Rock, Paper, Shotgun

26/09/2009 at 08:56 MultiVaC says:

I’d like if they avoided a monthly fee. I don’t know if that’s realistic, but it’s the main thing that could sell me on the concept.

26/09/2009 at 09:07 Dreamhacker says:

Remove the dice-roll mechanics and stick to skill-based FPS combat.

26/09/2009 at 09:39 Batolemaeus says:

Sony, eh?

If their attitude towards mmos is any indication…rip planetside.

26/09/2009 at 09:54 Tei says:

I have receive (And filled) a survey about the topic. I hope we all have luck, and a awesome succesor of PS is develop. *CROSS FINGERS*

26/09/2009 at 13:01 PureHalibut says:

Interesting, the question is can SoE as it is now actually pull it off.

The optimist in me is pleased they are asking for input
The realist in me is worried they’re making an mmo by survey

Anyway, they’re gunna need a bigger boat.

26/09/2009 at 14:31 Paul Moloney says:

The main thing is to make sure the game scales properly on a variety of hardware. When PS first came out, it was unplayable on my then relative up-to-scratch PC. By the time I _could_ play it, the game was old hat already.

P.

26/09/2009 at 14:53 Zenanon says:

It already happened, it’s called Section 8.

26/09/2009 at 15:08 dsmart says:

@ Zenanon

It already happened, it’s called Section 8.

Lay off the drugs.

Comparing the derivative S8 to Planetside is the sort of thing that should warrant a righteous spanking.

26/09/2009 at 16:09 Larington says:

Ahh crap, I forgot to mention removing CR5s and making high level strategy a matter of outfits working together instead of a bunch of arguing about next target as in the current planetside. Oh well.

Couldn’t resist, uhh, yeah… ID 5364525

To see SOE undo their reputation for releasing good games but then damaging the gameplay overtime post release. Decide early on on a set of core design goals and make sure you stay true to those design goals post release.

Planetsides strength is in its teamplay and a sequel should play to that more than to anything else. Few games are even trying to match Planetsides scale, do everything you can to avoid the game becoming an instanced 10 versus 10 (Or whatever) game, theres enough games like this out there now.

Build the game from the ground up to be resistant to attempts at cheating, including finding appropriate consultants who can advise on methods of preventing cheating, leave nothing to chance in this regard.

Build the game so that it is easy to modify existing world content, indeed, try not to reduce the size of the art team post release, the least controversial way of adding new content to the game is to provide new planets/environments in which to fight. If necessary, planets can be rotated in and out of gameplay as if the interplanetary links are unstable to prevent there being too much real estate in the game.
Also, provide some kind of special arena (Or set there-of) for small scale tournament fights of single players or groups of players.

There should be two types of aircraft, those that can hover/move slowly and those that have to maintain a high speed in order to stay airborne, no combat aircraft should be able to do both.

Remove 3rd person infantry mode primarily due to its dominant strategy repercussions.

More infantry deployable weapons, in fact, Heavy Assault should require the user to deploy it, make it a heavy defence weapon, let the main assault rifles rule infantry vs infantry combat rather than giving an obvious dominant strategy in the form of Heavy Assault as it exists in Planetside at the moment.

Use a system of combat across territorial base borders instead of using interlink lines. But also provide a special kind of landing craft that allows an empire to force open a new front line against an opponent (Creates an opportunity to hack the base in the same territory as the landing craft).

Each planet should have around 3 continents (Or equivalent landmass if its a waterless planet) on it, linked by grand bridges. Interplanetary combat occurs via portals (And later landing craft like dropships), with sets of portals for aircraft, sea vessels and grand bridges that lead into the portals. Meanwhile, the portals existance means that a player can fly off the north side of the world and attack the south.

Make it easier for outfits to organise special events, at minimum with an onLogin message that the officers can change to notify players of organised events or better still a messaging/calendar system (Which both outfits and game masters/CSRs can use for various events). Anything that can be done to make it easier/faster for people to work together should be considered.

