserz, have bullet-drop, so aren't hitscan.


@The Kush

Originally Posted by The Kush

Lol kid quit putting words in my mouth. Please quote where I said PS is the only game with "proper" teamwork.

Just a sec, right here:

Originally Posted by The Kush

I didn't say that so don't put words in my mouth. It did however achieve a level of teamwork that hasn't been matched in any other game.

By your words, no other game achieved the level of teamwork that PS1 had (not true, but not the point atm), therefore what you are saying is that every other game has not as good teamplay as PS1 does, therefore PS1s teamplay is the, for lack of a better word, proper one.

Originally Posted by The Kush

I said you can't compare BF/CoD/Halo teamwork to PS teamwork. I never said it didnt exist. I am simply saying the amount of teamwork and type of teamwork involved is not duplicated in those games.

Never said it was, was just pointing out that your "no other game" statement, which by definiton means every game not just BF3/CoD/Halo, was wrong.

Originally Posted by The Kush

And I never said anything about wow or EVE or Everquest or anything so once again your learning a valuable lesson don't put words in someone's mouth.

that was in reply to Xyntechs post, as I stated, and not you.

Originally Posted by The Kush

EDIT: to answer your question about superiority the answer is one word, scale. It's easy to coordinate 6 guys now lets see you step up and do that with 50.

But here I can play the EvE card again, bigger scale then PS1.

Originally Posted by The Kush

It's rather amusing that you have convinced yourself a small team requires the same amount of teamwork as a large one.

Yeah, so much for the whole putting words into other peoples mouth?


P.S.: The whole insulting thing with calling me kid isn't really helping your point.

P.P.S.: Look, I will say the the part that CoD or Halo have no teamplay is utterly true.
I'd maybe debate BF3, because you CAN use teamplay very effectively, but, like you said, not near the scale of PS1.

It's just that your post reads like "Only PS1 teamplay is worth a crap, and if you haven't played PS1 then gtfo because your opinion ain't worth shit"
Atleast to me.


@Pyreal

Originally Posted by Pyreal

I didn't make myself clear. If you haven't played PS1 you have no point of reference to say whether or not this Speeding up is detrimental to the core gameplay of PlanetSide.

Yeah, but the poll isn't about PS, it's about PS2, that's what I mean.

Originally Posted by Pyreal

I said react to an opponent. Obviously, standing in the open isn't reacting. Again, I didn't make myself clear. Or maybe it's intentional on your part, at any rate, this is the scenario I don't want: you die before you are even allowed to seek cover.

That's what I meant with adapting new tactics.

Of course you won't be able to just dash away into cover everytime you come under fire in the open, because you just got ambushed while you ran around in the open, when you should've moved with cover.

Originally Posted by Pyreal

No. I meant learning to counter class and fit combinations. If there is no window (or ability to create that window) in which to execute a strategy, strategy will have no place in PS2.

That's really just en exaggeration on your part, saying no strategy will have place in PS2 just because the TTK got lower.

Originally Posted by Pyreal

You assessment of my statements are wholly inaccurate.

A ***** is a still a shovel, however, every cognac is a brandy, but not all brandies are a cognac.

Sorry, but I have no idea what you mean.

Look, I'm in no way saying that the TTK has to stay exactly like it is atm in alpha as seen in the video.
All I'm saying is that a lower TTK is NOT the end of the strategyworld as we know it.

I mean that's what actual beta will be for, not the end of the strategyworld hopefully, but actually tweaking stuff like TTK to were it is balance.



Holy crap people, post slower. :x

[The Kush]

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

By your words, no other game achieved the level of teamwork that PS1 had (not true, but not the point atm), therefore what you are saying is that every other game has not as good teamplay as PS1 does, therefore PS1s teamplay is the, for lack of a better word, proper one.

Yes my opinion is no fps game has matched the level of teamwork PS1 has and possibly no game has matched that level. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. We are talking about a fps and that is the genre I am refering to. I could have been more specific and said that. Yes there are games like wow, eve, ect like I agreed and those games are fairly populated.. But sadly I cant say playing a fps vs an rpg requires the same skill. mmorpg's usually require a mere button to be pressed, and usually the most players working together at a time is 40. FPS require aiming and things of that nature. So maybe PS was the best teamwork we have seen in an mmo or any game for that matter because of how diverse the gameplay is vs everyone casting spells. or the smallscale small map teamwork of CoD BF Halo ect. That is my opinion, everyone else has their own, but the scale of this fps brought some real magical moments of working together, and im sorry you havent experienced that and I hope one day you will.

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

Never said it was, was just pointing out that your "no other game" statement, which by definiton means every game not just BF3/CoD/Halo, was wrong.

As I mentioned before I dont play games like that they bore me. I was refering to FPS apologies for not making myself clear. And how can you judge the PS teamwork when yo have never played PS?

