Trending Games | WildStar | Guild Wars 2 | World of Warcraft | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,637,242 Users Online:0
Games:678  Posts:6,072,494
Recent forum postsRSS
Active threads
Cloud view
List all forums
General Forums
Developers Corner General Discussion
Popular Game Forums
Click a status to find game forum
Game Forums
Click a letter to find game forum
A-C
2029 Online 2112: Revolution 2Moons 4Story 8BitMMO 9 Dragons A Mystical Land A Tale in the Desert III A3 ACE Online ARGO Online Aberoth Absolute Force Online Absolute Terror Achaea Adellion Aerrevan Aetolia, the Midnight Age Age of Armor Age of Conan Age of Empires Online Age of Mourning Age of Wulin Age of Wushu Aida Arenas Aika Aion Albion Online Alganon All Points Bulletin (APB) Allods Online Altis Gates Amazing World Anarchy Online Ancients of Fasaria Andromeda 5 Angels Online Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord X Asda 2 Asda Story Ashen Empires Asheron's Call Asheron's Call 2 Astera Online Astonia III Astro Empires Astro Lords: Oort CLoud Asura Force Atlantica Online Atriarch Aura Kingdom Aurora Blade Auto Assault Avatar Star Battle Dawn Battle Dawn Galaxies Battle for Graxia Battle of 3 Kingdoms Battle of the Immortals Battlecruiser Online Battlestar Galactica Online Battlestar Reloaded Beyond Protocol Black Aftermath Black Desert Black Gold Black Prophecy Black Prophecy Tactics: Nexus Conflict Blacklight Retribution Blade & Soul Blade Hunter Blade Wars Blazing Throne Bless Blitz 1941 Blood and Jade Bloodlines Champions Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Brawl Busters. Brick-Force Bright Shadow Bullet Run Business Tycoon Online CTRacer Cabal Online Caesary Call of Camelot Call of Gods Call of Thrones Camelot Unchained Canaan Online Cardmon Hero Cartoon Universe CasinoRPG Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Chrono Tales Citadel of Sorcery CitiesXL Citizen Zero City of Decay City of Heroes City of Steam City of Transformers City of Villains Civilization Online Clan Lord Clash of Clans Cloud Nine Club Penguin Colony of War Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances Company of Heroes Online Conquer Online Conquer Online 3 Continent of the Ninth (C9) Core Blaze Core Exiles Corum Online Craft of Gods Crimecraft Crimelife 2 Cronous Crota II Cultures Online Cyber Monster 2 Céiron Wars
D-F
D&D Online DC Universe DK Online DOTA DOTA 2 DUST 514 DV8: Exile Dalethaan Dance Groove Online Dark Age of Camelot Dark Ages Dark Legends Dark Orbit Dark Relic: Prelude Dark Solstice Dark and Light DarkEden Online DarkSpace Darkblood Online Darkfall Darkfall: Unholy Wars Darkwind: War on Wheels Das Tal Dawn of Fantasy Dawntide DayZ Dead Earth Dead Frontier Deco Online Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Nest Dragon Oath Dragon Pals Dragon Raja Dragon's Call Dragon's Call II Dragon's Prophet DragonSky DragonSoul Dragona Dragonica Dragons and Titans Dream of Mirror Online Dreamland Online Dreamlords: The Reawakening Drift City Duels Dungeon Blitz Dungeon Fighter Online Dungeon Overlord Dungeon Party Dungeon Rampage Dungeon Runners Dynastica Dynasty Warriors Online Dynasty of the Magi EIN (Epicus Incognitus) EVE Online Earth Eternal Earth and Beyond Earthrise Eclipse War Ecol Tactics Online Eden Eternal Einherjar - The Viking's Blood Elder Scrolls Online Eldevin Elf Online Elite: Dangerous Embers of Caerus Emil Chronicle Online Empire Empire & State Empire Craft Empire Universe 3 EmpireQuest Empires of Galldon End of Nations Endless Ages Endless Blue Moon Online Endless Online Entropia Universe EpicDuel Erebus: Travia Reborn Eredan Eternal Blade Eternal Lands Eternal Saga Ether Fields Ether Saga Online Eudemons Online EuroGangster EverEmber Online EverQuest Next EverQuest Online Adventures Evernight Everquest Everquest II Everquest Next: Landmark Evony Exarch Exorace F.E.A.R. Online Face of Mankind Fairyland Online Fall of Rome Fallen Earth Fallen Sword Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken World Fortnite Fortuna Forum for Discussion of Everlight Freaky Creatures Free Realms Freesky Online Freeworld Fung Wan Online Furcadia Fury Fusion Fall
G-L
GalaXseeds Galactic Command Online Game of Thrones: Seven Kingdoms Gameglobe Gate To Heavens Gates of Andaron Gatheryn Gauntlet Gekkeiju Online Ghost Online Ghost Recon Online Gladiatus Glitch Global Agenda Global Soccer Gloria Victis Glory of Gods GoGoRacer Goal Line Blitz Gods and Heroes GodsWar Online Golemizer Golf Star GoonZu Online Graal Kingdoms Granado Espada Online Grand Chase Grand Fantasia Grepolis Grimlands Guild Wars Guild Wars 2 Guild Wars Factions Guild Wars Nightfall Habbo Hotel Hailan Rising HaloSphere2 Haven & Hearth Hawken Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Helbreath Hellgate Hellgate: London Hello Kitty Online Hero Online Hero Zero Hero's Journey Hero: 108 Online HeroSmash Heroes & Generals Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Bestia Heroes of Gaia Heroes of Might and Magic Online Heroes of Thessalonica Heroes of Three Kingdoms Heroes of the Storm Hex Holic Online Hostile Space Hunter Blade Huxley Illutia Illyriad Immortals USA Imperator Imperian Inferno Legend Infestation: Survivor Stories Infinite Crisis Infinity Infinity Iris Online Iron Grip: Marauders Irth Worlds Island Forge Islands of War Istaria: Chronicles of the Gifted Jade Dynasty Jagged Alliance Online Juggernaut Jumpgate Jumpgate Evolution KAL Online Kakele Online Kaos War Karos Online Kartuga Kicks Online King of Kings 3 Kingdom Heroes Kingdom Under Fire II Kingdom of Drakkar Kingory Kings and Legends KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Lands of Hope: Phoenix Edition LastChaos League of Angels League of Legends - Clash of Fates Legend of Edda: Vengeance Legend of Golden Plume Legend of Katha Legend of Mir 2 Legend of Mir 3 Legendary Champions Lego Minifigures Online Life is Feudal Light of Nova Lime Odyssey Line of Defense Lineage Lineage Eternal: Twilight Resistance Lineage II Linkrealms Loong Online Lord of the Rings Online Lords Online Lost Saga Lucent Heart Lunia Lusternia: Age of Ascension Luvinia World
