2002 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

silverhydra, on 23 March 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Not only is this a horrible idea to implement, but splitting the playerbase is asinine. Leave it in for training grounds and leave it out everywhere else. If you implement features the way you described, clans are going to have to define whether 3rd person is allowed or prohibited because you give players the option to segregate themselves.

also; the same question that keeps coming up; CW. Will there be 1st person worlds? 3rd person ones?
The only way this works is if there are two entirely seperate CW servers.

[benth]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 23 March 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

Wanna see something damn funny?

http://mwomercs.com/...d-obscure-devs/

Look at the lock message of the mod

So yes, there have been discussions of 3rd person. No, we did not intend to suggest that a third person view is 'coming soon.' And please remember:





nice troll

There seems be a pretty bad break in communication with this matter.

We have IGP mods telling us that 3PV will only be in testing grounds.

And then we have Bryan and Paul telling us that 3PV will be in regular matches, only segregated by player preferences.

I wonder what's going on in the offices.

[James DeGriz]

You know when you read this:

• Camera is locked horizontally to the torso. This is not a peek around corners mode.
  
• Camera is locked vertically to the torso, you can only look up and down as far as your torso can.
  
• When approaching cover (to rocks/building etc), the camera pulls IN so FoV is greatly reduced when standing close to something.
  
• 3rd Person is not a free-cam.
  
• HUD will be significantly reduced if not completely removed.
  
• LOS targetting is NOT affected by 3rd person. If you cannot target it from 1st person, you cannot target it in 3rd.
  
• ONLY the targeted enemy (Press R) can be identified in 3rd person... all other HUD indicators are turned off.

and then you read this:

[color=#959595]Garth Erlam, on 16 November 2012 - 03:59 PM, said:[/color]

[color=#959595]MechWarrior Online is, and will always be, a game focused on 1st person combat in Mechs. That experience is sacrosanct to the classic Mechwarrior experience[/color]

Those two statements aren't as mutually exclusive as it might appear. Specifically, I think the key word in Garths post is "focus". Re-reading Bryans post, it would seem 3PV is so horribly gimped anyway, people aren't going to want to use it unless they REALLY can't cope with FPV. Those people will probably leave as a result anyway, which brings us back to the main thrust of the original problem: Why are you bothering with 3PV?

[Mystere]

Divine Madcat, on 23 March 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

Sure, except polls don't work that way. Elections are based on the people who DID vote, not the sum of people who could have voted.

Laws require that elections be held as such. Therefore, this is not a good analogy.

As far a games polls are concerned, whether "official" or (especially) user-created, PGI is under no obligation to follow their results.

[Khanublikhan]

When I used to play the old mechwarrior games, I used to enjoy changing into 3rd person POV (and wireframe) mode purely for aesthetic reasons. Purely to enjoy watching the mech I was piloting walk / run through its animation cycle. This combined with the awesome music *was* mechwarrior for me. i.e. Watching the mech run as I travelled between mission waypoints.

Implimenting 3rd person view should be done for aesthetic reasons only, in my opinion. Sure, keep a tight control of the camera to minimise "peeking" over and around cover; but you know what? Any advantage gained from "peeking" is miniscule.

Segregating the playerbase on which point of view is your preference... ...is an astonishingly bad idea.

Point of View switching during game time should be allowed *and* encouraged both for aesthetic reasons and to act as a "rear view mirror" when that spider is on your six when your a Stalker pilot. Do that, and there is no need to segregate your playerbase at all.

In short:

3rd person POV could be beneficial to the game. It could be used in creating community movies. There could be mech emotes viewable in 3rd person POV.

Devs: Point of View preference of a player should be merely a matter of personal preference. It should have miniscule / inconsequential difference to another player. It should have no knock on effect into other game systems or design choices.

Edited by Khanublikhan, 23 March 2013 - 10:30 AM.

[Roadbeer]

I know you've all been waiting for it, so here is...

ROADBEER'S FINAL WORD ON THIS TOPIC.

cue music.

Lets take what we know.

Quote

Yes we are currently working on a 3rd person option for MWO.
Offers up a different style of gameplay and tactics.

With that being said, any speculation or suggestions that it be training grounds only or UAV (any variation thereof) are totally nullified. This is GOING to be in the game, it will be as much of an option as a Joystick or Full screen/Windowed mode.
You can't have a different style of gameplay/ tactics in the training grounds unless it seamlessly translates into the game. What would be the point of learning to pilot your mech in 3PV in the training grounds only to have to RELEARN how to pilot your mech in 1PV once you actually get in the game?

