Remember Smedley's promise in '07? Nothing changed in 8 years

Complaining at the over abundance of "THis game sucks, I'm leaving WAAAAA" threads isn't entitled.

Demanding Daybreak change their game because you can't play it properly is.

And learn what irony means.

I'm not sure players realise how much their decisions can affect the game. If you really don't like what they are doing, let them know of course, but then you quit. If they make too many changes that people don't like and see their players and subscriber number go down then they realise they have made a mistake.

For example, when Origins first was released in early beta there was an issue in the agreement which nobody reads, but someone somewhere always does. The way it was worded was that they could look at any and all information on your computer, I of course was against this. As soon as this information leaked out, they immediately changed it as they intended to do this to stop hacking.

However, my issue with what they did was they shouldn't have done that in the first place, so I unistalled Origins and decided they will never get my money. It means I can't play Battlefield, a game I loved, but I stand by my word.

If PS2 becomes a game I don't like, as much as a shame it is as I love PS1 and PS2, I'll leave. It's a simple as that.

Oh ****, you're right. This is the worst thing to happen since the Holocaust

Sorry. You will have to wait until they finish porting the game to the Xbox One before we get any real content. See you in 4 years.

No where in my post did I mention anything about one of the worst attempts at mass genocide in history.
How you can even compare the two is really beyond me.

You're a flippin idiot (sorry mods).

I believe that all the people who were pessimistic when daybreak showed out are sensible enough to realize that their main goal was to turn the users into "Money Spending Revenants"


-_-

People hating on the game again?

Smed is to Planetside what Alan Ladd Jr. was to Star Wars. That's all that really matters.

Its pretty simple. The devs just aren't talented enough. When things became too complicated or costly they simply scrapped the idea or project.

Just look at PS2 on PS4. They had forever to port it and could barely accomplish that.

Planetside 2 is pretty much one of the worst games I've played which is also one of the most entertaining ones. In otherwords, the game has always been an irritating buggy mess. There was never a moment during PS2s' lifespan where I could sit down and play the game saying 'Oh wow, there is absolutely nothing wrong going on.' which wasn't related to weapons/vehicles/etc. Every.single.patch has been a big, fat buggy mess.

Just about every other FPS game or MMO has it's **** un****ed a year after release. PS2 is the only game where every time I've come back, something got fixed but a bunch of other problems popped up. Yeah, we don't have vehicles exploding and floating up into the air infinitely or bodies moving around with crazylegs anymore, but now we have hackers flying through the air apparently (I'm a believer now, thanks) and guns aren't showing firing animations/projectiles.

Seriously, there is never a moment in this game where its not ****** in some way. Its so embarrassing and just sad. I like the work DBG has been doing, but I know I've spent at least $500 since this game was released, and to see its progress has more or less hit a brick wall...yeah. PS2 is in the mud and its only sinking deeper and will never be anywhere near as good as Planetside 1 or anywhere near what it could've been. And Planetside 2 is fighting a losing war with itself because its already a three-year old game and already showing its age. Yeah, the graphics are still pretty, but in comparison to the other games coming out...just no. Battlefront 3 for instance looks ******* incredible and will probably be more entertaining than PS2 could ever be again, and I'm usually not crazy about Star Wars.


Oh. And even it has orbital strikes


Either way, I don't see a point in spending money on Planetside 2 anymore. If you want to play a game for free with large-scale battles and whatnot, PS2 is your bag. But I just don't want to spend anymore if the game is going to stay as a beta. I mean really, thats all it comes down to. The only thing PS2 has going for it is that its free and that its a MMOFPS. But that really is it. Are those two features really worth dealing with everything else wrong with the game?

Thats a decision you/everyone has to make on an individual basis. For me, personally, the answer is no. Those two do not make the game worth spending my time and money on, so I play other games

I was there for that change of direction during beta of PS2 (2012?).(1 month before release I should remind you)

--Smed, basically took a game that was almost finished (and not fun or interesting or even Planetsidey) and redirected it based on player input. They threw together amerish and esamir at the last minute based on that input (indar was to be the only planet). --So technically, there have been 3 new continents for those of us that have been here a month longer than release.

--Granted, it took 3 months of people complaining and trying to figure out why solutions that were proven in PS1 had to be argued and proven to be useful in PS2 before they were implemented. (anyone remember the dilemma of trying to remember where you parked during a tank zerg?)

To be honest, perhaps that is just the creative process of the dev team. While I appreciate the transparency, at the time it felt to many that the devs were constantly at odds with the community. Most likely, a downfall of only communicating via text.

When it was all said and done, some very smart people made some very good arguments about scale, strategy (tactical and strategic), as well as a general sense of accomplishment that had been missing from the game. While some of these issues are still here, they've been rewriting the code and reorganizing the development process in order to make steps toward the vision laid out that day. --So I have to say I disagree if you think Smed isn't listening to the players.

I personally the answer to your questions can be found in two facts.

----First, Sony was something like $1 Billion in the hole last year-- I'm sure this played some part in the ability to support the game and ultimately led to the selling of SOE games to DBG.

--Second, the code was written to not be changed at it's origins. The reason the game was buggy for the first 1 1/2 years was because of this realignment to make a true MMOFPS instead of the original idea of several CoD matches that that you could walk between. (really, lattice and contiguous conquest weren't rules--you just picked anyplace and started a fight there).

