2002 replies to this topic

[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.

[Cubivorre]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

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.

Hope that answers your question.

If what you are concerned over is getting players more familiar with controlling their battlemechs, why can we not just restrict access to this feature to the training grounds? THe newbies can go their and play around with it and learn and actually use the training ground for what it was meant for: training. Once they are ready to put on their big boy pants they can come join the rest of the players in the real game. That way it saves you guys a heck of a headache in design as well as getting raving madmen attacking you in the forums.

[DKTuesday]

I like the idea of TPV with no HUD while in it the view. Makes it fair that way methinks. Better awareness at the cost of weapon systems.

[QuantumButler]

Go for maximum trolling.

Make 3rd person view only useable in training grounds or on stock, unmodified, unupgraded tech level 1 mechs.

The second you change anything in the mechlab you're locked out of 3rd person view for that mech forevermore.

This would in practice mean it could only ever be used by total newbs to learn how to pilot or whatever and anyone who tried to use it in a serious match would be stuck in a mech so bad not even 3rd person view could ever salvage it, make it clear it is only a tool for learning the ropes, part of the game tutorial basically, training wheels that won't help you at all against any real opposition. Don't add seperate queues or anything, let them fight real mechs.

Of course, none of us want 3rd person, but think of this as a thought exercise, since IGP is probably forcing 3rd person view in some form.

[Viges]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

This thread is not about whether or not 3rd person should it exist. Rather, we want your feedback on how it should be implemented. Understand we're not debating the merits of having 3rd person or not.

training grounds only

[Lyrik]

van Uber, on 22 March 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

This is important, that complexity is an attraction of its own. While not a very large one, it's a very solid one. If World of Tanks is equal to WoW (as in simple, broadly attractive gameplay), then MWO is the equivalent of EVE-online (complex) with only a fraction of as many players. Important to note however, is the fact that EVE has one of the best player retentions in the industry and is still growing after ten years on the market. That is quite the success despite only having a playerbase roughly 3% of World of Warcrafts.

So staying the course and not "dumbing down" the game is a proven way to success. It may not be as quick, but it sure has stamina. Just ask CCP.

And for the record, EVE had a terrible, terrible new player experience for the better part of its ten year existence.

That is true. Other hardcore games with abyssmal new player experience are Demon Souls and Dark Souls.

Whoever thinks that 3rd person is only for noobs has never played really hard games ;-)

[Hedonism Robot]

I think 3rd person would be fine in the following:

• Spectator Mode
  
• Testing Grounds
  
• Co-op Vs AI mode (when this gets added)
  
• maybe lobby based custom games when they are added

In PVP part of the fun of the game is the simulation aspect. At the moment some cockpits massively restrict vision. I can not think of any reason not to use 3rd person on an atlas for instance. The game is purely competitive so anything that gives advantage will force a lot of players to use it. This is the reason we complain about thermal vision even though it has cool effects, it's just too good and doesn't let us enjoy the detailed art work of the game.

[Mister Blastman]

Syllogy, on 22 March 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

People with a Marketing Degree knowing more than you?!

Didn't you know? Guys with Marketing Degrees are wiser than even the doods with PHDs in Particle Physics or dual Doctorates/Masters in Astrophysics.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 22 March 2013 - 07:17 AM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

I am not reading through 27 pages just to post my opinions and ideas, so if this is completely off-topic, or been stated 100 times, great.

3rd Person view should be a per match consumable that costs MC only (buts lasts the entire match). That is the only way I will feel that you have not wasted my time and my money (founder + multiple MC injections) on a feature that I refuse to play and refuse to play against. I hope you carefully consider you income model before alienating your core playerbase.

But as longs as you making a new queue for game breaking game mechanics move ECM in there too, its current implementation is so haphazard and operpowered, that really has no place in the game. but if you making a kiddy-mode queue, it may fit in there.

[Mudslinger]

I was always a 1st/3rd toggler fan boy in the mechwarrior series. I manipulated my camera between 1st and 3rd person views constantly in the older mechwarrior games for two reasons: Tactical advantage & to see my mech in all its glory moving within the setting. That said, MWO is a much more competitive game than the Mechwarrior series ever was. Tactical advantages make all the difference in the world here and 3rd person will change it entirely. I understand the need to grow the player base, so I am assuming there is no choice but to implement. How is the question.

