Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

WOW! This game is a complete disapointment.

245

Comments

  • marganculosmarganculos BrnoPosts: 192Member Uncommon

    ooooooooooooooooohhhh really another topic? so whats the point of any MMOFPS... FPS? Battlefield? CoD? CS? etc... you just run with gun and shoot other players... WOW OMG FTL QQ.. This "insert-any-FPS-like-game" is a complete disapointment.

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon

    Map may be larger than your average fps, but not all of the map used. Each area is like playing  BF3 map. There is no difference. Dont see to many people hiking the 10k between battlesites, and each battlesite is about the same as a large BF3 map.

    Game is ok, but nothing i cant get from a fps game.

    compared to BF3:

    Player progession....check

    unlock weapons...... check

    unlock accerorries .... check

    tanks.... check

    flying things.... check

    multiple classes you can change once dead..... check

    camping.... check

    people playing fps solo and killing the team ..... check

    Friendly fire...... check

    grenades, prime weapon, 2nd weapon........ check

    no alien life forms, no true reason to take over a base, no reward for winning other than to win....... check

    win/lose/kdr/etc....... check

     

    Not much difference. BF3 maps are of good size, and after playing PS2 for a few hours i never realy needed to move to another area. So basicaly you have a huge world map but only a small portion is used. And i ahvent seen more than maybe 50 people in any given area yet, no thousands of players in same area. So player base and map sized compared is about the same.

    Its new and all flashy, so of course it feels like it is more than it realy is.

  • SenadinaSenadina San Diego, CAPosts: 896Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by derek39

    Your expectations are just ridiculous. The game does exactly what was advertised, Yet you complain.

    You got exactly what hyped you up. I don't understand why you think the game was supposed to be like an mmorpg.

    To get exactly what you seem to be looking for. Check out Firefall. You should be pleased with it more.

     Or Defiance. 3rd person FPS, but  will have PvE in a persistent MMO world.

    Erm, edited because he can't check it out yet :)....(not enough coffee.)

    image
  • trenshodtrenshod charlotte, MIPosts: 128Member
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    I have yet to play but have watched others play and it looks fine. Maybe gaming as a hobby/profession isn't your thing any longer. Venture out into the real world and do something else. No one really wants to hear your sob story how games aren't your cup of tea any longer.

  • AeolronAeolron Ottawa, ONPosts: 648Member
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    The only thing that was a complete disapointment is clicking on this thread. I hear COD is good for easy kills with players that lack skill.

  • BetaguyBetaguy Halifax, NSPosts: 2,590Member
    Originally posted by Onomas

    Map may be larger than your average fps, but not all of the map used. Each area is like playing  BF3 map. There is no difference. Dont see to many people hiking the 10k between battlesites, and each battlesite is about the same as a large BF3 map.

    Game is ok, but nothing i cant get from a fps game.

    compared to BF3:

    Player progession....check

    unlock weapons...... check

    unlock accerorries .... check

    tanks.... check

    flying things.... check

    multiple classes you can change once dead..... check

    camping.... check

    people playing fps solo and killing the team ..... check

    Friendly fire...... check

    grenades, prime weapon, 2nd weapon........ check

    no alien life forms, no true reason to take over a base, no reward for winning other than to win....... check

    win/lose/kdr/etc....... check

     

    Not much difference. BF3 maps are of good size, and after playing PS2 for a few hours i never realy needed to move to another area. So basicaly you have a huge world map but only a small portion is used. And i ahvent seen more than maybe 50 people in any given area yet, no thousands of players in same area. So player base and map sized compared is about the same.

    Its new and all flashy, so of course it feels like it is more than it realy is.

    Exactly^^Tthe one's here trying to tell me PS2 is more mmofps than any other FPS recently released is full of delusions

    image

  • ThaneThane berlinPosts: 2,232Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    it's three whole continents and growing, doubt you saw it all. most likely you just didnt find the continent change terminal ^^

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    sure it has, your warpgate. you can only be shot by morons there :P your own teammates.

    * Nothing player built.

     so? they already said player bases wont be in for lunch, and no one expected em to be in.

