2002 replies to this topic

[Wrenchfarm]

I understand PGI wants the game to be accessible and fun for as many players as possible. Hey, I want that too. More people playing Stompy Robots means more Stompy into the future. If basic player control has been revealed as a major stumbling block for new players, they should try and fix that.

The question I have, and I would like a dev response, is why are they even talking about 3rd person view when they haven't even attempted an in-game training mode or even provided instructions?

Why are we going on about hypothetical player modes, playerbase splits, and camera angles when they haven't even tried the most basic and easiest way of helping new players get acclimatized to the game - showing them how.

Why doesn't PGI sit down and make a tutorial mode. It doesn't have to be intense. Just a little guided tour around a testing map that explains basic movement ("Think of your mech like a tank, the legs are like treads, the torso is like a turret, and the arms can be like free swivelling guns" ect) basic weapon properties ("Here is how weapon grouping works, take a look at the bottom right..." "Notice the effective range...").

Why are we engaged in this highly divisive conversation about a feature it seems nobody in the core playerbase (the core that invested in this game I remind you) when we haven't even tried other obvious and infinitely more palatable solutions?

Make a tutorial, make an in-game "help" box or basic instruction pamphlet instead of relying on out-of-game videos, and do some market research to see if that helps new players get into the game. If it works, GREAT we never need to talk about 3rd person again. If it doesn't, then you can come back to the community and say "look guys..." At lease we could see that you tried different options before jumping to something that clearly most of us believe will wreck the game.

[Ozric]

Yet another bad idea! This is not really one of mine, but there are too many pages in this thread for me to find out where I got it, but this is a way that it could actually work.

Open Cockpit Mode (Really sit on top of your mech mode)

Opening the cockpit would enable full, free camera 3rd person, but would also open the cockpit in game which would be a dreadful weak spot if fired upon. It would also take you a few moments to close it again, preventing at least some exploitation, and though moving and even shooting would be possible, jumping would not, and perhaps you would not be able to got faster than a certain KPH. Light mechs will benefit from 3PV more than anyone, and this feature could help to reign them back a bit.

The best thing about this idea is you could see inside your cockpit, from outside! Maybe you would even be able to see your vanity items. The worst thing about this idea is that it's a little silly.

[K1ng Ghidorah]

I feel like the time you guys are spending on implementing 3rd person view is pretty much wasted time.

That said, if you're so hell-bent on implementing this, then people who play in 3rd person view should ONLY be allowed to play against others using 3rd person view. Period. No mixed games. There should be no opportunity for someone to play with any type of advantage that could exist with 3rd person view vs. 1st person view.

Guess we'll see what comes of it.

[benth]

Heeden, on 22 March 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

The only problem I have is the way you make it a "trust" thing, makes you seem like one of the "Ghostcrawler promised me a pony" crowd from WoW. End of the day the devs want to make the best game they can and wailing about "trust" and "broken promises" just makes it less likely for them to communicate their thoughts and intents in the future.

First of all, this isn't the first time they've gone back on their word. Their word being "X is terrible for the game, we'll never do it." And then they do.

Second, the language they treated 1st person with. Paul called it a Pillar of the game's design. He used similar language to imply it as sacred, core, central to the mechwarrior experience they want to provide. They said this when they opened up Founder's packages. 5 million was given to them on faith, on trust, based on these promises.

Third, they completely change their attitude. What once was one of the most important facets of their game is now simply, "The position at the time."

This is more than Ghostcrawler not giving someone a pony. This is Ghostcrawler taking out PvP, because some people don't like PVP and they want to reach that audience.

Edited by benth, 22 March 2013 - 05:39 PM.

[Alois Hammer]

Heeden, on 22 March 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

Do you think the consumable coolants negate the need to manage heat then?

Their addition sure negated PGI's severely-depleted credibility.

Edited by Alois Hammer, 22 March 2013 - 05:41 PM.

[MegaBusta]

http://youtu.be/WpE_xMRiCLE
Ultimately the problem here is it feels like PGI wants us to be Lando.

Edited by MegaBusta, 22 March 2013 - 05:46 PM.

[Shively]

der langsamere, on 22 March 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

http://youtu.be/ddL0OTjWNUc

actually Im starting to see WHY they want 3rd person, theyre advertising it as mosrlt 3rd person. This video is almost all shots from the outside

better yet, why do they have third person on their in office servers if "noone is working on it"?