1) 3rd person should be utilized initially in the training grounds only. But that is not enough be itself. The Training Grounds are currently not a place of training, but more of an experimental static map. The Training Grounds should be implemented with actual "training" with an interactive, immersive tutorial similar to the old MW series. There was a voiced mech commander guiding you through the topics of throttle, turning, torso rotation, heat, etc. and you had to practice each to a certain level of proficiency until you moved on to a new area of proficiency . Then you got to blow up stuff! I know AI brings in all kinds of new challenges which may not be even possible. But I really think it is necessary due to the complexity of the MWO style of 1st person shooter (or 3rd person for that matter), new players need it. Training is where MWO falls it's shortest IMO - Youtube videos won't do it nearly as effectively.

3) Arcade vrs CW. This was a great idea if you are forced for any number of reasons to include 3rd person views. Pugging should allow a choice between 1st or 3rd persons as an option (Arcade mode). CW should allow 1st person only. Your goal is cater to both 1st and 3rd persons players, but you must at all cost make sure they do not interact without fragmenting the community and increasing que times. Also, minimize tactical advantage of 3rd person players by not allow the camera to rotate or pan in and out - only only a static 3rd person view. How this will effect player fragmentation and que times are questions that cannot be answered unless implemented.

4.) It is my belief that most (not all) people like 3rd person less for a tactical advantage and more for immersion. Watching the mech you built and custom painted tear through terrain, viewing PPCs, gauss, LRM/SRMs, etc. pound on your mech's armor, and watching projectiles, missiles and lasers exiting from your hardpoints is really just plain cool and immersive to a lot of people. Without it, they lose interest in the game quickly. Therefore, it may sound crazy, but setting up an option to record your match and watch in 3rd person, could remedy this. The camera moves around freely to various angles and you could really immerse yourself into a battle of giant mechs and at the same time review your performance. I am not sure how possible this really is, but it may address a large part of the 3rd person desire.

In any case, however your team decides to handle it, it is quite a challenge. Not handling it properly will result in a lower pool of players - maybe not immediately - but much sooner rather than much later. GOOD LUCK!

Edited by Mudslinger, 22 March 2013 - 07:27 AM.

[Geekz]

let me put it this way

and to make it simpler we shall make a comparison

LOL has 3 game types

dominion
summoners rift
proving grounds

MWO should only have this in case they implement 3rd person

1 match Q for 1st person and 1st person only = real manly MWO players ( includes me)
2 match Q for 3rd person players only = newbies in training or they just like seeing their own mechs

problem solved everybody is happy!

[Mister Blastman]

OKAY. If we're getting 3rd person view, where's our... "Satellite Link... Established"

And don't try and say Command Console is it. It isn't. If you're going to cater to the noobs, us elitist hardcore players want catering too!

[DKTuesday]

Syllogy, on 22 March 2013 - 07:06 AM, said:

Or, since you won't have to worry about a Tactical Advantage if you don't want to play against people in 3rd Person, you don't have to worry about "Fair".

I don't care if the view is in the game or not. I understand different strokes for different folks. I offered a consensus in a positive manner. I don't need someone like you, who is no better than the people yelling expletives against the system, being condescending and try to attack me. I for one am for options. Play the way you want. How about don't be a part of the problem.

I don't see the need to split the player base with different servers. One, the community had already done that for you. Two, they people complaining are supposedly going to quit anyways. So just let the TPV peeps play with everyone.

Edited by DKTuesday, 22 March 2013 - 07:22 AM.

[NightFireSoldier]

Honestly I think the three splits you listed are a bit much. If you are going to do this just have it be two modes.

Have a basic scrimmage mode which is what we have now and let everyone pick first or third person and mix them up doesn't matter.

But then when you add community Warfare have any drops to support planets be mandatory first person.

This way your just breaking the game into two queues one which is basically Free play/Training and the more competitive Community Warfare where it can be seen as the "real" fights which would be why you can't 3rd person in them.

Just my two cents.

[MoonUnitBeta]

“Free Flowing” 3^rd Person View:

Rather than a fixed 3^rd person view that is positioned directly behind the mech at either awkward odd height to field of view, I wonder if the camera would need to be “floating”.
As in, a shoulder view from the right side, when I turn left the camera floats to the left in kind of an arc; up and over the mech to the left side. A fixed FOV would be required as altering this would produce a wider view of the field and give any player an advantage over those who do not know; unlike 1^st view where it just allows you to see more cockpit.
See this picture as example.


