Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What is PS missing that you would like to see in PS2?

2

Comments

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Originally posted by Soki123

    Originally posted by Nerf09


    Originally posted by Triadninja


    Originally posted by Nerf09


    Originally posted by MarL

    Guild owned territories or player owned bases.

    What function would they serve?

     Acctually that would be the coolest idea ever. Not only could  you get the competitive clans into it, but that way, a guild who owns a large amount of territory would be considered a "godly" guild, and would be looked at as a flagship for your faction. Plus, that also adds the ability to let players put structures and whatnot in their own places.

    I wouldn't consider a bunch of pimpled faced brats or unemployed bums as "godly", and what purpose would owning structures have?

     I agree, theres no point to it at all. It s a faction v faction v faction game, not guild v guild game. Only way thats a good idea is if they do it like DAOC. Claimed keep/building etc has some perks for all, but the guild/outfit that owns it can get a count on how many are attacking etc. Other then that, theres no point.

     In PS1 outfits could declare a base their home base.  It allowed outfit members to recall port back to it, so it was sort of an extra bind point in the game.  It was most useful for defending that base and also for a rally point for outfits that did coordinated Galaxy drops.

  • Nerf09Nerf09 Member CommonPosts: 2,953

    Originally posted by Aluvius

     

     In PS1 outfits could declare a base their home base.  It allowed outfit members to recall port back to it, so it was sort of an extra bind point in the game.  It was most useful for defending that base and also for a rally point for outfits that did coordinated Galaxy drops.

    Sandbox:  Player created content

    Themepark:  Developer created content

    What you just described is sandboxy, developer didn't put it there, the players did it themselves.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Originally posted by Nerf09

    Originally posted by Aluvius


     

     In PS1 outfits could declare a base their home base.  It allowed outfit members to recall port back to it, so it was sort of an extra bind point in the game.  It was most useful for defending that base and also for a rally point for outfits that did coordinated Galaxy drops.

    Sandbox:  Player created content

    Themepark:  Developer created content

    What you just described is sandboxy, developer didn't put it there, the players did it themselves.

     Oh sure, Planetside is the most sandboxy of any mmo I've played.  I don't mean in an Uncle Owen way, but in an emergent gameplay manner.  That's what made it so addictive.  SOE dumped a box of tools on the floor and then backed away slowly as the lord of the flies process took hold.  Its an entirely tactical game and tactics aren't made by devs.

    Some will like that and some won't.  If you like fps games and pvp sandboxes you'll love Planetside.

    That being said I'd recommend on waiting for PS2 to come out, the original game is quite dated when it comes to the graphical engine.

  • Nerf09Nerf09 Member CommonPosts: 2,953

    Originally posted by Aluvius

    Originally posted by Nerf09


    Originally posted by Aluvius


     

     In PS1 outfits could declare a base their home base.  It allowed outfit members to recall port back to it, so it was sort of an extra bind point in the game.  It was most useful for defending that base and also for a rally point for outfits that did coordinated Galaxy drops.

    Sandbox:  Player created content

    Themepark:  Developer created content

    What you just described is sandboxy, developer didn't put it there, the players did it themselves.

     Oh sure, Planetside is the most sandboxy of any mmo I've played.  I don't mean in an Uncle Owen way, but in an emergent gameplay manner.  That's what made it so addictive.  SOE dumped a box of tools on the floor and then backed away slowly as the lord of the flies process took hold.  Its an entirely tactical game and tactics aren't made by devs.

    Some will like that and some won't.  If you like fps games and pvp sandboxes you'll love Planetside.

    That being said I'd recommend on waiting for PS2 to come out, the original game is quite dated when it comes to the graphical engine.

    That's the trick with sandbox, a developer can intend to add something sandboxy and it turns out to be a themepark addition. 

    Like adding Guild perks would seem to be sandboxy but in reality it would be a themepark addition, giving health boosts and weapon damage mods would force players into joining Guilds.

     

     

    A good sandbox example is fireworks in SWG.  Cool little toys with no apparent function (or maybe they were intended to have a function with entertainers who knows), but they were used regularly by players to advertise and hawk their wares.

