236 replies to this topic

[Stone Profit]

MrPenguin, on 27 March 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

Heres the thing. I pretty much gave up trying to take most people here seriously.

If I have anything constructive to bring up, il just post it directly to the devs. If I see someone who I can have a great conversation with, I will converse.

If they can't give you that much, then you can either ignore the post or give it the non-serious reply it deserves.

Yeah, the problem is that people refuse to look at things from reality. If the devs never said "we will never have 3rd person view" in those literal terms then the option is open. I treat everything I hear from a business as though it were in court in front of a judge, because (And this is very very key) THATS HOW THEY WRITE IT.
But I do amuse myself attempting to use logic to show them why they are wrong. Why? Because...

QuantumButler, on 27 March 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...is-when-needed/

Posted 17 July 2012 - 01:36 PM

POPULAR
MechWarrior Online is being designed to put you the player in the seat of the pilot. It is 100% first person view only. Being the pilot is one of our key design pillars and 3rd person breaks that pillar on multiple levels as seen in many of the other 3rd Person discussions.

We will investigate 3rd person in the far off distance for special game settings, but this is very far off in the distance.

While we appreciate those who enjoy 3rd person, MWO will be 1st person out of the gate and in the near future.

-Paul
Lead Designer


Nowhere do I see the words "we will never have 3rd person view" and in fact it SAYS EXPLICITLY that they are looking into it at that time. Why is it so difficult to understand?

7 Nation Army, on 27 March 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

I might stop playing for this reason:

http://mwomercs.com/...nced-heres-why/

Goodbye and thanks for all the fish.

[QuantumButler]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

Yeah, the problem is that people refuse to look at things from reality. If the devs never said "we will never have 3rd person view" in those literal terms then the option is open. I treat everything I hear from a business as though it were in court in front of a judge, because (And this is very very key) THATS HOW THEY WRITE IT.
But I do amuse myself attempting to use logic to show them why they are wrong. Why? Because...


Posted 17 July 2012 - 01:36 PM

POPULAR
MechWarrior Online is being designed to put you the player in the seat of the pilot. It is 100% first person view only. Being the pilot is one of our key design pillars and 3rd person breaks that pillar on multiple levels as seen in many of the other 3rd Person discussions.

We will investigate 3rd person in the far off distance for special game settings, but this is very far off in the distance.

While we appreciate those who enjoy 3rd person, MWO will be 1st person out of the gate and in the near future.

-Paul
Lead Designer


Nowhere do I see the words "we will never have 3rd person view" and in fact it SAYS EXPLICITLY that they are looking into it at that time. Why is it so difficult to understand?


Goodbye and thanks for all the fish.

I see you can't read either.

"It is 100% first person view only. Being the pilot is one of our key design pillars and 3rd person breaks that pillar on multiple levels as seen in many of the other 3rd Person discussions."

The point is that this 1st person cockpit only pillar of MWO design is something that made me and many founders want to pay money for this game in the first place, now they've changed their minds, we feel lied to, abused, cheated, and betrayed, and no longer trust anything the developers say because their word obviously means nothing, if you enjoy being lied to or don't think you have been so be it, but I and many others feel we have been lied to and are not happy.

Edited by QuantumButler, 27 March 2013 - 07:30 AM.

[Stone Profit]

QuantumButler, on 27 March 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

I see you can't read either.

"It is 100% first person view only. Being the pilot is one of our key design pillars and 3rd person breaks that pillar on multiple levels as seen in many of the other 3rd Person discussions."

And you cant understand that if they did not literally say they wouldnt "which they didnt, and in fact said they were looking into it at that time) then the option is open. You simply refuse to use logic in understanding that post. You feel lied to because of your inability to understand the english language. Therefore, you deserve it. And that makes me chuckle. So now Im done with you. Feel free to contine to be wrong, I shall be ignoring your posts henceforth.

[QuantumButler]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

And you cant understand that if they did not literally say they wouldnt "which they didnt, and in fact said they were looking into it at that time) then the option is open. You simply refuse to use logic in understanding that post. You feel lied to because of your inability to understand the english language. Therefore, you deserve it. And that makes me chuckle. So now Im done with you. Feel free to contine to be wrong, I shall be ignoring your posts henceforth.

Thank god.

[MrPenguin]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

We will investigate 3rd person in the far off distance for special game settings, but this is very far off in the distance.

