2002 replies to this topic

[Mao of DC]

Mystere, on 24 March 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

Or are you so hell-bent against 3PV that you intentionally want to SABOTAGE the whole idea?

No just restrict enough so that it remains fair for both 3rd and 1st person users. I just feel that you should get the best gameplay experence in frist person. Like the difference between, shooting from the hip, and aiming down the sights.

Oh BTW the update to the OP has some of the concepts I suggested on this forum so...

Edited by Mao of DC, 25 March 2013 - 09:18 PM.

[DirePhoenix]

Roadbeer, on 25 March 2013 - 09:11 PM, said:

So if I'm reading that right

35.73% Hate the idea, the other 64.27% either Dislike, are apathetic, or like it.

Of that 35.73%
24.13% Despise the idea
10.40% Absolutely loath the idea.

Am I reading your data right?

Additionally, I'm not sure which is more disturbing, that 3 people count for almost 100 posts in this thread, or that you counted all 975 posts.

You are not reading the data correctly.

This was in response to your post about 50 pages of "NO". Postcounts and page numbers do no attribute to position of the participating parties. If you are getting the impression that "Everyone" is against this because you're seeing a high number of posts that say no, you're still in error, because a lot of these posts are by the same people, over and over and over again. Postcounts are irrelevant. Thread size is irrelevant. Just because you scream your opinion so often that no one can see anything else does not make your opinion any more or less relevant or even correct. It just means you're loud.

Also as to how I found these numbers, we all have tools at our fingertips to do the exact same thing. I could tell you, but that may spoil the fun of your own discovery.

[WiFiN]

Well, I'll throw in my two cents.
I don't see 3DP camera control as a form of direct control in ANY competitive game (though it's good for PvE coop for example).

Why? Well because it involves exploits in one way or another even with fixed camera - people will twist their torso to look above things or around corners even if you'll make camera zoom in.

Secondly, it will split the community - longer queues, skill level gaps. Doubt anyone needs it.

The only way I see to implement 3DP camera for direct control in the actual matches is to add dynamic "fog of war" that will effectively block the vision of the areas player can not see. This might be resourse intensive, but it's flawless.

The compromisive solution would be to add a tutorial with 3DP camera enabled that lets the player to learn the hud indicators and how orientation of their torso\legs affects their movement. As far as we have a training room they will get a hold of it far from the heat of battle. That way instead of being stuck in the ways of WoW-like MMORPGs they would actually grasp something new without additional frustration.

UAVs can work too, but I would rather see them used for recon, rather than parktronic for handicaped.
You're MechWarriors after all, bear this title with pride for your skills and determination.

Edited by WiFiN, 25 March 2013 - 10:33 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

DirePhoenix, on 25 March 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

Postcount/Volume =/= community consensus.

yeah, the voices in their head count ten to one over us

DirePhoenix, on 25 March 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

Postcount/Volume =/= community consensus.

As of this posting, 35.73% of this thread's posts come from 28 individuals. Everyone else in this thread previous has 5 posts or less.

24.13% (nearly a quarter) of the posts in this thread as of this posting come from 12 individuals who have 10 or more posts each.

​3 individuals in this thread each have over 31 posts so far, accounting for 12% of the posts in this thread alone.

ya, 98% of posting stats are made up on the spot

DirePhoenix, on 25 March 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

Also as to how I found these numbers, we all have tools at our fingertips to do the exact same thing. I could tell you, but that may spoil the fun of your own discovery.

lol this reads "I made them up" to me.

[ceeon]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 04:39 PM, said:

Honest answer.

The analysis on those who voted, showed that the majority of votes came from a very narrow demographic of our player base. And while they represent some of core players, they did not necessarily represent the opinion of the general user base. The majority of our players never visit, post, or read the forum content, so the poll could be considered weighted in favour of a specific demographic.

Since the majority of players who have an issue with 3rd person come generally from the core players, we elected to address this issue via this forum post to collect all of the concerns and ideas that this group faces or has with 3rd person.

