Planetside 2 announcement tonight

Looks like no change in pricing. $20/month for SOE all-access pass a month at a time, $14.99 a month when pay for a whole year at once.

That's the same rate it's always been, so looks like Planetside is keeping the same pay structure.
 
SOE didn't say anything on pay structure. Judging on the influences from modern day FPS games I feel there will be a cheaper option. Be it buying the game and having ftp limiations or $5 a month, We'll see.
 
Looks like no change in pricing. $20/month for SOE all-access pass a month at a time, $14.99 a month when pay for a whole year at once.

That's the same rate it's always been, so looks like Planetside is keeping the same pay structure.

$20/month... screw that, I don't care that I can play the whole SOE catalog, I hope there is a la cart, or else it is like paying for a buffet when all you want are some french fries.
 
$20/month... screw that, I don't care that I can play the whole SOE catalog, I hope there is a la cart, or else it is like paying for a buffet when all you want are some french fries.

there will still be a la carte. if station access is remaining the same (and theres been a price drop recently). then there will be a la carte. likely as it is now. 15 dollars a month per game, or 20 for station access.
 
But no problem throwing away $60 each month on games like DNF, Homefront, Brink, etc and then complain here over and over.

You have to realize the nature of this game; The company must buy many many, very powerful servers, as well as bandwidth and pay developers for constant content updates and patches, much more so than expected from a single player game these days (the majority of which receive no patches whatsoever after release).

All that is not free for the company and a one time fee of $60 simply can't cover that

Planetside launched with 4 American servers, a few months later they were down to 2 American servers. Now of course they have 1 server. It would be foolish imo to do the same thing over again unless all they are doing is a quick cash grab on the core Planetside playerbase.

$15 per month is too high for a pvp only game. They would have to compete against heavyweights like Wow and Star Wars which will offer a huge amount of PVE and PVP content for their millions of players. Planetside 2 will be lucky to break 50k-100k players with their old payment model.
 
What faggotry is this? A wow fanboy? GW fizzled out? And what is this shit talk of GW2? It looks fucking awesome man.

I don't like WoW, really. Or LOTRO. Or AoC. Or GW. They're all the same in the end. GW was fun for a bit. WoW is boring as all hell. AoC...eh. LOTRO is just WoW. With less people. Oh, and it's lord of the rings.

GW from what I saw, is not really going very strong at this point - correct me if I'm wrong there. It doesn't have people coming in droves like WoW.
 
I've spent thousands of hours on GW and I am quite bored with it now. There hasn't been a expansion in years, since EotN (Areanet is focusing on GW2 development) so the player base does have much for new content. The only thing to work onfor now is getting 30 points in the ranking system for shit in GW2, which likely won't appeal to the majority of the players. Its just a massive grind fest.

Any thoughts on going towards a class system like BF in this game instead of customizing your own with the cert system? I think its an awful idea personally.
 
Planetside launched with 4 American servers, a few months later they were down to 2 American servers. Now of course they have 1 server. It would be foolish imo to do the same thing over again unless all they are doing is a quick cash grab on the core Planetside playerbase.

$15 per month is too high for a pvp only game. They would have to compete against heavyweights like Wow and Star Wars which will offer a huge amount of PVE and PVP content for their millions of players. Planetside 2 will be lucky to break 50k-100k players with their old payment model.

If I was designing a MMOFPS, I would create it with one server in mind and have the world scale based on the number of subscribers.

I don't like WoW, really. Or LOTRO. Or AoC. Or GW. They're all the same in the end. GW was fun for a bit. WoW is boring as all hell. AoC...eh. LOTRO is just WoW. With less people. Oh, and it's lord of the rings.

GW from what I saw, is not really going very strong at this point - correct me if I'm wrong there. It doesn't have people coming in droves like WoW.

Last I checked WoW was losing subscribers. 500,000 in 3 months to be exact.

As for sales of GW, in 2009 it had 6 million sales and as of 2010 6.5 million.

Also Guild Wars isn't an MMO, so it is nothing like AoC, WoW, or LotRO.
 
Last edited:
$15 per month is too high for a pvp only game

Completely not true. The problem is, a $15/month PvP game requires much higher standards/quality/innovation than PvE-based games. PvE MMORPG players mostly buy into the whole "grind, grind, grind....keep giving me enough to grind and I will stay with the game for years." Every major MMORPG failure pretty much happens due to massive launch problems, bugs, lack of polish, and/or lack of content. As long as a PvE MMORPG does not launch with serious problems such as those, they are generally successful even with mediocre gameplay or zero innovation.

PvP players on the other hand, are mostly not interested in the "grind." They want to get out there and play reasonably competitively ASAP, regardless of the game's genre (FPS, RTS, etc...). Therefore, an MMO PvP game requires innovation and being more than just the same-ole on a larger scale. There has to be something that will make a PvP player willing to invest time (not PvE grind) into the game because it has something non-MMO PvP games do not have. Unfortunately, no one has yet attempted to resolve this issue through innovation. If/when someone does, and there are still any non-console players with brains left (even the PC players are becoming more obsessed with graphics than gameplay), it will get those $15/month subscriptions.
 
