36 replies to this topic

[Alex Warden]

Hugh Fairgrove, on 19 June 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

[DELETED CONTENT]

he doesn´t like the idea of playing a "trainee" mode, cause he is pro... as much as i don´t like tobe called some kind of "hardcore" elitist just because i prefere 1st person...

the point is, Pando, the comment of your clan mate was correct in a way...trainee might be not the right term, as much as hardcore isnt the right word for my "normal"... PGI made an unlucky move by calling those names...

i for my part would suggest something like "Cockpit only" and "mixed"

Edited by Destined, 19 June 2013 - 02:15 PM.
Quote Clean Up

[BigMekkUrDakka]

Syllogy, on 19 June 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

Okay... since you've seen it many, many times, please give us some examples of how 3PV was implemented in a way similar to how MWO plans to implement it, but actually allows cheating.

first of all stop catching up to words, and read carefully i spoken of "client side features" that could be used as cheats in the first place not specifically about 3pv, since in normal shooters you gain better situational awareness by listening to your environment or just using "wallhack"
but anyway on your word google "3rd person cheat tf2" and you will find plenty of "toolz" to use 3pv where it shouldn't be used, the same can be found for q3, CS or whatever game you want (thou i still cant understand why you would want 3pv in q3)
and about "3pv implemented as it will be in MWO", okay will see but unless they put camera in mechs crotch it wont be anything good from my point of view

[Pando]

Hugh Fairgrove, on 19 June 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

All I did was agree with someone. Then you singled out my postm, which was an attack on me calling me a name for something that wasn't even my idea initally. How does that make me a sheep? Maybe you should learn to accept other peoples opinions. Just like it doesn't upset me that you have a problem playing a mode called "training" because your better then 75% of the players out there (like you stated). Opinions are opinions. People like you are what honestly make me dislike forums.

No i'm not accepting anyone's position regarding taking any minority or majority of the community playing in a specific game mode in community warfare no less...with all house factions available.....and calling them "training".....what are they training FOR. Answer me that.

[Alex Warden]

Pando, on 19 June 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

No i'm not accepting anyone's position regarding taking any minority or majority of the community playing in a specific game mode in community warfare no less...with all house factions available.....and calling them "training".....what are they training FOR. Answer me that.

i think you lay too much weight on the word "training" and ignore the reason WHY your mate made that comment... butgo ahead with raging over peanuts

Edited by Alex Warden, 19 June 2013 - 08:07 AM.

[Hugh Fairgrove]

Pando, on 19 June 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

No i'm not accepting anyone's position regarding taking any minority or majority of the community playing in a specific game mode in community warfare no less...with all house factions available.....and calling them "training".....what are they training FOR. Answer me that.

No ones disagreeing with you like Alex said. We could call it something else. Training was just a suggestion by your clanmate. Were not against you on the idea.

[IceSerpent]

Pando, on 19 June 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

No i'm not accepting anyone's position regarding taking any minority or majority of the community playing in a specific game mode in community warfare no less...with all house factions available.....and calling them "training".....what are they training FOR. Answer me that.

They would be training for real combat a.k.a. 1PV. That being said, I think it's better to call 1PV "Normal" and 3PV "Rookie".

P.S. @Zerberus: Apples are not citrus fruits, just thought I'd let you know...

[Pando]

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.

Ghost Badger: How does PGI plan to reconcile Community Warfare matches with 3PV and 1PV? How will they reconcile matches between teams with different preferences? Or do they plan to split the CW mechanic by viewpoint?
A: 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).

aniviron: You've stated in the past that you don't want to give players using third person view a competitive advantage by being able to see around corners, behind them, or in their far periphery. Do you have any concrete plans for how to do this? It seems like this will be an unavoidable side effect of having the camera located behind the mech, and it is the main reason that almost the entire forum is against having it in the game. You could assuage a lot of upset on the forums if you detailed how you are going to do this.
A: Once players get their hands on 3PV, I think most people will be pleasantly surprised how little the camera impacts gameplay. Early tests are showing that there is not much of an advantage. That being said, until we get this viewmode in the hands of 1000s of players, we’re not going to see how it fully gets used.

Khanahar: Why exactly is 3rd person not implemented as a module?
A: It’s not end game content.

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.

Let me help paint a visual


---------------------------- [- Normal, 1st and 3rd available = FACTIONS

Community Warfare -]

-----------------------------[- Hardcore 1st only = MERCS


Everyone has known merc units were always on a scheduled system. It's mentioned on the community warfare post...that is almost 2 years old now.

Edited by Pando, 19 June 2013 - 08:52 AM.

[Zerberus]

IceSerpent, on 19 June 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

P.S. @Zerberus: Apples are not citrus fruits, just thought I'd let you know...

Ehm, yes, absolutely correct, my brain farted. I meant to type orange but happened to be eating a grany smith at the time

[Kraven Kor]

Zerberus, on 19 June 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

Ehm, yes, absolutely correct, my brain farted. I meant to type orange but happened to be eating a grany smith at the time

Well, I'm glad the important parts of this thread got sorted out...

[Felicitatem Parco]

Now if we can all just agree on calling peppers and tomatoes Fruit, then we'd all be on the same page.

Anyways, it seems to be a pervasive misconception that "normal" playmode = Factions and "hardcore" = Mercenaries. The Mercenary side of things is going to be "locked" into 1st person only, and the faction warfare will have both 1PV and 3PV options available. The Devs said they won't be forcibly pitting 1pv players against 3pv players, including in Faction fights. I don't know enough about how the Faction warfare is going to be handled, but the Territorial and scheduled nature of the Mercenary fighting (with contracted assaults and organized defensive preparations) is best treated as a single-perspective environment to prevent any playstyle-related conflicts.

