Jump to content

- - - - -

3Rd Person


2004 replies to this topic

#21 Sadist Cain

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 600 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:14 PM

Whilst I still completely fail to see the reasoning behind adding 3PV as its been so vicously opposed above all else by the community and will inevitably steer a playerbase towards a far less beneficial class of customer to the franchise I will add...


The only reason people want 3PV is to SEE the mech theyve spent hours customising tweaking and fiddling with, along with the coolness it dispenses. the best option I can see is a very minimalised HUD with minimal accuracy and movement benefits sacrificed for cool looks.

If at all possible the best thing would be some sort of projectile cam that can be enabled so that when a Ballistic weapon or missile is fired you get to see it in flight, Many sims offer this feature along with 3PV and dont fail to create a realistic simulation environment (DCS A-10 for example)

Personally I think you should save any efforts you're putting into 3PV as it's simply not worth the time and energy for what it'll bring in return, efforts would be put to much better use developing some form of replay theatre or action replay capture system.
This will satisfy the needs we ALL have to see our beautys in battle without having to mess with the game mechanic, no one at all could dislike the addition of a replay theatre and you folks reap the benefits of an arseload of free advertising by the many creative and sometimes boarderline obsessive Video makers out there. That alone will hoik in far more players than any cheesy 3PV could ever hope for.

#22 Bryan Ekman

    Creative Director

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 1,106 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:14 PM

View PostShadowVFX, on 21 March 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

One final thought: I would prefer it to lock you into either 1P or 3P perspective for the entire game. No on-the-fly view switching to exploit the typical 3P benefits.


This is another good point that needs to be addressed. Thank you!

#23 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:15 PM

Bryan, please answer this honestly.

I have seen 2 polls on this topic and they have been OVERWHELMINGLY against 3rd person. Why are you guys so stuck on this when clearly the players (by majority) don't want it?

#24 irony1999

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Chu-i
  • Chu-i
  • 301 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:15 PM

Any chance of having the third person be more realistic - eg - having a UAV hovering over the shoulder of anyone using 3rd person?

This way in a mixed match you'd see them when they see you - always.

Bonus points if you could shoot it down (or at least temporarily incapacitate it).

#25 Jetfire

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,745 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:16 PM

Expanding the player base is certainly a valid motive.

I submit that a review of War Thunder is in order, not for their 3rd person, but for their flight mechanic difficulty levels in Multiplayer.

Rather than use a setting, create 2 drop modes. ARCADE and MECHWARRIOR. [Eventually add a training mission(s) too]

ARCADE:
3rd person toggle

MECHWARRIOR:
3rd person UAV consumable - acceptable

CW can then be MW mode only and Arcade can be for grinding CB and goofing off, if that is your preference. I would play arcade now and then, but it should be like a whole different game mode.

#26 Zeus X

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,307 posts
  • LocationLuthien

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:17 PM

View Postirony1999, on 21 March 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

Any chance of having the third person be more realistic - eg - having a UAV hovering over the shoulder of anyone using 3rd person?

This way in a mixed match you'd see them when they see you - always.

Bonus points if you could shoot it down (or at least temporarily incapacitate it).


If a UAV is seen, you should be able to shoot it down and blind the pilot for the match. :ph34r:

#27 Ceesa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 201 posts
  • LocationBoston, USA

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:17 PM

For me to comes down to this: will my playing experience be affected? Right now I'm quite happy with most aspects of this game. Concerning fragmentation of the playerbase, I only care if it will noticeably increase the match queue times, which right now are perfect. I can almost always find a match in under 15 seconds. If splitting up the base double my queue time, I'd be against it. But that presumes that playing in 1st vs 3rd person gives some sort of advantage, and I'm not convinced that it does.

If the only thing that changes is the view, then I say let the player decide. There's no need to split the playerbase over this. I see it being like racing games. Some people like to drive in 1st, some in 3rd, but no matter how you slice it, the car has the same characteristics. Sure, one mode might give you more feedback about certain things (expanded field of view, for example), but there are cons as well. So long as each view has pros and cons, I see it no different from giving your mech a different loadout.

TL;DR
Implement 3rd person view as an option and don't split the playerbase.

#28 Scratx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 3,270 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:17 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:


We have discussed internally releasing 3rd person via the training grounds first. This would allow the player base to provide useful feedback on the implementation.


Do so. Since it seems to be obvious by now our pleading not to do 3PV isn't going to stop you, then let us see for ourselves an hypothetical 3PV by ourselves, and the training grounds is about as harmless as it comes regarding enabling such a mode.

I am very skeptical 3PV is in any way a good thing but I understand why it is being seriously considered... show it and just please PLEASE don't enable it for matches until you're sure that:

- It won't fragment the player base too much
- The implementation's well done and addresses as many of our concerns as possible.

#29 Zeus X

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,307 posts
  • LocationLuthien

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:18 PM

Here is an idea for 3rd person (even though i am against it completely).

Make 3rd person ONLY in pug matches, with 3rd vs 3rd or 1st vs 1st, this will help with bringing in new players and people can goof around like they do in pug matches to being with.

Leave CW with only 1st person.

Edited by DCM Zeus, 21 March 2013 - 04:21 PM.


