2001 replies to this topic

[MWHawke]

If there is 3rd person view, I want a Nuke so that the enemy won't see it coming from behind and will not be able to look over obstacles to see where I launch it from.

All everyone is doing is going in circles. You say you want to assist new players. If the HUD is minimal, how the he_ _ will this help new players play? Also, if you lock the Mech while in 3rd person view, it will not help the newbie play anyway. So, this argument goes to the fishes.

If you want cool pics, then locking the view to behind immediately counters this argument coz you can't see diddly.

PGI, what SUBSTANTIVE argument are you giving for 3rd person view??!?

Posted Today, 03:17 PM
Garth Erlam, on 16 November 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:
Hi Mechwarriors,

So Russ let slip in an interview with No Guts No Galaxy we are looking into a 3rd person view option. It seems a lot of people are unhappy with this, so we’d like to explain our thought process here.

For reference, we also strongly recommend listening to Russ’s comments, as he provides a clear case for our approach.

Over the course of development, we’ve had a huge number of requests for a 3^rd person camera option. At this early stage, it’s something we feel that warrants further analysis, understanding and exploration.



Can you help explain which is which??!? Or are you doing what you accuse other people of, ie. trolling?

[Zeus X]

MWHawke, on 27 March 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

If there is 3rd person view, I want a Nuke so that the enemy won't see it coming from behind and will not be able to look over obstacles to see where I launch it from.

All everyone is doing is going in circles. You say you want to assist new players. If the HUD is minimal, how the he_ _ will this help new players play? Also, if you lock the Mech while in 3rd person view, it will not help the newbie play anyway. So, this argument goes to the fishes.

If you want cool pics, then locking the view to behind immediately counters this argument coz you can't see diddly.

PGI, what SUBSTANTIVE argument are you giving for 3rd person view??!?

Posted Today, 03:17 PM
Garth Erlam, on 16 November 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:
Hi Mechwarriors,

So Russ let slip in an interview with No Guts No Galaxy we are looking into a 3rd person view option. It seems a lot of people are unhappy with this, so we’d like to explain our thought process here.

For reference, we also strongly recommend listening to Russ’s comments, as he provides a clear case for our approach.

Over the course of development, we’ve had a huge number of requests for a 3^rd person camera option. At this early stage, it’s something we feel that warrants further analysis, understanding and exploration.



Can you help explain which is which??!? Or are you doing what you accuse other people of, ie. trolling?

The same thing was said again within this forum too.

And on top of this, Bryan asked the core players how to implement 3rd person, while disregarding the player bases polls of 3000+ No's on 3rd person.

PGI right now is either doing two possible things, trolling the community for a HUGE April fools, or they are just plain screwing up and keep shooting them self in the foot with an Arrow IV.

Even further, they participate for a few posts, and then nothing for days, weeks, and even months, and then PGI wonders why the community blows up over things like 3rd person or coolant flush as examples.

PGI's lack of communication is getting way out of hand.

Edited by DCM Zeus, 27 March 2013 - 03:38 PM.

[Purplefluffybunny]

WOM; 'World of Mechs'. Far better title for your game PGI, far more descriptive.

Just think of the better market penetration you could get with such a name change and the mutual brand recognition! Hell, you already advertise MWO on the same black market websites that peddle p 0 r n, pirated software and all manner of OGRISH, NSFW, degrading material! Your advert even looks similar!

Go on PGI! Be brave and make the name change! Ignore all these naysayers! Introduce consumables and flourish! Oh wait you have done that one already.....

Edited by Purplefluffybunny, 27 March 2013 - 03:44 PM.

[van Uber]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

Still not a promise they wouldnt do it.

I never claimed they broke a promise. I get that they would eventually explore this venue. But I also got the impression that it would be years away and that 1st person was a cornerstone of the game design. Or as Paul puts it:

"Being the pilot is one of our key design pillars and 3rd person breaks that pillar on multiple levels as seen in many of the other 3rd Person discussions."


As can be read here: http://mwomercs.com/...is-when-needed/

Again my issue is that because they explore this a lot sooner than previously publicly stated, I'm concerned that other cornerstones, or "design pillars" might not be so fundamental to this game. I'm worried that this puts MWO on a slippery slope where increasingly larger concessions are being made to cater to a larger audience.

