1139 replies to this topic

[ICEFANG13]

Wintersdark, on 06 June 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

You keep saying this, but it's total fabrication.

Bryan said, right from the outset (see: 3rd person announcement thread) that players would have the option of playing 1st person only, or mixed/3rd person. They've been extremely clear from the get-go that you could elect to have 1st person only games, period, and that you'd never be forced to play against 3rd person players in 1st person if you didn't want to.



Emphasis is Bryan's.

And then you remember that 3rd person was never going to be in the game, it was going to be 100% first person, as they said.

And then you remember he said how devastating a 6 MG Spider would be, and how SHS are perfectly viable depending on how you play. Of course, both are completely untrue, and there aren't even 6 MG Spiders.

And then you remember that Bryan himself, contradicted himself, as he did in Ask the Devs 36->32, in 36 he said,

"Pakidis79: It has been mentioned before that around the time of the Highlander's release that collisions would be turned back on. Since the introduction of Heavy Metal, is there a more definitive time for collisions now?
A: Not sure who said that. Collisions will come after Launch."

And in 32 he, himself, said,

Chunkylad: Will the Highlander when released be featured with one of its signature bonuses: jump jetting and landing on light mechs? Is the Highlander the face of reintegration of collisions into the game?
A: Close. If all goes well, that would be about the time collisions could make it back into the game.

So you could see why I would be hesitant to accept that 3rd person will not play 1st person based off of his word eh?

[Deathlike]

ICEFANG13, on 06 June 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

And then you remember that 3rd person was never going to be in the game, it was going to be 100% first person, as they said.

And then you remember he said how devastating a 6 MG Spider would be, and how SHS are perfectly viable depending on how you play. Of course, both are completely untrue, and there aren't even 6 MG Spiders.

And then you remember that Bryan himself, contradicted himself, as he did in Ask the Devs 36->32, in 36 he said,

"Pakidis79: It has been mentioned before that around the time of the Highlander's release that collisions would be turned back on. Since the introduction of Heavy Metal, is there a more definitive time for collisions now?
A: Not sure who said that. Collisions will come after Launch."

And in 32 he, himself, said,

Chunkylad: Will the Highlander when released be featured with one of its signature bonuses: jump jetting and landing on light mechs? Is the Highlander the face of reintegration of collisions into the game?
A: Close. If all goes well, that would be about the time collisions could make it back into the game.

So you could see why I would be hesitant to accept that 3rd person will not play 1st person based off of his word eh?

I distinctly remember the quotes, and I'm not surprised people are disappointed. He did put in the caveat "if all goes well"... well, they're still trying to address JJ shake. 3rd person was going to be implemented regardless whether people did thoroughly read the 3rd person thread. Perhaps emphasis with bold lettering would help the vision of the people reading it.

The sad thing is.. the original "intent" may still change.. like it did for coolant. So, I would be more skeptical or cynical of the stuff that is brought to the table (even through Ask the Dev posts), unless it's fully fleshed out and explained... like the monthly dev posts.

[kesuga7]

Would be nice to have a place where PGI stance of a certain thing is expressed

Ex:
*Clan invasion

After Launch

*Flamer throwers

Currently tweaking for future patches that will inbound in less than 2-4 months

*Third person view

We plan to implement at (Time here) and are preparing to beta test them within 30-60 days. Will be released regardless of outcome. Players will not be forced to play in third person view



*Battlemech release date

Depending on the current state of the game during patch time a mech will be announced within a months perioid ( or something else)



****************

Have it done by topic and it would have to be allot of info too (and work :s )

Bad idea? i dunno
welp

Edit: sucks being at the end of a page on your post

Edited by kesuga7, 06 June 2013 - 07:17 PM.

[Tkhaw]

3rd person or no, I would still enjoy destroying enemy mechs

[Grimmnyr]

Well, after my wonderful two hour commute through a horrible traffic jam on my way home from work, I realized that I don't have time to be upset about 3PV in MWO and that I will probably not quit for good (at least not until Star Citizen is out). I do hope that when PGI puts first person and third person players in the same games (which will happen), that they put some sort of indicator over the mechs of people who are using 3PV, so I can at least know that they are watching their mechs get cored in third person, while the are figuring out how their legs work.

[xengk]

Shumabot, on 05 June 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

They don't have to say it, trust isn't built on technicalities it's built on implications and trends. That so many people thought the Orion was coming out and feel that PGI betrayed some level of trust means, explicitly, that PGI did. You can defend PGI was technicalities and dictionary definitions for the individual words they used, but then look at what you're doing. PGI was quite happy to have people think one thing and now they're quite happy to do another. Whether or not they ever concretely promised the Orion is irrelevant so long as people feel let down.

