2002 replies to this topic

[LogicalTightRope]

Pando, on 30 June 2013 - 07:40 AM, said:

This is exactly what I expected from you...nothing

You delivered exactly what I expected. Thanks. I love being right.

There is no reason to be a jerk, buddy. Patronizing your opponent only makes you the bad guy.

Edited by LogicalTightRope, 30 June 2013 - 07:42 AM.

[BigMekkUrDakka]

Pando, on 30 June 2013 - 07:40 AM, said:

This is exactly what I expected from you...nothing

You delivered exactly what I expected. Thanks. I love being right.

If talking about mechwarrior. Licensed mechwarrior video games. Licensed mechwarrior video games with 1st person ONLY pitted against licensed mechwarrior video games with OTHER perspectives is irrelevant to this discussion thread...i think you're in the wrong thread.

What did happen?

I called you out
I cited specifically your incorrect term usage
You fired back with blah blah advantage blah blah i'm not going to answer you
Childish, again what I expected from you.
Facts; there are more licensed mechwarrior IP games with 3rd person which does make 3pv apart of the mechwarrior experience regardless of what you FEEL personally.
Run along now.

I'm going home now. Thanks for the discussions LogicalTightRope. Enjoyed it

This is exactly what I expected from you...nothing

You delivered exactly what I expected. Thanks. I love being right.


What did happen?

I called you out
I cited specifically your incorrect term usage
You fired back with blah blah advantage blah blah i'm not going to answer you
Childish, again what I expected from you.

Run along now.

PS: see i can do the same nice going to personalties then i tried to keep you on discussion about MWO not some other unrelated games

Edited by BigMekkUrDakka, 30 June 2013 - 07:46 AM.

[LogicalTightRope]

Pando, on 30 June 2013 - 07:40 AM, said:

I'm going home now. Thanks for the discussions LogicalTightRope. Enjoyed it

I see you had fun gloating about your victory over BigMekkUrDakka and repeatedly insulting him. Sorry you didn't earn the pleasure of doing the same to me.

[Hotthedd]

Are there any 3PV advocates who would be against having 3PV and 1PV on separate servers? If so, why? The only reason I can fathom to be against this solution is the fact that 3PV must give a sensory advantage over 1PV, and 3PV advocates would want to use that advantage.

[Pando]

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

I see you had fun gloating about your victory over BigMekkUrDakka and repeatedly insulting him. Sorry you didn't earn the pleasure of doing the same to me.

I insult him because he needs to be insulted. I didn't have to result to insulting you. I could though.

[LogicalTightRope]

Pando, on 30 June 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

I insult him because he needs to be insulted. I didn't have to result to insulting you. I could though.

Well if you feel the need to insult him, maybe you should halt the conversation and come back when you cool off.

Hotthedd, on 30 June 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

Are there any 3PV advocates who would be against having 3PV and 1PV on separate servers? If so, why? The only reason I can fathom to be against this solution is the fact that 3PV must give a sensory advantage over 1PV, and 3PV advocates would want to use that advantage.

Well I'm a 1pv advocate who wants 3pv and 1pv on the same server, but a huge cornerstone of that is making sure the viewpoints are fair. I can certainly see someone wanting to play 3pv fairly but not wanting to split the community, so I think it's plenty possible for it to be legitimate. Don't assume the worst all the time, only usually =P

[Mystere]

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

providing a better data visualization solution for people who play 3pv but not 1pv is unfair because that resource is then only available to people playing 3pv, not 1pv. As a result of the reduced workload for the brain, 3pv players are more able than 1pv players to allocate more resources for other things like piloting and gunnery. It is not a great solution. Logic, my friend.

Better HUD design is fine, as long as it's available to both, of course.

In the organization where I work, we deal with massive amounts of data collected all over the world ( ). At the same time, we have people who are excellent at spotting anomalies given nothing but the raw data. As such, for these people, we give them the data via spreadsheets.

Unfortunately, a number of other people are not as capable. For these people, we convert that same data into graphs and charts that help them better understand.

