2002 replies to this topic

[AndyHill]

Why did you shoot at rocks instead of going to 1PV for shooting like you're supposed to?

[Hekalite]

Krivvan, on 01 August 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

I find it funny that the forum response (especially in this thread) is so negative, but the majority of the people actually playing were fine with it, even if it wasn't segregated.

Oh? Where did you get that impression? The feedback thread was very careful not to ask questions like "did you like it" or "would you feel comfortable playing in mixed mode matches" etc. If you go by the poll question did it offer a tactical advantage only 33% said no. Not to mention, there were many people in the feedback thread asking for some of the disadvantages to be removed or scaled back (presumably from that 33%). How many people who are currently "fine with it" will maintain that position if adjustments are made?

[Gulinborsti]

With all the disadvantages for 3rd person view observed (visible marker/drone, aiming harded, no mini map, reduced HUD, ...) it looks like people forcing themselfs to play in 3rd person view will have a hard time.

Good, I appreciate this.

But I can already imagine the whining about the "arcade feeling", "hard aiming" and eventually they might be heard and PGI will make 3PV more competetive..

Very bad, game ruined.

However, some points still need to be confirmed (didn't go through 99 pages):

1) Players should be forced to stay in 3PV for a whole match, no switching between 1PV and 3PV.
2) The "I can look over cover" issue needs to be solved.

I am aware that there are 2 or more queues planned to separate 1PV only, 3PV only and mixed mode players.

But player base separation will lead to serious complaints and then - again eventually - make PGI to merge those queues at some point and then ... game ruined.

Edited by Gulinborsti, 02 August 2013 - 04:32 AM.

[Shiro Matsumoto]

Just.. dont put it in, please. Scrap the idea.

[Terran123rd]

Based on the vid, I'm pretty hopeful about PGI's implementation of 3rd. It looks almost exactly like I had imagined it should and about the only thing missing would be to cull things not visible to the cockpit (or otherwise increase how many things pull the camera in).

Oh, and get rid of the toggle (though I'm sure it's only there for testing and will get replaced with a match setting when it goes live).

[VagGR]

can you at least tell us why are you so stubborn about this? you seem so determined to implement 3pv no matter what we or anyone else is saying. what makes so sure this is such a great idea...

[Kojin]

So some of my fears I said in my earlier post in this thread seem to be there. I couldn't test it, but the screen grabs and couple of vids seem to show them.

From what I can see -

The camera shows too much vertically above the head and too wide a FOV
- Possibly can be fixed by restricting FOV to a small degree of change (say 60-70 horizontal) only 'letterboxing' some of the view. Shift UI elements to top maybe? Also the floating camera should close up more when mech is behind cover.

I question the lack of a minimap. Although it does limit the information gathering in 3pv, it also removes any newb friendly whereabouts information.
- Put minimap at top of screen, but only show player direction, topographic features and only current target arrow.

I like the floating camera module behind the mech. I think that this shouldn't be destructible in itself as many sugest, but I do think a percentage of damage it receives should be put onto it's mech. CT damage makes sense.

I do also think 3pv should be locked in so you can't switch between 1st and 3rd person during a match. It does, however, make sense to be able to switch during testing so people can see the differences "live" so to speak.

I would rather it not be in, but if it's going to be a feature, make it work properly and give little to no advantages rather than doing it just because.

[Ian Howe]

Well,

I think that 3PV is a really really good idea but not for pvp. It should be available for testing grounds and maybe later for other modes against npc targets. But everyone is playin' that game because it's a nice >First Person Simulation Shooter< with a lovely tactical challenge.

Ever played Counterstrike in 3rd person?
Or Unreal, CoD, other shooters?

I think not.

But as many of us we have played MW4:Mercs and other MW games where we sometimes or only played in 3rd person against npc targets. So i like the very beeing of 3PV but there are so many benefits from using 3rd person and others with 1st person that the key gameplay is to switch those views as often as you can to get the best combination of awareness, aiming and so on.

Sorry but i dont want to push every 2 seconds F4 just to be as good as possible..

But i would surely using 3PV to learn my mechs turning, size, movement and exploring the maps to improve my knowledge on testing grounds.

Summarized:

I want to be the pilot

not the camera


Possible solution:

- Add 3PV in Training grounds, Tutorial and private matchmaking (on/off option)

- 1PV ONLY when dropping in Conquest or Assault or other upcoming pvp modes exept private matchmaking



P.s. THAT LITTLE CAMERA IS JUST TO CUTE TO BE ACTIVATED IN DANGEROUS SITUATIONS!

[Mystere]

Wow, PGI gives a preview and people are acting as if it's already the final implementation.

Also, some of the "suggestions" (e.g. 70% C-bill and XP penalty) sound more like an effort to sabotage the implementation.

In any case, I was expecting a classical implementation or a (possibly holographic) tactical map/display. As such I was pleasantly surprised.

Assuming the blatant bugs (e.g. not seeing legs, lag, jitter, FPS degradation) are fixed, several improvements can be made by making the drone an integral part of the gameplay as follows:

• Make the drone a deployable item with a delay in seconds. (tunable)
  
• Make it suffer at least the same visual degradation experienced from the cockpit when shot at.
  
• Allow it to be destroyed. (How much damage? How many drones does a mech have?)
  
• Integrate the drone with the UAV module, with the former as default equipment and the latter as an upgrade. (Why even have two separate UAVs?)
  
• Reduce the intensity or even eliminate that annoying blinking light that can be seen from way too far.
  
• Give it compressed 360 degrees of vision, possibly as a pilot module upgrade. (Similar to a BT neurohelmet's vision -- hardcore mode? )

Finally, do not separate 1PV from 3PV.