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    so, this is how it sounds when you support a game? chripes, i dont wanna see you flame a game :>

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    correct, it's always good to end a statement with a completely unbiased and logical conclusion  *G*

    oh you...

     

    sounds like you expected monopoly while buying chess here. (not saying PS2 is the equivalent of chess. just naming 2 different games)

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  • saurus123saurus123 nonePosts: 570Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by PsyMike3d
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    at least its free... and not pay2win ;)

    its p2w

    before you are able to buy all the upgrades and stuff

    a guy who paid already have best weapons, armor, +25% more hp and kill you with 3 bullets :)

    when you need to put full magazine into him

     

    not mentioning alot of bugs like screen flickering, texture dissapearing, porting enemies, tanks etc

    and random fps drop to 1fps

  • Z3R01Z3R01 NYC, NYPosts: 2,426Member

     

    Planetside 2 = MMOFPS

    Firefall =  MMORPG FPS

    Maybe you should try Firefall? its f2p. It has a world with missions and other traditional mmorpg features.

    PLanetside is basically battlefield 3 only 10 times the size.

    Playing:

    Waiting on:

  • FalcomithFalcomith Hastings, FLPosts: 800Member
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    "No safe zones" 

    Each faction has a dedicated base where the other factions can't access. It's the main area to launch aircraft from or setup your soldier.

    It sounds like you went into it thinking it was a mmorpg, like Tabula Rasa (R.I.P). Just a few minutes of research would have told you this. Oh we'll. Hope you find what you are looking for.

  • Z3R01Z3R01 NYC, NYPosts: 2,426Member
    Originally posted by saurus123
    Originally posted by PsyMike3d
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    at least its free... and not pay2win ;)

    its p2w

    before you are able to buy all the upgrades and stuff

    a guy who paid already have best weapons, armor, +25% more hp and kill you with 3 bullets :)

    when you need to put full magazine into him

     

    not mentioning alot of bugs like screen flickering, texture dissapearing, porting enemies, tanks etc

    and random fps drop to 1fps

    A game is only pay2win if you can pay with cash stuff that can't be achieved in game through gameplay.

    With PS2 this is not the case. 

    Playing:

    Waiting on:

  • Z3R01Z3R01 NYC, NYPosts: 2,426Member
    Originally posted by Betaguy
    Originally posted by Onomas

    Map may be larger than your average fps, but not all of the map used. Each area is like playing  BF3 map. There is no difference. Dont see to many people hiking the 10k between battlesites, and each battlesite is about the same as a large BF3 map.

    Game is ok, but nothing i cant get from a fps game.

    compared to BF3:

    Player progession....check

    unlock weapons...... check

    unlock accerorries .... check

    tanks.... check

    flying things.... check

    multiple classes you can change once dead..... check

    camping.... check

    people playing fps solo and killing the team ..... check

    Friendly fire...... check

    grenades, prime weapon, 2nd weapon........ check

    no alien life forms, no true reason to take over a base, no reward for winning other than to win....... check

    win/lose/kdr/etc....... check

     

    Not much difference. BF3 maps are of good size, and after playing PS2 for a few hours i never realy needed to move to another area. So basicaly you have a huge world map but only a small portion is used. And i ahvent seen more than maybe 50 people in any given area yet, no thousands of players in same area. So player base and map sized compared is about the same.

    Its new and all flashy, so of course it feels like it is more than it realy is.

    Exactly^^Tthe one's here trying to tell me PS2 is more mmofps than any other FPS recently released is full of delusions

    1800+ players vs 64 or whatever small amount BF3 can handle... This is what makes PS2 stand out from every other game.

    Playing:

    Waiting on:

  • Storman1977Storman1977 Columbus, OHPosts: 207Member
    Originally posted by Z3R01
    Originally posted by Betaguy
    Originally posted by Onomas

    Map may be larger than your average fps, but not all of the map used. Each area is like playing  BF3 map. There is no difference. Dont see to many people hiking the 10k between battlesites, and each battlesite is about the same as a large BF3 map.