The game is actually in a good place finally as far as bugs are concerned. It runs much faster and the gunplay is a lot more fluid now (though I still feel I have to ADS all the time). Hopefully that means more time spent on adding depth to the gameplay. Resource revamp is a big change for most of the players and could shock the community if done improperly... Can you imagine logging in tomorrow and suddenly you're always resource starved because no one will repair the generators or turrets at the bases???

While this is a resounding disagree with OP, I do hope the flamethrower can be figured out and Beta Nights return with it as well.

I was a very strong supporter of the lattice system. The original hex system, while it made it possible to find fights of any kind, was so hectic...jumping around the map with no discerning purpose made the game so frustrating. At least the lattice system gives some very light layered sense of strategic gameplay. I never understood why Smed/Higby were kicking their feet at some of the suggestions we had made previously, only to give in (they did listen in more than once instance).

The problem with PS2 is that PS2 doesnt know what the **** it wants to be. It gives the impression that squadplay/tactics matter, but in truth the devs aimed for a regular play session to be around 30-45min. In comparison to something like Planetside 1, it was less about 'what can we do to win this fight/alert' and more about 'what can we do to win this continent?'. The simple fact is that...PS2 advertises itself to be this grand-scale wargame of strategy, but in truth its just a glorified battlefield game. PS1 at least made it so that outfits could turn the tides of a fight by some very well-pulled of tactics. Squadplay was a very big deal (i'm talking more than just max crashes).

For instance, a squad could go behind enemy lines to take down a generator at a base that can't be capped, then hold the gen room while the enemy tries to retake it. This would in turn pull enemies off from the frontline as well as starve the base of base benefits because the link is broken due to the generator/power being taken down at an entirely different base. Or a platoon could ensure a base gets NTU starved and flips to neutral...I mean, it had more tactics than just "OK DAGGER ACTUAL, GO TO ALPHA AND TALON WILL GO TO BRAVO"

Like, seriously. It had actual teamwork/squadtactics. More than just 'ok guys pls shoot my target' or some other stupid ****. It wasn't necessarily just a numbers game, it was about muh strategies. Yes, this is a rant, but bottomline is that PS2 is not PS2 but rather Battlefield 4284

Regardless of what the devs do, it seems like they are unable to win. The nature of the game itself makes development pretty difficult to do. The game needs to always reach that 'sweet spot' with the gameplay...too many players, too little players, too strong weapons, too weak weapons, etc...all these things factor in to that sweet spot. And with PS2, it just seems -extremely- difficult to find it.

Also, boat is sinking:
http://steamcharts.com/app/218230#3m

It took PS1 about 7 years to hit that sweet spot, unfortunately it wasn't really publicized. I didn't really intend to start this conversation, but i guess it was the subject matter of my post.

As far as the "boat is sinking" comment. I recall talk of a re-launch at some point after DBG realigned the dev team and some major changes happened. If that's still true, then it doesn't really matter if the boat is sinking at this time. Prolly a good thing, not sure how much of the current playerbase would still play if there were meaningful resource changes that actually impeded some play-styles under certain circumstances (for example: no HA shields w/o an amp station on continent). So after the changes they'll need to attract new (old) players anyhow.

The relaunch will need to communicate the changes though. Hopefully they took some tips from FFIV Online relaunch, that game was horrible at first and relaunched quite successfully 2 years later.

A relaunch would be wonderful. Some publicity to get people to come back and try the game. But as you said, it would have to have some improvements coming...those people could come back and play, but if they don't got a reason to stick around, then a relaunch wouldn't do any good.

There needs to be a reason for people to play and stick around. MMOs are notorious for having the carrot on a stick effect. With PS2, the carrot is almost non-existent, lol. For instance, a lot of those directive rewards are in some ways worse than the guns they're supposed to be replacing. Its like, really? Lol. I understand in some cases why that might be the case, but at the same time its like...why bother?

Let's also be serious too, the gaming environment right now, I'd say, is more hostile/competitive than it was when PS2 released. This year and next year have some huge games coming out for the PC, such as SWTOR's expansion pack, Battlefront 3, Star Citizen (next year, hopefully), and a few other games. While Planetside 2 is cool and in its own genre/league, I just don't know if PS2 necessarily has what it takes to stay afloat and compete with these other games for players/player's time. If anything, I think what we'll see with a relaunch is people will come to the game/come back to the game, play it, get infatuated, then get bored and go onto 'greener' pastures. There is not much PS2 has to offer to get people to stick around.

You know, I'm almost on the fence with PS2 in terms of how it should be. While I hate the idea of items/gear/equipment and some kind of RPG system, I kind of almost feel that PS2 could really use something like that to get people to play more. People like collecting ****. So far, the only thing PS2 lets you collect are implants and implant chargers.

I don't know. How do you get people to play an MMO for a lot longer than just the infatuation period? I started playing SWTOR again and the thing that I like about that is the RPG elements which is fun with friends. That gets me to play that game. And the UI/game itself feels responsive. And collecting ****/customizing my character to make them pretty is fun. I guess, what else does PS2 have besides shooting people in the face with guns/vehicles?

Ok how much is DBG/SOE paying you to say all that plus the inevitable and subsequent denial that you aren't being paid to say all that?

... because I want in.