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

P.S.: The whole insulting thing with calling me kid isn't really helping your point.

Not meant to be an insult.

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

P.P.S.: Look, I will say the the part that CoD or Halo have no teamplay is utterly true.
I'd maybe debate BF3, because you CAN use teamplay very effectively, but, like you said, not near the scale of PS1.

I never said the games dont have teamwork, I am merely saying it is a different kind. Doesnt require as much planning and communication because it is a smaller scale.

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

It's just that your post reads like "Only PS1 teamplay is worth a crap, and if you haven't played PS1 then gtfo because your opinion ain't worth shit"
Atleast to me.

That is definitely not the message I want to send. But as I have said you cant talk about something you dont truly understand. You have neevr played PS1 so you shouldnt be considered a knowledgeable source for information regarding PS1 and the kind of teamwork it created.

[captainkapautz]

Originally Posted by The Kush

Yes my opinion is no fps game has matched the level of teamwork PS1 has and possibly no game has matched that level. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. We are talking about a fps and that is the genre I am refering to. I could have been more specific and said that. Yes there are games like wow, eve, ect like I agreed and those games are fairly populated.. But sadly I cant say playing a fps vs an rpg requires the same skill. mmorpg's usually require a mere button to be pressed, and usually the most players working together at a time is 40. FPS require aiming and things of that nature. So maybe PS was the best teamwork we have seen in an mmo or any game for that matter because of how diverse the gameplay is vs everyone casting spells. or the smallscale small map teamwork of CoD BF Halo ect. That is my opinion, everyone else has their own, but the scale of this fps brought some real magical moments of working together, and im sorry you havent experienced that and I hope one day you will.

Meh, F the likes of WoW, but seriously, EvE is still the king in scale atm when it comes to teamplay.

It takes a different kind of "skillset" then an FPS, but, seeing as you can't objectively say FPS-Skill > Strategy-Skill, that doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by The Kush

And how can you judge the PS teamwork when yo have never played PS?

Originally Posted by The Kush

But as I have said you cant talk about something you dont truly understand. You have neevr played PS1 so you shouldnt be considered a knowledgeable source for information regarding PS1 and the kind of teamwork it created.

Not to rain on your parade or anything, but I started playing PS1 in Beta.

[Badjuju]

I honestly don't think its going to be feel that much faster overall as there will be much more players playing and likely larger battle fronts. As far as the ADS, I probably would not play this game if ADS was not in it. I am a huge fan of PS1 and all but ADS is something I would expect from a modern day shooter. Part of the reason why PS1 was so great for me was the immersion you got due to it feeling like you were on a real battle front. The changes they have made will add to that allot IMO. It adds to the realism and becomes more immersive for me. If they left everything the same I don't think many would ply it long as we have played the first for 9 years. I think the real issue is allot of people love PS1, and like everything else they have trouble excepting something new. Hip firing mechanics just seem very silly and outdated to me personally, especially being in the military. It will also allow people to work together more tactically as you can fire more precisely, and you don't have everyone hopping left and right into each others cross fire. Tactics is what this game is all about.

[The Kush]

Originally Posted by Badjuju

I honestly don't think its going to be feel that much faster overall as there will be much more players playing and likely larger battle fronts. As far as the ADS, I probably would not play this game if ADS was not in it. I am a huge fan of PS1 and all but ADS is something I would expect from a modern day shooter. Part of the reason why PS1 was so great for me was the immersion you got due to it feeling like you were on a real battle front. The changes they have made will add to that allot IMO. It adds to the realism and becomes more immersive for me. If they left everything the same I don't think many would ply it long as we have played the first for 9 years. I think the real issue is allot of people love PS1, and like everything else they have trouble excepting something new. Hip firing mechanics just seem very silly and outdated to me personally, especially being in the military. It will also allow people to work together more tactically as you can fire more precisely, and you don't have everyone hopping left and right into each others cross fire. Tactics is what this game is all about.

Not true. I like some new ideas and some I don't. I like the iron sights way more. But this game does take place in the "future" so something like taking more then a few shots to kill someone is not only believable but more fun in my opinion.

[captainkapautz]

Originally Posted by The Kush

But this game does take place in the "future" so something like taking more then a few shots to kill someone is not only believable but more fun in my opinion.

It being more fun is completely subjective.

I find it more fun if it doesn't take as long.

And the whole "future"-argument is kinda BS really, because they don't just develop new armor, weapons will get developed as well, so it would rather stay the same.

[The noob]

Right now, it's difficult to judge TTK imo. In the video, it looked like Biscuit was very good at landing multiple headshots, so that would definitely affect what the TTK would look like to someone watching the video. Playing the game is the best way of finding whether the TTK is good enough or not.