Hey, I dont like Forums - but this Post i have seen - i hope there wil be no 3 person view -
I will ask my girlfriend why she didnt want to play MWO - I remember its cause of the verry good trial mechs which makes a start beatiful :]

Its a beta - why u dont send some Feedback formulars? and ask the people - Thats the Role of playing in Beta -.
Reporting some Bugs - Get the feeling to help develope the game - But still the client crahes - the textures on Alpine peaks are ugly - at the start is a housecomplex where everytime a player get stuck (will send a ticket i m sure its c7 or somethink like that)

Some of my Clan start to play other F2p games because we play since closed Beta -
Compared to War Thunder / Star Conflict would be nice to have some more and with love programmed Game Modes.

For Example 1 Player will be the leader where Mechs can Respawn at him - Aim is to kill the leader of the enemy team to stop respawn und kill the rest of there Team -
Develope some Feedback formulars - im willing to help improve the Game as many ppl ...

Please do something - or Situation like Christmas ?

Regards ceeon,

Edited by ceeon, 26 March 2013 - 12:27 AM.

[DirePhoenix]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 25 March 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:

lol this reads "I made them up" to me.

...Says Mister 43/981 posts in this thread. You make up almost 5% of this thread just by yourself and are short by just one post from being the top poster here. I'm sure you'll overtake the lead shortly, however.

[Zeus X]

DirePhoenix, on 26 March 2013 - 12:37 AM, said:

...Says Mister 43/981 posts in this thread. You make up almost 5% of this thread just by yourself and are short by just one post from being the top poster here. I'm sure you'll overtake the lead shortly, however.

OOO OOO, Do me do me!!!

[Corvus Antaka]

thats right. 3rd person will help this game.

But respawn, or stock mechs, or a real tutorial or mentoring system, or chat lobbies, or ...

community warfare?

A pink highlanders gonna help. Grab "that" crowd.

Hey, you know what?

I don't care. If PGI makes money off these crazy ideas, if their business thrives because they keep flip-flopping like a wet half-dead fish, then why are we complaining?

as long as we dont have to play with 3rd person people, I really could care less.

Go PGI! We all know your doing this because it's not draining important energy month after month raging this debate. Because your so on-track to bring us much greater things like CW and other promised features!

If third person brings revenue to make CW happen, more power to PGI for doing it. If it brings in the credit card draining teenager who puts bunnies in the cockpit so I can watch PGI design more and cooler mechs and make all those featured they promised happen..even better.

Time to grab some popcorn and watch this mech sink...or swim.

[Vehement]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 March 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Hey, you know what?

I don't care. If PGI makes money off these crazy ideas, if their business thrives because they keep flip-flopping like a wet half-dead fish, then why are we complaining?

as long as we dont have to play with 3rd person people, I really could care less.

Go PGI! We all know your doing this because it's not draining important energy month after month raging this debate. Because your so on-track to bring us much greater things like CW and other promised features!

If third person brings revenue to make CW happen, more power to PGI for doing it. If it brings in the credit card draining teenager who puts bunnies in the cockpit so I can watch PGI design more and cooler mechs and make all those featured they promised happen..even better.

Time to grab some popcorn and watch this mech sink...or swim.

I could not have said it better myself. I think that 2 arenas is a great idea. In a single match, everybody is only 1st person. In a DIFFERENT selectable type of match, everybody is only 3rd person. If you want to only play in 1st person, then participate in a 1st person view game, where everyone is restricted to 1st person. If you want to play 3rd person, then participate in a 3rd person view game, where everyone is restricted to 3rd person only. I do not think that a match with mixed 3rd person AND 1st person players is a viable option. I think the mixed game type would DEFINITELY thin out the other 2 types too much. Giving people the option to play 3rd person is the way to go. New players will likely fill the 3rd person type of match (and some vets) And it sounds like most veterans wish to stay with only 1st person, so they can do that. Of course some of the new players may migrate to the "from the cockpit" view type. I am a legendary founder. When I heard that someone had FINALLY made a MechWarrior ONLINE game.... It did NOT matter the cost to me, I was going to be in on that no matter what. I frequently play other online games, some F2P and some require subscription. I often quit one entirely and try something else. The one game, however, that I have always kept playing is MWO. I spent another $49.99 on MC today, I have spent that amount several times in the past for MC and will continue to keep plugging money into it because I love this game THAT much. Make 2 game types where only the view point is the difference and let people decide which they would like to play. I will support you regardless of your decision and I know plenty of players that are as committed as I am.

