Damn, as an addendum to this my mind was just blown after I decided to look those guys up again to see what they were doing in PS2. Apparently their leader, who was also the leader of that WoW guild is now on Planetside 2's dev team.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Planetside 2 |OT| 12 Man Squads, 2000 Players, So Free You'll Want to Pay!
- Thread starter MrBig
- Start date
Damn, as an addendum to this my mind was just blown after I decided to look those guys up again to see what they were doing in PS2. Apparently their leader, who was also the leader of that WoW guild is now on Planetside 2's dev team.
Shaundakahl
Member
In a FPS like this, skill is a large and deciding factor in who wins in any given fight. I understand that, acknowledge it, and set the example. Those who try to say this isn't P2W, perhaps, haven't looked at it from a position removed. I don't want you to try and pick apart an argument to find what supports your position or belief - I want you to look at the merits of the issue and arrive at the reasonable conclusion. I want to clear up a few things.
There are items that only SC can purchase, yes? They are cosmetic only, so their impact on winning is negligible. The camo you can buy for infantry is a joke because the troops retain their faction colors; woodland cammies appear to be serious until you get to the punchline - brilliant blue and yellow helmet and trim throughout. The tank camo can be more effective, especially the winter skins equipped on Esamir. The vehicle camo suffers from the same faction-coloring as infantry camo and I see both of these as casualties of F2P. In order for the game to claim it isn't P2W, the camouflage (remember, can only be purchased through SC) can't be good enough to give you an advantage, so it has become less about a battlefield advantage and more about personalizing your avatar. Maybe that's important to immortals who have waged war for 300 years, or whatever. In PS2, one can be competitive without spending a single dime.
There has been an interesting culture developing in F2P games where gamers who don't buy any of the goodies available aren't doing the Right Thing. The game is advertised as being free-to-play, the developers are happy that so many can play with so little investment, the publishers like the insta-big player base, people appreciate free things, so why can't it stay there? Is it not enough to offer your support through playtime, the unavoidable shop talk amongst friends and forums, and appreciation for a job well done? I mean, the game is specifically titled free, so I stand beside the player that doesn't spend a dime when others call him or her cheap.
Finally, two highly skilled outfits are fighting over Vanu Archives on Indar - hundreds of players competing at an eSports level of skill. This is something the devs have expressed interest in and it sounds like they are pushing hard for an eSports angle in Planetside 2. The outfit that mandates a subscription to the game is going to have a significant advantage over one that doesn't. You cannot argue a 50% increase in resources will not affect the fight between the outfits. If the same faction mandates that every fighting member gets a boost... fuckin' fight over, folks.
They win.
Forgive me for the theatrics, I know there could be an underdog exception where the actual F2P outfits out there will triumph over the P2W outfits, but it is a long shot. Please, if you have evidence that proves otherwise, I'd love to see it. I want to end by saying that I love PS2 and I'm waiting for a good SC double or triple day so daddy can buy himself some sweet guns.
There are items that only SC can purchase, yes? They are cosmetic only, so their impact on winning is negligible. The camo you can buy for infantry is a joke because the troops retain their faction colors; woodland cammies appear to be serious until you get to the punchline - brilliant blue and yellow helmet and trim throughout. The tank camo can be more effective, especially the winter skins equipped on Esamir. The vehicle camo suffers from the same faction-coloring as infantry camo and I see both of these as casualties of F2P. In order for the game to claim it isn't P2W, the camouflage (remember, can only be purchased through SC) can't be good enough to give you an advantage, so it has become less about a battlefield advantage and more about personalizing your avatar. Maybe that's important to immortals who have waged war for 300 years, or whatever. In PS2, one can be competitive without spending a single dime.
There has been an interesting culture developing in F2P games where gamers who don't buy any of the goodies available aren't doing the Right Thing. The game is advertised as being free-to-play, the developers are happy that so many can play with so little investment, the publishers like the insta-big player base, people appreciate free things, so why can't it stay there? Is it not enough to offer your support through playtime, the unavoidable shop talk amongst friends and forums, and appreciation for a job well done? I mean, the game is specifically titled free, so I stand beside the player that doesn't spend a dime when others call him or her cheap.
Finally, two highly skilled outfits are fighting over Vanu Archives on Indar - hundreds of players competing at an eSports level of skill. This is something the devs have expressed interest in and it sounds like they are pushing hard for an eSports angle in Planetside 2. The outfit that mandates a subscription to the game is going to have a significant advantage over one that doesn't. You cannot argue a 50% increase in resources will not affect the fight between the outfits. If the same faction mandates that every fighting member gets a boost... fuckin' fight over, folks.
