Planetside 1 Free to play

Discussion in 'Off Topic Discussion' started by darkphilli, Nov 22, 2012.

  1. They tried this. They brought in a new development team of like 6 people in 08 and tried to do things. They simply cant. Its not worth their time. They cant do anything to the engine. Its too old. They didn't develop any dev tools for the game so they cant do anything to the core of the game. There was a post I think on ps universe years ago by Smokejumper (lead programmer on ps1) indicating that they could never really fix any of the issues that ps1 had. (it may have been his personal blog) If anything, don't think that just because they make Planetside f2p that they will ever seriously develop for it.


    I wasn't trying to throw miss information at you with the 30v30v30 and I figured you would realize that but you decided to attack me on it and say "no no its 120v120v120 haha your wrong." Its still smaller than Planetside 2 and that was my point. Counterstrike and Planetside have very little in common in game play. There are some similarities but don't kid your self.

    You talk of 9 years of balance but you give ps2 3 weeks and your done? You want stagnate base battles that last for 3 hours because 60% vs 40% is your idea of defense? Your trolling on the music part. That's a very specific opinion and not relevant to this convo.

    TTK that is longer but if I wall hump and/or get the drop on you with a jackhammer you either adad( bad netcode that they will never fix) to victory or die in 4 shots or less. Yeah that's much better. A twitch shooter is about reaction times not just situational awareness.You need situational awareness in twitch games but "twitch" is fast reaction made popular by Quake 3 and Counterstrike.

    I've had plenty of fun indoor fights. Do you play Plantside 2?(a rhetorical question, don't answer) We were overwhelmed by NC at Zurvan and we were actually able to push them out. We played the defense game the way it was meant to be played. We didn't spam long hallways or wait for a door to be opened by the enemy just to spam Thumpers or Rocket rifles. We actually had to think about the defense and move as a group. Did the same at a BioLab on Indar (East end of Indar, the name escapes me atm) but we did it. We pushed them out. It was a great time!

    None of the above matters and I wont change your mind. Good luck with PS1.
  2. You guys do realize that PS1 will never go F2P, they will eventually close it and move on.
  3. Regarding the comment, "no one's playing it", well, obviously when it goes f2p, there will be more people playing it! That's kind of a silly argument. SOE wouldn't bother releasing it as f2p if they thought only 100 people would play it.

    So that team in 2008 did nothing? They just looked at it and said, "it's maxed out, we can't fix anything or change anything"? I understand old, but unless they lost the source code, I can't imagine that changes couldn't be made. No one would expect miracles, but surely some improvements could be made.
  4. They have said that it will. Why would they make such a comment if it is so obviously outdated and hopeless?
  5. I know that they tried to fix things. They made it windows 7 compatible... They did a few changes here and there but they will never fix the terminal bug because they cant reproduce it. Even if they could they cant fix it. They have stated this. They also need dev tools. Tools that make is so one dev team can leave and another can come in after the contract is up. This is not how PS1 was coded. It was manually coded or hard coded for specific aspects of the a game. It was a hand modified version of the EQ1 engine. Unless the original programmers come back (and they wont because it would cost SOE $$$) there is nothing PS1 devs could do.
  6. "no time soon. We arent even looking at it. No one is playing it" from John Smedley on a question about PS1 going F2P. I beta'd PS1 and played it for 8 years, its dead, and will be closed. I loved PS1 but I love PS2 to and im happy with the direction there going with it, and look forward to new conts, decimator, buggies and other PS1 features there going to be adding on.
  7. Lets assume your right and PS1 goes F2P.....do you think it will remain the same and justbe free? Or do you think they will make certs, vehicles, weopans, cost SC to purchase? There a business and they know people will go back and play PS1 for the nostalgia and love of it, but SOE will make it so things you enjoyed for your 14.99 now cost money, and they will make it so it will be appealing to go to PS2 rather then pay for PS1 features. Game developers really dont upgrade and fix older versions of games when a newer version they spent millions on developing are released OTHER then to make money off those who are willing to play the original because they dont like the newer. Either way, pops will still remain low, SC will be required for alot of weopans/vehicles, and you will just end up playing PS2. Agsin only assuming your right, and with all honesty I dont see happening.
  8. Next month....
  9. Go play an older CS, then go play PlanetSide. And in the case of PS2, bigger isn't always better. The continents may allow more people, but it rarely turns into fights that were more epic than PS1's.

