2002 replies to this topic

[Noonan]

The cheaters WILL figure out how to use it in regular games and the rest of us will suffer. This WILL lead to me and many others leaving the game.

Unless there is a way to ensure that cheaters cannot make use of 3rd person, everything else is irrelevant.

[DukeDublin]

Vassago Rain, on 22 March 2013 - 05:17 AM, said:

...while they get ruined by poptarters...

The way I see it, players who poptart are players with enough knowledge to form tactics. If third-person was (for the short-term) limited to an optional Cadet queue, new players could get their bearings. Alt-accounts are a real thing so Cadet queue would be optional/limited to filter out vets. This gives PGI time to consider further implementation, backed up by real statistics.

Vassago Rain, on 22 March 2013 - 05:17 AM, said:

But then we have the issue of the new players in the ghetto not spending any money

Ghettos gonna ghetto (perhaps give them the big toys for a while, encourage them to spend through hands-on incentive).

Vassago Rain, on 22 March 2013 - 05:17 AM, said:

...and only those who premade up are the spenders, and they're refusing to use the feature.

I have no answer, but the matter of the fact is that players would have a choice to limit themselves, rather than feel obliged.

Edited by DukeDublin, 22 March 2013 - 06:01 AM.

[Relic1701]

I hate getting into these debates....but here goes, with a suggestion...

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.

Seems to me that this is a major issue, and that it requires delicate handling, therefore, I suggest setting up an official poll, then sending an e-mail to the player base (like you would with a patch update etc) inviting them to vote on the issue.

For those that do not regularly visit the forums, they have an invitation to, and to vote on a major issue, if they still decide not to, then that is their problem. It would be the only way (I can see, off the top of my head) that a poll would be a fair and just representation of the community.

Regards...

(Still happy to be a 90% kinda guy )

[Vassago Rain]

DukeDublin, on 22 March 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

The way I see it, players who poptart are players with enough knowledge to form tactics. If third-person was (for the short-term) limited to an optional Cadet queue, new players could get their bearings. Alt-accounts are a real thing so Cadet queue would be optional/limited to filter out vets. This gives PGI time to consider further implementation, backed up by real statistics.


Ghettos gonna ghetto (perhaps give them the big toys for a while, encourage them to spend through hands-on incentive).


I have no answer, but the matter of the fact is that players would have a choice to limit themselves, rather than feel obliged.

If you have to limit yourself, then something's wrong, and the reasons for adding whatever you added that we're limiting ourselves with come into question.

[Mild Monkey]

Vassago Rain, on 22 March 2013 - 05:37 AM, said:

Yes, companies need to make money. We gave them 5 million for their game already.

I'm not opposed to third person viewpoints all on its own. The problem is, it has a 24 year old history of ruining FPS games. So how do we add it to this game, without it breaking everything, and it attracting all the oh so many people who aren't here already, that are mechwarrior and counter-strike fans in the year 2013?

5 million is not anywhere near enough, you know. If it was, in fact, this sum. Companies tend to make rather bold claims about their success. Besides, only a very small part of this money was put to use in product development. It isn't near enough to keep a company afloat, money must come in in a constant stream or else they will shut down really soon.

Regarding tradition. You do have a point here, but tradition won't make this game great. A constantly growing playerbase will.
I do not know whether or not 3rd PV is going to attract newbs, but i certainly hope so.

Let's take MW4 as an example: While a sub-par game in terms of gameplay, mechanics and the graphic possibilities of the time it was a success for MS, it sold very well and the multiplayer was used by lots of players, your humble serf included. Due to 3rd PV it was a pop tart fest, but there was a lot of traffic there, and I'm talking pre MekTek here. MekTek has helped keeping the franchise alive for a few more years, with all the cra pp y graphics, popsniper gameplay and 3rd PV and whatnot. Bottom line: it worked there and there was no other option but to use third person view if you wanted to compete. Here, you shall have this option and the playerbase will hopefully be increasing.

Last words: Dividing players: Experienced killers like you and me are a nuisance for newbs and casuals. We frustrate them. Then they quit to never come back and will play Hawken and WoT and the likes. No. Better they play in their league, I stay in mine own.

[Kraven Kor]

As long as it "makes sense" and provides no real advantage over 1st Person, I'm OK with it.

A remote camera that locks you out of weapons, fine.

A "simulated view" that only shows you what you could see in 1st Person, so far as enemy mechs and such go, fine.

