Stop putting in stuff from PS1 that nobody wants.

You shouldn't be able to destroy that organization and work with a simple click of a button. There shouldn't be a get out of zerg free card.

You know that we didn't have SMG in PS1 right?

Second of all, the Phoenix and lancer are alot better in PS1 then in PS2.

In PS1 I could turn my mouse up to 5000dpi and arc the Phoenix almost at a 90º angle and arc it into a door way and fly down the hall way and hit camping maxes. Now that was both OP and Skilled.

Lancer WAS a sniper rifle in PS1, it was a truly amazing AV weapon. I wish you people would stop crying about every little thing that kills you, stop being bad and learn to stop standing in place.

Anything the Phoenix can do, a sniper can do that same.

... and pistol shotguns...

LMAO!

The amp!

Seriously!!!

I'm sorry, but you just made me laugh so hard!

Seriously though, the AMP was just Terribad....

The scatter pistol wasn't bad but you had to basically be right in their face to kill crap with it, after the buff the Beamer and Repeater are the far superior pistols.

i played PS1 for a bit over 1 week , IT WAS TERRIBLE ... i went back playing battlefield2

i agree with nearly everything OP said , except the AV rocket ... thats just wuss talk ... if you dont like that maybe we should get rid of shotguns too , mines as well , how about C4

i really wish this game would not be a sequel of PS1, because features taken from that antiquated non sense game just ruin this game IF to many of the features would be integrated

I played Battlefield 2 for a bit over 1 week, IT WAS TERRIBLE....I went back to playing Planetside 1.

I really wish this game would stop heading to BF2 and COD4 and be a true sequel to PS1 because features taken from those terrible games just ruin this game.

You mentioned SMG, I gave you SMG. Also it's not that bad... at point blank range...

AMP Pistol =/= SMG.

Yeah, very few infiltrators actually used the AMP. Most preferred to use the respective pistols, or even knife people in the back.

Also, they could fire while cloaked. You had to have Darkvision (an implant) to spot them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AutoMag_(pistol)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submachine_gun

You Sir,

http://images.wikia.com/powerlisting/images/8/8d/-yeah-****-clean-l.png

Planetside 1 is like whiskey. Its an acquired taste. There are A BILLION THINGS that PS1 did right (base layout, weapon damages, cert system, continental and global conquest, base benefits, teamwork aspect of vehicles, uniqueness of weapons, etc etc the list goes forever) that NEED to be implemented in planetside 2.

I won't say they were perfect, but the Lattice system is superior to the current hex system. That is a straight up FACT. The Lattice-Hex Bastard child they have shown us is a straight upgrade of both those systems. It provides the numerous options for attack needed to advance, while at the same time focusing the fights to create those REAL large-scale sustainable fights.

The base layout is a STRAIGHT downgrade in Planetside 2. They're not complex in the least. They promote vehicle spam. There's hardly any true defensible or key points (you could argue the generators, but you get lolpodded and tanked in there all day). The tunnel systems were so close to being a step in the right direction (as in underground in base fighting), but they ended up being anuses in the ground that poop out free experience to the attackers.

Continental conquest actually happened in Planetside 1, as did Global conquest. This does not exist in PS2. This is probably due to the lack of continents or the overwhelming idea that "Indar is the only continent with fun bases", which is not true. Just go fly and take a look at Split Peak Pass on Amerish. Lithcorp Secure Mine. NC Aresenal.
They're almost so close to being on the right track with adding continent locks, but I fear this will only bring more fights to Indar, because the other continents would be "locked down" for a faction. This was proven a bad idea back in beta when losing a fight at a base (no matter how small) locked the attackers out for 5 minutes and ended the fight. No large battles could formulate, much less persist. Maybe people don't like persistent battles and want that "win condition", but to me a battle isn't truly won if a game mechanic forces the enemy to fight somewhere else. That's your job to make them leave.