    I'd prefer base battles that last a long time and are rewarding (plus a real continental meta-game) versus a three-continent system in which almost nothing ever changes.


    ADAD does not go along with bad netcode. There are other FPS games where ADAD is a valid form of movement. Bad netcode made ADAD strafing hard to hit. When warp was not present, ADAD strafing separated people who could aim from people who couldn't. PS1 was just as much about reaction times as any popular twitch shooter. What do you think it took to repeatedly land shots on someone who was ADAD strafing right in front of you? Reaction time. You had to anticipate where his body would be and then aim there. And why are you complaining about someone getting the drop on someone with a jackhammer? A twitch shooter is basically all about who gets the drop on who. Yes, in PS1, even people who get the drop on someone can lose the fight, but that just proves that the other person was better than they were, which in a competitive FPS environment shouldn't be an issue.



    Other than Biolabs, PS2 has no real indoor areas. Bases design is more like those fake structures that SWAT teams use to train in. They are way to exposed to vehicle spam, there are no doors, windows are everywhere, fifty different entrances to each building, etc. You can cite those examples from PS1 and make it sound like it lacked tactics all you want, but at the end of the day, it took real coordination to push back attackers once you were trapped in the base. Those tactics may be different than PS2's, but they were tactics nonetheless.
    • Up x 1
  10. This is purely your opinion and not relevant to any facts surrounding your augment. We can go back and forth all day about what was epic or not in PS1 or 2 but it wont matter. You can go have fun in Planetside with your condensed base fights that last for hours with no real outcome. I will play PS2 and enjoy what it has to offer. The rest of your post I wont comment on. This thread is dead now. We differ on our opinions and you will never understand why twitch and non twitch are 2 different ways to play a game. I'm done discussing this with someone that thinks ADAD is a viable tactic in Planetside. That just means you have no concept of Net code or CSHD.
  11. The last I remember, planetside 1 was like a RPG shooting mechanic then calling it counter strike. It was not like anything like counter strike. I have read all you said. Personally I hate the shooting mechanic in planetside 1.

    I like planetside 1, but I think planeside 2 will be better game in 3 or 4 years if it lasts.

    O ya people stop saying the word copying use the word like inspiration, like jesus christ! If you know anything about innovation or creativity. You know that a lot of artist and creative people have sometimes stole little details from other arts and added it to there work or world.
  12. RKB

    Personally I prefer Planetside 1. I miss the crawling fights across a continent from base to base and forcing the enemy off the continent after several hours of play.
    Right now in Planetside 2 you just crush the enemy in the corner, for about 5 minutes at most. All for a tiny little bonus that isn't even worth the time it takes to gain.

    I feel that the main area planetside 2 is lacking is an objective. In planetside 1 the main long term objective was to sanc lock the enemy. A possible but difficult objective. Planetside 2 has no objectives at all. All you do is pick a direction and just gun down anything that happens to be in your path.

    Its also pretty irritating that the two main channels you can use to talk to the pubbers to get some general organisation going broadcasts to the enemy aswell.

    Right now as im writing this i want to go play planetside 2, but then as soon as I think about that I just start to think about the fact there is no reason to play it.

    Rant over

    TL;DR
    Planetside 2 is inferior to Planetside 1. But this will probably change as the game continues in its development.
  13. You can go have fun in PS2 with your condensed continent fights that go nowhere, because SOE's idea of capturing a continent is just a lock-benefit. And I'll take one PS1 base battle over the 50 different little battles that PS2's hex system gives me...except for the rare large battles that occur that are dominated by one-man solo MBTs and ESFs.

    I never said twitch shooters were the same as games with faster TTK, but I said both styles require the same amount of reflexes and "skill" as you players like to call it it. The common argument is that unless you die in half a second in an FPS, then it doesn't require skill, which is bogus and wrong.

