• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Planetside 2..Free to play..and looking awesome so far!

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Arsinek said:
I dont know what they were doing with that one trailer, they shouldnt have even put it out.
Click to expand...

What trailer was that? Was it the one with the TR fighting on a tower surrounded by VS/NC? If that was the one, that one came out about a year ago. So the newer E3 trailers would obviously be better.
 
Arsinek said:
So you really think the controls in BF3 and COD are completely different? If so you cant be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

you are going to have to be more specific since you are making shit for sense and seem to be changing your point?


I said they are not the same. the control layouts are obviously teh same, M+KB, but if you think that they act the same, you are sorely mistaken, alphas post about them being different backs what I am saying. you can go read the BF3 or MW3 thead and see tons of complaints on both sides about how the diehards of one of the other dislike how the other franchise does it

I would equate movement in COD to the old school fps's, doom, quake, etc. where you are essentially floating as you move around like a ghost or something and you can snap turn jump the millisecond you press jump and bunny hop easily etc

although its gotten better since MW2

battlefield has animations and times preventing real bunnyhopping dolphin diving ETC, your view moves side to side some when crouching or proning, standing, vaulting, affecting your aim
 
They have given out hundreds if not thousands of beta keys this week. Gets me excited knowing beta is close at hand 😀

I wonder how many they are expecting to be in beta. Someone should ask matthew higby that on twitter.
 
Was funny on Twitter last night Higby was tweeting out what was happening to Azure Twilight during their operations. He was getting responses like, "Funny how that rock just appeared right in front of me" and "What just happened?" tweets.

I think it's great when a dev like Higby goes over to the Planetside admins and says, "Hey, let's drop a couple of Galaxies right on their vehicle pad and see what happens." Almost made me go in-game to see what was going on.

<3 my Veterans status in Planetside. Much <3.
 
Zargon said:
you are going to have to be more specific since you are making shit for sense and seem to be changing your point?


I said they are not the same. the control layouts are obviously teh same, M+KB, but if you think that they act the same, you are sorely mistaken, alphas post about them being different backs what I am saying. you can go read the BF3 or MW3 thead and see tons of complaints on both sides about how the diehards of one of the other dislike how the other franchise does it

I would equate movement in COD to the old school fps's, doom, quake, etc. where you are essentially floating as you move around like a ghost or something and you can snap turn jump the millisecond you press jump and bunny hop easily etc

although its gotten better since MW2

battlefield has animations and times preventing real bunnyhopping dolphin diving ETC, your view moves side to side some when crouching or proning, standing, vaulting, affecting your aim
Click to expand...

I own MW2 and BF3, they feel almost identical.

Id say the only major difference between the 2 is better graphics in BF3 and vehicles.
 
Last edited:
Arsinek said:
I own MW2 and BF3, they feel almost identical.

Id say the only major difference between the 2 is better graphics in BF3 and vehicles.
Click to expand...

well..I don't know what to tell you. I see a distinct difference. and so do many others

I'm not going to argue with you about in the PS2 thread though 😛


I simply cannot get a damn beta key via twitter 🙁
 
Zargon said:
well..I don't know what to tell you. I see a distinct difference. and so do many others

I'm not going to argue with you about in the PS2 thread though 😛


I simply cannot get a damn beta key via twitter 🙁
Click to expand...


Id be willing to bet the average person doesnt see a difference in the 2.
 
Arsinek said:
Exactly, they are only slightly different, to the point where I dont even notice. I think you have to be a fanboy to say there is any meaningful difference.
Click to expand...

I do notice the (slight) differences, but it's not really meaningful. I don't even remember where this all started from. Of all the things we could be talking about, it's a comparison between MW and BF. :|

Planetside 2 is neither, and is going to kick both games' asses. :colbert:

I'll try and change the subject. In a couple of the E3 vids we got a pretty good look at night time, and I must say it was pretty dark! I've heard we'll be able to choose when to turn vehicle lights on and off. I think it would be neat (not my idea, saw it posted in the PSU forums) if there were spotlights on the walls like turrents.
 
Last edited:
Red Storm said:
I do notice the (slight) differences, but it's not really meaningful. I don't even remember where this all started from. Of all the things we could be talking about, it's a comparison between MW and BF. :|

Planetside 2 is neither, and is going to kick both games' asses. :colbert:

I'll try and change the subject. In a couple of the E3 vids we got a pretty good look at night time, and I must say it was pretty dark! I've heard we'll be able to choose when to turn vehicle lights on and off. I think it would be neat (not my idea, saw it posted in the PSU forums) if there were spotlights on the walls like turrents.
Click to expand...


"Really I want an MMO with COD game play when it comes down to the actual combat. But MMO so it has more depth then just endless games of TDM."

Mention COD and the uber nerds go berserk.

So anyway, from the last game play I saw PS2 looked pretty good, in regards to the way the character moved/action looked.

Now my main concerns on the game are, what exactly are you fighting for? It is a territory capture game correct? Whats the benefit of capturing territory? What does it do?

I get the sense there is no crafting in the game so theres no need to capture areas to harvest resources to build things. I did see some talk of "resources" somewhere but it seemed like it was just forms of money?
 
Resources let you purchase things things in game. Like vehicular, etc. Also allow you to keep major outposts.

Last i heard the smaller outposts if completely lost you will eventually lose the main bases because not producing resources.

