2002 replies to this topic

[Heeden]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 26 March 2013 - 07:55 PM, said:

Why arent they asking THEM for "how to implement it" and instead asking us, who are the minority that they dont care that we dont want the feature?

It's a brain-storming session. They want to implement it, they're not sure how yet.

This thread was made to allow the forum community to give some input and a few good ideas have surfaced.

[post edited to remove some stupid]

Edited by Heeden, 26 March 2013 - 09:54 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Heeden, on 26 March 2013 - 07:55 PM, said:

Hardly surprising, for every constructive post you get 2 pages of people who either don't know what the thread is for, are deliberately trolling or left their tin-foil hat at home.

I call irony due to thew nature of the deliberate trolling in the statement lol

Heeden, on 26 March 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

It's a shame, I think that means they've abandoned the forum as a place for feed-back.

They did that at the start... Remember? We're the minority? The great silent majority are the ones theyre listening to.

Heeden, on 26 March 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

This thread was made to allow the forum community to give some input and a few good ideas have surfaced, unfortunately too much trolling/missing-the-point is going on and I somehow doubt they'll bother in the future.

Yeah, trolling and missing the point or telling them we dont want it but they dont care
Even ppl that tell them HOW to do it tell them first how they dont want it lol

[Heeden]

[content deleted for being stupid]

Edited by Heeden, 26 March 2013 - 09:56 PM.

[Stone Profit]

Third person view is going to be fine and in fact even benifit MWO in the long run! WHAT!?! I hear you say. Look at the big picture.

1: You will be able to choose whether you will play with people in first or third person.
2: But wait, that will segment the population! Except it wont. Those already here do not want third person for the most part. Youve said it yourselves. Which means the people third person view brings in will be entirely new to the playerbase, or at the very least those who came back for third person view. This means that there will essentially be two sides of MWO, 1st pv and 3rd pv. So you will still not be affected.
3: Those individuals who want to play in 3rd pv have money. MWO needs people who have money to spend it. So, Viola! MWO will benefit from having 3rd person view. PGI would be ******** to NOT have 3rd pv.
4: Anyone who doesnt understand this and quits, is, shall we say, less than intelligent.
5: Those who cry about 3rd pv need to realize the economics of the real world.
6: Anyone who still demands there not be 3rd pv is selfish and would rather MWO fail than have them introduce a mechanic that will in no real way affect them if they choose not to use it. These people need to be shoved out an airlock for the good of humanity.
7: Im not going to use 3rd pv, because I want to play a sim of MW, and not watch the back of my mech walk around, and since I will be able to choose whether I play with those using 3rd pv and I will choose not to, this will not affect me in any way except to support the game franchise I so very much enjoy.
8: PGI is doing fine, they did not "betray" you or break any promises. If you think they have, you need to figure out what promise means. I read all the info they have put out over the past year and a half, and they never promised anything other than to make an MW f2p online game. And they have. AND they have done a great job at it.

That is all.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Stone Profit, on 26 March 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

2: But wait, that will segment the population! Except it wont. Those already here do not want third person for the most part. Youve said it yourselves. Which means the people third person view brings in will be entirely new to the playerbase, or at the very least those who came back for third person view. This means that there will essentially be two sides of MWO, 1st pv and 3rd pv. So you will still not be affected.

Well itll be fun to watch the third que die then I guess

[Michael Costanza]

I don't care much about third person view if I'm not being forced to use or play against it... but I do wonder if it should be a higher priority than some other elements of the game. I also wonder if, just by adding the functionality, it will create exploits similar to how people delete map assets or alter their config files to gain an advantage.

[Heeden]

[content deleted for being stupid]

Edited by Heeden, 26 March 2013 - 09:56 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Heeden, on 26 March 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

3rd and mixed queues you mean, but I don't see why you're so upset by the business if you think it will die due to unpopularity anyway.

Please quote where I said that

[Heeden]

[content deleted for being stupid]

Edited by Heeden, 26 March 2013 - 09:57 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Heeden, on 26 March 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

Didnt know the third que was the entire game/business?

as you tried suggesting here:

Heeden, on 26 March 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

but I don't see why you're so upset by the business if you think it will die due to unpopularity anyway.

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 26 March 2013 - 08:52 PM.

