Is Planetside 2 being released too soon? - Page 3

Crator · 2012-10-20, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by Pyreal

What, get this game out the door and ship the Devs off to work on EQ Next?

This really all depends how successful (how much money) the game makes. If it does good then they will continue making it better and adding more. Of course after launch they'll be making a lot of changes and adding things. But after that depends on it's success.

sameer · 2012-10-20, 10:57 PM

Yea if it were proper beta, they would be in beta for another year atleast. Nov 20 is a joke. Hope they can make it well for launch.

NC Waffle · 2012-10-21, 01:03 AM

Yay for buggy launches, oh whoops that sounds like Paradox Interactive, but they at least have it be just a lot of minor bugs that were hard to spot in the inside beta of only a small amount of people not the hundreds of PS2 testers and all the major bugs left in game.

james · 2012-10-21, 01:19 AM

Originally Posted by Crator

Nah, they'll just fire Smed. Might be good too. Don't forget though, they are also currently working on EQ Next. If you remember, or didn't know, PS1 was released a year before EQ 2. Now the same thing is happening again...

The current state of Sony is quite bad if they do loss what seems to be a large chunk of change from this game, i would expect a ton of the people to laid off. Sony is already laying off people right and left

typhaon · 2012-10-21, 02:14 AM

Probably...

At the pace things have been going - they probably need until the end of the year.

I think they really need to have Amerish live... tested... and have spent a few weeks on the metagame.

I'm far less concerned with various cert/weapon/vehicle bugs and balancing.

Sturmhardt · 2012-10-21, 03:18 AM

Originally Posted by Pyreal

What, get this game out the door and ship the Devs off to work on EQ Next?

Holy shit, I never saw this, but you might be right...

Figment · 2012-10-21, 04:41 AM

Tbh, I personally feel we should maintain beta attitude, as playerbase for another year, while SOE communicates their continued working on it much like how Wargaming did with World of Tanks: released but far from finished. It would revise new player expectations a bit.

RobUK · 2012-10-21, 04:58 AM

I'm feeling burnt out from all the character wipes and gameplay changes. I have gone from rushing home from work so that I can get in game to literally having to psych myself up to log in and play. Now we have this new queue system and all the conspiracy theories about artificially created queues aimed at enticing people to buy a membership.

Add in the horrible experience of logging in and literally racing out of the warpgate to escape the hordes of unchecked griefing retards, plus the "if you don't like the game, piss off and play something else" attitude of certain SOE employees, and PS2 has gone from my dream game to feeling like a cheap and nasty money grab dressed up as an FPS.

Personally I want the game to launch so that I can work on a character properly, use the SC to see if it enhances the game experience or is P2W in disguise, and to see if I can get rid of the horrible seedy feeling that is creeping into my consciousness when I think about Planetside 2.

I feel a very strong need to finally decide if this is going to be a game I want to play or not.

Mox · 2012-10-21, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

So the real question I would ask is - what do you think is ship critical that you fear wont be ready by 11/20?

I fear a launch without testing or even implementing proper basic game mechanics.
E.g.

Meta game is not existent
Capture mechanics are still a mess
Player/Zerg-guiding mechanics are not implemented
Map (continent and global) still a mess
Release with only 3 continents is a big question mark since interncontinental warfare needs enough continents and icw is a major feature of ps2.

How long the average gamer will play the game if only some unorganized skirmish will going on? We really need these mechanics pre launch!

Nasher · 2012-10-21, 07:07 AM

They are clearly trying to rush it out before christmas, but it could use a few more months of development tbh.

A lot of bugs from the early tech test seem to have re-appeared as well. Such as flashing/invisible player, equipment not working properly, crashing to desktop etc.

Also many things are still to even be get in to the game AND be fully tested. A number of things were removed early on to be put back in later, they are running out of time to test them now.

Figment · 2012-10-21, 07:51 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

So the real question I would ask is - what do you think is ship critical that you fear wont be ready by 11/20?

Originally Posted by Mox

Meta game is not existent
Capture mechanics are still a mess
Player/Zerg-guiding mechanics are not implemented
Map (continent and global) still a mess
Release with only 3 continents is a big question mark since interncontinental warfare needs enough continents and icw is a major feature of ps2.

