2002 replies to this topic

[Biglead]

Why not make it an unlockable Module that can be used 2 times per match? Launch a probe, get third person. If the probe gets shot down then it's back to FPV. Just like canon?

[valkyrie]

Biglead, on 23 March 2013 - 05:53 PM, said:

Why not make it an unlockable Module that can be used 2 times per match? Launch a probe, get third person. If the probe gets shot down then it's back to FPV. Just like canon?

I would be totally fine with this. It'd be an evolution of the surveillance drone that was shown in the original reboot trailer.

[Biglead]

valkyrie, on 23 March 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

I would be totally fine with this. It'd be an evolution of the surveillance drone that was shown in the original reboot trailer.

Exactly what I was thinking.

[ChildeRoland]

if we live in the future with big *** battle mechs why is our radar so limited? is this not a basic tool inside our mech...also if we battled in a mech and i had no rear view mirror or image display to see what was behind me I would say WTF. Furthermore if a player is skilled enough to switch back and forth between 1st person and 3rd person to get a view then likely he's gona kill you anyway.

not sure it really adds that much of an advantage or disadvantage. in other online games matchmaking has a hard time pairing up player skill so the winning side is often predetermined becuase there are many more skilled players on one team versus another...just luck of the draw, or smarter matchmaking that takes into account a players kill death ratio, damage per game, etc etc...

[RedDragon]

Heeden, on 23 March 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

I'm assuming less than 440,000 of those accounts are duplicates, so still an overwhelming majority did not vote against 3pv. Whilst we're on the subject, how many of the 3,000 who did vote against 3pv were duplicate accounts made by forum crusaders.

Also, what makes the people who use forums and voted in that poll more loyal and valued than people who don't or didn't? What is the correlation between amount of money paid and amount of time wasted on forums?

The point you (and the people who say we feel we should treated better as other/our opinion is worth more) don't seem to get is this: At this point, there is no other opinion. The forum users have spoken that they don't like 3rd-person view. There are no other people (at least not many) who have been asked and who do want 3rd-person view. We only have the word of one Dev who told us that they have some dubious data no one knows of that there is a majority of players that want 3rd-person view.
So to make your argument valid, there first must be a good number of people who in fact want it to be implemented. Before we actually know that there is a considerable base of players wanting this, our opinion is not better than theirs, our opinion is the only one. It's that simple. Who tells us that the majority of those 400.000+ users doesn't like 3rd-person? No one. We only know that a large number of players voted against it.

Heeden, on 23 March 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

Is that relevant to the post I quoted (i.e. is it another example of a game where 3.p.v. was considered inferior to 1.p.v.)?

MW4 is the epitome of bad 3rd-person implementation.

[Litalus]

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Lets assume we see a live active list of all available matchmaking options when we click find match to select an option. You guys are saying that you plan to find ways to address community segmenting. No matter how much addressing you do, you will flat out have the following.

Assault: Any
Assault: 3rd Person
Assault: 1st Person
Assault: 8v8 Any
Assault: 8v8 3rd Person
Assault: 8v8 1st Person
Conquest: Any
Conquest: 3rd Person
Conquest: 1st Person
Conquest: 8v8 Any
Conquest: 8v8 3rd Person
Conquest: 8v8 1st Person
Any: Any
Any: 3rd Person
Any: 1st Person
Any: 8v8 Any
Any: 8v8 3rd Person
Any: 8v8 1st Person

And this is ONLY with what we currently have. What about this?

CW: Assault: 8v8: Any
CW: Assault: 8v8: 1st Person
CW: Assault:....
....
....
....

Now add ELO in the mix!

Please tell me how you possibly plan to keep the playerbase from segmenting. Weather or not new players can understand and comprehend how MWO is played in my eyes is irrelevent. THIS will hurt the game.

[Roadbeer]

Litalus, on 23 March 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Lets assume we see a live active list of all available matchmaking options when we click find match to select an option. You guys are saying that you plan to find ways to address community segmenting. No matter how much addressing you do, you will flat out have the following.

Assault: Any
Assault: 3rd Person
Assault: 1st Person
Assault: 8v8 Any
Assault: 8v8 3rd Person
Assault: 8v8 1st Person
Conquest: Any
Conquest: 3rd Person
Conquest: 1st Person
Conquest: 8v8 Any
Conquest: 8v8 3rd Person
Conquest: 8v8 1st Person
Any: Any
Any: 3rd Person
Any: 1st Person
Any: 8v8 Any
Any: 8v8 3rd Person
Any: 8v8 1st Person

And this is ONLY with what we currently have. What about this?

CW: Assault: 8v8: Any
CW: Assault: 8v8: 1st Person
CW: Assault:....
....
....
....

Now add ELO in the mix!

Please tell me how you possibly plan to keep the playerbase from segmenting. Weather or not new players can understand and comprehend how MWO is played in my eyes is irrelevent. THIS will hurt the game.

This.