M-Q
MU Online Mabinogi Maestia: Rise of Keledus MagiKnights Magic Barrage Magic World Online Manga Fighter MapleStory Martial Heroes Marvel Heroes Marvel Super Hero Squad Online Marvel: Avengers Alliance MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms MilMo Minecraft Mini Fighter Minions of Mirth Ministry of War Monato Esprit Monkey King Online Monkey Quest Monster & Me Monster Madness Online MonsterMMORPG Moonlight Online: Tales of Eternal Blood Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mytheon Mythic Saga Mythos N.E.O Online NIDA Online Nadirim Naviage: The Power of Capital Navy Field Need for Speed World Nemexia Neo's Land NeoSteam Neocron Nether Neverwinter Nexus: The Kingdom Of The Winds NinjaTrick NosTale Novus Aeterno Oberin Odin Quest Odyssey RPG Ogre Island Omerta 3 Online Boxing Manager Onverse Order & Chaos Online Order of Magic Original Blood Origins Return Origins of Malu Orion's Belt Otherland Forums OverSoul Overkings Oz Online Oz World Pandora Saga Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Panzar Parabellum Parallel Kingdom Parfait Station Path of Exile Pathfinder Online Perfect World Perpetuum Online Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pirate Galaxy Pirate Storm Pirate101 PirateKing Online Pirates of the Burning Sea Pirates of the Caribbean Online Pixie Hollow Planeshift Planet Arkadia Planet Calypso PlanetSide 2 Planetside Planets³ Playboy Manager Pocket Legends Pockie Ninja Pockie Pirates Pockie Saints PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Project Blackout Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Puzzle Pirates Quickhit Football
R-S
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Realm Fighter Realm of the Mad God Realm of the Titans Realms Online Reclamation Red Stone Red War: Edem's Curse Regnum Online Remnant Knights Renaissance Repulse Requiem: Memento Mori Rift RiotZone Rise Rise of Dragonian Era Rise of Empire Rise of the Tycoon Rising of King Risk Your Life Rivality Rockfree Rohan: Blood Feud Role Play Worlds Roll n Rock Roma Victor Romadoria Rosh Online Roto X Rubies of Eventide Ruin Online Rumble Fighter Runes of Magic Runescape Rust Rusty Hearts Ryzom S4 League SAGA SD Gundam Capsule Fighter Online SMITE SUN Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowrun Online Shaiya Shattered Galaxy Sho Online Shot Online Shroud of the Avatar SideQuest Siege on Stars Sigonyth: Desert Eternity Silkroad Online Skyblade Skyforge SmashMuck Champions Smoo Online Soldier Front Soul Master Soul Order Online Soul of Guardian Space Heroes Universe Spellcasters Sphere Spiral Knights Spirit Tales Splash Fighters Squad Wars Star Citizen Star Sonata 2 Star Stable Star Supremacy Star Trek Online Star Trek: Infinite Space Star Wars Galaxies Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures Star Wars: The Old Republic StarQuest Online Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
T-Z
TERA TS Online Tabula Rasa Tactica Online Tales Runner Tales of Fantasy Tales of Pirates Tales of Pirates II Tales of Solaris Talisman Online Tamer Saga Tank Ace Tantra Online Tatsumaki: Land at War Terra Militaris TerraWorld Online Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Hammers End The Legend of Ares The Lost Titans The Matrix Online The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot The Missing Ink The Mummy Online The Myth of Soma The Pride of Taern The Realm Online The Repopulation The Secret World The Sims Online The Strategems The West Theralon There Therian Saga Thrones of Chaos Tibia Tibia Micro Edition Tiger Knight Titan Siege Titans of Time Toontown Online Top Speed Topia Online Torchlight Total Domination Transformers Universe Traveller AR Travia Online Travian Trials of Ascension Tribal Hero Tribal Wars Tribes Universe Trickster Online Trove Troy Online True Fantasy Live Online Turf Battles Twelve Sky Twelve Sky 2 Twilight War Tynon U.B. Funkeys UFO Online URDEAD Online Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Ultima Online Ultima X: Odyssey Ultimate Naruto Ultimate Soccer Boss Uncharted Waters Online Undercover 2: Merc Wars Underlight Unification Wars Universe Online Utopia Valkyrie Sky Vampire Lord Online Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Vanquish Space Vector City Racers Vendetta Online Victory - Age of Racing Vindictus Virtonomics Vis Gladius Visions of Zosimos VoidExpanse Voyage Century Online W.E.L.L. Online WAR (Warhammer Online) WAR2 Glory WYD Global Wakfu War Thunder War of 2012 War of Angels War of Legends War of Mercenaries War of Thrones War of the Immortals WarFlow Waren Story Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune WebLords Wild West Online WildStar Wind of Luck WindSlayer 2 Wings of Destiny Wish Wizard101 Wizardry Online Wizards and Champions Wonder King Wonderland Online World Golf Tour World of Battles World of Darkness World of Heroes World of Kung Fu World of Pirates World of Speed World of Tanks World of Tanks Generals World of Warcraft World of Warplanes World of Warships World of the Living Dead WorldAlpha Wurm Online Xenocell Xiah Xsyon Xulu YS Online Yitien ZU Online Zentia Zero Online Zero Online: The Andromeda Crisis Zodiac Online Zombies Ate My Pizza eRepublik

