114 replies to this topic

[Lukoi Banacek]

Ghost Badger, on 06 June 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

If you don't want to, you'll never have to play in 3PV or play against people using it.

That's what PGI has said but given it remains yet another way to split the queues up, do we necessarily believe PGI will stick with that self-imposed limitation? They didn't with coolant for example.

Since we all have no idea what CW will ultimately look like, the system that PGI chooses to use for developing matches for planetary attacks etc, will potentially lead to a situation where some pilots are let into matches who choose to fight 3PV simply to keep the CW moving.

[Livewyr]

zraven7, on 06 June 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:

Alternate universe theory. See, there is this universe, and there is the 3drPV universe. In that universe, humans eyes work on a somewhat odd quantum-tachyon principal, which places the point of human vision a good distance behind and above the person in question.

It's a weird place. Lots of clear walls, and TVs have to be 10ft across, and mounted on the roof.

lol thanks for that! hahaha

[FactorlanP]

Lord Jay, on 06 June 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

Optional 3PV is not compatible with Community Warfare.

How do you reconcile a team that plays in 3PV attacking a planet being defended by a team that only plays in 1PV?

ding ding ding

We have a winner. Anyone who thinks it is going to be as simple as a check box, is naive.

[xDeityx]

It comes down to a matter of faith. Not religious blind faith in spite of evidence but rather faith that gets placed in a person or entity after that person or entity has repeatedly demonstrated that they deserve that faith.

I have no faith in PGI to tactfully implement 3PV in a way that doesn't ruin the artistic integrity and immersion of their game.

I have lots of faith in PGI to do what's best for IGP's bottom line in the short term. PGI has indicated that they believe 3PV will bring more players to the game even though it would fracture the community, so to me this is clearly a money grab rather than an attempt to bolster the game's viability in the competitive scene.

[EvilCow]

What is the position at this time? would host state rewind help determining the position next time?

[ManDaisy]

Then again... steam could just bring more players if that was what they were after. You know whos gonna suffer most from 3rd person view?

Light mechs thats who.

Edited by ManDaisy, 06 June 2013 - 11:46 AM.

[Clit Beastwood]

How about kills/damage/cbills earned during 3pv don't count for anything, i.e. you don't make money, you don't make XP, any time spent playing in 3pv is just playing. 3pv is "arcade mode".

[A banana in the tailpipe]

I'm glad that PGI decided to focus on hemming up Balance rather than 3PV.

[Livewyr]

Fierostetz, on 06 June 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

How about kills/damage/cbills earned during 3pv don't count for anything, i.e. you don't make money, you don't make XP, any time spent playing in 3pv is just playing. 3pv is "arcadetroll mode".

there we go, a little closer

[Acid Phase]

IceSerpent, on 06 June 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

They also knew that coolant flush was a hot issue with the community, they also knew that weapon balance was a hot issue with the community, they also knew that proper matchmaker was a hot issue with the community...see the pattern?

Very true. This was definately PGI's biggest bait and switch moves that up to this day, isn't sitting well with the community. You can examine it from all the angles you want. In the end, it still looks like sh*t.

[ManDaisy]

Thats not a bad suggestion, limit 3rd person mode to "practice" games.

[FupDup]

Fierostetz, on 06 June 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

How about kills/damage/cbills earned during 3pv don't count for anything, i.e. you don't make money, you don't make XP, any time spent playing in 3pv is just playing. 3pv is "arcade mode".

There are still plenty of goonsquads out there that would use it despite no earnings.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

FupDup, on 06 June 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

There are still plenty of goonsquads out there that would use it despite no earnings.

Yeah but if you can't earn c-bill, exp or participate in CW. And 3PV is just a special mode for playing in 3PV. Then I think that would be fine.

Will PGI do that? No chance.

[Clit Beastwood]

FupDup, on 06 June 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

There are still plenty of goonsquads out there that would use it despite no earnings.

What I really meant to say was

1. 3pv only plays against 3pv in designated 3pv games (where you can toggle back to 1pv if you want). (prevent an unfair advantage)
2. 3pv games net no earnings, cbills, xp, etc. (motivate noobs to learn the "simulator" 1pv game style).

So, the goon squads would only be gooning other goon squads. Not 1pv squads. The 3pv/arcade mode could fulfill the role of "I just got off work and want to play 1-2 "fun" matches."

Or... 3pv as a consumable module that only lasts 30 seconds. :ducking:

Edited by Fierostetz, 06 June 2013 - 11:56 AM.

