659 replies to this topic

[Superstoff]

Quote

snooping tools that allow us to watch players real time.

Teh NSA...!!111

[CaveHermit]

The Best way todo 3pv without causing to much backlash is the UAV consumable. The UAV follows the mech. If you want 3PV then make a control that switches to the UAV PoV. (Rotational controls on the UAV to look around. (or better yet pop the UAV PoV on the Hud of the mech, [Small box in the upper left/right corner.]). That way if you want 3pv you got it. and give more incentive to shoot down the UAV.

[ICEFANG13]

Lucky 7, on 15 June 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

So you get all fuzzed about an assumption based on general mistrust?
Why should they not have room to spare for paying customers?

Also who says that the majority of people will play 3PV?
You don't know that, neither do I..
We just have to wait and see.. no need for doom and gloom yet.

BRYAN SAID IT IN THE FIRST POST! IN THE FIRST QUESTION!

"A: 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."

[Lucky 7]

ICEFANG13, on 15 June 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

BRYAN SAID IT IN THE FIRST POST! IN THE FIRST QUESTION!

"A: 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."

Yes but how do they know that? They also just assume that this will happen..

[ICEFANG13]

They also assume that it will bring players in, instead of playing to their strengths and working on making the 5 million dollars of founders and other closed beta players happy. Which is it? Are most players going to change to 3rd person like they assumed? Or are they going to get more players like they assumed?

[Lucky 7]

ICEFANG13, on 15 June 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

They also assume that it will bring players in, instead of playing to their strengths and working on making the 5 million dollars of founders and other closed beta players happy. Which is it? Are most players going to change to 3rd person like they assumed? Or are they going to get more players like they assumed?

As I said earlier imho we have to wait and see. It obviously didn't help that nearly all of us voiced or voted "no" to 3PV.

[ICEFANG13]

Why did they even work on putting it in game instead of making the core players that already exist happier?

[VanillaG]

JudgeDeathCZ, on 15 June 2013 - 01:41 AM, said:

MrTarget: Why ditch the Orion from June's update?
A: We wanted to offer a mech with a slightly different meta game.

O rly?
Giving us 2 potential jumpsnipers (Quickdraw and Victor) to jumpsniper meta is a way to change meta yea...

I think they are talking about the AssaultWarrior Online meta, not jumpsniping. All adding a baby assault mech does is reinforce heavier drops. As for the people complaining about 2 60 tons, you will have my sympathy when there are 3 mechs with the same weight (i.e. 50 tons).

[Jakob Knight]

Bryan Ekman, on 14 June 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Ask the Devs #40

3PV
Viper69 : If we are going to be able to choose to play against people using 3PV or not to, how are you going to address the then fractured and smaller groups that then have to wait in queue for a match that meets their perimeters?
A: 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.

Warge: Are any plans to encourage future 3PV players to use 1PV? Maybe slight XP or/and CB boost, that sort of things...
A: 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.

The most disappointing part of this Answers post, and possibly in the entirety of MWO's short history.

We've gone from '3PV will never happen' to '3PV may happen, but be in the training areas' to '3PV will be an optional mode' now to 'We are making the game primarily 3PV and leaving the 1PV as optional play for the few hardcore players. All players will have to use both modes now to play the complete game'.

The journey to the mundane is now complete for MWO, and it can now take it's father's place at the side of Angry Birds.

[Felicitatem Parco]

ICEFANG13, on 15 June 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

Why did they even work on putting it in game instead of making the core players that already exist happier?

How many thousands of Gamers have only played MechAssault and not any MechWarrior titles? How many of us core players are going to quit when we still get to play in 1st-person matches? (Hint: Not one "core customer" is going to quit simply because other people in other matches are playing in 3PV). Heck, 1st person gets an entire gamemode to itself, specifically for the core players.

Adding 3PV to this game WILL draw more customers, there is absolutely no denying that. There are people who prefer to play 3PV games and that's what they are going to play. DO NOT dismiss them as "inferior" customers who would merely sully this game's pristine habitat. Adding more customers is what we want. More customers means more exposure, which means more customers... which all means more money and a better game.

