Any word on them giving this game a point?

That's basically already what the game is.

I'd love to have more depth to the game. A real resource system where you need to have supply lines, uses for vehicles beyond farming or being off in your own little vehicle-duel world (it's fun, but there's nothing you can do in this game with vehicles that can't be done better with infantry, except moving really fast), a more fleshed out leadership system (and one that rewards the people who spend their game time making sure others have fun at the sacrifice of their own gains), outfit progression, mechanics that promote specialization over generalization (there's no reward or incentive to being a really good engineer/medic since it's all about da KILLZ, except if you get lots of them you're a farmer and terribad and if you don't have enough then you're also terribad even if you spend all your time squad leading or reviving or repairing friendlies because the only stat the game really measures is kills), deeper class development, more limitation on vehicle spawns, a lattice/hex hybrid that only connects the main facilities, the ability to do things in adjacent enemy territories that aren't linked (so small tactical squads have more to do), mechanics and lore that encourage people to stick to their faction--there's a whole lot of things that would make this game a lot more interesting and a lot more fun.

Like a lot of other players, I'm getting pretty disillusioned with the way the game is progressing. I've seen my outfit progress from a pretty small group when I first joined, to an awesome group which I had the privilege to lead in our squads or platoons where we could field multiple squads every night, to where we are now where we struggle to get a full squad. People get bored of the endless TDM, and PS2 does it much worse than other games because of fourth factioning and long-term imbalances. Mattherson is a total poopshow right now. Every time there's an alert VS pop goes to 50% and everyone else gets squelched. If there was more to do than fight the zerg in giant TDM mode, maybe it would be more fun. Maybe if the game rewarded more than just zerging, it would be more fun. Maybe if the game rewarded outfits for working as a team and working with other people on their faction, the game would be more fun (And we'd see fewer outfits simply dying out or getting burned out due to more and more of their strategic options being cut from the game).

Maybe I'm being a little too bitter, but the state of the game right now is embittering.

Ok... so first to reply to 10 previous posts that seem to enjoy pretending like they didn't understand OP's question.

You can have an online game to see who can press space bar the fastest. How long do you think it would be fun for? 10 seconds? A minute? So you add some more buttons to it besides spacebar, some flashy graphics, some kind of story, play against more than one person, progression, item collection and so on. As you keep adding these things, we will call them content, the game becomes more enjoyable and it takes longer and longer to become bored with it.

As we know, capturing the same bases on same 3 continents is starting to get a bit stale after a year. So the question is, when will there be new content? When will the point of the game be taken to a further level of complexity, fun, a meta-game/content expansion?

So to answer OPs question: To my best knowledge sometime in the next 6 months. From what I'm reading Devs are focusing on performance with next 1 maybe 2 patches. We recently saw the first patch dedicated to performance, they promised there would be 1 or 2 more. They also hinted on some balance changes in near future in recent interview, as well as that we will see a new continent (Hossin) before summer. That one was a bit indirect, but they basically said it will not be on test server without going live for a whole year. That's where the 6 month figure comes from.

Why is Hossin important? They don't want to implement it without having battle islands and continent locking mechanic put in place. Hossin is key to this. Continent locking mechanic is progression, another goal to work towards, another layer of strategy to consider, a way to pin another empire down and show dominance. Expanded meta-game in other words.

That's all I could gather from reading planetside related things on forums/redit/outfit forums. Hope that's the type of answer OP was looking for.

Kind of an asinine statement. I know this is the internet and all, but lets be civil. You don't need to attack him to defend the game.

I'm a HUGE fanboy, I played PS1 when it came out and about crapped myself when I heard PS2 was coming. And as far as the warfare goes, it everything I ever wanted. No cavesystems or BFRs.

But lets be real. The number of log-in SWELL during the 2 hour alerts. People are starving for an objective. Then when the alert is over? Everyone logs.

You need an objective?

Here is one: "HAVE FUN, that's an order!"

PS2 is a never-ending war that can't be won by any one side. You log in, you find, or make, a battle, you duke it out with your enemies. You log off.

Hopefully somewhere along that line you had loads of fun and got entertained, if not consider finding something else to play.

What's the point of this game he asks, geesh, may as well ask what's the point in reading a book or watching a movie.

I thought about that too, and I kind of feel like its not a real comparison.

The real comparison would be, "whats the point of reading a book with no conclusion". This is like reading about characters forever and ever and ever, but with no story progression (I use story here to tie in the book reference before anyone says "no on givs a *** about he story m8).
Have you ever been to a party and been told one of those never-ending jokes?
Like the one about the boy with the ping-pong balls? Thats what PS2 feels like.
Remember watching Napoleon Dynamite and thinking, "I bet something funny is about to happen", but it never did, right? Thats what this feels like.

