849 replies to this topic

[Targetloc]

If it's not restricted to the testing grounds... fail.

[valkyrie]

daemur, on 20 March 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

Who is this 3rd person?

The worst second worst idea your studio has ever had.

[Rikard Mauer]

Tennex, on 20 March 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

i'm not the person you think i am

i think we all have the games best interest in mind. i'm open to anything that may add to the playerbase

I'm open to anything that may add to the playerbase as long as it doesn't take away from the original vision and greater potential of the game itself.

[Josef Nader]

daemur, on 20 March 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

Who is this 3rd person?

The guy who's gonna make me put this game down indefinitely.

[Davers]

Rikard Mauer, on 20 March 2013 - 07:43 PM, said:

Explain to me how you think third person won't have any advantage over first person please.

I didn't say that. I said

Davers, on 20 March 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

As long as it doesn't have any advantages over First Person then I'm fine with it.

If it does have advantages over First Person I would not be fine with it.

[MegaBusta]

Davers, on 20 March 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

As long as it doesn't have any advantages over First Person then I'm fine with it.

It has an advantage over first person by its VERY NATURE. It dramatically expands your field of view and gives you peripheral vision you wouldn't have otherwise.

It would ruin the "pseudo-sim" feeling of the game, and on top of that, you know all those cockpit items? Yeah, you're never gonna see them now.

[QuantumButler]

Rikard Mauer, on 20 March 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

I'm open to anything that may add to the playerbase as long as it doesn't take away from the original vision and greater potential of the game itself.

Which this does, because the devs originally, way back when, said "hell ******* no" to 3rd person and coolant and gave us their word they'd never ever add these things.

Shows you how much their word is worth, eh?

[Sean von Steinike]

The betrayal continues.....disgusting...truly disgusting.

[Rikard Mauer]

Davers, on 20 March 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

I didn't say that. I said




If it does have advantages over First Person I would not be fine with it.

I worded it poorly.

In what manner do you believe third person can be implemented without providing an advantage over first person while also not being completely pointless?

Edited by Rikard Mauer, 20 March 2013 - 07:49 PM.

[FrupertApricot]

NONONONONONONONONONONO

[Vassago Rain]

I like to think of 3rd person as the grim reaper, who puts two canadian companies on the street, because it means they've lost all integrity, are all liars to the core, and will never work in the software business again.

The big question here is, why did I trust the people who developed Duke Forever's multiplayer with 60 dollars? Oh well. Shouldn't have expected more. shame on me.

[jakucha]

Sean von Steinike, on 20 March 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

The betrayal continues.....disgusting...truly disgusting.

They haven't actually said anything yet. Calm down Nancy.

Edited by jakucha, 20 March 2013 - 07:49 PM.

[Damocles69]

"Who is this 3rd person?"

​ unprofessional... please dont troll your community. you all at PGI have set a pretty low standard so far. hate to see you drag this IP through the mud more so than you already have

Edited by Damocles69, 20 March 2013 - 07:50 PM.

[Targetloc]

[Vlad Ward]

5 c-bills says it's restricted to the Training Grounds anyways.

[Mazzyplz]

when you activate third person LRM should look a bit like this:


and the sky should turn like this:

[Josef Nader]

The very idea that they're wasting man-hours working on a feature that nobody wants rather than putting all their effort into producing features that we have been promised and waiting for from the start is absolutely sickening.

Edited by Josef Nader, 20 March 2013 - 07:51 PM.

[MrPenguin]

Damocles69, on 20 March 2013 - 07:49 PM, said:

"Who is this 3rd person?"

​ unprofessional... please dont troll your community. you all at PGI have set a pretty low standard so far. hate to see you drag this IP through the mud more so than you already have

Learn2Forum

[Vermaxx]

Josef Nader, on 20 March 2013 - 07:40 PM, said:

If they go to 3rd person period, that will be the last day I play.

Why do people say this? Do you realize this represents significant time, energy, and effort on PGI's part to develop, bugtest, bugfix, and "balance" a new feature like 3rd person cam? There's a whole mess of technical problems that need to get fixed. If PGI is busy working on a 3rd person camera no one bloody wants, they -aren't- working on other features that we DO want, like Community Warfare, improved netcode, and performance fixes.

Judging by some of the things they've rolled out after internal testing, I doubt it will derail any of the major fixes very long. Doubly since the major fixes are forever in coming anyway.

QuantumButler, on 20 March 2013 - 07:40 PM, said:

I like how the MWO community unanimously said "no" to 3rd person, and PGI went "well too bad you're getting it anyway"

Truely they listen to our input and give us what the playerbase wants.

Unfortunately, that's the CoD playerbase.

Then maybe more of the 'hardcore' fans should have paid money. No, I'm not digging you. I'm digging the people who sit there admitting they've paid zero so far and complain about everything PGI does. PGI is a business, with evil overlord businesses who want to make money off Mechwarrior. Bosses do not care about IPs, or fans, or legacies. They care about bonuses. Bonuses come from financially successful products. If people wanted the true-to-legacy game, more of them probably should have paid. PGI's evil overlords went the way of the most likely payout.

COD titles sell like hell, and are also fun if you are not complete arse at them. Or maybe you think they're too easy. Whatever, the sales figures speak for themselves. You can contrast BO2s sales with MOH-Warfighter if you want proof that not all shooters are created equally.

Sorry to break it to some of you - those who enjoy 'hard' video games with serious learning curves and significant simulator elements are not the majority, no matter how vocal they are in a forum. Games are made to sell product, not cater to die hard fans. The ones made for die hard fans are often significantly underfunded, slow to release, totally free, and/or die off too soon.

[Vassago Rain]

Vlad Ward, on 20 March 2013 - 07:50 PM, said:

5 c-bills says it's restricted to the Training Grounds anyways.

I would like to sell you a bridge that's not made of coolant.