[Heeden]

[content deleted for being stupid]

Edited by Heeden, 26 March 2013 - 09:57 PM.

[Franchi]

Stone Profit, on 26 March 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

Third person view is going to be fine and in fact even benifit MWO in the long run! WHAT!?! I hear you say. Look at the big picture.

1: You will be able to choose whether you will play with people in first or third person.
2: But wait, that will segment the population! Except it wont. Those already here do not want third person for the most part. Youve said it yourselves. Which means the people third person view brings in will be entirely new to the playerbase, or at the very least those who came back for third person view. This means that there will essentially be two sides of MWO, 1st pv and 3rd pv. So you will still not be affected.
3: Those individuals who want to play in 3rd pv have money. MWO needs people who have money to spend it. So, Viola! MWO will benefit from having 3rd person view. PGI would be ******** to NOT have 3rd pv.
4: Anyone who doesnt understand this and quits, is, shall we say, less than intelligent.
5: Those who cry about 3rd pv need to realize the economics of the real world.
6: Anyone who still demands there not be 3rd pv is selfish and would rather MWO fail than have them introduce a mechanic that will in no real way affect them if they choose not to use it. These people need to be shoved out an airlock for the good of humanity.
7: Im not going to use 3rd pv, because I want to play a sim of MW, and not watch the back of my mech walk around, and since I will be able to choose whether I play with those using 3rd pv and I will choose not to, this will not affect me in any way except to support the game franchise I so very much enjoy.
8: PGI is doing fine, they did not "betray" you or break any promises. If you think they have, you need to figure out what promise means. I read all the info they have put out over the past year and a half, and they never promised anything other than to make an MW f2p online game. And they have. AND they have done a great job at it.

That is all.

You know that 3rd person is handled cleint side right?

You know that most players in the beta know how to modify their user config files doing things like unzipping files and deleting files and inserting files to speed up render and decrease grainy textures right?

You know that many beta testers have demonstrated that PGI does not have an effective file checking system right?

You know that it will be a simple matter to modify your client to enable you to use 3rd person view in 1st person games right? I predict online tutorials on how to will be available inside of 12 hours of 3rd person going live.

[REDACTED]

Edited by Helmer, 26 March 2013 - 09:20 PM.
Ad Hominem

[Stone Profit]

Franchi, on 26 March 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

You know that 3rd person is handled cleint side right?

You know that most players in the beta know how to modify their user config files doing things like unzipping files and deleting files and inserting files to speed up render and decrease grainy textures right?

You know that many beta testers have demonstrated that PGI does not have an effective file checking system right?

You know that it will be a simple matter to modify your client to enable you to use 3rd person view in 1st person games right? I predict online tutorials on how to will be available inside of 12 hours of 3rd person going live.

Are you really to dim to put this stuff together?

Now that Ive proven you wrong, you start trying a different tact, which in fact makes no point as thats the players, and therefore pgi has done nothing to you. but you still feel so very wronged. Life must be difficult for someone with such a huge victim complex. "Pgi is screwing me over!' "no they arent" "well, theyre making it so other players can screw me over!" you are so very laughable.

[Franchi]

Stone Profit, on 26 March 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

Now that Ive proven you wrong, you start trying a different tact, which in fact makes no point as thats the players, and therefore pgi has done nothing to you. but you still feel so very wronged. Life must be difficult for someone with such a huge victim complex. "Pgi is screwing me over!' "no they arent" "well, theyre making it so other players can screw me over!" you are so very laughable.

Actually I posted in this thread becasue I have been watching it for some time. Took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about as it was in another thread and I don't normally look at who the poster is. In the other thread you asked for a post where PGI said "first person only" I provided exactly that from Paul himself.

Now on your drivel.

I don't have a "victim complex" When/if I have to play with people in 3rd person either because PGI combines the ques or people modify their files I will play one of the many other games I have installed or find another game to buy and play.

PGI could institute a file checker, PGI could simply NOT put 3rd person in, PGI has chosen this route instead. What follows is entirely on them.

Edited by Franchi, 26 March 2013 - 09:44 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Franchi, on 26 March 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

Actually I posted in this thread becasue I have been watching it for some time. Took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about as it was in another thread and I don't normally look at who the poster is. In the other thread you asked for a post where PGI said "first person only" I provided exactly that from Paul himself.

