|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
   |
Posted - 2013.08.03 08:47:00 -
[1] - Quote
PS2 is a terrible game and it's even more boring than Dust.
I don't know why anyone would want anything to do with it. |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 16:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:PS2 is a terrible game and it's even more boring than Dust.
I don't know why anyone would want anything to do with it. Because it is not a terrible game? I'm not sure how you can say that objectively with any hint of sincerity. Maybe it's not a game you like but it certainly captures many of the immersive dynamics DUST 514 originally intended to fulfill. Pray tell, what could PS2 learn from DUST 514?
Very little, because Dust sucks as well. PS2 is not exactly an upgrade either, it's a sidegrade and it's a bad one.
You play Dust, you get bad mechanics with the promise of even numbers and theoretically an even fight.
You play PS2, you will always have a lopsided fight by the numbers where tactics do nothing exept make the fight longer or shorter, never changing the outcome of anything. And if you do win, who cares. Whatever you took will be gone by the time you wake up.
In PS2 you will never, under any circumstances, get a "good fight". It is impossible. Not because of the aiming mechanics or similar problems like Dust has, but because the game simply works in a way where it cannot and will not happen ever. The numbers are always lopsided. It's the type of game where competitive gamers go to die because everything was already decided before the fight even began. |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 16:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
Well with Dust, 16 versus 16 can actually result in a good fight if both teams rise to the occasion.
In PS2, one side will always outnumber the other, and if both sides are evenly matched in skill it will simply come down to the numbers making it a pre-determined outcome from the start.
So I'm not full of it. PS2 is flawed from the get-go.
The only way a person can find a "good fight" in PS2 is if he is not actually fighting for anything at all and is in the game as a pure soloist, looking to get himself in over his head and challenge his limits that way. That is the only way the game has any merit, and at that point its just a giant team deathmatch.
If you play the game how it was intended to be played, it is completely pointless as a competitive gamer. |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 16:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Well with Dust, 16 versus 16 can actually result in a good fight if both teams rise to the occasion.
In PS2, one side will always outnumber the other, and if both sides are evenly matched in skill it will simply come down to the numbers making it a pre-determined outcome from the start.
So I'm not full of it. PS2 is flawed from the get-go.
The only way a person can find a "good fight" in PS2 is if he is not actually fighting for anything at all and is in the game as a pure soloist, looking to get himself in over his head and challenge his limits that way. That is the only way the game has any merit, and at that point its just a giant team deathmatch.
If you play the game how it was intended to be played, it is completely pointless as a competitive gamer. Have you seen the coming battle islands?
Can't say that I have. I gave up on the game a while ago.
Let me ask you something though. In your time with PS2 what can you honestly claim you, as a player, have accomplished?
In Dust you could say "We took and held this region of space" or "we won this tournament". What can you say about PS2 that has any merit whatsoever, though?
"We took an outpost that changes hands five times a day! Yea!".
Not exactly inspiring. |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 16:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
xjumpman23 wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Well with Dust, 16 versus 16 can actually result in a good fight if both teams rise to the occasion.
In PS2, one side will always outnumber the other, and if both sides are evenly matched in skill it will simply come down to the numbers making it a pre-determined outcome from the start.
So I'm not full of it. PS2 is flawed from the get-go.
The only way a person can find a "good fight" in PS2 is if he is not actually fighting for anything at all and is in the game as a pure soloist, looking to get himself in over his head and challenge his limits that way. That is the only way the game has any merit, and at that point its just a giant team deathmatch.
If you play the game how it was intended to be played, it is completely pointless as a competitive gamer. PS2 is currently more competitive than DUST514 and is doing more to cater to competitive players than DUST514. #FactsOnly
Not really.
See what I did there? |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 17:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
MlDDLE MANGEMENT wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:xjumpman23 wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Well with Dust, 16 versus 16 can actually result in a good fight if both teams rise to the occasion.
In PS2, one side will always outnumber the other, and if both sides are evenly matched in skill it will simply come down to the numbers making it a pre-determined outcome from the start.
So I'm not full of it. PS2 is flawed from the get-go.
The only way a person can find a "good fight" in PS2 is if he is not actually fighting for anything at all and is in the game as a pure soloist, looking to get himself in over his head and challenge his limits that way. That is the only way the game has any merit, and at that point its just a giant team deathmatch.
If you play the game how it was intended to be played, it is completely pointless as a competitive gamer. PS2 is currently more competitive than DUST514 and is doing more to cater to competitive players than DUST514. #FactsOnly Not really. See what I did there? PS2 has MLG Dust has Urgent Fury Not even a contest.
MLG is a rotating doorway for first person shooters and fighting games.
It's also a fraudulent business with a lot of crooks at the helm.
Don't taint a good debate by mentioning MLG, thanks. |
Himiko Kuronaga
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
1090
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 18:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Well with Dust, 16 versus 16 can actually result in a good fight if both teams rise to the occasion.
In PS2, one side will always outnumber the other, and if both sides are evenly matched in skill it will simply come down to the numbers making it a pre-determined outcome from the start.
So I'm not full of it. PS2 is flawed from the get-go.
The only way a person can find a "good fight" in PS2 is if he is not actually fighting for anything at all and is in the game as a pure soloist, looking to get himself in over his head and challenge his limits that way. That is the only way the game has any merit, and at that point its just a giant team deathmatch.
If you play the game how it was intended to be played, it is completely pointless as a competitive gamer. Have you seen the coming battle islands? Can't say that I have. I gave up on the game a while ago. Let me ask you something though. In your time with PS2 what can you honestly claim you, as a player, have accomplished? In Dust you could say "We took and held this region of space" or "we won this tournament". What can you say about PS2 that has any merit whatsoever, though? "We took an outpost that changes hands five times a day! Yea!". Not exactly inspiring. Yes the strategic element of Planetside 2 is still in development. And they are very open about what they are doing, how they are doing it, and how long it is taking. We get WIP information, they let the average consumer give input on their roadmap, and they very quickly respond to player crisis. But it really isn't any different to say you "captured X district on Y planet" at all. It is just more tedious so that makes it more meaningful? Battle lines ebb and flow in Planetside 2 over the course of hours. And fairly soon there will be outfit recognition for capturing territory. So actually very soon you will be able to capture a base and anyone who visits it will know it. And they will, because it's not a lobby that is only active when the shift is up.
Look, if you like PS2 "open world" gameplay here is what I recommend.
Don't ask to just remake the game from scratch, because thats a bad idea. There are those of us who actually like the game types we have now, we just want them iterated upon and patched up.
Instead, ask for a persistent battle zone on each planet that links the districts together. These areas could be joined at any time, and would have their own smaller outposts. Prior to a PC battle there could be optional objectives that an alliance could attempt to take and hold, somewhat similar to PS2 style conquest of flipping territory back and fourth.
If you can hold the objectives prior to the PC battle itself, maybe you get some kind of advantage going into it. Control of half the points, sentries, additional clones, whatever. That way it gives your entire alliance the ability to participate in support of the fight itself, and it doesn't screw up the core game thats been established. |
|
|
| |
|