659 replies to this topic

[Lord Rip]

Farpenoodle, on 16 June 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

To be frank I'm not interested in discussing this either. I think you'd have to be pretty mental to imagine that 3PV is what they want you to play in when there's clear evidence to the contrary with the CW thing and the way they've constructed the game so far. Or maybe the developers really don't want you to buy shiny cockpit items and pointlessly make challenges for said items.

There is more money in the loanshark like paint and pattern schemes which will more than make up for cockpit items

[ICEFANG13]

hammerreborn, on 16 June 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

How is a completely separate mode that can't be used in CW to progress in any way (merc v merc wise) not a special mode?

Special only means distinct, and as normal and hardcore modes have different rules, different functions, and one can't be used for certain meta playstyles, fits the very definition of special.

Thank you for at least acknowledging that special 3rd person modes were always on the table though.

Thanks for letting me know, because you seem to know the details.

Its like the Orion swap, just because it doesn't say it explicitly doesn't mean that when Paul said that the game is 100% first person we should expect something different.

I mean sure he didn't say that he promised it would be this way, and he signed his first born away if they did anything else, but we shouldn't expect there to be a 3rd person view anywhere near the primary game.

[Farpenoodle]

Because making features for absolutely no purpose is A Good Idea™ and A Sound Business Decision™.

[CutterWolf]

stjobe, on 16 June 2013 - 02:12 AM, said:

Paul Inoye, July 17, 2012:
(http://mwomercs.com/...is-when-needed/)

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

Bryan Ekman, June 14, 2013:

There will be two modes Normal and Hardcore (FPV) only. We anticipate most players will play the first mode leaving the hardcore mode for the those wanting a challenge. 3PV will be going onto test servers in the next 60 days and we’ll see how it goes from there.
[...]
The plan is to have scheduled matches will be FPV only, since these will be performed between Merc. Units. Regular matches will follow the above rules (Normal/Hardcore).
[...]
Probably not, however we’re going to emphasize that both view modes are essential to a well-rounded experience, with FPV being something that you use if you are a true sim-head.


So...

From "100% first-person view only" and "3rd person in the far off distance for special game settings" to "We anticipate most players will play the first mode" and "FPV being something that you use if you are a true sim-head" in just under a year.



And the thing that really has me questioning if they've completely gone off their rockers: "TT is just a guideline and not really applicable to a realtime simulation".

What happened to "we want to stay as close to TT as possible"?

Really PGI. Go back and re-read your dev blogs. That's the game you promised us and got us to spend our founder's money for. That's the game you should strive to deliver.

You and I have disagreed on some things in the pass stjobe but I see eye to eye with you on this one. This quote here ""TT is just a guideline and not really applicable to a realtime simulation". Does he not know that since he has made the switch from 1PV to 3PV as the primary mode that this game is no longer a realtime simulation game since simualation games do NOT have 3PV as a mode of play??

How as a game devloper can you change the entire scope of your game after getting such a good review as this from PC Gamer Magazine #233 DEC 2012:

The following is directly copyed word for word from the review, I have bold, italic and underlined key parts of this review that spelled out very clearly what PGI got right but have now thrown out the window..........

"MechWarrior Online preserves the variable armor, modular damage system, location-based hardpoints, slow reloads, heat management, and throttle response of its grandparent game. They're all modeled in a way that fells modern but familiar. And thank goodness: these are the organs that make MechWarrior pump.

After month spent in MWO's closed beta, I've found it to be a great deal more than a nostalgic fling. The meat and potatoes that makes MechWarrior work is totally intact. Any given session feels like a 16 person boxing match with every weight class thrown into the ring. Awesomes and Atlases pick on pesky Jenners, who perform hit-and-run. Catapults exploit the long reach of their LRMs. Assault mechs stand their ground and swing in heavy weight slugfests, trading haymakers until someone falls down.