I love how they edited your post to remove your quoting Garth directly on whether there'd be third-person.

I wouldn't be surprised if the original post no longer exists.

This is unacceptable, PGI. You lie, you deceive, you censor, and overall, you treat your customers like the scum under your boot.

This will not stand.

Edited by Shively, 22 March 2013 - 05:45 PM.

[Fate Aki]

Is the next lie to be that this shall be a "Pay to Win" game? Not flaming at all. I am seriously asking if this is what is next.

[wolfhnd]

I posted my thoughts in another thread but will share them here as well.

While third person as proposed is fair and reasonable there are a few additional considerations that have to do more with the community than game development.

First I'm strongly in favor of the focus of the game being on simulating mech combat. This does mean that the developers spend more time perfecting the simulation aspects of the game in contradiction to my opening statement but that is secondary to developing a player base that enjoys simulations more than first person shooters. The community should encourage players who are new to the game to at least try it as a simulations. Some people see "full Real" as snobbish and elitist but it's important to convey the concept of immersion to new players. In order for players to get the most out of a game immersion is critical and 3rd person views tend to get in the way of full immersion.

Second the developers promise to not dilute the player base by segregating players by view choice. I don't think that a "niche" game like this will ever have the numbers that other games attract and any division could have a negative effect on available matches. It is the responsibility of the developers to provide a platform that attracts players but it is the community that to a large extent dictates the way the game is played. A good gaming community is one in which the majority of the players are not only focused on their own achievements but one in which new players are encouraged and helped along by the membership. As far as it is possible the membership of this community should encourage and assist new players to move to a more fully immerse non 3rd person simulation experience.

[wolfhnd]

"I love how they edited your post to remove your quoting Garth directly on whether there'd be third-person."

I think this deserve if not an apology at least an explanation, unwarranted censorship leads to revolution and anarchy.

[Tezcatli]

I personally don't like the idea of 3rd person. But as long as we have the option Not to play against 3rd person players. I'm okay with it.

It might make it easier for new players. But when they're getting destroyed because they didn't know the basics. I think it will turn them away regardless.

Edited by Tezcatli, 22 March 2013 - 06:20 PM.

[SweetWarmIce]

I'm against 3rd person view (first person view Mech simulator remember?) but if you have to add it:
Limit it to the Training Grounds and Four Man Groups only.
Eight Man Groups and Community Warfare are 1st person view only.
You can only change view in-game while you're in the Training Grounds.
Keep the restrictions listed in the OP like targeting and zooming in close to cover.

[Alois Hammer]

DCM Zeus, on 21 March 2013 - 03:56 PM, said:

Could we get a poll?

We had one, long ago before the mods deleted it. Big one, on the order of 5000-ish votes against and less than 200 for.

So of course now we've got the "Up yours, 3rd person is coming so suck it up" thread. Kinda tells you what good a poll would be.

MegaBusta, on 22 March 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

http://youtu.be/WpE_xMRiCLE
Ultimately the problem here is it feels like PGI wants us to be Lando.

Shut up and get your clown shoes on, Mary. You'll need them to look good in 3rd person.

Edited by Alois Hammer, 22 March 2013 - 06:40 PM.

[ChapDude]

since it looks like we will be able to choose what 'views' we play against, ill put in 2 cents.

my idea is along the idea that 3rd person view is going to fundamentally have/add more visible to it compared to 1st person IF the view is meant to be used in combat. So how about if you made it more and more grainy/pixelated the further away from the crosshairs. In my mind this would help negate some of the extra 'vision' the 3rd person would have though movement would be noticeable at close range.

[Ceefood]

Even though my post got deleted it seems for having an honest opinion & complied with forum rules I will post again - if any mod deletes this post without messaging me first & gives a reason & allow time for reply first then ......

I still dont understand why 3rd person needs to be implemented
the only reason is for tactical advantage over others WHICH = CHEATING

PGI you stated in beta this was to be a simulation - 3rd person is arcade not simulation!!! SO does this mean you are contradicting yourself AGAIN??

if you are a good pilot you use what you already have - radar, sensors, vision both from yourself & teammates
a bad pilot looks for exploits like 3rd person, aimbots etc

3rd person has no place in a simulation game pure & simple

PGI you also stated this was to be a PC game & not compromised by porting to consoles. So your reasoning for 3rd person is to broaden your audience. Porting to consoles does the same thing so will you change your mind on this too???

you posted a poll & the vast majority voted against 3rd person so you want to ignore that & make it anyway???
you state that the voters may have been a small demographic but THIS IS BETA so you need the feedback to make a better game. if the remainder of the demographic failed to vote or couldnt be bothered what makes you think they have any interest in making the game better.
ALSO you could assume from the poll that the vast majority of players saw the results before posting & noticed that 3rd person was already winning & thats what they wanted so why vote for something that is going to win??