I would like to hear one good argument about how adding 3PV will have a significant detrimental effect on this game. Everybody just screams "waiting queues!" but we also know that Matchmaking thresholds can be adjusted at liberty, and adding 3PV will add more players to the playerbase. The people who yell "Wall haxs! Looking around corners!" have to consider that a match of all 3PV players presents no advantages to anyone on the field (they all have the same perspective -> no advantages to anyone), and every single Mercenary contract will be fought 1PV vs 1PV (which, as we have established already, gives nobody an advantage).

[Surtr]

Prosperity Park, on 15 June 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

How many thousands of Gamers have only played MechAssault and not any MechWarrior titles? How many of us core players are going to quit when we still get to play in 1st-person matches? (Hint: Not one "core customer" is going to quit simply because other people in other matches are playing in 3PV). Heck, 1st person gets an entire gamemode to itself, specifically for the core players.

Adding 3PV to this game WILL draw more customers, there is absolutely no denying that. There are people who prefer to play 3PV games and that's what they are going to play. DO NOT dismiss them as "inferior" customers who would merely sully this game's pristine habitat. Adding more customers is what we want. More customers means more exposure, which means more customers... which all means more money and a better game.

I would like to hear one good argument about how adding 3PV will have a significant detrimental effect on this game. Everybody just screams "waiting queues!" but we also know that Matchmaking thresholds can be adjusted at liberty, and adding 3PV will add more players to the playerbase. The people who yell "Wall haxs! Looking around corners!" have to consider that a match of all 3PV players presents no advantages to anyone on the field (they all have the same perspective -> no advantages to anyone), and every single Mercenary contract will be fought 1PV vs 1PV (which, as we have established already, gives nobody an advantage).

That's a solid argument. I am against 3pv out of principle, but you are correct in that there is no solid, business based argument against it.

There are two saving graces in my mind:

1) Having 3PV is not going to magically draw all the mouth breathing CoD twitch addicts, they just aren't smart enough.

2) Hopefully 3PV will attract more of the less savory types of players (in my opinion) the bad pugs, the FoTM players, etc. etc.

The game is in a great place right now, I just hope PGI pays close attention to what changes like this might do, and also remain willing to admit when they've made a mistake.

[Jakob Knight]

Prosperity Park, on 15 June 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

How many thousands of Gamers have only played MechAssault and not any MechWarrior titles? How many of us core players are going to quit when we still get to play in 1st-person matches? (Hint: Not one "core customer" is going to quit simply because other people in other matches are playing in 3PV). Heck, 1st person gets an entire gamemode to itself, specifically for the core players.

Adding 3PV to this game WILL draw more customers, there is absolutely no denying that. There are people who prefer to play 3PV games and that's what they are going to play. DO NOT dismiss them as "inferior" customers who would merely sully this game's pristine habitat. Adding more customers is what we want. More customers means more exposure, which means more customers... which all means more money and a better game.

In the first place, 1PV was supposed to be the -ENTIRE- game, and the entire reason MWO exists instead of people just going to play MechWarrior Tactics. The simulator aspect is the -only- thing that sets apart MWO from other types of mecha tactical games, and to say it's a good thing that it gets an entire -optional- section to the game and is not now considered the main play mode of the game is just attempting to sell a bad decision as a good one. It's a degradation, not an improvement.

In the second place, the reason that the Devs are adding 3PV to the game is -precisely- because the players who will play in that mode -are- inferior. They cannot handle a 1PV game, and so must be given a 3PV experience in order to play at all. This is the overriding premise behind introducing 3PV into a 1PV game, and to say that we should not consider inferior players inferior is to just ignore the obvious. I don't know if they will 'sully' the game environment, but why would I want someone who can't even drive their mech in the game? That's just taking a slot for someone who could actually contribute instead of needing a crutch just to play.

Thank you, no. We don't need the players who require 3PV in this game. We'll play just fine without them (and have been).

[Felicitatem Parco]

Jakob Knight, on 15 June 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

...but why would I want someone who can't even drive their mech in the game? That's just taking a slot for someone who could actually contribute instead of needing a crutch just to play.

Thank you, no. We don't need the players who require 3PV in this game. We'll play just fine without them (and have been).

