[Suggestion] Ten simple features that made Planetside great.

Good on you, I've had sex too....I just don't equate it to videogames I play for maybe half an hour a day.

I like fast games. You like slow games.

PS2 is a fast paced game.

Deal with it

Er... As someone working through being a noob in PS1 for the last couple of days, its just as fast paced as PS2. I don't know where anyone ever got the idea that PS1 is slow. *gets damn near insta-kill blasted by a PS1 Jackhammer* Yup, still fast.

I think the only thing I am missing from playing PS2 for the last couple of years right now doing this lil PS1 noob experience is regenerating shields, the player characters are a little blocky, and not having to do inventory tetris, otherwise so far the whole thing has been exponentially better than PS2 *shrugs*

I agree, it's a faster paced game and that's just the way it is. PS1 wasn't slow either, despite what many may "theorize". Unless you've actually played it in it's prime or at least watched it when youtube was still young, you'd assume it was slower but it wasn't. It was just more persistent and had more weight. Choices for which and what place to attack of defend actually mattered because the game always kept you considering the "Grande Scale of Things" rather than just "I've only got 15 minutes, better have a quickie some where".
PS1 offered fast combat but if that's all you're in for, it was the wrong game for you.
PS2 is trying to accomplish this but it's failed already, hence why there are these huge overhauls with each massive patch. First we over hauled the continental progression by ditching the Hex System and moving to a Lattice System.
Then we finally added continental lattice when hossin was pushed early (even though it was well past the due date given long ago)
And when that wasn't enough, they finally began to push forward the new Resource revamp.

Despite all of it's efforts to be nothing more than mass people shooting in a fast paced environment (yay, quickie sex for everyone!) ? It doesn't have the endurance to last as an MMO regime. MMOs need to last many years. This isn't a CoD that you can just recycle most of the engine and re-release every 2 years. So every passing year so far we have retraced slightly back to PS1s mechanics. Why? Because they worked. And as I pointed out on an earlier post, even the PS1 devs realized that what they had installed STILL wasn't enough: re-read -

[Over time, though, the endless nature of Planetside’s war created virtual combat fatigue. “That was definitely, if I can take the egg on my own face, a mistake,” admits Lawrence with surprising candour.]

What he means here is that you cannot just have a game of this scale simply have people shoot at each other and that's it; one of PS2s issues and a major reason why new people quit. You're going to die a lot, even in PS1 you die repeatedly. The difference was that in PS2 there is virtually nothing else to do as a new player but die repeatedly to the chaotic mess that this PS1 devs refers too in another comment below. In PS1, Metagame tactics meant there was more than just "more combat with more players".

At this point, the game is meant for the 15 minute quickies. I just still can't fathom why people will pick PS2 over other large scale twitch FPSs like Battle Field or even TitanFall (which isn't massive, the battle definately are way larger than the CoD arena paintballing sprees).
It's buggier, it's more demanding on your system (sometimes too demanding) and getting into a fire fight with 128vs128 with no tactics utilized at all or no meta game to help direct the flow is just a repetitive grind.

TTK in PS1 is higher then PS2... Especially with vehicles...

Because it's better than all of those games combined for me on a personal level.

To each their own.

No, i like many speeds of game.
i'd just like this one to be slower because planetside was, i don't expect CoD to get slower because planetside was. and i don't expect planetside to get faster because CoD is.............thats not unreasonable.

they have their own names to live up too.

tbh i'm not even against a 'fast' PS!

SOE could have made a true-er PS sequel that pleased the CONFIRMED 'subscription paying for several years or more' players
AND
a fast paced FPS to please the CoD types................ with hats.

and linked them! continents in one effect cont links/benefits in the other and vice versa.
same 'war' scale, improved performance(players going to one or the other, can't render 1500+ anyway so limit conts to 1000 no one would notice), everybody is happier with a game more to their liking.

Some of the things in PS1 were god awful, I'm glad they didn't make a "replica" of it neither, somethings from it would be nice though. I assume things like this is why Devs' ignore forumside. I haven't offered much debate or argument but I was hoping common sense, if it exists here would do the arguing for me.

I've seen many suggestions on these forums but these are by far the best ones. Others dramatically change the game and you just want to add more depth. You got my full support.

Some things were.

But there's very little that was in PS1 that isn't in PS2 that wouldn't make PS2 better.

