16 replies to this topic

[Black Sunder]

I keep seeing people posting about a single player campaign and training. I'm confused because I thought this was an online game to be played with multiple people and I can't find any dev quotes about this SP thing.

[Leyana]

Perhaps people are thinking that this will be an MMO with 'rooms' or 'matches' for people to fight in?

Not all MMOs are persistant (ie like WoW and TOR) some MMOs are made out of 'hubs' where you can see other people but when you enter the 'battle area' all you can see are your allies and opponents (ie like Guild Wars 1 and Hellgate).

You could conceivable have a 'single player' campaign with some co-op elements in the latter type of MMO.

I would think that MWO would go that direction since the MechWarrior universe lends itself to heavy PvP instead of PvE.

[terminator]

It seems that is what some people were expecting especially from the announcement from 2k9.

[Rhinehart]

I'd much rather see a good mix of PVE/PVP elements as i generally play MMOs to relax. PVP is NOT relaxing as far as I'm concerned. In fact I find the competition to be highly stressful to the point of occaisionally having to quit a game and find something else to do. That's because I am highly competitive and absolutely hate losing lol. But I never have enough time to match other online players in gear or experience, my life is too busy. So while the universe may lend itself to PVP I'm hoping for PVE elements as well.

[Starkiller]

Actually Battletech is a primarily PVE game and not as much PVP oriented. I worked for FASA and was a Marauder for years, PVP is not a much a central focus point of the game as is the PVE focus. Of course there is an element that prefer PVP over PVE (me being one) but that does not mean the franchise is PVP driven though.

PS I have seen no mention of this being an MMO either, I have no idea where people keep getting this, it is Mech Warrior Online, no where does that same Mech Warrior MMO/MMORPG.

Edited by Starkiller, 07 November 2011 - 09:34 PM.

[Colaessus]

Well that for sure, MWO is not a MMO, it is just a multiplayer online game. Nothing massive about the MW universe, Only its mechs are.

I think people are getting confused with the silent RPG part of it.

[Dozer]

Just because a game is online and gives you the ability to play with others doesn't make it mandatory for you to do so. There are times, for a laundry list of reasons, people simply want to play online solo. Online gaming mirrors life. Just because I live in a neighbourhood with 100 families, some of which I know and others I don't doesn't mean I want to go out and spend time with them every day. Sometimes I like to sit in bed watching a DvD and having a beer by myself I still feel part of the community, whether I sit in bed or not.

Accordingly there is a reason to put forth a PvE side to even a game like this. Indeed doing solo content is very lore appropriate. It shouldn't be ruled out just because the game is online and is about huge awesome mechanical death machines. A smart developer should cater for both options to expand the client base and revenue stream. The idea is to take the market share of single player offline games by appealing to that audience as well.

Edited by Dozer, 07 November 2011 - 09:57 PM.

[Dozer]

Amro_One, on 07 November 2011 - 09:40 PM, said:

Well that for sure, MWO is not a MMO, it is just a multiplayer online game. Nothing massive about the MW universe, Only its mechs are.

I think people are getting confused with the silent RPG part of it.

Actually when you get down to basics MWO is both and MMO and MMORPG. There is not commonly agreed definition on the number of players needed to be 'Massively' and whether they need to be concurrent or independant, it is definately multiplayer i.e. more than one, it is online and you are playing a role. There is progression and customisation, and it has a theme. So, when you look at the actual antecedents it is both of those terms.

I don't think people are really getting confused. I just think it's a legacy of the acronyms beginnings clouding the modern day realities.

Edited by Dozer, 07 November 2011 - 10:53 PM.

[fakey]

While I would also like some PvE elements at some point (ie. running missions with fellow mercs and such) from what the developers have said this is going to be a primarily PvP game. While they haven't ruled out PvE in the future, I sincerely doubt we're going to see it at launch.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

The part were my mech gets blowed up, and I don't have anything to fight in....
I wonder if they will have infantry in this game, and how long it would take to buy an Atlas on an enlisted man salary.

It sure would be nice if was some single player options to rebuild yourself from the disposessed.

