was the launch, i remember convincing all my friends to purchase PS on release and there was insaine lag everywhere.

they couldnt handle all the players so they created player caps on zones.

long story short, all my friends left in the first week and i stayed behind till lag evened out. (had some kick ass battles too!)

but these graphics, there so rich. im buying a new comp to handle all the new games im purchasing soon but hopefully it wont be lag city all over again. (super rich graphics + 100 or more players in an area = crap FPS)

I thought the problem is that it is still developed by SOE, and that it is going to be f2p at launch.

Originally posted by ellobo29

was the launch, i remember convincing all my friends to purchase PS on release and there was insaine lag everywhere.

they couldnt handle all the players so they created player caps on zones.

long story short, all my friends left in the first week and i stayed behind till lag evened out. (had some kick ass battles too!)

 

but these graphics, there so rich. im buying a new comp to handle all the new games im purchasing soon but hopefully it wont be lag city all over again. (super rich graphics + 100 or more players in an area = crap FPS)

The problem is with those friends.  Maybe companies should release some attention deficit disorder pills along with the game.

There wasn't really a problem with the game.

At its height it was amazing and most people who played it remember it fondly. It just got old and started to stagnate due to lack of development as well as flawed design decisions like the caves and BFRs which drove a lot of people away.

Originally posted by Nihilist

There wasn't really a problem with the game.

 

At its height it was amazing and most people who played it remember it fondly. It just got old and started to stagnate due to lack of development as well as flawed design decisions like the caves and BFRs which drove a lot of people away.

Hit the nail on the head.  One of the greatest things about PS1 is how clear it is what went wrong with it.  I think that this means PS2 can be all that much better.

The other problem was that at PS1 release FPS players were not used to paying a subscription.  Now with console subscriptions, this is much less of an issue.  And obviously PS2 isn't going to cost money monthly anyways so...

---

Originally posted by Nihilist
There wasn't really a problem with the game.
 
At its height it was amazing and most people who played it remember it fondly. It just got old and started to stagnate due to lack of development as well as flawed design decisions like the caves and BFRs which drove a lot of people away.

---

this^

at release the game was good, but it lacked the management required to keep it going.

Originally posted by skyexile

 

---

Originally posted by Nihilist
There wasn't really a problem with the game.
 
At its height it was amazing and most people who played it remember it fondly. It just got old and started to stagnate due to lack of development as well as flawed design decisions like the caves and BFRs which drove a lot of people away.

---

 

this^

at release the game was good, but it lacked the management required to keep it going.

yup^

Plus, not to many people were actually playing MMORPGs back then, so when the community left because of some dumb choices, the game died quickly. Same thing sorta've happened with DOAC.

Me and my friends are all looking forward to PlanetSide 2. Even a few clans from BF2142 are interested. As I am sure a ton of console fans, that once they get a taste of something so bold, they'll want to come and show us all...

SOE knows this and has budgeted the game accordingly. I do not see any shortcommings in the management on this one.

The developers where aware about this. There main focus is no lag....

They said this: "First when planetside came out it was fun, now when all computers are much better its WAY more fun due to no lag". "So that will be our main focus". 

So i guees. No lag.

Yeah SoE is a terrible company.

Originally posted by mikethk

The developers where aware about this. There main focus is no lag....

 

They said this: "First when planetside came out it was fun, now when all computers are much better its WAY more fun due to no lag". "So that will be our main focus". 

 

So i guees. No lag.

Great, they're "main focus is no lag."  Just PERFECT!  You know what this means...

Reducing lag is Blizzard reducing games from 8 players in Diablo 2 to 5 players in Diablo 3, and completely removing the necro army.

Reducing lag is reduction of pets in all MMORPG's from UNLIMITED in UO to ONE (1) in WOW-clones.

Reducing lag is probably reduction of battles from hundreds of players in Planetside1 to 64/32 players per server in Planetside2?????? 

Games have gotten suckier not better

I'm pretty sure they're well aware that the performance limits of their first game is going to be compared to the limits of this new game, Nerf09. Your line of reasoning seems pretty out of sorts if you honestly think we'll be seeing SMALLER scale population filled battles in an area as opposed to LARGER ones with the new game.

Granted, it IS Sony we're talking about. If anyone can step on their privates while trying to take a step forward with something, it's them. But I would be surprised to see smaller battles due to limit constraints from the game engine.

Originally posted by Tedly224

I'm pretty sure they're well aware that the performance limits of their first game is going to be compared to the limits of this new game, Nerf09. Your line of reasoning seems pretty out of sorts if you honestly think we'll be seeing SMALLER scale population filled battles in an area as opposed to LARGER ones with the new game.

Granted, it IS Sony we're talking about. If anyone can step on their privates while trying to take a step forward with something, it's them. But I would be surprised to see smaller battles due to limit constraints from the game engine.

"Bigger battles when internet improves from phone to optical, and bandwidth improves"  Says the developer 10 years ago.