MMORPG.com Discussion Forums

PlanetSide 2

PlanetSide 2 

General Discussion  » WOW! This game is a complete disapointment.

7 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Search
124 posts found
  Kanester

Advanced Member

Joined: 5/08/10
Posts: 309

11/23/12 12:34:42 PM#101
Originally posted by Thebigthrill

So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

 

* Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

* No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

* Nothing player built.

 

This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

No you didn't do much research did you? It's like me buying Warcraft and expecting to play Call of Duty.

This is a case of learn to play. Yes you take bases and then defend them but there is a lot more to it than that, Join a squad and use tactics. Great fun.

  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 12:36:44 PM#102
Originally posted by Storman1977
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by Storman1977
Originally posted by grounnn
 

800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions. Occasionally you'll have the 3rd come in but other than that it's 1v1. Oh and I cannot forget about the 30-40 players sitting inside the warpgates per map, so that's about 120 people off the 800 as well.

When you break it down it's not better than a normal FPS it's just all on one server. The customization is VERY lack lusters. Even less than FPS's today. They have MUCH more customization than this game; there's no real reason to spend money on the cash shop. The bases you're fighting for a very dull and have very little strategic value what so ever.

They say they're pushing the bar, but nothing has changed. Nothing impressive is improved. There's massive server lag in long running battles for control of bases. To the point at which the player models are no longer showing until you're in their faces.

Where in any of my posts did I say it was better than any other shooter?  I only inferred it was much larger than any of the other pure shooters.  I said it was better than most other MMO''s at one aspect, maintaining a sense of a living world by the ebb and flow of control of territory and having a large, persistant world. 

As for customization, how many of those game allow you top end customization out of the gate?  You have to earn those upgrades, and PS2 only differs in that you can shortcut the process by purchasing it instead of earning it.  I said in another thread that the only thing that differentiates PS2 from BF and CoD, gameplay wise, is the persistant world. 