[Lord Perversor]

PEEFsmash, on 17 June 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

There are many good reasons to dislike this 3PV move by PGI. If FPV turns into a "hardcore" mode, then we should all rejoice. Why? Because then there would be a concentration of good players queing which the game currently lacks. The attitude of "get my *** handed to me until I'm driven to quit in shame" comes from this game's culture of whining/complaining for game fixes instead of a culture of self-improvement and challenge. If you get your *** handed to you, as we all have, rebound, improve your play, figure out what went wrong, and improve. Who plays PvP games just to beat up on people who are bad? We play to overcome challenges presented by real people, and compete.
It saddens me that opinions like the OPs are behind many 3PV complaints. The splitting of an already small community, and the ability to see behind yourself and /over/around cover are the real problems. The last thing we should be worried about (and the first thing we should be encouraging/working toward) is an increase in the skill level of pilots.

Hats off my dear Sir, that just the right point.

Someone may just wish to blow up some steam and relax a bit crushing Battlemech that's what 3pv can do (as it seems 3pv can be played with 1pv too it's just that the top match of CW the *hardcore* will be 1pv only)

[FirstSeraph]

Doesn't anyone else think that the best solution to all of this is that we just call 1PV and 3PV what they are, instead of "normal" and "hardcore?" After reading through a lot of the commentary on this situation, it seems like the community has accepted that 3PV is coming, whether they like it or not. This is not the issue. The issue is in how the modes are labeled.

Let's take a look at PGI's reasoning. The decision to add 3PV is driven by the expectation that it will draw more players to the game, which is a fair assumption. In fact, PGI actually expects that the number of players drawn to the game by the addition of 3PV will match or even outnumber the number of 1PV players, which is why they are so intent on calling 3PV/mixed mode "normal." Normal mode is the mode in which the most players are expected to play. Unfortunately, the reasoning behind this labeling is faulty as all hell, because it rests entirely on the idea that calling it "normal" will somehow increase the attractiveness of the game, as if a player who comes looking for a 3PV Mechwarrior game to play will somehow want to play more if the 3PV is called "normal" instead of 3PV. Other than this, there is absolutely no other reason for calling the 3PV/Mixed mode "normal" mode.

The players, on the other hand, are understandably miffed for a number of reasons, the most prominent of which I will list here: 1) they're worried that calling FPV mode "hardcore" will create a bias that causes new/incoming players to play and accept 3PV as "the way the game should be played," thereby segregating them from the larger community, 2) the ones who paid to play/support the game feel betrayed and lied to - to have the mode they paid to support relegated to "not-normal" status is adding insult to injury, 3) they think that 3PV will give a competitive advantage, thus forcing them to use it themselves if they want to keep up with their peers, unless they choose to deal with long-*** queues.

Understand this, PGI - if 3PV is added and the number of players who want to play 3PV is larger than the ones who don't, then neither I nor any other player have a legitimate complaint. I can't control what other people want to play, and if the number of people who want to play 3PV outnumbers the number of people who like 1PV, then I can't very well argue with that, can I? If, on the other hand, we feel like you've manipulated the playerbase into playing a certain way, that's an entirely different story and you won't like the results, believe me. Call the modes what they are, PGI - no more artificial biases.

[FirstSeraph]

One other thing. It's important to remember that the absolute most crucial thing is that 3PV, when implemented, has to offer zero competitive advantage. Not even the smallest iota. If this can be accomplished, everything else falls into place - we can have 1PV/3PV available official Community/Faction Warfare matches, complaints from 1PV players will dwindle to nothing, and 1PV "hardcore" mode will really just become a place for people who want to challenge themselves (which is pretty much what PGI stated they wanted it to be anyway). The labeling thing is the easiest and quickest solution, but balancing is the best solution. Everyone gets what they want, which is a balanced game that can be played any way you want to play it, and we all win.

[N0MAD]

Ask the Devs #40

3PV
aniviron: You've stated in the past that you don't want to give players using third person view a competitive advantage by being able to see around corners, behind them, or in their far periphery. Do you have any concrete plans for how to do this? It seems like this will be an unavoidable side effect of having the camera located behind the mech, and it is the main reason that almost the entire forum is against having it in the game. You could assuage a lot of upset on the forums if you detailed how you are going to do this.
A: Early tests are showing that there is not much of an advantage. That being said, until we get this viewmode in the hands of 1000s of players, we’re not going to see how it fully gets used.
That First sentence in that answer alone should ring warning bells very loudly, there is NOT MUCH, considering PGIs testers lack of experience in testing features ( the splash damage from missiles that was discovered by a player and documented via videos) gives me little confidence that the NOT MUCH statement will turn into ALOT.

Edited by N0MAD, 19 June 2013 - 06:44 PM.

[Lokust Davion]

Pando, on 19 June 2013 - 07:11 AM, said:

No, I'm not going to fight on my steiner account in community warfare under a mode called "trainee"

exactly my point. making 1pv as "Normal mode" would encourage more players to play 1pv.

[TehSBGX]

Lokust Davion, on 17 June 2013 - 09:14 AM, said:

PGI really needs to switch "Hardcore/1pv" to "Normal" and switch "Normal/3pv" to "Trainee".

I think "Wuss" is also very appropriate.

[Skadi]

You have no idea how HARD the "elite" players laughed at them calling first person game play "elite", its just sad he even made that statement, and scary that he considers first person hard.