If anything, this is proof that they kept there promise.
It was released first and for most as a 100% first person shooter. As said.
3rd person was investigated. As said.
3rd person, so far, is only to be implemented in the training grounds. Which is a special game setting. As said.
Any other form of 3rd person is currently under review with nothing set in stone yet.
The entire reason the 3rd person thread exists is so the community can intelligently help PGI find a balance between the 2 views. Theirs a way to implement them in the game with out breaking balance or segeregating the community. Just because some people here can't think of something in 5 minutes doesn't mean there isn't an answer.

I won't lie. I fully see the problem with 3rd person. Its the reason I never played mechwarrior 2 or 4 online. (well, among many other things)

But I would like to see MWO pull off 3rd person in a way that works. And I'm more then willing to contribute my own ideas in a polite, coherent manor so that I can help with making this game better for all players. Especially if it means making the community grow even larger.

Its truly a shame that most people in this thread simply cannot say the same.

Edited by MrPenguin, 27 March 2013 - 07:34 AM.

[Franchi]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

And you cant understand that if they did not literally say they wouldnt "which they didnt, and in fact said they were looking into it at that time) then the option is open. You simply refuse to use logic in understanding that post. You feel lied to because of your inability to understand the english language. Therefore, you deserve it. And that makes me chuckle. So now Im done with you. Feel free to contine to be wrong, I shall be ignoring your posts henceforth.

They said they might investigate it in the far off future and ONLY in special game modes.

In addition

Quote

MWO will be 1st person out of the gate and in the near future.

Unless you want to give up your "it's beta" excuse then yes indeed they did lie here, we are still not out of the gate as in launched.

[QuantumButler]

MrPenguin, on 27 March 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

If anything, this is proof that they kept there promise.
It was released first and for most as a 100% first person shooter. As said.
3rd person was investigated. As said.
3rd person, so far, is only to be implemented in the training grounds. Which is a special game setting. As said.
Any other form of 3rd person is currently under review with nothing set in stone yet.
The entire reason the 3rd person thread exists is so the community can intelligently help PGI find a balance between the 2 views. Theirs a way to implement them in the game with out breaking balance or segeregating the community. Just because you can't think of something in 5 minutes doesn't mean there isn't an answer.

I won't lie. I fully see the problem with 3rd person. Its the reason I never played mechwarrior 2 or 4 online. (well, among many other things)

But I would like to see MWO pull off 3rd person in a way that works. And I'm more then willing to contribute my own ideas in polite manor so that I can help with making this game better for all players. Especially if it means makig the community grow even larger.

Its truly a shame that most people in this thread simply cannot say the same.

It's truly a shame that some people in this thread have so much faith in PGI's ability to pull off a 3rd person view that isn't superior to 1st person view when many other developers have failed to do so year after year.

Where does this faith come from?

Edited by QuantumButler, 27 March 2013 - 07:36 AM.

[Stone Profit]

MrPenguin, on 27 March 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

If anything, this is proof that they kept there promise.
It was released first and for most as a 100% first person shooter. As said.
3rd person was investigated. As said.
3rd person, so far, is only to be implemented in the training grounds. Which is a special game setting. As said.
Any other form of 3rd person is currently under review with nothing set in stone yet.
The entire reason the 3rd person thread exists is so the community can intelligently help PGI find a balance between the 2 views. Theirs a way to implement them in the game with out breaking balance or segeregating the community. Just because some people here can't think of something in 5 minutes doesn't mean there isn't an answer.

I won't lie. I fully see the problem with 3rd person. Its the reason I never played mechwarrior 2 or 4 online. (well, among many other things)

But I would like to see MWO pull off 3rd person in a way that works. And I'm more then willing to contribute my own ideas in a polite, coherent manor so that I can help with making this game better for all players. Especially if it means makig the community grow even larger.

Its truly a shame that most people in this thread simply cannot say the same.

Yes, the evidence they attempt to use to prove their own point in fact proves ours. The irony is so delicious I think I will spread it on an everything bagel for breakfast. om nom nom. They still refuse to believe. I say the game is better off without them. Actually, I think the world would be better off without them, but thats probably overly harsh as I havent had my coffee and everything bagel with delicious irony spread yet...
But the sheer fact is that it will be good for the game as it brings in more people to spend money, and thats what business do, and what they need to grow. Will there be problems? certainly. But Im sure the devs can handle it. And there is no issue 3rd pv can bring out that I cannot overcome with the most op thing of all: Teamwork.