"I magically view my mech from outside my body?" Not really fine.

[Ozric]

3rd person will never be restrained to just a training mode. Even if it is introduced as such, people will immediately begin to cry on the forums about letting them use it in game and sooner or later they will get their wish.

As we now know that PGI will be implementing 3rd person, it's just a matter of when, I guess we should just get used to the idea and try to find a workable solution. It's that or quit right? It is a little unfair to make us solve the problem though, the burden of proof (of concept) should be on the people that decided on the plan in the first place, but here we are.

Splitting the player base seems to be the current thinking, but I am not sure the true ramifications of splitting it in this way have really been understood. We already have a very divided community, 'golds' vs 'F2P', LRMs vs brawlers, how do think this will work out for 3rd person/1st person debates? Particularly as 3rd person is widely understood to have an advantage over 1st. Seems to me like 3rd person players will always be second class 'easy mode' citizens because of this. A split community will affect MWO more than any other Mechwarrior title because the internet is so much stronger than it used to be. Games can live or die because of their community these days, and this is especially true of games that thrive on micro transactions.

And how far would this split go? Separate forums? Separate leader boards? Merc corps will probably pick one or the other for ranked matches so that would mean two (or three?) leader boards, and would the rewards be equal despite the differences? If so, with 3rd person giving a buff to situational awareness, would the 3rd person boards be the strongest? And if this is so the game becomes 3rd person, 1st person relegated to a fringe game mode for people that like to make things harder for themselves.

The same is true of community warfare. Separate galactic maps? The thinking here appears to be that it should remain 1st person only and this is the one bright light in an otherwise gloomy prophecy. If CW at least sticks to the pillars and is as deep and engaging as we all hope it will be, then it will truly become the core MWO experience that everything else is built around and all the 3rd person pick-up games in the world won't effect it at all. Except proving 3rd person players to be easy mode noobs, of course, in the eyes of 1st person players.

But this may not be how it works. What if you can select the vision mode before the match? Some planets could have been taken in 3rd person, some in 1st. What happens when the two meet? I don't think we can disregard the possibility that there could be multiple galactic maps, as crazy as that sounds.

I suppose what I starting to work towards is no split ques, no split community, and the ability to switch vision modes in game. I'd much rather we did not have 3rd person, or had to have this discussion, but the die is cast and unless we make some drastic alterations to our expectations we are not going to be any help at all. Gaming technology is capable of amazing things, perhaps we need to think outside the box? If I can come up with a good way to implement this then I will post again, but right now I'm too disappointed to think clearly.


Edit: 48 new posts while I was writing this...

Edited by Ozric, 22 March 2013 - 06:24 AM.

[Lyrik]

Vassago Rain, on 22 March 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

Then why have the choice in the first place? We're not talking a singleplayer shooter here, like MW4. This game was made for PVP action. There's no 'accidental' online PVP action, like with MW4. That's all there's to this game.

So 3rd person view must be executed in a way that it doesn't give an advantage over 1rd person view. Or different leagues. Which could kill competitive (ha) gaming in MWO if this new feature doesn't bring more players in.

No free floating camera would help. A low angle also.

[Muffinator]

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

We would like to invite your constructive feedback on how you would like to see 3rd person executed.

I think 3rd person is a great idea and will improve the game a lot for people who want to use it. The way you are thinking of implementing it (separate queues) sounds more than fair - probably overkill actually. I'm looking forwards to having the choice and more importantly being able to actually see my paint jobs. If you can give us total free camera for the first 15 seconds of the match while still in base or something so we can get front on screenshots that would be even better.

[Vassago Rain]

Lyrik, on 22 March 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

So 3rd person view must be executed in a way that it doesn't give an advantage over 1rd person view. Or different leagues. Which could kill competitive (ha) gaming in MWO if this new feature doesn't bring more players in.

No free floating camera would help. A low angle also.

Yes, basically, and some other stuff. I covered it in a post a page or two back, with an anime girl. it's a very complicated issue, and if it's not solved, or at least taken care of properly, the game's done for.

[Malcivious]

I'd be fine with a 3rd person view, and going against them while staying in 1st person view as long as I get a wide angle rear view camera. One that's always visible on the HUD, and one that I can switch to full screen, by holding a button or toggling.

[GabRaz]

BF3 has a hardcore mode where external views for vehicles are disabled as well as other modifiers. Why not have that choice.