Well that's already happened.  You know why games have actually reduced in size from 64 to 32 to even 16?  Companies are getting cheap with their servers.

Originally posted by Nerf09

Originally posted by Tedly224

I'm pretty sure they're well aware that the performance limits of their first game is going to be compared to the limits of this new game, Nerf09. Your line of reasoning seems pretty out of sorts if you honestly think we'll be seeing SMALLER scale population filled battles in an area as opposed to LARGER ones with the new game.

Granted, it IS Sony we're talking about. If anyone can step on their privates while trying to take a step forward with something, it's them. But I would be surprised to see smaller battles due to limit constraints from the game engine.

"Bigger battles when internet improves from phone to optical, and bandwidth improves"  Says the developer 10 years ago.

Well that's already happened.  You know why games have actually reduced in size from 64 to 32 to even 16?  Companies are getting cheap with their servers.

Dude,

This is an MMORPG, not a FPS shooter, with maps....  & problems with PlanetSide's netcode & the basic internet infrastructure are moot. As large scale battles are possible now in 2011.

Secondly, "Games" have not reduced in size... console games have, not PC games.

OP was 100% correct that PS1 release was terrible.  I played through beta, pre-ordered, and stopped playing for months until the servers were stabilized.  There is absolutely no argument... the game was next to unplayable on release.  Hell, half of my corp (NDC) stopped playing on release.

Originally posted by Phelcher

Originally posted by Nerf09

Originally posted by Tedly224

I'm pretty sure they're well aware that the performance limits of their first game is going to be compared to the limits of this new game, Nerf09. Your line of reasoning seems pretty out of sorts if you honestly think we'll be seeing SMALLER scale population filled battles in an area as opposed to LARGER ones with the new game.

Granted, it IS Sony we're talking about. If anyone can step on their privates while trying to take a step forward with something, it's them. But I would be surprised to see smaller battles due to limit constraints from the game engine.

"Bigger battles when internet improves from phone to optical, and bandwidth improves"  Says the developer 10 years ago.

Well that's already happened.  You know why games have actually reduced in size from 64 to 32 to even 16?  Companies are getting cheap with their servers.

Dude,

This is an MMORPG, not a FPS shooter, with maps....  & problems with PlanetSide's netcode & the basic internet infrastructure are moot. As large scale battles are possible now in 2011.

Secondly, "Games" have not reduced in size... console games have, not PC games.

Planetside's a MMOFPS not a MMORPG.  And the maps are just bigger.

Originally posted by Nerf09

Originally posted by Phelcher

Originally posted by Nerf09

Originally posted by Tedly224

I'm pretty sure they're well aware that the performance limits of their first game is going to be compared to the limits of this new game, Nerf09. Your line of reasoning seems pretty out of sorts if you honestly think we'll be seeing SMALLER scale population filled battles in an area as opposed to LARGER ones with the new game.

Granted, it IS Sony we're talking about. If anyone can step on their privates while trying to take a step forward with something, it's them. But I would be surprised to see smaller battles due to limit constraints from the game engine.

"Bigger battles when internet improves from phone to optical, and bandwidth improves"  Says the developer 10 years ago.

Well that's already happened.  You know why games have actually reduced in size from 64 to 32 to even 16?  Companies are getting cheap with their servers.

Dude,

This is an MMORPG, not a FPS shooter, with maps....  & problems with PlanetSide's netcode & the basic internet infrastructure are moot. As large scale battles are possible now in 2011.

Secondly, "Games" have not reduced in size... console games have, not PC games.

Planetside's a MMOFPS not a MMORPG.  And the maps are just bigger.

 

Case in point.. EVE ONLINE.. 50,000 online on one server all day long.. and up to 3000 people in one spot at some points. the server tech is here.. companies are just cheap and they want to pull it all off with making the most money possable....  Computer Hardware has increased in power since PS1 was released buy no less then 1000 fold... yet games can't handle large scale battles .. BS.. in eve fights of 500 people happen every day.. and one a week at least fights of 1-1500+ happen

The Battlefield series is still 64 player mp.  Alot of that has to do with their continual investment in the engine unlike other franchises such as CoD.  Of course that means we don't see a new Battlefield game every 18 months heh.

The same with Planetside 2's new engine.  Its been developed specifically for the mmo space to allow thousands of players on the same "maps".  I'm also looking forward to seeing how they use it for EQ3.

First of all A)  Eve Online isn't one big server, several systems make up 1 server, and while you are traveling you are jumping from one server to another

Second of all B)  You get 500 people on one Eve server and you've got mega lag even if you're not drawing other ships on your screen.

Originally posted by syrusmag3

Yeah SoE is a terrible company.

 

^

that's what went wrong with it.  Any other company and it would've took off like a rocket.

Originally posted by twodayslate

I thought the problem is that it is still developed by SOE, and that it is going to be f2p at launch.

SOE is for sure a problem