211 replies to this topic

[Captain Wolfsburg]

Exoth3rmic, on 23 March 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...095-3rd-person/


[/list]Now I suppose you can bend that to mean "we're spending salary implementing it but then we might bin it."

But that isn't what he actually says, means or will do.

I read the post you linked. From the sound of it, the way they intend on implementing 3rd person would give little to no advantage to the person using it, outside of allowing them to see the backside of their mech. If this is the case, it's something I can tolerate. As long as it's not MW4's awful over the shoulder 3rd person view the poptarters loved so much.

[Windies]

A5mod3us, on 23 March 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

I read the post you linked. From the sound of it, the way they intend on implementing 3rd person would give little to no advantage to the person using it, outside of allowing them to see the backside of their mech. If this is the case, it's something I can tolerate. As long as it's not MW4's awful over the shoulder 3rd person view the poptarters loved so much.

Pulling the camera in so you can't see around objects can always be abused by proper placement of your mech. You can always back up a little bit so the camera goes out further and still look around objects while fully remaining in cover. Many games have tried to design a 3rd person view that gives no advantage over 1st person view, most have failed. That is why rather than designing a restricting 3rd person view, World of Tanks designed a complete system for being able to see anything. Basically everything is invisible until you are within viewing parameters.

That's a system I don't want to see come into play in MW:O because it create's boring turtle matches.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 22 March 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

but the majority of people who dont play this game and MIGHT give us money if we cater to them vastly outnumbers the minority who do play it and do give us money, why should we listen to the minority over that vast majority?

Nice how you hid the answer in your question Buddah!

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 March 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

Nice how you hid the answer in your question Buddah!

I know it can be hard so read sarcasm but that was pretty obvious
Im guessing you knew that though

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 23 March 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

I know it can be hard so read sarcasm but that was pretty obvious
Im guessing you knew that though

[Mystere]

Thirdstar, on 21 March 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

A staggering number of Founders believed this 'mistruth'.

All I can say then is: tough!

[Karyudo ds]

Windies, on 23 March 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

Pulling the camera in so you can't see around objects can always be abused by proper placement of your mech. You can always back up a little bit so the camera goes out further and still look around objects while fully remaining in cover.

If they made the camera lazy that might solve that a little. So if you walked left to look around a corner the camera would still be off to the right a bit. I wounder if tethering it to the legs would work though. Sure you'd be able to see where you're not looking but aiming like that would be a pain anyway.

Ultimately if you're going to these lengths you may as well just put in an average system and restrict it to training and maybe exhibition matches (if we had those).

Edited by Karyudo ds, 23 March 2013 - 10:31 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

A5mod3us, on 23 March 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

I read the post you linked. From the sound of it, the way they intend on implementing 3rd person would give little to no advantage to the person using it, outside of allowing them to see the backside of their mech. If this is the case, it's something I can tolerate. As long as it's not MW4's awful over the shoulder 3rd person view the poptarters loved so much.

I don't think they intended us to turn Catapults into Gauss Cats either. Not that its a bad thing, just that if there something to be exploited from 3rd person folks have already done so else where and they want that exploit here.

[Mystere]

Windies, on 21 March 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Why not, do they still have a shred of integrity left that I'm unaware of?

Did you join OWS or any such activity in protest of your government and its Wall Street paymasters? If so, are you continuing or have you given up already? If you have given up, why?

If people use the "passion" they are displaying in these forums on something more substantial, maybe the world will be a better place.

Jade Kitsune, on 21 March 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

You imply I want MWO to stagnate when that's far from the case.

We need CONTENT, not crackpot ideas to cater to a non-existant player base.

Actually we need more content and more players.

Also, I sometimes view crackpot ideas as "risky ideas with potential for big gains".

zverofaust, on 21 March 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

Btw, this forum drama is also content. User generated content, and people like me find it absolutely delicious.

Just like this man, I hope.

(OMFG! I am agreeing with zverofaust.)

Edited by Mystere, 23 March 2013 - 11:02 AM.

[Tezcatli]

I'm really cynical. In my eyes it looks like they got their initial target demographic. Which was the battletech/mechwarrior fans. Who provided them with the funding to continue developing the game. Now they're turning their sights on a demographic that isn't as interested in battletech/mechwarrior universe, just general gaming fun. They are being considerate to the fans of the IP, but are indeed spending resources on things to bring in another demographic.

As long as I don't have to play with 3rd person view players, I'm okay with it. But I really think the game is in serious need of new game modes. Ones that have more depth then just capture points. Something like actually defending or assault a real base. Something that makes you feel like you're in the battletech universe. Not just running from one point to another whilest shooting at each other.