Some form of public reassurance would be nice and offset a lot of that worry.

[MayhemStrider]

I just read through all 58 pages of this shitstorm, and I have a few words to add myself. Both arguing parties (being PGI and the core player-base certainly want this game to be the best it can be. We want to pull in players, expand game-modes, and continue having excellent user experiences that this game can offer. It has its problems right now for sure because every expansion has managed to hinder at least someones experience with the game.

We need to start working together on this kind of thing Bryan, though a lot of ideas presented in this thread and many others are not good fits, there are a few that are. These typically come from many of the same people too. Perhaps we can find a way to find representation of the hardcore competitive community that could give input on content expanding this game as a quality assurance for the PGI team.

If you want to bring in new people, myself and many others I'm sure would be happy to participate in a mentor program of some sort until you have a quality tutorial for people that just want to jump in the game without doing any research. Don't just outright ignore the core audience, many of us play this game daily. We do know whats wrong and even have ideas for how to make the game better. Use that as a resource to make your game more successful.

-Strider

[MayhemStrider]

and to add to that, having arguments in venues like this just make more cancerous crap to sift through to actually pull something positive that will improve everyone's experiences. Don't be part of the problem. Take it to private chat or go kill each other in the field.

Edited by MayhemStrider, 27 March 2013 - 04:24 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Kraven Kor, on 27 March 2013 - 11:51 AM, said:

Yeah, go back to MW:4 days where if you weren't in a pro ladder, finding a 1PV / HOLA match was next to impossible since everyone was in the stupid 3PV / NHUA matches.

Ok, thats the second person to get that post wrong, let me clear that up.
I was replying to the guy who was saying there are only two sides to the argument. 3rd or 1st. There was a third que mentioned in the OP. It was that que to which I was referring

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 27 March 2013 - 06:13 PM.

[elsie]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

Why add 3rd person?

• Reduces friction for non-MechWarrior players, non-core players, and expands the MWO market to a broader audience. It helps to make the game more accessible and less intimidating.
  
• Offers up a different style of gameplay and tactics.

Could you expound on the different styles you would expect to come from third-person view? It seems to me that if the information is restricted to the same you would get from first-person, then nothing would really change as far as gameplay and tactics.

Oh, and for the record, I think 3PV is a bad idea.


elsie

[Red Klown X]

since we cant stop you ! Here some constructive idea :

- 3rd view must only use on training ground .
- 3rd view must only use with trial .
- 3rd view cant be switched ingame , and you have a 3rd view view as in wot for aim .

[raptorak]

3RD Person could be a cool addition, but must be made so that one cannot use it to see too much more than one might use it to tactical advantage.

One thing that you can do in MWO at the moment is sneak behind unsuspecting players. Giving a 3rd person mode buffs static noobs and other oblivious players in this aspect.

Also, after adding a 3rd person mode, you will be swamped with messages from 12 year olds asking why you can't use it in freelook, and how you can do that in WoT or other such games. Be wary of this.

Basically PGI, I hope you read my post because here is the most important thing you must not do. DO NOT alienate your current playerbase and your hardcore mechwarrior fans with game design decisions. You may well be looking for ways to cater to the masses to get a brief player increase and noob influx, but just look at Tribes Ascend. They made many decisions that angered old-school Tribes players, regen health, limited to 2 weapons per class, no modding etc. After an initial run of good reviews, they barely have enough players to keep the game running. I know this very well since I was part of that game since early Beta and have since left in disgust along with a whole host of other disappointed Starsiege fans.

