49 replies to this topic

[ExtremeA79]

PGI is calling this game a simulation and trying to make it that way, but at the same time trying to balance it to make it a fun game, a FPS.

The thing is, I don't PGI can do both at once. PGI has got to choose, simulation or FPS?

I would love a real simulation like mechwarrior 2 and 3, and to a extent, 4.
However this is a Online game and is probably going to stay that way, and PGI should make this game balanced and a FPS, instead of making it a simulation and following Battletech lore.

Edited by Darren Tyler, 18 June 2013 - 03:56 PM.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

I'd like for them to go balls to the wall, unforgiving simulator mode, but that will never happen.

[FupDup]

How, exactly, are we defining "simulation" in this thread? (I want to know so I can properly formulate a post without relying on too many assumptions).

[Pater Mors]

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

PGI is calling this game a simulation and trying to make it that way, but at the same time trying to balance it to make it a fun game, a FPS.

The thing is, I don't PGI can do both at once. PGI has got to choose, simulation or FPS?

I would love a real simulation like mechwarrior 2 and 3, and to a extent, 4.
However this is a Online game and is probably going to stay that way, and PGI should make this game balanced and a FPS, instead of making it a simulation and following Battletech lore.

I agree to a certain extent.

Where things can be kept canon, they absolutely should be, but when something starts impacting on game play in real way because of sticking to canon, then game play needs to come first.

[Tennex]

u want this? hate to break it to you but MWO was never really a simulator

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

The thing is, I don't PGI can do both at once. PGI has got to choose, simulation or FPS?

they are doing both at once right now. if they were just a simulator they'd look like the above video

Edited by Tennex, 18 June 2013 - 03:39 PM.

[ExtremeA79]

FupDup, on 18 June 2013 - 03:34 PM, said:

How, exactly, are we defining "simulation" in this thread? (I want to know so I can properly formulate a post without relying on too many assumptions).

Sticking to canon, pretty much.
Think of a Flight Simulator with a game mode. The game mode is a race. You have to take off, and travel 200 miles to another city with other players. The simulator tries to stick to the real world so obviously a certain plane will be better than another plane. But when you try to balance out the race, you might want to make things easier, dumb it down, put in 3rd person view, change the values of the planes to make them balanced.

Sorry it was a terrible analogy, so the sentence "sticking to canon," best fits it.

[Gaan Cathal]

FupDup, on 18 June 2013 - 03:34 PM, said:

How, exactly, are we defining "simulation" in this thread? (I want to know so I can properly formulate a post without relying on too many assumptions).

This

[verybad]

It's not going to be a Sim.it never was, and no other MW games were either. They're all FPS.

[ExtremeA79]

Tennex, on 18 June 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

u want this? hate to break it to you but MWO was never really a simulator






they are doing both at once right now. if they were just a simulator they'd look like the above video

I said I don't think they CAN, they are trying right now but I don't think they will be successful.

[Roland]

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

PGI is calling this game a simulation and trying to make it that way, but at the same time trying to balance it to make it a fun game, a FPS.

The thing is, I don't PGI can do both at once. PGI has got to choose, simulation or FPS?

I would love a real simulation like mechwarrior 2 and 3, and to a extent, 4.
However this is a Online game and is probably going to stay that way, and PGI should make this game balanced and a FPS, instead of making it a simulation and following Battletech lore.

Mechwarrior has always been more of a shooter with sim elements, than either a pure sim or pure shooter.

It's kind of sim-like, but it's in the field of old PC games like wing commander and Tie Fighter... it's never been a pure sim, like you see with various aircraft simulations. And that's good. Because mechwarrior is more fun than those games.

As things stand, MWO is already far more on the sim side of things than mechwarrior 4 ever was... not sure how you could think otherwise, unless you never actually played MW4.

[Tennex]

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

I said I don't think they CAN, they are trying right now but I don't think they will be successful.

if they were a true simulator they wouldn't be succesful eaither

nobody wants to push nobs all day

the mechwarrior franchise of FPS games are more succesful than any simulator ever will be

Edited by Tennex, 18 June 2013 - 03:41 PM.

[ExtremeA79]

Right now MWO is a FPS, not a simulator, but if we want balance then we have to put balance first and canon second, instead of the other way around, no strings attached.

