475 replies to this topic

[Tsen Shang]

Starkiller, on 15 November 2011 - 05:37 AM, said:

Hate to do it to you, but it was not the first on a console. Several titles were on Sega, NES, SNES and others back in the day. As far as neckbeard, yes he is, but someone has to educated the uneducated masses of gamers that think WoW invented the internets!

Nothing wrong with correcting me if what I'm saying is false and it's my fault for not being specific enough. Other MW games were released on consoles, yes, but none of the other releases were flagship titles for Microsoft or got the advertising power of the Xbox + MS behind them. It's the same thing as Marathon and Halo.

Glare, on 15 November 2011 - 12:16 PM, said:

Cool it everybody.

Redbeard: Ad hominems are never appropriate. That said, having little to no working knowledge of the rules while arguing vehemently against their inclusion is a little... short-sighted. At least have the decency of conversation to research what you're yelling about before yelling about it.

Same goes for you on the ad homs, Starkiller.

What I wouldn't give for real mods in these topics.

Agreed. Would love to see some real mods. Gotta ignore the trolls though.

[Hodo]

Tsen Shang, on 14 November 2011 - 11:41 PM, said:

Because MechAssault was the first Battletech mutant game released on a console, which is far more accessible than a gaming computer to most people.

Starkiller, he's a troll. Just ignore him.

He's a troll because he is right? How the frakk does that work?

Do you have to sit down to urinate?


^^^^^ Thats how you troll.

Edited by Hodo, 15 November 2011 - 06:51 PM.

[Red Beard]

Hodo, on 15 November 2011 - 06:50 PM, said:

He's a troll because he is right? How the frakk does that work?

Do you have to sit down to urinate?


^^^^^ Thats how you troll.

I could not have said that better.

[Red Beard]

Hodo, on 15 November 2011 - 06:50 PM, said:

Do you have to sit down to urinate?

I have not heard that one since I was a wild land firefighter in my distant youth.

[Red Beard]

So, today's Q and A has pretty much swept away any lingering thoughts that there will be any really heavy focus put on having the new game resemble the TT. Hope you can handle that one, fan boys.

[renegade mitchell]

From the recent Q&A.

What difficulties have you had transferring the mechanics from the tabletop game to a PC game, and what mechanics have you had to change or modify? Since this is a reboot, will history change in-game or do you mean reboot in the same way as a movie franchise is rebooted?


[MATT N] Hey you said REBOOT! You win a prize! Someone knows how to get their questions answered! Good job!

[PAUL] Challenging question and I’ll try my best to answer. There’s been a common misconception amongst the community that I’d like to clear up. While MechWarrior® Online™ does refer to BattleTech® for historical and canon reference, it does not mean that it’s a direct port of the table top rules to a videogame. The table top rules are laid out to make sense for a turn based strategy game. Some of those rules just don’t apply when dealing with a real time game environment. Core rules such as munitions accuracy, heat management and movement speed will have to be tuned for real time gameplay and will differ in varying degrees from the table top rules. How far they differ will come out of gameplay testing and tuning and at this point I cannot comment further on how that progress is going. It is an exciting time in the studio right now and I don’t want to release information too soon and have it change on you, the community, later. I am quite vulnerable to pitchforks and torches.

[DAVID] While there hasn’t been anything that I would call a great difficulty, the thing that we always have to keep in mind is that we want to capture all of the flavour of the tabletop game but need to be aware of when a direct translation of a tabletop system won’t work for a real time computer game. Though I would say that the biggest impasse we’ve come across is melee combat; that’s a system we don’t want to tackle until we know we can do it right.

[Hodo]

Red Beard, on 16 November 2011 - 02:28 PM, said:

So, today's Q and A has pretty much swept away any lingering thoughts that there will be any really heavy focus put on having the new game resemble the TT. Hope you can handle that one, fan boys.

Yep, pretty much killed it for me. Oh well, theres always hope someone grabs the old code to Multiplayer Battletech:3025 or Solaris.

[Atlas3060]

Quote

Though I would say that the biggest impasse we’ve come across is melee combat; that’s a system we don’t want to tackle until we know we can do it right.

Good! That actually is a relief for me, do it right instead of right now. I applaud them for it.
Honestly even if they get close to MW4 gameplay I'd be happy.

[TheRulesLawyer]

The Q&A didn't say anything we didn't know in that regard. We've always known that there wouldn't be a literal port of the TT rules. Its simply not possible. OTOH They also said they were trying to resolve many of the game play problems that the previous MW games had. So all the fans of alpha striking legs with pinpoint aim are probably going to have to live with something that isn't the previous MW games either.

[Yeach]

Renegade Mitchell, on 16 November 2011 - 02:47 PM, said:

From the recent Q&A.

[DAVID] While there hasn’t been anything that I would call a great difficulty, the thing that we always have to keep in mind is that we want to capture all of the flavour of the tabletop game but need to be aware of when a direct translation of a tabletop system won’t work for a real time computer game. Though I would say that the biggest impasse we’ve come across is melee combat; that’s a system we don’t want to tackle until we know we can do it right.

Make it like neverwinter/ dragonage melee with RNG.

[Creel]

Red Beard, on 16 November 2011 - 02:28 PM, said:

So, today's Q and A has pretty much swept away any lingering thoughts that there will be any really heavy focus put on having the new game resemble the TT. Hope you can handle that one, fan boys.

That's a pretty biased reading.

Sounds like they're trying to strike a balance between the two and are going to see how it best plays out. Assuming that you are automatically right about where that balance will fall is a bit presumptuous.