This game could very well find itself in a similar situation, being that it is a good game with a hardcore fanbase but has a huge learning curve, just like Tribes. Be careful with how you play your hand and 'dumbing down' the game, because noobs are only in it for the short term, your core fanbase are the ones that keep buying MC and if you forget this don't plan on them staying around forever. I mean sure, you already have my $150, but I am far more likely to invest more in future if things evolve in a way that is good for the game. Honestly I understand how annoying and hyperbolic the hardcore are, but please don't forget that they only hate on you because they love you

And finally, I will take this opportunity to say that, in general, I think this game is indeed heading in the right direction. If 3rd person support is added, it can't just be slapped in there. It must come along with other features that ease the pain. Don't just put 3rd person in followed by a huge advertising campaign. Announce it alone with a single-player campaign

Finally, your netcode is the biggest issue for noobs in my opinion. The netcode fix for lasers has been a godsend to all players above 100 ping (I myself have 300+), and I imagine many new players could not understand why their shots are flying through targets with no damage. There is still a HUGE problem, however, with PPCs, missiles, and especially ballistics. Those weapons just fly through targets and have a huge delay when firing. I finally know how these weapons are supposed to work having used the training grounds. I never knew PPCs are supposed to fire directly where you fire, for me they wait a second to fire and fly through the target 50+% of the time, rendering them a massive heat-waste.

Edited by raptorak, 28 March 2013 - 03:01 AM.

[Chemie]

limit it to trial mechs and I would be fine with one queue. Spliting queues is bad. No one would complain if the newbs had 3PV and ONLY trials mech mixed in with 1st person view.

[Coolant]

Seems like those that only want 1st Person need a demographic as evidence there is interest in 3rd Person. As I've mentioned before, the most recent title in the MW series - MW4:Mercs - which, from roughly 2002 to 2012 had active players (servers only recently were retired), had primarily (overwhelmingly to be more precise) 3rd Person servers. It was just as easy to create player run 1st Person servers as it was creating 3rd Person (a simple checkbox). IF all of the die-hard 1st Person players that have either posted or voted in all these notorious threads/polls played Mercs (if you didn't how can you say you have supported the community the last 10 years?), then why weren't the majority of players playing in 1st Person only servers? Why was there empty 1st Person only servers? Why were there at times a complete absence of 1st Person only servers? And, the main question: Why were the overwhelming majority of players in 3rd Person servers? There is your demographics...

Edited by Coolant, 28 March 2013 - 10:07 AM.

[Stone Profit]

Coolant, on 28 March 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

Seems like those that only want 1st Person need a demographic as evidence there is interest in 3rd Person. As I've mentioned before, the most recent title in the MW series - MW4:Mercs - which, from roughly 2002 to 2012 had active players (servers only recently were retired), had primarily (overwhelmingly to be more precise) 3rd Person servers. It was just as easy to create player run 1st Person servers as it was creating 3rd Person (a simple checkbox). IF all of the die-hard 1st Person players that have either posted or voted in all these notorious threads/polls played Mercs (if you didn't how can you say you have supported the community the last 10 years?), then why weren't the majority of players playing in 1st Person only servers? Why was there empty 1st Person only servers? Why were there at times a complete absence of 1st Person only servers? And, the main question: Why were the overwhelming majority of players in 3rd Person servers? There is your demographics...

Unfortunately, this reasoning is flawed, as the 3rd person in MW4 provided much better tactical abilities than first person, and so if you wanted to play MW4 competitively you HAD to play in 3rd person. Therefore the data is skewed from what people prefer to what people felt they were forced to use.

[SilentWolff]

Stone Profit, on 28 March 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

Unfortunately, this reasoning is flawed, as the 3rd person in MW4 provided much better tactical abilities than first person, and so if you wanted to play MW4 competitively you HAD to play in 3rd person. Therefore the data is skewed from what people prefer to what people felt they were forced to use.

This is absolutely correct.
MW4 jumped the shark right when Mektek took over and most of the good players had already left. Bunch of easy mode 3rd person bads were left that wanted Mechassault type of gameplay.
And make no mistake, 1st person (in MW4 in particuliar) took a hell of alot more skill than 3rd person did.

[Coolant]

Stone Profit, on 28 March 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

Unfortunately, this reasoning is flawed, as the 3rd person in MW4 provided much better tactical abilities than first person, and so if you wanted to play MW4 competitively you HAD to play in 3rd person. Therefore the data is skewed from what people prefer to what people felt they were forced to use.

I don't see how it is flawed. You could play ONLY 1st Person against ONLY 1st Person or 3rd Person vs 1st/3rd Person. If a server was set for 1st Person, then there was no option AT ALL for 3rd Person. These advocates of 1st Person only, IF they are so adamant against 3rd Person, would've started 1st Person only servers and with so many 1st Person players (according to all the vast amounts of people voting against 3rd Person) the 1st Person only servers in Mercs should've been flooded with players. They were not. Mercs players had the option to play 1st person only or 3rd person...the vast majority chose to play in 3rd Person servers.