That's it for now.

Edited by Mystere, 02 August 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Mystere, on 02 August 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

Finally, do not separate 1PV from 3PV.



That's it for now.

Do you REALLY think 3PV will bring in enough players (numbers AND money-wise) to replace the ones who are guaranteed to leave if the queues are merged?

Or were you just trolling with that last statement?

[Shae Starfyre]

My opinion on the matter, if it matters, is that in the long term, if this game is to make the cut, which I believe it will, this implementation of 3rd Person View, coupled with the segregation of servers and 1st and 3rd person views, only bolsters the game.

It is screaming with the potential of a sand-box experience.

If enough players gravitate to this game, they will have many choices both tactically, competitively, and casually.

The more options, modes, gizmos and what not that they provide should be embraced.

IF YOU HAVE THE CHOICE TO NOT PLAY THAT MODE there is no issue, there will be plenty of players; more than imagined if YOU ALL JUST CHANGE YOUR OUTLOOK and quit being doomsayers!!

Please, people. Read the up on these issues, test them, try them, feedback them, but don't destroy diversity; help build diversity.

Edited by Aphoticus, 02 August 2013 - 09:02 AM.

[Salient]

We've been lied to by PGI. They promised us mechwarrior, but instead are giving us world of mechs. Probably all part of their plan, milk as much money out of the mechwarrior fanbase as possible, then abandon them so that they can focus on stealing WoT player base.

[Belorion]

Salient, on 02 August 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

We've been lied to by PGI. They promised us mechwarrior, but instead are giving us world of mechs. Probably all part of their plan, milk as much money out of the mechwarrior fanbase as possible, then abandon them so that they can focus on stealing WoT player base.

Which Mechwarrior title was it that was FPV only?

[Shae Starfyre]

Promises, Promises....hearing it makes me feel like I am talking to my 5 year old...

All they have to do is stop calling it 3rd person view, and code it to be an indepth peice of equipment with synergy with pilot skills, other deployables, and even mech quirks.

There is no imagination around here. There needs to be no splitting of queues. We merely have to embrace technology, and make it so that it is part of the game, and not part of the UI.

Deployable, Destructable, Ammo and Equipment Driven; Differetn Types (Covert, Entrenched, POV, Attachable), whatever! Code it as part of the game, and stop calling it 3rd person.

Imagine the scout's role then or the Assault that drives deep to his death just to get to drop an entrenched deployable so that the rest of his team can gain the intel.

Edited by Aphoticus, 02 August 2013 - 10:29 AM.

[Serpentbane]

I Wonder how the DFS comunity would have responded if Falcon Dynamics said "hay, we need more users, lets make a version of A10 Warthough that looks, feels anf flies more like Hawx" with the official reason being that the game is to hard to understand for most people. I say, if those people does not want to learn how to start the A10 button for button, well, let them buy Hawx. In my opinion this splits the comunity and the player base, and also makes double the workload in some aspects of the game, while it is very clear that some important issues is still not resolved with the game in general. Focus on the comunity at hand.

[Mystere]

Hotthedd, on 02 August 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

Do you REALLY think 3PV will bring in enough players (numbers AND money-wise) to replace the ones who are guaranteed to leave if the queues are merged?

Or were you just trolling with that last statement?

Yes, but only just a little bit.

But, seriously, if they can make the 3PV drone seamlessly integrate with the gameplay as I outlined above, the game will be well on it's way to not require separate queues. The drone can be tailored to be a major part of the "information warfare" aspect of the game.

And keep in mind, the "information" you think you are getting from the drone might actually be misinformation.

[Stewbawl]

as a proponent of 3rd person view i don't quite understand the imposed limitations of the 3pv HUD. i fully understand the floating drone with the red light over our head, 3pv expands your view possibilities so it should expand the view possibilities of those looking at you, but why do you lose your minimap? i understand adjusting for the difference in view but there shouldn't be limitations based on viewing preference. why should we be forced to arm lock while in 3pv?

i also don't see why ques would need to be split

honestly it feels like 3pv is being punished just because there is outspoken hatred against it. just because it appears that the minority of the player base are pro 3pv doesn't mean that it should be treated so harshly before it has even made the transition from the test server to the primary server.

my true feelings on the subject are that 1st person view is far superior and has the advantage, 3rd person view is more of a cosmetic thing. i paid money to unlock colors and paint schemes and i'd like to be able to enjoy them in game and not just in my mech bay. i see myself running around in 3pv when getting to a location or simply running about, but when it comes time to brawl it's 1pv time.

[ManDaisy]

Krivvan, on 01 August 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

I find it funny that the forum response (especially in this thread) is so negative, but the majority of the people actually playing were fine with it, even if it wasn't segregated.

Thats a lie your gonna keep repeating until people assume its try isn't it?

[MercJ]

Posting this here too, as I believe it would address many of the actual gameplay concerns:

I posted this in the public test feedback thread as well, but I firmly believe adding a delay to deploying your drone (switching views), perhaps even with a cool animation showing your drone detach/deploy, would solve many of the concerns people have about using it to gain an unfair advantage. That way, you couldn't quickly peek around a corner and then switch back to aim effectively. Make it a strategic choice.

You should have to decide if you want to see a little differently while giving your position away or stay in the cockpit (and receive all of the sensor information/warnings/minimap etc). Also, you should have to make sure you pick a good time to switch views, as it would effectively take you out of the fight while you transition - the actual time taken would have to be tested.

[ManDaisy]

I'd rather have it locked at the start of a match but I could see a shutdown/startup sequencess where the viewer straps on a pair or oculus rifts and takes em back off.

Edited by ManDaisy, 02 August 2013 - 12:16 PM.