Planetside 2

[Nebu]

But, from what I have read from you in the past, you had a rather stable, stable of people in DAOC.

Fair point. 

More often than not it's the people that make the game fun.  Broken people with broken toys is indeed a very apt comment (stolen from another thread).  My fondest MMO memories have far more to do with human interaction than they do with the games.  It's really a matter of the game allowing the people to create those moments.  Something which may be lost as games become more linear in nature. 

[slog]

Well I'm sure Sony-Verant-whatever will have learned their lessons from the original.  Much like EQ2 was superior and more of a success then EQ, PlanetSide 2 Next will be a better game at launch and more successful.

[Mrbloodworth]

Well I'm sure Sony-Verant-whatever will have learned their lessons from the original. 

Ahahahahahahaha.

Good one! 

[slog]

Well I'm sure Sony-Verant-whatever will have learned their lessons from the original. 

Ahahahahahahaha.

Good one! 

In all seriousness, I read the article on MMOGAMER and I got the impression that the main lesson that Smedley learned from EQ2 is not to call mmo sequels GAME2, so he changed the name to "Planetside: Next".

As much as I want to like this game, if that's all he learned then ....

[Speedy Cerviche]

My problem with PS was that it wasn't very sophisticated as a FPS. At the time I remember being heavily into BF1942 and PS just did not hold up well in comparison in just about every area.

Movement and physics felt clunky & limited, only 1 hitbox on people & vehicles, hit detection was this weirdass client side system (lagger/hacker dream), terrain was boring and generic, so were the base objectives, even the weapons & explosions were mostly dull.

Why pay 15$ per month when I could get better FPS gameplay for free? 64 player BF1942 servers were massive enough, you had tank columns colliding, bombers raining death, urban ruin battles, artillery, amphibious assaults with naval support, with planes dogfighting all over the map above you, all happening all over the same map.

I loved the concept of PS but execution-wise the whole thing was amateur hour. From the FPS mechanical aspects being fairly primitive & boring compared to genre leading games, to the MMO aspects being lacking, updates slowly forthcoming, & barely justifying the subscription. Then moving on we find out that the whole world was basically hardcoded, making it extremely difficult to patch anything to fix and refresh things which really needed updates.

I'm glad the whole thing has a champion backing it at SOE who wants to give it another go, hopefully they can learn from previous mistakes.

[UnsGub]

If Planetside Next just starts off with the same features but built so they can change and add to like any other current MMO it will work.

Mixing up the maps\content is going to be key to longevity for me.  Four base layouts are fine to start with but remove\change\add a few every month will slow down my typical burnout.

Many roles are something I expect them to continue with.  Half the original ones were beyond my skills but I found three or four I was ok at and could rotate through.  The more one can do in more the places the better as long as the population funnels work.

[01101010]

My problem with PS was that it wasn't very sophisticated as a FPS. At the time I remember being heavily into BF1942 and PS just did not hold up well in comparison in just about every area.

Movement and physics felt clunky & limited, only 1 hitbox on people & vehicles, hit detection was this weirdass client side system (lagger/hacker dream), terrain was boring and generic, so were the base objectives, even the weapons & explosions were mostly dull.

Why pay 15$ per month when I could get better FPS gameplay for free? 64 player BF1942 servers were massive enough, you had tank columns colliding, bombers raining death, urban ruin battles, artillery, amphibious assaults with naval support, with planes dogfighting all over the map above you, all happening all over the same map.

I loved the concept of PS but execution-wise the whole thing was amateur hour. From the FPS mechanical aspects being fairly primitive & boring compared to genre leading games, to the MMO aspects being lacking, updates slowly forthcoming, & barely justifying the subscription. Then moving on we find out that the whole world was basically hardcoded, making it extremely difficult to patch anything to fix and refresh things which really needed updates.

I'm glad the whole thing has a champion backing it at SOE who wants to give it another go, hopefully they can learn from previous mistakes.

I was informed a lot of the "clunkiness" and same-style of bases and terrain had to do with the scale the game was going for. Same with the client-side hit detection. Back then, there just wasn't the computing power to pull off those massive battles with infantry, vehicles, air support, etc without sacrificing a lot. I could cope with the simplistic graphics and "shooterness" of PS given I was a soldier trying to help my army take over continent after continent while keeping our own home continents under our control. That was enough impetus to keep me playing and poopsocking it all summer when PS was released. It really was not about leveling up or unlocking more certs for me. There was just a general sense of global domination on a team/army scale.