I never implied to you that you said PS2 was better than any other fps. I was just typing more things that I wanted to add to the convo. I would hardly consider PS2 a persistant world and I hate it when people use the word persistant. There's nothing persistant about it. The only thing changing in PS2 are the Control points, you can't build anything, and you can't destroy anything ( other than vehicles and generators). Their persistance is equal to going to a BF3 match that goes on indefinately. You log in and take 3-4 control point then leave and come back a few hours later those points are no longer yours. Heck Battle Field: Bad company 2 had more persistance to its game, and all you were able to do is knock buildings down, but at least the maps were never the same from start to finish.

This game equates to a large scale Halo Territories match and that's about it.

The green highlight is where you implied.  As for the game having a persistant world, it does.  If you had a never ending BF3 match, then it too would qualify for the term persistant.  Persistant does not equate dynamic.  It means ongoing.  The persistance comes from the fact that once you win a control point, you can lose it again.  There is no absolute victory (at least not until one faction completely dominates a server to the point no one tries to create an opposing character, at which point I would hope that SOE would step in) therefore the battle for control persists.  It is not a dynamic and living world. 

Even if you were to say there is no end to the match. Let go at this again from a different angle; for example the other FPS did end, so long as you DO NOT play on the server it will always persist without you. Persistant is a word that can be said about any online game. So long as you don't play it. The game will "change" you'll unlikely to play the same match or fight the same players. Which is why I dislike that word, it means nothing and is nothing more than a word to abuse to raise the hype bar for games that truely aren't a living world.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  Storman1977

Hard Core Member

Joined: 5/06/06
Posts: 200

11/23/12 12:39:12 PM#103
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn
800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.


OMG stop, just stop.

 

If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

I''ve seen much largerr clashes than 30 v 30.  But, you're not going to care nor listen.  You've made your decision on the games worth and ability.  Frankly, I've seen very large scale clashes (200+ per faction with all three faction vying for control) with both ground and air vehicles and my performance never noticably dipped.  As for the game being able to handle the entire server population being in one location, I think you'd be hard pressed to find ANY game that could handle 2400+ player characters at one ingame location, in a single instance, doing anything more than standing around.  So, with that, I think we'll have to agree to disagree and move on.

  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 12:48:40 PM#104
Originally posted by Storman1977
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn
800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.


OMG stop, just stop.

 

If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

I''ve seen much largerr clashes than 30 v 30.  But, you're not going to care nor listen.  You've made your decision on the games worth and ability.  Frankly, I've seen very large scale clashes (200+ per faction with all three faction vying for control) with both ground and air vehicles and my performance never noticably dipped.  As for the game being able to handle the entire server population being in one location, I think you'd be hard pressed to find ANY game that could handle 2400+ player characters at one ingame location, in a single instance, doing anything more than standing around.  So, with that, I think we'll have to agree to disagree and move on.

My performance doesn't dip at all in the form of my pc running well, but I play on Mattherson which is usually Very High/Full and the server has lag issues when larger scale battles last for long periods of time. I also see players skipping across the terrian in smaller scale battles. as for the 30v30 you should properly read my text. I said 66 per side which implies around 132-198 players depending on how many are actually fighting. I spent yesterday in a 4 hour battle where we won from both sides, but we never had more than 60 players fighting on each side at a time. As I said before Arma II can easily do 2000+ players in a game location, there are videos of the cpu tests on youtube. Go look it up. I will continue to play the game, it okay for now. However, it's by far not the best FPS to date and brings nothing new to the table that hasn't been done before.

I also highly doubt you've seen 200+ players per side fighting for control. first of all 800 is the correct amount for a server it's split 3 ways between each of the maps. In addition there are WAY more than 1-2 battles happening at a time lowering the amount of players in a single area. The only time I'd say a server would have a full 200 on their side, is when they are in the corner of their warpgate getting camped. Other than that I think you're just spewing out numbers to otherwise prove that I'm wrong.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  Storman1977

Hard Core Member

Joined: 5/06/06
Posts: 200

11/23/12 12:57:41 PM#105
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by Storman1977
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn
800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.


OMG stop, just stop.

 

If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

I''ve seen much largerr clashes than 30 v 30.  But, you're not going to care nor listen.  You've made your decision on the games worth and ability.  Frankly, I've seen very large scale clashes (200+ per faction with all three faction vying for control) with both ground and air vehicles and my performance never noticably dipped.  As for the game being able to handle the entire server population being in one location, I think you'd be hard pressed to find ANY game that could handle 2400+ player characters at one ingame location, in a single instance, doing anything more than standing around.  So, with that, I think we'll have to agree to disagree and move on.

