Planetside 2 Will "Revolutionize the FPS Genre"

[Jumplion]

Well, they certainly aren't revolutionizing trailers, because that one looked as generic as you get.

It's the gaming industry. Revolutionary is mostly a term meaning "gimmick weapon."

Concise and to the point, something I wish I could be when stating everything wrong with the industry...

 

[Atmos Duality]

No. No it won't. It's not going to revolutionize shit. Nothing that has ever made that claim in the FPS genre ever did (not even Halo).
We tried the MMOFPS model before and nobody wanted it because it was too fucking laggy.
But, now that we've past the era of 56k, we're ready to embrace the massive gun-fight, right?

Well, in our evolutionary slog from the murky depths of 56k into the swampy lowlands of DSL and Cable, we've also stumbled into the Dark Ages of FPSes where Halo/Call of Duty reign. There might be smarter amphibians in the swamp, but nothing is going to be able to tangle with those big fish.

Hell, we had access to the Best of Both Worlds in the Tribes series years ago, but rather than developing that idea further, the entire franchise up and died (and is going to vainly attempt to pull the MMOFPS gig off, if rumors are any indication) due to the onslaught of generic console pigshit; a deluge of knockoffs and mediocrity that has darkened our skies for many years now.

 

[w00tage]

And the whitewashing to save Smedley's reputation becomes official history. SOE failed the original game from a business perspective. They didn't even MARKET it, used the development team as a dumping ground for downsized programmers, trashed the core concept of the game and drove away tons of players with the first and only expansion, and finally perverted it with "community events" to show how politically correct of a business they were.

All this while the players were filming TERABYTES of movies for Planetsidemovies.com, putting up fansites (Planetside Idealab by Hayoo is STILL up and running - good god that guy rocks), forming huge outfits and generally having a heck of a good time joining up to try to take the entire world away from the two opposing factions.

The technology worked to create truly massive battles back then, hosting over 3600 players on one server farm "world" back in 2004, with 400 players per continent all fighting over the same bases. There was nothing wrong with the basic abilities of the tech and the graphics of that day look pretty close to the graphics of another game coming out soon - Star Wars The Old Republic.

The gameplay concept is not "limited", it's simple, clear and executable entirely by the players, which is why the game was popular - WE were in control of the gameplay experience, and it was all about joining together to take over the entire damn world if we could. But that is something that corporate game designers just don't understand.

But they're going to make it ALL BETTER by using better technology, letting you "level offline", and putting in CLASSES ffs. What-how-why do they not understand why the game was popular with LARGE-SCALE TEAM PLAYERS that joined together to FIGHT FOR CHAINED OBJECTIVES and FREELY CHOOSE THEIR OWN ABILITIES in doing so?

I have a morbid fascination now to see what kind of "achievements" system they put in to a game that was originally all about you being a part of a squad, which was a part of a platoon, which was a part of an entire side of a conflict to take over the world.

I would say "W.T.F" but this is SOE under Smedley. You can absolutely count on the most clueless, self-serving bs artist, bandwagon-jumping approach to anything they do.

 

[shaboinkin]

As long as I get my freakishly large battles with hundreds of people on each side with countless tanks sitting on the outskirts of a base laying fire, while you have 5 drop ships overhead holding 20 people each and having them all jump out and land in the middle of the base, while having mechs...and hackers...and medics...and engineers...and heavy assault guys...all while having dozens of fighter jets overhead in dogfights and dropping bombs..and OMG I WANT THIS GAME NOW! What a great game this was back in the day...

 

[Jonci]

I used to have great times in Planetside riding/fighting with the Azure Twilight outfit on Emerald. College/money/lame computer sort of forced me from the game, and eventually it just was too aged. Definitely glad to hear that the battles will actually be over the whole continents and not just for the bases.

Still, Dust 514 promises a lot by being part of the EVE universe. Planetside 2 will have its own rough fight ahead.

 

[Karlaxx]

You know what? If it's still fun, I don't care if they've 'perverted the core concept'. It will be a fun game and I will play it because I don't mind class systems and I absolutely love strategic considerations.