This reminds me of a section from Neil Gaiman's Good Omens.

Quote

"Welcome to the world," he said wearily. "You get used to it after a while."

The baby shut its mouth and glared at him as if he were a recalcitrant general.
Sister Mary chose that moment to come in with the tea. Satanist or not, she'd also found a plate and arranged some iced biscuits on it. They were the sort you only ever get at the bottom of certain teatime assortments. Mr. Young's was the same pink as a surgical appliance, and had a snowman picked out on it in white icing.

"I don't expect you normally have these," she said. "They're what you call cookies. We call them biscults."
Mr. Young had just opened his mouth to explain that, yes, so did he, and so did people even in
Luton, when another nun rushed in, breathless.
She looked at Sister Mary, realized that Mr. Young had never seen the inside of a pentagram, and confined herself to pointing at Baby A and winking.

Sister Mary nodded and winked back.
The nun wheeled the baby out.
As methods of human communication go, a wink is quite versatile. You can say a lot with a wink.
For example, the new nun's wink said:
Where the Hell have you been? Baby B has been born, we're ready to make the switch, and here's you in the wrong room with the Adversary, Destroyer of Kings, Angel of the Bottomless Pit. Great Beast that is called Dragon, Prince of This World, Father of Lies, Spawn of *****, and Lord of Darkness, drinking tea. Do you realize I've nearly been shot?

And, as far as she was concerned, Sister Mary's answering wink meant:
Here's the Adversary, Destroyer of Kings, Angel of the Bottomless Pit, Great Beast that is called Dragon, Prince of This World, Father of Lies, Spawn of *****, and Lord of Darkness, and I can't talk now because there's this outsider here.

Whereas Sister Mary, on the other hand, had thought that the orderly's wink was more on the lines
of:
Well done, Sister Mary-switched over the babies all by herself. Now indicate to me the superfluous child and I shall remove it and let you get on with your tea with his Royal Excellency the American Culture.

And therefore her own wink had meant:
There you go, dearie; that's Baby B, now take him away and leave me to chat to his Excellency. I've always wanted to ask him why they have those tall buildings with all the mirrors on them,

The subtleties of all this were quite lost on Mr. Young, who was extremely embarrassed at all this clandestine affection and was thinking: That Mr. Russell, he knew what he was talking about, and no mistake.
Sister Mary's error might have been noticed by the other nun had not she herself been severely rattled by the Secret Service men in Mrs. Dowling's room, who kept looking at her with growing unease.
This was because they had been trained to react in a certain way to people in long flowing robes and long flowing headdresses, and were currently suffering from a conflict of signals. Humans suffering from a conflict of signals aren't the best people to be holding guns, especially when they've just witnessed a natural childbirth, which definitely looked an un-American way of bringing new citizens into the world. Also, they'd heard that there were missals in the building

[Grimmnyr]

Wintersdark, on 06 June 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

You keep saying this, but it's total fabrication.

Bryan said, right from the outset (see: 3rd person announcement thread) that players would have the option of playing 1st person only, or mixed/3rd person. They've been extremely clear from the get-go that you could elect to have 1st person only games, period, and that you'd never be forced to play against 3rd person players in 1st person if you didn't want to.



Emphasis is Bryan's.

Well they said right from the onset of MWO that it would never be a 3rd person game, so what is your point? Also, saying that "you'd never be forced to play against 3rd person players in 1st person if you didn't want to", really is just lawyer speak for "no one forces you to play this game", or "you will not be forced to play in 1st person against 3rd person, because you have the option to use 3rd person yourself". See, saying it they way Brian did, makes it so any of those scenarios would not be lying.

But like I said in my previous post, I don't care anymore, so I will just go buy some MC so I can paint the stars white on my Sherman paint job.

Edited by Ed Steele, 06 June 2013 - 11:41 PM.

[Fate 6]

Wieland, on 04 June 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

This thing doesnt even have enough different versions.

^
It has 3 variants that are basically the same, and 1 that has 2ML instead of a missile. Unless this thing has GODLIKE hitboxes, the Trebuchet is the same exact thing with slightly lighter armor.

[Hammertrial]

Ed Steele, on 06 June 2013 - 08:09 PM, said:

Well they said right from the onset of MWO that it would never be a 3rd person game, so what is your point? Also, saying that "you'd never be forced to play against 3rd person players in 1st person if you didn't want to", really is just lawyer speak for "no one forces you to play this game", or "you will not be forced to play in 1st person against 3rd person, because you have the option to use 3rd person yourself". See, saying it they way Brian did, makes it so any of those scenarios would not be lying.

