De-evolution of Planetside?!

[LightningDriver]

I don't see how you can equate a tech demo of the game where everyone is running around figuring out how to play, compared to how outfits will run at release.

Everyone I have spoken to in my outfit is looking forward to this. We feel it's not a perfect product (but what ever is, right?), however, we are overwhelmingly positive. These doom posts every time a new game gets released is beyond old.

[Shrink]

The build you saw at E3 was exactly that. A build made specifically for E3. It shows the people who don't know PS1, most of the people at E3, what the game might be like if you are attacking a base all at once on an even battlefield. We all know it will be different than this, so chill. Wait for beta broski

[Zebasiz]

Also it seems by your post that you're mainly judging this from the E3 livestream, which they said was a "simplified" version of the game. With set up spawn locations for each faction, a few control points, and short respawn timers.
Mainly it was set up so people could get a feel for what the large combat would look/ feel like. But there wasn't enough time to really display any of the tactical gameplay. They had only 10 odd minutes for each person.

Gah, ninja!

[JPalmer]

Originally Posted by Xaine

I understand and agree with most of what you said.

Sadly, PS2 is aimed at a bigger market and to make the game more accessible to more people, the game has to be dumbed down.

I said this in a thread recently, and everyone went into a fan-boy nerd rage and chewed my face off, so i can't be bothered trying to talk about it any more.

However, the game is being made more simple and it is being dumbed down, its just a fact.

It is called streamlining. Not "dumbing down."

And there is nothing wrong with that. ADS and a class system were needed.

I for one can't wait for class updates. Something PS1 could not do.

[basti]

Originally Posted by Access

As most old-school gamers I was growing more and more sceptical towards the
gaming industry over the past years, since it seemed to hit a serious dead end
in terms of innovation or evolution of their games. I was getting bored, annoyed,
and finally angry at how the industry doesnt even care to try anymore.
Even more annoying is the fact that they gloriously succeeded in constantly
dumbing down their customers to a point where there is nothing more important
about a game but the name of the frenchise and technological advancements of
a games engine.

But than, at last, a deep and unspoken hope was answered last year with the
official announcement of Planetside 2. Hell yeah! I survived the drought-stricken
years of boring killgames, horrid rpgs and empty and lifeless mmos to embrace the
goddess called Planetside once again to entertain me for years to come.
Or so I thought...

I was excited and thrilled over every video we got to see, every stream,
interview and information we got to fantasize with. Well... that is until I got
to see the gameplay at the E3 livestream the last few days. And there it was,
like a lump on the testicles, the slowly rising realisation that things might
not work out as perfectly as you imagined.

After seeing the gameplay footage these past days I'm actually pretty amazed
how most of the so called "veteran" players tend to ignore the fact that nearly
all of the tactical gameplay, which was pretty much the backbone of Planetside,
is close to nonexistant in the sequel...

And what we are left with today is roughly:

1. killing stuff with a handgun
2. killing stuff with a vehicle
3. killing stuff with an aircraft
4. killing stuff with landing droppods on their heads
5. domination gametype

I'm very dissappointed since as of now the game got no kind of tactical depth
what so ever compared to the original. Without tactical hotspots like command
centers, generator rooms or even destroyable spawn points/equipment
terminals I honestly dont see a need for any planned out tactical gameplay
anymore which made Planetside the game we all loved. All we get is a massive
killgame as seen ever so often before.

Character/Weapon/Vehicle customization does not make a game interesting, the
gameplay does. And it is lacking way behind of what any honest veteran Planetside
player should expect it to be.
I dont really like what is advertised in the visual customization department either.
It is seriously lackluster and behind on what should be possible with the engine
or even is appealing enough to even pay for it. For example the oh so boring
different 20th century camo skins... why...?! this is not CoD MoH or hatever,
this is the 28th century, a time appropriate customization should not be too much
to ask for. I really hope theres much more interesting customization planned until
release, like nanowired or battleworn armor, since I honestly cant see the game
manage its finances with just the booster sells in the long run.

Dont get me wrong, I love the engine, the fast paced action, skies burning up
from airbattles, falling debree and the design and textures of the models. (the
vehicle and base ones, the weapons on the other hand are really in need of some
workover sound/modelwise)

But please, why the freck does it have to be a so damn simplified Planetside?

Welcome to the de-evolution of games, where the developers nowadays accredit
the avarage gamer the attention span of a squirrel. (which is according to a
random internet person up to 4 minutes)

Someone get me a facepalm Picture to edit into later!


WHat have you seen of Planetside 2 at E3? The same as i saw? Because i saw a good shooter with 2000 players on a map. What we make out of it is completly up to us.
Of course you havent seen the tactical gameplay that we used to have in PS, but thats simply because those guys who played at E3 are dorks that dont have a clue. How could they, most of them never played planetside, and they played planetside 2 for like 30 minutes.

Planetside wasnt amazing because of its shooter elements. Planetside was amazing because we made it amazing!