You could probably make a nice bit of cash releasing episodic style missions for co-op play for when players grow weary of the ‘main fight’. Also, when the playerbase drops below a certain number, bases should become locked so that one side can’t dominate the universe during a quiet period.

In addition to providing the standard monthly subscription, include a special timeblock subscription that costs the same amount as a one month subscription that allows a casual/part-time player who only plays the game for 10 hours a week to play the game for, say, 2 months worth (a 10 hrs/week) as a value for money option for folks who don’t have lots of time to play the game. Of course if you go for a free to play option that won’t be necessary.

26/09/2009 at 17:02 GuiSim says:

I have such fond memories of Planetside.. huge 3 way fights with hundreds of player all over a single bridge ! :)

TECHNOLOGY = MIGHT

26/09/2009 at 23:58 Shalrath says:

It’s only slightly on topic, but every time I hear about Planetside getting a new game, I think of STALKER the MMO, which I would kill for.

27/09/2009 at 16:09 Darthey says:

I could right an essay on what Planetside got wrong (and what it got right), but coming from a teamwork-orientated group (Renegade Legion, Werner) the thing that annoyed me the most was the way the game rewarded character advancement by making you more independent from your fellow soldiers. It lead to an end-game where the top outfits, Soul Reapers, Mercs and FaNG, were all Mossie pilots with killwhore loadouts. A lot of people have fond memories of the games first few weeks, as the limited certs caused people to work together. These days the standard unit is the swiss-army-Rexo, complete with AI, AV, med and repair glue, completely independent from the guy standing next to him. That gave rise to ‘the zerg’, a group of individuals rather then a team.

But if you want to talk about Planetsides demise? I’d focus on three points; the badly implemented ‘Core Combat’ expansion, the mess the Battlefield Robotics made of the gameplay, and the lack of anything conclusive in the persistent world and the completely lack of marketing.

But surprisingly after that massive drop in players the game moved into a steady decline (with the occasional reverse), and still has enough players to be fun today, years after people thought it would be dead.

28/09/2009 at 16:19 Rat says:

They didn’t just ask current players; I’ve been unsubbed for a couple of years and was invited to participate in the survery.

13/01/2010 at 23:05 ToXeye says:

I think they need to alternate the current system if they want to augment the gameplay, by the following points:
#1: One would want to gather people without making the game smaller -> Put rewards that randomly appear on the map in order to gather for a battle about it. And not just the underground stuff that evidently only dilutes the existing player base and hides a lot of the action where very few can watch it.
#2: The BFRs have also been a grave disappointment, at least what I have heard from more enduring Planetside players -> For once, why can’t these seriously problematic items at least be hard to requisition? The lure of money put a leash around its on neck when it discriminated traditional FPS gaming and dominated it with less intriguing BRF combat…
#3: Perhaps, combine #1 and #2 in order to reduce the density of fun-killers in a dynamic way.
#4: Do not discriminate players, their way of playing, etc, with expansions. How is that done? Simple: You could easily add vehicles that require a lot more than just ten players to pilot without ruining the balance of the game. Instead of expanding the game with mechs, expand with super-heavy tanks. Because mechs only require one pilot and are extremely unlikely to encounter in a world that is eternally hung up in a state of attrition and war about resources (which we have hidden in our imagination but nonetheless are the source of all these imaginary gadgets that we shoot each other with). Simply put: BRF tech seems so unlikely in a world where you still need a pilot to fly an aeroplane.
#5: Do it in the past time. Because you can’t change history. Too late, is what I say. Perhaps I am merely full of rant, but the following words hold true: “ww2 simulator in space”. There. That’s it. Nothing seems as futuristic as a wheeled car that has hoovering coffee mugs but can’t hoover itself. I know, the ironies in above lines are not easy to swallow. Just lick them. I can give a concrete example: The setting is more dear to a human if the human-cyber-ratio is greater than 1.00 The most intriguing sci-fi is about a human’s relation to technology, not about technology that does not require us. The mechs should crash and burn as soon as they are hit by an EMP-grenade. They are too high-tech to survive tech itself.