Trending Games | Wizard101 | Elder Scrolls Online | World of Warcraft | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,899,314 Users Online:0
Games:751  Posts:6,267,904
Sony Online Entertainment | Play Now
MMORPG | Genre:Sci-Fi | Status:Final  (rel 11/20/12)  | Pub:Sony Online Entertainment
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

PlanetSide 2 Forum » General Discussion » PS2 is a Disappointment

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search
61 posts found
  tixylix

Hard Core Member

Joined: 12/02/11
Posts: 1121

9/04/12 4:07:27 PM#21

I played it since the test test and I hate it, just doesn't feel like Planetside and all my Outfit mates from the first game agree.

 

Another SOE failure.

  tixylix

Hard Core Member

Joined: 12/02/11
Posts: 1121

9/04/12 4:08:51 PM#22
Originally posted by Omali
Originally posted by UsualSuspect
Originally posted by Thane

maybe that's why they call it beta and not release?

jesus... some people will never get it...

The beta argument would have been a good one, and one I would have agreed with and been content to just wait out the problems, but as I said before, the moment they lifted the NDA they're happy for people to judge the game as it is. Why would you risk that on an inferior product? It just says to me that this is what we can expect, they'll tweak a few things, bring the locked certifications online, then call it done.

They opened the NDA to get a lot more feedback. John Smedley has stated that the game may change radically by the time it is actually ready for release, and they want the community to shape how the game develops.

They want people judging how the game is with the intention of making it better, not reviewing it as if it is anywhere close to a finished product. There's a very fine line, I suggest you find it.

 

John Smedley says a lot of things, none of which are true.

  MindTrigger

Advanced Member

Joined: 12/19/07
Posts: 2628

9/04/12 4:15:25 PM#23
Originally posted by UsualSuspect
Originally posted by coretester
there's no point to anything and it's just terrible all the way through.

This is my biggest problem with it at the moment. There really is no point, the game gives me no motivation to go out there and fight for territory. The territory just swings back and fore every few minutes, you can capture a base or outpost and within a few minutes that base or outpost is back in the hands of the enemy. Why bother?

In PS1 the motivation was capturing lands, you could push the enemy completely off a continent and then move on to the next one. That was the goal, to try and conquer the lands. Making the whole game about a couple of bases on some godawful landscape is just a major fail in my opinion. It gives you nothing to care about, the scale is just too small to be interesting.

I'm having this problem with WvW in GW2 as well.  Yeah, your server get some low-level buffs, but in the end, you just zerg from keep to keep in an endless cycle.  I just think it's all too simple.  Land should be captured and held while keeps (or bases) are built by players.  Otherwise.... meh.

A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 17371

9/04/12 4:40:07 PM#24
Originally posted by tixylix

I played it since the test test and I hate it, just doesn't feel like Planetside and all my Outfit mates from the first game agree.

 

Another SOE failure.

Can I assume that you guys are saying this stuff to the developers? Perhaps bringing up why Planet Side 1 was great?

  MindTrigger

Advanced Member

Joined: 12/19/07
Posts: 2628

9/04/12 4:45:22 PM#25
Originally posted by Sovrath
Originally posted by tixylix

I played it since the test test and I hate it, just doesn't feel like Planetside and all my Outfit mates from the first game agree.

 

Another SOE failure.

Can I assume that you guys are saying this stuff to the developers? Perhaps bringing up why Planet Side 1 was great?

These are things developers have to know from the beginning.  Once the game design is settled on, we've learned that it is what it is.  What blows me away is how little these companies pay attention to their customer's opinions.  They are apparently behind trends in what people want as well.

A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  SnarlingWolf

Novice Member

Joined: 6/23/09
Posts: 2728

9/04/12 4:56:27 PM#26

I liked PS1 for the first couple of months it was out. There were some balance issues with the different sides but otherwise it was fun. Even with PS1 though it was fairly pointless overall. We would run a group who would purposely sneak in and capture all the bases the enemy wasn't at and when enough of their forces came over we'd go back and recapture the original one we were attacking. That was what PS was.

 

I was excited when they initially announced PS2 but then they said cash shop shortly thereafter and I stopped following it all together. I'm not surprised there isn't a lot of enjoyment there and that they managed to make it worse than the first.

 

Back then there weren't a lot of good 32x32 or 64x64 player team FPS games that had infantry, air and mechanized units all in one which is what part of the draw to PS was. But now there are games like BF and a couple other franchises that do this and do it better than PS ever did (although the newest BF is pretty awful). So why play one that has a chash shop that is worse??

  Goll25

Novice Member

Joined: 1/19/10
Posts: 187

9/04/12 4:58:15 PM#27
To this forum, I am not sure what isn't a disappointment anymore.
  Wicoa

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/08/07
Posts: 1614

9/04/12 6:55:18 PM#28
Originally posted by Goll25
To this forum, I am not sure what isn't a disappointment anymore.

