Planetside 2 - Looking grim...

  • 72 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by hoossy (933 posts) -

As other people have said... what do you expect?

I mean, I understand the feeling. We love our Planetside, and don't want it to be fucked with. On the other hand, Planetside 1 only had Battlefield 1942 to compete with... and while similar in some aspects... they were very different in others. Plus, the market wasn't yet saturated with CoD and clones.

Skip to today and finding a large, dedicated audience in the FPS genre is harder than ever. Everyone is already balls deep into BF, CoD, or other shooters. For Planetside 2 to be successful, they can't rely on the relatively small number of folks who have been waiting patiently for this game to release, while giving the middle finger to the other big franchises. SOE has to compromise, and they can do so without fucking up what makes Planetside special.

The classes and killcam are just meant to help bring the BF/CoD people into the fold... without freaking them out....

Once they are comfortable, they will see what a genius play style that Planetside can provide. Lovers of true teamwork with stay and prosper.

I feel pretty confident in this game's future.

#52 Posted by Anomareh (92 posts) -

@hoossy: I expect them to call it what it is and seeing as it's not Planetside I'd expect it to not be called as such. Don't know how many times I can say it. The ONLY issue people have with this game is it's damn name. If it was called anything other than Planetside, this thread would not exist.

#53 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

This game will be great. Planetside was good in many ways and it definitely encouraged teamwork but this game is will be so much better.

#54 Posted by Asrahn (552 posts) -

@Anomareh said:

Pretty sure there's barely anyone that actually gives any fucks about this game past it's name. If this game was called Space Wars in Space 6486 this thread would have never happened.

Emboldened: Granted. This is the deal with basically every sequel that's ever been made, even excellent games like Dragon Age: Origins faced some rage as well from old Baldur's Gate fans.

Underlined: Would I take this out of context if I was to believe that you claim that the game would not have reached such hype and/or attention if it hadn't been for the name they choose for it?

#55 Edited by Anomareh (92 posts) -

@Asrahn: Yes, you would be taking it out of context. I'm saying the only reason there is any uproar is because it's called Planetside and what they've shown of it makes it look nothing like Planetside (superficial similarities aside). If it was called whatever else, people would just be saying "Oh hey cool, a F2P Planetside-like game." (I still challenge the idea that if that livestream was shown with no context people would jump to Planetside sequel.), instead of "OMG WTF is this shit! They are removing everything that made Planetside Planetside!"

There is no reason for this game to be branded as a Planetside game. For other franchises it often makes sense fictionally, or the franchise itself is highly regarded, or it hasn't been nearly a decade since the last entry. Planetside is fucking 9 years old and even then it wasn't the new hotness. Planetside was basically a cult classic. That awesome thing no one knows about and never touched.

I think my last 5 posts have said the exact same thing just 5 different ways... this is getting tiring.

#56 Posted by Asrahn (552 posts) -

@Anomareh said:

@Asrahn: Yes, you would be taking it out of context. I'm saying the only reason there is any uproar is because it's called Planetside and what they've shown of it makes it look nothing like Planetside (superficial similarities aside). If it was called whatever else, people would just be saying "Oh hey cool, a F2P Planetside-like game." (I still challenge the idea that if that livestream was shown with no context people would jump to Planetside sequel.), instead of "OMG WTF is this shit! They are removing everything that made Planetside Planetside!"

Being a longtime fan of the Command & Conquer series, I too know the pain of seeing something you love ran into the ground and/or altered completely, so I can sympathise. It's a shame that the game, as you see it, alienates old PS1 players when so many who never played PS1 seems very excited about the game - it would have been nice to have some old blood giving us some directions in the game.

It's an interesting discussion all in all really, exactly how alike must the sequels be to not bring the ire of their old fans, and how much can they change to still give their old players something new? From an outsider perspective, little seems to have changed in terms of core mechanics between PS1 and 2, but it is also the observation of the unexperienced eye. I can only hope that the finished product will throw out killcams, and that the entire game in its essence will be wholly team-based, as I heard PS1 was, and that it may be the bridge between old and new Planetside players.

