this is disconcerting...

[Sephirex]

Originally Posted by Drakkonan

The part that disappointed me was that he mentioned CoD instead of Battlefield. Battlefield's guns feel a lot better than CoD's, but that's primarily due to recoil.

I personally think he just picked the most well recognized name.

[SturmovikDrakon]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

Guys. It's not going to be the same game as PS. SOE is pitching this game to console gamers. It's going to feel like CoD with red, blue and purple factions.
Even after watching hours of beta footage, people are still going to act surprised at what they see next week when they finally play it.

And producing a "twitch" style console game will bring in more money than a rehashed, arcade, ADADAD game that maybe 1000 people were playing up until last month.

What

Besides that, his points are valid. I recently became obsessed with the way guns feel in games'

One of the things I wish SOE adds to heavy mounted MGs and base wall turrets is a screen shake everytime you fire to simulate how powerful the weapons actually are
If you've fired an HMG on top of a buggy in BF3 I think you'll understand where I'm getting at

[WiteBeam]

Originally Posted by SturmovikDrakon

What

What's don't you understand? SOE would trade every PS vet they had for twice as many new gamers. The dev team is great, active and hands on with the community. But in the end, it's all about the money.

[NoDachi]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

Guys. It's not going to be the same game as PS. SOE is pitching this game to console gamers. It's going to feel like CoD with red, blue and purple factions.
Even after watching hours of beta footage, people are still going to act surprised at what they see next week when they finally play it.

And producing a "twitch" style console game will bring in more money than a rehashed, arcade, ADADAD game that maybe 1000 people were playing up until last month.

What a stupid thing to say.

Damn NDA.

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

What's don't you understand? SOE would trade every PS vet they had for twice as many new gamers. The dev team is great, active and hands on with the community. But in the end, it's all about the money.

All games are all about the money.

That's why they're made, they're made to sell. Not to ingratiate themselves with a closed circle of forum dwelling neckbears. This is obvious.

[GLaDOS]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

Guys. It's not going to be the same game as PS. SOE is pitching this game to console gamers. It's going to feel like CoD with red, blue and purple factions.
Even after watching hours of beta footage, people are still going to act surprised at what they see next week when they finally play it.

And producing a "twitch" style console game will bring in more money than a rehashed, arcade, ADADAD game that maybe 1000 people were playing up until last month.

What? You can see into the future? What must I do for you to teach me your ways?

[SturmovikDrakon]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

What's don't you understand? SOE would trade every PS vet they had for twice as many new gamers. The dev team is great, active and hands on with the community. But in the end, it's all about the money.

They're pitching to console gamers on a PC exclusive?

Most PC gamers I've talked to are not fond of CoD in any way

[WiteBeam]

Originally Posted by NoDachi

What a stupid thing to say.

Damn NDA.



All games are all about the money.

That's why they're made, they're made to sell. Not to ingratiate themselves with a closed circle of forum dwelling neckbears. This is obvious.

What does anything I said have to do with the NDA?

Originally Posted by GLaDOS

What? You can see into the future? What must I do for you to teach me your ways?

Cert prophet.

[SturmovikDrakon]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

What does anything I said have to do with the NDA?

Because he can't prove how wrong you are about the gameplay

[brighthand]

Originally Posted by Littleman

You have to understand: some people hear "CoD" or "Battlefield" and it wasn't preceded by "not like" they instantly start writing PS2 off as another horrible clone.

I won't miss these people.

I didn't say that ps2 would be a COD clone, but rather that COD and its simplification would have a bad influence on the game's core gameplay/mechanics. I would have to be braindead to see all the gameplay and read up on the info, and then think that PS2 could possibly be 'another COD clone.' I would however encourage you to think of the possibility that certain integral features of the series can be 'simplified' or dillouted in an attempt to appeal to a wider audience. i.e. less tactical options when managing logistics (this doesn't seem to be the case, but I am using it as an example).

At any rate, as long as I don't find myself zipping over to one spot, spraying some guy to death, then zipping over to another to do the same thing, with a stiff camera and uber quick handling, like a horny humming bird that just ate a pile of pixie dust.

[NoDachi]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

What does anything I said have to do with the NDA?

Because it's stopping people 'prove' what you're saying is rubbish. So instead we have to suffer tedious circle arguments from whiners.

[Littleman]

Originally Posted by brighthand

I didn't say that ps2 would be a COD clone, but rather that COD and its simplification would have a bad influence on the game's core gameplay/mechanics. I would have to be braindead to see all the gameplay and read up on the info, and then think that PS2 could possibly be 'another COD clone.' I would however encourage you to think of the possibility that certain integral features of the series can be 'simplified' or dillouted in an attempt to appeal to a wider audience. i.e. less tactical options when managing logistics (this doesn't seem to be the case, but I am using it as an example).