This forum does seem to follow the wave of what is general gamer opinion by way of migration and mass dumping and theres one exception,WoW, its still the most popular mmorpg.

I will say it doesnt seem like the off spring of planetside except for the factions. Though I am willing to wait it out to see.  Got my eye on Hawken now thanks to bill.

  UsualSuspect

Hard Core Member

Joined: 11/01/04
Posts: 1223

 
OP  9/05/12 1:41:16 AM#29
Originally posted by Sovrath

Can I assume that you guys are saying this stuff to the developers? Perhaps bringing up why Planet Side 1 was great?

I make posts on the beta forums, yes. There are actually a lot of posts on the forums about lack of motivation, how it seems pointless fighting back and fore if it stays a stalemate forever. People are becoming very disenchanted with the game the longer they play it, which isn't good considering it isn't even released yet. If they don't make some changes to the core gameplay the game is going to bomb very quickly and I doubt they'd even get their investment back, considering it's completely free to play.

  User Deleted
9/05/12 1:56:51 AM#30

I played PS2 for a bit and I'm not impressed. Would love to see PS1 with new shiny skin (better engine)but the same would go for DAoC... so not sure if I just start to think that in the past every thing was better, and/or I'm just getting old.

  Slampig

Hard Core Member

Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 2401

Whatever you do, do NOT speak ill of Asheron's Call 2...

9/05/12 2:05:28 AM#31

I don't know when beta tests stopped being actual tests and turned into free trials. To see companies like Blizzard and SOE actually TEST the games is refreshing. Too bad the general gaming public expects these free trials, maybe a lot of these people should look up what it means to beta TEST...

 

Just saying.

That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!

  IAmMMO

Novice Member

Joined: 5/17/08
Posts: 1321

9/05/12 2:50:23 AM#32
Originally posted by UsualSuspect
Originally posted by Thane

maybe that's why they call it beta and not release?

jesus... some people will never get it...

The beta argument would have been a good one, and one I would have agreed with and been content to just wait out the problems, but as I said before, the moment they lifted the NDA they're happy for people to judge the game as it is. Why would you risk that on an inferior product? It just says to me that this is what we can expect, they'll tweak a few things, bring the locked certifications online, then call it done.

 

It's not an inferior product. You're mistaking reality with your opinion.

  Arclan

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/29/07
Posts: 1437

"Ideas are worthless. The only currency that holds any weight is the ability and drive to execute."

9/05/12 9:22:20 AM#33


Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
I liked PS1 for the first couple of months it was out. There were some balance issues with the different sides but otherwise it was fun. Even with PS1 though it was fairly pointless overall. We would run a group who would purposely sneak in and capture all the bases the enemy wasn't at and when enough of their forces came over we'd go back and recapture the original one we were attacking. That was what PS was.

 

I was excited when they initially announced PS2 but then they said cash shop shortly thereafter and I stopped following it all together. I'm not surprised there isn't a lot of enjoyment there and that they managed to make it worse than the first.

 

Back then there weren't a lot of good 32x32 or 64x64 player team FPS games that had infantry, air and mechanized units all in one which is what part of the draw to PS was. But now there are games like BF and a couple other franchises that do this and do it better than PS ever did (although the newest BF is pretty awful). So why play one that has a chash shop that is worse??


Well said, and I agree with some of your post. I disagree that BF and PS are in the same genre. The former is a FPS frag fest where 15 versus 15 is the norm. The latter is more like a war where 100 versus 100 is the norm. 15 minute base captures feel epic wherease 30 second flag captures seem tedious. Getting certifications and awards for various professions is more immersive than clicking on medic/engineer/soldier in BF. They are entirely different games.

Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
video game company layoffs are twice the national average.

  D_TOX

Novice Member

Joined: 11/20/07
Posts: 281

9/05/12 10:16:12 AM#34
It sounds to me like PS2 is a game that requires team-work and group play to get the most out of it. I can imagine it seems like a big zerg borefest when you log on casually to 'play for a few hours'. Of course it does. You have no connection with any other players. I imagine joining an outfit and/or playing with friends however, making use of the variety of classes/vehicles/weaponry in conjunction with another, i imagine this is what brings the most enjoyment out of PS2. Just my 2 cents. 
  SnarlingWolf

Novice Member

Joined: 6/23/09
Posts: 2728

9/05/12 10:24:38 AM#35
Originally posted by Arclan

 


Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
I liked PS1 for the first couple of months it was out. There were some balance issues with the different sides but otherwise it was fun. Even with PS1 though it was fairly pointless overall. We would run a group who would purposely sneak in and capture all the bases the enemy wasn't at and when enough of their forces came over we'd go back and recapture the original one we were attacking. That was what PS was.

 

 

I was excited when they initially announced PS2 but then they said cash shop shortly thereafter and I stopped following it all together. I'm not surprised there isn't a lot of enjoyment there and that they managed to make it worse than the first.