    And yes, ADAD strafing was PlanetSide's primary close-quarter method of dodging shots, other than sticking with a team and using MAX suits or what have you. Just because everyone was capable of ADAD doesn't mean the game lacked teamwork and degenerated into a huge ADAD-fest where no one attempted to use tactics to win a battle. Quite the contrary.
  14. Except that SOE didn't innovate anything. It's BF, but with worse gunplay, worse graphics, worse interface, worse payment model. The only thing going for it is size, which once again, SOE didn't innovate that, PlanetSide 1 tried being "bigger" 10 years ago. And for all the game's size, its ironic that the best battles are the ones that are 30v30 or 20v20 because those fights are usually more fair and not dominated by the hordes of solo battle tanks and fighters that the large battles have.

    It sickens me to see how easy SOE's size card has fooled hordes of people into thinking that this game is the next best thing. For most people who played PS1 (and I say most, not all), PS2 is a piece of garbage that took 2 steps forward and 2000 steps backwards.

    There's my opinion. If you're tired of hearing it, tell SOE to hold up to their promise and make PS1 free-to-play. They'll probably just shut it down though, judging by their "promise" record for the past 10 years.
    • Up x 1
  15. Well, count me in. I'm always willing to back to PS1. Don't get wrong, not going to blame BattleField style here but if I want to play BF, I will just go to play BF.

    What I like PS1 is a very unique game in the world. I understand time was passed, many experienced players might never back but I'm not asking decent fights everyday everyweek. It won't be happened again we all know that but I beat playing PS1 as casual player still much more enjoyable than in PS2.

    I wish PS2 could really totally different after half year but at this time, this isn't my cup of tea. I really wish PS2 will improve but who knows? If that day finally arrive, I'll play PS2 for sure.

    Actually, I don't care to pay a small subscription fee for PS1 but still a USD15 for an age game is too crazy. I'm not young anymore and have no time, probably could only log on one to two times a week.
    • Up x 1
  16. I know I said I was done responding to you but I have to.

    First what do you do in Planetside? You capture continents that give you benefits? Is this not the same thing in Planetside 2? Did we have benefits at all in the first 3 weeks of PS1? No we didn't! Second, I will help you a bit. "I never said twitch shooters were the same as games with faster TTK" I think you meant slow TTK or something. You have gone so far off of your argument your talking in circles so that's kinda lol. I'll give you the TL:DR of our whole argument:

    MC: Why do people say Planetside 1 is dated game play? It takes and resembles CS the most and that game is one of the most competitive shooters out there.
    Vamperial: Twitch shooters are different from Planetside. Planetside may have borrowed some things but it is a very different game. The arena concept that they tried to create failed do to their terrible net code, hit registration, CSHD, and PS is not a twitch shooter.
    MC: tactics and TTK give you better game play in PS1 or are on par with CS making it a stand up shooter 9 years later.
    Vamperial: Your not getting it. I'm done.

    You have yet to make any case or even acknowledge the fact that PS1's Arena idea fell flat. You just continue to balk at the idea that Planetside 2 did anything right and believe Planetside 1 was the end all be all of the two games. You try to hand me back condensed because you think 120v120v120 is big anymore. It isn't. I played Planetside 2 all day yesterday. There were more people fighting back and forth than ever in Planetside. That is simply a fact. You think I call TTK and twitch "skill" then say its a common argument? Where? I haven't read this. Please tell me where you read that all CS and COD players agree that twitch and fast TTK are the =/= "skill". I don't play COD and played CAL on CS some 5 years ago.

    TO SOE: Please make PS1 F2P so that MC and his ilk can flee to the safety of Planetside's dated and broken style of game play. Thanks
  17. Simple truth is if PS1 was as good as certain people are trying to make a case for people would be willing to pay for it. More over, enough people would be willing to pay for it to keep it going for a long time and keep the content viable and we wouldn't see threads for people to asking for it to be free. Instead you got a handful of people willing to keep paying for it and they want the free players to provide content for them like they do for the payers in PS2.

