[Guide] ►Why PLANETSIDE 1 is STILL better than Planetside 2! PART 2!

No hard feelings I still like PS2

PS1 BETTER THAN PS2 PART 2!!!!!

I do have to say I prefer PS1 over PS2. Strictly considering each game's design, I prefer PS1 in every way. Yes, even combat. Of course, once you add the community factor, playing PS1 isn't very enjoyable today as there's usually only 2-20 players online at any given moment (and the game was designed with the expectation there'd be way more people playing than that. Unlike PS2...) Probably doesn't help that you have to be looking specifically for the original game in order to find it...

Despite that, I have to point out there are some problems in the video such as:
- It's more you listing things you like rather than explaining why they would be good to have
- You're comparing PS1's subscription model to PS2's free to play model
- You blamed DBG for servers being DDoS'd during sales instead of, you know, the people DDoSing
- At 9:28 isn't that the repair tool? (Sure the point remains even if you were using the correct tool but now this is just looking like an IGN review)

I interpretted that as a sign of contempt.

There were some interesting things done in PS1 that I wouldn't mind seeing in PS2.

But as I said in the other thread, PS2 is ultimately superior. If it wasn't, the population would be on PS1 instead. Just like the majority pop for the EQ franchise is in the first game (launched 3 servers this past year for EQ1, EQ2 only had 1 after losing half its servers in mergers). Age and graphics really are not an excuse.

And my biggest argument... the supporters of the notion PS1 is better, play PS2 over PS1. That speaks volumes in itself. There's enough of them to get decent fights in PS1 if only they all went over. But they won't. If only they'd be honest with themselves.

In fact last month wasn't there a 'big' push to get everyone to play at the same time? How many did they get? I mean they should have been able to get some who never played to join to boost that number. Did they get at least two dozen?

If Daybreak has not enough resources for more Continents ,bases ,Vehicles ,then why they dont release a Moddingtool for the Community and the playerbase vote the best thing in his category?
The Modder/Moddingteam gets some DBC or real money as bonus for his work.
I saw in this forum much screenshots from nice things wich will never come into the game.

I played PS1 only 1x and never came back because the servers are dead. (nobody home)
I never had the chance to get the experience.

for starters its too difficult to communicate to everyone who prefers ps1, what would be the best method of communication to do that? only a very few visit the forums and a very few visit reddit

for there to be decent fights you will need about 500 people minimum, just 50 or 100 wont do in a game like planetside (same with planetside 2)

planetside 2 hasnt lasted as long as ps1 did yet - at the 3 year mark (where we are now) there was MORE people playing ps1 than there are players in ps2

if there was a big push to play ps1 last month where was it advertised? i never saw it anywhere? (which is the problem)

the EQ argument doesnt work as planetside is no longer supported and will never be supported again no matter how many players because its free now with zero income - there are often hackers on ps1 and there are rarely devs or mods to kick them

also EQ is a rare outlier - do you think the hundreds if not thousands of multiplayer games that have been between 2000 or so and now that only have a few people playing are all bad?

the shooting mechanics in ps1 is what mostly lets it down - just about everything else is much better, if you added the graphics from ps2 and the shooting mechanics from ps2 to ps1 you would have a much better game than ps2 will ever hope to be


ps1 is a much better game than ps2 (apart from shooting mechanics) even YOU would like it if they added things like sanctuarys, intercontinental lattice, more continents, LLU capture mode, vehicle gameplay, variety of weapons, base design or heck even continent design, base capture mechanics, hacking vehicles, destroyable spawn tubes..........................................and more
but you are unable to see it because you are blinded by the few negatives

This video is so painful to watch at times

This is just an opinion fest and some stuff you say about planetside 2 compared to 1 are completely bollocks.

the part where you shot the reaver with 5 missiles and it still was at what half health?
i think i just came

So how do your opinions stack up against others?
All I see here is nostalgia for a game you once played.

For example. You say something about a part where there is a slugfest for hours between groups of tanks in PS. I personally hate that. You might be stuck for a few minutes, but finally you should be pushed back or you push them back.

Artillery that fires over 4 regions away? Cheap uninteresting mechanics in my book.

You have trouble spawning vehicles because of resources? A lot of people think they are spammed, together with grenades and such. I myself have no problems with spawning, as I'm conscious of my usage, which makes me more tactical in tjat regard. I'm a free account, so I have the slow resource regeneration.

Say you should fight for vehicle purchase? Why? Unadulterated opinion here.