They win.
Forgive me for the theatrics, I know there could be an underdog exception where the actual F2P outfits out there will triumph over the P2W outfits, but it is a long shot. Please, if you have evidence that proves otherwise, I'd love to see it. I want to end by saying that I love PS2 and I'm waiting for a good SC double or triple day so daddy can buy himself some sweet guns.
I would think if they were serious about turning PS2 into an eSport they would have specific servers for it, where everyone is on an even playing field. But if they don't you are correct, the subscribing team would have a slight advantage.
Anyways, about these SC triple and double days you keep talking about: Are these both for EU and US players or do we Europeans get shafted as usual? If not, where is the information about them when they occur?
As long as they keep up the policy of allowing you to unlock any weapon with certs it'll be okay. If you look at it from the perspective that someone who has $500 to spend on imaginary video game weapons usually has less time per week to play than the average free player, then the system should balance itself out eventually. Yes, I know this is a generalization, but I'd say that the 'money = shortcut because I don't have free time to grind' is the only way to justify the F2P model from a competitive standpoint. Hell, most of the truly effective stuff can't be bought - you need to grind out thousands of certs to get those extremely effective vehicle speed/armor/maneuverability bonuses or the higher ranks of infantry passives. Even with boosts that takes a long time. It might even be a more even playing field this way - someone who played for 500 hours will have a much more powerful character overall than somebody who bought a bunch of guns, just keeping skill/experience out of the equation.
It still really sucks being a fledgling with nothing but default gear and some Liberator starts raining death on you with its $7 gun. You feel like an NPC opponent just there to make the paying customers feel better. But the alternative is a dead game because hardly anyone wanted to pay $60 + a subscription for an FPS even back at Planetside's launch when the market was more accepting of such a thing, and the F2P model actually fits the game perfectly.
I will say that the resource boosts are kinda iffy. But I mean, it's not like resources are starved and you could just use a strategy that didn't involve hurling nonstop grenades.
It still really sucks being a fledgling with nothing but default gear and some Liberator starts raining death on you with its $7 gun. You feel like an NPC opponent just there to make the paying customers feel better. But the alternative is a dead game because hardly anyone wanted to pay $60 + a subscription for an FPS even back at Planetside's launch when the market was more accepting of such a thing, and the F2P model actually fits the game perfectly.
I will say that the resource boosts are kinda iffy. But I mean, it's not like resources are starved and you could just use a strategy that didn't involve hurling nonstop grenades.
Doppelganger
Neo Member
I would imagine that any and all outfits wanting to compete at an eSports level would have subscriptions. That is, if that are at all serious about competing.
Free to play works for me. I don't have a lot of time to devote to games anymore. I still enjoy playing games, but I can't go spend $60 on a game, only to play it for a few hours. The barrier to entry on F2P is nil (assuming you have a capable PC). I get to decide if a game is worth my money after putting a little time into it. If it's not for you, that's cool, it was free. If you love it, then you can spend whatever you feel like spending.
That being said, I don't feel like purchasing station cash gives you much of a leg up on the competition. Upgrading your abilities give you more of an advantage than anything you can buy. Not to mention, anything you can buy can be purchased with (a lot of) certs as well. I know you can purchase cert boosts, but you still have to put in time to earn them, even if it is less time.
It's all about working together and playing as a team anyway, not 1 on 1 match ups. A player with a 2:1 or higher K
ratio does not have that great of an impact on the outcome of a battle. A highly organized fleet of tanks and aircraft on the other hand...Anyone have any 'go to' graphic config tricks to save on frames? I"m currently on a Q6600 @ 3Ghz, and a 5850 @ 850/1200. Running at 1920x1200 and looking to squeeze out more frames if possible. Is there any 1 or 2 settings that affect performance the most?
I want to upgrade, but its not a priority for me right now. Maybe next year.
I want to upgrade, but its not a priority for me right now. Maybe next year.
Doppelganger
Neo Member
Drop down to 1680x1050? Not ideal, but dropping resolution is a quick way to get better FPS. Other than that, i'd kill the shadows first and see where that gets you.
Well downscaling to that res makes everything look washed out as shit. No game on my monitor looks good at 1680x1050. I have the shadows at low already, just wasn't sure if there were other settings to be aware of.. since I know we have some beta players around here.
I do have 2 other monitors at home, both 1080p monitors. I could swap from 1920x1200 to those, but they are 22" instead of 24" and I'm not sure if I'll really see 'that' much improvement.
edit. I don't recall a "render quality' selection? Is that what its called or was that the Graphics Quality at the top of the selection? I know you can independently change that alongside other options.