#30 von Pilsner

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,043 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:19 PM

Not a fan of this decision at all, but please make TAG invisible (to everyone but the guy using it) so that 3pv players can not see they are being TAGged.

Please do not allow a moving camera that looks over hills and around corners.

Please do not make Pop-tarting any easier either...

#31 Shumabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:20 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 21 March 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

Bryan, please answer this honestly.

I have seen 2 polls on this topic and they have been OVERWHELMINGLY against 3rd person. Why are you guys so stuck on this when clearly the players (by majority) don't want it?


I saw a poll today that said the community was overwhelmingly in favor keeping missiles as they were. Why are you guys so stuck on demanding a bad game? The polls on this forum can be made to say anything. I saw one saying paints should cost more last month.

Edited by Shumabot, 21 March 2013 - 04:21 PM.


#32 Zeus X

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,307 posts
  • LocationLuthien

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:22 PM

View PostShumabot, on 21 March 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:


I saw a poll today that said the community was overwhelmingly in favor keeping missiles as they were. Why are you guys so stuck on demanding a bad game? The polls on this forum can be made to say anything. I saw one saying paints should cost more last month.


Link or it didn't happen!

I do not know what forum you are on.

#33 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:22 PM

View PostDCM Zeus, on 21 March 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:


Link or it didn't happen!

I do not know what forum you are on.


Beat me to it

#34 Lord Banshee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 355 posts
  • LocationChi-Town IL

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:23 PM

3PV should never be an option in Community Warfare.
If the pugs need training wheels then in typical 4-man or less drops, 3PV view should only face other 3PV or FPVs who specifically agree to it.
But of course 3PV should not exist at all.
(ninja'ed by Zeus)

Edited by Lord Banshee, 21 March 2013 - 04:24 PM.


#35 M4rtyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 691 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:23 PM

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

  • Play against 1st and 3rd person players.
  • Play against 3rd person players only.
  • Play against 1st person players only.
  • Players can set their preference in the options menu, or during the launch phase before matchmaking.




See the problem with this is it delutes the player base into 2 seperate pools which impact how quickly you find matches and how well balanced they are. While -NOT- being a guarantee of actually gaining a larger market.

It's a bad idea, period.

My suggestion, since you obviously want it anyway, is put it in the Training Ground first, let new players use that for them to gain more of an understanding with the movement and control of a mech. Then if people actually want it enough in live matches then you can listen to them. However far out it may be this plan of action is flawed.

But overall, its a huge waste of resources and time when there are so many other core aspects of the game needing work.

Edited by M4rtyr, 21 March 2013 - 04:25 PM.


#36 Shumabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,695 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:24 PM

View PostDCM Zeus, on 21 March 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:


Link or it didn't happen!

I do not know what forum you are on.


The General one.

#37 Jetfire

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,745 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:24 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 21 March 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

Bryan, please answer this honestly.

I have seen 2 polls on this topic and they have been OVERWHELMINGLY against 3rd person. Why are you guys so stuck on this when clearly the players (by majority) don't want it?


For one, there is the point that they need to farm casual players who haven't even tried the game yet, which is what an ARCADE mode would be good for. I am all for letting PGI collect more casual money, but keep it in an alternate mode. The content creation goes to both modes without any work anyway, so you don't really lose anything, in fact the core player base benefits long term.

#38 Zeus X

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,307 posts
  • LocationLuthien

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:25 PM

View PostShumabot, on 21 March 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:


The General one.


No link, so your trolling.

#39 BeakieHelmet

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:25 PM

I don't see a problem from a balance perspective if the game allows us to only play against other players where first person only is enforced, but I very strongly worry about splitting up the community further.

Especially three different ways.

If you are dead set on making third person an option I suggest only splitting the community two ways - first-person-forced or first and third person toggleable, since you don't get an advantage from going first person when others can go third. Having a forced third only is a little redundant, in my opinion.

In the end though, Banditman is completely correct - 3rd person causes more problems than it would solve, and I'd rather see the man hours put towards refining the first person experience and core gameplay issues. It is my opinion that MWO would benefit most from dropping the idea of a third person camera completely.

If the game is good, word of mouth will draw in more players, and I think there's the potential to lose more players than you would gain with a third person camera.

If you're really worried about drawing in new players, give players incentives to recruit. Maybe a C-bill bonus for each player they bring in that plays 25 matches, and for pete's sake make the game friendlier to new and casual players in ways that doesn't hurt the hardcore ones.

I mean, come on. Is any new player who doesn't already like Mechwarrior going to think that buying a 20 dollar assault mech is worth it? I think you guys really need to rethink a lot of the new user experience, and focus on the ability to draw in players more than milking the existing ones.

I say again, that doesn't mean making the game easier or in any way dumbing down the core gameplay.

#40 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:28 PM

View PostJetfire, on 21 March 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:


For one, there is the point that they need to farm casual players who haven't even tried the game yet, which is what an ARCADE mode would be good for. I am all for letting PGI collect more casual money, but keep it in an alternate mode. The content creation goes to both modes without any work anyway, so you don't really lose anything, in fact the core player base benefits long term.


It's nice to be quoted. However, I asked Bryan for an answer, not the pulpit.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users