I'd read it as pretty encouraging from either side of the argument. They're aware of the issues and are playing with it to see what works best. perhaps it's overly optimistic, but I trust them to do just that.

Again, they stress they want to find the best way to simulate the BT universe in a fun and playable way. I'm in favor that.

Edited by Creel, 16 November 2011 - 04:29 PM.

[Red Beard]

Creel, on 16 November 2011 - 04:29 PM, said:

That's a pretty biased reading.

No, it wasn't. I am right.

[guardiandashi]

red beard it IS a very biased reading especially considering the 2nd response from the end where they revisited the targeting issue

but oh wait you ARE very biased and come across as having a hate on for anything that isn't twitch based instant gratification "I Pw0n Y00z... N3wb" gameplay

especially when they mentioned having an average battle taking ~20 min or more

what I saw when I read the Q&A was more along the lines of battletech history is important, the battletech universe's "Feel" is important, however we are going to put some tweeks on it and add more information warfare then was historically shown in most battletech resources

its going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

right now I am seeing drones as being (typically) limited info gathering resources IE the video had the drone able to scan several blocks around the protagonist's mech and determine that there were 2 mechs in the next block but was unable to determine type, Ideally the 'hammer would have had a recon mech id'ing the jenner and atlas, giving the hammer an opportunity to squash the jenner at the 'hammers ideal range, and work over the atlas... instaid the jenner was scouting and vectored the atlas in where it could squash the 'hammer

[Nik Van Rhijn]

It will be interesting to see where things go. 20 min matches can be hard on mechs that are ammo dependant. It would seem that pre-aranged lances will have an advantage over individuals just turning up to play as a group of individuals. When this starts were all going to be "n00bs" and old reflexes from previous games could get us killed.

[Gaius Cavadus]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 16 November 2011 - 11:32 PM, said:

20 min matches can be hard on mechs that are ammo dependant.

Retaining the TT ammo values per ton would be a mistake. Mw4 stepped in the right direction by increasing the ammo per ton (generally doubled it).

[Alizabeth Aijou]

Well, some canon designs are simply designed as ammo-deprived.

[Melissia]

Quote

Mechwarrior games are not a representation of the table top...

And a good thing, too.

What works for a turn-based strategy game does not work for a first person shooter style game, and if they tried to force it to work it would have sucked.

I'm glad for Mechwarrior. Mechwarrior is really the only reason Battletech is still alive today. Both Battletech and Mechwarrior are superior to the other in certain regards...

[Odin]

So far I'am very happy with way Piranha is approaching the board game rules and their plan, translating these into the real time simulation we gonna see, PvsP. How this all turns out? We all don't know jet. Even the Devs can't say for sure at this moment.
No one can. Pre realise Beta and Beta will see some heavy tweaking I assume.

All in all, I encourage the lads, to stick to their plan - its a great adventure - I'm sure we all appreciate this.

Boaters gonna boat and complainers gonna complain, no matter what is said or done. PC Mechwarrior titles bring the franchise forward and keep it alive - introducing Battletech to new fans, getting new ways to get the game going. Being a die hard simulator freak my self, I actually welcome the new RPG elements, planed for this mech simulator - it's whats missing in most, for the general public boring, simulations.

So, it'll not gonna be an experience we had before, neither with dady's old Mechwarrior games, nor for board game players. All we need now is some faith, no? Pretty much sure, it'll not gonna be the game I dream off, but with some little luck; it'll comes close!

Edited by Odin, 17 November 2011 - 05:04 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

I can't believe how intense you all are getting! For crying out loud, you are arguing over a video game. Get respectful or go to the Pokemon forums! You sound like the 16 year olds on those forums (without the swearing!!!).

Here's my take. Those of you beating your chest over the superiority of the video game. Sure it's pretty, but face it you sit in front of a computer and play against an AI or some person half a world away. You are all alone!

Table Toppers actually get together and pretend we are controlling multi ton death dealing avatars of war! We socialize for 4-8 hours face to face with our friends. We spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars to play a game and not have a real life!

Let me put the point out there that we both share. Whether it's table top or computer Sims... We are all pretending to be god's gift to the battlefield.

This MWO game is going to be part board game mechanics, part Sims mechanics, and part *** that is stupid! WHY? Because every game out there has those qualities that someone doesn't like! Even the games I love have something that I wanna rage on.

So get over yourselves, respectfully disagree with differing opinions on how this game should be, and wait for the game to hit the market. Then rage because you do/don't like it!

It was the pre game forums that divided the MechWarrior Darkage players from the BattleTech players before the game was even released!!! Some of you are acting the same way now!

No matter what, if you like the MechWarrior game or the BattleTech TT you are a fan of the environment the TT game created!

I would like to have a play alone "In Game" as well as the ability to shoot you guys to pieces but I'm not getting that (IIRC) and I'm not whining about it because any BattleTech/MechWarrior is better than nothing in my book.

[minobu tetsuharu]

TheRulesLawyer, on 16 November 2011 - 02:58 PM, said:

The Q&A didn't say anything we didn't know in that regard. We've always known that there wouldn't be a literal port of the TT rules. Its simply not possible. OTOH They also said they were trying to resolve many of the game play problems that the previous MW games had. So all the fans of alpha striking legs with pinpoint aim are probably going to have to live with something that isn't the previous MW games either.

They said they are going to address problems from other games but the person who answered that question was indignant over anyone questioning the viability of lasers having pin point accuracy.

We'll see how much his tune changes, if people complain enough about getting legged and other nonsense that comes from precision targeting without any of the associated risks from gaining that level of accuracy.