Eventually, some of the "spreadsheet masters" also start using the delivered charts and graphs, or the data visualization tools used to produce them. Plus, some of the "picture" people become more proficient processing the data via spreadsheets, and/or also start using the same data visualization tools.

It's a win-win situation.

Edited by Mystere, 30 June 2013 - 08:05 AM.

[BigMekkUrDakka]

actually i never saw anything besides selfish arguments from 3pv advocates like:
"i want it"
"other mw games had it so i want it here"
in various obfuscated form's of course
sometimes you hear "it will increase playerbase" but there is no definitive proof of this actually happening, and there wont be any in the future, growth and reduction of active players can be completely unrelated to 3pv to be honest, actually judging by forums its the least concern of community

[LogicalTightRope]

Mystere, on 30 June 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

In the organization where I work, we deal with massive amounts of data ( ). At the same time, we have people who are excellent at spotting anomalies given nothing but the raw data. As such, for these people, we give them the data via spreadsheets.

Unfortunately, a number of other people are not as capable. For these people, we convert that same data into graphs and charts that help them better understand.

Eventually, some of the "spreadsheet masters" also start using the delivered charts and graphs, or the data visualization tools used to produce them. Plus, some of the "picture" people become more proficient processing the data via spreadsheets, and/or also start using the same data visualization tools.

It's a win-win situation.

So how about we give the same information to 1pv players? Not sure I like that completely, because I think of MechWarrior as a game in which you do have to think and multitask to succeed, kinda what sets it apart from some other games. However, if 3pv gets such an advantage, 1pv should too - viewpoint preference should not impact core gameplay in a major way, in my opinion.

BigMekkUrDakka, on 30 June 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

actually i never saw anything besides selfish arguments from 3pv advocates like:
"i want it"
"other mw games had it so i want it here"
in various obfuscated form's of course
sometimes you hear "it will increase playerbase" but there is no definitive proof of this actually happening, and there wont be any in the future, growth and reduction of active players can be completely unrelated to 3pv to be honest, actually judging by forums its the least concern of community

"I want it" makes sense, considering it's a video game, made for entertainment (but I understand the implications may be too large for it to be a sufficient answer). However, you're right that the fact that it was in other MW games does not excuse its addition here - it must be proven to me before I accept it because too much can go wrong. Segmenting the playerbase threefold in the queues can be rather major.

As for playerbase and attracting new players: I don't get that argument so much either. Most other shooters are 1pv only, so I don't think 3pv will attract the outside crowds as much as others think. Then again, MW isn't most other shooters.

Edited by LogicalTightRope, 30 June 2013 - 08:11 AM.

[The Prowler]

Heeden, on 21 March 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

I think 3rd person mode should be limited to a few "novelty" game types. Possibly with lower CBill/MC rewards to encourage 1st person to be the "main" mode.

This is based on the assumption that 3rd person is good for training and can be a fun quirk, but 1st person is the way MW is supposed to be played.

I quite like the idea of lower earnings to promote FPV, until people have enough c-bills and xp to not care on the difference it makes just to try and get an advantage from TPV. it should be strongly pushed towards FPV is the way to go but TPV is there to get used to the system.

[BigMekkUrDakka]

its drifted in my mind right now, i cant remember any game that changed its development course this much (1pv to 3pv its like a u turn for me), probably developers of fallout initially wanted to make post apocalypse game on d&d rules but decided to make their own system i don't know probably if we had this much publicity back in the day i would feel myself betrayed
in all honest its just feels like bad decision right before release they could wait for year at least for that and see if its even necessary for any reasons

[Hotthedd]

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

Well if you feel the need to insult him, maybe you should halt the conversation and come back when you cool off.


Well I'm a 1pv advocate who wants 3pv and 1pv on the same server, but a huge cornerstone of that is making sure the viewpoints are fair. I can certainly see someone wanting to play 3pv fairly but not wanting to split the community, so I think it's plenty possible for it to be legitimate. Don't assume the worst all the time, only usually =P

The problem is that 3PV can be file hacked into 1PV-only games. Separate servers would eliminate this issue.