Once we have continental lattice and home continents, at least we wouldn't only be fighting on Indar. Or if we are, It will suck being the faction that holds indar, with everyone attacking you.

It might be cool if there was some central base on each continent, if one faction controls them all they could activate a global win, 1 hour and all enemy players die and respawn to their home warp gate. these global wins are tallied on a score board. Of course, activating the global win is ballzy because it will guarantee both other factions gang up on you to stop it. These should be super bases, the biggest, most defendable bases in the game.

RIght? Thats a good idea. And even so, right now I'd take anything. A-n-y-t-h-i-n-g.

We will hopefully be seeing continental locking at some point next year.

Resource system is terrible and meaningless, Unlocks even more so. SOE could have done something so much more elaborate but what we have here is a Battlefield's Conquest gametype diluted enough to support one thousand players.

GW2's WvW resource system would work wonders for this game, and hopefully provide depth, i.e. Nanites must be transported to outposts to resupply the spawners, Vehicle/air resources must be carted to places where they'll be most needed. It'll hopefully take the edge off the on-the-rails territory layout the game currently suffers from.

Teamplay and C&C is very satisfying but that's from the personalities, not the game.

Being able to mash warpgates should have been a day one function. Perpetual stalemates are boring. I reserve being proud of killstreaks and 1337skills and other dudebro KPIs for the likes of CoD/battlefield.

when it comes to FPS games PS2 has more "of a point" than any other fps game i can think of

whats the point of winning a round in battlefield or COD when it just resets again? to me those games have no point as whatever you do just gets reset

at least i feel i have accomplished something in ps2 when i take a biolab or small outpost, i feel like i have helped my faction get one more step closer to total domination, but when i play battlefield and the round ends and i have to start again i really do think "whats the point?"

didn't they say they were planning o add in random or player generated missions at some point?

honestly tho I don't need the game giving me specific objections or constantly telling me what to do/accomplish since that is the job of either me or another outfit member when we are leading

Game is repetitive. You wouldn't have fun at your job if you did the same task every day.

You just highlighted why there is no point to play this game. Who enters a war that can't be won? Seriously. what kind of messed up squad leader would enter a fight he knows he can't win?

After a year, even after 3 months, that got old.

When it launched, yes. Now, no. Already playing other games. Don't need you to tell someone when to move on.

Books and movies tell a story. They also end...

The game's fine the way it is...although some more variety in the alerts would be nice...

Which is?

All reset means is to set again. That's it.

You're making up your own definition.

I don't think you understand what the word "reset" means.

But there is no total domination in PS2. You've made up an ending that doesn't exist. It's all in your head. So capping those bases doesn't mean anything.

Who says you have to start again? Don't maps... rotate?

BF4 doesn't lie about what kind of game it is.

You're job is to only win the match. If you try to add something that isn't there that's your problem.

Then it's not fine the way it is...

You forgot the trademark.

Soon™

I have trouble getting the point you're trying to make. So the fact that the game has no end is bad ? Why a BF/COD end splashscreen is more meaningful that what we have here ?

Also, to the people that pretty much hate the fact that this game lacks an end, or more objectives... Why are you playing this game then ? And it's not ironic or anything, I'm actually curious of why people that complains about this game's lack of "point" still play it none the less.

this is a PVP FPS the only point is to kill other players and have fun doing it... if you don't get that or don't find it fun than the FPS genre isn't for you... I'd say try another type of game but ALL of them have no point beyond killing time by finding enjoyment in continually repeating the same task

so whats YOUR point?
you really think games like bf4 HAVE a point to them?

my bad for using the word total in there but just domination happens
"But there is no total domination in PS2. You've made up an ending that doesn't exist. It's all in your head. So capping those bases doesn't mean anything."
might not be total domination but last i played i got a dominating victory on esamir during the alert - and it doesnt get reset like stupid bf4

"Who says you have to start again? Don't maps... rotate?"
yes but all the flags you capture gets lost and you have to start again

"BF4 doesn't lie about what kind of game it is."
what type of game is that? a game with no point?


i think we both have a different view on what a game with a point is - for me its progression with persistance that makes me feel like i have accomplished something meaningful and it seems you think the bf4 style of "you win lets restart" (yes its a restart because nothing is persistant) is a game with a point

Well in my opinion, the point of a game is to be pointless.
Sometimes there are a storyline or so, but after all it is pointless...
So take a break from your life and do something pointless...

PS: If you looking for the lore/story in Planetside, check this one: http://planetside.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Lore

Best comparison I've seen in a while.