Now on your drivel.

I don't have a "victim complex" When/if I have to play with people in 3rd person either because PGI combines the ques or people modify their files I will play one of the many other games I have installed or find another game to buy and play.

PGI could institute a file checker, PGI could simply NOT put 3rd person in, PGI has chosen this route instead. What follows is entirely on them.

Its funny he stopped posting in that thread (or I assume as all I see is "This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Stone Profit. View it anyway?") when Helmar showed up and came here instead.

[DirePhoenix]

LordBraxton, on 26 March 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

At the end of the day I have polls with ~5000+ votes and a community majority backing me up against the rhetoric of a few posts?

Whats your point? I know not EVERYONE is against 3rd person but when its 5000 vs 300 I think you KNOW where your community's interests lay.

so thanks for the wall of text but it really says nothing

The point I am making is that referring to those polls with 5000+ "votes" is pointless on several levels (P.S. These polls are not votes. You're not voting on anything. You don't get to decide game design, the devs do). First, 5000 is barely over 1% of the known population (and if you can't see how that's unrepresentative I can't help you) and second, 5000 is doubtfully even the amount of forum participants here, meaning there are people on these forums that aren't taking part in someone's poll (shocker), and third, the people that participate in these forums don't represent anyone other than themselves anyway.

We're a different demographic than the average gamer. Most gamers don't participate at all in the forums for the games they play. I know I only participate in a couple of the forums for the games in my collection. Does it mean I enjoy those other games any less? No. Does that mean I am any less part of those other games' playerbase or community? No. Does it mean I care any less about the direction or changes to those games? NO. We are inherently biased by the sheer intent to even come here and participate in discussion about it (whether it's in the form of posting or even just reading and lurking), when we could just as easily simply play the game when we feel like and do something else when not playing the game like pretty much everyone else.

So what is YOUR point here? If it's to try and throw some poll figures around like they mean something, I'm telling you those are pointless. Whether or not this game gets a third person view is not up for debate. None of us here get to make that decision but the devs, and they have made their decision. Ekman has been kind enough to throw us a bone and let us offer some suggestions on how to implement a third person view, which I and several others have already done. And even then, it's still not up for us to decide, the devs still get to make that call. "Don't do it at all" is not an option.

mekabuser, on 26 March 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

these types of posts need to be examined.. A cursory examination of this post reveals.. THE MOST AMAZING THING>>>
Its almost too funny to type..
literary digest,.. great depression.. .. truman. LMAO>>
oh and btw.. we arent talking a few percentage points here.. we are talking those who WANT 3pv are almost off the radar completely..
Your logic, your post.. everything.. its all malarkey.. The worst type to boot.. Ze wall of text that confuses many , but is .. ahem.. still wrong.

I should have realized that post was going to be too heady for some. Perhaps a cartoon would illustrate this better? Because this is the exact same behavior that we're seeing here in regards to these forum polls, and even in your own post. All the newspapers at the time were following the same data from the same people. All saying that there's no chance in hell that anyone wanted Truman for President. They had millions of poll results, all saying the same thing! Why was anyone else even running against Dewey? It was such a sure thing they even went ahead and printed the next day's papers with the headline of Dewey winning, when the truth was that they weren't listening to the "entire community", only their own "minor" demographic.

[van Uber]

Mystere, on 26 March 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

If visual and sensor parity can be achieved between 1PV and 3PV, what possible objections could there still be for not segregating the population?

As someone who really don't want to see 3PV I have to concede to your points. However, to me, your point rely on a big IF. I just have not seen an example where this has been successfully implemented without a difference in perceptive abilities. But I'm not saying it can't be done.

My largest concern is the split queues. If there is the slightest difference I want it out of the matchmaker since I truly believe that it will hurt the game in the long run.

But thats not really the big picture here. The big picture is the fear that MWO suddenly finds itself on a slippery slope. 1PV was described as something holy, but if that is up for debate one begin to wonder; "What is the next sacrosanct, pillar of game design that will be revised?". And that is probably why I feel a bit cheated, when something that was so outspoken when I signed on is suddenly not important anymore.