    I hope they just close PS1 entirely so we can stop seeing threads like these. They usually make no logical sense and are usually one guy with an over sentimental attachment to the first game. At first you'll see an influx of people who make huge rants but after a year or so they'll get the message and either sit down, shut up and accept PS2 or will have moved on. Either way they're just annoying at this stage, like "that guy" who just can't let it go.
  18. Well since you asked, heres why you are wrong.

    Single hitbox for everything. No headshots, no limb shots doing less, just one single hitbox. Even the original hallmarks of online FPS's had headshots (Quake3, Halflife1 based mods, etc). Infact most of these games had multiple hitboxes and registered arms, legs, body, and head all as unique hitboxes.

    INSANE CoF bloom, this is particularly noticable on bolt drivers, you simply look to the right/left and your CoF blooms to nearly full screen. Even other games which used expansive CoF's. Far and away PS1 has the most extreme CoF bloom of any big name shooter, EVER.

    Then the BIG one... Client Side Hit Detection. Due to the technology of the time this was required to make the game function. That reasoning doesn't change the fact that it lead to the actual shooting mechanics feeling amazingly sloppy. This is the biggest reason for a lot of the wonky shooter feelings from PS1.

    There is no doubt that PS1 had poor shooter mechanics, you could get used to it, you could work with it, but it felt so much worse compared to how fluid and snappy other shooters (even at the time) felt in comparison.
  19. The difference is in the continental capture mechanics themselves. In PS, capturing a continent means capturing a continent. It's yours until the enemy invades again. There are no permanent footholds on the continents. There is true, evolving, global battles over Auraxis, and capturing certain continents/bases influence the entirety of the global campaign. The best commanders plan with this meta-game in mind. PlanetSide 2 is one step below this. The only "meta" is how you approach the continent from the same direction over and over again in an attempt to shove both the empires back into their respective permanent warpgate footholds, and then you camp them for as long as you can.


    I fail to see where you are getting this arena concept from? Are you implying that the whole game is based on arena shooter mechanics, are are you referencing the Battle Dome that never actually got put into the game? Either way, you're completely wrong.



    I'm sorry, I had to laugh at your sentence, "there were more people fighting back and forth than ever in PlanetSide." PlanetSide's pop-lock mechanics didn't always work the way they did above, and before that rule, you would see huge 2v2 battles between empires, which, by the way, is another thing that made PlanetSide 1 special... 2v2 fights instead of a constant three-way. Its ironic that SOE took the thing that players complained about the most - deadlock three-way stalemates - and made it the standard in the sequel. It probably has something to do with the fact that they completely removed all of the other mechanics from PS1 that promoted fighting for your empire above yourself, logistics in the form of NTU, a command system that was flawed but better than what we have now, etc.

    You fail to acknowledge the weak points of PlanetSide 2's "size." You really think anyone besides NASA could render 2000 people on their screen in a small area? The hex system is in place to spread fights out, so what you essentially end up with is three PlanetSide 1 sized fights instead of a "666v666v666." In this instance, it doesn't really matter that PS2 continents can allow more people onto them, they're doing it wrong. Lattice may have gotten dull after 10 years, that doesn't mean it was a bad system. SOE could have changed the lattice links once every half a year to keep things fresh, instead they scrap it for something useless.

    Same goes for resources. At first, I thought resources sounded great on paper, then I found out the way SOE implemented them is the same way any other F2P grindfest would do it.

    And as for you asking for proof, I'd tell you to read the beta forum arguments but SOE wiped them. People instantly denounce PlanetSide 1 as "not skillful" and pipe up shooters like Battlefield as requiring more "skill." This is completely wrong. Both types of shooters require tactics and strategies, albeit different ones. There isn't some set-in-stone reason why faster TTK games are more skillful.