...and for some reason, the battles that always stand out in my memory were the ones that took HOURS to fight. Gunuku started as a simple hack and flip which erupted into a massive NC/TR battle complete with everything you can think of, which then lead to the VS taking bases behind both factions resulting in a final 3way at Gunuku with NC having the base and TR and VS each having its own tower. ANT runs and stopping them were insane... just a full day of fun. Haven't had that type of experience in a game since...

[tazelbain]

1) no sub.
2) massive differences in play style between the sides.
3) more options for bad fpsers to contribute.
4) certs and equipment layouts merged, Eve's power grid vs CPU model would work well here

[Mrbloodworth]

2) massive differences in play style between the sides.

4) certs and equipment layouts merged, Eve's power grid vs CPU model would work well here

I can't agree with this. There was nothing wrong with the cert system, or innovatory system (that was attached to armor type if you recall, also affected speed, and gun load out slots, and vehicle limitations). I also absolutely hate "Kits". Mixing and matching what YOU want was one of the greatest things about plantside.

Considering I bet most that complain about equipment space never used trunks, or all the manners you can ship/store/gain equipment in the field. That and you would be removing a big chunk of utility from hacking.

Certs (like skill load outs in games like GW) are necessary for the team aspect, and game balance. The game never needed Rambos or jack of alls (See black ops fiasco). They are the basis of allowing ever expanding content, while leaving it being temped and not falling into the power progression pitfall. As far as the power grid CPU system, why? Certs make so much more sense when you are talking about soldiers and do the same thing in essence.

For the most part, the design and systems of PS classic was a close to perfect as one can get. What it needed, was modern graphics, more solid net code, and a more manageable pipeline to add new content regularly. IMO. It died not because of any flawed systems, it died because it stagnated, EARLY.

As for difference. Massive? I don't think so, Meaningful and distinct differences, yes. I rather liked what they had.

I'm likely horribly biased.

[tazelbain]

I agree that you needs restrictions to prevent FPS version of tankmages.  I just think you could achieve the same thing without having the certs and more sophisticated Equipement system.  I cite EvE because it differentiated roles without requiring you forget the skills allowing you to do the other roles.

I don't see how you response is related to #2.  I thinking like how Tremulous, Natural Selection, Starcaft have side substantially diffident.  Maybe a less obvious example would LoL.  Where you really need to adjust equipment and strategy based on who you opposition is.  This sort of variety will keep the game fresh longer.

[Mrbloodworth]

Ah, I get what you mean about certs now.  My response to number two was basically saying i thought what they had was enough. As for fresh, I think if they had been able to continue to add things at all, that would have followed the faction rules would have accomplished that. "Massive" differences just sounded way to much I guess. There were already some great differences, mostly in the VS though.

Speedy Cerviche:  Planetside was really quite complicated, its complication was in utility or real effects. Not numbers like other games. Vastly more complicated than BF1942 or other games of its time. From the tech used to the rule sets and game mechanics.

just because I love linking it, and I think it embodies what planetside was about.

[Ratman_tf]

just because I love linking it, and I think it embodies what planetside was about.

Asshole.  I wish I could have captured Planetside Shortly After Release, in a magic bottle, and be able to play it again today.

[Ghambit]

just because I love linking it, and I think it embodies what planetside was about.

Asshole.  I wish I could have captured Planetside Shortly After Release, in a magic bottle, and be able to play it again today.

Back then, I wish I could capture EVERY MMO shortly after release and be able to play it again.
All such magical moments of late have been lost.   

[Mrbloodworth]

Asshole. 

 

[shiznitz]

That goddamn expansion screwed it.

[01101010]

I blame the LLU bullshit for starting the death roll. Lattice, ok. Run blinky run...not so much.

[Ghambit]

That goddamn expansion screwed it.

The xpac had nothing to do with it.  It was the typical nouveau-MMO whack-a-mole A.D.D. that killed it.  Too many titles trying to share too small a niche back then.
You could say the xpac screwed it for the hardcore types, but that's as far as you could go with that argument... and by then, the playerbase was so /crickets that it didnt really matter anyways.