Tennex, on 18 June 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

if they were a true simulator they wouldn't be succesful eaither

nobody wants to push nobs all day

Look at mechwarrior 2, 3, and 4. See how successful they were.

[Sybreed]

Tennex, on 18 June 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

u want this? hate to break it to you but MWO was never really a simulator






they are doing both at once right now. if they were just a simulator they'd look like the above video

you're just making noise. He meant a simulator like a mechwarrior game with those features:

- R&R back
- More limited mechlab
- Rearm stations (not obligatory)
- No coolant
- Gun recoil, no infinite convergence
- etc

Edited by Sybreed, 18 June 2013 - 03:43 PM.

[FupDup]

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

Sticking to canon, pretty much.
Think of a Flight Simulator with a game mode. The game mode is a race. You have to take off, and travel 200 miles to another city with other players. The simulator tries to stick to the real world so obviously a certain plane will be better than another plane. But when you try to balance out the race, you might want to make things easier, dumb it down, put in 3rd person view, change the values of the planes to make them balanced.

Sorry it was a terrible analogy, so the sentence "sticking to canon," best fits it.

That analogy is horrible indeed because it sounds like an ideal "simulator" game is one where a single "plane" is superior to all others and having more than one competitively viable plane makes the game dumb.

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Look at mechwarrior 2, 3, and 4. See how successful they were.

Those weren't anything even remotely close to the A-10C Warthog video. All you've ever had to do in those previous MW games is steer, throttle, aim, and shoot.

[Tennex]

Sybreed, on 18 June 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

you're just making noise. He meant a simulator like a mechwarrior game with those features:

- R&R back
- More limited mechlab
- Rearm stations (not obligatory)
- No coolant
- Gun recoil, no infinite convergence
- etc

wait MW2, 3, 4 had R&R, more limited, mechlab, and no coolants?
i think thats just what you want.

i don't think you should be putting words in his mouth

Edited by Tennex, 18 June 2013 - 03:47 PM.

[ExtremeA79]

Roland, on 18 June 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

Mechwarrior has always been more of a shooter with sim elements, than either a pure sim or pure shooter.

It's kind of sim-like, but it's in the field of old PC games like wing commander and Tie Fighter... it's never been a pure sim, like you see with various aircraft simulations. And that's good. Because mechwarrior is more fun than those games.

As things stand, MWO is already far more on the sim side of things than mechwarrior 4 ever was... not sure how you could think otherwise, unless you never actually played MW4.

Well yes that is what I mean. Canon first, balance second.
MWO is not much of a sim compared to the other mechwarriors I think, except MW4 like you said.
MWO however is a Online only game, which is different from the other games in that they had campaigns, locals, instant action. They put canon first with balance second.

[Tennex]

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Look at mechwarrior 2, 3, and 4. See how successful they were.

and they were also FPS games...

Edited by Tennex, 18 June 2013 - 03:47 PM.

[ExtremeA79]

FupDup, on 18 June 2013 - 03:44 PM, said:

That analogy is horrible indeed because it sounds like an ideal "simulator" game is one where a single "plane" is superior to all others and having more than one competitively viable plane makes the game dumb.



Those weren't anything even remotely close to the A-10C Warthog video. All you've ever had to do in those previous MW games is steer, throttle, aim, and shoot.

In simulators there usually won't be balanced, and it is likely there will be superior mech/plane.

[Pater Mors]

Sybreed, on 18 June 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

you're just making noise. He meant a simulator like a mechwarrior game with those features:

- R&R back
- More limited mechlab
- Rearm stations (not obligatory)
- No coolant
- Gun recoil, no infinite convergence
- etc

These are the things I meant when I said game play needs to be considered over canon.
- Bad for game play, should be left out.
- Bad for customization and game play, should be left out.
- Good for game play. Much better than R&R.
- Ambivalent on coolant.
- Currently very bad for game play, seriously in need of change.

Edited by Pater Mors, 18 June 2013 - 03:48 PM.

[FupDup]

Darren Tyler, on 18 June 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

In simulators there usually won't be balanced, and it is likely there will be superior mech/plane.

Wouldn't everybody (that knows how to play the game) driving the exact same plane make for a boring game?