To be precise, I would say:

Command systems tested, refined and verified (none in place now, "/leader" does not count and shows it doesn't work yet, besides, awful command for command chat)
(Inter-)Outfit organization improved
(Nearly) completed and streamlined UI, particularly for squads, platoons and outfits a lot is yet to be done (far from ready)
Better HUD customizability
Better settings customizability
Evaluation of what should be considered "basic weapons", available to all at start
Being able to see what is happening globally on other maps
The actual warpgates need to function
Intercontinental meta-game
Mapflow on Indar between north and South has to improve drastically (the ridge between north and south has to be extremely revised to allow for better logistics and enticing players to move between the areas).
Waaaaaaaaay improved chat system over current unintuitive system (among other things, the guy who thinks "/outfitsay", "/platoonsay", etc are proper commands should be spanked)
Refinement of advanced certifications (many have yet to be tested, we only had a short period of testing specific equipment)
Tutorial on all kinds of levels
Outpost layouts and designs that should be far less prone to camping. As long as outpost camping is a big part of the game, the game will lose players to that.
Vehicle spam has to be cut down, multi-crew units should have proper incentives to not run them alone, next to ever, instead of 90% of the time.
Certification system has to have far less Call of Duty influence and far more character uniqueness and individualisation

Once the game is launched, devs will consider a lot of systems as set in stone. They currently already consider far too much as set in stone.

If they launch the game with the prospect of infinite certifications and being able to unlock everything, you'll never be able to go back on that without pissing off the hypocrite and selfish bastards that want to have access to everything over time (while they complain about jacks of three (which they call "all") trades in a single life). And tbh, that remains the most retarded thing about the cert system: being able to unlock everything and then forcing arbitrary limitations through the class system. The class system itself is therefore another thing that really needs major overhauls. They can in principle easily do these overhauls, but once they've launched the game, they'll be even more unwilling to change it than they are now.

That's a bad thing. But yeah, as someone else indicated, once the game is launched, they'll be more inclined to pull resources from the game to work on other games. That makes it far less viable too to do major overhauls. :/

I don't want to sound like a pessimist, but I'm merely being realistic here. The only upside is they'll start making some money. But I really do hope they'll communicate very clearly that the launched game is incomplete and that we can expect continued development akin to how World of Tanks has been overhauling and expanding its game since launch.

PredatorFour · 2012-10-21, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by Figment

[*] Outpost layouts and designs that should be far less prone to camping. As long as outpost camping is a big part of the game, the game will lose players to that.

Questions for the devs...
The original game lasted 9 years, albeit pops maxed out early in its life but it still sustained good enough activity to be enjoyable with the merges. Do you really think this iteration of Planetside will be as successful? Go another 9 years? Taking the above comment into account?

With ease of camping people just wont want to play the who camps wins game. Planetside 1 wasn`t like this, why make its sequel like that? Is this a `modern` thing ?

dethred · 2012-10-21, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by Mox

How long the average gamer will play the game if only some unorganized skirmish will going on? We really need these mechanics pre launch!

Funny, I played for 7 hours last night and during that time I was in several organized battles. I would consider myself an average gamer and I played 7 hours in one evening, with several other average gamers. Only reason we stopped was the 3am server shut down.

You'd sound a lot more reasonable if your criticisms were constructive, and not absolute on every subject concerning the game. Sounds like you're just here to bash it.

james · 2012-10-21, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by dethred

Funny, I played for 7 hours last night and during that time I was in several organized battles. I would consider myself an average gamer and I played 7 hours in one evening, with several other average gamers. Only reason we stopped was the 3am server shut down.

You'd sound a lot more reasonable if your criticisms were constructive, and not absolute on every subject concerning the game. Sounds like you're just here to bash it.

If you are on a forum about the game your not an average gamer.

Figment · 2012-10-21, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by dethred

Funny, I played for 7 hours last night and during that time I was in several organized battles. I would consider myself an average gamer and I played 7 hours in one evening, with several other average gamers. Only reason we stopped was the 3am server shut down.

You'd sound a lot more reasonable if your criticisms were constructive, and not absolute on every subject concerning the game. Sounds like you're just here to bash it.

I think he means in terms of months, not individual session length.

Meaning, how many 7 hour sessions would you have before you'd seen enough of it? I mean, when GoldenEye64 came out, we played a couple 12 hour sessions...

Now with PS1, 6 hour sessions were common for me, but so far, PS2 has made me play 3 hour sessions on average. Currently can't even login due to server being full, and if server being full means I can't play (my main character / with my friends and lead my outfit) then yeah...

The game's not in a state where it could viably be launched. So if the question is, "will it be one month from now"? I simply have to be realistic and say "probably not". >.>