Quote

You will have the following options as a player:
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.

We understand players may be concerned about matchmaking and further segmenting the player base. So are we. Before going live with a 3rd person option, we plan to investigate and solve any potential issues further fragmentation may cause.

So, again, out of the Training grounds and out of UAV (why would you set your sync to avoid people using a UAV, it would be like setting your sync to avoid people using Cap Accelerator).

To Bryan's credit, he did give them an out, saying that they are concerned about the fragmentation of the playerbase that this may cause. They have used this reason for not wanting to include TDM as a matching option.

The irony is, that they don't want to put in a feature that the core community wants because it will fracture the playerbase, but they are willing to pursue a feature that the core community doesn't want, which will do the EXACT same thing.

Now, to the accusations of lying/misrepresentation. Look, I get it, the game evolves and sometimes you have to go back and reevaluate your stance on a position. So, I'm not in that camp. What's bothering me is how completely schizophrenic this message is coming out. You have this post from Bryan saying "This feature is happening" but you have posts from staff members saying "This will be a camera option in Training grounds" in response to "Tweetgate"

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2114566

You (as a company) have created so much confusion on the topic with contradictions and by being beyond cryptic with your plans for it, it's no wonder that (for once, I understand why) the community is apoplectic. Add to that, making an announcement before you have to abandon it for the weekend, leaving it unguided and over-moderated until your return from PAX is just plain irresponsible. If this is supposed to be your baby, you just forgot it at the hospital when you drove your wife home. Should have said, "We have a major announcement about this (in regards to Tweetgate) that will be addressed when I return from PAX". Let the forum speculate, not rage, in your absence.

Quote

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.

Since the majority of players who have an issue with 3rd person come generally from the core players, we elected to address this issue via this forum post to collect all of the concerns and ideas that this group faces or has with 3rd person.

So, we know you don't want it, but help us figure out how to implement it?

Quote

We did an analysis of our data and found that players in general were having a hard time learning how to control their BattleMechs. We spent time studying their behaviours, observing, and then formulated a series of improvements. You have already seen some of them (new user controls). We did some market research, looked at the target demographic that we engaged initially but did not retain (played a few matches and left), and found that many players were not able to easily grasp the concepts of their `Mech, especially movement. 3rd person will help solve some of these issues, along with a new UI, training and testing grounds, and other features coming down the pipeline.

Wouldn't it have made more sense to get in touch with those players, since they would be the demographic you are targeting with this? I don't know, maybe you have and you're trying to get a consensus of what would bring people (back) while not alienating your core community. From what I see in the polls, these are for the most part, mutually exclusive camps. On this topic, you are a pilgrim in an unholy land. Those who are against 3rd person are VEHEMENTLY against it.

Honestly, I don't see how you're going to pull this off by making 3rd Person a usable feature that doesn't drastically segment the matchmaking pool. I used to be a Pollyanna Cheerleader for you guys, but the way this is being handled, I now have my doubts.

[Redmond Spiderhammer]

So I'm coming late to this topic.. I havent read all 35 pages but enough that the points being brought up all started to repeat. The only concern to 3pv that so far makes any sense is the enhanced field of vision. Everything else is tied to managing player reaction to 3pv.
Playerbase fragmentation is a big concern, but it shouldn't be. There should be one sole concern: Balance with 1PV. Balance it and throw everyone in together or don't add it at all. Thats my advice. You mentioned in your(Bryans) post about making mechs for which you dont have cockpit los not targetable.

Is it possible to have the client not render those mechs that wouldn't be rendered in 1pv?

This to me would solve ALL your field of view/ balance concerns and you dont have to worry about the whole rest of the mess.

Khanublikhan, on 23 March 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

When I used to play the old mechwarrior games, I used to enjoy changing into 3rd person POV (and wireframe) mode purely for aesthetic reasons. Purely to enjoy watching the mech I was piloting walk / run through its animation cycle. This combined with the awesome music *was* mechwarrior for me. i.e. Watching the mech run as I travelled between mission waypoints.

Implimenting 3rd person view should be done for aesthetic reasons only, in my opinion. Sure, keep a tight control of the camera to minimise "peeking" over and around cover; but you know what? Any advantage gained from "peeking" is miniscule.

