Please remove Vehicle seat swapping. - Page 2

Rago · 2012-07-17, 03:15 PM

I in fact like Swapping Seats, like in every newer Game.It is useful.

MrBloodworth · 2012-07-17, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by exoteror

My main reason is if you are not fully manned you can swap and try to kill the other guy.

That's the problem.

maradine · 2012-07-17, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Is this a generational thing? No repercussions to your choices? You don't even have to get out to man a different gun, that's ok?

There are lots of repercussions to your choices in this game - "crap, I got into the wrong seat" doesn't appear to be designed to be one of them.

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Your machine gunner got sniped, so you should be able to instantly pop in and continue firing at his target? NVM that the guy who removed your gunner should now have his advantage he played tacitly for?

Presumably, that sniper is now lined up for a very quick and easy double kill, seeing as the driver parked it to get on the gun. If he could make the shot on the move, you've now just given him gravy. This is a problem?

fvdham · 2012-07-17, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

There are lots of repercussions to your choices in this game - "crap, I got into the wrong seat" doesn't appear to be designed to be one of them.

If you are in the wrong seat you did not pay attention to the yellow icon.
Just get out, move to the right icon, get in.

EisenKreutzer · 2012-07-17, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Is this a generational thing? No repercussions to your choices? You don't even have to get out to man a different gun, that's ok?

Your machine gunner got sniped, so you should be able to instantly pop in and continue firing at his target? NVM that the guy who removed your gunner should now have his advantage he played tacitly for?

I don't see how you got from my post to "no repercussions." I believe I was both polite and clear in my post, and I'm not sure I appreciate this aggressive line of questioning, in which I believe you are trying to imply that I am juvenile and immature, but I'll try to respond.

No, I am not against choices having consequences, neither for me nor my enemies. I understand that you feel this is a valid argument for disallowing seat swapping, but I don't agree with you.
In your machine gunner/sniper example, the death of the player and the brief end of firing is, in my opinion, reward enough for the effort of the sniper.

I don't neccessarily disagree with your point, but I do feel that allowing for seat swapping solves more issues than it creates.

MrBloodworth · 2012-07-17, 03:23 PM

Nope, I'm not being aggressive. Sorry you feel this way. It just seems that people who grew up on the recent crop of session based shooters ( Session based shooters are built on the premiss of the disposable experience, because they end ) are the ones who seem to be OK with this.

I'm clearly not going to change peoples minds, and that is who they seem to be designing for. Its another system to protect users from themselves, personally I feel it cheapens the title, but OK.

Clearly people feel, that despite their choices, or despite "loss" ( Gunner, teammates, Support ), they should have the full arsenal a vehicle allows at any given time, regardless of this being a team based game.

Flaropri · 2012-07-17, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Its not, as you can instantly swap to whatever suits the situation.

Yes, but you can't fire all weapons at once. You don't have all firepower if you don't have a full crew. Being able to adapt is different from having full firepower.

Now, we can debate how quickly people should be able to adapt, but I think that saying that because people can switch seats they have full firepower is flat out incorrect. You can't fire a Lib's Nose, Belly, and Tail cannons all at once if you're the only person in it. You might be able to switch and use one of those, but you don't have your full firepower to bare (or the ability to fly well).

My take on it. Hotswitching is fine at the moment. If there is a problem, it could be with (especially tanks) making use of hotswitching to bypass reload times as a single player. The easiest way to fix that (if it is actually the case) would be to reset the reload time if the person switches, so it starts again from the beginning if/when they get back into that seat.

If there is a greater problem, having it default to reload regardless or even have an engine restart for pilot seat, could be a way to deal with it, but I don't think it's necessary from what I've seen so far (but play experience could change my mind).

I don't think there's a need to remove adaptability entirely, since there are obvious trade-offs with getting out of the driver seat to man a different weapon.

fvdham · 2012-07-17, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

If I were flying a Liberator (I'm not the best pilot), I would like to give the pilots seat to my friend if he is a better pilot than me.

You don't need seat swapping for this.
Have you not played PlanetSide 1 ?

You can land, both leave the vehicle and enter the vehicle.
Or even better, the best player gets the plane.

EisenKreutzer · 2012-07-17, 03:25 PM

Nope, I haven't played Planetside 1.

Stardouser · 2012-07-17, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

There are lots of repercussions to your choices in this game - "crap, I got into the wrong seat" doesn't appear to be designed to be one of them.