[Ratman_tf]

The xpac had nothing to do with it. 

It certainly didn't help. In hindsight, I think more support for Outfits was the direction they should have gone. Terminals and billboards at home base that allowed you to track the achievements and exploits of Outfits kinda stuff.

[shiznitz]

I blame the LLU bullshit for starting the death roll. Lattice, ok. Run blinky run...not so much.

I liked the LLU variety, actually. 

You could say the xpac screwed it for the hardcore types, but that's as far as you could go with that argument... and by then, the playerbase was so /crickets that it didnt really matter anyways.

I was not a hardcore type and I played regularly as a random squaddie until the expansion. The caves were much harder on PUGs and sucked population from the surface battles just as the game population started to decline for many reasons.

SOE would have been better served forcing everyone to upgrade the game engine to support a changeable world map and focus on Outfit stuff as Ratman said.  I wish there had been a way to actually look at the action from a bird's eye view from home base in real time.  It was a high tech world yet the only good recon required actually deploying.

I loved the combat mechanics which gave poor FPS players like myself a chance to compete, but still allowed really good FPS guys to excel. All three sides were excellently balanced as evidenced by the constant complaining from everyone about everyone else.

Oh well.

[Mrbloodworth]

I also enjoyed the LLU stuff. Perhaps just not the caves. Game needed more logistics.

[LK]

Game needs a lot more than that. Game needs soldiers to follow orders. Military command structure & player freedom in a game are in direct opposition to each other. The side that follows order is the side that's most likely to win... but is that side having fun? This, I think, is the central problem of the game. It never reconciled that basic issue.

I think players went in expecting to blow shit up and realized that isn't the best way to play the game. They came in for fun, not competition.

[Nebu]

Game needs a lot more than that. Game needs soldiers to follow orders. Military command structure & player freedom in a game are in direct opposition to each other. The side that follows order is the side that's most likely to win... but is that side having fun? This, I think, is the central problem of the game. It never reconciled that basic issue.

I think players went in expecting to blow shit up and realized that isn't the best way to play the game. They came in for fun, not competition.

You hit on part of what the game missed for me.  Players are willing to put up with less gameplay fun if they win strategic victories.  The problem that I saw was that you would give up personal freedom and fun for a battle victory only to find out that the victory was pretty meaningless. 

I think that the key to making a game like this worthy of a subscription fee is in making the game fun in both the short and the long term.  The difficulty then comes in how do you create long-term fun that isn't also terribly unbalancing.  Herein lies the problem that has plagued pvp MMOs.

[kildorn]

Following orders versus just dicking around and short term victories pretty much describes the issues with any non deathmatch FPS.

Planetside just had larger teams and a longer round than a Battlefield server, but the "gamers have little reason to obey some dude they've never met before" aspect remains the same.

[01101010]

Following orders versus just dicking around and short term victories pretty much describes the issues with any non deathmatch FPS.

Planetside just had larger teams and a longer round than a Battlefield server, but the "gamers have little reason to obey some dude they've never met before" aspect remains the same.

Very true unless ou are in a guild/outfit with people you chat with via Voice Programs. I for one hated leading anything in any organized FPS game I have played. I am much more a "take orders" kinda guy and was happy to do it. But there are a ton of console players that are hardwired into their 10-15 minute fights in which they are all alone on a team. These are the people that tend to get shredded in the game by teams that actually organize - and they are also the people that bitch the most on the forums, IMHO of course.

[Nebu]

Very true unless ou are in a guild/outfit with people you chat with via Voice Programs. I for one hated leading anything in any organized FPS game I have played. I am much more a "take orders" kinda guy and was happy to do it. But there are a ton of console players that are hardwired into their 10-15 minute fights in which they are all alone on a team. These are the people that tend to get shredded in the game by teams that actually organize - and they are also the people that bitch the most on the forums, IMHO of course.

While this is very true, the monthly sub from the solo console gamers still counts the same in the coffers.  You need to find a middle ground to appease both crowds if you want to keep your game alive.  Wolves need sheep and all that stuff. 

PS catered to the guild/team crowd and couldn't garner enough regular subs to be successful.  PS2 needs to adapt to this or it will suffer the same fate.  No matter how pretty the game is, there are just too many other options out there for FPS gamers.  PS2 will have to satisfy not only the hardcore niche that they have already attracted, but also bring in some fresh blood.  If they fail, PS2 will suffer an identical fate.