Franchi, on 27 March 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

They said they might investigate it in the far off future and ONLY in special game modes.

In addition


Unless you want to give up your "it's beta" excuse then yes indeed they did lie here, we are still not out of the gate as in launched.

I like how you add a quote with no reference to know who it came from. You probably wrote that yourself lol also, that never said they wont do third person, it only says it will be first person in the beginning. and out of the gate means from the moment of conception, not launch. I love how you guys just use everything so wrong in an attempt to make your case and yet fail so hard every time. learn some reading comp skills bro.

Edited by Stone Profit, 27 March 2013 - 07:40 AM.

[QuantumButler]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

Yes, the evidence they attempt to use to prove their own point in fact proves ours. The irony is so delicious I think I will spread it on an everything bagel for breakfast. om nom nom. They still refuse to believe. I say the game is better off without them. Actually, I think the world would be better off without them, but thats probably overly harsh as I havent had my coffee and everything bagel with delicious irony spread yet...
But the sheer fact is that it will be good for the game as it brings in more people to spend money, and thats what business do, and what they need to grow. Will there be problems? certainly. But Im sure the devs can handle it. And there is no issue 3rd pv can bring out that I cannot overcome with the most op thing of all: Teamwork.


I like how you add a quote with no reference to know who it came from. You probably wrote that yourself lol also, that never said they wont do third person, it only says it will be first person in the beginning. and out of the gate means from the moment of conception, not launch. I love how you guys just use everything so wrong in an attempt to make your case and yet fail so hard every time. learn some reading comp skills bro.

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

Yes, the evidence they attempt to use to prove their own point in fact proves ours. The irony is so delicious I think I will spread it on an everything bagel for breakfast. om nom nom. They still refuse to believe. I say the game is better off without them. Actually, I think the world would be better off without them, but thats probably overly harsh as I havent had my coffee and everything bagel with delicious irony spread yet...
But the sheer fact is that it will be good for the game as it brings in more people to spend money, and thats what business do, and what they need to grow. Will there be problems? certainly. But Im sure the devs can handle it. And there is no issue 3rd pv can bring out that I cannot overcome with the most op thing of all: Teamwork.


I like how you add a quote with no reference to know who it came from. You probably wrote that yourself lol also, that never said they wont do third person, it only says it will be first person in the beginning. and out of the gate means from the moment of conception, not launch. I love how you guys just use everything so wrong in an attempt to make your case and yet fail so hard every time. learn some reading comp skills bro.

Cool ad homeniem bro.

[Thirdstar]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

Yes, the evidence they attempt to use to prove their own point in fact proves ours. The irony is so delicious I think I will spread it on an everything bagel for breakfast. om nom nom. They still refuse to believe. I say the game is better off without them. Actually, I think the world would be better off without them, but thats probably overly harsh as I havent had my coffee and everything bagel with delicious irony spread yet...

I swear some of the golds are coming apart at the seams.

[QuantumButler]

Thirdstar, on 27 March 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

I swear some of the golds are coming apart at the seams.

We call these people paid shills.

[Stone Profit]

QuantumButler, on 27 March 2013 - 07:41 AM, said:

Cool ad homeniem bro.

You need to learn what things are before you attempt to use them in an argument. I didnt attack his character as a way of invalidating his argument, I have already invalidated his argument. Im simply saying he needs to learn to read properly lawls. Sorry you successfully trolled me on that one.
Ad hominem

In Latin, the word homō (of which hominem is the accusative case) has the gender-neutral meaning of "a human being", "a person" (unlike some of the words in Romance languages it gave rise to, such as French homme and Italian uomo). A translation of ad hominem that preserves this gender-neutrality is "to the person". Ad hominem is an attack on the person, not the person's arguments,^[7], though mere verbal abuse in the absence of an argument, however, is not ad hominem nor any kind of logical fallacy.^[6]

[QuantumButler]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

You need to learn what things are before you attempt to use them in an argument. I didnt attack his character as a way of invalidating his argument, I have already invalidated his argument. Im simply saying he needs to learn to read properly lawls. Sorry you successfully trolled me on that one.
Ad hominem

In Latin, the word homō (of which hominem is the accusative case) has the gender-neutral meaning of "a human being", "a person" (unlike some of the words in Romance languages it gave rise to, such as French homme and Italian uomo). A translation of ad hominem that preserves this gender-neutrality is "to the person". Ad hominem is an attack on the person, not the person's arguments,^[7], though mere verbal abuse in the absence of an argument, however, is not ad hominem nor any kind of logical fallacy.^[6]

I thought you were ignoring me?