If they are offering massive scale fights where thousands of players can get in on the action at once, you simply cannot play this sort of game anywhere else, people will be willing to pay a sub fee for that the same way they'd sub for WoW.

Planetside was ahead of its time and had the massive launch of WoW to compete with not long after its release, now a days MMOs are a dime a dozen and we have a massive FPS fanbase, I think Planetside was slightly ahead of its time and suffered for that, the timing is right with PS2 and I think with the original fans pumped for it and it being a one of a kind it has a strong shot at maintaining a solid playerbase.
 
A little example showing Planetside when it was at its prime,

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkmv8pSKZyo"]YouTube - ‪Sturmgrenadier Planetside Video‬‏[/ame]
 
Also Planetside did have a Free to Play option for awhile called Planetside Reserves. There was Battle Rank and Command Rank limitations. It lasted 2-3 years I believe.

Depending on pricing, I am interested in Planetside 2. I was a little late to see the primetime Planetside but I played for about 6 months in 2005 for $30. Ended up getting about a years worth of play time for $20 at Hastings because they were doing a damaged box sale. They had 4 90 timecards for $5 bucks each because the boxes were crushed. Gave 2 away and bought the boxed game for $20.
 
Monthly fee wouldnt work for me at this point, F2P Tribes is coming this fall, also Firefall, and with BF3 and RO2 as well...
 
As long as it provides value for that $, why not? Hope it isn't F2P, I want decent support and continued expansion.

Did Planetside ever have cheats/aimbots? That would really suck; none were around for the time I played it.

Planetside had speed hacks and wallhacks as far as I know, but no aimbots thankfully. Or atleast I don't think there was any.

I personally cannot wait for the game to come out. I'm going to be buying the game on launch day awell as a 1 year/ 6 month subscription.
 
Monthly fee wouldnt work for me at this point, F2P Tribes is coming this fall, also Firefall, and with BF3 and RO2 as well...

Exactly. I see a there being some kind of no monthly fee option and a benefited sub plan. Really what killed the original in the end was the sub in my opinion.
 
Already looks dated but you can bet Ill be on day one.

Agreed. Looks a bit dated, but not bad at all. And I'm not expecting a game that could have hundreds of people in a battle to have player models equivalent to The Witcher or Mass Effect.

The trailer was indeed a bit lackluster...several shots of 3-4 people crouched firing (I think they recycled the same shot 3-4 times, too?), then cut to a few more people running and shooting. Doesn't show too much if you don't know what the game is.

I'm excited though, nontheless.
 
Already looks dated but you can bet Ill be on day one.

The game is going to be huge, so we cannot expect say Metro 2033 visuals. This is obviously a early release, so I wouldn't be shocked if things will get better. Smed said the engine is built for top PCs of 2011 and ones that are 5 years old. Maybe they will actually make that much of a difference in graphic settings. This looks PC exclusive, so that will not be a hold back.
 
Man, as we get into the 2nd half of '11, it's going to get crazy in here with all these games coming out. I can't effing wait! :D Of course, it's really going to make it really difficult for me to make my goal of actually being in good shape for this next snowboarding season. :(
 
I REALLY hope they learned their lesson with Planetside.

It was a fun game, but for an MMO you need to have REASONS behind fighting, things to do, objectives (with actual depth to them).

It wasn't that fun month slater just jumping to various area's capturing htem over and over and over.

You need different things to do in context with layers and layers of depth of various things it can affect and ripple throughout the game.
 
Yeah woohoo! instead of using one of the many other physics engines out there they use on that favors a specific brand over another and cripples it without that brand's gpu.

1. It's called business. Google it sometime
2. PhysX is the best physics engine/API out there right now AFAIK
 
1. It's called business. Google it sometime
2. PhysX is the best physics engine/API out there right now AFAIK


It's in SOE's business to please the people that buy their game. Ati card users aren't pleased with Physx because it runs like shit on the CPU and NVidia purposly cut out allowing any ATI people to use a lower end nvidia GPU to run alongside an ATI).

So from a business standpoint, it benefits Nvidia, not SOE who will likely get many upset ATI users out of it depending on what they use it for.

I'd GLADLY take euphoria over PhysX, because they make use of actual models and how they interact with terrain and other things (IE Red Dead Redemption, Star wars:TF, GTAIV) and it works well without punishing you for what brand GPU you use.

PhysX is mostly used on particles and things of that nature in games (Batman/Alice, etc) and is greatly restricted to one brand compared to another which cuts the people who buy your product that can actually see/have fun with that stuff in half.

NVidia on the other hand hopes it'll sell cards, and that's why they pay developer sto use PhysX (they say they don't, but they do, an dlabel it as "business relations."
 
