The next hurdle for PS2 is named BF4

The way I look at is... I bought 3 months of membership, if this game does not improve in this three months no more money is going into this game and BF4 will have my attention. Around the time SOE better well damn have me convinced Planetside 2 is going to be this amazing game for years to come. If not well my time and money will be into Battlefield 4.

There are no "hurdles" when you're a niche game. PS2 isn't in the same ball park as Battlefield series. If PS2 was mainstream/big time, then BF4 would pose a major threat, like it does to COD's customer base.

Reports from the E3 game floor suggest otherwise: the combat is even more fluid and has picked up the pace slightly compared to BF3.

If 20 million in title sales, upwards of 300,000 peak players over a year and a half after release, and more than 2 million Premium sales are 'a major disappointment' then I'm sure it's a formula SOE would hope to accidentally stumble upon.

360 and PS3 are still going to be 24v24. Xbox One, PS4 and PC will all be 64v64.

If you think it wasn't designed for the PC then you definitely didn't play it on a PC with some of the higher end options enabled.

It is but it's been reduced quite a bit. You can still hide 1,500 meters from the objectives, all by yourself, prone on some random rock hoping to get a lucky headshot with the risk being a little flash of light if you happen to miss and the target turns your direction.

Other than jets, there are no single player vehicles in the game. If you were with a teammate, in this team-oriented game, the enemy would not be able to steal your vehicle.

BF3 had the largest maps of any previous Battlefield title and it's largely why Armored Kill (the DLC that had the biggest) was one of the least popular of all the extra content released.

The only real OP DLC weapon I can recall was the M5K and it was adjusted in relatively quick order. The best weapons (statistically) are the ones that are included with the base game: M16A3, M4A1, AEK-971, M416, M27 IAR, etc. As for Origin, it's a non-issue, as you launch PS2 with the SOE-specific launcher, too.

And others hit the nail on the head: these are two different titles aiming for similar but slightly different target audiences and there's really no reason why one player can't enjoy both. Heck, grab Titanfall when it comes out spring of next year and you've basically got your FPS bases covered. These are exciting times, indeed.

"If you think it wasn't designed for the PC then you definitely didn't play it on a PC with some of the higher end options enabled."
Well to start, BF3 was to be a PC title then ported over to console. But 1/2 thru development, they changed this. It instead became a console game ( optimized for PS3 ) and then ported over to PC with all the limits the consoles have. BF3 is a shadow of what it should have been. 1 yr later they finally got some more thing in it.... But by then too late. Personally BF3 was a very disappointing title for me. The final straw... sniper scope glint aka beacon of death attached to only sniper rifles that could be seen from anywhere.

Now for BF4..... to little to late. PS2 is the new format for shooters.... 64 players... pffft.
And they are even putting in the scope glint crap.... i will not buy....

don't count on 2143

It's now battlefront dice is already working on it. But god they can screw that up. If they follow battlefield formula than it will go south if they truly want to make battlefront than there may be hope for starwars games.

LOL that game is an insult, its exactly same game as its always been. They are milking a generation too stupid to know when they are being made a mug of.

Because it is watered down console ported garbage. It will not matter how good it is if bullets can turn 90 degrees and chase you up stairs.

BF3 was pretty to look at when the sun wasn't blinding you.

This is what it felt like to be a sniper in BF3 with sniper scope glint. AKA beacon of death on your sniper rifle seen from everywhere. And they putting it in BF 4.

http://www.apacheclips.com/boards/vbtube_show.php?tubeid=2932

I spent 2 years being an Admin on servers for those games, they are the literal bottom of the gene pool cess pit of gamers. hacking, filth child **** llinks, screaming race hate obscenities all day long....Not to mention Activision an EA, ROFL! even SOE's **** up on SWG pales into nothing compared to the greed an **** those two companys **** people on daily.

I've really grown to hate EA and don't want to buy any of their games if possible.
I even go out of my way to them now.




DICE is the only company that could get me on the fence to even consider buying it.

LOLOL... yes cause that is the NEXT hurdle BF4... you forgot:

CoD Series
Halo Series
Counter-Strike Series
Team Fortress 2

BF4 isn't the next hurdle of PS2... every single FPS game is. This game's player base is miniscule compared to every other AAA fps game. The only hope for PS2 to succeed is its success on PS4.

I loved PS1, PS2 has so much freaking potential, but the DEVs just don't seem to be adding anything that makes players stay. BF3 still has a larger player base then PS2.

Side note: BF4 isn't catching up on the level of a 8 year old title. Remember, the ONLY thing that separates Planetside Series from other FPS games is its persistent world and massive battles. However, its shooting mechanics, bullet travel mechanics, movement, and nearly every other FPS element has always been sub-par for its time. It was the same with PS1 and its STILL the same for PS2. If PS2 wants to be taken SERIOUSLY as a FPS game, it needs to either cater its gameplay to elite level fps games like CS and Tribes, or to easier games like CoD and BF series.

Stats don't lie, massive battles get boring very quickly.

I dont by anything ea or activision have touched, because they tend to turn everything into ****.

I'm excited for BF4.

Vehicles are actually deadly and also usually limited, and you don't have to roam around looking for a fight that's not a spawn camp.

I'm not quitting Planetside any time soon -- it has its own perks -- but I'm hoping BF will do better in some of the places that PS2 drives me crazy.

The problem was 2 things. the 1st was that, despite the actual map size, the combat areas were tiny. MUCH smaller than the actual map itself, and the outsides of the combat area wernt even usable. the second part was that the combat areas were incredibly packed. The engagement distance, on average, for me was similar to when i played COD simply because of all of the crap in the way.

Yes the 2 games are not exactly the same size, but the comparisons are still valid. Coming from BF1942, BF2 maps were small. Coming from BF2 the BF3 maps were tiny. The comparisons are made as an argument against the trend, not the actual, sq foot, by sq foot comparisons. A BF2 vet looks at BF3 and says why not COD, its the same play style?

True...
RIP Sim City 5...
And I have contemplated starting to dig a hole for SW: Battlefront 3, but DICE is handling it so it is down to how much DLC their is and how the whole game ends up $$$ and game-play wise...

Now to the OP, unless any of the new games coming out can offer 50v50 tank and aircraft battles with 100v100 infantry fighting along side over ONE part of the map. And does this better, PS2 is safe.
IMO

I can't take other FPS's seriously after experiencing 1000+ person cluster****s in Planetside.

PS2 is a dancing bear; it isn't graceful or pretty, but there's nothing else like it.

BF4 and ArmA3 will be a hard trial for PS2. Sure it will survive, the question is - will there be more than 1 server per region in Q1 2014.

This comment confuses me. Are you saying that the BF title never changed?

I know that ArmA3 is going to give PS2 a run for its money in my wallet. Cant wait for some ArmA3!

yes cause ps4 ps2 ... we will all have to move to ps4 eventually im afraid ...