Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Home Sweet Home
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2014-06-23, 01:56 AM | [Ignore Me] #18 | ||
Captain
|
Painstakingly handcrafting these continents was a really stupid idea to begin with. And 80 "or so" outposts? What? WHY? Nobody needs that many and half of them never see any action anyways. This absurd amount of unique bases is imo even bad for the gameplay (tunnel/rushlane syndrome, no space to fight) and creates so much additional balance work. I'd rather have four or five different, good base layouts that work instead of 80 that all have some annoyances, imbalances and quirks.
There is a reason PS1 relied heavily on copy+paste bases; You actually get some continents done that way, and more continents (different visuals) -> more bases (same visuals). Also you don't have to spend weeks on a design that ultimately proves to be bad and ends up eating up yet more time to be fixed. Look, i know you SOE mappers and designers are capable to make some good looking stuff. PS2 simply is not the game for you to let it all out. It's a game "about numbers", remember? Man, what a waste of time and to me another sign that these guys have their priorities wrong in order for a Planetside game to work and/or have no friggin' clue where they want to sail with this ship. COD clone? Original MMOFPS? Planetside? Quick buck? Identity crisis? I dunno... So my advice because i'm a nice guy: Copy+Paste some GOOD, real BASES, and get some continents done! Put the focus on continents instead of bases and give us some original and unique enviroments instead of spending most of your time trying to arrange the same, grey props (which look the same on every continent anyways) in a different way for each base. OR, if you really, really, insist on handcrafting every single base and can't be convinced by logic or common sense, atleast use distinctly different art styles that reflect the different continents (esamir = igloos, indar = tents, you get the idea - just check up World of Warcraft to see how it's done right). Currently it's just the worst of both worlds. That being ranted, i heard we get Hossin? Nice! Might have to check back in for that. Last edited by Babyfark McGeez; 2014-06-23 at 01:58 AM. |
||
|
2014-06-23, 05:50 AM | [Ignore Me] #20 | |||
Lieutenant General
|
Considering your 16km sized continent will allow for a lot of circumvention, you couldn't possibly control all approach routes far away, you would need to guard the immediate perimeter of the base like a mother bear watching her cubs. |
|||
|
2014-06-23, 09:36 AM | [Ignore Me] #21 | ||
First Sergeant
|
They have gone for unique bases on every cont so that it's a richer environment, I can understand why but they have to absolutely have to use what already there in base design stop putting so many outposts in there and just spend the time on the actual map and land then drop the existing bases where appropriate make a couple of changes due to the lay of the land etc and job done next cont. Do it that way and it will be so much quicker for us to see new continents.
|
||
|
2014-06-23, 04:14 PM | [Ignore Me] #22 | ||
Id absolutely support the idea of expedition continents if it reduces the painfully slow roll out time for new continents, sure spend quality time on the primary bases, but copy and paste the outposts. If this principle gets us fighting on Searhus sooner then id support it 100%.
|
|||
|
2014-06-23, 05:11 PM | [Ignore Me] #23 | ||
Sergeant
|
What I've always envisioned is smaller outposts, or just small clusters of buildings, that don't have CPs, terminals or spawns in them. Not important by decree of the devs/mapmakers, but opportunities for staging points or sabotages between major bases that need to be scouted and cleared out before, say, advancing an armor column.
|
||
|
2014-06-23, 07:16 PM | [Ignore Me] #24 | |||
Staff Sergeant
|
To alleviate the "Nobody will want to play on them" or "They won't represent the hi fidelity continents as well", I'd also only make the expedition continents available when the player numbers are high enough on the server to support them. Otherwise it's Amerish, Hossin, Indar, etc.
Might also use Stardouser's ideas on the expedition continents to make them high risk / high reward continents:
|
|||
|
2014-06-23, 10:29 PM | [Ignore Me] #25 | ||
Master Sergeant
|
"Well heck, I say you throw down some construction equipment and barrels and just make this a part of the game! Make new continents that "aren't fully established" a part of the game's lore."
I actually don't mind this idea...... but it could be done well or fail terribly. I do agree that they need to find a way to get the other continents out ALLOT faster then they have been thats for sure.
__________________
|
||
|
2014-06-24, 05:51 PM | [Ignore Me] #26 | |||
Staff Sergeant
|
If bases could be crowd-sourced like helmets, decals and camos currently are, it'd allow the level artists to just extract the best player-designed bases via copy/paste. |
|||
|
2014-06-24, 07:18 PM | [Ignore Me] #27 | ||
Sergeant Major
|
I said this long, long ago - in a time when PS2 was fresh and new... one of the bigger mistakes made was the choice to address a whole host of OTHER issues, before addressing the lack of endgame.
Games make this mistake over, and over, and over, and over... Sure - it's nice that we eventually got better continents and nicer forts to fight around - but as simple and flawed as the original ones were... they worked. Had all those hours of dev-time (and I know not all dev-time is equal) been put into true sandbox features, continent capture, and all the other stuff you can think of - I think PS2 would've been a lot better off for it. Along the same lines... more bases doesn't mean more fun. Any of the continents could've had their # of bases cut in half -- and replaced with just FUN features to the game and it would've been a better experience. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|