Shaundakahl
Member
Render Quality is a slider on the left side of the graphics options. I suggest going down to 85 if it is currently maxed out. It controls AA and some other stuff.
Render quality allows you to lower (or increase) the res of the game independently of the UI, lower that if you're being limited by your GPU. Lower shadows, flora, terrain, and particles if you're being CPU limited. More here.
Ok, lets say the "P2W Outfit" has invested in resource boosts and the "Non-P2W Outfit" has spent all of their time investing in acquisition timers. The "P2W Outfit" will have an over abundance of resources but will still be held back by the vehicle spawn timers and reverse will happen for the "Non-P2W Outfit". There are still checks and balance systems in PS2. I'm not going to wholeheartedly say that it's not P2W AT ALL but it's as non-p2w as you can get without your business falling apart. It also still takes a lot of skill to be able to compete, 90% of the time so many just tend to say that it's not P2W as a generalization. Also, they aren't locking you out of anything but cosmetics, which you have to pay for.
Have they changed the number of people per server or the number of servers? It seems there are less queues now but also all the continent fighting is dull. Each faction picks a continent and rolls it, then they just cycle to the next continent. There's hardly any 3x/3x/3x shares of population now.
(On Mattheson)
(On Mattheson)
Reduce your resolution, turn OFF shadows and flora
Doppelganger
Neo Member
You're looking at server population, they are talking about continent domination.
Shaundakahl
Member
Mr. Nothin, that doesn't make too much sense. Think about it - an entire outfit without a single cert... in anything? The game does have checks and balances, but this is not example of the system in action.
How could a faction "pick a continent to dominate" if they aren't stacking the population count? Isn't what you are talking about just the natural flow of the game? Factions launch big offensives that eventually lose steam, then a counter offensive gets launched and takes back some of the territory lost.
When alot of people log on they look at the map, if the map is 80%+ for another faction, its a good sign that people have given up on other factions and gone to other maps. (Which is confirmed when you see another map held mostly by another faction and so on.)
3 maps and 3 factions is stupid. And adding more maps will just dilute the population.
2 maps on rotation once a week would be ideal.
The camo is pointless in this game unless you like being unique. Like it's been said above, that doesn't help much when your faction colors still have to be present so you can be identified as friend or foe, but I think it's definitely meant for avatar customization more than any sort of advantage.
I just laugh at the camo because they have some real modern camo in there as if we'd be having those throwbacks this far into the future. If they're doing that, I want my character to dress as a Roman on TR since it'd have plenty of red. I know the camo is just part of the "it's a game meant for fun" thing, but it's still funny to browse the shop and see camo you would see today when this is so far into the future.
I think the only big difference as far as the P2W goes is that the paying players will just have an advantage in the beginning of the game which is fine really when it's pretty balanced anyway, but they'll have an advantage once new content comes out and they get to use the new toys right away whereas the free players will have to start saving up certs again unless they already had a lot saved up. I have no problem with that but you know you'll hear a few people bitching about being killed by the new weapon the same day it came out when they only have 20 certs saved up for it...lol
To me, this game does a good job for a F2P game when we're used to being burned by them. They have it balanced just right to where they can make money and continue with the game but also keep the free players happy.
I just wish I knew how the game was doing since I hope it lasts for a very long time.
I just laugh at the camo because they have some real modern camo in there as if we'd be having those throwbacks this far into the future. If they're doing that, I want my character to dress as a Roman on TR since it'd have plenty of red. I know the camo is just part of the "it's a game meant for fun" thing, but it's still funny to browse the shop and see camo you would see today when this is so far into the future.
I think the only big difference as far as the P2W goes is that the paying players will just have an advantage in the beginning of the game which is fine really when it's pretty balanced anyway, but they'll have an advantage once new content comes out and they get to use the new toys right away whereas the free players will have to start saving up certs again unless they already had a lot saved up. I have no problem with that but you know you'll hear a few people bitching about being killed by the new weapon the same day it came out when they only have 20 certs saved up for it...lol
To me, this game does a good job for a F2P game when we're used to being burned by them. They have it balanced just right to where they can make money and continue with the game but also keep the free players happy.
I just wish I knew how the game was doing since I hope it lasts for a very long time.
Wouldn't that then be reflected in the faction population percentage on that map? Even when a faction has 55%+ of the map, the population ratio usually seems pretty balanced. Or does that graph reflect the percentages on the server as a whole?