[PredatorFour]

Originally Posted by DayOne

"Character/Weapon/Vehicle customization" is what make the gameplay interesting!

and this:
"1. killing stuff with a handgun
2. killing stuff with a vehicle
3. killing stuff with an aircraft
4. killing stuff with landing droppods on their heads
5. domination gametype"

Are you NOT liking these things? You don't like diversity when it comes to ways in which to win a fight? Hell, even PS1 base capture was basically either like one, really long capture time, domination point or a capture the flag.

Yes, some people are going to play this game just to shoot at stuff (PS1 "zerg rush" anyone?) but with the mission system these people can be controlled by others who know how to play the meta game, e.g. capturing the right bases to stop the enemy from being able to spawn so many tanks.

Games are not de-evolving, you are simply ignorant of the change that is taking place.




Also this^

You completely misunderstood what he was saying. Games like cod are cash cows which churn out the same game every year for money, so other games are trying to cash in on these players. By making their games simpler and easier to understand(run,gun,fun) it will attract these players hence giving them potentially more money. Games are getting easier and easier to play and it is in general a dumbing down. Its a shame they cant make games hard anymore, where it is challenging to play.

[Kalbuth]

Originally Posted by JPalmer

It is called streamlining. Not "dumbing down."

And there is nothing wrong with that. ADS and a class system were needed.

I for one can't wait for class updates. Something PS1 could not do.

Classes have nothing to do with what OP outlined

[ringring]

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Bittervet circle jerk in 3....2.....1.....

Do be like that, it is an honest conern, don't shut people up.

To the point. I understand your concerns but I only take what I have seen as being partially indicative of the proper game. Even in the commentary Arclegger said something along the lines of 'he can't wait until release and see' the tactical and organised play that will happen'.

So, insert customary wait until beta plea, once we get we'll test things out and point out any gameplay elements that need to be there for longevity.

The game as we saw it looked really simple, which is good put at the same time it needs depth for longevity and that can't be shown in E3 demo kind of environment.

[UKSwiFT]

I'm consistently confused by the belief that 'tactics' can only exist if forced upon a player by a collection of game systems of some kind. It doesn't work that way and couldn't work that way in a massive environment like Planetside 2. Players will do whatever the hell players want to do. What is the 'best' thing to do only evolves from playing the game a lot, which none of us have, to create that meta-game of builds and tactics.

What you can do though, is give incentives to play more tactical such as capturing points, staying alive, and being an all-round better player. That's what happened in PS1 and that is what will happen in PS2. We are given the tools in order to create these epic battles, these epic battles aren't created for us.

[Kalbuth]

Originally Posted by basti

Someone get me a facepalm Picture to edit into later!


WHat have you seen of Planetside 2 at E3? The same as i saw? Because i saw a good shooter with 2000 players on a map. What we make out of it is completly up to us.
Of course you havent seen the tactical gameplay that we used to have in PS, but thats simply because those guys who played at E3 are dorks that dont have a clue. How could they, most of them never played planetside, and they played planetside 2 for like 30 minutes.

Planetside wasnt amazing because of its shooter elements. Planetside was amazing because we made it amazing!

I beg to differ a lil bit. PS1 was also awesome because the saving ANT run was a thrilling moment when running through ennemy lines, the gen hold against big opposition was stressfull, and was denying ennemy tanks, etc...

Which existed because the NTU mecanism was in place, the generator system was in place, all that which is not setup by the players, but the game itself.

And I've not seen such objective not necesserily centered on the base capture, but all that was setup around the actual capture, and was a side objective helping the global one.
Perhaps there will be, we can only hope so, but I've yet to see that. It's not stupid to bring up the point

[Access]

Originally Posted by DayOne

Are you NOT liking these things? You don't like diversity when it comes to ways in which to win a fight? Hell, even PS1 base capture was basically either like one, really long capture time, domination point or a capture the flag.

What Planetside distinguished to any other fps back in the day was not the simple
fact that you could shoot people in different ways but that you had different tactical
possibilities to influence a fight short of shooting every single enemy in the face.
It's called in-depth gameplay which PS2 apparently seems to be lacking as of now.


As for the gameplay we've seen in the E3 Demo: the game mechanics are not
changing simply due to the fact that your spawnpoint is a few hundred yards further
off than it was in the forward base. And even though organized outfits are what
made PS into a Legend, due to the fact that there is nothing to do short of zerging
your way from capture point to capture point they wont be able to influence the
game experience like they did in Planetside.

[ThermalReaper]

I still believe that my post should be directed to anyone who believes that something is OP/UP/imbalanced/simplified.

[ArmedZealot]

Originally Posted by Access

What Planetside distinguished to any other fps back in the day was not the simple
fact that you could shoot people in different ways but that you had different tactical
possibilities to influence a fight short of shooting every single enemy in the face.
It's called in-depth gameplay which PS2 apparently seems to be lacking as of now.

Name exactly what you saw in E3 that gave you that impression.

[stargazer093]

oh...this thread again...

anyway, time for an old chinese gaming forum slogan:"you want to play you play you don`t want to play you go away"

[Eyeklops]

I don't think PS2 is "losing" tactics. Think of it as a "shifting" tactical importance to other areas. The infantry, or shooter, part of the game looks to be much more tactical than PS1.