Instant Seat Switching

[p0intman]

add it, im past the point of caring. it'll get added to the list of things ill abuse the hell out of to make people cry.

[SniperSteve]

Since it looks like they are doing away with the icons for the seats on the ground, interior seat switching looks like the way it is going to be.

I am worried delayed seat switching will result in frustration, and that instant seat switching will result in drivers hot-swapping seating to use other weapons between reloads or something of that nature. Not sure if that is a bad thing, but will probably happen.

To sum-up: I really don't care too much.

[Death2All]

Originally Posted by Envenom

This has nothing to do with realism. It has to do with FUN. Think game mechanics. Why impose the extra annoying step of exiting a vehicle and then making the player re-enter. You're already in the damn thing! GAMEPLAY friend. Think about it.

"It's not about realism it's about fun! Add a realistic mechanic because it's fun"


I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

You can twist it and rephrase it all you want, it still boils down the simple fact that you want to add realism into the game because you perceive it as fun or enjoyable.

I already gave my example of what it detracts from gameplay, you haven't said anything other than it's "fun". You've lost your credibility thanks to your subjective, narrow minded 12 year old opinion.

Either give some evidence to support your theory or go away. "becuz itz fun xD" is not an argument.

[Envenom]

Originally Posted by Death2All

"It's not about realism it's about fun! Add a realistic mechanic because it's fun"


I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

You can twist it and rephrase it all you want, it still boils down the simple fact that you want to add realism into the game because you perceive it as fun or enjoyable.

I already gave my example of what it detracts from gameplay, you haven't said anything other than it's "fun". You've lost your credibility thanks to your subjective, narrow minded 12 year old opinion.

Either give some evidence to support your theory or go away. "becuz itz fun xD" is not an argument.

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want?

Thanks for the snarky response

[Death2All]

Originally Posted by Envenom

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want?

Thanks for the snarky response

Thanks for not addressing any of the points I made and avoiding the discussion entirely. Since you don't have anything useful to add to the discussion other than direct responses to me, completely disregarding the thread topic I think you can go ahead and not post anymore. Thanks.


"Someone is getting the better of me? Better resort to being defensive and bring up my irrelevant Battlefield experience and throw in some emoticons to suggest that I'm not even slightly riled up! That will show him!"

[Zenben]

Originally Posted by Death2All

"It's not about realism it's about fun! Add a realistic mechanic because it's fun"


I'm sorry to hear about your autism.

You can twist it and rephrase it all you want, it still boils down the simple fact that you want to add realism into the game because you perceive it as fun or enjoyable.

I already gave my example of what it detracts from gameplay, you haven't said anything other than it's "fun". You've lost your credibility thanks to your subjective, narrow minded 12 year old opinion.

Either give some evidence to support your theory or go away. "becuz itz fun xD" is not an argument.

Who are you to dictate what is fun and what is not? Maybe to him, realism IS fun. It's all subjective, dude. Grow up.

On-topic, I don't like the idea of someone pulling a tank with AA on it, locking the gunner's seat, and just instantly seat switching when they see a plane. If there is seat-switching, it should only be for non-drivers/pilots and it should have a delay.

[Zekeen]

Originally Posted by Envenom

I've played Battlefield since it's inception, and this is how it's always been. It's fun. It works. What else do you want?

Thanks for the snarky response

It works well for a fast points game with racking up the kills, but it doesn't "quite" fit with Planetside. PS is a much more tactical game, and not about doing things faster, but doing things smarter and better. It's more on relying upon allies than doing it all yourself. That's why this is a hot topic. It's better to have a gunner than be a driver and jump to gunner instantly.

[Timealude]

Originally Posted by Zulthus

So we noticed in the PS2 stream that you can now instantly switch seats from inside a vehicle without exposing yourself.

I personally dislike this. You should have to expose yourself and get in the proper seat to use a gun... not even a matter of enter/exit anims anymore but this just doesn't sit well with me. They're just driving the Sunderer and instantly switch to the gun to kill someone... I just don't like the idea of it.

What do you think?

wasnt this feature in ps1?

[Envenom]

Originally Posted by Death2All

Thanks for not addressing any of the points I made and avoiding the discussion entirely. Since you don't have anything useful to add to the discussion other than direct responses to me, completely disregarding the thread topic I think you can go ahead and not post anymore. Thanks.


"Someone is getting the better of me? Better resort to being defensive and bring up my irrelevant Battlefield experience and throw in some emoticons to suggest that I'm not even slightly riled up! That will show him!"

You haven't addressed MY points. How is adding the extra step of exiting a vehicle add anything to gameplay other than slowing it down and stinting the action? And how Battlefield an irrelevant experience? BF: Vehicle combat on an immense scale. They've got it nailed down friend. The proof is in the pudding; BF is one of the longest running and most successful large scale vehicular combat games in our generation. It only makes sense to draw comparisons.

Let's stop with the childish putdowns. I'm here to discuss a point, not watch you get passionate over seat switching and have an aneurysm.

[Death2All]

Originally Posted by Zenben

Who are you to dictate what is fun and what is not? Maybe to him, realism IS fun. It's all subjective, dude. Grow up.

