In the following video Zoran the Bear discus the differences in players expectations in the gameplay in a massive game like Planet Side. I think that his line of thought has some pertinence, in my humble opinion. But, more important, what you guys think? EC shouldn't be worried with something like that, or it may be a important factor to attract and maintain players?

so you are suggesting that EC should never become an open world game because open world game are too chaotic and have consistency problem?

Well, you have a point there, open world games can be chaotic. But I, personally, believe that a good player to player communication and informing correctitilly the player where is the action it's vey important.

Edit: important to resolve that probem...

Define open world.

Awesome vid. The gist is; the openworld in PS2 is inconsistent, it's awesome sometimes but due to a range of factors isn't awesome all the time, those wanting the same experience each time will struggle to find that and may leave for that reason. Faction overpop is a large part of this problem, as is off peak times.

I suspect the solution for EC isn't to create a consistent experience, but identifying what makes it inconsistent and turning them into features. Overpop of one faction needs to be made beneficial to the other factions and during off peak ought to have its own game mode that takes advantage of the lack of players.They've got potential solutions with the PvE factors and their mission system, it'll be interesting to see how well they work.

Technically, according to the definition of some, PS2 is an open arena. Open world usually has aspects that simulate the world "living" without direct player intervention as well as a large environment that players can interact with. For the purpose of the original point though, the differences matter little.

But PS2 isn't an "Open World" game, it's actually an "Open Arena" game. Most of us (including myself) were getting our terminologies wrong.

And Nathan has recently confirmed that EC will never be an Open Arena game like PS2. It's instead going to be much more similar to Heroes & Generals where we fight in large Instances connected by lattices lines, which are packed with "Open World" Content.... whatever that means?

I was confused by it as well. I think the issue is that there are so few details right now that it's hard to imagine. You also seem to be a very detail oriented person, which I'd imagine is adding to your frustration.

I think that he cited Skyrim as being an example of open world, so maybe there's a lot of Skyrim-like crap to do. I can't imagine what though, since we aren't going to have "quests."

Maybe the player determined objectives will be much more in depth than we thought? The current game modes don't leave much to the imagination. However, we've only seen things way before the meta is introduced.

_______________________________________________________________
As for the OP, I agree with Planetside 2 being difficult to get into. I only logged in twice, and I couldn't figure out what was going on in either situation. One of the times I got lucky and was able to join a fight on a bridge while I was the light assault. I was fighting the other light assaults on the top of the upper part of the bridge, and after I won that mini-battle I supported the rest of the faction on the underside of it. After we won the bridge, I got bored and wandered off.

The other time I just really couldn't figure out what anyone was doing strategically. There was one enemy player that was keeping a location objective, but it was enclosed and he was better equipped than I for the situation. He was a better player as well. I tried wandering around the map to find other objectives but there was no one else that I could find. There were other enemies at the original objective but they didn't seem to be doing anything relevant.

I never figured out how to spawn vehicles. I know there are tutorials somewhere for it, but I didn't feel like trying to find them. The game took more effort to get into than I felt like giving it.
_____________________________________________________________

I think that if EC is going to do open world, there are several ways around these problems. There could be a mini mission for players that want to scout the enemy locations and plant locator devices for drop pods to lock into (or something along those lines). The beacon could give off specific or general information about the number of enemies and load outs. There are a lot of players that just enjoy exploring the maps (myself included) that would enjoy this aspect of the game. There are issues with it, but it's just one example.

More tutorials explaining more than just "these are the loadouts" and "this is how you shoot and enemy" could solve a lot of the confusing aspects of PS2.

That's disappointing, but understandable. I imagine Arkhona will be larger than any of PS2s 10x10km continents.

Never played H&G, how does their model work? Does it work well?

EDIT:

Yeah, their tutorials suck. If you try it again, join a squad and ask them for the basics. If the squad's part of a good platoon, you should have an awesome time.

ok so why in the video he talk about the problem of confuse the player because the open world game nature of open world game of planetside 2 and instead casual players prefer close arena less chaotic and more focused and rewarding?

how can planetside 2 not be an open world game but have issue derived by a bad development of the open world?

I did try to play Planetside 2, and I understand totally what hes talking about, even with more time to invest.

The Solution is not to make EC an instanced game, but to make it Openworld AND fix the problems.
A Main point in the Video was that, the interface is problematic and doesn't show you accurately where what fight is.

The good thing about a openworld is that one player can have a 12vs12 fight about some random outpost, or even a 6v12 fight if he wants, while another player can have a 500vs500 fight at the same time somewhere else.
What, according to the video, PS2 fails to do is to direct the player that wants a 6v10 battle to the 6v10 battle and the player who wants big battles doesn't find the big battle.
This problem is even more alleviated for new players who have no clue where the natural spots for those kinds of battle are. And its still a problem for experienced users who invest much time. If its even hard for them, how should a new player handle it.

From new player experience, I can definitly tell you that it is a problem. For example, the system that brings you quick and easy into a battle, at the same time doesn't teach you where each location is in relevance to the other locations.
Their Tutorial doesn't explain very well how to find a fight or read the map.


Sometimes you have really fun battles, sometimes you are in the wrong battles or just lost.

Again, this doesn't mean Openworld is bad. Openworld has positives and negatives, but we have to make sure that the negatives are not too harsh on new players and that we have the right tools so that everyone can experience the parts of the openworld he wants to.

Also, Korel maybe you shouldn't post these as facts if you even know that you don't exactly understood what he meant
Nathan has NOT confimred that EC will never be an open world game like Planetside 2 (technically you are correct if we focus on the Planetside 2 part, but with the context below, you are painting it as if we never get a openworld.)
The picture and the Heroes and Generals stuff is in regards to before the 2 years. After that it will be more openworld than that.