Cert system is hopelessly lost. Planetside 1 had it perfect with inventory/certs. Planetside 2 could have been this way, while still selling guns. It would just be a PS1 cert system with the option to "purchase" guns with auraxium (a resource in beta) for certain things you were certed into. For example, if you certed in to Medium Assault, this would allow you to buy and use the carbines. But if you dropped the cert for medium assault, you wouldn't be able to pull guns from the MA pool. Whether you certed or purchased them. This promoted DIVERSITY and REDUCED TANK AND AIR SPAM in Planetside 1. And it really worked.
One of the biggest problems in Planetside 1, in my opinion, was the increase in BR/Cert points. Players became less specialized and more general soldiers (akin to what we have in PS2 off the start). It created inter-personal dependency and teamwork to have people certed as medic or engineers. Because maybe you spent those certs on Rocket Launchers to fight MAXes to protect them. It didn't invalidate anybody. Because if the enemy outfit had spent all their certs in magriders and reavers and AMSes, chances are that your HA/Rexo/adv medics were going to crush them once they had to get inside the base. It was an extremely imbalanced way to balance things. And it was perfect. The "everyone can do everything" idea took this away, and makes it a numbers game. Mad at the enemy for putting up a good defense with their good indoor fighting weapons in PS2? EVERYONE IN MAXES! Lets do this!

Uniqueness of weapons. Yeah, I think enough has been said here. Apart from the Lasher and ESRLs, just about every gun is the same as other guns in the game. All carbines, LMGs, Assault Rifles, etc really have the same feel in my opinion. And they all looked different from one another. Very different. Even on the same empire. The lasher didn't look like a pulsar. The MCG looked amazing. The Jackhammer even looked boss (and had a really unique tripleshot).

Base Benefits. Planetside 1 did this right. PS2 almost did this right. Except for the fact that Bio labs hardly reduce the spawn timer. And nobody uses the turrets so whats the point of an Amp Station. And when you're assaulting a base, you'll more often than not be using a vehicle terminal that can spawn tanks at a smaller outpost (and usually the enemy has tech), so you barely even need a tech plant. They're just not important enough. I think that if an empire doesn't have tech, they should only be able to use stock weapons on their vehicles. And stock is more than viable for just about everything. And on the topics of vehicles, the 2-man MBTs in PS1 were far better for teamplay than PS2. But this comes back to the problem that EVERYONE has an MBT off the start.


But what do I know. I've only been playing the game for 12 years.

there is always a few people who like some obscure game ... ps1 players alone will not keep this game alive... especially not free2play... even as free2play this game maybe had 26000 simultaneous loggins at its peek... bf2 toped 55000 at its peek and it was NOT FREE

you want PS1 them probably you have to merge all servers in to 1 and make it subscription based... because that's is how many dedicated PS1 players are in existence

you can NOT compete with CoD the competition is way to big there , and this is a vehicle based game anyway ... on the other hand since EA tuke over battlefield series there is no competition at all... EA blows at making good games .. logic would dictate that if you want to make money thats the customer base your aiming for

Agreed.

If they took anything from PS1, I wish it would have been base design...

Oh, I missed something in my post. Music. Planetside 1 had constant music wherever you went. And it was great. And glorious. And really really added to the game. Planetside 2 has music. But doesn't play it. Except for the 12.23 seconds before a base gets captured. Or when you go AFK in some obscure location where not even a single bullet is fired for 5 minutes.

Um, they didn't have anyone to fall back on when PS1 came out since it was brand new but for some odd reason it lasted 10 years. Also, PS2 can just get new players. All you COD and BF kiddies can go play COD and BF. It's that simple but don't twist a game that was once good into a pile of mush.

Right now PS2 is like a really smart intelligent girl dressed up like a **** so its attracting all the wrong kinds of people. It just has to change its image and it will attract the types of players we really want.