Yeah, maybe I was being a little over zealous deciding what's fun or not, still doesn't give him an excuse to disregard the topic and spew out irrelevant garbage that doesn't pertain to anything at all in a feeble attempt to defend his ideals. I'm just asking him to provide an example of what makes it fun for him, in order to get some insight. He refused to do that thus far.

Originally Posted by Zenben

On-topic, I don't like the idea of someone pulling a tank with AA on it, locking the gunner's seat, and just instantly seat switching when they see a plane. If there is seat-switching, it should only be for non-drivers/pilots and it should have a delay.

How would you like presenting that point and then have it be completely dismissed by some tard saying "WELL VEHIKULS IN REAL LIFE CAN DO IT SO WHY COULDNT WE DO IT IN THE FUTURE DX??????" "I LEIK IT CUZ ITS FUNNNNN".


Bashing aside, I agree with your point. Assuming SOE aren't complete idiots (a pretty bold notion to assume, I know) they would implement some sort of delay onto vehicle switching. Even with that in place however, I feel like it wouldn't solve the issue, it would just make a half-assed attempt to tame the problem.

[WellWisherELF]

Instant vehicle seat switching encourages solo play and deters teamwork. This was actually a similar problem in the original Planetside. Lone wolves would intentionally disallow gunners in their tanks and instead drive it to the battlefield, get out, and then just sit in the gun seat until they died. Having the ability to instantly switch to the gun from the driver's seat will just make this practice all the more common, by players taking multi-crew vehicles and opting to drive them solo, just so they can get their own kills from manning the turret. In PS1, if you were caught in a vehicle without a gunner, you were reaver toast. But now, there is virtually no disadvantage to driving a vehicle now, as you don't have to risk jumping out of the vehicle to defend yourself.

[Zenben]

Originally Posted by Death2All

How would you like presenting that point and then have it be completely dismissed by some tard saying "WELL VEHIKULS IN REAL LIFE CAN DO IT SO WHY COULDNT WE DO IT IN THE FUTURE DX??????" "I LEIK IT CUZ ITS FUNNNNN".

When someone presents an irrational opinion (especially on the internet) I ignore it and move on. His invalid argument does not invalidate your valid argument.

[Captain1nsaneo]

It's not about realism or fun, it's about the game adhering to an internal logic.

The logic PS2 has is that your character takes up physical space. In some cases that means that switching between seats is fine. For example in a Sundy it's very likely that your character can move between positions inside the vehicle. In modern tanks you could also switch positions with out exiting the tank. However, if you think about a police car, you need to physically get out to move between the front and back seats. The reason is that there is a physical object blocking you. You can move between seats in a van but getting in and out of the driver's or gunner's seat probably takes more time than sliding along a bench.

Or listen to balance

Remember how the dev's talked about how tanks could have awesome AA or AV weapons for their gunners? Imagine switching to your AV weapon while your main gun reloaded. That whole 1 gunned tank vs 2 one-manned tanks suddenly breaks in horrible ways when the 2 one-man's can both use gunner weapons too.

[Death2All]

Originally Posted by Envenom

You haven't addressed MY points. How is adding the extra step of exiting a vehicle add anything to gameplay other than slowing it down and stinting the action?

Yeah, I did, right here:

Originally Posted by Death2All

I like this. Your penalty for choosing the wrong seat should be...Well you're in the wrong seat, tough luck. Better not make that mistake in the future.

I just don't like seat changing, even with a delay on firing, or movement, or anything I still dislike it greatly. Anything that let's you switch from a gunner seat to a driver seat without being in any danger (apart from a delay in movement or firing) is lame. It always boils down to people camping around in their tanks spamming, only to switch to the driver seat and zoom away once they're in any real danger. That is boring. Please don't degenerate PS into yet another lame modern FPS manifested with the most borderline retarded mechanics to ever plague games.

Originally Posted by Envenom

And how Battlefield an irrelevant experience?

Because it doesn't pertain to anything being discussed. It's just you trying to throw some out information to enforce your point that makes no sense.

It would be like me saying "Well, I like non vehicle switching because I played PS1 since it came out". That's stupid. At least I actually gave a reason for why I liked it

Since it's apparent your reading comprehension isn't up to par today, I'll go ahead post it again for you

Originally Posted by Death2All

I like this. Your penalty for choosing the wrong seat should be...Well you're in the wrong seat, tough luck. Better not make that mistake in the future.

Originally Posted by Envenom

BF: Vehicle combat on an immense scale. They've got it nailed down friend.

Okay, if we're going to have argument like that then I guess I'll just say "Planetside combat is on a massive scale. They've got it nailed down friend"

Do you see why that sounds stupid? You're not saying why this is. You're just saying it like it's a fact.

Originally Posted by Envenom

BF is one of the longest running and most successful large scale vehicular combat games in our generation. It only makes sense to draw comparisons.

...WHY?HOW?

What makes it so successful? Explain to me how it's better. Give some examples.

Jesus, fuck.

[Death2All]

Originally Posted by Zenben

When someone presents an irrational opinion (especially on the internet) I ignore it and move on. His invalid argument does not invalidate your valid argument.

I can't let that stigma perpetuate, otherwise more and more people catch wind to that ideal and latch onto it because they're idiots. You've got to make a point on shutting down idiots, otherwise your community degenerates to the likes of Call of Duty or some other awful community.