    Game is ok, but nothing i cant get from a fps game.

    compared to BF3:

    Player progession....check

    unlock weapons...... check

    unlock accerorries .... check

    tanks.... check

    flying things.... check

    multiple classes you can change once dead..... check

    camping.... check

    people playing fps solo and killing the team ..... check

    Friendly fire...... check

    grenades, prime weapon, 2nd weapon........ check

    no alien life forms, no true reason to take over a base, no reward for winning other than to win....... check

    win/lose/kdr/etc....... check

     

    Not much difference. BF3 maps are of good size, and after playing PS2 for a few hours i never realy needed to move to another area. So basicaly you have a huge world map but only a small portion is used. And i ahvent seen more than maybe 50 people in any given area yet, no thousands of players in same area. So player base and map sized compared is about the same.

    Its new and all flashy, so of course it feels like it is more than it realy is.

    Exactly^^Tthe one's here trying to tell me PS2 is more mmofps than any other FPS recently released is full of delusions

    1800+ players vs 64 or whatever small amount BF3 can handle... This is what makes PS2 stand out from every other game.

    Well, to be fair to BF3, I had quite a few matches on servers that were 128 vs. 128.  So, servers were capable of handling 256 players.  But that is still not the same as having three faction mass combat.  Was playing a couple hours last night and my faction alone had 1200 people on the server.

    image

  • ZagavaVonnZagavaVonn Akron, OHPosts: 249Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Z3R01
    Originally posted by Betaguy
    Originally posted by Onomas

    Map may be larger than your average fps, but not all of the map used. Each area is like playing  BF3 map. There is no difference. Dont see to many people hiking the 10k between battlesites, and each battlesite is about the same as a large BF3 map.

    Game is ok, but nothing i cant get from a fps game.

    compared to BF3:

    Player progession....check

    unlock weapons...... check

    unlock accerorries .... check

    tanks.... check

    flying things.... check

    multiple classes you can change once dead..... check

    camping.... check

    people playing fps solo and killing the team ..... check

    Friendly fire...... check

    grenades, prime weapon, 2nd weapon........ check

    no alien life forms, no true reason to take over a base, no reward for winning other than to win....... check

    win/lose/kdr/etc....... check

     

    Not much difference. BF3 maps are of good size, and after playing PS2 for a few hours i never realy needed to move to another area. So basicaly you have a huge world map but only a small portion is used. And i ahvent seen more than maybe 50 people in any given area yet, no thousands of players in same area. So player base and map sized compared is about the same.

    Its new and all flashy, so of course it feels like it is more than it realy is.

    Exactly^^Tthe one's here trying to tell me PS2 is more mmofps than any other FPS recently released is full of delusions

    1800+ players vs 64 or whatever small amount BF3 can handle... This is what makes PS2 stand out from every other game.

    I was in the Planetside 2 beta and I have to say it's one of the few betas in the last 5+ years where I kept logging back in over and over and over shooting stuff. Even The Secret Wworld wasn't close, and TSW was a pretty good game in it's own right. But Planetside 2 is just a fun game and well-done, and if you take it for what it's worth (a gigantic Quake-style shooter-fest)  you'll have a great time.

    Fyi I played Planetside 1 as well, and often people in my guild would play Star Wars Galaxies, then go over to Planetside 1 and just blast the snot out of each other for a few hours. I really wished they'd taken SWG and added in the MMOFPS combat to the game, it would've made it a really exciting combination.

    So no, I disagree that Planetside 2 is a bad game... Planetside 2 is a great game, you just need to take it for what it's worth though which is an MMOFPS and not a lot of in-depth elements like player housing or spending 30 minutes customizing your avatar or placing furniture in your spaceship :)

  • YohanuYohanu Laholm, AKPosts: 214Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by saurus123
    Originally posted by PsyMike3d
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    at least its free... and not pay2win ;)

    its p2w

    before you are able to buy all the upgrades and stuff

    a guy who paid already have best weapons, armor, +25% more hp and kill you with 3 bullets :)

    when you need to put full magazine into him

     

    not mentioning alot of bugs like screen flickering, texture dissapearing, porting enemies, tanks etc

    and random fps drop to 1fps

    You can only pay for weapons. You can't buy any other upgrades through the cash shop.