    Lol. Broken style of gameplay. Let me think here, PS2 has:
    • Vertical and horizontal player progression, with some upgrades adding direct power and nothing else.
    • A horrendous grind for non-paying players (because of a garbage F2P system, if SOE wanted F2P, they should have done what PS1 did with reserves).
    • Solo main battle tanks.
    • Horrendous air/AA balance that is hard to fix without unbalancing other facets of the game.
    • Super fast TTK leading to horrendous meat-grinders any time an infantry battle starts to exceed 50v50.
    • A resource/timer system on vehicles that discourages, no, prevents dedicated vehicle drivers from playing that role all day, just because SOE didn't implement a PS1-style cert system to prevent any and all players from having access to every vehicle in the game at all times. The solution to vehicle spam repeatedly has been for SOE to increase resource costs or increase timers, or both, which is the wrong solution. The system itself is rotten and SOE keeps applying band aids that absolutely destroy the core values of the first game (as in play how you want, when you want). PS1 suffered no such vehicle issues. Why? A smart certification system that meant all things were limited to who had them. BFRs were a brief hiccup but were cured later on with other patches.
    • Horrendous base design because the game mechanics themselves can't support true indoor/underground combat like the first.
    • A hex system that has potential but is implemented the wrong way, thus leading to dispersed fights or fights so large that its basically not fun, both for performance and TTK reasons.
    • Jump pads that negate base walls entirely, meaning defenders just defend the towers, not the walls, attackers get one tower then spread around the entire courtyard like a disease.
    • Lock on missiles that can't be broken by using terrain and superior flying, because the missile simply traces your path.
    • Fast TTK meaning that the differences between the "loads of weapons" are very minute, other than recoil patterns. Faction diversity has been hurt by the TTK.
    • No in-depth hacking like the first game.
    • No in-depth combat engineer roles like the first game.
    • No logistics such as NTU like the first game.
    • General lack of things for people to do other than shoot guns. You can argue that its an MMOFPS, and you're right, its only an MMOFPS, and offers only a scaled up BF experience. PlanetSide 1 was a combination of all types of games really, and had roles for even die-hard RTS/RPG players to enjoy.
    • About half the amount of vehicles as the first game because SOE thinks its better to pile more roles on fewer vehicles, which leads to stale looking battlefields. Seriously, go outside in PS2, you see mostly MBTs, and that's about it. A Sunderer here and there and the occasional Lightning and that sums up ground combat.
    • Capture mechanics that promote zerging instead of figuring out how you can make your squad more effective.
    • A pace of game and capture mechanics that severely favor large outfits over small ones in almost every instance. Gone are the days of 15 guys in PS1 holding off 60 off of pure skill alone. Everything has to be scaled up now.
    • An "S-AMS" that completely fails in comparison the first game, both in terms of logistical value, potential tactics, and battlefield usefulness.
    • Implants that are free-to-play gimmicks instead of the PS1 implants that actually gave you decent advantages.
    • Music that feels borrowed from any generic propaganda-filled war movie, and a game universe that is as immersive as a multiplayer BF match.
    So yes, in essence, a copy-paste PS1 with some balancing tweaks, a fresh engine (Forgelight), new graphics, SSHD and a better netcode would have blown PS2 out of the water any day. People would be running it better, and SOE would have had the option to increase continental population caps if the player-base demanded it, or make new continents with higher caps and base/continent design that supported larger amounts of people.

    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I wouldn't have even minded the move to an ADS game, but SOE literally tossed out all the good things for the generic IP we have now.
  20. Technology issues because of the size of the game and the technology available back then. A revamped PS1 could have had hitboxes, but I prefer a game with no headshots because its more fair and leads to less exploits/noob combos. People act like headshots are hard and skillful, they are not. All you have to do is train yourself to keep your reticule where heads usually are.

    For the bolt driver, yes, because it was a SNIPER RIFLE. SOE didn't want people taking a sniper rifle into a tower fight and dominating everyone, which was still very possible if you knew what you were doing. The rest of the game's COF blooms were manageable and people learned to hit most of their shots via a combination of crouching and burst-firing.


    Another technology issue. A revamped PS1 could have a Server Side Hit Detection system with a reworked netcode that mitigated warping.


    The majority of these issues wouldn't exist in PS1 today if SOE actually decided to do something with it. SOE could have fixed these problems five years ago in PS1 for that matter.

Share This Page