[Chemie]

While you said it in the OP, I think I need to state it again:

3 view queues * 3 (or more) regional servers * pug/premade/CW queues = 27 different queues. Now THAT is unworkable.

Firefall tried to implement split queues between 4 different "tiers" or chassis and it failed because that was too many queues. You simply cannot have regional servers AND three different view queues. Won't work.

Edited by Chemie, 26 March 2013 - 03:32 AM.

[Killer Koala 72]

Okay, my view on this topic is that of someone who has been playing online games since the modem first became afordable to the average keyboard jockey. I PERSONALLY think that 3PV should only be enabled if someone is willing to give up space on their mech for a beagle or UAV system. 3PV could be impemented as a strategic viewpoint, and with the weight of the communications gear for a UAV system it would need to be in a Heavy/Assault class Mech, with a command console AND a UAV launcher with a strict number of UAVS that last for a specific duartion.

hum, basically imagine a live view tatical map, with your Mech either stationary or moving in a straight line from UAV's launch. While inflight the UAV is a target - great for peeps with LBX weapons, and the potential to develop anti-UAV ECM bursts or somehting to disable its link back to the parent Mech is also another thing that could be considered.
I feel that this would be a more realistic 3PV implementation than an over the shoulder view, although if over the shoulder is the way to go then make the players camera a destructable object maybe?

ANy way I love the game in its current form, and feel that if it ain't broken, why mess with it?

[QuantumButler]

I like how the statement: "that was our position at the time, things change"

Basically means that no matter what they *promise* us, we have to assume that "things will change" and they'll break said promise later on.

Edited by QuantumButler, 26 March 2013 - 06:16 AM.

[Roadbeer]

DirePhoenix, on 25 March 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

You
are not reading the data correctly.

This was in response to your post about 50 pages of "NO". Postcounts and page numbers do no attribute to position of the participating parties. If you are getting the impression that "Everyone" is against this because you're seeing a high number of posts that say no, you're still in error, because a lot of these posts are by the same people, over and over and over again. Postcounts are irrelevant. Thread size is irrelevant. Just because you scream your opinion so often that no one can see anything else does not make your opinion any more or less relevant or even correct. It just means you're loud.

Snarky much? Just asking for a clarification of your data.

DirePhoenix, on 25 March 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

Also as to how I found these numbers, we all have tools at our fingertips to do the exact same thing. I could tell you, but that may spoil the fun of your own discovery.

Screen shot or it didn't happen.

DirePhoenix, on 26 March 2013 - 12:37 AM, said:

...Says Mister 43/981 posts in this thread. You make up almost 5% of this thread just by yourself and are short by just one post from being the top poster here. I'm sure you'll overtake the lead shortly, however.

Now you're just getting stalker creepy.

You're also not taking into account that A LOT of posts were moved and deleted, so your data is flawed, but thanking you for playing.

Edited by Roadbeer, 26 March 2013 - 06:11 AM.

[Alois Hammer]

DirePhoenix, on 26 March 2013 - 12:37 AM, said:

...Says Mister 43/981 posts in this thread. You make up almost 5% of this thread just by yourself and are short by just one post from being the top poster here. I'm sure you'll overtake the lead shortly, however.

"They say 3 percent of the people use 5 to 6 percent of their brain

97 percent use 3 percent and the rest goes down the drain

I'll never know which one I am but I'll bet you my last dime

99 percent think with 3 percent 100 percent of the time

64 percent of all the world's statistics are made up right there on the spot

82.4 percent of people believe 'em whether they're accurate statistics or not"

Todd Snider, "Statistician's Blues"

Roadbeer, on 26 March 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Screen shot or it didn't happen.

You're also not taking into account that A LOT of posts were moved and deleted, so your data is flawed, but thanking you for playing.

Hey, if numbers extracted by their proctologists work for the devs then why would their supporters be any different?