My performance doesn't dip at all in the form of my pc running well, but I play on Mattherson which is usually Very High/Full and the server has lag issues when larger scale battles last for long periods of time. I also see players skipping across the terrian in smaller scale battles. as for the 30v30 you should properly read my text. I said 66 per side which implies around 132-198 players depending on how many are actually fighting. I spent yesterday in a 4 hour battle where we won from both sides, but we never had more than 60 players fighting on each side at a time. As I said before Arma II can easily do 2000+ players in a game location, there are videos of the cpu tests on youtube. Go look it up. I will continue to play the game, it okay for now. However, it's by far not the best FPS to date and brings nothing new to the table that hasn't been done before.

I suggest you go back and look at those videos again.  Every video that I found (granted, not really an exhaustive search, just hot searched "Arma 2 2000 person" or youtube) that had 1500+ "players" on the server were with one real person and the rest on the server being AI.  Now, I'll be happy to look again if you can post me a link to a video that doens't have 1499+ NPC players...

  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 1:01:22 PM#106
Originally posted by Storman1977
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by Storman1977
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn
800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.


OMG stop, just stop.

 

If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

I''ve seen much largerr clashes than 30 v 30.  But, you're not going to care nor listen.  You've made your decision on the games worth and ability.  Frankly, I've seen very large scale clashes (200+ per faction with all three faction vying for control) with both ground and air vehicles and my performance never noticably dipped.  As for the game being able to handle the entire server population being in one location, I think you'd be hard pressed to find ANY game that could handle 2400+ player characters at one ingame location, in a single instance, doing anything more than standing around.  So, with that, I think we'll have to agree to disagree and move on.

My performance doesn't dip at all in the form of my pc running well, but I play on Mattherson which is usually Very High/Full and the server has lag issues when larger scale battles last for long periods of time. I also see players skipping across the terrian in smaller scale battles. as for the 30v30 you should properly read my text. I said 66 per side which implies around 132-198 players depending on how many are actually fighting. I spent yesterday in a 4 hour battle where we won from both sides, but we never had more than 60 players fighting on each side at a time. As I said before Arma II can easily do 2000+ players in a game location, there are videos of the cpu tests on youtube. Go look it up. I will continue to play the game, it okay for now. However, it's by far not the best FPS to date and brings nothing new to the table that hasn't been done before.

I suggest you go back and look at those videos again.  Every video that I found (granted, not really an exhaustive search, just hot searched "Arma 2 2000 person" or youtube) that had 1500+ "players" on the server were with one real person and the rest on the server being AI.  Now, I'll be happy to look again if you can post me a link to a video that doens't have 1499+ NPC players...

NPC or not, it can be done in ARMA II. Those videos show that it's possible to run smoothly under that amount of load. Also, lets not derail the thread. The whole point of the thread is just an expression of how players feel towards this subpar shooter. I'm holding my breath for when the hackers break their anti cheat and start ravaging the game. It's always happens to online shooters, and it's only a matter of time until the game becomes unbearable even more than it already is.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  TeknoBug

Novice Member

Joined: 10/13/07
Posts: 2164

11/23/12 1:30:05 PM#107


Originally posted by grounnn

Originally posted by TeknoBug  

Originally posted by grounnn 800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.
OMG stop, just stop.  
If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

That 800 players could very easily be ONE continent, when you look at each continent it shows the % population of each faction, last time I logged on Esamir had only 6% VS and the other 2 conts had 35-60%, and there were easily 100+ of us last night pushing the NC out of a base.


Back in Planetside 1 during beta I was in fights which consisted of 300+ players in a sinble base, it was chaotic.


BTW how do you know if it can't handle all at once? I was in beta and we had VERY high traffic on Indar a few times, network lag got flaky at times but it was still playable. However I'm on west coast and I play on Connery which is west coast and I recently rolled a new toon on Matherson which is east coast, and I feel the difference, there's less delay on Matherson than Connery. Briggs was experiencing lag and instability and they said it was bad hardware, so Connery could very well be suffering the same thing.


This IS a MMO, persistent world, players scattered all over the continents and can still communicate across the zone.

  Vannor

Elite Member

Joined: 8/11/03
Posts: 2883

11/23/12 1:38:00 PM#108
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by Varthander

at least its free... and not pay2win ;)
You can perfectly pay to win. advanced weapons for example. Still im playing it and i like it.

LOL not really, sure I can buy the highest powered rifle (Lasher or Solstice SC) but 3 hours later a free player can also get those same rifles without spending SC.

There is no way that a new player can grab something worth 1000 points in 3 hours without paying. No way on earth. Don't bother arguing it cos I'm trying to do it. I'm not a perfect player but I ain't bad, plus I'm using +50% experience boosts (so I'm actually paying). It is definately taking a LOT longer than that.

