I've been playing this game pretty solid since release and it's crazy fun. Of course, I play Vanu which is just overpowered as all hell so that might have something to do with it.
__________________
"...I had to be convinced that this EA... was an EA that we would be happy as a partner with going forward." - Mark Jacobs on EA purchasing Mythic, 7/28/06
This is a great game. These are awful ads, though. I mean - the flippin load screen for each faction has more unique distinction and personality than these three identical commercials. Maybe someone thought that "let's make it seem like call of duty" would drag in players... but I dunno... the game deserves better recognition.
Gave it a shot, but after 35 hours of playtime I see no reason to continue. It just seems like a less fun, more problematic Battlefield 3 with a coat of sci-fi paint.
Gaming Laptop: ATI 5750 mobile, i7 8 gigs ram, 10 fps at the biolab battles.
Works great for Nvidia users though.
I play vanu.
Noone plays the Smurfs (NC)
Most players play TR.
Im running a Phenom IIx4 and a 5770 with 4 gigs of ram and I tend to get about 20-40fps throughout the game. Of course, I also have everything but view distance turned off, just like I do with every shooter.
On Jaeger there are a lot of NC and not much TR.
__________________
"...I had to be convinced that this EA... was an EA that we would be happy as a partner with going forward." - Mark Jacobs on EA purchasing Mythic, 7/28/06
Gave it a shot, but after 35 hours of playtime I see no reason to continue. It just seems like a less fun, more problematic Battlefield 3 with a coat of sci-fi paint.
The game really has the same gameplay "feel" as Battlefield 3. But what has always sort of driven me crazy in BF3 feels amazingly responsive in the giant Planetside fights. Planetside always has friendly fire on, too - combat is dangerous and quick and there is always something interesting happening.
Battlefield is just too predictable. Planetside has reinforcements and ambushes and surprises and boredom and terror and damn... it's just exciting not knowing exactly what's going to happen, or how any given fight is going to play out.
The game really has the same gameplay "feel" as Battlefield 3. But what has always sort of driven me crazy in BF3 feels amazingly responsive in the giant Planetside fights. Planetside always has friendly fire on, too - combat is dangerous and quick and there is always something interesting happening.
Battlefield is just too predictable. Planetside has reinforcements and ambushes and surprises and boredom and terror and damn... it's just exciting not knowing exactly what's going to happen, or how any given fight is going to play out.
Where are you finding these unpredictable moments? All I see are boring snow hills and random enemies.
Sure, you know who's going to win the round within five minutes in BF3, but Planetside is mostly pretty predictable itself. Most players migrate to the continent where their faction has the biggest presence, then roll through largely undefended territories like dominoes. The huge persistent world sounds good on paper, but in reality it gives rise to two problems:
1) You almost never have a fair battle with a roughly equal number of players on each side. The side with the most players will win, and since most players prefer to attack over defend, attackers almost always win (unless it's The Crown).
2) This may just be me, but I never get a feeling of closure. Okay, so we just took over the whole continent, and there's so few enemies that they're not even trying to take it back. What next, go to another continent and repeat, while we lose all the territory we just took here? It just becomes a big boring cycle that never ends.
Sure, you know who's going to win the round within five minutes in BF3, but Planetside is mostly pretty predictable itself. Most players migrate to the continent where their faction has the biggest presence, then roll through largely undefended territories like dominoes. The huge persistent world sounds good on paper, but in reality it gives rise to two problems:
1) You almost never have a fair battle with a roughly equal number of players on each side. The side with the most players will win, and since most players prefer to attack over defend, attackers almost always win (unless it's The Crown).
2) This may just be me, but I never get a feeling of closure. Okay, so we just took over the whole continent, and there's so few enemies that they're not even trying to take it back. What next, go to another continent and repeat, while we lose all the territory we just took here? It just becomes a big boring cycle that never ends.
It's a gigantic Deathmatch... Gets old pretty fast. You can easily come up wit ha few ideas to make taking land actually mean a lot more than it does.
__________________ "This game raped my wife, slaughtered my son and left me for dead."
I couldn't get into it. Took me about an hour & all I can say is that I felt like a tiny part of the zerg. Just wasn't enough personal action to keep me interested. Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who played a TON of competitive Quake3 & UT99/2k4... obviously I prefer smaller scale FPS conflict.
__________________ I was nerdy before it was cool to be nerdy.
For every continent you control, you get +x foot speed bonus in zones you don't control (pure oxygen stockpile), and your opponents get +y foot speed bonus in zones you do control (rejuvenated). The extra speed will allow small groups to infiltrate and be much more effective scouts when invading. By not giving any bonus to a defensive posture, the continents should allow users to change power with more ease and avoid steamrolling.
Recap: Add terraforming plants, 1 for each continent. For each continent you control, you get a bonus to your side's run speed on foot. Multiple continents stack. To counter this, lands held by players are easier to invade with smaller squads of dedicated players. This allows the exchange of power more often and a continuous flow of game play.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by gzsfrk
Dude, you would have been, like, the coolest older brother ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubbishfoo
EA executives should drive Star Destroyers. Its somehow fitting.
That... doesn't actually fix the problem at all. In fact, it makes it worse. Territories don't need to be any easier to invade, and giving attackers the ability to dodge bullets better than defenders would just be ridiculous.
What the game needs (well, aside from bug fixes, lag reduction, hardware optimization, and being less pay-to-win) is incentive to balance out faction number discrepancies on a continent basis rather than just a server basis, and more incentive to actually defend territories rather than just trading territories you own for territories you don't.
That... doesn't actually fix the problem at all. In fact, it makes it worse. Territories don't need to be any easier to invade, and giving attackers the ability to dodge bullets better than defenders would just be ridiculous.
What the game needs (well, aside from bug fixes, lag reduction, hardware optimization, and being less pay-to-win) is incentive to balance out faction number discrepancies on a continent basis rather than just a server basis, and more incentive to actually defend territories rather than just trading territories you own for territories you don't.
I'm sorry you don't realize the beauty in sustained gameplay.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by gzsfrk
Dude, you would have been, like, the coolest older brother ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubbishfoo
EA executives should drive Star Destroyers. Its somehow fitting.
Where are you finding these unpredictable moments? All I see are boring snow hills and random enemies.
That's sort of like saying battlefield is just a bunch of flags and trees. Between all the places to fight over, the variety of the landscape (each base is unique in some way,) the variety of classes, vehicles and attack routes, there is so much here.
Now, granted - you have to put more into the game than most any other shooter. You've got to be willing to try and get that tank around the flank, or try to organize a squad to separate from the herd. You've got to keep checking the map to see what areas are being contested at any given instant so you can decide where to go and when.
The game also requires two things that no other FPS does: patience, and knowing when to retreat. Sure you have the option to fling yourself into the nearest giant mess over and over - but you miss all the best stuff.