    So Themepark is something which boxes players into a narrow path, and sandboxy is something that can be used for many different things.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Originally posted by Nerf09

    Originally posted by Aluvius


    Originally posted by Nerf09


    Originally posted by Aluvius


     

     In PS1 outfits could declare a base their home base.  It allowed outfit members to recall port back to it, so it was sort of an extra bind point in the game.  It was most useful for defending that base and also for a rally point for outfits that did coordinated Galaxy drops.

    Sandbox:  Player created content

    Themepark:  Developer created content

    What you just described is sandboxy, developer didn't put it there, the players did it themselves.

     Oh sure, Planetside is the most sandboxy of any mmo I've played.  I don't mean in an Uncle Owen way, but in an emergent gameplay manner.  That's what made it so addictive.  SOE dumped a box of tools on the floor and then backed away slowly as the lord of the flies process took hold.  Its an entirely tactical game and tactics aren't made by devs.

    Some will like that and some won't.  If you like fps games and pvp sandboxes you'll love Planetside.

    That being said I'd recommend on waiting for PS2 to come out, the original game is quite dated when it comes to the graphical engine.

    That's the trick with sandbox, a developer can intend to add something sandboxy and it turns out to be a themepark addition. 

    Like adding Guild perks would seem to be sandboxy but in reality it would be a themepark addition, giving health boosts and weapon damage mods would force players into joining Guilds.

     

     

    A good sandbox example is fireworks in SWG.  Cool little toys with no apparent function (or maybe they were intended to have a function with entertainers who knows), but they were used regularly by players to advertise and hawk their wares.

    So Themepark is something which boxes players into a narrow path, and sandboxy is something that can be used for many different things.

     In PS2 if you want any outfit (guild) perks then you have to take up certification points to do it.  Your outfit doesn't just get stuff automatically.  There are going to be all sorts of outfits with different foci, there won't be any cookie cutter all level 3 outfits get 5% damage bonus stuff.  If you want to solo and concentrate on yourself then you'll be rewarded for that as well because you'll be able to use those cert points on personal power enhancing stuff.

    In other words if you want something then you'll have to sacrifice something else to get it.  Doesn't get more sandboxy then that.

  • Nerf09Nerf09 Member CommonPosts: 2,953

    we'll see

     

    Sounds like something that requires an excessive amount of balance to banal accuracy.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    All certs are open to everyone, that's most of the balance problem taken care of right there.   Not to mention that in PS1 I killed most people with a pulsar which was the first upgrade from the basic infantry weapon.  No need for any of the heavy weapons, skill played a more important role than equipment.

  • VlasVilneousVlasVilneous Member Posts: 6

    Originally posted by Aluvius

    All certs are open to everyone, that's most of the balance problem taken care of right there.   Not to mention that in PS1 I killed most people with a pulsar which was the first upgrade from the basic infantry weapon.  No need for any of the heavy weapons, skill played a more important role than equipment.

    Yeah, heavy weapons did play a role though.  I used the thumper a lot to dislodge people, which did have the unfortunate side affect of sometimes hitting my team.

    Although my standard loadout always consisted of the NC equivelent  (cant think of the name, railgun?) to your VS.  Tactics centered around running behind maxes and knowing how to aim.  Especially since they added the team damage penalties.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Originally posted by VlasVilneous

    Originally posted by Aluvius

    All certs are open to everyone, that's most of the balance problem taken care of right there.   Not to mention that in PS1 I killed most people with a pulsar which was the first upgrade from the basic infantry weapon.  No need for any of the heavy weapons, skill played a more important role than equipment.

    Yeah, heavy weapons did play a role though.  I used the thumper a lot to dislodge people, which did have the unfortunate side affect of sometimes hitting my team.

    Although my standard loadout always consisted of the NC equivelent  (cant think of the name, railgun?) to your VS.  Tactics centered around running behind maxes and knowing how to aim.  Especially since they added the team damage penalties.

     Yeah I think it was the railgun for NC.  Thumpers were nice but situational, I usually carried one when assaulting a base or when defending after we'd lost the courtyard.