What is up to PGI to figure out with this idea:
- The speed at which it shifts
- Whether or not the camera “clicks” into the left and right position or allows the player to “float” the camera above their mech and keep it there when not turning (meaning, when I turn left, and stop with the camera half way, is it going to stop as well, or is it going to continue to transition to the other side?)
- The angle of the arc
- The field of view
- The distance the camera is positioned behind the mech
- Whether the camera also performs a –Z axis arc (so when the camera transitions up and over from side to side, it also arcs away from the mech, giving you full view of the mechs back/hips and a little bit of both sides as it transitions over).

Hopefully this is still getting read 28 pages in…

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 22 March 2013 - 07:27 AM.

[I am]

I for one would like to thank you for taking the timeand effort to make MWO a more diverse gaming experience. I truely believe if you draw a larger audience, and raise gross profits, that it will lend to even more development and improvement for everyone in the long run.

Suggestions:

Well alot of players are anti-3pv, so the fact that you are striving to allow them to never vs 3pv players is great. My suggestion would be the following.

Have a hardcore mode (see modern warfare 2). One could select hardcore mode, and it would put them into 1pv only games.

If you wanted, you could also restrict groups exceeding a certain size to hardcore only mode. Basically hardcore mode would be for exactly what you describe in your OP. Those long time fans who do not find the current meta daunting.

You could incentivize participation in hardcore mode with a greater credit bonus, special achievements, etc. Bascially it would go like this.

Currently you have assult, conquest, or both, or training. You could add a side option for those choosing asslt, conquest, or both, making the options then asslt, hardcore asslt, conquest, hardcore conquest, both, hardcore both, or training.

Options could exist to allow one to choose either hardcore, normal, or both.. as well as asslt, conquest, or both.

Something about the word hardcore that I think alot would see this as a challenge and step up to the challenge. Alot of newer players would ofc opt out of hardcore mode initially.

Rewally with the inclusion of this additional mode, you have alot of options. You could have teams queuing in hardocre get used as fillers for the 8 man queue for example.

It cold really give you alot of options in terms of dynamic queuing of players. ELO would still be applied to all modes.

Just my 2 cents. Happy to see the game moving in a great direction!!! Keep up the good work.

[AV 4 T 4 R]

Bryan,

I've a question maybe not yet discussed but that could seriously impact the game and the players.

If you are going to introduce in the same "software" both 3rd and 1st person, without "splitting" the code too, what can protect 1st player from a potential hack able to "unlock" the 3rd view also in normal game?

I know this is not a "Standard" but, if there will be found a way to activate it through a Cvar or any kind of code, the entire "faith" on the game, on the CW and in clanwars will totally collapse, devastating the user experience and generating a fear of "joining events" from the players.

So if you really want to introduce it (and I hope not), just create another client, or something separated.

[Bguk]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

This thread is not about whether or not 3rd person should it exist. Rather, we want your feedback on how it should be implemented. Understand we're not debating the merits of having 3rd person or not.

Constructive feedback(I hope).

Only implement it in the training grounds. This will enable anyone that wants to learn the ability to see where their mech is heading to do so.

If you must include it in other modes, do not include it as an option for CW. Only have it as 2 options in random drops. One being a mix, the other being only 1st. Segregating the community is bad.

Let's hope the eta is 20 years.

[ThunderOverWater]

Don't make 3rd person optional. It's hard enough to find balanced drops as it is.

Implement a "fog of war" so the player can only see what his mech sees. That way 3rd person doesn't have any sightline advantage over 1st.

Alternatively, make 3rd person a camera drone module that can be damaged and destroyed. Only allow zoom in 1st person, and the 3rd person camera drone would be another level of zooming out.

(Keeping immersion intact and discouraging poptarts are the keys here.)

[Chrithu]

I just want to answer to Brians argument that people voting no to 3rd person in the past were coming mostly from the core population and thus basically ccarry not enough weight.

That is a fair point. And you are right when saying what those polls resulted in does not matter. Because according to your argumentation in the opening post the only number that matters in this whole discussion is this:

How many people currently NOT playing MW:O are not playing BECAUSE there is no 3rd person?

Do you have any numbers or educated guesses on that number that are more than just wild speculation?

Also to add something more constructive:

What will you do to counteract cheating attempts to have 3rd person in the 1st person queue?

And what is your plan B if you are mistaken and the 3rd person queue ends up too little populated to get matches going?