Planetside 2 vs Planetside 1

The main difference (apart from all the design and gameplay ones) is the players.
The typical PS1 player had the wisdom of Solomon, the humanity of Ghandi, the strategic nouse of Richard Lionheart and the compassion of Francis of Assisi. They were paragons of angels and gods amongst men.

PS2 players, on the other hand, are just quite nice.

lol

PS1 was a unique game in many ways, I liked how you had a unique role with your character, you couldn't fly a mosquito, drive an MBT, hack a terminal and use a MAX all at once as a BR10, BR20 then BR23 was the max rank for a long time and you only had so many cert points to allocate into abilities and vehicles. I also liked that you could loot enemy weapons, a TR carrying a jackhammer or an NC carrying a pulsar, I also liked the inventory loadout design which was way better than the lame loadout system we have now. There were also command ranks up to CR5, leading squad/platoons gained command rank xp and each rank gave you unique tools like reveal enemy on proximity or entire continent map, but the best one was the orbital strike.

But a while ago they bumped the BR to 40 and then anyone that reached BR38 or so could use every vehicle and every ability cert in the game, which is what PS2 is like now, right from BR1 you can drive every vehicle and use almost every item the game has, there's no uniqueness to your character anymore.

Sadly thats part of the problem. The socalled free to play model ensures that gamedevelopment will mostly focus on releasing new items for you to buy. The grind has to be neverending to force you to buy stationcash, and they have to release a steady stream of new (and improved?) items for you to buy.

In PS1 we got to br20 quickly and could focus on just finding the best fights.

Why are you using the secondary fire on the Decimator. D:

It's making me sperg out while I watch this.

Because I'm not bad at the game, and I understand you can self-detonate next to tagets if they move or you miss your shot. Why waste ammo if you are in no danger?

as a PS 1 vet I cannot agree more. PS2 flat out fails in some aspects. It light years behind PS1.

The most frustrating thing to me is see the absurd amounts of potential PS2 has, yet it just isn't there. It requires a lot of work. It's still a good game, but it lacks what sucked us in to the first one.

Guy on first page pretty much summed it up. PS2 has better graphics. Better gunplay that feels more like real shooting. But otherwise PS1 had the idea of a MMOFPS down a lot better. The way you basically picked a career for your character in the beginning before they raised the cert limits was very interesting. Unlike in PS2 where everyone can be everything just by visiting a terminal.

And map design was actually way better. Bases that felt more defensible, an more like actual buildings instead of weird open hangars or a roofed garden. The map was also more focused with choke points, and territory mechanics that promoted head to head fights. One can only hope that SOE eventually brings PS2 up to par in these other areas.

Never played PS1 but its old and dead.

It may be old and dead by your reckoning but I don't think that is actually the case. PS1, at its core still contains elements which could have been updated and re-welcomed and loved by players in PS2. Things which are made glaringly apparent because of their omission considering that if implemented, many of the problems in PS2, (e.g., lack of meta game, lack of iconic faction specific weapons and mechanics for example) could be solved/addressed and the game would be improved overall, instead of remaining Vehicle-Zerg-Side.

PS1 still has relevant content to offer to the PS2 experience, and if implemented it would make it a more satisfying and engaging experience than what it is now and I say this confidently because I experienced PS1 first and the COD's/Battlefield game's second and I know which made the more lasting impression, i.e., PS1.

How is that a comparison? Why do you(and many other people here, from some comments I have seen) hate on a game you never even played?

This is all you need to know...PS1 > PS2 except the gun mechanics. PS2 lacks so much its not even funny, poor game gonna be in trouble, we can already see it.

try the game when it´s f2p and u will not come back to PS2

It is unfortunate the closed beta forums were wiped when this open beta started, there were many pages long comparisons on every aspect of the two games on those- and most of them still valid since the three biggest problems (base design, lack of metagame and solo tanking) are still on PS2.

When comparing the two games and drawing the "it had 8 years to mature" card, it is important to remember that the capture mechanics, awesome base designs and continental conquest system were part of PS1 since end of its beta, not 3 years later or at the 5-year mark.

but then again, PS2 is still on open beta so guess theyll have those features sorted out once the launch comes.

I think there's a degree of 'rose tinted vision' here:
- the "lattice system" is not something that PS1 launched with. The strategic game of launch PS1 was a joke.
- the lag in PS1 was terrible.
- infantry combat in bases could be summarized as 'jackhammer vs locked-down max'.
- the bases were basically identical and (if I remember correctly) had several 'issues' that needed alternate paths creating.
- there was no 'headshot' mechanic etc.

It eventually grew into a good game, then probably went a bit too far and gained too many systems. It was probably easier to throw all of that away and start from scratch than attempt to upgrade such a rigid game.

Looking at what PS2 needs to work out in the short/medium term:
- the lattice system was not perfect, but it scratched an itch. PS2 needs to work out how to scratch that itch. (focusing battles, reducing the amount of tedious 'guard duty').
- grenade-spam is too common.
- bases are a bit too simple/useless.
- vehicles need to be able to switch weapons (this is 'blocking profitability').
- infiltrators are not infiltrating.
- the game needs 'mixing up' a bit. Someone's suggested 'events' in another thread which would be an interesting idea.

Planetside 1, better bases better progression bigger feeling battles.

Man, it's strange seeing a old game have more interesting things than this game. You even see both weapons on the players in PS1. The bases with actual doors like fun too. I feel like games back then were more ballsy and open to different gameplay & design. Now everything is more or less a formula to get money.

PS2 is strategy for the console generation. In other words it was all removed because it's "boring". Gotta rush, rush, shoot, die, respawn.

PS1 I never played cause I was poor, playing EQ1 and SOE wanted 15$ a month for PS1 when there were lots of good shooters for free (and I was addicted to CS somewhere around that time).

It does seem to feel like the current gen of gamers have made this a staple of the big picture. Or not so much as made it as allowed it to happen by being complacent with mundane gameplay and minor amounts of innovation. The whole "mainstream" pool has become a big pile of bleh and everyone wants their games to be that way. Its aweful and disappointing entirely. But with enough constructive criticism we might be able to actual change this game into something worth tossing money at and be able to hold the attention of many gamers for more then 3 weeks.