It's a poor example, since all CoD really has going for it IS the gun play. Even BF doesn't offer a lot of comparisons outside of how killing implements work. And really, the meta game, the part that actually brings the complication and strategic depth to Planetside, isn't going to be affected much by how the weaponry performs, whether they work like weapons in CoD, BF, Quake, or Unreal. No, weapon performance effects the tactical level, and for what's it's worth, in Planetside 1 that always boiled down to ADADAD with the cross-hairs over the target, or some other, less standard approach, like a boomer, nade spam, the reaver, etc.

But regarding weapons handling, there is no "dumbing down" or simplifying. If anything, weapons handling across the genre has over all gotten more complicated, but regardless of that, it's really just a matter taste. I happen to like CoD's fire arms. However, they could do with a little less accuracy while ADS for the sake of customization to have another attribute to work with in PS2.

[brighthand]

Originally Posted by Littleman

It's a poor example, since all CoD really has going for it IS the gun play. Even BF doesn't offer a lot of comparisons outside of how killing implements work. And really, the meta game, the part that actually brings the complication and strategic depth to Planetside, isn't going to be affected much by how the weaponry performs, whether they work like weapons in CoD, BF, Quake, or Unreal. No, weapon performance effects the tactical level, and for what's it's worth, in Planetside 1 that always boiled down to ADADAD with the cross-hairs over the target, or some other, less standard approach, like a boomer, nade spam, the reaver, etc.

But regarding weapons handling, there is no "dumbing down" or simplifying. If anything, weapons handling across the genre has over all gotten more complicated, but regardless of that, it's really just a matter taste. I happen to like CoD's fire arms. However, they could do with a little less accuracy while ADS for the sake of customization to have another attribute to work with in PS2.

Ok. I did not make it clear that I am NOT making a connection between gunhandling and meta game; I KNOW that there is no correlation between them. I was referring to COD's influence in general on other shooters, which can manifest itself in several different facets of the game which INCLUDES gun handling resulting in zippy fast spray and praying.

I am also clarifying my point about PS2's handling and stating that I don't expect it to be like ps1, as that would be bad. I am merely saying that several other games lost their charm owing to devs dumbing down their game to appeal to the COD crowd (be it in gun mechanics, or meta game, or whatever), and the excerpt I found intimated a possible step in that direction- which is cause for concern.

BUT, as I have read and seen much more, I am inclined to think that perhaps I have nothing to fear, and the game will be the last bastion of true PC FPSing that we have all been waiting for.

...The beta will reveal all...

EDIT: and no, COD's gunplay IMO is highly unappealing. The pace is too fast, the person who sees you first will get the kill, no recoil on the guns- animations are not bad but they are sped up, and the soldier's movements are stiff. It just didn't feel all that visceral and immersive. The last COD I played was MW2.

[opticalshadow]

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

Guys. It's not going to be the same game as PS. SOE is pitching this game to console gamers. It's going to feel like CoD with red, blue and purple factions.
Even after watching hours of beta footage, people are still going to act surprised at what they see next week when they finally play it.

And producing a "twitch" style console game will bring in more money than a rehashed, arcade, ADADAD game that maybe 1000 people were playing up until last month.

i see a few comprimises ill miss like hacking and the inventory system.

but you have to remember, ps1 wasnt teh game they wanted to make, its teh best they could do with the tech they had.

we were already playing a comprimise, and it did well, lets give some time and see how this goes.

[camycamera]

although CoD is not the best example (it is the worst example, actually), i see where they are going. they basically want the guns to feel weighty and such like others had said before, but i just hope that they don't dumb down the game so it appeals to the CoD crowd.

[Bittermen]

Originally Posted by brighthand

If you have read my previous thread about 'modern shooters' you will know where I am coming from and why I would be slightly troubled by the following excerpt taken from an interview with Games Industry International:


"The Call of Duty players want to play a game where the weapons feel good, where the combat feels snappy, it feels twitchy, it feels exciting, and it feels legitimate. The weapon that I'm firing feels like a weapon. It doesn't feel like some floaty Nerf gun or something. I feel the impact, I hear the sound of the impact. I see the animation from it. We're building our game to follow that also. It would be way easier if we were just making guys running around with lasers and not worrying about that mechanic, but we're spending a ton of time on the weapons. We're spending so much time iterating that gun feeling that I think we will be able to capture those people who are used to playing a triple-A FPS. Because they're not playing a compromised FPS experience when they play PlanetSide 2."

full link here: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...-duty-audience


note: while the rest of the interview gives me a positive outlook, I still cringe a lttle bit at the mention of COD having any influence over PS2's gameplay and a desire to make it 'more accessible'. I have heard that too many times before, and it leads to perdition. Thoughts?

original thoughts on the matter here: http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=45638

Umm how is this disconcerting in anyway? CoD is not a bad game. It's just been milked to death and it's player base consists of 12 year old homophobs.