[LogicalTightRope]

The Prowler, on 30 June 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

I quite like the idea of lower earnings to promote FPV, until people have enough c-bills and xp to not care on the difference it makes just to try and get an advantage from TPV. it should be strongly pushed towards FPV is the way to go but TPV is there to get used to the system.

I don't think one should be pushed more than the other. They are (or, should be) just preferences. If someone legitimately wants to play 3pv, and the system is as fair as Bryan Ekman says it is, be my guest. I just hope it can be equal.

Hotthedd, on 30 June 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

The problem is that 3PV can be file hacked into 1PV-only games. Separate servers would eliminate this issue.

Hm. That's a big concern. In the ideal situation that 3pv and 1pv are effectively equal, that wouldn't make a difference, but I don't think it will be flawless at all.

[Hotthedd]

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

Hm. That's a big concern. In the ideal situation that 3pv and 1pv are effectively equal, that wouldn't make a difference, but I don't think it will be flawless at all.

There is no way to make 3PV and 1PV "effectively equal" if we are to believe the reasons PGI has given for bringing 3PV in the first place.

If it is not inherently easier, it will not attract the phantom crowd they say that 3PV is marketed to.

If it is not rendered in such a way as to let people take screenshots of their Mech' in action, then it will not satisfy the current advocates of 3PV.

In short, 3PV will either be what the 3PV advocates want, or it will be not worth doing in the first place. I would bet on the former. And if that is the case, separate servers is the best way to go.

[van Uber]

Hotthedd, on 30 June 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

In short, 3PV will either be what the 3PV advocates want, or it will be not worth doing in the first place. I would bet on the former. And if that is the case, separate servers is the best way to go.

I don't like the separate servers idea. I want a natural progression from 3PV to 1PV through different incentives like economy and loyalty. Separate servers would hamper that progression.

[Hotthedd]

van Uber, on 30 June 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

I don't like the separate servers idea. I want a natural progression from 3PV to 1PV through different incentives like economy and loyalty. Separate servers would hamper that progression.

3PV players do not want to "progress" to 1PV. 3PV players want the situational awareness absent from 1PV and the ability to see their own paintjobs.

All it takes to get good at 1PV is practice.

[Coolant]

BigMekkUrDakka, on 30 June 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

actually i never saw anything besides selfish arguments from 3pv advocates like:
"i want it"
"other mw games had it so i want it here"
in various obfuscated form's of course
sometimes you hear "it will increase playerbase" but there is no definitive proof of this actually happening, and there wont be any in the future, growth and reduction of active players can be completely unrelated to 3pv to be honest, actually judging by forums its the least concern of community

I'm gonna be completely self-less from now on and agree with everyone that has a different view because what I want in MWO doesn't matter as long as someone else gets their way....not

[Mystere]

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 08:09 AM, said:

So how about we give the same information to 1pv players? Not sure I like that completely, because I think of MechWarrior as a game in which you do have to think and multitask to succeed, kinda what sets it apart from some other games. However, if 3pv gets such an advantage, 1pv should too - viewpoint preference should not impact core gameplay in a major way, in my opinion.

It is the same information, whether you're in 1PV or 3PV. But by design, 3PV would be less mentally challenging than the current HUD. And that is precisely one of the reasons PGI gave for deciding to put 3PV into the game.

[Mystere]

BigMekkUrDakka, on 30 June 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

tl:dr: stop pointing at other mw games they have nothing to do with mwo

Hold a second. Isn't MW4 one of the reasons people are using to discredit 3PV? People can't have their cake and expect to eat it too.

[Mystere]

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

Heh. It's reasonable to think some 3pv proponents have ulterior motives considering the reasons many present for 3pv would also allow for advantages ...

That's fine an all, but ...

I do not appreciate being lumped into that group.

LogicalTightRope, on 30 June 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

For instance, seeing the majority of your rad paintjob, while somehow not being able to see enemies behind your mech. By the way, any elaboration on that?

And as for your specific question, the answer is the same as the answer to the following question:

Is there anything in your HUD that tells you there is a mech behind you?

(It's a trick question. )

Edited by Mystere, 30 June 2013 - 01:45 PM.