I really think they need to put some sort of population cap on each continent where you can still have more people on one continent but not like 70% of the faction there...lol. All I see are continent zerg rushes where there's a lot of one faction and none of the other because they're busy doing the same thing on another continent.
To keep the game interesting and actually a battle, maybe limit it slightly. Basically, I was with about 50 vehicles on Amerish capping base after base with no opposition as they did the same on Indar. It's basically avoiding the fight and just getting easy points.
I want to keep it dynamic as possible, but like a fail safe number wouldn't be too bad so it's not so lopsided on each continent.
To keep the game interesting and actually a battle, maybe limit it slightly. Basically, I was with about 50 vehicles on Amerish capping base after base with no opposition as they did the same on Indar. It's basically avoiding the fight and just getting easy points.
I want to keep it dynamic as possible, but like a fail safe number wouldn't be too bad so it's not so lopsided on each continent.
Well of course you need to select the continent and it's not uneven on all continents at all times.
But as example, thats how it looked like a few minutes ago on Miller on Esamir. Pretty sure there a far more extreme examples out there.
I think he means on the individual planets, not the world pop, which is usually pretty balanced.
For example, right now on Amerish, the ratio of VS:TR:NC is 1:5:3
I can use the same exact logic against your statement....my point was to point out that when it comes down to outfit vs outfit fights, it's really about organization and skill. Doesnt matter how many tanks you can pull if our outfit has 15 very skilled mosquito pilots. There are too many other factors to consider before you can say "this outfit has 50% boosts so they win against an outfit w/o boosts".
They should have just went with making 1 permanent warpgate on each continent and make them home continents (Amerish = VS, Indar = TR, Esamir = NC). I mean, that's the way it's happening right now anyways..you just have massive amounts of 1 team on each contient. But, the problem they face now is that since there's no linear continent progression, then ppl just warp back and forth to the continents that have the most population for their faction. If we were able to KICK factions off of a continent and deny them access to it then ppl would be forced to regroup and try to advance towards the warpgate that gives them access to that continent they got kicked off of. It would make for bigger and more epic battles rather than 1 HUGE ass zerg per continent.
No need to worry, Higby hinted that they are doing VERY well and said it's exceeded their expectations. When asked what the attachment rate was for player who buy stuff...Higby said "I can say this....and gave a HUGE grin to the camera".
That's a pretty good idea really. It would make for a lot more large dynamic battles as well since people would have to regroup to start their attack instead of just a few people sneaking into a base and capturing it.
I just hope they do something with it. I logged out after just a few minutes because it got old with all of TR on Amerish capturing as the other continents had the same thing for the other factions. You basically are forced to join the big group because you're so outnumbered on the other continent that you just end up constantly respawning after being camped 6000 times.
Well they were going to go with that idea but they pulled out at the last minute because they didnt want what's happening now to happen. Problem is, is that it's happening but it's worse this way.
It's possible but I dont see it ever being a problem. I dont see it happening because, lets take indar for example....TR does a massive push towards the VS on the west but all of those resources arent being used against the NC on the East. Everytime there's a huge zerg on the West then the East gets taken. This happens for pretty much all factions (not equally though, ppl like to double team TR lol). Each continent has 2 free warpgates to access. All 3 continents will be contested both ways at pretty much all times unless they push out far enough into another continent. As soon as your team pushes 1 warpgate, you're giving up on the other one. It'll be the same back and forth that we have on each individual continent but on a worldwide basis. Having that on a macro scale would be infinitely better than having it on the micro scale that we have now.
Also...they WANT more 2 way faction fights vs the amount of 3 ways we have right now. They want 3 ways to be unique feeling instead of a huge stalemate. Another reason they want this is because it really showcases the differences between the different factions and how you go about approaching them. Example: As TR, we're about to go fight the VS...they have better aircraft with us so we need a lot of skyguards to help mosquitos. Another example: As TR, we're going to fight NC and they have better tanks than us so bring a bunch of aircraft.....also our aircraft are more equal to theirs so we dont need as many skyguards, put those resources towards mosquitos.
You might want to bring a sundy with AMS certed if you're having problems with far off spawns. Or run with a squad/outfit that is well organized and brings their own mode of transport (galaxy) and/or spawning (beacon/sundy).
I think what you're seeing is more indicative of where you're looking. Neogaf in particular has a lot of folks in the industry and extremely hardcore fans so their statements of "supporting developers" and whatnot should be taken more as the exception than the rule. Free to play developers and, to a large extent, players realize the value the non-paying players bring to the experience as a whole so I don't think you need to worry too much. Planetside 2 is the first f2p game that I've spent any real sum of money in and personally I want the pool of non-paying players to be as large as possible. Not because of any advantage you think I might have but because I think the experience is better when it's shared with a larger group.