The game is going to be huge, so we cannot expect say Metro 2033 visuals. This is obviously a early release, so I wouldn't be shocked if things will get better. Smed said the engine is built for top PCs of 2011 and ones that are 5 years old. Maybe they will actually make that much of a difference in graphic settings. This looks PC exclusive, so that will not be a hold back.

Considering the game was internally scheduled for an early 2011 release before they moved it to a new graphics engine, I expect the game to be late in development.
 
this game could look worse than the first for all i care if it manages to recapture the same feeling

holy shit getting together with a compliant bunch of people and waging infinite amount of warfare all night long and then waking up to the same fucking battle still going on... which you go on to decide later that day after being in a key push, eventually helping set in motion a further chain of events leading to a continental lock.

FUCK the first game was good, god damn. it was fucking ridiculous actually just how awesome it was. battles at their largest were probably over 400 people fighting at once.
 
Not really, but for an MMO that is forgivable.

Forgiveable?

More like necessary!

When you have thousands of people on the same battlefield you simply cannot have the same kind of detail you would have in a regular FPS game.
 
Considering the game was internally scheduled for an early 2011 release before they moved it to a new graphics engine, I expect the game to be late in development.

You are wrong.


With that article it is safe to assume this game is still early in development. This is why Smed said months ago they're moving EVERYTHING over to a new engine. The MAX units still only have concept pictures thus far as well not even a rendering. If there is still a rexo there has not even been a picture of that released.
 
SOE depends on hype. They hype the hell out of games, promise a lot and what they deliver never seems to be quite what people expect.

So......while I want to see a Planetside game I think SOE will have to work a lot harder to impress.

SOE promised fast updates for DCUO, withdrew that about 3-4 months into retail. In fact they took out a lot of powersets before the game launched....people got a taste of the game in beta and got something different when it went retail. Betaed this, it got really screwy a few weeks prior to retail.

SOE is closing SWG in nov/dec of 2011, but claims it will still put out content updates (why?) and we'll see if that's actually true. They really did a number on SWG fans over the years, and I quit playing after the first month of it because they wouldn't quit changing the classes to where I'd login and be struggling to kill things that were easy the day before.

Vanguard, still screwed up after 2+ years.

EQ2, remember when all that voiceover work was going to make the game awesome and you heard about it all the time? Dunno much about this game aside from it's free play experience is really annoying.

EQ1, every expansion that was released while i played had something majorly wrong on release, usually involving higher level zones being incredibly easy. High level guilds would exploit this and then they would "fix" it so the plebe players got a nice big gap between them and the "special" players. Also add in a lot of GM corruption in the early years and item destroying bugs that existed for years into the game...items would just poof during trades. Oh and corpse eating bugs, happened a lot with the LFay Mistmoore Zone border, people would be near death at the border, zone and come out on the other side completely naked with no corpse to retrieve on either side.

Planetside, they never quite made the game lag free when it was in full battle. And they never did seem to grasp what players wanted in the game. You got the "tunnel" expansion pack which basically removed the majority of vehicles from the game. Then they gave you BFRs which were way stronger than most vehicles. And the game eventually devolved into each faction running big loops doing base caps with almost no defense happening because there was no benefit to doing so. In my opinion they let this game rot on the vine and never really put real effort into keeping players engaged, which is why I don't believe what they say about PS2. Plus you add in the other games and how they screwed people on those and their promises kind of ring hollow, so they have no game they can point at and say "See we treated the majority of players really well."
 
It's in SOE's business to please the people that buy their game. Ati card users aren't pleased with Physx because it runs like shit on the CPU and NVidia purposly cut out allowing any ATI people to use a lower end nvidia GPU to run alongside an ATI).

So from a business standpoint, it benefits Nvidia, not SOE who will likely get many upset ATI users out of it depending on what they use it for.

I'd GLADLY take euphoria over PhysX, because they make use of actual models and how they interact with terrain and other things (IE Red Dead Redemption, Star wars:TF, GTAIV) and it works well without punishing you for what brand GPU you use.

PhysX is mostly used on particles and things of that nature in games (Batman/Alice, etc) and is greatly restricted to one brand compared to another which cuts the people who buy your product that can actually see/have fun with that stuff in half.

NVidia on the other hand hopes it'll sell cards, and that's why they pay developer sto use PhysX (they say they don't, but they do, an dlabel it as "business relations."


Last I looked, you couldn't use an nVidia and ATI card side by side due to Windows driver issues. Is this no longer true?
 
Seems Planetside 2 will be a mix of f2p and cash shop.

Q. Can you elaborate a little bit on the free aspect that has been mentioned?

A. There will be a cash shop for the game however the goal is not to sell power. For example we would sell things like customization because we would like there to be a massive amount of ways to customize your characters. So people could recognize you or your outfit out of a group. We will not sell a more powerful gun or vehicle.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/p-john-smedley-qa-79.htm
 
Back
Top