You seem a bit contradictionary here and there. At one point you want bridges to be open and tank slugfests (both on Esamir), the other moment Esamir is too open and you can see every attack in advance while they can come from anywhere?

So many opinions here from an older game. They simply made a new game with some parallels and some differences with PS. I do understand that you might not like some things, but this only makes PS better for you.

Comparing PS1 to PS2 is a bit like someone comparing a Christmas of their past to a Christmas of today, it is almost impossible to compare directly because time is time and so far it is still linear.

The past is what it is (or was) and cannot be recaptured (often unfortunately).




The reality is however that mechanics/gamplay-wise very little that was in PS1 and isn't in PS2 wouldn't make PS2 a better game, if it was added.

Even Core Combat would actually work better in PS2 (although if they have any sense they'd get rid of the 70's disco meets 80's crystal with laz0rs vibe and just make it proper gritty Stalingrad city-fight - as it was orginally "supposed" to be).

Some parts of PS1 just cannot be transfer because of the different systems or design choices, but the rest......




And it has to be remembered that PS1 was limited by its time (as ambitious as it was for its time), so really PS1 shouldn't be (and perhaps more importantly should never have been) the limit of ambition either (although I accept the reality that Dev-time is very limited now).

I never played PS1 but I can see a ton of archaic design choices made in the game be it from the UI to general gameplay design layout. While there is no real guide on how to design good maps to fight on, there are a ton of rules of thumb or best practices without having to rely on cookie cutter layouts (like having a minimum of 3 different ways to assault one objective). Also, I remember when splash damage trounced any infantry combat be it from the NC's Asad Babil, oops I mean "Vanguard" tank, to the classy Lib parade that dotted the early game's balance. So, that little coverage on the bridge, probably the best way to describe Esamir is a bridge too far, in some cases meant a lot more back then than it does today.

Hm....

I disagree

it seems you needed a part 2 because noone gave a crap about part 1...

this is not giving a crap part 2


if you dont like ps2, dont play.

Since the server architecture is very similar to EQ1's.. I'd be surprised if you could get 500 on there without any hiccups. 500 would fill in all the continents. But you don't need all the continents filled to have one decent fight.

They stopped releasing expansions around this time, so I'm going to assume no.

It was in the forums, I saw it and wasn't even looking for it.

Its no longer supported because it died. EQ didn't die. Thank you for reiterating my point.

Thousands or even hundreds of MMOs since 2000 seems a bit of a stretch. I'd love to see that list.

Shooting mechanics are pretty damn important in a FPS which both PS1 and PS2 are. PS1 didn't have an excuse, many FPS's did it right during that time that it came out. Heck even before it came out games did this better.

Sanctuaries - Already have them. They're called Warpgates.
Intercontinental Lattice - I don't care one way or another.
LLU - Escort quests in MMO's annoy the sh-t out of me.
Vehicle Gameplay - If I login PS1 right now.. I can't pull a Vanguard, Prowler, or Magrider, or a Galaxy. I get.. a flash like thing. That sucks.
Variety of weapons - There's over a hundred weapons in PS2. There's a dozen or two in PS1.
Base Design - I've seen the bases in PS1. They're like 3 or 4 designs. PS2 had this problem, but they're slowly fixing it. PS1's bases are squares and single building. Boring.
Continent Design - PS1 continents are too small to work a large force.
Base Capture Mechanics - On paper, this sounded cool. Till I tried to take a base in practice. This sucked.
Hacking Vehicles - C4 fairies (while legit) are already pretty annoying. Having an infil pop you out and killing you sounds horrible.
Destroyable Spawn Tubes - about the only thing I liked. I'd prefer SCU's dropping spawn rooms however.

You say a few negatives. I gave the game a good week's worth of play. I tried to like it. It was frustrating, gimmicky, and slow.

You want to know why EQ1 did better than PS1? Because over the years they took the annoying crap out of the game. No corpse runs, faster exp values, rebalance of spells, reduction of fizzles, higher skill up rates, you can see faction adjustment values, and so forth. Doesn't seem like PS1 had those QoL changes. Perhaps if it did, it might be tolerable.

But here's how you can prove me wrong. A definitive way. Find the people who agree with you. Send them a PM. And get something started to go play PS1.

I bet you won't. And the reason being is you'd rather just play PS2. That's always the thing that disproves PS1 being a better game. Even PS1 aficionados would rather play PS2. They don't like to admit to it. But their actions speak louder than their words.