Edited by Agent.0.Fortune, 07 November 2011 - 11:07 PM.

[Sirisian]

Dozer, on 07 November 2011 - 10:00 PM, said:

Actually when you get down to basics MWO is both and MMO and MMORPG. There is not commonly agreed definition on the number of players needed to be 'Massively' and whether they need to be concurrent or independant, it is definately multiplayer i.e. more than one, it is online and you are playing a role. There is progression and customisation, and it has a theme. So, when you look at the actual antecedents it is both of those terms.

I don't think people are really getting confused. I just think it's a legacy of the acronyms beginnings clouding the modern day realities.

There is no commonly agreed upon definition. This means that when the developers say it's not an MMO, which they have, then it's not.

On a purely subjective definition though multiplayer games with instanced matches or instanced lobbies aren't really MMOs. You kind of need a living persistent world. For instance, you wouldn't called BF3 an MMOFPS just because it has persistent character (RPG) mechanics. You'd look at say Planetside for that which has persistent maps and battles where player leave and join with no defined start and stop. Again extremely subjective. If they had multiple planet/territory maps where you just joined whenever and fought with a relatively large (64+) amount of people with no fixed start or end then I'd say it fits into the definition of an MMO mech game. (See signature).

Regarding the OP, the devs said no single player was planned or PVE. They seem to be focusing solely on match making games with 4 person lances. Along with that a persistent instance match territory takeover system was vaguely alluded to.

[Dozer]

Sirisian, on 07 November 2011 - 11:16 PM, said:

There is no commonly agreed upon definition. This means that when the developers say it's not an MMO, which they have, then it's not.

On a purely subjective definition though multiplayer games with instanced matches or instanced lobbies aren't really MMOs. You kind of need a living persistent world. For instance, you wouldn't called BF3 an MMOFPS just because it has persistent character (RPG) mechanics. You'd look at say Planetside for that which has persistent maps and battles where player leave and join with no defined start and stop. Again extremely subjective. If they had multiple planet/territory maps where you just joined whenever and fought with a relatively large (64+) amount of people with no fixed start or end then I'd say it fits into the definition of an MMO mech game. (See signature).

Regarding the OP, the devs said no single player was planned or PVE. They seem to be focusing solely on match making games with 4 person lances. Along with that a persistent instance match territory takeover system was vaguely alluded to.

Fair point. They did say it's not a MMO so I'll happily take that as the end of discussion.

As for the PVE side of things while it may not be planned I think it's worthwhile to gauge the potential now (and continuously). Remaining 'open the the possibilities' should always be a strategic priority.

Edited by Dozer, 07 November 2011 - 11:24 PM.

[Atheenah Lightheart]

Ok, so if this is just a multiplayer game focused on PvE...whats the point?
I get online in games to play with other people but if i cant play with them in PvE and not against them in PvP,
as it is more focused on PvE....

I hope im wrong here, so please tell me otherwise.

[MausGMR]

Kill 50 Jenners and bring back their hip actuators.


lololololololololol....

[Inappropriate849]

Why do we need yet another thread like this? Doesn't the FAQ cover these questions about PvE and MMO and F2P?

Atheenah Lightheart, on 08 November 2011 - 04:07 AM, said:

Ok, so if this is just a multiplayer game focused on PvE...whats the point?

It's not. It's a pure PvP game. PvE content has been alluded to, but MWO WILL NOT LAUNCH WITH PvE CONTENT.

[Black Sunder]

Looking back over dev interviews and such and from what I see its going to be a purely pvp game and I'm very happy about that because I don't want to see the community divided by pve and pvp.

[Riptor]

If WoT is considered an MMO.. and it is...

You can say without any problem that MWO will be an MMO too. Multyplayer means its small scale with no persistant aspects, like battlefield or MW. You might level up but theres no persistant aspect of the game world.

For MWO we allready know that there will be an permanent aspect with the galaxy conquering mode. This permanent aspect makes it in my eyes qualify as a MMO

Also i think the battles will be a bit bigger then just 4 vs 4.. more like 12 vs 12 or 16 vs 16... atleast i hope thats the size of the matches.