26 replies to this topic

[slide]

I posted this in the official 3rd person response thread only to have it deleted. After 24 hours I am still ticked off at Bryan Ekmans attitude so here it is again. Bryans original post is on the 3rd page half way down.

http://mwomercs.com/...n/page__st__380


[color=green]Bryan Ekman, on 22 March 2013 - 10:09 AM, 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.[/color]

My response,

I just read this and quite frankly I am beyond incensed at your casual disreguard for the opinions of the very people who have effectively given PGI a chance of bringing this game to any sort of fruition and not incidently paying your wages for the last 6 months or so.

If the silent majority haven't got the time to post or defend their position then quite frankly their opinion doesn't count. You have had thousands of people tell you on these forums that 3pov is a bad idea and very few argue that it is a good one. Have you had thousands of emails asking for this, I doubt it because you couldn't possibly read them all. 3rd person is a complete back flip on what you promised at the begininning of this project and when people try to hold you to your own terms you completely ignore them. This is beyond arrogant.

I see now that PGI has completely decieved the people who invested their time and money in closed beta, by taking dedicated BT fans to the cleaners knowing that they would spend money at the mere mention of a mechwarrior title and are now going to make a generic fps with big stompy robots and the mechwarrior name. Do yourselves a favour and tell people this is going to be COD: Mechwarrior edition.

Any faith that I had that PGI can deliver what they promised is now gone. All that remains is to see how fast PGI can nail the coffin lid down on the BT universe.

Mods, go ahead and ban me, delete my account if you want, I am past caring at this stage

[Solomon Ward]

Get over yourself.

They were fair enough to give me the option to queue with people who use 1st person view only.

So i am fine with it.

Others prefer 3rd person view? To each his own as long as i am not forced to play with them.

[AlexEss]

Well that is the beauty fo it, is it not.

You are free to stop playing when ever you like. But i heard that MW:LL is still running so you do not need to leave the BT world.

The way i look at it is that i rather have a game then no game. And since this is a on-line game it need a steady stream of new players. Thus you need to make the game inviting to a wider audince or they will just go to hawken and MWO will get shut down.

But i am sure that PGI thank you for your contribution of about a years worth of subscription and wish you luck on your future gaming. =P

[AceTimberwolf]

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

Well that is the beauty fo it, is it not.

You are free to stop playing when ever you like. But i heard that MW:LL is still running so you do not need to leave the BT world.

The way i look at it is that i rather have a game then no game. And since this is a on-line game it need a steady stream of new players. Thus you need to make the game inviting to a wider audince or they will just go to hawken and MWO will get shut down.

But i am sure that PGI thank you for your contribution of about a years worth of subscription and wish you luck on your future gaming. =P

Problem with MW LL is that Development has stopped so all future of MW/BT is MWO and MWT

[slide]

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

.

But i am sure that PGI thank you for your contribution of about a years worth of subscription and wish you luck on your future gaming. =P

I doubt that they care enough to thank me at all.

[AlexEss]

So... it is still playable. And the OP seems to be vehemently against change so no development would suit him/her fine.

Also i'd like to add to make it very clear in case the OP missed it

They do not disregard "our" opinion... They just put it in to a bigger scheme of things. "we" are not the end all be all source of opinion on how things will be done. The devs like Paul and Bryan them self have stated on several occasions that they do not like third person view either but when a majority of the customers (and potential customers in case of people trying it on cons and trade shows) express they miss a feature it is smart to listen to them. It is business management 101

[Dvergar]

slide, on 23 March 2013 - 03:53 AM, said:

If the silent majority haven't got the time to post or defend their position then quite frankly their opinion doesn't count.

This is the dumbest thing in your post, which is pretty impressive given how bad the rest of it is.

These forums are terrible. Just because someone doesn't post here doesn't mean anything except that they're smart enough to avoid this cesspit of insane over-reaction, massive hyperbole, and empty threats. All three of which this hissyfit contains.

You're going to quit playing? Good riddance.

[MadPanda]

Solomon Ward, on 23 March 2013 - 03:58 AM, said:

They were fair enough to give me the option to queue with people who use 1st person view only.

Have fun playing with the same 20 people, that is during peak hours. Bad time of day = "failed to find a game". Bottom line is that we, "the core democraphic", need the casual newbs to play with us.

[AceTimberwolf]

MadPanda, on 23 March 2013 - 04:21 AM, said:

Have fun playing with the same 20 people, that is during peak hours. Bad time of day = "failed to find a game". Bottom line is that we, "the core democraphic", need the casual newbs to play with us.

Yes, Quite True. I can only play at night in the States and well in Japan I would be playing against Russians and others from the Asian Continent which for the Most part play in 3rd (Thanks WoT). So I would be dropping with a few people everyday. It'll be closed beta all over again. (Which I can always fall back to if need be)

[Joseph Mallan]

MadPanda, on 23 March 2013 - 04:21 AM, said:

Have fun playing with the same 20 people, that is during peak hours. Bad time of day = "failed to find a game". Bottom line is that we, "the core democraphic", need the casual newbs to play with us.

But will they be playing MWO with us or are we going to play Call of Mechs with them? I don't care about 3rd person myself, But MechWarrior isn't any other game and they aren't MWO. Keep it that way for verity's sake.

[AceTimberwolf]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 March 2013 - 04:26 AM, said:

But will they be playing MWO with us or are we going to play Call of Mechs with them? I don't care about 3rd person myself, But MechWarrior isn't any other game and they aren't MWO. Keep it that way for verity's sake.

Yea that too! Why try to make it like other games? Isn't the whole point about making a product you are proud of is that it is Unique and brings something new to the table? Albeit did that many people really play MW2 MW3 and MW4 in 3rd person? Online and offline I always played in First and of course the pods of yore.

