While playing in open-world there should be an option to queue up for instanced arena match. Arena would be some cool location like space station, unknown base on moon of Auraxis or perhaps underwater outpost. Reward for winning a match could be orbital strike or perhaps something less obnoxious such as nanite cost discount. Thoughts?
Note that this only gives players freedom to choose what they want. It doesn't force open-world players to instanced matches.
Please understand that Planetside has always been about seamless/Open world gameplay. Instanced matches would be undermining everything Planetside has been about since the first game.
Basically what the above poster said. Planetside is all about huge battles on a large and open field. Although your suggestion does remind me of the Battle Islands and the "cave planets" from Planetside 1. They were much smaller and focused feeling, except the "caves" which usually just confused me. I loved the ceiling mounted bases though. Felt very much like you were conquering a treehouse base. "NO VS ALLOWED"
Not that it's a bad idea, but at this point in time (well, since launch, really), this game has needed to have all of its glaring problems and inefficiencies fixed. New content, whilst it helps pay the bills, is usually more of a distraction from how this game is basically still in beta. Even then, new content coming out is at least in line with things we already have. Asking for something so out of the scope of this game is rather unhelpful, really. The grand scale of this game and it's enormous potential for coordination between hundreds of people has been diluted and forgotten about over time. What makes the game special is going to waste in favour of more immediate cashgrabs which, whilst understandable, is missing the point. It bears to mention all of this because creativity may be very valuable, but an appreciation of what we ALREADY have in front of us is more realistic and productive than wishing for something else entirely.
You're being way to negative about things. They have spent so much time optimizing the game that development of new content has been very stagnate for the last few months. Luckily, it seems development has started to pick up again since we are getting some new weapons soon, including ES weaponry. Anyway, my point is to not be such a negative nancy about it. The developers are human too, and they make mistakes. The game is not all bad like a lot of people like to preach on the forums. If you are not happy with the game, take a break and come back when there is new content. That is usually what i do.
This is not a Lobby Shooter so I'm going to have to say no. There are a ton of games to cater to that crowd and do it better too.
Do you think that creating one base for instanced matches would take too much development resources? Or do you think sizable portion of playerbase would abandon open-world aspect? Please name one PC lobby shooter that is sci-fi, has high TTK, vehicles, class system and can support more than a handful of players?
Pragmatism often comes across as negativity, when discussing difficult situations. I'm not in this game for new content. The Valkyrie is the flagship example of why that's a dreadful thing to be optimistic about. Gimmicks keep the bills payed in this game. Giving a more refined user experience to those leading large numbers of people isn't going to make money quickly, but what the lack of it has done is driven some of the most motivated and proactive people I've known out of this game. Ones that were really enthusiastic about what this game should be excellent at: live combat on an enormous scale. Basically, an RTS but with real people. Catering for those that want to play to the potential uniquity of this game isn't going to earn enough money in the short term and, since it wasn't done all that well to begin with, most of that spark is gone. Currently, any attempts at organisation and strategy lead to cries of zerg-this and tactical-overpop-that. It's boiled down to rolling from *********** to ***********, with the occasional redeployside jaunt to a distant base to stomp out of a spawn room. This game was never meant to be about the individual, but it's heartbreakingly difficult to market to anything BUT that sort of crowd. These are the issues I was addressing, not the endless bugs (read: features) and rickety servers. All of that I have put up with, because of how great this game has been. If we carry on losing sight of what this game WAS about, it will become just another Battle of Dutyfield and it will fade into obscurity.
I think you want TitanFall. The point of Planetside, as others have said, is the open world AND consistent battles. If you want what your asking for go play TitanFall or Global Agenda. Those two games have exactly what you want. In fact, I think Global Agenda answers your question. I don't remember how big the instances are but I think they allow 100+ in one arena and it's F2P.
Except Titanfall is awful too. It's got nice graphics, good idea, good balance between mechs and infantry (unlike horrible imbalance between vehicles and infantry in PS2). The launch was pretty good, I for one haven't noticed any bugs. However, it is still short TTK, has bad net code (possibly because I'm playing from Russia), and most importantly Titanfall tries to combine the uncombinable: 1) Twitch reactionary gameplay with adrenaline-ridden speed and very fast parkour movement (think Unreal Tournament). 2) Modern shooter mechanics like short TTK, aiming down sights, and horrible hip fire if you don't (Call of Duty, Battlefield). And don't even get me started on cheesy as hell OHK melee attack. Basically, it should be Unreal Tournament with mechs, but instead it's CoD with mechs. I don't hate CoD, but I think it's a bad match. Speaking of PlanetSide 2 - yeah, sure, it's meant to be as a big open world game. And it's magnificent because of it. After playing it, match based shooters seem hollow and small. So open world should definitely be the main way to play it. But sometimes I just want to login and have a good fight, without bull **** like: looking for a good fight, dealing with zergs, vehicle zegs or terrible bases. Or vehicle zergs surrounding terrible bases. And as much as I love PS2's open world, sometimes I just get too tired of choosing between several bad fights. It really is surprising how with hundreds of players online, sometimes there's just nobody to play with. That's why an ideal game will have both persistent open world, and matchmaking for small competitive fights, or just to have a short good time. All that said, I have zero faith in Gamebreak's ability to create a matchmaking system without wasting a year on it, so all of that is purely academic.
titan fall sits at a grad total of 12 players that arent brain dead AI. so, uh no, it doesn't fit the bill.
I notice everyone focuses on TitanFall but no one says anything about GA. Honestly, I didn't play TF at all so I wouldn't know.