Segregating the playerbase on which point of view is your preference... ...is an astonishingly bad idea.

Point of View switching during game time should be allowed *and* encouraged both for aesthetic reasons and to act as a "rear view window" when that spider is on your six when your a Stalker pilot. Do that, and there is no need to segregate your playerbase at all.

I quite agree with this. Minimize peeking and allow 3Pv as a (should already be in game) rear view mode.

[RedDragon]

Sir Fuzzy, on 23 March 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

An in-game poll isn't a bad idea, but mostly irrelevant as they are looking further down the line and opening up to a new player base.
If they want to grow they can not cater solely to the beta core players. There are only so many MW fans out there. They need new blood. Some sacrifices have to be made.
The Devs want 3rd person. At least they care enough to ask for constructive ideas on implementing it. The "do it and I quit" remarks are as inevitable as the "you don't care about us" ones but if you read through the whole thread quite a few people have some pretty good ideas which which are going to carry a lot more weight than stamping your feet as you leave the room.

An ingame poll would at least show if there really is some kind of quiet majority that supports/has nothing against 3rd-person. Even if the whole idea is aimed at new players not even in the game yet, I guess you have to agree that alienating your current fanbase in favor of some potential new players is a really bad idea.
Sure, you can accept that they don't listen to us paying customers and just provide some ideas to at least lessen the negative impact of 3rd-person view, but we can and should vote with our wallets to at least try to fully advert this whole debacle.

The whole idea they seem to try to sell us is that 3rd-person will be much inferior to 1st-person so there are no advantages. Now tell me - if you are a CoD player or whatever who only tries MWO because it has 3rd-person view (I still don't think there are even a handful of people who would do that) and you see that you are severely hampered by this view mode, wouldn't you want the Devs to improve it? I guess you can see where this is leading.

[AlexEss]

vrok, on 23 March 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

Well supposedly they think we're not important,

Let's try this again....

You... Are... Not... A... Special... Snowflake... Your... Opinion... Is... Not... More... Important... Then... Any.. Other...

They never said you do not matter. Just that you will not get special treatment. The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.

Edited by AlexEss, 23 March 2013 - 10:29 AM.

[RedDragon]

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

Let's try this again....

You... Are... Not... A... Special... Snowflake... Your... Opinion... Is... Not... More... Important... Then... Any.. Other...

They never said you do not matter. Just that you will not get special treatment. The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.

Don't we first have to determine what exactly ARE "the needs of the many"? We know that many voted against 3rd. Do we know anything at all about the other players who didn't vote?

[AlexEss]

RedDragon, on 23 March 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Don't we first have to determine what exactly ARE "the needs of the many"? We know that many voted against 3rd. Do we know anything at all about the other players who didn't vote?

Well i am no business major but if PGI states that they have data that back up their conclusion that A: The forum users that voted no to 3PV mostly cam form the same sub-set of players and B: that several new players have felt out of their depth without 3PV it stands to reason that they actually have said data or they would not do said thing. especially as it goes against the personal beliefs of devs such as Bryan and Paul.

Now i am not arguing that "we" are not holders of a legitimate opinon, only that polling "us" is akin to going to a sportsbar and asking if it would not be a good idea to replace todays broadcast with "the collected speeches of the Pope Benedictus"... That is why they have stated that they can not give "us" any special treatment in this question. Especially as they have yet to present their take on how it will work.

vrok, on 23 March 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

. Something they have absolutely no clue about because they certainly didn't poll thousands of other people for it.

Got any proof of this...?

Edited by AlexEss, 23 March 2013 - 10:42 AM.

[ryoma]

I believe that before putting in the programming effort of 3PV you guys should develop a tutorial and a proper trial mech system for new players.

[Kommunist Kodiak]

How about an external camera mounted at the top of a mech that can easily be shot off, fried by flamers, EMP'd, etc. In other words very limited or NO!

Edited by Kommunist Kodiak, 23 March 2013 - 10:47 AM.

[Fsutamu]

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

Honest answer.

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.

Since the majority of players who have an issue with 3rd person come generally from the core players, we elected to address this issue via this forum post to collect all of the concerns and ideas that this group faces or has with 3rd person.