[slide]

3rd person isn't my problem. My problem is that several thousand people have voiced an opinion that they are ignoring. When you come up against an issue that really bugs you and you are ignored you will understand.

As has been asked many, many times. Put up a mandatory poll in the client and the truth will come out. I can't see this happening because obfuscation is a much better form of communication.

BTW I have $220 invested in this mess and I will be getting every cent of value out of it, so no I won't be quitting.

[Chrithu]

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

And since this is a free to play game it needs a steady stream of new players.

Fixed that for you. There's a lot of sub-based games that were perfectly able to keep runing and being maintained with a more or less core audience of a few hundret thousand people. There is absolutely NO NEED for a constant influx of new players with the correct payment model. What there is might be a desire for a constant influx of new players in order to earn more money.

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

Thus you need to make the game inviting to a wider audince or they will just go to hawken and MWO will get shut down.

This is true. The question is however if 3rd person REALLY is the thing to achieve that. In my view if one deludes himself to believe that he's viewing at things WAY TOO SIMPLIFIED.

The things far more important are already being worked on and will be finished long before 3rd person. I'm speaking newbie friendlier controls (we already have that), Tutorials (will become part of training grounds), some way of ingame guideline of what to do first and next during your first few games (I guess that will be the achievements).

Then come other more important things that keep people away like balance, performance and stability.

And then after all this is sorted out one can argue if having 3rd person really is worth having caused such a stir in your core playerbase, taking the risk of splitting the playerbase by seperate queues, potentially making the client more prone to cheating, using dev time on it that could be used elsewhere and all that just for the off chance that there is a meaningful number of gamers out there that are just not playing MWO because MWO has no third person view gameplay. I think it isn't.

It is really hard to believe that there are more than a few thousand gamers world wide for which 3rd person truelly is something that makes you want to play a game regardless of the gameplay or feature set. This is such a hilarious thought in my view. As if someone that is not lured in by the outsight of killing big stompy robots that on top of it are highly customizable suddenly goes "Hey I've got to try and throw money at this" as soon as 3rd person view is added to the feature set.

Even people already in the community that say they want 3rd person want it just for one thing: Cosmetic reasons. Most people say that it'd be nice to see your own mech from time to time (I can totally see how that is hard pressure for the devs to do it). Some people are saying that they prefer playing in 3rd person, but the fact they are playing already shows that it is nowhere near a necessity to have 3rd person to get them to play. It's a minor cosmetic thing. BUT the flip coin is that in a competitive game that was build around the first person experience this minor cosmetic thing is causing a shitload of problems some of which are not solveable so that there's need for bandaids like having seperated queues.

And before the argument of "Sims had 3rd person eversince" is spewed around again: Yes there were 3rd person CAMERAS in Sims ever since. But in most sims there were no HUD in that view it was purely for viewing pleasure and not meant as an alternate main view for actual gameplay.

I'm ranting again. I will stop that now. I'm going back to playing my Jaggermech.

Edited by Jason Parker, 23 March 2013 - 04:39 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

slide, on 23 March 2013 - 04:34 AM, said:

3rd person isn't my problem. My problem is that several thousand people have voiced an opinion that they are ignoring. When you come up against an issue that really bugs you and you are ignored you will understand.

As has been asked many, many times. Put up a mandatory poll in the client and the truth will come out. I can't see this happening because obfuscation is a much better form of communication.

BTW I have $220 invested in this mess and I will be getting every cent of value out of it, so no I won't be quitting.

several thousand... v 7 billion potential customers. 9,000 or 7,000,000,000. Several thousand is a small number v the total world population. Even if half the worlds Population never will play a video game that is still 3.5 BILLION potential customers.

Perspective adjusted.

[Chrithu]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 March 2013 - 04:53 AM, said:

several thousand... v 7 billion potential customers. 9,000 or 7,000,000,000. Several thousand is a small number v the total world population. Even if half the worlds Population never will play a video game that is still 3.5 BILLION potential customers.

Perspective adjusted.

This needs further adjustment. That is 3.5 billion potential customers that according to what brian said are not playing MWO because it has no 3rd person. Ok that was an unfair turn around of words. That is 3.5 billion customers that brian hopes to motivate to play this game by adding 3rd person. Hmmm. That still does not sound better.

...

[Joseph Mallan]

Of those 3.5 billion close to half will not want 3rd person. Still 1.25+ billion players!! Cause you can't make everyone happy.

[MadPanda]

You guys are so insensitive. Did we suddenly forget the existance of third world countries? How about you start your calculations on how many people own a computer.

[Moromillas]

No, Bryan is right, and you are wrong. The posters on the forum do not accurately represent the entire player base.

This is too much melodrama. They're adding in all sorts of new features, and they're doing it without watering down the game. It's not some horrid catastrophe.

[Thirdstar]

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

The way i look at it is that i rather have a game then no game.

This one line just stood out to me.

I would personally rather play a good game than a bad game. I won't actively support MWO JUST because it's the 'salvation' of Battletech/Mechwarrior gaming.

Are many of you so desperate for ANY game in this setting that you've dropped your standards to just have A game instead of having a GOOD game?

For example I despise the Michael Bay version of Transformers. Those movies may have brought Transformers back into the mainstream, but I would personally rather they had never been made than have them turn into the abominations they now are.

Edited by Thirdstar, 23 March 2013 - 05:46 AM.

[Chrithu]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 March 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

Of those 3.5 billion close to half will not want 3rd person. Still 1.25+ billion players!! Cause you can't make everyone happy.

I think this is not quite the point. I still have a hard time to believe that 3rd person or no 3rd person is a play or not play decider for 1.75 billion people. That sounds really far fetched.