  • KuinnKuinn MestaPosts: 2,093Member

    I havent been reading that much about the game overall before the launch, and after playing it I still can say it's exactly what it was marketed being as. A massive multiplayer online firstperson shooter. It's mind boggling that some people get dissapointed here, you should already know if you like it or not since 100% of the game info was revealed before it released. There never were talk about any RPG features to be present in the game.

  • LoboMauLoboMau Marinha GrandePosts: 396Member
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    Damn...Im still laughing at "Map is much much smaller than I expected"!!! What a Comedian!! XD

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Whitebeards
    When you said maps are much much smaller..i just rolled my eyes and said  'never mind'. Maps in PS2 are anything but small.

    I agree. The maps are HUGE. You need vehicles or you have to walk for a long time. Thank god for instant spawning on many spawn points.

  • GhavriggGhavrigg Halifax, NSPosts: 775Member Uncommon

    PS2, I'll agree, is very shallow at this point. It feels like a basic version of the game was given out so they can work it from the ground up. Yet, honestly, I don't see any radical changes incoming for a LONG time (content-wise).

    Still, it's a game to log into for an hour or so every now and then when you're bored.

  • AcvivmAcvivm Austin, TXPosts: 321Member Uncommon

    I've been playing the hell of out this game, I really didn't expect to like it anywhere as much as I do. It plays a lot like BF3 and I never could really play that game for long periods of time before getting bored. With PS2 I think the big difference to me is the size of the maps and large avenues of approach that are possible when taking objectives, something that I hated with BF3 since most the maps were just funnels with very little room to improvise.

    I spent about 3 hours last night playing with a dedicated squad and a few random outfits numbering in the hundreds taking just one biolab and then defending it. I haven't had this much fun with a FPS in a long time, while I agree the idea of taking objective after objective without end can get tedious just the sheer amount of epicness of rolling with dozens of vehicles full to the brim with troops and assaulting fortified bases has blown me away.

    HEAVEN OR HELL
    Duel 1
    Lets ROCK!

  • SukiyakiSukiyaki GreenwichPosts: 1,398Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

     

    Its an overglorified FPS games with bigger maps than most other FPS games and higher number of player.

    Why did you even expect a bigger world or a gmore grand game? It should have been obvious from the start how tiny PS2's world is and how limited the scope of gameplay is compared to an MMORPG. Its a shooter. A bigger shooter but just a shooter.

     

    PS2 "continent" maps are barely 4 and rather 3 times the size of a generic zoned mmo map except there are only 3 of them in total while most zoned MMOs have dozen of them with dozen of themes. Its far from huge and vast.

    Plus the map design claim anyone what he wants is extremely repetitive and boring. Its like 3 basic themes over and over again all over the map. Spiked with the ever same few "base" buidlings every mile and only rarely some unique features.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since the points of interests are all of the same kind. That of an FPS. You dont visit the castle or a groove to battle a dragon and find a hidden chest and resque a little girl from a bear. At best you will shoot at the same people as 10 minutes before.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since in general your interaction with the world is very limited, much lower than in even most generic MMOs. Leave alone interation of a sandbox style game.

    In the end its just a map for a shooter.

     

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

     

    Its an overglorified FPS games with bigger maps than most other FPS games and higher number of player.

    What did you even expect a bigger world or a gmore grand game? It should have been obvious from the start how tiny PS2's world is and how limited the scope of gameplay is compared to an MMORPG. Its a shooter.

     

    PS2 "continent" maps are barely 4 and rather 3 times the size of a generic zoned mmo map except there are only 3 of them in total while most zoned MMOs have dozen of them.

    Plus the map design claim anyone what he wants is extremely repetitive and boring. Its like 3 basic themes over and over again all over the map. Spiked with the ever same few "base" buidlings every mile and only rarely some unique features.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since the points of interests are all of the same kind. That of an FPS. You dont visit the castle or a groove to battle a dragon and find a hidden chest and resque a little girl from a bear. At best you will shoot at the same people as 10 minutes before.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since in general your interaction with the world is very limited, much lower than in even most generic MMOs. Leave alone interation of a sandbox style game.

    In the end its just a map for a shooter.

     

    That's quite a typical "I haven't tried it so I have no idea what I'm talking about" response. Waste of typing.

