2001 replies to this topic

[TOGSolid]

Quote

Here's the situation I'm faced a lot... let's say I'm kinda shooting over a hill.. which tends to be uneven. More often than not, half of the PPC shots that I made from an Atlas-RS hits the hill. If I go over the hill more, I'll probably shoot much better, but will get exposed far more than I need. The fact is, the eye level of the Atlas relative to its arms is a huge hindrance as to whether or not my shots would connect... and there's no real hint if both my arm weapons will shoot over the hill to its intended target.

And my HUD alteration idea would fix that problem completely. You'd be totally aware as to whether your arms were clear to fire or not, thus completely negating the shot blocking issue. 3rd person view is hardly the easiest, or ideal, solution.

Edited by TOGSolid, 06 April 2013 - 09:53 PM.

[MWHawke]

T9FURY, on 05 April 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

To call people stupid or lazy because they can't grasp the concept of a particular in game function is both arrogant and insulting and it is players like that in a community that ruin it...I have tried introducing MWO to the clan I am a member of with no success and it is all due to two factors, leg / torso orientation and reticles. I have players that are FPS players used to turning both legs and body at the same time, strafing left and right and it all comes naturally, they have 1 cross hairs or scope to look through or they have never even played an FPS, now when they try to play MWO they have a body and torso that turn independently of each other and not only that they have to deal with 2 reticles. Yeah this would be easy for a kid to deal with and that is a scientific fact, but you throw it at your average 20 - 60 year bloke who, according to women can't multi task, they are pretty much screwed. At that is why MWO hasn't taken off with new players in my clan. So, should 3PS be introduced (do we have a choice?), if it helps bring in more players then yes,

What do you think strafing is? Body and legs running in ONE direction?

T9FURY, on 05 April 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

however, ONLY in the training grounds,

If it were limited to training grounds, then by all means. But what would the people learn using 3PV in training grounds?

Thontor, on 05 April 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure those are just cooldown indicators, letting you know when a weapon group is ready to fire.


To see if a weapon is in range you have to look at the weapons list on the bottom right. Black equals out of range, yellow equals within range, but reduced damage, and green equals within optimum range, therefore full damage.

I was pretty sure that if a target was blocked, it indicated it somehow. Will have to test it and see. Not been paying enough attention to what they specifically represent.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Gremlich Johns, on 06 April 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

This means they (PGI) are either stupid, or they are only concerned with extracting whatever $$ they can. PGI is ignoring details from a segment of the player base at their peril! I blame IGP, frankly. If PGI was the only party involved in MW:O, I think they would have taken MW:LL and that team and worked with it, combined arms and all.

when they cause this game to fail by adding in 3rd POV, ignoring bugs that have been here since I got here in JUNE, they will ask: why did it fail. all they have to do is realize something: those of us who have screamed out that this is a bad idea, are the ones who may be small in number <bryan's words not mine on that> but are the ones who paid the BIGGEST portion of $$ into them.

[Zaptruder]

Rejarial Galatan, on 07 April 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

when they cause this game to fail by adding in 3rd POV, ignoring bugs that have been here since I got here in JUNE, they will ask: why did it fail. all they have to do is realize something: those of us who have screamed out that this is a bad idea, are the ones who may be small in number <bryan's words not mine on that> but are the ones who paid the BIGGEST portion of $$ into them.

Oh. So you've actually spent more money on the game than just the founders? As I recall, you were screaming about not willing to pay a cent until they redress all the wrongs they've made.

[Rejarial Galatan]

nope, just my 60, and not 1 cent more to PGI until they can prove that this game wont fail

[Zaptruder]

Rejarial Galatan, on 07 April 2013 - 09:41 PM, said:

nope, just my 60, and not 1 cent more to PGI until they can prove that this game wont fail

Heh. I'm pretty sure the ones screaming the loudest then are the ones that think they want to spend money, but don't think the current product is up to scratch.

The people spending money would have to be happy enough with the current product and its direction to actually put some money into it.

But you know... you felt that way before this whole 3rd person feuding anyway, so I'm not sure what's going to change for you.

It amazes (and somewhat depresses me) how much time you spend harping on about a game (in a state) that you clearly dislike. It's like you've got nothing else going on in your life.

In somewhat depresses me because I enjoy the game for what it is - and having such vigorous vitriol be part of the discussion is making me clearly question my desire to invest additional time with such an extraordinarily myopic and unbalanced community of haters.

And before you take that last statement as justification for your hate - let me be clear - its the toxicity of this community that is turning me off from wanting to continue engaging in the game.

Maybe that's a mission accomplished for you - but I suspect you won't rest until everyone in the community and the developers have catered to your specific needs. Maybe then you'll spend a few more dollars on the game.