But like I said in my previous post, I don't care anymore, so I will just go buy some MC so I can paint the start white on my Sherman paint job.

No they didn't. See my sig.

But keep making stuff up. You're like Cartman convincing himself he made the fish sticks joke.

And the amount of contortions to come to your conclusion would make circus stars proud.

Edited by Hammertrial, 06 June 2013 - 08:43 PM.

[Alik Kerensky]

Bryan Ekman, on 04 June 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

• Third Person view will be pushed to test servers in the next 30-60 days.

I can feel the love of we will never make this a 3rd person game as a promise not kept... just like a wedding vow being only a suggestion if you meet that gorgeous redhead at the pool party...

I personally can do without this feature, but I guess your planning to change this in to next big arcade cheese shooter cause it's just so cool.

I just hope we can choose not to play with or against people with this kinda cheese enabled.

Edited by Alik Kerensky, 06 June 2013 - 10:40 PM.

[Grimmnyr]

Hammertrial, on 06 June 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

No they didn't. See my sig.

But keep making stuff up. You're like Cartman convincing himself he made the fish sticks joke.

And the amount of contortions to come to your conclusion would make circus stars proud.

Read and comprehend my post, there are no contortions. Also, when PGI first started plugging this game, they said it would be first person only. I am not inclined to search the internet for it at this hour though, so say I made it up and feel special, you probably need it.

[Wintersdark]

Shumabot, on 05 June 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

They don't have to say it, trust isn't built on technicalities it's built on implications and trends. That so many people thought the Orion was coming out and feel that PGI betrayed some level of trust means, explicitly, that PGI did. You can defend PGI was technicalities and dictionary definitions for the individual words they used, but then look at what you're doing. PGI was quite happy to have people think one thing and now they're quite happy to do another. Whether or not they ever concretely promised the Orion is irrelevant so long as people feel let down.

Oh, good lord. Sometimes, people just make me sad.

It's a game, in development. Plans change. You were not promised a pony, you weren't promised squat.

All PGI has done is tried to share their plans, as they are at a given point in time. This is not a promise written in blood, it's always potentially going to change. Simply because you want to interpret everything they say as a Promise, and weigh it down with Trust (as if it's actually important at all) doesn't make it so.

The alternative isn't that PGI always does exactly as they say, the alternative is that PGI says nothing, like a good many other studio's do after dealing with b*tchy forum folk crying because they didn't get their promised pony.


I, personally, would far rather PGI share their plans - with the knowledge that this isn't concrete and that anything can and likely will change - than simply stay quiet.

Edited by Wintersdark, 07 June 2013 - 01:14 AM.

[Chemie]

I am surprised this is 39 pages of QQ on 3rd person with little being said about the real problem. No CW phase 1.

Was promised for June and now ETA is unknown. What was originally 3 months after OB launch (ie was supposed to be January), and in March promised to at least start to roll out in June, is now gone missing.

This is why people are leaving the game...not the threat of 3rd person (although I do agree that lots will leave when they release 3rd person and more once they see the queues are empty).

Speaking of empty queues, I was playing last night and had at least 2 trials mechs in each match and one game a guy said "my first time every playing". Now I do not profess to be an expert but I assure you my ELO is sufficiently high that I should not be seeing trial mechs (nor have I until last night). Are the queues THAT EMPTY?

Edited by Chemie, 07 June 2013 - 03:25 AM.

[Galen Crayn]

It is absolute awesome how the PGI employee responsible for this forum totaly ignore all the member, many of them founder who gave them 5 million dollars!!!!! to make this game + people like me and others spent a lot of money for a beta! How can PGI be so disinterested in arguments of them? ONE sentence about why they dont bring out the orion this month would had been enough. But nothing! Unbelievable... And making a 3rd person Shooter out of it? Most of community says NO, so why you make it? The money from all of us was good enough to make the game, but now you think you dont need us anymore? Or is this only the fault of an very bad employee?

Edited by Galen Crayn, 07 June 2013 - 05:14 AM.

[JeremyCrow]

Chemie, on 07 June 2013 - 03:24 AM, said:

I am surprised this is 39 pages of QQ on 3rd person with little being said about the real problem. No CW phase 1.

Was promised for June and now ETA is unknown. What was originally 3 months after OB launch (ie was supposed to be January), and in March promised to at least start to roll out in June, is now gone missing.

This is why people are leaving the game...not the threat of 3rd person (although I do agree that lots will leave when they release 3rd person and more once they see the queues are empty).