[General Taskeen]

Mmm, so again goes the logic of "My MWO will be splintered, oh noes the Armageddon, all players will go to 3PV, oh noes!" Please, my favorite MW:LL Mech game is splintered onto 2 Servers, Pure Tech or Not Pure Tech, with a max 100 player base. What does MWO have, hundreds of thousands? Split the player base my ***.

Same logic when anyone brings up new game modes. My favorite was when people said a "classic" game mode would split the community. At least then we'd know all the best players like more challenges, eh?

[zraven7]

General Taskeen, on 06 June 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

Mmm, so again goes the logic of "My MWO will be splintered, oh noes the Armageddon, all players will go to 3PV, oh noes!" Please, my favorite MW:LL Mech game is splintered onto 2 Servers, Pure Tech or Not Pure Tech, with a max 100 player base. What does MWO have, hundreds of thousands? Split the player base my ***.

Same logic when anyone brings up new game modes. My favorite was when people said a "classic" game mode would split the community. At least then we'd know all the best players like more challenges, eh?

Still, the question of how to handle Clan Warfare is a serious one.

[Hammertrial]

zraven7, on 06 June 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

Alright, I'll assume this is NOT a troll question.

The big issue right now is that this came up early on in game development, and they said, repeatedly, that they would absolutely not be implementing 3rd person viewpoint at that time. They said that they felt that it broke the immersion and illusion of being the pilot.

A lot of the people who tossed in cash for founders packages did so knowing this had been said, so they kinda feel lied to. Thing is, we don't know why 3rd person is being pushed like it is, and we may never. The devs might be against it, but are getting pushed by their bosses. Maybe player-base numbers are below a certain thresh hold, and they are grasping at straws. there could be any number of reasons, and we just don't know.

Point is, a lot of founders were told one thing, then given another. It upsets people.

The other thing is, as stated above, the fear that it could seriously fracture the community, or that 3rd person users wouldn't be split from first person, giving them an unfair advantage. And yes, it was stated that they would always be split, but some people feel like they were already lied to once.

It's a little heated right now, is what I'm saying.

And then you read my sig, AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE (insert liar liar video here).

Saying PGI promised there would be never be 3rd person would rank on Politico's Lie of the Year.

Edited by Hammertrial, 06 June 2013 - 12:14 PM.

[Max Liao]

Hammertrial, on 06 June 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Saying PGI promised there would be never be 3rd person would rank on Politico's Lie of the Year.

They originally did say this, then they didn't. Just as they said they were going to stay as true to TT and canon as possible - (I use to quote that when it was in the FAQ) - then didn't. Finally, using Politico as a source for truth is questionable in and of itself.

The point is that (I think) this game is (still) supposed to be a (sorta-kinda) simulation. If you're simulating being a MechWarrior, you wouldn't be sitting on top of it - at least not while it was in action - you'd be sitting in the cockpit, where you belong.

[zraven7]

Hammertrial, on 06 June 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

And then you read my sig, AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE (insert liar liar video here).

Saying PGI promised there would be never be 3rd person would rank on Politico's Lie of the Year.

Ok, I know I should go dig up and link the proof, but I just really don't feel like digging through the dev releases. I'm sorry.

I can't remember who, but someone something to the effect of "being the pilot is a pillar of the game, and a 3rd person viewpoint would break that on every level."

If someone has this queued up, would you please link?

[AlmightyAeng]

zraven7, on 06 June 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

Alright, I'll assume this is NOT a troll question.

The big issue right now is that this came up early on in game development, and they said, repeatedly, that they would absolutely not be implementing 3rd person viewpoint at that time. They said that they felt that it broke the immersion and illusion of being the pilot.

A lot of the people who tossed in cash for founders packages did so knowing this had been said, so they kinda feel lied to. Thing is, we don't know why 3rd person is being pushed like it is, and we may never. The devs might be against it, but are getting pushed by their bosses. Maybe player-base numbers are below a certain thresh hold, and they are grasping at straws. there could be any number of reasons, and we just don't know.

Point is, a lot of founders were told one thing, then given another. It upsets people.

The other thing is, as stated above, the fear that it could seriously fracture the community, or that 3rd person users wouldn't be split from first person, giving them an unfair advantage. And yes, it was stated that they would always be split, but some people feel like they were already lied to once.

It's a little heated right now, is what I'm saying.

Thank you for assuming. It's not.

Personally I very much dislike the idea of third person view. But, if I'm not forced to use it, I figured, why should I care? It's not ruining MY experience.

The meshing of first and third person into community warfare was a concern I hadn't considered, thank you for bringing it up. Making me aware of such a potential concern is the reason for my OP.

As far as PGI having a poor track record as far as changing their minds...well...if the only argument is "They could be lying!" then what's the point of discussing. We kind of have to hope they mean what they say...right up until they don't.