 

Back then there weren't a lot of good 32x32 or 64x64 player team FPS games that had infantry, air and mechanized units all in one which is what part of the draw to PS was. But now there are games like BF and a couple other franchises that do this and do it better than PS ever did (although the newest BF is pretty awful). So why play one that has a chash shop that is worse??


 

Well said, and I agree with some of your post. I disagree that BF and PS are in the same genre. The former is a FPS frag fest where 15 versus 15 is the norm. The latter is more like a war where 100 versus 100 is the norm. 15 minute base captures feel epic wherease 30 second flag captures seem tedious. Getting certifications and awards for various professions is more immersive than clicking on medic/engineer/soldier in BF. They are entirely different games.

 Getting certifications is 1) nothing new and 2) only interesting the first time. After you're certified it is just the same old same old shooting game. America's Army did certifications for classes and it actually made some of the certifications hard enough that some people never achieved them.

 

Like I said, the newest BF was a failure. I was in the beta and I (and many many others) let them know everywhere they were going wrong but they released that steaming pile just like all companies do after beta. Betas don't mean anything anymore.

 

Also almost all of the different war games that have mechanized, air, and infantry can be made to host servers that are 128v128 so it is no different that planetside can do 100v100. Unless PS2 was going to make it hundreds and hundreds, even possibly a thousand or more, people in close proximity with real time battles, there is no point to playing an "MMO" version over a regular version of the same thing. Especially when the regualar version has a box price and then no other costs.

  ShakyMo

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/21/11
Posts: 7246

9/05/12 10:32:13 AM#36
Planetside is a persistent world

All those other games you mention are timed matches

That is the big difference, the war goes on whether you are there or not.
  UsualSuspect

Hard Core Member

Joined: 11/01/04
Posts: 1223

 
OP  9/05/12 12:24:10 PM#37
Originally posted by D_TOX
It sounds to me like PS2 is a game that requires team-work and group play to get the most out of it. I can imagine it seems like a big zerg borefest when you log on casually to 'play for a few hours'. Of course it does. You have no connection with any other players. I imagine joining an outfit and/or playing with friends however, making use of the variety of classes/vehicles/weaponry in conjunction with another, i imagine this is what brings the most enjoyment out of PS2. Just my 2 cents. 

You'd think so, but it doesn't seem to be so. I was on NC and every night a guy called Tactus would organise a platoon with all talking over voice chat, picking targets and working out plans of attack. But I still came away from it feeling like it was all pointless. The problem is that taking bases and outposts happens so fast that all the work the platoon had done was gone ten minutes after we'd moved on to another target. It only takes one person to go back and capture those outposts, thus creating a link to a base, where he either takes it himself or a small platoon come in and take over.

And there's no warning of this happening, nothing shows up on the map until the territory is no longer yours - and even if it did, by the time you'd organized a defence the base will have been captured anyway because the capture time is so short. This is one thing I hope they fix before release as at the moment the whole game is, as has been quoted in other forum posts, 'whack-a-mole' with bases.

  Superman0X

Elite Member

Joined: 3/28/06
Posts: 1032

9/05/12 1:15:16 PM#38

A quick update.

 

They added more servers, and then lowered the max number of players per contintent (~500) for Pax. This greatly improved performance, but lowered the numbers in fights. Because of this the fights have been much more dynamic, with low pop sides losing territory (down to just warpgate). When there are larger numbers, the fighting is more static, as it is harder to push anyone back.

 

I would suggest that they look at higher resource costs for things, as it seems like you are pretty much unlimited at this time (for all practical puposes). That would also make it more important to retain resources.

 

 

  kiltak

Novice Member

Joined: 4/10/04
Posts: 102

9/05/12 1:45:12 PM#39

I sat down to day and to give Planetside 2 a whirl and by time I logged off I wanted to rip my eye balls out of there socket. I spent more time walking and trying to get to locations then I actually did I playing. I mean they give you an instant action button but it has a cool down.  

I'm not saying that I won't play the game when it launches however right now I have to agree the game is all over the placey. Also this game is in a serious need of a tutorial.

  raykor

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/28/05
Posts: 326

9/05/12 7:46:58 PM#40

Planetside is my favorite video game…ever…period.  I played the original on-and-off over eight years.  I cannot emphasize how badly I want PS2 to be my new game for the next decade.

But I’ve been in the beta since the tech test and I too am not enjoying it.  I haven’t logged in for ten days.  Even for free, I just have no desire to keep playing.

BUT…this is a true beta!  I am not at all giving up.  I keep an eye on the beta forums and the patch notes.  I sincerely hope the final product is something I will enjoy but they have made it clear that this is not as much a sequel as a reinterpretation of the original.  I am fully preparing myself for the fact that this reinterpretation is simply not for me.

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search