[Mystere]

Jacmac, on 21 March 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

True! I'm on hold, and a lot of players I'm teamed with regularly are in the same boat. There is too much uncertainty right now, and like the stock market, uncertainty is not good for business.

That is not a very good generalization, especially to those who profit from such uncertainty.

Vaan, on 23 March 2013 - 12:59 AM, said:

On a side track, I don't see how does a 3rd party view can really damage the CW or whatever gameplay style in MWO.. Can anyone tell me?

The only thing PGI has given so far is the list of some of the ideas they are toying with.

Edited by Mystere, 23 March 2013 - 11:34 AM.

[TehSBGX]

tuokaerf, on 21 March 2013 - 07:40 PM, said:

I'm not excited about 3rd person view, I'd personally never use it and it can give an advantage in some situations. The post explaining some ideas on it however is fairly well thought out with some feedback needed on how it will operate in CW.

The controls are benign. It makes sense for some builds to do this, and good for new players. I myself had a hard time getting down the independent movement of the upper and lower body plus arms. If they were dumbing it down, they would have made those the only options.

As for Coolant, who really cares? We're a few days in and I've noticed no different in myself getting killed (I don't use it, my builds run fairly cool) more often or less than before in a brawl (well, besides the LRM fest).

I agree with alot of this, Coolant isn't THAT big of a deal and Yes there are builds that work better with arm lock. I don't use coolant and I haven't been at a huge disadvantage. Also with Arm Lock I feel a lot more comfortable brawling it out with faster Mechs. I still don't know how to feel about 3pv, but for all any of us know PGI could change their minds.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Question...

Where exactly is PGI getting the ideas from for things like the Cool Shot and the addition of 3rd PoV?

The OP and others who share his point of view keep referring to a 'non-existant' playerbase as being the targets of these additions, which makes no sense, because a non-existant playerbase wouldn't be asking for things as they aren't involved in the game at all.

The problem is..there IS a large number of people who DO currently play MWO that are asking for these things, that is why they are being developed.

It would appear Jade and company that you are NOT the majority of the playerbase and the views you hold do not coincide with the views of the majority of the playerbase. PGI catering to the REAL majority of the playerbase is exactly what they are doing, you just don't happen to fit in that catagory.

Now, take a step back, realize that you are NOT the center of the MWO universe and spend a little time getting used to the fact that you aren't important and that your opinions aren't valid to the majority. Once you've accepted this, you'll find the game far more enjoyable, I know I do.

And yes, I do happen to agree with Jade and company on many of the subjects brought up, however, I'm also an adult who realizes that I'm not in the majority. This is NOT Burger King, you will not get it YOUR way.

Welcome to real life.

[Taemien]

Being as most of the people I know (personally, as in in person, not through a chat room, aka Real Life) that play CoD are 27-42, I think that throws out the OP's argument.

Most kids under 18 are still playing Pokemon (or whatever took its place) and other Wii or 3DS games. They don't typically get into the CoD games or PC games period until their able to buy it themselves. And the ones that are lucky enough to have a PC or usually a MACbook from school are usually playing Minecraft or other cheap, non-resource heavy, java game.

In other words, the younger crowd is still playing stuff that uses a controller as its primary input. Not Keyboard, Mouse, or Joystick.

Also before you make any arguments about marketing strategies, please do us a favor and have at least one intro level college course on business or marketing.

[KingCobra]

Many of us old time players to the MechWarrior IP you can call us relics or old guard Knew what made MechWarrior great I was one of the first 100 players to ever play MechWarrior 2 Online for beta 1993 and one of the first 50 to play MechWarrior 2 online with net.mech/kali/and ten.net back to 1995. It has been a long road of golden moments and disheartening times with this IP.PGI has forgotten much of what made this IP great large lobby's for league play PVE campaigns and co-op play but they forgot one of the biggest reasons MechWarrior was great its players. The old guard like me trained thousands of new players ran leagues and did many things to keep the community alive and vibrant.I cant see very much of the old MechWarrior IP in MWO after 2 years PGI and the Devs still do not understand the MechWarrior IP.As Mektek found out it is not all just about how many fancy mechs weapons or items it has put in the game they failed. MWO could be a great MechWarrior game but if Brian and Russ do not understand the IP and what it was to millions who played all that BT/TT/PC MechWarrior/and even MechAssault games then I don't see this game making the cut with new players of any ages.

Edited by KingCobra, 23 March 2013 - 02:26 PM.