I think Planetside 3 is going to be a hell of a game.

Some things you say are extremely petty (whining about decal size? Really?), but some of the things you mention, like surprises in combat, do have some merit.

A PS3 is pretty generous to be honest. We're lucky if EQ3 gets off the ground. Landmark isn't doing so hot. And they'll being tight lipped about EQNext.. even locking threads about it.

we used to have over 500 per continent in the early days but as the population got lower the limit got lower to match, so no you are totally wrong there, 500 would currently be one continent and a little left over

you are wrong - there was more in ps1

not everyone reads the forums every day, even if they did these forums are not that popular even if EVERYONE that visits the forums daily went to play ps1 it wouldnt be enough

yes but its had a much longer run than ps2 will ever have, ps2 is already dieing
do you think ps2 will last as long as eq1? i will bet cold hard cash that it wont so in your eyes that makes ps2 a failure

i said multiplayer games not mmos

yes the shooting mechanics are bad - nobody disagrees

warpgates are not sactuarys
vehicle gameplay is better and i can pull anything i want in ps1, in ps2 when you start playing you get a substandard tank that needs upgrades to be useful
the weapons in ps1 are more varied, the weapons in ps2 are all copys of each other with slightly different rpm and damage
base design you are wrong
continent design - ps1 continents are bigger not smaller
everything else is is just you saying "i dont like it"

the first thing i said in my last post is that you cant, most people that prefer ps1 isnt playing ps2 for starters, second is that there isnt a way to communicate to everyone that does like ps1, there isnt enough people that visit the forums on a regular basis to even start a battle on ps1

you havnt even played ps1 enough or while it was populated to really make an informed decision about it, i have at least spent thousands of hours in both games

i actually like ps2 - i never said that i diddnt (look at my playtime on just some of my characters - the ones in my sig isnt even all of them), i just think ps2 would be a better game with some more things from ps1 (it already has a few)

you seem to really hate ps1 for some reason and are blinded by your hate - there isnt really any point debating with you any longer as you dont even have enough experience or know the facts of ps1 to even make an informed decision

ps2 wasnt successful enough for a sequel
ps1 was

I am making the decision that actually matters. And I'll explain this.

I started playing PS2 in November 2012. I instantly took to the game, learned it quickly, and did quite well. I didn't feel stuck, I felt like I could use what I wanted, and progress rather easily.

This was Beta PS2. Certs came much slower. They started you by drop podding you in the largest fight. And cert ranks on abilities and vehicles were drastically different.. for example, rank one jets, or other tools blew.

Fast forward a bit.

I tried PS1 early last year. I found I was very limited in vehicle choice, weapon choices, and there was no intuitive way to take the base I was assaulting. Apparently everyone I was with had the same issue (it was when they announced PS1 was F2P). We killed everyone in the base and couldn't take it. Why? I still have no clue. There were no indicators showing what the problem was.

I played a few more days and figured out a kit to work with that worked alright. However orbital strike spam made it difficult to get from one base to another. As bad as Libs or Tanks have been in PS2, I've never experienced this sort of issue in PS2. At least with Libs or Tanks you can blow them up. OS's not so much. I've heard these things have long cooldowns. But when 20 people do it right after another.. I don't think a 72 hour cooldown would matter much.

New player experience was horrible for PS1. Even compared to the 'worst' that PS2 has ever been. You say I don't have enough experience in PS1. Why would anyone bother to get enough 'experience' through that stuff in 2016?

Couple that with the horrible gunplay. The double edge sword restrictiveness of the inventory system. And the spamming of out of render explosions.. and you have a pretty bad game overall.

Hacks and Cheats. I did not see any of this when I played.

As for me hating the game. I gave it a fair shake. I played a week of it. That's more than I normally give a game with so many issues. I usually drop a game for less. But being the prequel to PS2, I felt I had to tough through it to maybe find the gem in the rough.

It wasn't there. Plain and simple.

I'm sure the old game had some fond memories for those who played it back in the day. And I'm sure much of the issues were shrugged off because you all simply didn't know any better. Much like I did with EQ1's corpse recoveries back in the day. I wouldn't tolerate that BS now in 2016 on their progression server. Its also why I avoid Project99 like the plague (not to mention the non-luclin models). And I doubt any of you would tolerate much of the BS that is in PS1. In fact.. I'm sure of it.. because quite simply you're not.

Get the hell over it already. It's dead. It's gone. Move along.