Not sure if all that changed though.
 
I wish it had crafting. Really Id like it to copy EVE's model. You fight for territory so you can harvest that territories resources that you then use to manufacture weapons, items, vehicles, etc.
 
Arsinek said:
Id be willing to bet the average person doesnt see a difference in the 2.
Click to expand...

Why even type these words?

We get that you have an opinion. How do you imagine you can speak for "the average person"?

Sigh.

We're talking about a completely subjective experience.
 
Arsinek said:
I wish it had crafting. Really Id like it to copy EVE's model. You fight for territory so you can harvest that territories resources that you then use to manufacture weapons, items, vehicles, etc.
Click to expand...

Essentially you do.

At least in planetside 1 you did. Sort of. Each base had a "specialty", some provided the construction of heavy vehicles (tanks, etc), some provided the construction of air vehicles, etc. If you didn't control those bases, or have them linked to your current base through the lattice, you couldn't directly build the specialty things.

That didn't mean you couldn't bring in those particular craft from your main base, but doing so meant you had to sink a lot of time going back to your home base, getting said vehicles, then bringing them all the way back to the fight (at which point may or may not be too late).

Granted, the system is as in-depth or provides for a lot of "alternate" play styles that EVE supports, but it's vital to the play of the game none the less.
 
jackstar7 said:
Why even type these words?

We get that you have an opinion. How do you imagine you can speak for "the average person"?

Sigh.

We're talking about a completely subjective experience.
Click to expand...

I typed them because this is a forum for having discussions. I feel I can speak for the average person because I spend time around average people that dont hold emotional attachments to video game franchises. And yes, were talking about a subjective subject, so what?
 
SunnyD said:
Essentially you do.

At least in planetside 1 you did. Sort of. Each base had a "specialty", some provided the construction of heavy vehicles (tanks, etc), some provided the construction of air vehicles, etc. If you didn't control those bases, or have them linked to your current base through the lattice, you couldn't directly build the specialty things.

That didn't mean you couldn't bring in those particular craft from your main base, but doing so meant you had to sink a lot of time going back to your home base, getting said vehicles, then bringing them all the way back to the fight (at which point may or may not be too late).

Granted, the system is as in-depth or provides for a lot of "alternate" play styles that EVE supports, but it's vital to the play of the game none the less.
Click to expand...

Ok. I guess Im just getting at I hope theres reasons to capture the bases/zones/whatever that actually mean something. If it doesnt provide a good reward or ties into the core of the game theres no incentive to do it then you just end up with another game that turns into a big TDM. I would probably be fine with never playing another game of TDM the rest of my life.

For instance the world PVP they added to WoW never really seemed to be worth anything. In Burning Crusade the most it did was give you a buff, lol. I quit after Burning Crusade so I dont know how important Lake Wintergrasp was to the overall game but my guess would be not important at all, more of just a sideshow.
 
Arsinek said:
I typed them because this is a forum for having discussions. I feel I can speak for the average person because I spend time around average people that dont hold emotional attachments to video game franchises. And yes, were talking about a subjective subject, so what?
Click to expand...

The whole point is that each person's experience is going to be different. Unless you're actively surveying and gathering data... you're just taking your opinion and attributing it to the faceless "average" people in order to create an artiface of consensus.

I don't care about video game franchises... why even inject that?
 
Last edited:
jackstar7 said:
The whole point is that each person's experience is going to be different. Unless you're actively surveying and gathering data... you're just taking your opinion and attributing it to the faceless "average" people in order to create an artiface of consensus.

I don't care about video game franchises... why even inject that?
Click to expand...


True and since its subjective Im just as right saying COD and BF3 are similar as someone who says theyre not. Of course I still feel Im right that theyre more similar than they are different and someone who says otherwise is being extremely nitpicky probably due to some sort of fanboy bias.

I interjected that because thats how fanboys operate, they get some sort of weird emotional attachment to video game franchises, in this case Battlefield, and then go around swearing how the game is superior to other games whether it is or not.
 
Arsinek said:
True and since its subjective Im just as right saying COD and BF3 are similar as someone who says theyre not. Of course I still feel Im right that theyre more similar than they are different and someone who says otherwise is being extremely nitpicky probably due to some sort of fanboy bias.

I interjected that because thats how fanboys operate, they get some sort of weird emotional attachment to video game franchises, in this case Battlefield, and then go around swearing how the game is superior to other games whether it is or not.
Click to expand...

Im a bf fanboy that owns every call of duty thats been released?

I love GOOD VIDEO GAMES, and I have a preference as to how I think in game character movement should 'feel'. and i am a fanboy because I choose one over the other?

I could compare hundreds of games, but its easiest to choose the popular curent hot ticket items.

I would compare PS2 more to Section 8 than either bf or cod but most people have no idea wtf it is so its like talking to a brick wall, which is also somewhat similar to talking to you since you feel your opinion is superior and you speak for the 'common man/average person' who we dont care about. we are video game enthusiasts


they are more similar than they are different, but that doesnt make them the same.

look at that ferrari and that pinto, they are more similar than different, so they are essentially the same, because they are both cars 😵




land assault video was nice was too short 😛


imaheadcase said:
If you can paint anything in game with real money. Dollars to donuts you are going to have a pink outfit for sure.
Click to expand...


you see that ALOT in ME3 multiplayer
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top