Then again, perhaps I am hoping for too much. Only time can tell, I guess.

#57 Posted by Anomareh (92 posts) -

I still argue an actual sequel to Planetside would be an utter failure in this day and age. The people that were playing those types of games then are such a small fraction of those playing now. Trying to make a Planetside game work, full of a bunch of 13 year olds with ADHD, would be no fun for anyone involved. The games of old that required teamwork on a massive scale are long since gone. If you still want that sort of experience there's basically only ArmA.

#58 Edited by Erk_Forever (157 posts) -

@Anomareh:

Clearly you are incapable of having a dialectic. I was in no way trolling, I was asking a question of your opinion; because, no I haven't read every single post in the thread. I'm lazy like that. I can however, hold a coherent discussion without resorting to insults. Since that's the way we're going to be though, maybe I can pass the time until Planetside 2 is released by explaining to you what a vagina feels like.

#59 Posted by Anomareh (92 posts) -

@Erk_Forever: Oh my bad then. I love having discussions with people that are lazy. Especially the type of lazy that can't be bothered to skim, what was at the time, a 2 page thread. The kind of lazy that can't even be bothered to read my post just a few before his own, answering the exact same question he asked, but from someone else, is even better.

Also, what's a vagina? Did you read about that on Wikipedia or something?

#60 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1817 posts) -

to me this looks like MAG MMO so i already preordered

#61 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

@Anomareh said:

I still argue an actual sequel to Planetside would be an utter failure in this day and age. The people that were playing those types of games then are such a small fraction of those playing now. Trying to make a Planetside game work, full of a bunch of 13 year olds with ADHD, would be no fun for anyone involved. The games of old that required teamwork on a massive scale are long since gone. If you still want that sort of experience there's basically only ArmA.

You know that gamers over the age of 13 still exist, right? A genocide didn't occur that killed us all off. And from what I remember of PS1, not everyone was mature or serious in any session I played.

#62 Posted by poser (392 posts) -

In order for this game to work, they need to cast a wider net. And I never played the first game, but my understanding is that PS1 died fast because the shooting was awful.

#63 Posted by Zaccheus (1792 posts) -

@connerthekewlkid said:

to me this looks like MAG MMO so i already preordered

I'm in the same boat as you, but I'd like to point out that it's impossible to pre-order an online free-to-play MMOFPS.

#64 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1817 posts) -

@Zaccheus: wow i just realized its COMPLETLY free to play dont even have to buy a copy thanks

#65 Posted by confideration (405 posts) -

The E3 videos on totalbuscuits YouTube channel are pretty great for gameplay footage. I am all in. Game looks super pretty as well.

#66 Posted by Noizemaze (16 posts) -

As long as Prowlers aren't gimped with needing one additional player to operate at full capacity, I don't care how many people are needed to run an MBT.

I believe the rewards for controlling territory are resources that provide access to vehicles and XP bonuses.

#67 Posted by Grimhild (723 posts) -

@Noizemaze:

Yup. I don't remember asking, but yup. :)

#68 Posted by Noizemaze (16 posts) -

@Grimhild:Seems I can't reply correctly, my fault

#69 Edited by WLF68 (14 posts) -

I don't know why some people are picky about the small things. It's going to be more less hardcore so more people will play. They aren't going to spend millons of dollars to make a game that only 200 people will play. The biggest thing is that the maps and scale is huge and that's why its GOING TO BE AWESOME. I will admit, I'm about done with Battlefield 3 but only because the maps are getting smaller, and I just can't keep going over a map endless times :) but Planetside 2 will be different.

#70 Posted by Kenobi (371 posts) -

It seems everything done here is to steamline the process. And the tanks are much more vulnerable than in PS1.

#71 Posted by minotaka (320 posts) -

@Kenobi said:

And the tanks are much more vulnerable than in PS1.

Thank gawd.

#72 Posted by TheHT (11093 posts) -

Being free to play, having 1-man operational tanks is a great thing. Without a barrier to entry, there'll probably be more trolls so...

Not to imply subscriptions completely remove the troll problem, but it's a higher barrier to entry.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.