 

[King Toasty]

Never heard of PlanetSide, but this looks very cool. If they pull it off right, get a little bit lucky, it could be big. Color me interested.

I just hope it's coming for consoles. But I doubt it.

 

[The_Emperor]

I think the class system is a bad idea, it stops people from being able to pick and choose their skills to fit with their friends. I hope this game will be good but SOE's track record tells me it will fail.

 

[minignu]

Planetside was the most fun I've ever had in a game. Ever. To people comparing it to Battlefield or whatever - don't bother. The original was/is completely different to anything I've played before or since. Comparing a shooter with 32 vs 32 servers against a game that had literally thousands of players at once in a persistent world doesn't really make sense.

Here's hoping they don't repeat the mistakes they made in the first Planetside and actually balance things correctly. If they play this right, this could be a great, great game.

 

[Worgen]

well the original planetside was pretty cool but since sony handled it that means they messed it up so Im skeptical

 

[MarsProbe]

Dear Planetside 2 Developers,

What you have here looks good, but you have to take in consideration that Team Fortress 2 is now free and nobody wants to pay a subscription for a Battlefield or Call of Duty remake.

Your Friend,
UtterSpartan

You seem to have never actually played planetside. There is NOTHING, not one game, that has EVER come close to what planetside was. It's biggest problem was in fact being waaaay ahead of its time. With new technology and an upgraded advancement system, this could be the next big thing.

Really, yes. Isn't it more accurate to say that the likes of Battlefields and Call of Dutys multiplayer options are watered down versions of Planetside, if we want to go down that route.

Anyway, it's kind of hard for me to be impartial here, as I have a soft spot for the original Planetside - I still put that game down to giving some of the best online gaming experiences I've ever had. Jumping out of a Galaxy transport as part of a full sqaud on top of an unsuspecting enemy tower never got old. Given that other games have came along and made the whole "futuristic space armour" look incredibly ubiquitous and generic, the sequel will have more of a job to do in getting itself noticed these days.

If I am going to play this game, I am probably going to have to save to either get a semi-decent gaming rig or a PS3, should it come out on that platform (don't see a 360 release as very likely).

Oh, and Vanu Soveriegnty forever!

 

[pulse2]

I understand your point, but its not so much WHAT has been implemented, it's HOW. As of yet, we have not seen a shooter where it really feels like a war with two sides trying to take over certain points and essentially win the war. MAG had a good idea of that, but I still think it could have been implemented better.

Think Command and Conquer but from an FPS perspective, I've noticed Starhawk is doing something similar to this.

I'm not saying that that is what they WILL do, but its what I'm hoping for anyway, that to me would be the unique element because for once, rather than helping your team win in a simple team based match FPS' usually have, you'll actually feel like part of a race of people trying to defend your colony, freedom and nation. Again, elements of this have popped up in MAG and Dust, but I have yet to see how Dust implements it.

See, thing is, aside from the big battlefields and somewhat interesting squad/platoon/army system, MAG had pretty much nothing else going for it and it could have been just another military FPS shooter that everyone would forget about relatively quicker than people have already forgotten about.

I'm not asking for developers to just pump their FPS games with nothing but new ideas, some things just work. Though, I guess to an extent, that is exactly what I'm trying to ask them to do. Developers keep pumping up ideas that have been done before, but oooooohhhh this time it'll be different! This time you can be in charge! This time capturing territories will mean something! This time singleplayer and multiplayer will merge seamlessly together! And it never fucking works! What they implement is just as tired and worn out as how they implement it.

*sigh* Look, I am just so cynical about the entire FPS genre. I do admit that from what I'm reading, Planetside 2 does look interesting. But I am just so sick of the buzz words that developers keep using for the same damn game that everyone has seen a dozen times over. Every time a new FPS comes out, I get hopeful just as you do that "maybe this one will be a breath of fresh air to the genre" but nope, every single goddamn time it plays pretty much exactly like every other game. The singleplayer is tacked on with a shit story, the visuals are grimy gray and boring brown, the controls are always likened to Call of Duty, the multiplayer (god the multiplayer!) is always the same shitty CoD system that is so fucking broken I can't believe developers still use it....