[Dark_MadMax]

More accountability  , f2p and more fluid gameplay and I bet PS2 (heck even PS1) would be a smashing hit . Look at WoT - it makes good money ,being released only in russia so far,  action multiplayer game, with f2p model.

Imagine if PS was made on same scale but  with polish of WoT and F2P model. I just dont see how it wont work. Surely it wont reach WoW numbers ,but it would definitely will have its audience.

[LK]

Compelling single player aspect where completion of missions contributes to persistent war effort. Unfortunately, the amount of content necessary given the fast pace of an FPS to satisfy a solo player must be extreme. If it takes you 30 seconds - 1 minute to kill a mob but only < 5 seconds in a FPS...

Here's the thing: an MMO game needs to stand on its own and satisfy ONE player to have a solid core with which to prosper. Moreover, players want to login and have a minimum expectation of the experience. If they login to find their side handicapped and being shat on... that's not going to rally them, they are just going to stop playing.

The game is *made* for competitive people loyal to a cause, their outfit, and with the fighting ability and structure to pull off short-term and long-term victories. That's a very, very small segment of the gaming population. For the rest, you have no time to make friends except in the heat of battle, and your usefulness and the reason people might recruit you is only equal to your ability to perform, so socializers are DOA. Achievers have the achievements but they will be beaten down by battlefield losses (which are always prolonged sieges in my experience because of how much of a bitch it was to take down a base with "respawning".) if there's no competitive fight to them. Explorers have *nothing* to check out. Most of the battlefield between bases is dead space.

The game got what it was designed for. That doesn't mean it's going to be a financial success. A sequel needs to be vastly different to its predecessor to enjoy any high-scale level of success. Otherwise it needs to be built as, and exploited to the fullest, a niche game.

Free to Play, I agree, would be a necessary component if they keep on like this. If they want to churn out large quantities of content, they need subscription. I don't understand "more accountability."

[01101010]

While this is very true, the monthly sub from the solo console gamers still counts the same in the coffers.  You need to find a middle ground to appease both crowds if you want to keep your game alive.  Wolves need sheep and all that stuff. 

PS catered to the guild/team crowd and couldn't garner enough regular subs to be successful.  PS2 needs to adapt to this or it will suffer the same fate.  No matter how pretty the game is, there are just too many other options out there for FPS gamers.  PS2 will have to satisfy not only the hardcore niche that they have already attracted, but also bring in some fresh blood.  If they fail, PS2 will suffer an identical fate.

Oh I agree with ya on this. It sorta worked in PS in that the lone wolves were always the ones to go blazing ahead and provide the distraction, albeit inadvertently, for organized squads to roll in or flank or do something other than a frontal assault. Those ramboes got their fill of kills and deaths unless a squad was organized to defend...then they were just fodder. I do recall my outfit assimilated a few of the lone wolves when they saw how things actually worked. So those people and guilds/clans/outfits can coexist and function. Retention is an issue for everyone, but more so for the wolves given their shelf life is shorter in games like PS. Outifts can help retain some of those, but the game should have a cushion to keep the others around a little longer.

[Slayerik]

What about allowing outfits to be open? When someone creates a character, at the end of the process they are given a list of open outfits (sortable by player numbers) with a short description. You can choose to decline, pick one, or click RANDOM. Seems like it would be a decent way to get people at least in a (bad) group.

[Malakili]

In world war 2 online you can do basically just that (minus the random part).  If you set your squad recruitment up, it'll show people without a squad what squads are looking for people when they sign onto the game.  Of course, you can just close it if you don't want to join any, but I think it probably helps.

[KallDrexx]

In all seriousness, I read the article on MMOGAMER and I got the impression that the main lesson that Smedley learned from EQ2 is not to call mmo sequels GAME2, so he changed the name to "Planetside: Next".

As much as I want to like this game, if that's all he learned then ....

That sounds pretty sound to me.  EQ1 was hugely successful, so making an EQ2 that varied a lot from the mechanics of EQ1 was a mistake, because EQ1 players went in thinking it was the same as EQ2 when it really was an entirely different MMO (lore-aside).