Edited by Coolant, 28 March 2013 - 10:38 AM.

[Stone Profit]

Coolant, on 28 March 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

I don't see how it is flawed. You could play ONLY 1st Person against ONLY 1st Person or 3rd Person vs 1st/3rd Person. If a server was set for 1st Person, then there was no option AT ALL for 3rd Person. These advocates of 1st Person only, IF they are so adamant against 3rd Person, would've started 1st Person only servers and with so many 1st Person players (according to all the vast amounts of people voting against 3rd Person) the 1st Person only servers in Mercs should've been flooded with players. They were not. Mercs players had the option to play 1st person only or 3rd person...the vast majority chose to play in 3rd Person servers.

I do not have much personal experience with MW4 multiplayer, but what I did have reflects what I wrote. However, I can say that the sheer fact that anyone played in third person shows that there is in fact a market for third person in mwo, much to the dismay of those who claim there is not.

[Coolant]

SilentWolff, on 28 March 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:

This is absolutely correct.
MW4 jumped the shark right when Mektek took over and most of the good players had already left. Bunch of easy mode 3rd person bads were left that wanted Mechassault type of gameplay.
And make no mistake, 1st person (in MW4 in particuliar) took a hell of alot more skill than 3rd person did.

If I remember correctly, Mektek did it's first Mekpatch just 2 years after the game was released. There were still plenty of players still playing. Majority were playing 3rd Person servers. If 3rd person wasn't viable to keep players playing, why did the game continue as long as it did? How long would it have survived if only 1st Person? And, it still begs the question, if PGI wants to attract a larger user base, how does your point about good players leaving within 2 years be an argument against 3rd Person? Seems like the opposite actually. The fact that players left in Mercs, and some players having left MWO, would encourage the game to expand to attract new players to fill the void.

[Alienfreak]

DirePhoenix, on 28 March 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

Forums are a self-selected portion of the game's population because players can select for themselves whether or not they participate in the forums regardless of if they're playing the game. You can play the game without participating in these forums. You can't be a part of these forums without having some interest in the game.

The polls you see on these forums that are created by forum participants are an even more selective portion of the game's population because first they have to select to participate in the forums in the first place, and on top of that, select to take part in the poll, which is their choice.

Regardless, talking about whatever self-selected portion 'B' of self-selected portion 'A' of a game's population a feels about a topic is pointless to this discussion, where we're supposed to be giving ideas about how to implement a design decision that has already been made, not discussing whether it was the right decision or not.

Participants of voting polls are self-selected because they can select for themselves whether or not to participate while having cast a vote. You will not participate if you have no interest in politics.

See where we are heading?
Only compulsatory polls by goverments are "not self-selected".

[Gallowglas]

Thontor, on 28 March 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

I find that to be a faulty analogy. It's more like if you had pizza restaurant in that town... And you only sold deep dish pizza... You advertised yourself as a deep dish pizza restaurant....

Then you realized you would get more customers if you sold a thin crust pizza as well. But a poll of all of your current customers says most of them don't want thin crust! They want deep dish only!

Well, of course they do. They wouldn't be your customers if they didn't prefer deep dish.

That doesn't change the fact that most people prefer thin crust and you, as the restaurant owner, would get more customers and make more money if you sold thin crust too.

The poll saying most of your current customers prefer deep dish doesn't change that fact. Because the very fact that they are already your customers makes it a biased sample.

Exactly this. That is quite succinctly why one could suggest that any poll of the forums involves selection bias. That's not just my opinion. That's based on rules that have been reinforced by countless consumer psychologists for whom I create online studies. Basically, if it's not a strictly demographically balanced or completely random sample, it's unusable data.

If that doesn't explain it for you, then there's really nothing more to say that's going to convince you.

[Ghost_19Hz]

3rd person is not something i want but, if i don't have to be forced into playing 3PV i'm ok.

It will bring in more players, even if i never get to play any matches with them, at least we get to share it with them somehow. And it'll be more money for the further development of MWO for everyone.