Planetside 1 was ahead of its time

culkid · 2011-07-06, 11:10 AM

In my opinion, Planetside came out at a time when MMO gaming and having higher end PC's was nowhere near as popular as it is today. The ideas/features that planetside provided were original and fun to play. If Planetside 2 is anything like PS1, we will have an amazing game on our hands which can hopefully sustain large numbers. Nothing better than a huge battle on a Cyssor Bridge for 2 hours until Galaxies flew in to drop troops behind the enemy.

Redshift · 2011-07-06, 11:29 AM

bridge battles sucked

Grimster · 2011-07-06, 12:34 PM

Nah I really loved bridge battles most of the time.

Some of my most epic memories with my outfit are from bridge battles.

Nothing gets your adrenaline rushing like sitting in a Vanguard trying to cross a bridge that is heavily shelled by the enemy.

Well maybe hot dropping with your full outfit squad over a sieged enemy base that also was a rush.

Logit · 2011-07-06, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by SRxRedshift

bridge battles sucked

This.

DviddLeff · 2011-07-06, 02:25 PM

I loved Tore because of the bridges that surrounded it.

Of course, as a VS Magrider driver bridges just concentrated my targets and stopped them from flanking my squad.

But yeah, after WoW and the glut of MMOs that have followed many more people are willing to pay a subscription fee, and are bored of the same old RPG game mechanics.

Raymac · 2011-07-06, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

I loved Tore because of the bridges that surrounded it.

Of course, as a VS Magrider driver bridges just concentrated my targets and stopped them from flanking my squad.

But yeah, after WoW and the glut of MMOs that have followed many more people are willing to pay a subscription fee, and are bored of the same old RPG game mechanics.

I loved those fights too. I don't even know how much of this I spent between Tore and Laka, but it never really got old for me. I would usually fly a reaver, so there was enough room to flank the VS along the east and attack from that direction.

I also got pretty good at flying underneath that bridge to avoid those damn VS AA maxes.

Bridge battles were great just because they were a bottle neck. Thats about it. There were so few bottle necks on the maps that the bridges were just about all we had. I'm really looking forward to the new maps to see if there will be more "natural" bottle necks to fight over.

And yes, the original PS was way ahead of its time, so I'm excited to see what happens since I think the time is just right for it now.

basti · 2011-07-06, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

I loved Tore because of the bridges that surrounded it.

Tore?

FORTRESS LAKA!

edit: and about bridge battles.
I remember clearly my first one. I dont know where it was, it was literally within my first hour of the game. Think it was Hossin. but to the point: TR VS NC, LOTS LOTS LOTS of tank shells flying around, infantary behind cover fireing at each other, reavers and mossys flying low right between the two fronts, it was bloddy brilliant.

DviddLeff · 2011-07-06, 04:07 PM

Tore was my favourite; as VS we naturally seemed to take it due to the lattice structure before the reshuffle; and then the TR/NC struggled to take it from us due to the water. My Vindicators and I once defended Tore for 5 hours straight, with differing amounts of support from the VS until the enemy was forced to withdraw.

I loved pilots who flew under bridges; when I'm using it as cover for my mag column!

Aractain · 2011-07-06, 04:21 PM

Considering most people still had 56k and the devs (around the indurstry) thought that simple damage was enough of a mechanic for all playstyles (rather than control, support and execution the Three Intertwinded Roles of Everything) that only now is starting to change.

Yeah I would say its ahead of its time - it was good they tried but they failed at nearly everything they implemented. It was so close to being utterly astoundingly good and obviously worth playing but I wanted it to be so much more than a set of binary outcomes.

Maybe this time....

Goku · 2011-07-06, 04:41 PM

I got a chuckle out of all you VS saying you <3 bridge battles. I like bridge battles depending on the location. The Mukuru/Nzame/Leza tri bridge area is the best in my opinion. The bridges are short enough for prowlers and vans to actually shoot across, so it even the playing field a bit when it comes to dealing with VS. I don't really care for the Tore bridge as I have died countless times on there with my van. Though I will say I have nuked 4 or more BFRs coming over from Leza to Tore on that bridge numerous times with my OS. BEP can be found there

. I mostly remember nuking TR BFRs there though.

Sirisian · 2011-07-06, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by Goku

I got a chuckle out of all you VS saying you <3 bridge battles.

Vehicles are like fodder for us VS. I just pull out my lancer and destroy everything. All you hear is "vvvv pew" as like 10 lancers lock into a tank and destroy it in seconds.

Also regarding to the topic it was before its time because as mentioned 56k was prevalent. I actually tried to play this game when it came out using a 56k connection. Had to get DSL until it would run.

Goku · 2011-07-06, 05:42 PM

Yes I always find myself running from Lancers before Strikers. With a Striker you can somewhat avoid due to obstacles getting rid of the lock. Though with a Lancer you think you are in the clear then you start getting pelted and you are dead

.

BlazingSun · 2011-07-06, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by culkid

The ideas/features that planetside provided were original and fun to play.

Fun? Yes. Original? Not so much. Both Battlefield 1942 and C&C Renegade came out before PS. Planetside wasn't that much different .. just bigger and with more players. On a side note: There are more poeple still playing Renegade than Planetside.

Aractain · 2011-07-06, 07:10 PM

Not to mention World War II Online which has a bigger scope than Planetside.

BorisBlade · 2011-07-06, 08:05 PM

Actually PS doesnt play at all like BF. Those games are more about instant death and quick play. Very little interactivity with various aspects of the game. No teamwork really needed other than everyone zerg the other team. Not much diversity, not much of many things. PS has alot more depth. It feels more strategic even from the point of the soldier in how you fight or what you fight with. BF, and esp CoD are just zerg in and hope you get the first shot, if you do you win if you dont they win (due to instant death with most any weapon), instantly respawn and zerg back at em again. Its the same as teh days of UT and quake just with modern weapons and better graphics.

Thats what i like about PS, its nothin like those games, at all. If it was just those games but with more players i wouldnt play it. And yeah WW2OL had a bigger scope but it fails at really producing it since it feels so empty 99% of the time, its executed so poorly. PS was the only game to actually execute the scale in a way so you could experience the massive fights regularly.

And yeah it was ahead of its time, the server structures werent able to do as much as we would have liked nor were players able to really play it as so many were still on 56k, not to mention the pc's were not able to handle it then either. That is no longer the case with everyone on broadband, much better server designs with more power and pc's of the day can handle that type of game much more easily.