Just...........for fuck's sake.........I want good games, that's about it. But it's just stagnating. I read a really good post a little while back, basically said how we all want the industry to grow and yet the industry itself adamantly refuses to. We need to be harsh, we need to be critical. I dunno, maybe Planetside 2 will be the revolution to the whole genre, but if it isn't it doesn't deserve any more money than any other military FPS despite its pedigree.

I think where the difference comes in is in what you are exactly doing and how dynamic the battlefield is, a constantly changing battlefield keeps things exciting. Rather then having a lobby and match joining, have a permanent map liek you would in WoW or any other game, the size of the map allows for convoy missions, not as a seperate mode, but so that you can ACTUALLY transport equipment to and from bases, which will obviously require protection. The capture the flag mode is no longer required because on that very same battlefield, there will be a struggle to steal resources and items from the other team in order to speed up your battle win.

As it's jump in jump out at any point, the ability to keep up to date with how things are going on the battlefield sounds awesome and obviously you level up and get access to new weapons, learning how to use those more effectivly etc.

All in all, it SHOULD be an addictive game because unlike normal FPS titles, it's constantly improving for you, your missions become more successful, you are given the ability to construct as well as destroy, lead squads of your own as you gain more experience etc etc.

Now that to me would thrash ANY FPS out there

 

[Logarithmic Limbo]

I played the Planetside copiously, before SOE fugged it up. Same as they did with SWG. Anything SOE lays their grubby hands on seems to meet with an unkind fate.

 

[theApoc]

Dear Planetside 2 Developers,

What you have here looks good, but you have to take in consideration that Team Fortress 2 is now free and nobody wants to pay a subscription for a Battlefield or Call of Duty remake.

Your Friend,
UtterSpartan

You seem to have never actually played planetside. There is NOTHING, not one game, that has EVER come close to what planetside was. It's biggest problem was in fact being waaaay ahead of its time. With new technology and an upgraded advancement system, this could be the next big thing.

Really, yes. Isn't it more accurate to say that the likes of Battlefields and Call of Dutys multiplayer options are watered down versions of Planetside, if we want to go down that route.

Anyway, it's kind of hard for me to be impartial here, as I have a soft spot for the original Planetside - I still put that game down to giving some of the best online gaming experiences I've ever had. Jumping out of a Galaxy transport as part of a full sqaud on top of an unsuspecting enemy tower never got old. Given that other games have came along and made the whole "futuristic space armour" look incredibly ubiquitous and generic, the sequel will have more of a job to do in getting itself noticed these days.

If I am going to play this game, I am probably going to have to save to either get a semi-decent gaming rig or a PS3, should it come out on that platform (don't see a 360 release as very likely).

Oh, and Vanu Soveriegnty forever!

You just made me smile, thanks...

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Don't knock Planetside until you've tried it. Don't worry about classes and all that crap. Whatever they may say, that is not what makes Planetside unique. It was nothing like the usual CoD crapfest. It had way more options and a persistent world. You had to think larger. You had to coordinate with your team to be successful, and then your team had to coordinate with other teams to win a battle. And then, further coordiation was required to ensure the enemy didn't simply attack some undefended point and make the victory worthless.

The persistent world adds dynamics that Battlefield and Call of Duty cannot reproduce. This will be obvious to anyone who so much as tried it.

 

[Jumplion]

I think where the difference comes in is in what you are exactly doing and how dynamic the battlefield is, a constantly changing battlefield keeps things exciting. Rather then having a lobby and match joining, have a permanent map liek you would in WoW or any other game, the size of the map allows for convoy missions, not as a seperate mode, but so that you can ACTUALLY transport equipment to and from bases, which will obviously require protection. The capture the flag mode is no longer required because on that very same battlefield, there will be a struggle to steal resources and items from the other team in order to speed up your battle win.

As it's jump in jump out at any point, the ability to keep up to date with how things are going on the battlefield sounds awesome and obviously you level up and get access to new weapons, learning how to use those more effectivly etc.