This has to be the poorest explanation I have ever heard. So you are making changes to the game that the comminity is against and has been. And admitingly havent poled the entire player 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.) and yet you put the requests for feedback in the place you admit the average player never visits. Why waste everyones time? Do you think all the players that never visit the forums will magically decide to come to the rescue of this bad idea and start posting in the forums they never visit. Are you guys after some world record for longest game in open beta we aren't aware of? Focus on content, competion and fixing the things you have broken. This is the key to the future of this game.

[ryoma]

You know what I would love to see? A poll put into the login screen of MWO asking about 3rd person.

[Roadbeer]

Fsutamu, on 23 March 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Are you guys after some world record for longest game in open beta we aren't aware of?.

Not even close, I know of games that have been in open beta for 2 years and still running under the BETA flag... we're barely at what 6 months?

[Mystere]

Divine Madcat, on 23 March 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

Sure, there is no "obligation".. but my point is not any less right. The people who don't express their rights to be heard, shouldn't have grounds to complain when something they don't like happens. If the other users can't be bothered to actually participate in this BETA, then their opinion SHOULDN'T count.

Someone once wrote that a large number of people go to forums only to complain. Who said that and what was the percentage again?

[wanderer]

Every time I see this sort of thing happening, it only reinforces my impression that the game is suffering in some way from pressures- financial almost certainly - that are driving the dev crew to introduce new features that they've specifically said "No way" about in the past.

In the process of trying to get new people to hand you money to play MWO, you are choking the flow from your existing players- and I guarantee you this, those existing players are doing a bang-up job of throwing more negative PR into the air right now than any possible benefit you're getting from adding 3PV.

Whoever is pushing these decisions on the dev team is attempting a RL re-enactment of "The Producers", and I'm not up for Mechwarrior Online becoming "Springtime For (a very bad German leader in the 1940's)". PGI made promises.

You aren't keeping them, in fact with acts like this you are taking a 180 and saying "We don't care about the promises we made for money, we need more money so we're going to chuck them if it'll get us that money".

Rather than ramming the development of the game squarely in the most discomforting places the fans supporting it can imagine, how about we simply stop trying to shoot it in the foot and be straight with the customers instead? No rational development team would do something like this unless they believed that the previous course was doomed to total failure of the project in question.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

People don't seem to realize that if 3rd is put in, they will have separate queues. If you don't want it in your games, you'll be able to play without it in matches that simply don't allow its use. You basically won't even notice it's in the game at all unless it delays the queues; which I doubt since the majority of players are against it. The people wanting 3rd will be the ones that have to wait for matches. People need to stop acting like panicking children when they've outright said it'll never be allowed in matches that are set for 1st only. If you're against it, then just set the filter to 1st only when you queue. Problem solved. You would not ever have to play in matches with or against anyone that used it. But some people would actually like third person and it would open their game for more market. It's similar to a game having PvP+PvE, rather than just 1.(Btw when are you giving us PvE/Co Op modes Piranha?)

Edited by Bluten, 23 March 2013 - 11:23 AM.

[vrok]

AlexEss, on 23 March 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

Got any proof of this...?

What you should be asking is if there's any proof for the following quote, because if there was they would show it or at least hint at it:

Quote

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.

There are like a million posts about how the new player experience in this game is **** since forever, and somehow no 3PV is supposed to be the culprit when they haven't even tried fixing the horrendous beginners experience at all for the last 6+ months? The friction is extreme long before even thinking about different view modes. Unless this is based off of the opinion of someones mom watching her son at PGI showing her the game or something like that, this is ********.

How many new Counter-Strike or CoD/MW players do you see asking for 3PV? How many potential MWO players do you think PGI/IGP could possibly reach out to to poll about something as specific as this given the state of the game and how it plays? I can guarantee you that whatever amount they can throw out is dwarfed by the people that the core community knows, and those people are actually potential MWO players, not Tomb Raider Xbox360 players or their moms.

The reason the community is asking for a poll to be made outside the forums, is because the community is confident that this reasoning is ********, and want to prove it. Then again PGI already dismissed such an action because these people would never visit the site/forums/fan pages and as such anyone who voted would be a supposedly small subset of the player base. Even if a poll was made in the launcher, they could just as easily dismiss it with the same backwards reasoning. How exactly would you poll it then? Random people off the street who have never heard about the game and have no clue about how the game plays or how games work in general? It can't be done with a meaningful result using their own reasoning. If they had they would prove it.

Edited by vrok, 23 March 2013 - 11:40 AM.