Complexity of the Game

Deice · 2012-06-24, 08:36 PM

I had introduced many friends to Planetside in the past. Not many stayed… When asked about the game, most liked it but had said that it was overly complex and level progression was slow. Being a new player was difficult though it actually kept me going! Will this deter new players in Planetside 2 even being free to play? How much is too much? Waiting to see how the mission system pans out.

Otleaz · 2012-06-24, 08:38 PM

No, they are designing the game to be as easy to understand as possible.

NEWSKIS · 2012-06-24, 08:40 PM

Sadly they're trying to get the bf/cod communities into it so its not going to be as complex as the original.

Clonehunter · 2012-06-24, 08:40 PM

Level Progression? I think I heard of that for PS1, but I wasn't sure about PS2. Is that going to be a feature for PS2?

Deice · 2012-06-24, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by NEWSKIS

Sadly they're trying to get the bf/cod communities into it so its not going to be as complex as the original.

I did enjoy the complextiy of PS1. I hope it's not just a dumbed down ver with updated graphics... Still looking forward to playing and searching every nook and cranny of the game and UI.

NEWSKIS · 2012-06-24, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by Deice

I did enjoy the complextiy of PS1. I hope it's not just a dumbed down ver with updated graphics... Still looking forward to playing and searching every nook and cranny of the game and UI.

The complexity was what gave you so many different things to do in the first game.

amblingalong · 2012-06-24, 09:15 PM

As excited as I am for this game, one of the saddest things for me has been the degree to which systems have been neutered or taken out entirely. In particular, the ability for a single really good infiltrator to turn the tide of entire battles by taking out generators, the cc, and spawn tubes while overcoming challenges like limited inventory (so you had to carefully plan your items and hack supply closets) and base pain modules/automated turrets with interlink.

I think PS2 will be awesome, but in terms of that type of super tactical gameplay, I don't expect much. The bases have explicitly an intentionally been designed to play like typical FPS maps, instead of a carefully crafted puzzle your team had to solve.

amblingalong · 2012-06-24, 09:23 PM

It's also worth noting that a huge amount of strategy surrounding radar/mosquito coverage/Interlink/audio amplifiers has been removed, partially because there are no longer automated turrets (whether you feel this is good or bad, it undeniably lessens the importance of information warfare to some degree) and partially because stamina (and thus implant management, surging, etc) isn't in the game.

Basically, PS2 will be a great experience, but much, much less complex. Some people will like that, some won't.

Toppopia · 2012-06-24, 09:23 PM

Don't you guys see? This is Higby's plan. He will make the game simple to draw in the BF3/COD crowd, then once they are hooked, ie, after 6 months to a year, he will start bringing in way more tactical stuff so that the BF3/COD people are used to a strategic game and don't immediately think "Oh my gosh, this game is too complex". And thus, i just revealed Higby's masterplan and he will most likely have me assassinated now. But please wait till i have played before you kill me.

Deice · 2012-06-24, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by amblingalong

As excited as I am for this game, one of the saddest things for me has been the degree to which systems have been neutered or taken out entirely. In particular, the ability for a single really good infiltrator to turn the tide of entire battles by taking out generators, the cc, and spawn tubes while overcoming challenges like limited inventory (so you had to carefully plan your items and hack supply closets) and base pain modules/automated turrets with interlink.

I think PS2 will be awesome, but in terms of that type of super tactical gameplay, I don't expect much. The bases have explicitly an intentionally been designed to play like typical FPS maps, instead of a carefully crafted puzzle your team had to solve.

Is there a happy medium? Are there in depth support/non combat rolls? Most cod/bf players are concerned abut K/D, No? Don't get me wrong... I look at it. I have been so pissed about it I would play a support roll for a while.

amblingalong · 2012-06-24, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by Deice

Is there a happy medium? Are there in depth support/non combat rolls? Most cod/bf players are concerned abut K/D, No? Don't get me wrong... I look at it. I have been so pissed about it I would play a support roll for a while.

Support roles are incredibly important in PS2. Engineers and medics are the classic examples, but also troop transport pilots, scouts and spotters, long range fire support from liberators or MBTs... Theres plenty to do.

K/D is kinda irrelevant in PS1, honestly. If you get no kills but take out the spawn tubes and generator of a base, you can accomplish way more than getting 200 kills that are immediately respawned.

Toppopia · 2012-06-24, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by amblingalong

Support roles are incredibly important in PS2. Engineers and medics are the classic examples, but also troop transport pilots, scouts and spotters, long range fire support from liberators or MBTs... Theres plenty to do.