Then again you also stated that coolant pods were not going to be implimented then backflipped & implemented anyway.
EVEN THOUGH IT FAILS TO RECOGNISE ESTABLISHED RECOGNISED BT TIMELINES WHICH YOU ALSO STATE YOU FOLLOW. plus the majority of players were against it oh except for bad players who cant manage heat & alpha builders who do more to ruin the game for alot of players.

WHY wshould you listen to this or the majority of posters here - BECAUSE we fund you & if you want that to continue you NEED to listen. IT ISNT wanted & ISNT needed.

if you are trying to descredit yourselves further please continue with 3rd person & watch the people who help bring you the money to make the game (the FOUNDERS including me) start to walk.

I was looking at founders package for MW tactics but when I see you guys make this game as well I refuse to give you more money when you continually dont listen to the fanbase

please understand I like the game - it has problems but this is BETA so I understand - but I like alot of others want a game to play that we are proud of & if we are we continue to put money into it.

instead of working on things that are NOT needed like 3rd person & coolant pods DEVOTE those resources into fixing problems properly like LRMS - dont drop the damage they do just remove splash damage same for SRMs - they dont need it
it would also help if the hit more randomly than hitting centre torso 90% of the time

[SirDubDub]

As has been stated before, it seems that one of the most elegant ways to address this issue is the inclusion of a togglable avatar of the player's mech within the HUD or cockpit displays. This depiction of the player's mech would reflect the actual nature of the mech model itself, including leg movement, torso rotation, missile door orientation (it might begin to address this issue as well), arm orientation, damage, etc. essentially this would render the mech's world model as it would in a full third person view, without having to compensate for the greater situational awareness that true third person would provide.

[Shively]

SirDubDub, on 22 March 2013 - 06:48 PM, said:

As has been stated before, it seems that one of the most elegant ways to address this issue is the inclusion of a togglable avatar of the player's mech within the HUD or cockpit displays. This depiction of the player's mech would reflect the actual nature of the mech model itself, including leg movement, torso rotation, missile door orientation (it might begin to address this issue as well), arm orientation, damage, etc. essentially this would render the mech's world model as it would in a full third person view, without having to compensate for the greater situational awareness that true third person would provide.

This is most likely the best option.

It provides none of the supposed advantages of 3rd-person over 1st-person.

The space to do so exists in the cockpit - every mech has blank display screens that do absolutely nothing. The displays could be placeholders for other functions? Easy solution: create a keybind to toggle each display.

There's a history for it - it existed in MW2/3 at the very least.

It prevents any splitting of the community and further problems with Community Warfare that would be caused by having to account for a split between view modes.

It prevents the inevitable merging of first-person and third-person players after the discovery that the game hasn't the population to support it.

Finally, it allows PGI to save face by not breaking yet another promise to their players.

It would appear that the proper implementation of a third-person view mode isn't to implement a third-person mode at all. It's to implement a third-person view by proxy of the cockpit.

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

[Eddrick]

Anton Chigger, on 22 March 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

How long before this post gets deleted, I wonder?

Both of the two above are going off topic. Which was the reason for the deletion in the first place. It was already stated that discussioning anything besides ways 3rd person view can/should be implemented needs to go to the "Regarding 3rd person" thread.

Edited by Eddrick, 22 March 2013 - 07:26 PM.

[ryoma]

Paul I have a quick question directed at you.

Do you guarantee that first person players will never have to play with third person players if they choose not to? I want to see a promise from you that we wont have to play with third person players. Right now people are very suspicious that a few months down the line of 3rd person view you will merge queues to eliminate the split. What is your opinion on that view of the company?

I think it would matter very much to the community if you would make that promise.

[Franchi]

Heeden, on 22 March 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

So combining the queues is your constructive feedback on how you would like 3pv to be implemented?

My constructive feedback is BE HONEST WITH US.

Edited by Franchi, 22 March 2013 - 07:40 PM.