It's been a while since I've played BF3 but I remember the hardcore servers were pretty prevalent.

[Tice Daurus]

Ok....

Here is my long drawn out winded POV on 1st person and 3rd person...

First 1st person should never be mixed with 3rd person if you have to do a 3rd person gaming mode. It won't work. Mixing 1st and 3rd person is a terrible idea and should never be crossed together EVER.

Now as to what I would LIKE to see happen if we have to do 3rd person:

Limit it to training tutorial for people first training or on training grounds testing.
Limit it to spectator mode AFTER you are dead.
If you have to do 3rd person in the game, the only acceptable allowance of 3rd person should be limited to people who have say Aerial DRONE view or Satellite scan, AND it has to be a MASTER MODULE slot deal. And a person cannot move or fire when using this view as they are receiving incoming telemetry and to move mean you break single lock transmission. So you can either watch in 3rd person via Aerial drone or Sat Scan views, or break transmission and resume fighting.

Personally I don't want 3rd person in there because it will fragment the community, and it will serve nothing but to harm the game overall. I know you guys are deadset on having 3rd person. However, this game needs to stay as a 1st person, especially in CW. If it's a CW battle, it has to be in 1st person ONLY. NO EXCEPTIONS!!! If it's a 3rd person team holding a world, they have to hold it and fight the battles all in 1st person. If it comes down to the fact that I'm fighting a 3rd person team and they are using 3rd person in a battle in CW, then I'm done giving you any more money. I'll burn off the rest of my MC's, I'll play only in the 1st person lobbies, and stay there.

Bryan, the reason this needs to stay 1st person is the tactical aspect of this game makes it unique. I understand you want to cater to the Call of Duty crowds, and having 1st and 3rd person is cool to have to cater to all people, but to clarify the core player position on this, you shouldn't be making a 3rd person at all. The reason for this is that this game should be made for intelligent people. Is that a bit classist? YES, but in today's gaming society, games are dumbed down to the lowest common denominator and made so you guys can get the most cash. That's not what this game should be. This game needs to be unique. DON'T be another Hawken. It will make it to where people will look at Hawken and MW:O and go and say "What's the f***ing difference? One goes slow and one goes fast? Ok go with the fast one!" And they'll go to Hawken.

The game needs to embrace it's own identity and say "F*** Hawken! Come play a game that will challenge you mentally as well as based on skills!" That's what this game is, and to go and put 3rd person in...it brings you down to the level of Call of Duty. Why would you want to be a carbon copy lookalike of something else, when you can be unique? That's what MW:O is...unique. The day you put in 3rd person into the game as a playable game mode, it dumbs the game down.

At least that's my two cents on it.

TL;DR version

If you have to do 3rd person, I'd want it limited to training tutorial, training grounds, if you are already dead in Spectator Mode OR in a 3rd person MASTER Module form for Aerial DRONE or Satellite Scan ONLY and you can't fight while getting a 3rd person view to look around the map. And if we are forced to have 3rd person gaming, 1st person only or 3rd person only is acceptable, but when it comes to CW, it HAS to be 1st person ONLY, no exceptions.

[Veebora]

I think in random battles it should be segmented in Hardcore (No 3rd Vision) and Standard (3rd Vision allowed).

CW should be only hard mode, solved.

But I think 3rd Visions is a must for MWO, we need more players to this game get strong and with lots of updates.

[John MatriX82]

Thanks PGI, I don't want 3RD person to be in game anywhere than in Training Grounds.

I already know that I'll play 1st only matches, segmenting the community and I'll have to deal with cheaters that will activate and enjoy it in competitive or in pug against me that I can't and I don't want it to be used.

Thanks.

Each damn time you do something right and then you introduce things that screw up the player base that WANTS this game to endure and have the success it deserves. Keep doing it, I'll soon find alternatives.

[BlackJackRaider]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:

Yes we agree, 3rd person is not the entire solution, only part of it. Resources are already working primarily on those exact features. Not one single person is working on 3rd person.

My question is this: if you have already realized this need and put resources towards improving it (which is a great idea by the way), why not wait until this has actually been implemented to see if it helps new players adjust?

This could save you as the devs a lot of headaches--and calm down us members of the pitchfork waving masses at the same time. If you find that a fully developed tutorial system/mode in conjunction with the training grounds is enough to help newcomers learn to play and move correctly, would you still implement 3rd person?