That just sounds a bit greedy. This game is meant to be for everyone who wants to blow up big stompy robots, not just for the "good" players. The fact that 1PV is going to be the only one available for the player-driven Campaign shouldn't be dismissed as selling a bad decision, as I think we can all agree that 1PV in Mercenary Contracts is a good decision, and adding 3PV to the "masses queue" is an effective way to get more people in the game and generate more positive game reviews from new players.

[Wieland]

Wow, i am a hardcore player. I always thought that i am a normal player.
Thank you PGI for upping my status.
Takeing the fact that the most successfull shooters are first person(for example BF and CoD) and that there are actually more first person shooters than third person, i never thought that i belong to a minority.


Oh, and, could we make it so that the 3rd person game is called Mech Online and the 1st person game Mechwarrior Online?

Edited by Wieland, 15 June 2013 - 08:10 AM.

[Jakob Knight]

Prosperity Park, on 15 June 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

That just sounds a bit greedy. This game is meant to be for everyone who wants to blow up big stompy robots, not just for the "good" players. The fact that 1PV is going to be the only one available for the player-driven Campaign shouldn't be dismissed as selling a bad decision, as I think we can all agree that 1PV in Mercenary Contracts is a good decision, and adding 3PV to the "masses queue" is an effective way to get more people in the game and generate more positive game reviews from new players.

I don't care how it sounds. It is the truth, and has been so stated by the Devs (that the reason for 3PV implementation is to bring in players who cannot/will not play in 1PV). And that 1PV is going to be the only available mode for the player-driven Campaign is in no way a 'fact'. A 'fact' is something that is true and cannot be changed, yet the very implementation of 3PV is proof that nothing the Devs say can be relied upon to be 'fact'. Indeed, we see in the answers in this very post that the Devs now consider 3PV to be the 'normal' playmode of the game, and 1PV to be an optional 'hardmode', so why you would consider that 3PV would not become the baseline for the Campaign as soon as the Devs can write it in is not understandable.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree that this is in any way a good thing for MWO, and to change the entire emphasis of the game to cater to inferior players and get good reviews is a very bad sign of corruption. I think your analysis is flawed, and you need to understand that the basis of any good competitive activity is that the skill level of the participants must meet certain base standards. This is just lowering the standards so those who shouldn't be in the game become the basis for how the game is modified and developed.

Edit: As a side note, I will also note that real world militaries have a vetting process for determining who they allow to join their military because not everyone has the skills needed to do the job. This isn't cruelty, but fairness, as it is not fair to put a man/woman into a situation they cannot handle and expect them to perform well. It isn't fair to them, and it isn't fair to the men and women who have to serve with them. In MWO terms, how do you think the 3PV players will feel when they get into the game and (against what we can expect)find themselves shut out of Community Warfare and unable to obtain the weapons and equipment they need to remain competitive (and those rewards have to be part of CW, or there is no encouragement for players to participate)? It is not kindness to put in 3PV into the game as proposed.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 15 June 2013 - 08:57 AM.

[Braggart]

Prosperity Park, on 15 June 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

How many thousands of Gamers have only played MechAssault and not any MechWarrior titles? How many of us core players are going to quit when we still get to play in 1st-person matches? (Hint: Not one "core customer" is going to quit simply because other people in other matches are playing in 3PV). Heck, 1st person gets an entire gamemode to itself, specifically for the core players.

Adding 3PV to this game WILL draw more customers, there is absolutely no denying that. There are people who prefer to play 3PV games and that's what they are going to play. DO NOT dismiss them as "inferior" customers who would merely sully this game's pristine habitat. Adding more customers is what we want. More customers means more exposure, which means more customers... which all means more money and a better game.

I would like to hear one good argument about how adding 3PV will have a significant detrimental effect on this game. Everybody just screams "waiting queues!" but we also know that Matchmaking thresholds can be adjusted at liberty, and adding 3PV will add more players to the playerbase. The people who yell "Wall haxs! Looking around corners!" have to consider that a match of all 3PV players presents no advantages to anyone on the field (they all have the same perspective -> no advantages to anyone), and every single Mercenary contract will be fought 1PV vs 1PV (which, as we have established already, gives nobody an advantage).

When they start making balance changes based on what happens in 3rd person you will see the folly. They wont have seperate values for 3rd person and 1st person. When they find out that 3rd person turned the game into nothing but camping crest humpers, and then make changes to the game to fix that, 1st person will also suffer.