Ironically even Core Combat would likely work better in PS2 than it did in PS1 (it's 80's crystal meets 70's discoball theme would still be horrible though).

SOE - on behalf of the thousands of players who love this game and DON'T use the forums - don't listen to these people. The game needs work, sure, but it is not - nor should it ever be - PS1.

I mean - the original Planetside is still online guys - why don't you piss off and play that, and leave the game I LOVE alone, huh?

That's so mental-trousers I have to question how high you are.

But then again, you're on about artificially padding the game to give the illusion of depth, so whateves.

and who the **** are you that i should give up on the hope of a game i will love?
bearing in mind, galaxy's were the 'main' spawn............. until they changed it to sundies because ground game.
also no ants........... but were gonna add them now.
also no lattice............. till it was added.
also no sanctuary..........
ams cloak

hmm, PS2 seems to be learning from it's elder sibling.....

instead of 'directives'......... yes

'directives' may as well be behavioural research on animals........... ring the bell 6 times, receive food....... shoot X guys with Y weapon, receive another weapon.
at least the animals do it because they NEED food......... you do it because you like being told what to do

Sorry but someone who plays this game for 15-30 minutes a day maximum is also not the right person to make comments about this game. You are a casual, and appealing to casuals is bad for long term money influx. PS1 would have never lived that long if it only appealed to casuals who will usually leave a game after a year. Games like EVE, WOW and PS can survive long enough because they appeal to NON CASUAL gamers that are willing to pay subscriptions of 12€/15$ a month for YEARS. Sorry but you are, as you proved, not that kind of person.

And PS1 had many great things that could be IMPROVED UPON and then added to PS2 in order to add depth, more specialised roles & gameplay and also more ways of killing for those kill-addicted "casuals".

And who the **** are you that I should not try to defend a game I love from what I feel would be detrimental changes?

A casual? Wow, ok. I'd argue that over 30 days worth of playtime over 5 characters in all three factions is enough to assess a game fully, but hey you want to hand wave that away as irrelevent and use the argumentative language of a 12 year old you go right ahead.

*pats head*

From the beginning the devs have always said they would be adding in more and more elements to PS2 as time goes along... Some of the elements are even from PS1, go figure... Sometimes the devs need hints of what we want, sometimes they try and put stuff in that we didn't even think of or ask for... Some of those things work well, some of them must be revamped or removed to work well... There's no need to suggest these ideas will ruin the game or not be fun or anything... Do some of you just dislike change that much?

A lot of pleasant ideas, but some I don't like.

Want PS2 to have even less new players that it already has?

The fact you don't assure you have an engineer friend with you before pulling a MAX is at cause here. The gamedesign itself is fine.

I prefer to deal with something armed with canons that something I need to kill and can't find at all due to being cloaked.

In real warfare too, a single infantry unit, if equipped the right way, can blast off a tank.

Quoted from you. Yes that makes you more of a casual player And nowhere did I question your qualification to ASSESS the game, right? Similarly, your "fast gameplay, twitch shooter ADHD" attitude is what indicates that you will probably soon lose interest in the game, probably just like you already lost interest in other games and moved on.

This is no personal offense, but IMHO catering to casual players is the wrong move for SOE. The fact remains that MMOs live by catering to LONG TERM PLAYERS, players that do not only play the game for a year and move on but actually stick around for far longer (and thus invest more). Just look at EVE, which is thousand times more complex than PS1 or 2, but has kept a good sized playerbase for many years now.

It's a good thing the PS2 doesn't confine itself to any single personal preference ---> AMS cloak being worked on

is this like the love you have for any particular version of CoD? why don't you play it now? i put good money on you being 'bored' with it, unlocks unlocked etc, 'nothing' left to 'do'.

i want this game to last and not because of a 'new' gun every week.(not to mention balancing them against everything else will just get 'easier' with each addition! /sarcasm) like PS1 lasted me 5-6 years(maybe £1000 paid sub, i certainly haven't paid more than a third of that in the 2 years so far, so SOE losing out on my money i'm willing to pay for what i 'want').
you want it to be more like another game thats boring to you now and that you don't play! so how is it being more like CoD going to keep you as a player........... if CoD can't even keep you as a player?

While I have no proof that my opinion is better than yours, that's not because designers work on it that it brings proof that it is a good idea either.