Debunking some myths regarding PS1 playerbase demise. - Page 5

Cyrane · 2012-08-12, 05:06 PM

Cool write up but I'd have to disagree with the Pay to Win expansions. In my opinion they weren't that bad and they didn't make you super overpowered and completely unbeatable (after a good patch).

Eyeklops · 2012-08-12, 06:54 PM

Excellent post. PS1 suffered from "power creep." New content was almost always overpowered. The BFR's, Galaxy Gunship, Phant. IMO the GG breaks tank gameplay when it's around. I still long for the balanced slow orb Lasher of old. Why they ruined a good gun I will never know, all it needed was 5 more in the clip. :/

RoninOni · 2012-08-12, 07:05 PM

Well, since PS2 is F2P.... no worry on that really.

They drop new content, just drop the cert points to unlock it.

To keep their player base, they'll HAVE to keep things balanced.

If they add something that everyone suddenly certs into and starts abusing, then it'll get nerfed :P They need to keep their player count up

Ritual · 2012-10-25, 09:27 AM

I think the lattice system was an idea created by the beta community, not necessarily by the SOE design team. Wasn't it named the "Matrix system" on the beta forums?

The moral of the story in this thread? Im not sure.

Don't use the live servers as testing grounds?

texico · 2012-10-25, 09:44 AM

For me the poor coding was a massive death wish too. I always remember people telling me that the current Devs had very little ability to change the game; couldn't edit terrain or bases for example. It did badly for lag too, and there were some persistent bugs that just could not be got rid of.

The terminal bug anyone? It made me chuckle attacking a base stairwell to see the VS/TR running at me in PJ's and going "yep, term bug".

And the white terrain glitch, that haunted almost my whole time playing. After about 6 hours suddenly you'd see a patch of terrain gone white and thought "here we go". You had to restart as soon as you saw it because it meant the game was going to crash in the next few minutes. PAIN IN THE ASS.

Personally, PlanetSide 1 as I knew it ended when Markov merged with Emerald and as Fig said, it killed Werner dead. Prior to that, Werner was a kind of community. After years of playing you pretty much recognized everybody on the whole server on all 3 empires, and all the outfits too. Werner had the TR zerg too, 40% population. Once it merged, all those kind of things vanished/changed.

But the point in all this is what I've been saying a lot; PlanetSide 1 worked. Despite ALL the hurdles outlined in Fig's post it was still able to maintain a playable population for 9 years, because the game worked.. But it never managed to take off because of all the things in Fig's post. What happens if you give it that? What happens if you give it a HD facelift? A lucrative marketing campagne? Get it in all the stores, on steam, in all the magazines, fix all the gamebreaking bugs, give it a massive dev team for monthly content development, give it a F2P model, fix the excessive lag, make sure the gaming world over knows and is talking about the only MMOFPS that exists?

These were all the things that needed "fixing" in PlanetSide 1. Not some shoddy false idea that the core mechanics were flawed/unappealing.

ringring · 2012-10-25, 09:50 AM

Having looked at those subscription figures again there is one notable thing that I don't think anyone has commented on.

It is, at release or just after the subscription peaked at 60k. They stayed steady(ish) for a while and as Figgy said the decline really kicked in at the introduction of BFR's and the release of WOW.

But, the peak was only 60K! For the only MOFPS on the market!

Why was this? Did people not know about it? Was there no or little marketing? This implies that the same game launched differently and better would have gained a much greater player base and no one would be talking about relative failure.

Or, the other explanation is that a player base of 60k is the natual limit for an MMOFPS, I doubt anyone seriously would believe that.

On the 'why people quit' thing. I would also say that the game was not stable at all. I know many game up because they crashed all the time, even 1 year after launch when I joined it did this.

Gatekeeper · 2012-10-25, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by texico

For me the poor coding was a massive death wish too. I always remember people telling me that the current Devs had very little ability to change the game; couldn't edit terrain or bases for example. It did badly for lag too, and there were some persistent bugs that just could not be got rid of.

The terminal bug anyone? It made me chuckle attacking a base stairwell to see the VS/TR running at me in PJ's and going "yep, term bug".

And the white terrain glitch, that haunted almost my whole time playing. After about 6 hours suddenly you'd see a patch of terrain gone white and thought "here we go". You had to restart as soon as you saw it because it meant the game was going to crash in the next few minutes. PAIN IN THE ASS.

Personally, PlanetSide 1 as I knew it ended when Markov merged with Emerald and as Fig said, it killed Werner dead. Prior to that, Werner was a kind of community. After years of playing you pretty much recognized everybody on the whole server on all 3 empires, and all the outfits too. Werner had the TR zerg too, 40% population. Once it merged, all those kind of things vanished/changed.

But the point in all this is what I've been saying a lot; PlanetSide 1 worked. Despite ALL the hurdles outlined in Fig's post it was still able to maintain a playable population for 9 years, because the game worked.. But it never managed to take off because of all the things in Fig's post. What happens if you give it that? What happens if you give it a HD facelift? A lucrative marketing campagne? Get it in all the stores, on steam, in all the magazines, fix all the gamebreaking bugs, give it a massive dev team for monthly content development, give it a F2P model, fix the excessive lag, make sure the gaming world over knows and is talking about the only MMOFPS that exists?