  • ed_angered_anger Member UncommonPosts: 60

    Originally posted by Nerf09

    The ability to herd the largest number of cats doesn't deserve reward or respect.

    A successful game will cater to ad-hoc grouping and small unit tactics (very small unit). 

    it doesn't sound like you played planetside at all, actually. it's a pretty zergish game at heart with 300 people battles.

     


    Originally posted by Nerf09

    I wouldn't consider a bunch of pimpled faced brats or unemployed bums as "godly", and what purpose would owning structures have?

    owning structures gives a goal for larger groups, owning territory is a reason to play in itself, people identify with "their space" and get into the game more. think of eve for example.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Yeah in fact no rvr mmo has ever been without the zerg.   Its usually the guilds that tend to "herd the cats" into at least the correct general direction, so it does deserve some reward heh.

  • binkusbinkus Member Posts: 57

    really hope they make the TR max worth playing, move around and static target victim mode were the two options

     

    i would also like to see those pistols they brought in removed, the unload a whole clip pistol

     

    more hand to hand weapons i would like to see, for a bit more damage making assault troops

     

    would still like to see the caves but with a bit less faffing around in them

     

    oh and if they design bases, these forts or strong points, can they be designed like they were made for purpose like big gates, rather than a nice backdoor and two huge openings, make them propper fort like maybe with a bit more variety like airbases and stronghold

     

    the loving nostalgia feeling from the first game is flooding back, there were moment in the first game where it was just epic! you would be ground pounding with artillery shots flying over your head gun fire whizzing past as you head for a tree to jump over the walls or that rock by the back door emp the CE clusters ahh the memories 

    nerf scissors! rock is fine...
    yours paper

  • VultureSkullVultureSkull Member UncommonPosts: 1,774

    I wish that someone else develops a similar game for exmaple: 

    EA could get Dice, or whoever makes the Battlefield series talking to Mythic who made DAoC talking, to produce an awesome MMO/RvR/FPS..................................

  • binkusbinkus Member Posts: 57

    Originally posted by VultureSkull

    I wish that someone else develops a similar game for exmaple: 

    EA could get Dice, or whoever makes the Battlefield series talking to Mythic who made DAoC talking, to produce an awesome MMO/RvR/FPS..................................

    I agree i sort of wished and hoped that the new warhammer 40k would go down the RP FPS route sadly they took some third person route which just makes it pretty dull IMO, it coul dhave been awesome with the variety of races and vehicles

    so this PS2 is my only hope of getting that epic action back that the first one left me longing for

     

    sorry to jump on your bandwagon :)

    nerf scissors! rock is fine...
    yours paper

  • nomssnomss Member UncommonPosts: 1,468
  • VlasVilneousVlasVilneous Member Posts: 6

    Yeah, I was hoping War 40k MMO would have been a cool FPS, but I am afraid it may go the route of Tabula Rasa.

    We will see how it goes, but I dont have high hopes for it.

    So, because of the War40k developer failure, I am glad PS2 is being developed.

  • binkusbinkus Member Posts: 57

    Originally posted by VlasVilneous

    Yeah, I was hoping War 40k MMO would have been a cool FPS, but I am afraid it may go the route of Tabula Rasa.

    We will see how it goes, but I dont have high hopes for it.

    So, because of the War40k developer failure, I am glad PS2 is being developed.

    Yeh exaclty my thoughts think it will be another game on the shelf in a few months after release

    they missed a trick not putting it FPS and really bringing people into the WH40k universe first hand with char development

    made the mistake of putting this opinion on the forum for wh40k dmo and was wildly hated by the fanboys

    nerf scissors! rock is fine...
    yours paper

  • MarLMarL Member UncommonPosts: 606

    Originally posted by nomss

    Story.

    really? lol

    Ive played hundreds of games and i cant tell you one story about the game.

    Actually its getting worse in games with cut scenes thats the time i go take a leak.

    Basically a game should say you are the blue the red people have made fun of your mother you will kill them forever the end.

    Gameplay is the fun to me I dont need a reason why im doing stuff just point me in the right direction.