K/D is kinda irrelevant in PS1, honestly. If you get no kills but take out the spawn tubes and generator of a base, you can accomplish way more than getting 200 kills that are immediately respawned.

My most played class probably will be the medic or Light Assault, because i like being a medic, and will they have any unique weapons?

And i will like LA for flanking enemies and getting into annoying spots.

And whichever class has a proper Light Machine gun, i will play as that, unless all guns can get a drum mag, then i will outfit my medic to be a suppressive medic.

So support classes will be important as you say, because who will transport/support our brave COD people that don't like using vehicles or playing support classes? Thats where we come in, the glorious team work orientated people.

Littleman · 2012-06-24, 09:49 PM

I'd say the complexity is actually deeper this time around...

First game, cert points paid for base equipment you couldn't do anything with but grab and use. The "complexity" came from setting up your inventory efficiently, and being properly equipped for the situations you weren't planning to find yourself in. EI, infantry bringing along a rocket launcher or a sniper rifle or both and a mid-range handgun (the AMP is pretty beast with proper tap-fire, actually) was generally a good idea if the fight was outdoors.

This game, we get all that right out the gate, but it's sectioned between classes, however now you get to modify it all with side grades.

I think complexity was the wrong word for PS1, it was more of a gap due to old, archaic systems, such as the network coding. Vets abused the code with ADAD. Newbs didn't quite understand that, especially as time went on and broadband became widely available, so the idea that the game is compensating for 56k was completely alien to them. Couple that with slow TTK's with anything but a heavy assault weapon, and not having the certifications to afford everything plus implants one needs to be prepared for a multitude of situations like most of the longer term players could, and it was just discouraging.

New people don't like dieing when they feel they should have won. This isn't a "get over it" scenario: a game NEEDS new blood to survive, especially one that relies on people for there to be a game. No one can force anyone to keep playing when they're not having fun. The words "it'll get better if you just commit" are empty and hollow: the game needs to be great the moment they hit "enter game."

As one noteworthy example, getting the jump on someone must equal a kill if one's aim is true, or it's bull$#!% worth quitting over. I almost did and I was coming back as a vet. I've spoken with real newbs and they did quit over that scenario. Their MA rifle should be able to KILL in less than half a magazine of well placed shots. Essentially, before the bastard they're shooting has time to turn around kill them MUCH faster with their better gun.

Part of what caused PS1's decline was the thick wall that was going from cannon fodder to someone who can perform half-way decently. NO ONE likes to die over and over and over and over and over again with few kills to show for it.

First impressions are everything. I was lucky enough to get to play Planetside when it first started, dazed and confused after a HART drop, only to solo down two NC as my Vanu despite how $#!%%& the pulsar was at the time, using a rock for cover (I was playing tactical before CoD 1 was even released.) I felt awesome, and proceeded to climb the hill and taking that tower right after that. Everyone was a newb back then.

8 years later, you have long time vets that have seen it all, know what strategies work, how the netcode operates, etc, smashing newbs to bits. There's no way to ease them in nicely, because vets don't know to nor how to hold back. They're prepared for anything and everything. The new guy is not.

So to reiterate, I think PS2 will actually be the more complex game this time around, but SOE knows they have to make the newb experience actually enjoyable for more than 10% - if that many - of the new players joining in some years down the road. So if the game feels "dumbed-down" to you, I can't convince you otherwise, but I can tell you it's so you'll always have a lot of people to shoot at, instead of the same few familiar faces you see in PS1 now, and not because they're doing anything to stand out from the crowd.

amblingalong · 2012-06-24, 09:58 PM

I think you're missing the point, which is that while plenty of FPS aspects have been improved, a ton of systems- especially with the bases- have been removed or changed to resemble typical FPS maps. Basically taking over a base now looks a lot like a large scale deathmatch, with the winner capturing the facility. In the original you could do things like take out generators/spawn tubes, you could install modules, you got lattice benefits, you had storage lockers that played a key role in infiltration... It's not inherently good or bad, it's just much more like a deathmatch as compared to the originals cerebral problem-solving elements.

Littleman · 2012-06-24, 10:06 PM

Not complex by any means, some of those I'd call common sense in taking a base with as little resistance as possible Especially at bio labs... Of course, by extension, they could also be called dick moves that ended fights fairly abruptly.

Regarding the locker and lattice bit. Those are unfortunate consequences of rendering them for the most part moot via hexes and no looting + spawning in with the load out of your choosing.