All in all, it SHOULD be an addictive game because unlike normal FPS titles, it's constantly improving for you, your missions become more successful, you are given the ability to construct as well as destroy, lead squads of your own as you gain more experience etc etc.

Now that to me would thrash ANY FPS out there

Do you really think that this sequel will replicate, and in turn enhance, the original's mechanics? Do you really think that?

Because I highly doubt it will. As I said, I am being very cynical, but I cannot help but feel that there is no doubt that they will "dumb down" the game for a broader appeal. They'll just plop you in a random, hugeass map, and you'll just randomly pick off some dudes. That's it. I highly doubt there will actually be any sort of meta-meta-game as you described in the game itself of transporting equipment or protecting resources within the game.

As much as I would love for everything you have said to be true, I find it completely ludicrous that this will happen. And it's a damn fucking shame, because the original Planetside sounds like a pretty awesome game, and due to SOE's history of fucking things up (apparantly, as I have never played an SOE game), Planetside 2 looks wary for fans of the original game.

The proof is in the pudding, in the end. We'll just have to wait and see...

 

[Speakercone]

Never played Planetside, might give it a look. I don't think I understand what they're selling though.

As far as I can tell, it's Fallout 3 with a Brink style class system and there's other people also running around killing the shit you need for your quest. If that's the case, colour me vaguely interested.

 

[pulse2]

I think where the difference comes in is in what you are exactly doing and how dynamic the battlefield is, a constantly changing battlefield keeps things exciting. Rather then having a lobby and match joining, have a permanent map liek you would in WoW or any other game, the size of the map allows for convoy missions, not as a seperate mode, but so that you can ACTUALLY transport equipment to and from bases, which will obviously require protection. The capture the flag mode is no longer required because on that very same battlefield, there will be a struggle to steal resources and items from the other team in order to speed up your battle win.

As it's jump in jump out at any point, the ability to keep up to date with how things are going on the battlefield sounds awesome and obviously you level up and get access to new weapons, learning how to use those more effectivly etc.

All in all, it SHOULD be an addictive game because unlike normal FPS titles, it's constantly improving for you, your missions become more successful, you are given the ability to construct as well as destroy, lead squads of your own as you gain more experience etc etc.

Now that to me would thrash ANY FPS out there

Do you really think that this sequel will replicate, and in turn enhance, the original's mechanics? Do you really think that?

Because I highly doubt it will. As I said, I am being very cynical, but I cannot help but feel that there is no doubt that they will "dumb down" the game for a broader appeal. They'll just plop you in a random, hugeass map, and you'll just randomly pick off some dudes. That's it. I highly doubt there will actually be any sort of meta-meta-game as you described in the game itself of transporting equipment or protecting resources within the game.

As much as I would love for everything you have said to be true, I find it completely ludicrous that this will happen. And it's a damn fucking shame, because the original Planetside sounds like a pretty awesome game, and due to SOE's history of fucking things up (apparantly, as I have never played an SOE game), Planetside 2 looks wary for fans of the original game.

The proof is in the pudding, in the end. We'll just have to wait and see...

Agreed, we'll have to judge upon release

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Ah crap.

This could turn out absolutely incredible if done properly, but it seems that they're trying to cram in lots of stuff that has no real place in the game.
A persistant world constantly changing via the players would not work. Imagine all the problems in big multiplayer games like Bad Company 2, which are mostly caused by giving players too much freedom and power, and they wanna times that by like 10?
Whatever, persistent worlds shaped by the players just do not work, and cannot effectively work even in principle.

It also seems that they are going to cater way too much to people who spend shitloads of time playing the game but not necessarily being any good or very clever at it, like in RPG's. Of course its too early to tell for sure, but in RPG's, more time = better gear = win, in shooters, skill (I hate using that term) + common sense + some other crap like luck = win. You don't have to have the biggest gun to have a chance, but I get the feeling its going to be that way in this game.
Then again, at least they are considering ways to prevent the newbies from getting left behind.

I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for this one, but I really really hope they don't try and cram too much stuff in and mess it up somehow.