If that's true then PS2 is a shot of whiskey in a big tall glass full of gingerale, lime and a pound of ice from esamir. I guess that makes us no-nonsense drinkers? ;-)

I dunno about that ...how are walls an obstacle to soldiers that can fly? Why would anyone even use stairs if you can just fly to the top of a PS1 style tech plant? PS1 bases were a complex ballet of activities to both attack and defend. Now we're thrown about with teleporters, circus cannons and people that can just float up to the top of a wall, walkway or roof. I don't think it was ever an option..but they sure didn't have to eliminate basements. Pre-cave fraggles lived down there...it's kind of sad.

The goal of Planetside 2 should be to implement everything from Planetside 1 and add and improve on it.

Actually planetside had a good number of players at the start, especially considering ps1 was launched at a time before wow made mmo's popular and almost completely without any advertising. It even had a subscription fee, and that was unheard of for fps games at the time. It lost subscribers when it got old and the devs made some fatal errors in development (BFR's), but still it lasted 10 years as a mostly completely neglected game.

Its time that devs learn the lessons that games like EVE and the countless wow-clones have shown over the years. Making a successful game is mostly about finding a niche that makes your game unique. Trying to copy and take over the player base from another game usually fails as they might as well play their usual game. Planetside 2 could build upon the great elements of ps1 to make a truly unique game experience that would have had a stable playerbase for years. Sadly they didnt, and are now losing both the old ps1-fans and the "new" cod/bf fans.

Don't blame the players for the way the game is today, the devs made all the decisions and created this game the way it is. Players had little input. Do you think the players are the ones that released 1-shot pump action shotguns? Did the players launch the game with air superiority that ruled over all? Did the players create a hover tank that was impossible to balance and was overpowered for 2 months after launch? Did the players create NC OP MAX? Did the players even asked for annihilators to be invented? Did the players create empire specific launchers which are just ridiculous, badly balanced weapons in a FPS game, and apparently they were copied over from PS1? For all the issues this game facing today or had faced in the past 4 months, they are all on SOE's devs. Don't blame CoD, BF, kiddies, teenagerd, or anybody else for that. I get that it's popular to blame the larger games, but it's getting old.

As for the comment about CoD & BF "kiddies" going back to CoD & BF, judging by the game's falling population, I would say they have done just that. This reminds me of age old EQ1 vets who can't let the good 'ol EQ1 go, so they run up the mouth about all the other new games and label anybody who prefer newer games as "kiddies". They always have this holier than thou attitude as if their old game was still the king of the hill. They always claim if EQ1 went F2P it would become a top 3 game again...but EQ1 did go F2P and the game hasn't gotten more popular. I can understand EQ1 vets having that attitude, because EQ1 was the king of the hill for 5 years during its early days, and peaked at 450k subscribers. I played EQ1 hardcore during those years. But Planetside 1, it merely peaked at 75k subscribers back in 2003, and fell sharply from there. It was never a popular game, not by today's standards, and not by 10 years ago standards. So let's calm down on the holier than thou attitude.

I don't play CoD. I've always preferred BF:BC2 myself. I'm not a kid, but I'm a gamer and like to play games, both FPS & MMO's. Why should I go back to BF3 when I prefer this game? You would be blind to not see that SOE clearly went after Battlefield franchise players. You look at this game and see which game it most closely resembles to, it's BF3. It's not planetside 1, it's not CoD, it's BF3. Heck I don't even like BF3 as much as I did with BF:BC2. Now I would argue this game is partly badly balanced because SOE keeps on wanting to add elements of Planetside 1 into this game. This game is also partly badly balanced because SOE can't figure out who their target audiences are. I would argue if this game was more like BF3 or even better BF:BC2, then this game would get at least twice as populated. This is because there's a window of opportunity to grab the Battlefield franchise players, since EA/DICE have made some bad choices with the BF games and expansions.

They're trying to hybrid this game into something that appeals to all kinds of audiences, and they run into risk of not appealing to any at all. It's arguable if more PS1 would improve Planetside 2. I can already tell adding empire specific launchers which were copied from planetside 1 has not improved this game at all. In fact I think it has made infantry vs infantry and infantry vs vehicle balance worse. And it's highly debatable if tweaking the hex system to be more like ps1's lattice system is going to improve this game or make things worse. I guess time will tell.