Plrease go back to doing that.

[Ransack]

I am, on 26 March 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

You, are absolutely correct. I should not assume the 4 mans are the hardcore player base. Let me clean the statement up..

Where did everyone go?

Players who have played a long time have left due to unmet expectations, whether reasonable or not.

Players who are new, largely leave because of the 4 man pub experience.

Players who have not left, like this game despite these negatives. I fall into this category, but it does not mean we are ok with the above either.

Add one more type, someone like me who just activated premium time to run it out (was holding out for the clans, but screw it now). 90 more days then poof, my ties are gone, and I start looking for something that is actually fun.... like this game used to be. Now it's pretty stale and stagnant. Adding new big maps with the same two goals is pretty humdrum to me. Basically, the gameplay just has not evolved past base capping. People are bored and burned out on doing the same thing day after day

[Franchi]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

Yes, the evidence they attempt to use to prove their own point in fact proves ours. The irony is so delicious I think I will spread it on an everything bagel for breakfast. om nom nom. They still refuse to believe. I say the game is better off without them. Actually, I think the world would be better off without them, but thats probably overly harsh as I havent had my coffee and everything bagel with delicious irony spread yet...
But the sheer fact is that it will be good for the game as it brings in more people to spend money, and thats what business do, and what they need to grow. Will there be problems? certainly. But Im sure the devs can handle it. And there is no issue 3rd pv can bring out that I cannot overcome with the most op thing of all: Teamwork.


I like how you add a quote with no reference to know who it came from. You probably wrote that yourself lol also, that never said they wont do third person, it only says it will be first person in the beginning. and out of the gate means from the moment of conception, not launch. I love how you guys just use everything so wrong in an attempt to make your case and yet fail so hard every time. learn some reading comp skills bro.

That quote is from Paul, I linked to a SS of it in this thread quite a while ago, and Butler linked to it a few posts back, you in fact quoted it in full not 10 post ago.

I am sorry i did not give you the full context, I didn't realize you couldn't remember what you posted less than thirty minutes ago.

Edited by Franchi, 27 March 2013 - 07:49 AM.

[Thirdstar]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I like how you add a quote with no reference to know who it came from. You probably wrote that yourself lol also, that never said they wont do third person, it only says it will be first person in the beginning. and out of the gate means from the moment of conception, not launch. I love how you guys just use everything so wrong in an attempt to make your case and yet fail so hard every time. learn some reading comp skills bro.

This whole para here, this one? Yeah, that's an Ad Hom.

Franchi, on 27 March 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

That quote is from Paul, I linked to a SS of it in this thread quite a while ago, and Butler linked to it a few posts back, you in fact quoted it in full not 10 post ago.

Like I said, the Golds are sounding unhinged.

[Stone Profit]

QuantumButler, on 27 March 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

I thought you were ignoring me?

Plrease go back to doing that.

Why would I do that when you are both so very wrong and it bothers you so very much?
Plus when you quote me i just have to find out what inane thing you said. I also like how you clearly know youre wrong about the ad hominem attack and choose to ignore that. lawls.

[QuantumButler]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Why would I do that when you are both so very wrong and it bothers you so very much?
Plus when you quote me i just have to find out what inane thing you said. I also like how you clearly know youre wrong about the ad hominem attack and choose to ignore that. lawls.

Oh so you're psychic and can detect when my jimmies are rustled now?

Sorry bro, you're small time, I'm merely baffled at your ignorance. I've been trolled by people far more skillfully than you.

[Thirdstar]

Stone Profit, on 27 March 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Why would I do that when you are both so very wrong and it bothers you so very much?
Plus when you quote me i just have to find out what inane thing you said. I also like how you clearly know youre wrong about the ad hominem attack and choose to ignore that. lawls.

Hey hey guys, check out the old guy trying to troll. Isn't he cute? Awww.

<3

Edited by Thirdstar, 27 March 2013 - 07:54 AM.

[Stone Profit]

QuantumButler, on 27 March 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

Oh so you're psychic and can detect when my jimmies are rustled now?

Sorry bro, you're small time, I'm merely baffled at your ignorance. I've been trolled by people far more skillfully than you.

Ah, the personal insults come out again. No reasonable arguments, so start saying mean things. DELICIOUS!