[mattkachu]

KingCobra, on 23 March 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

blob of text and pic

Mektek didnt "fail"

went years down the line. still saw some people playing as late as 2009, which is longer than any other of the oth MW titles.

When they launched MWO, they told us outright, no PvE. thats why they didnt call it MW5.

The reason why there's little respect for previous mechwarrior fans is because none of us want Nastolgia Warrior Online. Every MW was different, every one had their gimmick. Not to say MWO is good, but it is different. Some people like it more than others.

[KingCobra]

mattkachu, on 23 March 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

Mektek didnt "fail"

went years down the line. still saw some people playing as late as 2009, which is longer than any other of the oth MW titles.

When they launched MWO, they told us outright, no PvE. thats why they didnt call it MW5.

The reason why there's little respect for previous mechwarrior fans is because none of us want Nastolgia Warrior Online. Every MW was different, every one had their gimmick. Not to say MWO is good, but it is different. Some people like it more than others.

#1 Did Mektek produce a AAA MechWarrior title?=NO=Fail #2 PGi has not fixed the forums for Win8 or IE10 #3 If Microsoft had not pulled the plug on the MSN gamming zone there would still be MW3-MW4Mercinaries players still online playing the last true MechWarrior AAA titles.#4 Yes I believe there are millions that would have preferred a nostalgic type MechWarrior platform than a F2P MWO.#5 Im a BT/TT/MechWarrior/MechAssault/Mecha fan and yes I do love posting any mecha pics I come across.If your mad because my opinion hits home with many O well so be it.-->

[mattkachu]

lol



When everything closed down, mektek kept it running for more than a decade. I think most people (maybe not the 1% of the community on the forums) would agree that any mech game is better than none. Just because you didnt like it doesnt make it so.

MW4 is free now, pretty cool. I can play single player on there without the fear of spamming wall text on the forums.

Edit: you originally say mektek was fail because they didnt understand the communtiy. Then you said they fail because they didnt create a new game.

Its a mod. Deal with it. and now its free.

I'll keep my eye out for Nostalgia warrior online, maybe i can find it in a goodwill or a 90's vintage store.

Edited by mattkachu, 23 March 2013 - 03:24 PM.

[Clarice Creed]

I want to echo the general sentiment of the thread.

The development of this game is taking steps in the wrong direction. I did spend money on founder believing what they are making is a battletech simulator game, in the vein of the previous mechwarrior games but still improving upon that and broadening the scope with faction warfare across a galaxy map. Not important to me personally but they also aligned with the old battletech timeline and made it sound like a great plan going forward.

I feel that now, 8 months later, there has been little progress on that front. Instead the last few months there have been steps towards p2w (redacted after player outcry) and moving away from the simulator aspect in favor of a gears of war style 3rd person game. There is no more faction allegiance, galaxy warfare or anything like it then we had in Aug'12. Even worse, the clan factions should be showing up pretty soon and the groundwork for factions in general isnt in the game at all. That isnt what we were made to believe this game will be, no matter how you spin it now.

There are some stories of a company losing focus of their main customers while chasing a greater market share and suffering from it, I dont want to see MWO fall to that.

For me this seems similar to what happened in EVE Online development a while back. For those not familiar, its a game about spaceships. At some point the company making it lost touch with their players and focused their revenue on things unrelated to the actual EVE Online game, taking subscription money and pumping it into things like advanced physics 3D engines for other games they wanted to make under the pretense of the designs being for EVE itself. That blew up in their faces, they faced a huge exodus of players and bad publicity. Afaik they refocused their efforts on the game paying their bills and recovered from it. Hopefully the MWO devs come to understand this too.

[Oy of MidWorld]

I wrote this up before, i'm not going to write it all again, so i'll just copy and paste:

What you've actually made, what you've achieved is a thinking man's shooter. It is excellent in its own way. But it doesn't fit in with your target demographic. I'ts aready much to complex, tactical and excellent to appeal to a casual action gamer. That just being the core gameplay. Too many variables for people who do not want to put up with understanding them.

But then there's people who want to. Focus on the one thing and do it right, and you'll have a growing playerbase of people who want to play a thinking man's shooter. Who come here for exactly this experience.

And it's not just us grognards. We have some new players in our ranks without any BattleTech background whatsoever. After a few weeks they knew more about hardpoint setups strenghts/weaknesses than i'll ever care to. One even got hooked to the novels... Now what did we do? We showed them the ropes in a 4-man, explaining the game.

You really need to make a tutorial, and that's it.