[Crohnic]

I don't understand why people are complaining about the advantage of 3PV. Everyone who elects to play within a match where 3PV is enabled will know the risks regardless if they choose to play in first person or not. For those like myself who choose to play in first person only, the 3PV advantage is a non-issue.

Spitting the community is an entirely different issue. We are giving up the chance to get a team death match mode. That sucks.

[Inconspicuous]

Litalus, on 23 March 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Lets assume we see a live active list of all available matchmaking options when we click find match to select an option. You guys are saying that you plan to find ways to address community segmenting. No matter how much addressing you do, you will flat out have the following.

Assault: Any
Assault: 3rd Person
Assault: 1st Person
Assault: 8v8 Any
Assault: 8v8 3rd Person
Assault: 8v8 1st Person
Conquest: Any
Conquest: 3rd Person
Conquest: 1st Person
Conquest: 8v8 Any
Conquest: 8v8 3rd Person
Conquest: 8v8 1st Person
Any: Any
Any: 3rd Person
Any: 1st Person
Any: 8v8 Any
Any: 8v8 3rd Person
Any: 8v8 1st Person

And this is ONLY with what we currently have. What about this?

CW: Assault: 8v8: Any
CW: Assault: 8v8: 1st Person
CW: Assault:....
....
....
....

Now add ELO in the mix!

Please tell me how you possibly plan to keep the playerbase from segmenting. Weather or not new players can understand and comprehend how MWO is played in my eyes is irrelevent. THIS will hurt the game.

Very well said.

[RedDragon]

Heeden, on 23 March 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

The devs have said they are looking in to 3p.v. because they've received multiple queries about it and also because they've seen new players struggling with a system in a way 3p.v. would greatly alleviate. You seem to be suggesting that the devs have made that up and are sabotaging the game (i.e. their livelihoods) in order to troll the forums.

No, I am suggesting that the Devs want to push through with 3rd-person because they expect/hope to get new paying customers by doing so, no matter what negative reaction this invokes from the core player base. And they try to "sell" it to us by proclaiming that although the polls show otherwise, the majority of the players in fact want 3rd-person view. Which I (and many others) take for a blatant lie (or at least really uninformed/ignorant supposition).
I don't believe they want to harm their own game. They want to make money and therefore their game to succeed. But the way they try to shove that down our throats is just disgusting.

Heeden, on 23 March 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

I wasn't saying that bad third-person doesn't happen, I was refuting the claim that all games which feature optional 1st or 3rd person views will implement 3rd person as a superior choice.

And MW4 is the best example of a game where 3rd-person ruined the whole experience. That's exactly why people here are so furious and sensitive about it and why the Devs have promised us from the start that there won't be any form of 3rd-person view ever. Which in turn is why I and many others were so optimistic to spend a lot of money for this project.

[Sir Fuzzy]

RedDragon, on 23 March 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

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.

Well, whether there is a "quiet majority" or not is irrelevant. PGI is not required to prove anything. Sorry, but it's true. It's a business and we are customers, not stock owners. We either buy a product or not. End of story.

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?

Again, why would WE, as customers, need to determine this? WE just need to determine if we buy or don't buy. A forum poll determined that 1% of the forum accounts don't want 3rd person. Not surprisingly, this unsanctioned and unprofessional data was discarded by the company. The poll has no official value.

RedDragon, on 23 March 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

How would they have gotten any feedback? Have you seen any poll or questionnaire anywhere? Has anyone on this forums received an email asking about it? If they had really done any research into this field with a representative group of players, I'm sure we would have seen anything of it.

The burden of proof is not on PGI. They can make their product however they want to. Sorry to rain on your parade here but really it's a simple matter of voting with your dollar. If you don't have constructive feedback to offer than you are just wasting your time typing out all these conspiracy theories over and over again.

Your opinion does matter, but it's been expressed already. They took it seriously enough that they made this thread (which has been derailed at this point but whatever). Now it's just waiting to see if you will buy more MC or not in the future.

edit: and I agree with you that MW4 quality 3rd person would suck. I am assuming it will just be another option we can ignore whenever it's implemented.

Edited by Sir Fuzzy, 23 March 2013 - 06:50 PM.

[CheeseThief]

Firstly the attempt to appease the whiners by segregating the community into a million tiny little bits is the stupidest idea I've heard in a while.


Secondly, how robust is the lighting engine?

A way to do 3rd person fairly would be to add a 'vision' light or something similar to the cockpit, and when in 3rd person making enemy mechs invisible unless 'illuminated' by this vision light. Terrain and buildings stop the light, but not trees or bases. Optimistically doing it with the lighting engine would let the game illuminate the pair of Jagermech arms poking over the hill instead of going 'Ahah, Vision point! Thy mech is now relieved!", but vision points would probably be a lot easier. Also the lighting engine lets the client do it instead of adding more load to the server.


I am in support of 3rd person so long as it doesn't give any awareness advantages over 1st person. I want to be able to flip to 3rd person and oogle my mech and check possible lines of sight on it but I don't want to have to constantly flick between 1st and 3rd for situational awareness nor do I want to have the community chopped into hundreds of little bits by 10+ matchmaking pools.