In contrast Planetside wasn't largely successful, but even so the mechanics of a PlanetSide sequel won't be that much different than the original.  The differences will mostly come in a macro way (e.g. the FPS mechanics, skill system, and vehicles will probably be quite similar). 

People going into the PS sequel will be able to come in with expectations of how the game will play, where as people going from EQ1 to EQ2 had to totally change their expectations because the games differed so much.

[LK]

If your game needs other people (players) to show others why it is fun or how to play, then you've failed in your role as a game developer and will only see the hardcore, niche players with new talent being left to their own devices as only a few mentors are available to train the masses.

Why would established players give any kind of a shit to take a random under their wing and show them the ropes? You'd need to create massive incentives, and even then, you're relying on players to not fuck it up and be GOOD teachers, and the ransoms to take their role seriously and put in the required effort to succeed.

It's the game's job to be a good teacher! If you as the developer can't interest people in your product from the get go... you designed it wrong!

[Malakili]

If your game needs other people (players) to show others why it is fun or how to play, then you've failed in your role as a game developer and will only see the hardcore, niche players with new talent being left to their own devices as only a few mentors are available to train the masses.

Why would established players give any kind of a shit to take a random under their wing and show them the ropes? You'd need to create massive incentives, and even then, you're relying on players to not fuck it up and be GOOD teachers, and the ransoms to take their role seriously and put in the required effort to succeed.

It's the game's job to be a good teacher! If you as the developer can't interest people in your product from the get go... you designed it wrong!

The trick is to make your game accessible enough that its easy to get hooked on, and hard enough that you don't get bored with it after a month.  Thats been my problem most games I've played lately.  Even if they are great to start with, they just don't seem to go anywhere.   If there is a reason, despite my occasional rant, why I just can't put Starcraft 2 down, its because its constantly evolving and changing and I am constantly challenged by it.  Of course, a game like SC2 at least has a ladder, so not everyone is playing together off the bat. 

Doesn't mean it needs to require other players to show you how to play, but let me put it another way - any game I've played long term, I've pretty quickly ended up turning to other players to learn how to play better, in everything from Counter-Strike (original) to Starcraft 2 to WoW, to EVE, to WW2O. 

[LK]

That's a natural desire in trying to get better: seeking objective opinion or another's perspective to compare against your own. That's a compeitive trait though.  Most people have an unrealistic impression of their ability and aren't honest with themselves to seek help or listen to it if they find it. Players not having fun and getting curbstomped won't care to learn and will just move onto something more fun that eases them in better.

When someone logs into the game, it's for them and their buds and nobody else. There is no recruitment and socialization aspect in game. An outfit leader would need to make an effort to train new recruits, but most would rather poach the players that are good and have proven themselves by actually succeeding at what they are doing.

My opinion of most Outfits / Guilds is that they aren't organizations like the military that takes anyone and trains them up, but sports teams that recruits and invests in top talent. You still need to design the game that people at all skill levels can participate... but those at a higher level need to face similar opposition.

WoW succeeds because you can train on your own, socialize on your own, and learn on your own and succeed. Planetside can tea h you the wrong lessons when you're on your own and doesn't have the environment to train and encourage new recruits. It is literally a "die enough times and you'll figure it out because hey you can't die anyway." Like giving a new 18-year-old recruit a gun and telling him to go fight.

War isn't fair. *Good games are.* Planetside and games like it aren't destined to last.

[Malakili]

War isn't fair. *Good games are.* Planetside and games like it aren't destined to last.

Well, I look at something like World War 2 Online (which is my favorite MMOFPS to date, though I must admit, its towards the sim side, so its arguably a slightly different genre), and it feels very fair.   Granted, there are systems in place that help it be fair, but there is still a pretty huge difference between someone who knows what they are doing and someone who doesn't and there is also almost no difference in available "gear."

My opinion of most Outfits / Guilds is that they aren't organizations like the military that takes anyone and trains them up, but sports teams that recruits and invests in top talent. You still need to design the game that people at all skill levels can participate... but those at a higher level need to face similar opposition.

Thats a very accurate analogy I think, but I also think that there is much more willingness to "train" new but dedicated players in an MMO atmosphere than in say, a competitive FPS atmosphere.  In a 6v6 TF2 league, you can't carry dead weight with you, but its a lot easier to bring an extra guy to the fight in an MMO.