The beta is low on bells and whistles, but it makes some smart, simple changes to classic mechanics. Traditionally, blasting a mech's leg off has been an arguably easier way to bring it down. MWO removes "legging" as it once existed: losing a leg doesn't kill you. But this actually makes the tactic more meaningful: it's the only way to take away an enemy's speed. Because MWO is the first time Mechwarrior has been a free-to-play, multiplayer-only game, Piranha is keen to shut down any paths of least resistance that might be available throught exploitative mech customization or easy aiming. The experience of fighting from a cockpit distinguishes MechWarrior from other games. Being locked behind a laser-resistent window is mildly disorienting in MWO exactly as it should be. A third-person camera only appears when you've collided with another mech hard enought to fall down, or if you've died. I'm less happy with the window-dressing.

Your pilot's hands rest statically on the throttle and joystick as you decelerate and turn. And while there's a freelook command to inspect panels, they don't currently offer much valuable information. While these coclpit aesthetics don't currently meet the standard for "futuristic trucker cabin" I associate with MechWarrior, being forced first-person puts you in a situation that demands and rewards battlefield awareness in a way that's on par with Counter-Strike or Tribes: Ascend. Spotting either through the built-in mechanic, or by having an eye good enough to faint heat signatures over infrared is key, because enemies only apper on your radar when you or and ally have line of sight. If a Huchbackflanks around an office building to attack you from behind, the only alert you'll have that it's there is the camera whiplash as its Autocannon 20 rings your bell.

Remember when Darth Vader mutters "I have you now" at the end of Episode IV? Being behind an enemy without them knowing feels like that. MOW's detection mechanics are near-perfect in the way that they emphasize vision as a skill while leaving plenty of holes for flanking. And with that in place, strategy and individual responsibilty is made as necessary as it might be in, say, Dota 2 wanderion offis a sin. A lot of that is owed to the inertia of mechs. If you jog into a pack of enemies, it's going to be tough to reverse throttle, turn, and flee without getting killed."

Edited by CutterWolf, 16 June 2013 - 07:23 PM.

[New Breed]

Can't say I'm happy about the new damage models.. it's just so generic, lasers doing bullet hole type damage?. Why can't us people with good computers have good damage models?, and people with toasters have mechs that look like the surface of the moon.

[Windies]

Jason Radick, on 16 June 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

Makes me wonder if 3pv is testing the waters for/gearing up for a console release.

I wouldn't be surprised if their fallback plan isn't to try to market this on the next gen console's if the F2P business model fails.

[Mangonel Jorgensson]

I think the current state of the game and this sad excuse for a ATD illustrates pretty clearly that PGI is not up to task.
All the stuff about weapons not doing the same damage every time they hit and HSR rewind messing up more than it fixed should be an indicator that PGI cant even get the core mechanics of the game working and balanced. how the hell are they going to get an elaborate CW system up and running and in place?

i could give a flying **** about 3PV, but damn they are worried about that crap and they can't even get the game they have now to work correctly.

our best bet for salvaging this game is for everyone to go buy a powerball ticket and pray someone with some sense and love for the BattleTech genre wins enough to buy a controlling interest in the company and put this project back on track. it would take a hardcore SoB to sacrifice that kind of loot but at this point that's our only hope. these guys are so far off the mark from what was originally promised that it's not even remotely the same. if i had know that this is what my founders purchase was helping to "support" then i would have keep my money in my pocket.

the current state is shameful

Edited by WM Mangonel, 16 June 2013 - 06:45 PM.

[Popsmosher]

Not to mention it takes a hope and a prayer to drop against another 8 man. You end up hitting the button over and over again.

But don't worry guys!!! There is obviously lots of users still on. That is why you see the same guys over and over again.

[ICEFANG13]

Don't worry, 3rd person will add (and retain) enough players to offset the players who leave! The silent polls show it to be true as well as the emails to the target demographic.

[Mangonel Jorgensson]

Come on man. that's the sweet *** ELO system working as intended.

