Is SOE trying to force the game into a predictable pattern? - Page 4

VioletZero · 2012-03-29, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by Raymac

OK. Maybe I wasn't clear enough so I will bold the important parts so you can understand.

Capisce?

Oh yeah, I'm sure a player's first experience being spawn camped will keep them playing for a long time.

Dreamcast · 2012-03-29, 10:21 PM

Huh?

Bro this is Planetside 1 with better graphics basically.

Planetside 1 was no where being near being n00b unfriendly....it was easy as hell.
This game isn't either.

I really fail to see your point.

SKYeXile · 2012-03-29, 10:32 PM

With the added shields to spawn rooms i think they're doing all they can to prevent spawn camping.

Kriegson · 2012-03-29, 10:51 PM

Basically, you (the OP) are freaking out over vague concepts and even more vague theories on elements of the game that we know nearly nothing about, and that is to far effected by the human element to reasonable remain "predictable".

You cite EVE as an excellent game with a rich and storied history, but then what does the gameplay of EVE ultimately revolve around? Capture the objectives (mines, sites to build your own stations, etc) organize attacks and defenses, gain power and prestige.
All of the above are included in PS2, albeit with their differences largely beyond the realm of nuance.

Virtually all of the concerns in this thread are invalidated by the fact that we have virtually no idea how things are actually going to work, and that they could change as needed in beta.

Raymac · 2012-03-29, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

Oh yeah, I'm sure a player's first experience being spawn camped will keep them playing for a long time.

By saying that, and I mean no disrespect, you show that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Seriously, don't just take my word or the word of anyone else here telling you this is nothing to worry about. Get on Planetside. Experience it for yourself. And see for yourself why this is a non-issue.

VioletZero · 2012-03-30, 01:23 AM

Originally Posted by Raymac

By saying that, and I mean no disrespect, you show that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Seriously, don't just take my word or the word of anyone else here telling you this is nothing to worry about. Get on Planetside. Experience it for yourself. And see for yourself why this is a non-issue.

I'd love to but I have no money.

But I don't think SOE thinks like you do. They think that if they don't have control and things don't go exactly the way they think it should, then the game will turn out too different from Call of Duty and will scare players away.

There has been little to no mention of how they plan to expand on the MMO elements besides the wishful thinking of sandbox building content.(Which, in my experience with MMOs, such things NEVER come to fruition.)

The entire focus up to this point as all been about making the shooting fun. And while that is indeed important, it definitely shouldn't be the -only- thing they focus on.

And with this focus on making the shooting fun, they want to make the scenarios fun. And the way they do that(at least from a designer's perspective) is to manipulate the game's mechanics so that it is a well designed experience that doesn't branch out in its own direction. And the way they're doing that is to have this phenomenally stupid three sanctuary system on all of the continents so that the closer you get to the sanctuary, the harder it will be to take. essentially meaning that nothing will ever change because it will always focus on the center points and territory will never change up. NC will always come up from the southwest corner, take one of the middle objectives, lose it shortly after to someone else, and go on from there.

SKYeXile · 2012-03-30, 01:39 AM

The backing game design seems pretty solid at the moment.

It encourages pvp through the need to old land, via resource ticks and not resources through capturing.
there is an incentive via resources to hold and fight for land.
there is extensive customisation through the purchasing of new weapons and cert trees.
Battles will be very dynamic through use of mobile and the large number of spawn points.

i can see afew possible flaws with some system, but they're really only due to lack of information, what we do know, it looks pretty solid. I'v played my fair share a MMO pvp games, from MUD's to daoc and practically everything inbetween, from WAR's and Aions to indies like perpetuum, i can generally spot a world pvp game design flaw these days, I'm just not seeing it with PS2.

Raymac · 2012-03-30, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by VioletZero

I'd love to but I have no money.

OK, then just listen to somebody that has played the game since May 2003. I've played for long all day sessions, and I've jumped in for smaller 30 minute sprints. I can tell you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it was always incredibly easy to find WHERE the fight was. It was easy to tell where the big fights were and where the small fights were, so you cuold pick what you wanted depending on your mood. There is absolutely no reason to purposefully design the game to happen in a predictable place.

Think about it this way. If they really wanted us to fight in a predictable area, aren't there far better mechanics to facilitate that? Like the lattice link, or designing the map center to have more bases or a mega-base, etc. etc.

It's one thing to think that it will end up as a stalemate as an unintended result of the design, but it is way off to think this is the purpose behind the design. And the great thing about it being an unintended result is that it can be fixed during testing.