Edited by Zaptruder, 07 April 2013 - 10:27 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Zaptruder, on 07 April 2013 - 07:52 PM, said:

Oh. So you've actually spent more money on the game than just the founders? As I recall, you were screaming about not willing to pay a cent until they redress all the wrongs they've made.

While I appreciate the sentiment, I believe you miss the point. It would seem that PGI is catering to those that have not paid a dime toward this game (in the hopes that they MIGHT) over those that have paid to get this game off the ground. Paid, I might add, with the premise that there would be no 3PV/respawns/etc.

[Mystere]

Zaptruder, on 07 April 2013 - 10:25 PM, said:

In somewhat depresses me because I enjoy the game for what it is - and having such vigorous vitriol be part of the discussion is making me clearly question my desire to invest additional time with such an extraordinarily myopic and unbalanced community of haters.

And before you take that last statement as justification for your hate - let me be clear - its the toxicity of this community that is turning me off from wanting to continue engaging in the game.

Do you know what bugs me the most about the game? It is not the game itself at all, warts and all, because I am very much aware and accept that it is a work in progress. No, what bugs me the most are the rabid foaming-in-the-mouth nerd raging haters. There is so much negative emotion for what is essentially nothing more that a video game. I'm sorry to say but this already goes way beyond passion - the usual excuse some people give for their behavior.

But, instead of making these people depress me, I decided to turn the tables and relish every PGI act that pushes the buttons of these folks. In short, I turned it into entertainment.

Now back on topic ...

I don't really understand what people are so afraid of, especially if PGI can create a 3PV mode that achieves visual and sensor parity with 1PV. Just because MW4 and other games had those balance issues does not mean MWO will have it too. It has been over a decade and technology has moved far ahead since then.

As such, people should really wait until we have something we can test. Then you can complain all you want to get it fixed. But raging right now is just premature. It is coming, so help make it work, or get out of the way of those who want to.

Edited by Mystere, 08 April 2013 - 07:04 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

KuruptU4Fun, on 05 April 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

If memory serves, having an option for both a 1stPV and a 3rdPV have been available since the first Need for Speed, or at least shortly there after. The option has spanned many genres, and many AAA games that have provided it have had quite a bit of success sales wise. Does that translate to an MMO? Well few to none of us really know do we? So why not give PGI the benefit of the doubt to experiment with the concept? Companies have come a long way from a short time ago to now when it comes to options. When Ford first offered the Model T to the US, he stated that the customer could have any color car they wanted, as long as it was black. Do you as a consumer want only one choice from a company which would essentially be forced upon you, or do options appeal to you when someone provides them?

From what we have been told, this is a FPS, if you choose to you can play against others who choose to play in 3rdPV or not at all. PGI is not going from a FPS to a 3rdPS, and if they can make 3rdPV to where those players have no or a very small advantages for playing that way then I say let them do it.

PGI has come up with several things that have been added to this game that the forum community has rallied to the argument that it's overpowered. One was changed almost immediately and it and subsequent additions (Cool Shot and Artie/Air strikes) have been proven to be not as overpowering as the naysayers believed they would be. On that point most people have seemed to drop the subject altogether. So scream all you want now about 3rd person. But I'm betting a lot of those people will fade into the background once they see (and at least play for a bit) that it's not the game breaking subject they were screaming about before...

Have you played MW4 in team or League ? not ...than silent ...3PV and unlimmitedAmmo/Heat destroy the small MW4 Community

[MW Waldorf Statler]

TOGSolid, on 06 April 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

And my HUD alteration idea would fix that problem completely. You'd be totally aware as to whether your arms were clear to fire or not, thus completely negating the shot blocking issue. 3rd person view is hardly the easiest, or ideal, solution.

and while the FPS player is shaken in his cockpit of shots, and blinded by Flamern interested all this is not the 3VP .. the poor kids, can not run without 3PV're just a demagogic straw man, but armor go in BF3 they can ? there is also a torso and a tower, the move differently? It's about the heir people want every possible advantage to be able to outsmart the other with little or may be able to win against others can already see all the Pink Puppets with 3PV jump over the hill

what the next Target from the 3PV Fans ? Hawken ?

Edited by CSJ Ranger, 08 April 2013 - 07:38 AM.

[Alex Gorsky]

All simple for me, when 3rd be added to mwo i'm leave.

Best regard PGI, you founder whit 2000+ played matches

[Valaska]

Can we get an option for PGI to actually listen to its community and fix the **** the majority are demanding? Like ECM?