Hey, while we are at it, let's just cancel all the chassis under heavy as well, no need to even bother developing those mechs because no one is ever goign to use them because there is no incentive to even bother. it's assault warrior online for the twitch kiddies all hopped up on mt dew!

8 man is a lie, there is no 8man,

hard to play 8 man when only 1300 people are playing at any given time and none of them want to play organized drops because those are a joke too, no tonnage limit, no role warfare, just alpha the **** out of everything with the biggest gun you can strap on x 5


people are burned out on this game because idiocy is running rampant in all the aspects of the game from development on down.

Edited by WM Mangonel, 16 June 2013 - 06:55 PM.

[White Bear 84]

hammerreborn, on 16 June 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

Uh, maybe someone can be more helpful with an actual link/quote, but a developer posted a good writeup about issues with lost packets screwing with hit detection (basically if your ping varies wildly even hsr can't keep up). It's being worked on in the upcoming patch as far as I'm aware

Ta, thanks for the post. Satisfies me for now if its due in the upcoming patch, hopefully they will provide enough details when its fixed...

You know, i can totally handle cheese and poptarting, but faulty HSR really does stuff the game up - its a pain when you cant tell if you need to lead your shots or not because you dont know if the HSR is correct or not. This should always get priority.

[hammerreborn]

White Bear 84, on 16 June 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

Ta, thanks for the post. Satisfies me for now if its due in the upcoming patch, hopefully they will provide enough details when its fixed...

You know, i can totally handle cheese and poptarting, but faulty HSR really does stuff the game up - its a pain when you cant tell if you need to lead your shots or not because you dont know if the HSR is correct or not. This should always get priority.

Since I'm now on my home computer, I was able to track down the quote.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2448949

Karl Berg, on 13 June 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

Hey guys; yes, as you've noticed our issues with packet latency and loss aren't completely sorted, although the graphs indicate we came pretty close. With this very last patch we're now within about 10 to 20% of the total packet rate from about a month ago, except now players won't get disconnected due to low levels of packet loss or large latency variations. We have another fix coming with next patch to try and bring us all the way back in line, which should hopefully also solve the latency problems several users are noticing.

HSR, as it is right now, is extremely sensitive to varying latency, so for those of you experiencing large latency variations due to the increased send rate, this next patch should make things much better. Slightly longer term we are discussion options for removing the need to compute latency for HSR all together.

ICEFANG13, on 16 June 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

Thanks for letting me know, because you seem to know the details.

Its like the Orion swap, just because it doesn't say it explicitly doesn't mean that when Paul said that the game is 100% first person we should expect something different.

I mean sure he didn't say that he promised it would be this way, and he signed his first born away if they did anything else, but we shouldn't expect there to be a 3rd person view anywhere near the primary game.

Except when the same post from Paul said 3rd person in the distant future (this is over a year from that post, I'd call that distant future). I mean, do people read to the bottom of the post?

And what does 3rd person have anything to do with Orion, something that wasn't even remotely promised at all?

I really wonder what it's like in the world of the third person deniers, having all the facts laid infront of them and still screaming that something that never happened happened.

[Jakob Knight]

ICEFANG13, on 16 June 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

Don't worry, 3rd person will add (and retain) enough players to offset the players who leave! The silent polls show it to be true as well as the emails to the target demographic.

And all of those players will be the ones who couldn't figure out which way their mech moves when they push the throttle forwards. Hope you enjoy playing with and against players of such 'quality'.

[ICEFANG13]

Jakob Knight, on 16 June 2013 - 07:13 PM, said:

And all of those players will be the ones who couldn't figure out which way their mech moves when they push the throttle forwards. Hope you enjoy playing with and against players of such 'quality'.

I'm not too concerned, they won't be sticking around anyway. Its not like 3rd person is a tutorial, they won't keep enough.

[Jakob Knight]

hammerreborn, on 16 June 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

How is a completely separate mode that can't be used in CW to progress in any way (merc v merc wise) not a special mode?

