As server populations nose dive, it may be time to look at some options that bring in new players, get them used to game play and certed up. Also to bring in more revenue to DBG so that PS2 is not simply abandoned. Most FPS have more than one game mode. DBG could create multiple PS2 game modes with little effort on the part of developers. TDM and CTF modes of 12, 24 or 64 players with time limits and auto balance could be created out of the bases, character models and weapons that already exist. Tank and aircraft TDM could also be created. Traditional combined PS2 game modes could easily still be available on the same servers. Instant respawn is also a feature of most FPS now, and it's frustrating to wait for respawns in PS2 after playing instant respawn FPS. Forumsiders will freak, i'm sure, and argue that such game modes would 'water down' player base. Far from watering down player base, such changes could bring in waves of new players who would be less likely to be cannon fodder after playing CTF or TDM and certing up their weapons and other gear. (Hopefully forumsiders aren't simply interested in maintaining their supply of cannon fodder) Players in tradtional PS2 game mode would be the most serious players, less randoms and more squad/platoons. Keeping in mind that this is not a frantic suggestion to tweak a carbine, I'm sure everyone will respond in a thoughtful and rational way.
I must say I was surpised when I first played that a BR1 could end up facing a fully certed and experienced BR100 on the same server (I was brainwashed by the WoW battlefields that have limits on the range of ranks allowed into each one). I'm not sure I fancy death match-style team size limits and time limits though. And respawn delay is not something that bothers me either - the chance to check my stats, or swear viciously and volubly, while I wait hopefully for a passing medic to rezz me without getting a death on my stats isn't so bad. I guess Koltyr (when it arrives) and the new certing system for BR 1-15 is a step in the right direction although having different, parallel servers for people in differnt BR bandings is probably too much to expect for a whole load of technnical and performance reasons
This is not a conventional shooter and if there something to do to improve it that's NOT stupid instanced mechanics that are more than 20 years old. PERIOD. Planetside 2 doesn't have to copy the mass of shooters out there, it creates its very niche and it has to focus on its very unique features: massive persistent war. We need depth: more strategy, fight for resources, better leadership tools, more logistics, more combat environments with different challenges, more empire specific vehicles and weapons.
^ This ^ !!! We don't need any BattleDuty: Call of Medal nonsense here! This is PLANETSIDE, and we need depth, meta, strategy, leadership stuff, persistence, etc. etc. etc. THAT's what truly makes Planetside into what it is, and THAT's what we need more of.
Aren't battle islands in the works? I'm ok with them making some smaller battle maps, but I don't think the game is anywhere near the point of needing 12v12 or less. If they added such modes now, they'd essentially be hurting the regular game but stealing players. I would love it if they were added, but that would speed up the death of a game mode that isn't dead yet(though people here would have you believe otherwise).
I don't see why people want strategic depth so much considering your relative contribution to strategic scheme of things is what? like 1/6000 on a full continent? That's like 0,01% Your actions make so little impact that you might as well be watching a movie than playing a game. No wonder players usually identify with their KDR or SPH. At least personal stats are largely within your control and you can watch yourself slowly improve them. Now you can say that players play Planetside because they like the feel of massive 400 man fights. Well guess what? Instanced rounds can make those fights even better because at least teams would be balanced and there would be less spawncamping and zergstomping going on.
You could actually add these game-modes in the main-game. Splitting the players across different game-modes will only serve to empty the servers. CTF for instance, you can add open flags, ground/air vehicle flags and infantry flags. 'flag' can be anything, like special cores that control a base or something. To make it possible for normal bases to co-exist next to a CTF one, you can recapture stolen cores to undue enemy captures. This allows a king-of-the-hill type of base to participate in a CTF one after the first core is captured and brought to that base. Any flag is constantly shown on the map, and if it's carried by an ally or enemy. This way players can really fight for it, defend the flag carrier or try to kill him and recapture the flag, bring it back to the base. Perhaps even put in a system that if the flag is in enemy hands for long enough the base is captured anyway. Open flags would require the most captures as they are easiest to get. You can capture one and use anything, from infantry to vehicle, to bring it to your own base. These could have multiple flags to capture at the same time. Vehicle flags need less captures. You drive up to a specific point in the base and take a few seconds to load up the core onto your vehicle. Preferably this is a very open spot where C4, tank mines and infantry flanking is likely, or where vehicle combat is encouraged. Once loaded up you need to bring it to a nearby base and deposit it there with another several seconds of unloading time. Infantry flags can only be transported by infantry... so they have to walk all the way back to the base. This might sound tedius, but it enforces players building convoys to defend the flag carrier, keeping other infantry at the ready to pick up the flag and keep moving. The defenders become the attackers once they need to retake their flag, and just killing the flag-carrier and running across it won't help, you have to carry it back to your base again... if you aren't killed before you get back again. This makes area control, positioning, armor and transport much more important. Rather than fights around spawnpoints and control points, you get to fight across large area's. Closing a road actually means something as a single Sunderer that passes it by can't defeat it, as now the flag carrier needs to be taken passed it and has to take longer to get there.
Separate game modes that break up what this game is all about is the exact opposite of what I want to happen. When you try to make something for everyone, you make it for no one. I don't want DBG to try and focus on game modes and changes that make it easy for new players because that is not what this game is. Planetside is a massive shooter where cooperation and strategy should reign supreme. It will serve no purpose to drive away the core audience who loves what Planetside is supposed to be, in order to bring in a few new players who will end up not spending any money anyways and playing for less than a week. If you bring in players with the allure of small game types that they are used to, and are not representative of the real Planetside in any way, you're just going to drive them away, just like your core players who just want to have their special game, and play it and spend money on it till the apocalypse. If you don't make a game for the loyal and passionate fans of what it used to be, then you won't have anyone left to make the game for.
this. I'm also not suggesting that massive battles be eliminated, only that players have more choices, more game modes, some of which are balanced and have no spawn delay. What modern shooter these days has only one game mode? not many, and none that are successful.
wrong. look at CS:GO which has around 1/2 million players at one time playing. It has many game modes and fan made maps. Allowing for TDM and CTF in balanced, timed matches would allow community players to design maps and bring their squads in for short informal matches. All this could be done with present bases, landscapes, weapons and classes. Almost no work for dev, lots of new players. and more choices for players. who is not in favor of giving players choices? would this water down player base? nope. i think it would bring more players into the game.