[MischiefSC]

There is no Separate but Equal. Either 3PV will be better than 1PV or you'll get so much HUD/LOS nerfing in 3PV that it won't be as good as 1PV.

My real concern about 3PV is that it will inherently split the community. That's never going to be a good thing. Conflicts for ownership in CW, tournaments, anything that involves players competing with other players. In addition to which it will create a perpetual 'hardore vs pansy' debate in the community that will never be resolved.



The only functional way I can see it working is to make CW 1PV and do the same thing with tournaments. Put 3PV in and don't give it any limitations - let people see via 3PV around corners, etc. People who want 3PV want it for a reason and that reason is better field of view and improved spacial awareness. Implementing a gimped 3PV is not going to satisfy anyone. However you can't have a level competition between 3PV and 1PV players and MWOs long range goal is a very competitive game environment. You'll need to have a method of graduation from 3PV to 1PV *for players who want to be involved in the competitive side of the game*.

Otherwise the game will be split in a manner that can't mesh. It'll have to try and be two 'separate but equal' games running in tandem. There's no way that's going to be cost effective enough or player population effective enough to be a long term benefit.

[MWHawke]

Mystere, on 08 April 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

I don't really understand what people are so afraid of, especially if PGI can create a 3PV mode that achieves visual and sensor parity with 1PV. Just because MW4 and other games had those balance issues does not mean MWO will have it too. It has been over a decade and technology has moved far ahead since then.

As such, people should really wait until we have something we can test. Then you can complain all you want to get it fixed. But raging right now is just premature. It is coming, so help make it work, or get out of the way of those who want to.

You DO realize that you mentioned technology has moved ahead right? Since we are so advanced now, how come PGI can't even come out with a patch that does not screw things up?

[Mystere]

MWHawke, on 08 April 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

You DO realize that you mentioned technology has moved ahead right? Since we are so advanced now, how come PGI can't even come out with a patch that does not screw things up?

Because even though technology has moved ahead, some things remain the same (e.g. people and buggy software).

Even today, I still see developers and managers who insist on the 80's way of debugging (i.e. "printf()" and their current equivalents) instead of using the latest automated testing and debugging tools. It's extremely distressing to see people still doing such things in the 21st century.

Edited by Mystere, 08 April 2013 - 05:16 PM.

[Zaptruder]

MWHawke, on 08 April 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

You DO realize that you mentioned technology has moved ahead right? Since we are so advanced now, how come PGI can't even come out with a patch that does not screw things up?

Because as technology becomes better, it also becomes more complex.

As complexity grows, the number of bugs increase.

Still... some design and management choices can have severe knock on reprecussions in terms of bugginess and their fixability. It *sounds* like they've made the move towards redressing some of those initial design and management choices after gaining additional experience under their belt. But that's only been a recent event. One can only hope that we'll be turning the bend in the next month or so with regards to these sorts of issues.

[Utilyan]

I've seen folks play........if 3rd person can make them better in any way.......Some folks could even use 4th person and 5th.

[Multitallented]

Implement 3rd person only for training grounds and the tutorial mission. Don't implement it in matchmaking... Maybe you can have the option of turning it on in lobbies when they come out.

[Marcus Cvellus]

Well, if the third person is for newbies to adjust for location of their legs, it might just stay in training grounds or in newbie servers. For everyone else it will be just game breaking.

[Skalpel]

Got a thought on 3rd person view.

My personal preference is that third person view should not be implemented in this game.

But…

If it will be implemented, here are some suggestions to at least nerf it. This does not remove all the advantages of the third person view but it would help.

The main advantage of the third person view is the much bigger spatial awareness. That is wider FOV, looking around corners and over hills…

If I imagine how that would work even with no HUD or reduced HUD in the third person view I see it something like this. People will use 3rd person and then jump to 1rst person view quickly to take advantage over the sighting of enemy and such. So the accuracy advantage that is lost in the 3rd person view will then, once knowledge of the enemy position is known, will be quickly gained again in the cockpit view. So this quick transition from third to first person view is going to give people best of all worlds. And that is not good.

So in case 3rd person view is implemented not only in the training grounds but also on the battlefield, here is my solution.

Make the transition from third to first person view slow. Like a few seconds long.

That way quick transition from third to first person view would not bring such immediate advantage. Plus, the camera movement would maybe go from the back of the mech to vertical and down into cockpit to maybe disorient the user a little.

The short version

The quick transitions from 3rd to 1st view mode will give a uge advantage even if the 3rd person view is lacking HUD. Make the transition between views really slow so the advantage is not imediate. That way the 3rd person view is almost a disadvantage if you find yourself face to face with another mech.

Edited by Skalpel, 09 April 2013 - 01:42 PM.