First, if they do eventually have some sort of eSports scene in Planetside 2 it will almost certainly be on servers/maps dedicated to that purpose.
The hell I can't. Your silly appeal to possiblity discounts the fact that players will almost certainly have a stockpile of deployables and, if we're to assume that the F2P group is an organized outfit the players will almost certainly have specialized into a few roles rather than trying to be masters of everything. They will have planned out who needs to pull a particular vehicle if the primary goes down or the gunner & driver of a tank will switch off pulling tanks. If you're making a serious attempt at an eSports match you don't just walk in completely unprepared for a discrepancy in resources. That's also assuming that any sort of eSports match won't be played without resource boosts as it almost certainly would be played without them.
Even if this weren't in an eSports setting but in a regular server situation you're also pretending like the "regular" outfit won't have any paying members which is extremely unlikely.
Good luck getting thousands of players from a single faction to all subscribe/buy boosts.
Despite the fact that you're argument is an extremely improbable setup I'll point you over to EVE Online. If you''re familiar with EVE Online you know that a new player is at a disadvantage because long term players have a bunch of "cert" training already done. What happens is that after training for a small amount of time (say a month or two) the new player is able to specialize well enough that they can hold their own for a little bit and in a group setting they're able to be fairly effective. The longer that new player is able to train the smaller the gap between himself and the established player gets because of how the training works. Each progressive rank in a cert takes considerably longer to train. Much like Planetside where the latter ranks cost considerably more to cert into. What happens is that the new player is able to relatively quickly get to rank 3 or 4 (out of 5 total ranks) while that established player is spending a large amount of time training for rank 5. After a while the new player is only marginally less effective (or just as effective) at their chosen specializations than the established player is.
Arguably the system in Planetside 2 is even easier to become just as effective as a paying player because the actual improvements (rather than sidegrades) that are available with Station Cash are fairly limited. Even with a boost the effectiveness of a slightly faster cert gain is mitigated by the fact that they're slightly quicker into the expensive ranks of abilities which slow their progress and allow the F2P player to close the gap by grinding through the low and middle ranks.
To be fair, his setup was about as realistic as yours.
That's not how the Planetside 2 servers will work when more continents are added. Right now each continent caps at 2000 players total. The effective cap for say, Connery, is 6000 players. When more continents are added the effective cap will increase as well. You won't be spreading the same number of players across more maps. It should work out to where the addition of new servers will be pretty slow as they'll probably try to insure that each existing server sees additional userbase growth with the new continents before they open up a new server.
saveweyard
Banned
Downloading this now. QL on GiantBomb looked somewhat interesting; enough so to give this a shot.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
yeah!
while running along in a zerg versus zerg bloodbath. 25 fps max. :')
Those rocket pods sure are annoying though.
Twice while defending some biolab against huge piles of reds and blues (they were working together somewhat...kept yelling at each other to take stuff) I got this weird flickering screen crap that only goes away when I restart the client. Hasn't happened until today, but I haven't been in the middle of a firefight this massive yet either.
Looks like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd4o44OPPY0
In other news, I got a huge killstreak as an engineer because I accidentally stepped on some jump pad that dropped me behind a whole pile of red guys who were not paying attention.
Looks like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd4o44OPPY0
In other news, I got a huge killstreak as an engineer because I accidentally stepped on some jump pad that dropped me behind a whole pile of red guys who were not paying attention.
Leave Space America alone.
razgriz417
Member
wait until they turn to fly away then fire, I have like a 70% chance of hitting ESF when I wait to shoot
Garrus Vakarian
Member
It's surprising how much you can get done by finding an unguarded route into a base, even when I had to take down a guy or two I thought I was done for, but nobody really took notice.
I'm definitely having the same problem as in Battlefield where I try to heal/repair and the person sprints/drives away, even when I offer them repairs or healing. The difference in this game being if a tank you are chasing to repair suddenly backs up, you are a pancake lol.
On another note this game has amazing surround positioning, one of the few games where I notice sounds being 'above and behind' or flying 'above and through' the soundscape as in movies. Fantastic.
I'm definitely having the same problem as in Battlefield where I try to heal/repair and the person sprints/drives away, even when I offer them repairs or healing. The difference in this game being if a tank you are chasing to repair suddenly backs up, you are a pancake lol.
On another note this game has amazing surround positioning, one of the few games where I notice sounds being 'above and behind' or flying 'above and through' the soundscape as in movies. Fantastic.