  TeknoBug

Novice Member

Joined: 10/13/07
Posts: 2164

11/23/12 1:49:02 PM#109


Originally posted by Vannor

Originally posted by TeknoBug  

Originally posted by Varthander

at least its free... and not pay2win ;)
You can perfectly pay to win. advanced weapons for example. Still im playing it and i like it.
LOL not really, sure I can buy the highest powered rifle (Lasher or Solstice SC) but 3 hours later a free player can also get those same rifles without spending SC.
There is no way that a new player can grab something worth 1000 points in 3 hours without paying. No way on earth. Don't bother arguing it cos I'm trying to do it. I'm not a perfect player but I ain't bad, plus I'm using +50% experience boosts (so I'm actually paying). It is definately taking a LOT longer than that.

Well 3 hours is excessive, but I know a few players that was able to buy items that costs 1000 certs on the first day without using SC, if you play medic and engineer you'll get xp and SC much faster than sniping, flying an aircraft or randomly shooting at passing aircrafts with a burster MAX, I got 62 certs in less than half an hour last night which is my record highest so far and if kept that rate up then in 3 hours I'd have ~300.

  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 2:08:16 PM#110
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn

Originally posted by TeknoBug  

Originally posted by grounnn 800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.
OMG stop, just stop.  
If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

That 800 players could very easily be ONE continent, when you look at each continent it shows the % population of each faction, last time I logged on Esamir had only 6% VS and the other 2 conts had 35-60%, and there were easily 100+ of us last night pushing the NC out of a base.

 


Back in Planetside 1 during beta I was in fights which consisted of 300+ players in a sinble base, it was chaotic.


BTW how do you know if it can't handle all at once? I was in beta and we had VERY high traffic on Indar a few times, network lag got flaky at times but it was still playable. However I'm on west coast and I play on Connery which is west coast and I recently rolled a new toon on Matherson which is east coast, and I feel the difference, there's less delay on Matherson than Connery. Briggs was experiencing lag and instability and they said it was bad hardware, so Connery could very well be suffering the same thing.


This IS a MMO, persistent world, players scattered all over the continents and can still communicate across the zone.

Okay, so lets say there are 800 per continent, that means there are 2400 players per side on each server, meaning there are 7200 players per server. I know for a fact, that there is NO WAY that many players on each server because I play on Mattherson when it's full. You cannot have 7200 players playing on a server at once. As for stability. I was playing a 3 way fight for a control point for 4 hours and there were no where near 500 players in that area and the server was lagging. You couldn't see opposing players because the models weren't loading, and players with lower quality ISP's than me were skipping across the field. to say there are 800 players per side on a map is just rediculous. I think it's a rather funny joke to say that the servers have bad hardware already seeing that the game was just released, those things should be brand spanking new. As for the game being persistant, see my previous comments, any game and be persistant, so long as it's online. Persistant means absolutely nothing and is a worthless word when it comes to online gaming.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  ShakyMo

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/21/11
Posts: 7246

11/23/12 2:15:39 PM#111
No your talking out of your bum about persistence.

Planetside 2 is persistent (like many mmos with pvp e.g. daoc, eve)

Things like battlegrounds in wow, cod matches, battlefield matches, dota are not.
  muffins89

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/15/12
Posts: 1247

11/23/12 2:16:02 PM#112
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn

Originally posted by TeknoBug  

Originally posted by grounnn 800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.
OMG stop, just stop.  
If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

That 800 players could very easily be ONE continent, when you look at each continent it shows the % population of each faction, last time I logged on Esamir had only 6% VS and the other 2 conts had 35-60%, and there were easily 100+ of us last night pushing the NC out of a base.

 


Back in Planetside 1 during beta I was in fights which consisted of 300+ players in a sinble base, it was chaotic.


BTW how do you know if it can't handle all at once? I was in beta and we had VERY high traffic on Indar a few times, network lag got flaky at times but it was still playable. However I'm on west coast and I play on Connery which is west coast and I recently rolled a new toon on Matherson which is east coast, and I feel the difference, there's less delay on Matherson than Connery. Briggs was experiencing lag and instability and they said it was bad hardware, so Connery could very well be suffering the same thing.


This IS a MMO, persistent world, players scattered all over the continents and can still communicate across the zone.

Okay, so lets say there are 800 per continent, that means there are 2400 players per side on each server, meaning there are 7200 players per server. I know for a fact, that there is NO WAY that many players on each server because I play on Mattherson when it's full. You cannot have 7200 players playing on a server at once. As for stability. I was playing a 3 way fight for a control point for 4 hours and there were no where near 500 players in that area and the server was lagging. You couldn't see opposing players because the models weren't loading, and players with lower quality ISP's than me were skipping across the field. to say there are 800 players per side on a map is just rediculous. I think it's a rather funny joke to say that the servers have bad hardware already seeing that the game was just released, those things should be brand spanking new. As for the game being persistant, see my previous comments, any game and be persistant, so long as it's online. Persistant means absolutely nothing and is a worthless word when it comes to online gaming.

persistant means that people are fighting over territory as i write this.  and when i log in the map will be different than when i last logged out.  your trying to tell me Battlefield 3 is persistant because it's online?