    Own, Mine, Defend, Attack, 24/7

  • SharookSharook Member Posts: 72

    edit: i just read this interview and i am pleased to see that many of my ideas are supposed to be in that game.

    yay! a scifi total war fps sim. double-yay.

    now let's see if they will deliver what has been promised. it's still SOE we are dealing with....

     

    at the very least I would like to see a command interface in the kind of tribes 1 and 2, where the commander can give missions (like attack wp, defend wp, escort etc), see where his underlings are, even with a camera channel showing their perspective.

    and if ppl follow their orders they should get a xp bonus (like 20%) e.g. killed enemies on a defense mission at the wp to be defended gives 20% more xp.

    this should give quite an incentive for more cooperative and coordinated teamplay. it could be extended to not only squad/platoon leaders giving commands, but colonels coordinating multiple platoons and generals commanding the full army in one region (continent, planet whatever).

    there would be the need to determine a commander (above platoon leaders) or even a command structure within the players currently online. this could be done by voting, wanna-be commanders apply and the one with the highest vote gets the job. this would also lead to better commanders caring about their reputation and get elected more often than idiots.

    also this could balance out the well-known tendency that a losing/inferior side drastically dissolves or even loses players server-wide. a CC system could issue defensive missions like "ordered retreats",  "fallback and rally" which upon being successfully carried out would give substantial xp bonuses and even some strategical bonuses (faster repair at rally point)

     

    another thing i would like to see is more strategic value for bases. e.g. in a logistical/economical sense. let's say there is a base near a source of resource X which is important for aircraft manufacturing. so whoever captures this base can establish a structure (like a mine) which takes some time and needs to be defended during setup. and when the mine is online there are certain bonuses for the mine-owning faction in that region (continent). e.g. one ressource (fuel) allows aircrafts to run 10% faster, another is used for production and reduces the cooldown for vehicle respawn by 50%, another (armor) gives 10% more hp to armored vehicles, etc.

    you get the idea, there could be dozens of options

    or something of more stategical proportions, e.g. for every day you hold a certain facility your faction gets a reduced cooldown on certain assets (vehicles, weapons), which basically means your faction built up a certain amount of assets prior to a major offensive operation.

    having these kind of resources in your faction gives you military advantages, but makes your economy also more fragile and thus more prone to guerilla warfare since you need to defend a lot of objectives in order to keep your bonuses (or your specialise).

     

    as a counterbalance improved opponents should yield more xp upon being defeated. so a technological inferior faction woul have a hard time in fighting the superior faction, but the players of the former would advance faster than the latter

     

    spinning this thought further i would even like to see a campaign system instead of the eternal struggle which does not change at all. meaning each server launches a campaign wich then goes for like 3 months or until a faction meets a certain victory condition. then the campaign is reset (but not the characters, allowing to build up veterans over multiple campaigns). with this idea you could even introduce technological advance, i.e. more and better wapons, vehicles, armors being unlocked by research/economical objectives over the course of the campaign.

    for me this would make things much more interesting than the PS1 "Groundhog Day" war.

  • NC_KJonesNC_KJones Member Posts: 1

     the only thing i hope for  is more distinktive vehicles.Im aiming this mostly towards the air..I loved flying trying to be the aniti air wasp  keeping the skys clear of those pesky enemy moss but the hardist thing was making out friend or foe. On ground if you where standing out in the open and saw a  tank that had double barrels.You knew right away who you where facing.If you saw a tank with no tracks or weels  and had some what of a steel coffin look to it and your on ur little red quad you knew to go the other way but in the air if ur in wasp and see a moss .You dont know if he is friend or foe till you get right up on him and then you  feel uneasy  for chacing your own team mate and get shot down cause the intire time chasing your team mate the real enemy was chasing you. So im hoping now that the only reason why i have to fight another ship from my team is cause some one hacked it.

    so theres my "I Wish"

  • Nerf09Nerf09 Member CommonPosts: 2,953

    Originally posted by cludinsk

    Originally posted by Nerf09



    The ability to herd the largest number of cats doesn't deserve reward or respect.