    10
  • SukiyakiSukiyaki GreenwichPosts: 1,398Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

     

    Its an overglorified FPS games with bigger maps than most other FPS games and higher number of player.

    What did you even expect a bigger world or a gmore grand game? It should have been obvious from the start how tiny PS2's world is and how limited the scope of gameplay is compared to an MMORPG. Its a shooter.

     

    PS2 "continent" maps are barely 4 and rather 3 times the size of a generic zoned mmo map except there are only 3 of them in total while most zoned MMOs have dozen of them.

    Plus the map design claim anyone what he wants is extremely repetitive and boring. Its like 3 basic themes over and over again all over the map. Spiked with the ever same few "base" buidlings every mile and only rarely some unique features.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since the points of interests are all of the same kind. That of an FPS. You dont visit the castle or a groove to battle a dragon and find a hidden chest and resque a little girl from a bear. At best you will shoot at the same people as 10 minutes before.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since in general your interaction with the world is very limited, much lower than in even most generic MMOs. Leave alone interation of a sandbox style game.

    In the end its just a map for a shooter.

     

    That's quite a typical "I haven't tried it so I have no idea what I'm talking about" response. Waste of typing.

    Seems like you cant refute it, yet where eager to deny it even if it had to be this waste of a response.

  • dariuszpdariuszp PrzeworskPosts: 182Member
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

    Lol, amount of stupidity I see in this post is beyond whatever I could think of.

    1. Map is quite huge. Try to move on foot and see how long it will take to cross it. If you manage to cross it while being alive...

    2. There is one safe zone - your own starting base. After that you have small safe zones around the map if you control a base (bulding with forcefields - spawn points). But once you loose that point, this place will not be safe.

    3. You have huge map with camps, towers, bases, fortreses etc. What you would like to build there ?

    SWTOR, TERA and WOW are MMORPG. Planetside 2 my friend is MMOFPS. In other words it's a MULTIPLAYER SHOOTER. Like Battlefield series but with huge maps and no rounds - everything is permament. And it's a VERY good shooter. 

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by Thebigthrill

    So basically to sum up PS2 its just flipping territory and thats it.

    I played for about 3 hours and I'm really disapointed I was really hoping for a great game.

     

    * Map is much much smaller than I expected. I expected it to be a world .

    * No safe zones , I didnt do much research on this game but when I think mmorpg I think cities , safe zones and auction houses.

    * Nothing player built.

     

    This is the first time I support a FTP game, I dont like FTP but Im really glad I was able to try this game out before I wasted money on it.

    Between SWTOR , Tera , WOW getting Lazy , Diablo 3 sucking and now this PS2 crapfest , in my opinion video games as a whole are really starting to suck lately.

     

    Its an overglorified FPS games with bigger maps than most other FPS games and higher number of player.

    What did you even expect a bigger world or a gmore grand game? It should have been obvious from the start how tiny PS2's world is and how limited the scope of gameplay is compared to an MMORPG. Its a shooter.

     

    PS2 "continent" maps are barely 4 and rather 3 times the size of a generic zoned mmo map except there are only 3 of them in total while most zoned MMOs have dozen of them.

    Plus the map design claim anyone what he wants is extremely repetitive and boring. Its like 3 basic themes over and over again all over the map. Spiked with the ever same few "base" buidlings every mile and only rarely some unique features.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since the points of interests are all of the same kind. That of an FPS. You dont visit the castle or a groove to battle a dragon and find a hidden chest and resque a little girl from a bear. At best you will shoot at the same people as 10 minutes before.

    Plus the world feels even smaller since in general your interaction with the world is very limited, much lower than in even most generic MMOs. Leave alone interation of a sandbox style game.

    In the end its just a map for a shooter.

     

    That's quite a typical "I haven't tried it so I have no idea what I'm talking about" response. Waste of typing.

    I have played it for a day now, and i agree with him. Just a glorified shooter. People need to stop trying to make things out better than they are. Im happy its just a shooter, but tired of people saying its the new best thing and its so superior than anything else. Its not, played game like this years ago. BF3, COD, and other shooters could make a persistant world also, its the same thing. Doesnt change, doesnt evolve, no alien life forms, just the basics.

Sign In or Register to comment.