2522 replies to this topic

[NocturnalBeast]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 28 November 2014 - 12:56 AM, said:

So please, if you werent talking about TT, link me the sourcebooks for MWO.

Sigh...are you hallucinating or something? Please show me where I claimed that there were sourcebooks for MWO. Here is a link to a list of Battletech products for you though: http://www.sarna.net...leTech_products .

[RalphVargr]

Ed Steele, on 28 November 2014 - 12:33 AM, said:

Mechs that do not get slowed down even when almost completely submerged in water? 100 ton mechs that are brought to a complete stop when they step on a rock that is smaller than one of their feet, while light mechs run right through it? mechs that charge into each other at full speed and take next to no damage and then just warp through each other? Gravity that does not actually affect anything?.....

All quite true.

And if I hit any of your mechs with a cruise missile with a nuke, your mech will go away. Plus, a great deal of the map...

This is not a reality sim. This is an adapted table-top game that is a stompy robot shooter. Any inconvenient laws of physics are ignored.

[All Nine]

RalphVargr, on 28 November 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

All quite true.

And if I hit any of your mechs with a cruise missile with a nuke, your mech will go away. Plus, a great deal of the map...

This is not a reality sim. This is an adapted table-top game that is a stompy robot shooter. Any inconvenient laws of physics are ignored.

The point is that they aren't ignored in other iterations of MechWarrior/Battletech. They're not ignored because they are "inconvenient" to the game mechanics of MWO or the game universe. They are ignored because PGI are lazy and don't want to add/fix them, mainly because they can't sell a $500 solid gold collision package to old men with too much money.

Edited by All Nine, 28 November 2014 - 07:58 AM.

[Original ArchAngel]

Takes a while.. but at least it's good fun shooting others to make c-bills!

[Sandpit]

Captain Stiffy, on 28 November 2014 - 12:34 AM, said:

How about you show us where they don't?

Sure. The op has just over 100 likes. That's representative of a huge minority.
Next?

Vassago Rain, on 28 November 2014 - 12:44 AM, said:

Hmm, let's see.

There's 78 likes in Fixed Catapult Geometry Has Broken The A1, which is a 2013 thread.
153 in Ultimate Mech Discussion Thread, which is a 2012 thread.
13 massive upboats in Electing A Player "council" Of Sorts
This thread has 113 upboats.

For dev posts...

Russ has 91 likes in Heavy Mech Poll
He has 125 likes in Is Assault Mech Poll
Another 94 in Better Match Quality
175 for King Crab - Bringing Back Phoenix Or Founders

Oops! Seems that even if we go by upboat count, my thread is still far more important to the forum goers than even many of Russ' own threads.

So regardless of metric, I still win. Here, have a winking anime girl.

Trolls gonna troll i guess

[RalphVargr]

All Nine, on 28 November 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

The point is that they aren't ignored in other iterations of MechWarrior/Battletech. They're not ignored because they are "inconvenient" to the game mechanics of MWO or the game universe. They are ignored because PGI are lazy and don't want to add/fix them, mainly because they can't sell a $500 solid gold collision package to old men with too much money.

I'm an old man, without much money, who trained to use those inconveniencing physics packages about the time the TT version of FASA Battletech hit the shelves.

PGI had better start re-thinking this game.

NB: I E-Bayed off a lot of my old material to other old guys. It's a little more honest than F2P.

[Sandpit]

RalphVargr, on 28 November 2014 - 12:13 PM, said:

I'm an old man, without much money, who trained to use those inconveniencing physics packages about the time the TT version of FASA Battletech hit the shelves.

PGI had better start re-thinking this game.

NB: I E-Bayed off a lot of my old material to other old guys. It's a little more honest than F2P.

What would make the game more enjoyable for you?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

RalphVargr, on 28 November 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

This is not a reality sim.

Interestingly it was advertised as a sim

Sandpit, on 28 November 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

What would make the game more enjoyable for you?

This should be its own thread.

Seriously

[NocturnalBeast]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 28 November 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Interestingly it was advertised as a sim

We agree on something!

[Captain Stiffy]

Sandpit, on 28 November 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

Trolls gonna troll i guess

You mean like YOU? Seriously kid, get a life.

[Sandpit]

Captain Stiffy, on 28 November 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

You mean like YOU? Seriously kid, get a life.

Who's the one resorting to insulting name calling? Son
Kid
good for you sir

[Astrocanis]

All Nine, on 28 November 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

The point is that they aren't ignored in other iterations of MechWarrior/Battletech. They're not ignored because they are "inconvenient" to the game mechanics of MWO or the game universe. They are ignored because PGI are lazy and don't want to add/fix them, mainly because they can't sell a $500 solid gold collision package to old men with too much money.

Collisions were annoying. It's bad enough with all the direwhales trying to get in the last shot and alphaing a light/medium's backside, but when people (who really can't drive their mechs worth a hoot for the most part, anyway) ran into my light mech and my leg turned red, it really wasn't all that fun.

Laziness and assumptions of competence aside (and I submit that your snark should be reserved for those things you know something about, and then only unloaded infrequently), I think there are a lot of reasons for it besides "laziness". And, by the way, stuff your "old guys" comment.