    A successful game will cater to ad-hoc grouping and small unit tactics (very small unit). 

    it doesn't sound like you played planetside at all, actually. it's a pretty zergish game at heart with 300 people battles.

     


    Originally posted by Nerf09



    I wouldn't consider a bunch of pimpled faced brats or unemployed bums as "godly", and what purpose would owning structures have?

    owning structures gives a goal for larger groups, owning territory is a reason to play in itself, people identify with "their space" and get into the game more. think of eve for example.

    With every Dick and Jane squad out there, there isn't enough room for everyone to own land in Planetside 1, not to mention it would serve no purpose.  Hey I have one, how about we instance a Guild Building for all of you guys so you feel important.  You can decorate it like a doll house and invite anyone to view your instance.

  • Nerf09Nerf09 Member CommonPosts: 2,953

    Originally posted by Aluvius

    Yeah in fact no rvr mmo has ever been without the zerg.   Its usually the guilds that tend to "herd the cats" into at least the correct general direction, so it does deserve some reward heh.

    Do you know how many players follow the waypoints given to squads in BF2 or BF2142?  Zero.

    THe artillery strikes and the Unmanned drones are just irritating overkill weapons for 1 player who grinded their way up in rank.  If I want to grind I'll play WOW.

  • scragcatscragcat Member UncommonPosts: 94

    what is ps missing that i want to see in ps2?  anti-hack system that is productive not retroactive and continous marketing...ps1 would have gotten great benefit from both but it never happened.  oh and unicorns.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Originally posted by Nerf09

    Originally posted by cludinsk


    Originally posted by Nerf09



    The ability to herd the largest number of cats doesn't deserve reward or respect.

    A successful game will cater to ad-hoc grouping and small unit tactics (very small unit). 

    it doesn't sound like you played planetside at all, actually. it's a pretty zergish game at heart with 300 people battles.

     


    Originally posted by Nerf09



    I wouldn't consider a bunch of pimpled faced brats or unemployed bums as "godly", and what purpose would owning structures have?

    owning structures gives a goal for larger groups, owning territory is a reason to play in itself, people identify with "their space" and get into the game more. think of eve for example.

    With every Dick and Jane squad out there, there isn't enough room for everyone to own land in Planetside 1, not to mention it would serve no purpose.  Hey I have one, how about we instance a Guild Building for all of you guys so you feel important.  You can decorate it like a doll house and invite anyone to view your instance.

     Look I know a bad man touched you in PS1, but yet again I'll have to remind you that this is a Planetside 2 thread.  I'll not even mention the fact that its outfits, not squads that are the guild equivalent in PS1/PS2 or the fact that yes there is way more land than players in PS1 or even that as I said this is talking about PS2 where every bit of land will fought over for faction ownership .. oh wait I did mention those things, oh well.

    We get it, you don't want to play Planetside 2.   You'll be missed.

  • AluviusAluvius Member Posts: 288

    Originally posted by Nerf09

    Originally posted by Aluvius

    Yeah in fact no rvr mmo has ever been without the zerg.   Its usually the guilds that tend to "herd the cats" into at least the correct general direction, so it does deserve some reward heh.

    Do you know how many players follow the waypoints given to squads in BF2 or BF2142?  Zero.

    THe artillery strikes and the Unmanned drones are just irritating overkill weapons for 1 player who grinded their way up in rank.  If I want to grind I'll play WOW.

     Oh hi, as I said before this is a Planetside 2 thread, not Battlefield.   Not only that but your response to what I said albeit offtopic seems to be in agreement to what I said .. at least the first sentence anyway.  Yes its a known fact that many players aren't tactical, that's the zerg as in exactly what I said in the quoted part.  What successful guilds/outfits in rvr mmo's do is learn to herd the zerg.   Planetside 2 will make it much easier because it won't be using just waypoints but actual missions generated by those with the appropriate certs.

    Also yes I often do follow the waypoints given by squad leaders in BC2 because you get rewarded for doing so, just like what PS2 is doing.

     

    p.s.  What modern fps games are you playing that don't reward play with unlocks/certs via what you call "grinding" or what most people call "playing the game".

Sign In or Register to comment.