The guys from the Rebel-FM podcast over at www.eat-sleep-game.com asked themselves, why anyone would play Battlefield over Planetside - and they weren't able to provide any answers. That is quite baffling to me, and I think worthy of discussion. To keep my answer most broadly, Planetside 2 - to me - is a fascinating experience before it's a gripping game. The fascination comes from its enormous scale and persistent world in conflict. Which is both its strength and its biggest flaw.
The following is why I prefer playing any core Battlefield game over Planetside 2...
- Pacing (both the moment to moment gameplay, as well as overall progression, is way faster paced in Battlefield - due to not being persistent massively multiplayer on a nigh endless landmass, and not being hampered by being free 2 play)
- Balance (while huge battles with player controlled unrestricted vehicle spawns does lead to awesome experiences, balance too is player-driven, and not inherent to map design, and can be extremely out of whack)
- Fidelity (the fidelity of the overall presentation, as well as of physics and ballistics, will always be higher definition with a more limited experience)
- Breadth (there's infinite ways to play Battlefield, from tight CoD-esque CQC maps, to immense landscapes full with jets and choppers and tanks and what have you - and anything inbetween)
Most importantly however. Battlefield offers a win-state. I play competitive online games to win them. To best my enemies and strive for being first amongst my peers. Planetside 2 doesn't offer that. It does offer a great Battlefield experience, but it's no replacement for an actual Battlefield game. A game that can't be won, isn't really a game I want to play - so I'm still playing Battlefield over Planetside.
How about you guys?