Get the hell of my grass, you.

[Kattspya]

This game is ******* awesome. I leave for a year or so and I come back drunk as **** and see the complaining is the same as when I left only the grind is worse and they've added more mechs. As an added bonus >i cxan't even play because maintenance. PGI never change!

[Almond Brown]

Kattspya, on 28 November 2014 - 03:18 PM, said:

This game is ******* awesome. I leave for a year or so and I come back drunk as **** and see the complaining is the same as when I left only the grind is worse and they've added more mechs. As an added bonus >i cxan't even play because maintenance. PGI never change!

I know right. It totally sucks that they have the balls to Patch the game. LOL

[Bill Lumbar]

Kattspya, on 28 November 2014 - 03:18 PM, said:

This game is ******* awesome. I leave for a year or so and I come back drunk as **** and see the complaining is the same as when I left only the grind is worse and they've added more mechs. As an added bonus >i cxan't even play because maintenance. PGI never change!

If you haven't played the game in a year or two... and came back drunk, (assuming you didn't read the entire thread) and the servers are down because of the patch that many consider awesome they have coming in just a few min's.... how would you know if the grind is truly worse then what it was a year or two ago?

Given the fact PGI is putting out a patch that was slated several days from now, bringing in a new clan mech for the ones that bought the packs, and bumping up the X2 weekend to x2.5 to help make up the difference.... while some things might still be the same, I would say PGI is not doing all things they have in the past, which means to some degree its an improvement, and not the same old PGI.

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 28 November 2014 - 04:02 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

You guys couldn't let this die while I was away could you?

[Bill Lumbar]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 November 2014 - 04:14 PM, said:

You guys couldn't let this die while I was away could you?

Ummm no..... some couldn't...

But then again I am very buzzed.... off to get some of that x2.5 XP for my last timber to grind out

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 28 November 2014 - 06:00 PM.

[Vassago Rain]

Oh god, you guys added 10 more pages.

[Zerberus]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 28 November 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Interestingly it was advertised as a sim

Agreed.

But on the other hand, that brings up a both philosophical and technical issue:

How do you simulate something that doesn`t exist, without having to first physically create the real deal?

Since you can`t gather the data you need directly, all you can do is look for similar things that already exist, and extrapolate from there until you as a designer have something that, to you, looks like it could "feel" right without breaking the laws of physics.

That is, in and of itself, absolutely possible. However, it remains questionable as to whether or hot it truly does "simulate" the experience, as there is still no real experience to use as a baseline.

But then you add a constrictive set of rules that itself denies the existence of most known physics, and all of that just went up in a ball of smoke. You now have to somehow reconcile the massive differences between what would work in reality and what your new regulatory overlord of "Battletech" just imposed. Also possible, but the word "simulation" is getting stretched veeery far at this point, becasue you`re now simulating an object that does not exist, under a set of rules and thereby physics that also do not necessarily exist or even allow themselves to be logically reconciled in code with other things that MUST work for the entire concept to be able to stand.

But that`s not all. Now you have to remove a further major element of simulation and make it a "game". At this is more or less where the word simulation just self-erases itself from any discussion.

Now, is war simulatable in a game setting? Yes, to a degree. For example a high tier flight sim with pedals, hotas controls and a 3 monitor setup can feel very much like getting a mission and performing that mission, close enough to be used by some flight schools for early training (real simulator hours cost major bucks). But that`s also kind of like the "single player" version of warfare.

Becasue now you go on and add in more players, 23 in this case, that you may or may not have some degree of control over.

This inevitably results in complete anarchy with no resemblance to actual warfare or simulation, becasue everyone has their own idea of how these things should feel and what war is supposed to be. ANd that is where the last elements of simulation die, because you somehow have to take your superdetailed intricate sim and make it more "arcadey" so that it doesn`t stay too boring for the add crowd that can`t be arsed to spend 2 hours learning controls, while at teh same time keeping the simulation alive for the hc fans.

AND, since you`re not doing this for charity when teh dust settles, you somehow have to figure out how to expand beyond the niche fanbase that the restrictive ruleset you were imposed with brings along with it, becasue there is no way you can realistically make all of them happy enough to spend money and pay for tomorrow`s tank of gas.

I think when you really look at it good and hard, there was never a real chance for the game to have any sort of mass appeal and at the same time be a real "simulator".

[RalphVargr]

Zerberus, on 29 November 2014 - 03:01 AM, said:

I think when you really look at it good and hard, there was never a real chance for the game to have any sort of mass appeal and at the same time be a real "simulator".

We only need to look at World Of Warplanes, and War Thunder to see how all too true that is.

I stopped giving money to the Russians (where possible). I only have one gaming friend who plays Tanks (and, he is nuts). His ******* about team behavior are the same ones you see here.

Elite Dangerous releases on the same day that CW does. I'll give it about two months before they get most of the initial issues out of the way. It's a year ahead of Star Citizen, without the pretension. Fly through space, blow things up, make big bucks. Sounds great to me.