I think it would really reassure the hardcore of your paying customers if you were willing to say "We will try this tutorial mode to see if we can retain new players better. If (and only if) the same problems occur after that, we will have another discussion about how we should implement 3rd person."

In general, we the forum community love this game and want to see it do well. We all know that for that to happen requires attracting large numbers of players. However, we have a lot of concerns about how poor implementation in the past will turn out in this case, which is generally based on past experience with game breaking mechanics/implementation. At this point, your core community has a fairly low level of trust in PGI, which is why you see such a huge reaction against what amounts to a fundamental shift in the gameplay. Saying, that you have a plan and will see how well it does in attracting new customers is a much more reassuring gesture on your part than saying "3rd person is coming, and we know its going to cause problems," which is essentially what this thread means.

[DukeDublin]

I have a brilliant idea, make the 3 ton command console let you view in third person, while in third-person you are able to see anything in the line of sight of allied mechs (or what ever works best). This would both give the command console something that is flavourful and make it arguably worth 3 tons.

"Initiating enhanced imaging!"

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Third person is a huge problem from a competitive standpoint. It's potentially a huge boon from a training standpoint. What is the solution? Restrict third-person view to training.

My favorite option is that, once a real Training Grounds map has been added, have three iterations of the map. The first would be basic piloting and shooting. You would drop in third person, you'd have a tutorial with objectives to complete (torso twist left, torso twist right, walk forward, walk backward, shoot stationary target, walk while looking to each side, etc.). The second would be third person with a mix of stationary and moving targets, and have the goal be to learn more useful combat maneuvers (more complicated walking while twisting, shooting a variety of guns at short, medium, and long range against both stationary and moving targets, etc.). The third would be in first person, and would be otherwise the same as the second.

What is the goal here? To allow people who are unfamiliar with mechwarrior games to learn to play gradually, adding complications in each stage until, with stage three, they get to experience the real thrill of being in the cockpit of a 1-meter-tall walking tank.

I'd also support third person on the Testing Grounds, so people can check out their new paint jobs and such. When group Testing Grounds arrives it might be useful for Mechanima too.

What I don't want to see is third person in actual game play. Or, if it is going to be there no matter what (which the OP suggests will be the case), then it should not be allowed in any competitive aspects of the game. Are you participating in a tournament? First person only. Are you participating in Community Warfare? First person only. Are you doing a quick PUG drop with no wider implications just for fun and cbills? Then you can opt to have third person, but you'll only play against people who are willing to allow it in their matches.

What will this do? For everything with a wider impact (CW, Tournaments, eventual potential E-Sport applications) first person will be the only option. This will ensure a level playing field, eliminate all chance of exploitation, and simplify balance for all those types of events. Allowing it in random drops divorced from CW and other such things will mollify those who want to play with it, and having the option not to drop with people in third person mode will protect the (large) segment of the player base who dislike the mechanic.

TLDR - I'd prefer 3P be for training only, but if it absolutely must be added generally then at least keep it out of CW, Tournaments, and any future e-sport plans).

[James Montana]

If this is going to be part of mwo (sigh), then implement it only in the training/proving grounds.

Or

Let people get out of their mechs, and create an environment that mechwarriors interact with outside of battle (the direction I hoped this was going).

I think I'm going to consider shelving this for a bit. See you at "launch".

[icey]

Jade Kitsune, on 22 March 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

I'd like to add, that those of you advocating this "make a 3rd person view that conver's no advantages" idea... yeah won't work.

1) the resources to do such a mode of 3rd person would be monumental, it would be a pain in the arse to implement and given PGI's history at coding features, would probably be a buggy mess.

2) it diverts resources away from additional, worthwhile content that could otherwise be worked on by the limited resources PGI has at their disposal.

Things not in dispute:

* game will be getting 3rd person
* game population not high enough support a split of game modes, 3PP, 8/4man AND region
* game will crystallize around the mode with the most traffic

It's going to happen, and no amount of RAEG is going to stop it, so we need to make sure the version of 3PP that happens is the least disruptive, least-bad compromise option we can get.

I don't see any technical reason why the 1PP cull-from-render option isn't doable. Hard limit of 90 FOV, no toggle or freelook. Yeah, it's going to require programming resources, but so does everything. This is MUCH less bad than the alternatives. I would love for someone who knows about the Crytek renderer or someone from PGI to confirm whether this is feasible or not.