It's hard to argue against 3PV "if it is done properly". But so is "discard heat as a system, because it creates a threshold for a large demographic group that would otherwise spend enormous amount of money on this game".

[Jagdt]

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

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.

This poll (Currently showing 85% against) ?
http://mwomercs.com/...s-poll-revived/

Now, what you should be asking yourself instead, Bryan & crew is "Why is this poll only voted on by a percentage of people?" and "Why is there such a narrow usage of the community forums?" and "How can we get the votes from the other people in our player base, the vast majority of people who just login and play?"

Have you considered you're falling into a Base Rate Fallacy?
http://www.fallacyfi...g/baserate.html

I really really hope this doesn't become another MechCommander clone by the implementation of 3rd Person View. Since, that's really the only people I can see wanting it. . . Those who don't like actually wrapping themselves in a cockpit and having an immersive experience. Those limited forever to wondering what the next best console is going to be. Because that's where I can all too readily see this leading: Console Port.

No.

[QuaxDerBruchpilot]

Anyone here who thinks that PGI will support 1stPV endless once the 3rdPV-Kiddy-Contest-Group drops in? If it's correct that you can make money only from those 3rdPV-fanboys, then 1stPV will die faster than you can say "Holy Gauss explosion!".

[Alienfreak]

Jagdt, on 27 March 2013 - 03:38 AM, said:

This poll (Currently showing 85% against) ?
http://mwomercs.com/...s-poll-revived/

Now, what you should be asking yourself instead, Bryan & crew is "Why is this poll only voted on by a percentage of people?" and "Why is there such a narrow usage of the community forums?" and "How can we get the votes from the other people in our player base, the vast majority of people who just login and play?"

Have you considered you're falling into a Base Rate Fallacy?
http://www.fallacyfi...g/baserate.html

I really really hope this doesn't become another MechCommander clone by the implementation of 3rd Person View. Since, that's really the only people I can see wanting it. . . Those who don't like actually wrapping themselves in a cockpit and having an immersive experience. Those limited forever to wondering what the next best console is going to be. Because that's where I can all too readily see this leading: Console Port.

No.

Bryan and PGI have especially two problems if you ask me:
1. How do they come to the conclusion that the forum people are not representative for a randomized statistic?
We have elite founders here, noobs, veterans, TT gamers, TT haters, fans of boating, haters of boating, fans of COF and convergence and haters of convergence (only some examples.) You get almost ALL kinds of opinions in here.
So how do they come to this conclusion?

Their current approach seems rather like eristic dialectic. Most likely a Schoppenhauer 6.3 approach. (Prämisse unbewiesen aufstellen unter der das Argument gültig ist.)

2. Why are those other people more important than the forum folks?
They may be more. But are they more important?

You can assume that almost EVERY founder has a forum account and at least looked through the forums. And AFAIK the founders gathered 5 Million Dollars. By PGI standards that would be enough for 10 Maps and on top of that 40 Mechs! So those alone gathered more money than we have content now!
And if you assume, which seems logical, that people who invest a lot of real money in the game are generally more dedicated to the subject it would seem logical that those people tend to have a higher percentage amongst them that visit the forums than the non paying casual gamer.

So what does PGI think they will achieve by getting some uber causal 3rd person gamers on board?
If they are not willing to learn how to use the Mechsystem (my 15 year old female cousin was used to it after less than an hour) we have currently with 1st person I doubt they are willing to spend like $8 on a ******* camo for their mech. Let alone paying like $20 for a mech.

You must keep in eye that the paying hardcore fans are alienated by this move and it could lead to a high rate of abandoning of this game in that demographic. Especially if we have 3rd person in Realm vs. Realm matches. So is it worth it getting rid of your well paying customers for some non paying kiddies that will stay for the game for 3 weeks and then leave?



P.S.: I think the ACTIVE PLAYERBASE of 500000+ persons (5000 people are supposed to be less than 1%) is highly exaggerated. I see so many people so often in matches that I doubt I am really getting pitted against 200000 players in my region. Getting a specific player is at most 4/200000 (if he plays a lot more than others) per match. So seeing him like 4 times in 20 matches is 4*20/200000/4 = 1/10000. I doubt that number A LOT. Or I am just freaking lucky .

Edited by Alienfreak, 27 March 2013 - 04:27 AM.