These were all the things that needed "fixing" in PlanetSide 1. Not some shoddy false idea that the core mechanics were flawed/unappealing.

Absolutely spot on. Well said.

Some changes probably were needed - more exciting gunplay, for example - and some are probably a good idea - like replacing armour with shields. But the core gameplay of PS1 was solid in most respects, and just needed tweaking and building on - not scrapping and replacing.

Captain1nsaneo · 2012-10-25, 10:59 AM

Fantastic post, I agree with about 98% of it. I'll try to tease out what bugs me or I disagree with.

Originally Posted by Figment

CaveSide pay-2-win, easy-win-button-long-distance-killing (tape mouse button down for dozens of free kills per Flail shot - when Flail wasn't nerfed yet)

The only nerfs to the flail I know of is the armor reduction and its short range damage being reduced heavily. (There were also some changes to its range and angle of fire but those aren't really nerfs per se) Flails are fine, then again I bet we fall on different sides of the artillery debate.

Originally Posted by Figment

Furthermore, players were arbitrarily barred from using and acquiring particular weapons systems on the islands (even though necessary, due to for instance Skyguard being bound to the Tech Plant - something a lot of players have always considered a mistake due to aircav being omnipresent and counters being needed)

BI were changed and their rule sets homogenized which ruined them. When they launched they were each designed to cater to one style of fight and they were awesome at their chosen style. Your argument about ghost capping really doesn't make much sense as it could be applied to any other cont or the global system of base capping as well.

The normal argument about the bending was that it put the global lattice going through Oshur with the BI rather than Searhus which changed the way you could attack various conts making empire movement more constrained.

Also SG's being bound to tech wasn't a problem. Reavers are also bound to tech and you could always bring either back from sanc.

Originally Posted by Figment

Aftershock (BFRs) and WoW

Nailed it.

-----
And other posts:

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Cert bundles.

Bundles weren't a problem. Unless you liked buying all 3 ATVs for 2 certs apiece. There's 'specialization' and then there's 'no one ever expects to see this vehicle because the certs are better spent elsewhere sunderer'. Also lower pops at that point meant that you couldn't afford to have as much specialization as you could with larger pops.

Originally Posted by Ritual

I think the lattice system was an idea created by the beta community, not necessarily by the SOE design team. Wasn't it named the "Matrix system" on the beta forums?

The moral of the story in this thread? Im not sure.

Don't use the live servers as testing grounds?

I vaguely remember something like that, but it's been long enough for me to have developed dementia about it.

Definitely agree with the need for a beta server. SPAMMYLASHERNOOBS AWAY! (good days)
Devs please take note about the beta server. Everyone started at around Br11 or so with plenty of certs so that they could actually test the changes. (that was later bumped up to starting at 20)

Originally Posted by Figment

If you look at the above, pretty much ALL reasons of failure are related to mismanagement. SOME systems can be blamed, BUT these are always development mistakes that the players have always immediately pointed out.

Often in advance.

Hey remember that time when they added a cloaking flying transport with a 20mm pilot controlled gun despite everyone telling them it shouldn't have a gun?
For months.

PoisonTaco · 2012-10-25, 11:04 AM

Never played PS1 in its "prime" but Star Wars Galaxies was my first MMO. As long as SOE doesn't pull something like the NGE again I'll be happy.

Beerbeer · 2012-10-25, 11:05 AM

I don't believe the game was a failure based purely on developmental missteps. Did it help the matter as the game progressed? Probably not.

In my opinion, this FPS game didn't have wide acclaim like others simply for one reason: the cost of admission and the cost to continually play. FPS games as a subscription-based game model was sure to only appeal to a select few, while others with a one time fee are guaranteed to have a wide distribution if it's fun (e.g., moh, cod and BF franchise).

The developers, in their desperation, tried things that they hoped would help, that really didn't, but could you blame them?

Hmr85 · 2012-10-30, 06:38 PM

Awesome write up from figment as usual. I have to agree with Figment also.

Baneblade · 2012-10-31, 11:14 AM

PS1 was never more popular than when the Reserves Phase was ongoing.

MrBloodworth · 2012-10-31, 11:17 AM

You mean fodder-side. Imagine that.

Who would have thought 15 a month and a 20$ box fee would deter FPS players?

Originally Posted by PoisonTaco

Never played PS1 in its "prime" but Star Wars Galaxies was my first MMO. As long as SOE doesn't pull something like the NGE again I'll be happy.

PS2 is becoming the Planetside NGE.

Binkus · 2012-11-28, 09:51 AM

Bravo sir an excellent post!!

one of my pet hates at the moment are people in PS2 who quote the failure of PS1 as an example of vital missing game mechanics

i cant help thinking the cert system was far superior in PS1

for player longevity and intimacy with your character

curbing the PS2 venting to... "its good, but no where near as good as PS1 for game play and community"

Ghoest9 · 2012-11-28, 11:35 AM

56k modem lag and hacks hurt thre pop more than anything else.

But BFRs also drove people away over time. Many players found them frustrating to deal with - until later when they got the nerf hammer.