A bad shooter is a bad shooter, no matter how many people can be on one map at a time. And until glaringly broken balance issues are handled, it will continue to be a horribly bad shooter. Anyone with a standard of quality stays away from PS2. Fewer and fewer people are putting up with the crap. I'd give details, but the only people still playing are the One's totally fine with the way things are, so it'd be like tinkling into the wind.
please humor me saying something is bad but not explaining why is the worst thing you can do yes you will be trolled but this will be on every game forum and let us know how this game should change, maybe a game of your liking's to compare on how you think this shooter should be don't say battlefront or battlefield i know it's not the best shooter but it's the best 64+ shooter out there the players on this game like freedom of movement, playing vehicles and infantry, big maps and shooters if we where happy with a small map shooter where we only can play as infantry or vehicles we all played a other game
This movie is self-explaining (idiot with gatekeeper) and the NC guy is shooting puzzled soldiers in the back so... don't whine, l2p
It really is about time C-4 was nerfed, your video shows everything that is wrong with that complete bullsh*t.
An arena-shooter (BF, CoD, ect) player got lost and then ganked by a stalker infil. Littleman isn't capable of a high tempo, long duration fight. He got caught up in the cert farm and realized that he wasn't really capable of doing much more. He wanted more, but didn't quite know how to attain it. Perceived imbalances were used to cover his own ineptitude. But again.. ignorant to the bigger picture he did the only thing his parents, teachers, and government taught him to do... whine to the authority. The authority didn't answer.. PS2 is like the real world. Its tough, you've got to be self sufficient, and your judged and measured on yourself as well as others. That does emotional stuff to people such as he. He couldn't hack it. His best course would just be to leave and forget it ever happened.
Blatant class imbalance. NO OTHER GAME has a heavy assault class like PS2 does. Name one where there is a class that can move as fast as the "light" classes but has much more health and a gun with a massive magazine? "Front line fighter" isn't an excuse. THIS IS A FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. Basic balance principles ALWAYS apply or your game ends up like... this. A hemorrhaging heap until the water level falls below the hole, leaving a small puddle. The same puddle that made up the elitist posts above this one. The guys with the OHK sniper rifles have invisibility... At that range, they're flat out invisible. Garbage flight controls. So bad, that ground AA had to get jacked up to make the game playable for ground forces instead of relying on dedicated air hunter pilots, because asking dreamy eyed pilots to L2P was too much when there are better flight experiences just about everywhere else that support mouse controls. Flight in PS2 is as unintuitive as it gets, despite all of the examples out there of intuitive controls. Most facilities were not designed to support hundreds of players, yet are required to move on to a base that can. We're at worst dealing with CoD maps and at best smaller Battlefield maps outside of bases. This range supports 48vs48 at best. Many facilities are horrifically laid out to begin with, often laughably favoring the defense or the offense. I remember old Scarred Mesa Skydock, the Crown. Fixed, but still there are more to go. Two words: Indar T. As a rule however, if the imbalance has to go one way, better to err towards defense. In fact, continent lay outs are more for designed for aesthetics than actual game play. Ground vehicles don't handle so well in valleys and in rocky terrain, and PS2 doesn't even control the number of vehicles on the field like other games - it can have a vehicle in the field for every single player... and we're cramming all of that into a valley or ridge in many regions in game. Terrain design needs to either favor infantry or vehicles. Much of it favors neither, as most of these valleys are flanked only by steep ridge lines that are frustrating for even infantry to navigate, not ruined husks for buildings or simple forests. For reference, PS1 primarily relied on forests flanking large open spaces to give infantry a shot at field combat amidst the vehicles trading shots. And then I have a multitude of theoreticals that are more along design choices and developer intent, but are more encompassing of the genre. It's actually harder to support team play when one player is given the tools and power to be self sufficient (heavy assault, controversially, I question whether or not if head shot mechanics are a good thing for a game like Planetside.) You intentionally weaken the individual, you encourage them to stick with others. PS2 doesn't really encourage team play so much as it just has players that prefer to drop ammo packs over having a heavy shield. PS2 was strictly built to be CoD/BF in a massive space, and that. Doesn't. Work. Virtually zero thought was put into its actual development and cardinal sins were even allowed into its design. Losing Higby was among one of the best things to happen to this game, but it was probably a day late and a dollar short. Shame. Now all that's left are the players in this thread. The people I mentioned are okay with this train wreck of an FPS. Forget that it's an MMOFPS, as an FPS it's sub-par due to bad or short sighted design decisions (DGC as a whole seemed to have visionaries, but not planners nor designers.) Admittedly, PS2 seems to be trying to head in the right direction, but I'm afraid they might not get it there in time. Advertising only works when word of mouth and personal experiences aren't largely negative. As an aside: I can't tell if my lack of complaints about infantry weapon balance is a good thing or a bad thing, knowing how homogenized weapon selections are between the empires. Yeah, yeah, I'm bad... I only quit partially because I was tired of watching my allies get gunned down by ONE guy (often a heavy assault) or ignoring the sniper camping the vehicle pad that literally hasn't moved for 40 kills, among many other dumbfoundedly oblivious and uncaring behavior. The other reasons I quit was monotony (Quartz Ridge-Indar Comms) and because there simply ARE better FPS' out there. Which is a shame, because ironically the only game I could ever enjoy for hours at a time was PS2 before I got sick of it all in tandem with the populations dropping. I can immensely enjoy the other FPS'... but I can only do so for an hour before the map rotation has come full circle and we're all taking our AK-47's and M4's into battle again only from different sides of a mirrored map. But hey, if you're okay with a game that is mostly a joke of an FPS, fine. Just don't expect it to recover without taking itself seriously and doing the basic things right first. And finally, this forum has offered more than enough reasons, consistently, why the game is in horrible shape. I shouldn't have had to spell them out.
