I find it hard for myself going back to battlefield series after playing planetside 2.

I'm not going to going to lie. Its hard going back to games like COD or battlefield series. "Why" because the near scale of planetside 2. Planetside 2 is more complex game cod or battlefield. I'm not saying planetside is really a complex game. I'm saying theirs more things to do in planetside then theirs is in all of those fps games out right now. Accept for Natural selection and Arma. But planetside does beat most FPS games right now.
When I go back to cod or battlefield its hard to stay those 16 player matches or 32 player matches. I find myself not finding those games fun anymore after planetside 2. Planetside 2 feels more of a cinematic game, because of the large scale battles and all the these players around. These big fights really changed the scale I play fps now.

I can't wait for Continent locking and the Resource revamp. Its even going to make me want to play the game even more.

Moin

I agree. If they'd fix their performance issues and work on a real metagame I would play no other game.

Grüße,
regards,
the Toast

I can understand that. I do agree. But when I was little kid I played games because they were fun. I didn't get any kind of reward. Hell I played ps1 in the 90s I didn't have memory stick for almost 4 or 5 years. When I played a game I always had to restart the whole game.

No other game has the naturally emerging beauty of Planetside or Planetside 2. Developers work for weeks to script impressive looking battles to rage around the player, and Planetside outdoes them all, without even trying. People simply playing the game, is beautiful.

Agree with op, nothing beat PS2 in pure epicness and scale

Bought Battlefield 3 when it was in the Humble Bundle recently to try it out. The single player campaign had made a decent action movie but it was highly frustrating to play. I don't want freaking quick time events every other minute. I don't want to be interrupted by people yelling stupid things in my ear. I highly dislike that the all mighty BF gods will kill me if I happen to move over the imaginary lines of their narrow corridor. There was no skill, only a long line of frustrating interruptions. I hope they just remove the single player entirely and just release it as a movie.

I have yet to try multiplayer because it refuses to let me play.

BF3 single player was seriously disappointing

It didnt even let you in the jet

WHERE IS MY JET?! I WANT A DAMN JET!

As i've said elsewhere, they fix these two issues. Game gets out of its awkward teenage phase.

Sure it did. You get to do a very long run in the back seat which was the dullest part of the whole thing. Who thought a long sequence of nothing but QTE would be a good idea?

I've said it before, but PS2 is the game I thought the BF series would evolve into. I had hoped that BF3 would be closer to PS2 really.

As it turned out, PS2 is closer in feel/style etc to the old BF games. BF3 took the CoD route (for want of a better phrase).

Enjoy PS2 while you can people. In my view, the FPS gaming world looks pretty bleak otherwise - just CoD/BF3 style games.

I agree. Went back to it once when I got sick of PS2. Then I was reminded of the horrible, yet hilarious design decisions like portable suns, can't see **** & blue filters, horrendous screen shake, self healing M1 Abrams tanks, endless tank ammo and a reusable, infinite parachute that would put every base jumper to shame. I laughed and logged out.

Inb4 SOE marketing guy, BF3 is just a horrible game compared to its predecessors.

When I first bought BF3, I expected BF2 with better graphics. And I loved BF2, I still play it every once in a while.
But I was utterly disappointed with the route they went with. They just saw the money that CoD was scraping in, and got jealous.
I also hate their decisions, having to pay €60 or €70 for a pc title, having to pay €50 more for expansion packs and then also able to pay a certain amount to unlock all weapons.
Now, paying for weapon unlocks I don't mind, IF the game is F2P.

BF3 annoys me, from the controls, the glare, the bloom, the money grabbing scheme, the lack of commander spot, the small maps (esp after BF1942 and BF2), the linear objective maps, the horrible designed maps like Metro. It's just CoD with tanks, and I mean that in the worst possible way.

completelly agree! I played a lot of BF3 before but now when i play I find the maps ridiculously small and feel claustrophobic so I go back to PS2

It is the same as with the original. Planetside creates an itch that nothing else can scratch, no matter how bad the game is there is no competition.

At the top of the list of why I hate BF now is the constant squawking of dev team about player numbers and how 'over 64 players is not fun'.

Back 10 years ago 32 players was the norm for a server, titles like BF2 pushed that to 64 and that made an awesome game compared to the former limit. I hoped BF3 would stretch it to 128, after all it was 6 years in development and moores law says power doubles every 18 months, surely we would see more players. On top of that some mods had already bumped the 64 limit so surely we would see bigger battles in the official product?

No. Games are about polycounts and rather than spend some of the 6+ year gains on more hardware innovation they stuck to the tired old 64 player limit instead spending ALL the budget on visual innovation making it look nicer. And nicer it was, it looks more realistic and some bits of deformability was a nice idea but it offers very little difference in play from 2006.

Now we see the plans for BF4 we know what happened. They rushed BF3 out of the door knowing it was only a visual upgrade to BF2, knowing they should have added VOIP and larger maps from the start and clearly planned to sell the game game again as BF4 with these features finally included. In the old days we used to get told 'itll be out when its ready' when nowdays development cycles are more 'itll be out as soon as we can throw something together to charge you for'.

Having their dev team stick to this 'weve playtested with up to 256 but over 64 is not fun' line is just annoying to the extreme. I believe they say this not because of the fun aspect (PS2 designers clearly didnt agree) but because adapting to even 80 per side would create far more demands on their dev team to redesign elements such as squad screens, there would be greater voip loading and channels needing expanding, they would also have more low spec players running on lower visuals to deal with the load, the poly count would be reduced meaning less deformable landscaping to make things look pretty, but oh no, lets just cover all that up by saying 'we decided its not fun'.

Well im sorry to DICE, ive decided its not fun playing on 64 player retro designed games and if the best BF4 can come up with is the same old tat with the same old excuses, weaved together with new P2W style of buying ingame progression after paying for the boxed game too then I wont be padding their coffers with my money. They can suck my flaming skull hood ornament.

i agree with OP...and was highly disappointed with the fact that they have not increased the player count as well...would love to see a bf game that played like planetside 2...i just hope there will be enough incentive to keep players around once the new games release...compare bf3 and the amount of new content to come out in a year then look at planetside 2 content to come out in the past year...

I remember when they said that and it kind of made me mad they said that. Its very poor excuse to make. They're so ****** bias about it.I remember some guy open 125 player server they shut it down. They told us it went against they're policy. They said they don't want higher player counted players on servers. Just stick with 64 players. When everyone on the 125 server were having fun. It wasn't even laggy in that server.

It is very annoying quote to make.

I'm very worried about the star wars battlefield series. I feel like they are just going to make it a battlefield game.

On the downside this much players in PS2 create problems battlefield is free of.
Battlefield has also better quality control and you can expect to play without gamebreaking bugs.

I'd also love to try 128 or even 256 player Battlefield match. Why does dev team they wouldn't be fun?

If Planetside just didn't have so many gimicky fps helps like overhead markers&spotting,
Actual working armor and projectile values.
I miss World War II online (Battleground Europe)