Speaking of empty queues, I was playing last night and had at least 2 trials mechs in each match and one game a guy said "my first time every playing". Now I do not profess to be an expert but I assure you my ELO is sufficiently high that I should not be seeing trial mechs (nor have I until last night). Are the queues THAT EMPTY?

This! I don't understand why a feature most people don't want (3PV) is on it's way to being tested and a feature that most people want (CW) is nowhere to be seen.

[Viper69]

JeremyCrow, on 07 June 2013 - 05:15 AM, said:

This! I don't understand why a feature most people don't want (3PV) is on it's way to being tested and a feature that most people want (CW) is nowhere to be seen.

They probably want it in because there will have to be a separate league for the 3PV clans. You know if it went the other way around and CW landed first then halfway through the invasion 3PV came out one group would have to start fresh if they wanted to use a different view than what the league they were currently in supported. (assumption on my part). Also see how I tied 3PV in with CW

More than 3PV itself I am worried about all the subdivisions of groups.
1. 3PV only
2. FPV only
3. 3PV or FPV
coupled with all the current drop setups of
4. Solo
5. Groups less than 4
6. Groups of 4
7. Full group

So now you have taken our match maker and you are making it look for 6 parameters, filtering that and trying to find you a match with 8-12 other like people. That is what worries me about their system they are proposing. How is it even possible with the niche market this game is in to divide the queues up that many ways?

Edited by Viper69, 07 June 2013 - 05:48 AM.

[stjobe]

Just to straighten things out a bit, here's the actual link to Paul's own thread on 3rd person from July 17th, 2012:
http://mwomercs.com/...is-when-needed/

This is what he said:

Quote

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

[Hammertrial]

Viper69, on 07 June 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

They probably want it in because there will have to be a separate league for the 3PV clans. You know if it went the other way around and CW landed first then halfway through the invasion 3PV came out one group would have to start fresh if they wanted to use a different view than what the league they were currently in supported. (assumption on my part). Also see how I tied 3PV in with CW

More than 3PV itself I am worried about all the subdivisions of groups.
1. 3PV only
2. FPV only
3. 3PV or FPV
coupled with all the current drop setups of
4. Solo
5. Groups less than 4
6. Groups of 4
7. Full group

So now you have taken our match maker and you are making it look for 6 parameters, filtering that and trying to find you a match with 8-12 other like people. That is what worries me about their system they are proposing. How is it even possible with the niche market this game is in to divide the queues up that many ways?

Except 4,5, and 6 all go into the same pool...

stjobe, on 07 June 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

Just to straighten things out a bit, here's the actual link to Paul's own thread on 3rd person from July 17th, 2012:
http://mwomercs.com/...is-when-needed/

This is what he said:

Ya, not sure how anyone could say 3rd isn't coming from those last two sentences.

[InRev]

Hammertrial, on 07 June 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

Ya, not sure how anyone could say 3rd isn't coming from those last two sentences.

As I've said before, mainly because it's self-contradictory and contains two mutually exclusive statements, on the surface. Let's break it down, shall we?

"It is 100% first person view only."

Ok, that seems pretty straight-forward. First person game.

"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."

Wow, these guys really seem set on this first-person thing. Sorry third-person guys!

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

Wait . . . what? Didn't you just say that this is a first-person game and that third-person breaks your design pillars? What the poop?

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

Oh . . . so . . . it's only a first-person game right now . . . is that what he meant? First-person in the immediate present?

It's just a very convoluted post. He contradicts himself. "It is 100% first person view only." and "We will investigate 3rd person in the far off distance for special game settings" are mutually exclusive. If he had said "it is 80% first person view only" or "it is 100% first person view only today", fine. But he didn't. We can't read minds and, judging by this community's interpretation of that post, we can't read Paul's posts either. We shouldn't have to be Talmudic scholars to get what the devs are saying.

I know that you personally have taken this up as your crusade, and that's cool, but even you have to see that that particular post if a nightmare in terms of clarity.

PS: Please don't take this as a personal attack or turn this into another ad hominem mess I think we can do this in a civil manner!

[Viper69]

Hammertrial, on 07 June 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

Except 4,5, and 6 all go into the same pool...

OK that still leaves 4 groups that need to be sorted. Does that help a community that may or may not be growing? Presumably with the advent of the 3PV the community will grow but that is only going to effect positively on those that are willing to play with people among 3PV. So what happens to those not wanting to are they then forced to wait through long queues or join the 3PV game. Now this is all conjecture on my part but you know how humans are they tend to migrate to the path of least resistance.