Special only means distinct, and as normal and hardcore modes have different rules, different functions, and one can't be used for certain meta playstyles, fits the very definition of special.

I don't see why you think the mode of play they consider 'Normal' will not be the standard used in CW, as there would be no reason to have one of the major parts of the game restricted to an optional 'Hardcore' section of the game. And if you use the claims of the Devs as the basis for this, please note that the fact we even have 3PV coming and it is now considered the way the game is meant to be played (in direct contradiction to previous statements by the Devs) is proof no statement by the Devs can be in any way trustworthy. That bridge has been firmly and beyond shadow of doubt been burned by the Devs themselves.

So I would seriously reconsider any belief you may have that CW will not use 3PV as it's normal play mode.

[hammerreborn]

Jakob Knight, on 16 June 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

I don't see why you think the mode of play they consider 'Normal' will not be the standard used in CW, as there would be no reason to have one of the major parts of the game restricted to an optional 'Hardcore' section of the game. And if you use the claims of the Devs as the basis for this, please note that the fact we even have 3PV coming and it is now considered the way the game is meant to be played (in direct contradiction to previous statements by the Devs) is proof no statement by the Devs can be in any way trustworthy. That bridge has been firmly and beyond shadow of doubt been burned by the Devs themselves.

So I would seriously reconsider any belief you may have that CW will not use 3PV as it's normal play mode.

Why? If we're going to just doubt everything the devs say why not just stop playing the game now because the PPC will do 3 damage in the future. It's just as valid a hypothetical than them saying that merc vs merc planet fighting will be hardcore only and then not doing it.

Edited by hammerreborn, 16 June 2013 - 07:25 PM.

[Ryvucz]

Configuring the game to run on low end machines makes me laugh.

It's CRYengine for.. crying out loud.

I don't see the developers of Crysis dialing back the graphics for people that refuse to update their 2005 and before machines.

I want my crisp graphics, a sky that LOOKS like a sky and not some low definition astro dome.

I understand wanting to tailor the game for low end machines, but come on, this thing has been in low definition since, well.. always.

Show us what this engine can do and go all out, make the game cry baby compatible later.

[Jakob Knight]

hammerreborn, on 16 June 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

Why? If we're going to just doubt everything the devs say why not just stop playing the game now because the PPC will do 3 damage in the future. It's just as valid a hypothetical than them saying that merc vs merc planet fighting will be hardcore only and then not doing it.

It is much less valid to use statements from a source that is known to lie and change its testimony at whim than it is to use basic logic and game theory when projecting a probable course of action. Your statements are all just words thrown up without thought, whereas we know that a game is designed with the normal play mode as the basis for all content in the game, not optional modes. Therefore, as long as 3PV is the 'normal' mode, it follows that stating it will not be the basis for CW is simply illogical.

The simple truth is that you are holding onto the Dev's word as the basis of your argument, when you know that that word cannot be used as any basis of proof.

So, no. My statements are quite a bit more valid than yours, and if that means you cannot continue playing this game, then the Devs have only themselves to blame for that. I can continue to play the game without believing what the Devs tell me in their posts, the same way I can still live in a country where politicians lie to the public. It's simply a matter of not putting any faith in those who have proven unworthy of it.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 16 June 2013 - 07:40 PM.

[Farpenoodle]

What's logical about axing a feature they clearly spent a shitton of resources and one of the ways they make money that most of the same people criticizing them say want to stay in the game? Your world where this makes sense must have some awesome drugs.

Edited by Farpenoodle, 16 June 2013 - 07:59 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Farpenoodle, on 16 June 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

What's logical about axing a feature they clearly spent a shitton of resources and one of the ways they make money that most of the same people criticizing them say want to stay in the game? Your world where this makes sense must have some awesome drugs.

To date, they have not made a dime off of 3PV.

...but I can guarantee you they have missed out on a LOT of money by saying they plan to implement it.