-shrug-

Edited by Alois Hammer, 26 March 2013 - 06:32 AM.

[Mystere]

Strajen Marez, on 25 March 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

Please excuse me while I step outside and proclaim the following statement.: " THERE IS NO GOD!"

Oh dear, you only found that out now?



Again, people seem to be forgetting, overlooking, or simply ignoring (via fear, hatred, disgust, stubbornness, [place any other negative emotion here ]) one very basic thing: If visual/sensor parity can be achieved between 1PV and 3PV, there will be no need to segregate the player base.

And with the following I bade thee farewell (at least for the rest of the day anyway ):

Humans will seek to destroy those which they fear or do not comprehend

Edited by Mystere, 26 March 2013 - 07:14 AM.

[ChaosInc]

How do you plan to deal with weight class imbalance 3rd person view will add? Light will lose a lot from not being able to hind in a mechs blind spot in as many situation. Assaults will lose all most nothing.

[Pyrrho]

My vote is for everyone being restricted to 2PV. As soon as you target someone in either 1st or 3rd person modes, you switch to 2nd person and get the view that your target sees. Good luck!

[Fut]

Mystere, on 25 March 2013 - 12:36 PM, said:

And again you judge people too harshly. Perception is not just about "physical limitations":

Perception is the organization, identification and interpretation of sensory information in order to represent and understand the environment.

Alright, so what besides some sort of physical limitation would cause some one to be unable to correctly perceive MWO in it's current state?

Edit:

All I'm saying, is that not everybody is capable of doing everything. Whether it's something physical, mental, or something else - some people can't do some things. This is a fact of life.

To lower the game to a point were all people are able to play is a bad idea. For most of the people who are currently playing the game will be too watered down to be enjoyable.

Edited by Fut, 26 March 2013 - 08:40 AM.

[Franck991]

WiFiN, on 25 March 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

Well, I'll throw in my two cents.
I don't see 3DP camera control as a form of direct control in ANY competitive game (though it's good for PvE coop for example).

Why? Well because it involves exploits in one way or another even with fixed camera - people will twist their torso to look above things or around corners even if you'll make camera zoom in.

Secondly, it will split the community - longer queues, skill level gaps. Doubt anyone needs it.

The only way I see to implement 3DP camera for direct control in the actual matches is to add dynamic "fog of war" that will effectively block the vision of the areas player can not see. This might be resourse intensive, but it's flawless.

The compromisive solution would be to add a tutorial with 3DP camera enabled that lets the player to learn the hud indicators and how orientation of their torso\legs affects their movement. As far as we have a training room they will get a hold of it far from the heat of battle. That way instead of being stuck in the ways of WoW-like MMORPGs they would actually grasp something new without additional frustration.

UAVs can work too, but I would rather see them used for recon, rather than parktronic for handicaped.
You're MechWarriors after all, bear this title with pride for your skills and determination.

I am not utterly against 3rd person view if it implies a fog of war concept,(i suggested something like it few pages before) as i don't think it would give such an advantage to see the landscape around a corner. Every core user know the maps by heart anyway so... as far as the undetected mechs stay undetected once in 3rd person view, i don't see such a real advantage for the other chap.

In the idea of brainstorming, i had this thought about 3rd person view and training while reading the quote above:

Since the trial mechs are so underpowered (in my opinion) and training/3PV concept comes back often, here's my fuel to the story: why not implement 3rd person view to trial mechs only, in this sort of context: "you're the new generation of mechwarrior being prepared for the real battles, soon you'll pilot your own stronger mechs but now, you need to get used to piloting these trials in a context of war" and then when they buy their mech, oops, no 3rd person view...

Honestly, i don't think the training/3PV idea mark the spot PGI's trying to aim at but... anyway.

Edited by Franck991, 26 March 2013 - 08:53 AM.

[Aidan McRae]

Since it's coming, here's the way I'd like to see it implemented (and the only way):

3rd Person is a selectable option for new players, and will no longer be available after a player has acquired their full 'cadet bonus' of C-bills. That gives them enough time to understand the torso/leg thing, and after that, they are competent enough to play the real game. The simulation. That everyone else does.