Presumably, that sniper is now lined up for a very quick and easy double kill, seeing as the driver parked it to get on the gun. If he could make the shot on the move, you've now just given him gravy. This is a problem?

This. There are repercussions for switching seats. Ceasing movement chief among them.

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Nope, I'm not being aggressive. Sorry you feel this way. It just seems that people who grew up on the recent crop of session based shooters ( Session based shooters are built on the premiss of the disposable experience, because they end ) are the ones who seem to be OK with this.

I'm clearly not going to change peoples minds, and that is who they seem to be designing for. Its another system to protect users from themselves, personally I feel it cheapens the title, but OK.

Being a session shooter has absolutely nothing to do with it. ArmA is also a session shooter. So is CoD. It's about finding the perfect balance between realism and expediency for gameplay.

Persistence and scale do not have anything to do with what the realism levels should be. If anything, persistence and scale should increase the focus on the war, not the realism levels.

And your arguments are heavily rooted in realism, it would seem. Are you consistently supporting realism across all issues? Or just this one? Example: Is PS2 using mag system or ammo pool? If ammo pool, what about the repercussions of wasteful reloading?

MrBloodworth · 2012-07-17, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Flaropri

You don't have all firepower if you don't have a full crew.

You have access to all available firepower even after loosing a man(s). I believe you are arguing semantics.

maradine · 2012-07-17, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

You have access to all available firepower even after loosing a man(s). I believe you are arguing semantics.

Right. You didn't lose the gun. You have, on the other hand, lost 50% of the vehicle's simultaneous capability. It is now doing half of the things it was doing before. The difference is, the guy left behind gets to decide which is more important at the moment.

Synapse · 2012-07-17, 03:32 PM

Instant seat swapping seems a really poor idea to me, exactly because of the supporter's arguements.

Lots of discussion here is about tanks, but really we should be talking about the liberator. Seat swapping allows one guy to fly up over a base as a lib, jump over to the bomb seat, drop a bunch of bombs, and then back into the driver to fly away.

If doable at all, that should be extremely difficult. Personally I would rather solo liberators can't be done, but instant seat swapping makes that kind of stuff possible.

EisenKreutzer · 2012-07-17, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Nope, I'm not being aggressive. Sorry you feel this way.

Alright, fair enough. I'm sorry for misinterpreting you.

It just seems that people who grew up on the recent crop of session based shooters ( Session based shooters are built on the premiss of the disposable experience, because they end ) are the ones who seem to be OK with this.

I'm clearly not going to change peoples minds, and that is who they seem to be designing for. Its another system to protect users from themselves, personally I feel it cheapens the title, but OK.

Clearly people feel, that despite their choices, or despite "loss" ( Gunner, teammates, Support ), they should have the full arsenal a vehicle allows at any given time, regardless of this being a team based game.

I don't think the game is being designed with this sort of mentality in mind, though I appreciate that you feel that way.
Planetside 2 is fundamentally quite different than Planetside was. It owes more to modern military shooters than it does to the war game simulation that was part of what the original Planetside was. The devs have kept many elements of the previous game, enough to make the experience very similiar, but at heart it is a modern FPS, with all the good and bad that comes with that.

I think this is part of the problem we are seeing expressed in this community through various threads and heated debates.
The old guard, those who played, enjoyed and loved the original Planetside, want this new game to mirror the old one in as many ways as possible. Those who never played it, or who didn't enjoy it quite as much when they first played it, want to see many of these old features changed or even outright removed, to make the gameplay feel more modern, for lack of a better word.

I think the devs have a desire to create a really good, really popular game. But I don't think they share the strong devotion to everything about the original game that those who are long time fans of it (or games like it for that matter) have developed over the years.

In many ways, I regret never playing Planetside 1. It seems like a very deep, very good wargame, even with all its quirks and flaws (or so I am led to believe).
But Planetside 2 will not be a wargame, it will be a modern first person shooter with strong wargame elements.

Make of that what you will.

MrBloodworth · 2012-07-17, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by Synapse

Lots of discussion here is about tanks, but really we should be talking about the liberator. Seat swapping allows one guy to fly up over a base as a lib, jump over to the bomb seat, drop a bunch of bombs, and then back into the driver to fly away.

^ This.

Being a session shooter has absolutely nothing to do with it.

It absolutely does.