Edited by CheeseThief, 23 March 2013 - 06:56 PM.

[Sir Fuzzy]

CheeseThief, on 23 March 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

Firstly the attempt to appease the whiners by segregating the community into a million tiny little bits is the stupidest idea I've heard in a while.

This is the real issue. Their brief mention of completely destroying the match maker system over something as minor as 3rd person view. They will lose more players to endless que times and garbage ELO systems than they would ever gain by having 1 more view mode.

[Gremlich Johns]

While in 3PV, you cannot shoot your weapons. Look at your mech all you want, but no shooting.

However, as long as I have the option to drop in a FFP only match, I'm good.

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 23 March 2013 - 07:26 PM.

[Tincan Nightmare]

Heeden, on 23 March 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

The devs have said they are looking in to 3p.v. because they've received multiple queries about it and also because they've seen new players struggling with a system in a way 3p.v. would greatly alleviate. You seem to be suggesting that the devs have made that up and are sabotaging the game (i.e. their livelihoods) in order to troll the forums.

You know what drives me crazy about this is that I put a thread up in suggestions saying that PGI should occasionally send out player feedback cards that show up when the game launcher comes up. Basically, you launch the game, and before you can hit the play button it requires you to answer a short series of questions about various features. I mean this game is in beta, and player feedback should be one of the main conduits of information for them right now. And this applies to more than just 3pv, but other features as well like ECM. Yes some players would not want to answer the questions, but if you make it fairly short (just a couple of multiple choice questions) they would at least get an idea on what the majority of players feel about various game aspects, and probably about the game as a whole as well. Any game sinks or swims on wether people want to play it or not, so why do they not actively seek information from the players on how they see this game? Then post the results just like they post the answers to ask the devs. I mean as of now, what indicator do they have that a large pool of players is just waiting in the wings to start playing this game if 3pv is put in?

[SmokingGorilla]

If there is to be a third person mode, and it is aimed at new players to help them introduce themselves to mwo then here are my thoughts on possible implementations that might avoid a avoid a segregated of player queue:

1. Only works in a players first games when they are identified as a rookie. Maybe color coded in the tab view that will help with people knowing they might need some help, hopefully not as targets to be killed/ignored first. This mode lasts until some trigger i.e. games played, time played, score, damage done. Only while tagged as a rookie do you have access to third person mode.

PROS: helps new players get into the game

CONS: i would expect it would be lots of coding

2. Spectator mode Only

PROS: more engaging spectator mode; watching other pilots play your mech variant really is the most effective way to learn, plus figuring out new loadouts.

CONS: not really what a new player wants when they think TPV; dead spotter teamates who can call out targets, that the FPV pilot might not see.

3. Available via a pilot module

PROS: there is a cost to using TPV and a natural incentive to choose to go without TPV; can be available on all premades

CONS: Not easily available to new players (cost, and xp); battletech universe friendly?

4. Item with tonage and c.slots

PROS: there is a cost to using TPV a slot or two and a ton or two cost to using TPV might work since a pilot has to choose between; can be available on all premades

CONS: battletech universe friendly?

4a. Sensor drone as item

Enemy mechs can see you with your drone hovering over you; maybe bigger sensor signature, maybe ecm vulnerable; maybe a time delay to switch between FPV and TPV

PROS: another reason to use FPV instead of TPV, turns TPV into a game system rather than a ui element.

CONS: battletech universe friendly? some of these balancing techniques actually make it harder for new players to survive.

4b. Sensor drone as a ammo type

PROS: sensor drones can be shot down, only vulnerable while in third person view; multiple can be brought to the field

CONS: battletech universe friendly?

5. only on premades

PROS: new players use these

CONS: where did my TPV go on my brand new mech?

6. xp bonus

PROS: cost to TPV and incentive to not go TPV

CONS: how useful is it as a balancing methodology in competitive play where every advantage for the win is probably worthwhile

[The Gunman]

To prevent user fragmentation, would this be a wiser choice for game type options?

1. 1st person view only,
2. 1st & 3rd person view permitted.

This way the the purists (the ones that feel most strongly against 3rd person) can still have their 1st person only matches. While everybody else that doesn't care about view types will be less impacted.

Edited by The Gunman, 23 March 2013 - 08:37 PM.

[Ghost_19Hz]

Its hard to not feel like this is going in the game no matter what anyone says, and only because someone important enjoys it.
At the end of the day, its their game, not mine. So my opinion has no worth.

[Zerstorer Stallin]

Well this is the straw the broke the camels back. I'm done. PGI lied to me and did the ole bait and switch. I'll be back to laugh around the flames.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

One thing I see as an issue; thrid person brings all these people who arent playing the game right now to the game right?

So they play in third person. What then happens to the first person players?
Sure, youll get some crossover, but I think they 1st person que will dwindle as whats DRAWING the players (PGI assumes) to the game is third person, not first