I think the prostitute mod corrupted your game files man. -elhefen

  User Deleted
11/23/12 2:16:03 PM#113
OP if I were you I would try out Rift.
  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 2:25:17 PM#114
Originally posted by muffins89
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn

Originally posted by TeknoBug  

Originally posted by grounnn 800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.
OMG stop, just stop.  
If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

That 800 players could very easily be ONE continent, when you look at each continent it shows the % population of each faction, last time I logged on Esamir had only 6% VS and the other 2 conts had 35-60%, and there were easily 100+ of us last night pushing the NC out of a base.

 


Back in Planetside 1 during beta I was in fights which consisted of 300+ players in a sinble base, it was chaotic.


BTW how do you know if it can't handle all at once? I was in beta and we had VERY high traffic on Indar a few times, network lag got flaky at times but it was still playable. However I'm on west coast and I play on Connery which is west coast and I recently rolled a new toon on Matherson which is east coast, and I feel the difference, there's less delay on Matherson than Connery. Briggs was experiencing lag and instability and they said it was bad hardware, so Connery could very well be suffering the same thing.


This IS a MMO, persistent world, players scattered all over the continents and can still communicate across the zone.

Okay, so lets say there are 800 per continent, that means there are 2400 players per side on each server, meaning there are 7200 players per server. I know for a fact, that there is NO WAY that many players on each server because I play on Mattherson when it's full. You cannot have 7200 players playing on a server at once. As for stability. I was playing a 3 way fight for a control point for 4 hours and there were no where near 500 players in that area and the server was lagging. You couldn't see opposing players because the models weren't loading, and players with lower quality ISP's than me were skipping across the field. to say there are 800 players per side on a map is just rediculous. I think it's a rather funny joke to say that the servers have bad hardware already seeing that the game was just released, those things should be brand spanking new. As for the game being persistant, see my previous comments, any game and be persistant, so long as it's online. Persistant means absolutely nothing and is a worthless word when it comes to online gaming.

persistant means that people are fighting over territory as i write this.  and when i log in the map will be different than when i last logged out.  your trying to tell me Battlefield 3 is persistant because it's online?

There are players fighting in PS2 for territories just like there are people who are fighting for territories in HALO BF3 COD MOH. so long as they're playing the game is persistant. Your ranks aren't reset, your guns aren't default, all that stuff is still there and players are able to progress whether you're there or not. However, dota 2 is one of those few online games that aren't persistant.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 2:30:33 PM#115
persisting, especially in spite of opposition, obstacles, discouragement,persisting, especially in spite of opposition, obstacles, discouragement,persisting, especially in spite of opposition, obstacles, discouragement,persisting, especially in spite of opposition, obstacles, discouragement,Originally posted by muffins89
Originally posted by grounnn
Originally posted by TeknoBug

 


Originally posted by grounnn

Originally posted by TeknoBug  

Originally posted by grounnn 800/3 maps ~260 per map then you take those 260 and spread them across the map at about 3-4 objective points. Which leaves you with at most 66 players fighting at a time per side; which is usually just 1v1 factions.
OMG stop, just stop.  
If you have nothing constructive add to the conv. why speak? When you break down the game to the core you're not fighting much more than 60 people at time and the game CANNOT handle if all 3 factions went full out on eachother in one location.

That 800 players could very easily be ONE continent, when you look at each continent it shows the % population of each faction, last time I logged on Esamir had only 6% VS and the other 2 conts had 35-60%, and there were easily 100+ of us last night pushing the NC out of a base.

 


Back in Planetside 1 during beta I was in fights which consisted of 300+ players in a sinble base, it was chaotic.


BTW how do you know if it can't handle all at once? I was in beta and we had VERY high traffic on Indar a few times, network lag got flaky at times but it was still playable. However I'm on west coast and I play on Connery which is west coast and I recently rolled a new toon on Matherson which is east coast, and I feel the difference, there's less delay on Matherson than Connery. Briggs was experiencing lag and instability and they said it was bad hardware, so Connery could very well be suffering the same thing.


This IS a MMO, persistent world, players scattered all over the continents and can still communicate across the zone.

