16 replies to this topic

[Seddrik]

I am not asking about all the other options and decision, whethe ryou plan to quit or continue etc. Just the two main points. I was curious about it.

[Syllogy]

Does it matter?

[scJazz]

Nope since the feature is going in regardless. Waste of a poll... heck waste of a post... uh oh... I am waste.

[von Pilsner]

For those that missed it previously...

[Oppresor]

As I said in the last pole; I would like 3rd person as long as it doesn't replace the existing 2nd person view but instead compliments it. Switchable modes are the answer.

[Adrienne Vorton]

forget 3rd person--- it will happen

prepare for rage against "common/rare/epic/" upgrades for mech internals... probably just like tuning parts in NFS World, via random reward boxes or whatever...

i´m too lazy to find the proper AtD, but "Q: What will the endgame be in MWO? A: Epics" and some other hints were already made to forsee something like that...

[Syllogy]

Nobody here has invested any money in MWO.

You may have spent money, but it was for a product (MC, Founder's Package, etc.) all of which has been delivered as advertised.

Just because you spent $5 at Taco Bell doesn't mean you invested in Taco Bell.

Edited by Syllogy, 20 June 2013 - 06:58 AM.

[BattleTechMan]

Your right Syllogy, we did get what was promised to us in the actual product package. But many people including myself bought a Founders Package based on promises on the direction of the game development. I was in closed beta almost 2 weeks before I bought a Founders Package. I bought it because i felt the package itself was a good deal, and based on verbal statements made by the developers about what direction the game would be going. I know the company is based in Canada, but in America, if a company says something to the public regarding its products and business practice, people except them to follow it. Its called false advertisement. They made false advertisement statements. They delivered on the actual product package, that i can not complain about.

Take for instance, If a car company offered a car you really wanted, and made promises about that car and its development process. Then lets say they said that those who put money for the car before its out get access to the first models that roll off the line. Then lets say you received that car, only to find out a couple of the things they promised that made you want to buy the car in the first place wasn't delivered. What would you do? Keep the car? Return it? Or demand what was promised?

I for one will probably continue to play the game despite 3rd person view. But I refuse to play it. I refuse to try it even. I did not want it in the game in the first place. The best way to tell the developers they made a mistake is to simply not use the mode. Show them what a waste of time and money it is. Show them that the CoD crowd is a bunch of whiner and silver plate a**hats who wouldn't want to learn a new game if there lives depended on it ( not all just most). Why would you cater directly to people who haven't even played or invested a ounce of money into this game? Guarantee that car company would never cater too people that don't buy there cars. They would listen to the people that drive and pay for the cars they make. It just seem backwards to me. And trust me if your running your business right, you hardly even need to advertise or make hollow promises to get people to look at your product at all.

Edited by BattleTechMan, 20 June 2013 - 08:00 AM.

[Syllogy]

They promised a Mechwarrior Game, not that you wouldn't ever have 3rd Person View.

[Uh you havent met Stabem]

My concerns towards 3rd person view:
It's with all intents and purposes is equal to a wallhack. Allowing you to look around corners and over objects. Normally above your cockpit thus blocking your path of view.

What would be needed to be done to make 3rd person view unexpoitable for the most part is this one rule, to rule them all!!

• You can only see mechs within the view-radius of what the pilot would be able to see from the cockpit. And friendly mechs should be no exception to that rule.

After this the question becomes how about the terrain, how will that be managed in 3rd person view. And yet keep it unexploitable.

The more i think about this. All the more pointless it seems. There many issues to think about and consider. Eventually so many changes need to be made for it and limitations. That it's necessarily not even a advantage over a 1st person view.

And if the goal is to make better players, the best idea is making some training program. A nice introduction of you will. Maybe even with some historical facts of what battletech is (in-game factions as subject for example). So people bigger depth of the game while playing it and the story behind it. Also have a headstart as gameplay goes.

Edited by hellhoundlover, 20 June 2013 - 01:57 PM.

[FERAL TIGER]

Syllogy, on 20 June 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

Nobody here has invested any money in MWO.

You may have spent money, but it was for a product (MC, Founder's Package, etc.) all of which has been delivered as advertised.

Just because you spent $5 at Taco Bell doesn't mean you invested in Taco Bell.

Nah man, I now own that taco bell for all the burritos and Dorito tacos I've had.

Founders was definitely an investment! The risk being- the game will suck. We put in money to bolster the game quality, so that they just don't throw out a game and hope it turns a profit. Being a founder gave the Devs a demographic of people who were committed to the game, and wanted it to be done well.

The product has been delivered, yes, but I didn't purchase MWO, I invested in it so I could play if for a while.

[BattleTechMan]

You sure? Seems like a lot of quotes in the OP saying there was not going to be one in the first place. It slowly changed to what we will be getting in near future.

But like I said in my earlier post, 3rd person wont make me quit. Just disappointed. I will still play the game, just not in 3rd person. Ever. Do I feel like my money was wasted? Not completely. Only just a little bit now.

[Deathlike]

The reality of it is.. most Founders are under the impression that 3PV was NEVER going to be implemented. That is the mistake PGI made from the start to get money from people.

Had the majority of the Founders wanted 3PV from the start (or were promised 3PV after 1PV was implemented first), you would not have heard the same kind of complaints that 3PV is generating.

So, for all intents and purposes... PGI/IGP is at fault for this, as those investing in the majority (IMO) are those wanting 1PV primarily.

Edited by Deathlike, 20 June 2013 - 11:20 PM.

[Syllogy]

You are absolutely right about the cause of the QQ.

However, I would rather have a company come out and talk about their plans and their upcoming features, even if it means there is occasionally some bad information, rather than stay silent in order to avoid this kind of fallout.

Method 1: People get upset because plans have changed, but at least we get a steady stream of information and intent.

Method 2: People get upset because there is no information about anything on the horizon. Nobody knows what to look forward to, they can only look at what makes it into the patch notes every other week.

Edited by Syllogy, 21 June 2013 - 07:12 AM.

[BattleTechMan]

I also agree with you Syllogy. That is good perspective to have. I just hope that people who are not founders understand the simple matter of broken promises, and why some founders might be a bit upset. It is nice to have regular updates, and the are far more transparent the most other gaming company (sony cough*). So far, 3rd person view is the only complaint I really have about the games direction so far. And its a simple matter of never using the mode. If you don't like it don't use it. Just like if you don't like a product don't buy it. I like this product enough to want to keep playing. But this leads me on to another question? I understand games or a type of product, but do we all tend to treat games differently than other products?

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

Broken promise is broken promise....for a money grab!

[Oppresor]

Syllogy, on 20 June 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

Nobody here has invested any money in MWO.

You may have spent money, but it was for a product (MC, Founder's Package, etc.) all of which has been delivered as advertised.

Just because you spent $5 at Taco Bell doesn't mean you invested in Taco Bell.

You're absolutely right Syllogy, I haven't spent any money on MWO and I also totally agree that PGI have delivered a fantastic product.

I come from the time when we would go out to Game or the Electronics Boutique and buy a real CD or DVD with a real printed manual in a box; for me that was and should still be the norm. When and if MW5 is released as a final (Non Beta) product, I will be one of the first to part with my £34.99 because it will be worth it.

In the meantime, I will continue to carry out my duty as a Beta Tester for PGI and not complain about how many times I end up in the Killing Fields that are the Canyon scenario (Yes it can be that bad).