3rd person changes everything about this game, and it will have a huge impact on design and balance features. which because 3rd person is "normal" mode, all design and balance changes will reflect 3rd person.

Scenario. I wonder what is around that corner?

1PV I guess ill peek out and see, risking getting shot or seen.

3PV Nothing there, but I better not move because there could be a guy peeking like I am, and if I do move, he will have the complete advantage of lining up his shot as he comes out of cover and drilling me.

Scenario. Poptarting

1PV I gotta jump and spot the enemy and line up my shot as I come down.

3PV I already spotted the enemy, now I line up my shot before i jump, and then jump and let him have it.

Scenario, A light mech or something faster than you is fighting you.

1PV oh crap he just went behind me, which way did he go back there, how should I attempt to engage, Giving the advantage to the light that flanked.

3PV Ok light, you got behind me, but I can see you back there, and know exactly where to angle and reverse etc to get you.

Scenario, Start of the match, no one has engaged in combat

1PV, where are they?????????? We need to flank or do something. Atleast I know that if They can see me, I can see them.

3PV I'll just find a high point on the map and use my 3rd person view to see below me and at an angle in the distance.

Picture all that hill fighting where the enemy is right next to you on the other side of the hill, but you dont know the exacts, only now you will always know where they are. Think Caustic/Alpine/tourm, Those maps will now allow you to pick at your enemies if you have the height advantage, without showing yourself, and letting you line up your shots before ever leaving cover.

These all have an effect on how the game is played, and creates a completely different game.

Edited by Braggart, 15 June 2013 - 08:30 AM.

[Sasha Volkova]

Homeless Bill, on 14 June 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

Mostly disappointing, but at least you're keeping us informed. I'm really hoping that the difference between "hardcore" and regular is only the view. If there are more differences, I will be unbelievably sad.

I hope hardcore will live up to its namesake and add the following
- People will outright explode when/if they go beyond 110% heat.
- Missiles will do what missiles should do - be able to pick a mech apart if he stays out of cover for too long.
- Boating will be impossible since we are not riding super mechs in which an ac/2 and a Gauss can easily be swapped for eachother without any problems what so ever.
- The awesome is actually awesome (being the only actual legit TT boat ingame atm)
- Collisions will make it back.
- Ammo can be dumped to avoid explosions if the weapon using the ammo has been destroyed.
- Double heatsinks actually become double heatsinks, and not 1.4 heat sinks.
- SRMS becomes missiles again and not just small pieces of foam that we throw at eachother. (more damage)

No?
Well I guess hoping for a game that actually was legit Mechwarrior was too much to begin with.

[Strum Wealh]

CaveHermit, on 15 June 2013 - 05:52 AM, said:

Wow.. Not even a Yes/No/Can't be done to my question. I even pre-asked this question aross a few other boards before asking here. (Link to question http://mwomercs.com/...16#entry2427316 ) Most the responses I got was the Interior space staion was the best idea. Oh well I'll ask again in ATD 41.

With PGI trying to stay relatively close to BT source material with regard to in-game content, space stations as maps don't work because every canonical station or ship is far too small for even a single company of 'Mechs, let alone two companies (24 'Mechs - that is, 12 v 12) duking it out.
That is explained in more detail here and here.

On top of that, 'Mechs in space are simply impractical - it would be analogous to launching an assault on an aircraft carrier at sea with a group of main battle tanks.

[Wieland]

Bryan Ekman, on 14 June 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

irony1999: Currently it seems that CW Phase 1 is primarily delivering features for the "clan" (Merc corp) experience, from the current reveals. Will there be any enhancements for Faction members, or will that be delivered in Phase 2? Can you discuss these faction member enhancements?
A: Phase 1 will be the meta game (levels, ranks, loyalty points etc). Phase 2 will encompass association (being a part of a faction, whether a merc unit or house).

Interesting, Phase 1 will introduce stuff that is useless until Phase 2 is introduced.

[Braggart]

Wieland, on 15 June 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

Interesting, Phase 1 will introduce stuff that is useless until Phase 2 is introduced.

whats new.

PGI "I know you guys want some real game modes, here is another $30 hero mech, and some cockpit junk instead."