Okay, so lets say there are 800 per continent, that means there are 2400 players per side on each server, meaning there are 7200 players per server. I know for a fact, that there is NO WAY that many players on each server because I play on Mattherson when it's full. You cannot have 7200 players playing on a server at once. As for stability. I was playing a 3 way fight for a control point for 4 hours and there were no where near 500 players in that area and the server was lagging. You couldn't see opposing players because the models weren't loading, and players with lower quality ISP's than me were skipping across the field. to say there are 800 players per side on a map is just rediculous. I think it's a rather funny joke to say that the servers have bad hardware already seeing that the game was just released, those things should be brand spanking new. As for the game being persistant, see my previous comments, any game and be persistant, so long as it's online. Persistant means absolutely nothing and is a worthless word when it comes to online gaming.

persistant means that people are fighting over territory as i write this.  and when i log in the map will be different than when i last logged out.  your trying to tell me Battlefield 3 is persistant because it's online?

Persistant - Persisting, especially in spite of opposition, obstacles, discourgament, etc.

That is the exact definition for persistant. If you are not there in any online game to obscure the course of the game it's persistant. With that being said, most online games can be considered persistant. Just because the game resets doesn't mean it isn't persistant. Just because you're not there doesn't mean it's not continueing without you. Because, in reality, It is.

Which leads me back to my original statement. Persistant is a word that is worthless when it comes to defining an online video game.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  ShakyMo

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/21/11
Posts: 7246

11/23/12 3:16:53 PM#116
read a bloody dictionary.

Most online games pvp is not persistent because it is a TIMED MATCH

What is it with all the bloody newspeak on here lately
  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 3:22:23 PM#117
Originally posted by ShakyMo
read a bloody dictionary.

Most online games pvp is not persistent because it is a TIMED MATCH

What is it with all the bloody newspeak on here lately

The definition of persistant that I gave is from the dictionary. No where along the lines does persistant mean infinite, it just means it's ongoing; and if a game whether it has a timer or not, continues while you're not there it's persistant. That's the definition, I'm sorry I can't word it any other way.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  Vhaln

Novice Member

Joined: 7/07/05
Posts: 3167

11/23/12 3:23:06 PM#118
Originally posted by ShakyMo
See firefall doesn't interest me as it only has instanced tupperware pvp

 

I'm curious if that might change by the time they're ready to release the game, but even that aside, just as someone who's looking for a more complete game to play than just a bare framework for PvP, I have to go with Firefall.  It's far from perfect, and I'd love to see a more integrated PvP system, since it seems a little lame to do an FPS that's so heavily PvE oriented.. but still, just seemed like a much more subtantial game to me, than PS2, largely because of the much greater emphasis on a developed MMO gameworld.

When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.

  Mtibbs1989

Elite Member

Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 2229

11/23/12 3:25:30 PM#119
Originally posted by Vhaln
Originally posted by ShakyMo
See firefall doesn't interest me as it only has instanced tupperware pvp

 

I'm curious if that might change by the time they're ready to release the game, but even that aside, just as someone who's looking for a more complete game to play than just a bare framework for PvP, I have to go with Firefall.  It's far from perfect, and I'd love to see a more integrated PvP system, since it seems a little lame to do an FPS that's so heavily PvE oriented.. but still, just seemed like a much more subtantial game to me, than PS2, largely because of the much greater emphasis on a developed MMO gameworld.

Firefall reminds me of Tabula Rosa, I can't wait to try it out. It might be interesting. I just hope they don't dumb it down for casual players, I loved it when it was first released, it was like a warzone. But, then they changed it and took a lot of  the mobs spawns out and it became slow and boring.


Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.

  Storman1977

Hard Core Member

Joined: 5/06/06
Posts: 200

11/23/12 5:06:19 PM#120
Originally posted by grounnn

Okay, so lets say there are 800 per continent, that means there are 2400 players per side on each server, meaning there are 7200 players per server. I know for a fact, that there is NO WAY that many players on each server because I play on Mattherson when it's full. You cannot have 7200 players playing on a server at once. As for stability. I was playing a 3 way fight for a control point for 4 hours and there were no where near 500 players in that area and the server was lagging. You couldn't see opposing players because the models weren't loading, and players with lower quality ISP's than me were skipping across the field. to say there are 800 players per side on a map is just rediculous. I think it's a rather funny joke to say that the servers have bad hardware already seeing that the game was just released, those things should be brand spanking new. As for the game being persistant, see my previous comments, any game and be persistant, so long as it's online. Persistant means absolutely nothing and is a worthless word when it comes to online gaming.

You know for a fact, huh?  How do you know?  Any sources you can cite for this knowledge?  Or are you talking out of your own personal experiences?  Seems to me that I'm not the only one to have witnessed and participated in high population battles that outstrip your expectations/experiences within the game.

As for a game world being persistant, it is only so so long as there is a population playing it.  If there are no people on the server, than that server is not persistant, regardless of the game.  Many games have the ability to be persistant, but do not actually achieve persistance.

7 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Search