2021 replies to this topic

[Overkill C7]

von Pilsner, on 21 August 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

I didn't use 3PV yesterday when playing...are you able to target mechs that you can see in 3PV but not in 1PV?

[Ghost_19Hz]

After a few matches, i don't see how it would help new players much. Its very buggy but some of that is to be expected.

I didn't enjoy looking around corners to see enemy mech positioning/direction/type/number(s), but i found many areas that allowed this. The best being if you can find a wall that will still be high enough to cover your drone, but allow you to see left and right of it.

I observed most players using it to briefly spot over hills and around corners and switch back to 1PV, presumably the exact thing i was doing, garnering the changed gameplay 3PV offers while avoiding the penalties and buggy reticle.

In the end, advantage or not, it changes the gameplay. We all knew this already though, 3pv shooters are different than 1pv shooters. And not necessarily in a good way.

After recent dev comments about 3PV and my experience with it in this game as well as countless others, sadly I've changed my mind about getting the phoenix package. Instead saving that money for the fourth installment of another game coming out around the same date as the MWO release.

[Zeus X]

MastersVoice, on 21 August 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...s-poll-revived/

I dont get it, why adding a feature nobody wants ?

Because PGI says F*ck you.

Russ's own posts on twitter say it the most kindness of fashion.

[TrentTheWanderer]

I, for one, welcome our new "Mech Assault: Online" overlords.

When do we get an XBONE release? Will we be able to purchase a stand-alone arcade cabinet complete with joystick and analog buttons? Will it feature locked coin slots to purchase my premium time and other MC purchases?

I think share holders could get behind that!

[KitK]

OK, so I re-read B. Ekman's post. And I note the following:

Scientific method is being employed not just random development choices to rage the player base. Note that the current choice to not seperate the ques is the result of an evaluation of the design, development and testing. New information caused a change in direction. Is this not a driving principle in our very society? Yet we fault for applying standard scientific methodology.

The ques are postponed. That could be indefinately, but at least not off the table.

Based on their new information they want to rethink the solution for a way that prevents the segregation of the player base, which constantly comes up as a concern on the forums. So hey, this is a good thing right, trying to not segregate the player base with implemention of this feature.

They want a solution that also addresses other community wish list items. A wholistic approach. Again, a good thing right? It is an approach often called for in weapon balance.

So, I really think folks need to feed the good fire here instead of the flame war.

[zer0imh]

i miss mechwarrior 3...

[Zeus X]

KitK, on 21 August 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

OK, so I re-read B. Ekman's post. And I note the following:

Scientific method is being employed not just random development choices to rage the player base. Note that the current choice to not seperate the ques is the result of an evaluation of the design, development and testing. New information caused a change in direction. Is this not a driving principle in our very society? Yet we fault for applying standard scientific methodology.

The ques are postponed. That could be indefinately, but at least not off the table.

Based on their new information they want to rethink the solution for a way that prevents the segregation of the player base, which constantly comes up as a concern on the forums. So hey, this is a good thing right, trying to not segregate the player base with implemention of this feature.

They want a solution that also addresses other community wish list items. A wholistic approach. Again, a good thing right? It is an approach often called for in weapon balance.

So, I really think folks need to feed the good fire here instead of the flame war.

If they want to "rethink" the solution, they need to remove the pseudoscience first.

Edited by DCM Zeus, 21 August 2013 - 10:19 AM.

[skamage]

KitK, on 21 August 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

So, I really think folks need to feed the good fire here instead of the flame war.

Maybe you should tell that to the guys at PGI that are trolling their own customers.

[Jonathan Paine]

A couple of things are clear to me:
1. There is a fanatic core of players dedicated to the 1pv sim vision of mechwarrior. Seems to be only a couple of hundred thousand of us, but apparently we pay well (ref millions to launch mwo).
2. The developers believe that there are millions of people wanting a 3pv action vision of mechwarrior.

Solution?
Create separate game using existing resources. Keep original vision for us fanatics. Profit from both camps. Don't try to cover both bases with one game.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

skamage, on 21 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Maybe you should tell that to the guys at PGI that are trolling their own customers.

PGI is a great company. Everything is fine. PGI knows what they are doing. It's just a beta.

This game is excellent.

[grayson marik]

KitK, on 21 August 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

OK, so I re-read B. Ekman's post. And I note the following:

Scientific method is being employed not just random development choices to rage the player base. Note that the current choice to not seperate the ques is the result of an evaluation of the design, development and testing. New information caused a change in direction. Is this not a driving principle in our very society? Yet we fault for applying standard scientific methodology.

The ques are postponed. That could be indefinately, but at least not off the table.

Based on their new information they want to rethink the solution for a way that prevents the segregation of the player base, which constantly comes up as a concern on the forums. So hey, this is a good thing right, trying to not segregate the player base with implemention of this feature.

They want a solution that also addresses other community wish list items. A wholistic approach. Again, a good thing right? It is an approach often called for in weapon balance.

So, I really think folks need to feed the good fire here instead of the flame war.

After almost 2 years of beta... where the hell do you take your optimism from?

[MechFrog1]

Ngamok, on 21 August 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

3PV isn't game breaking. But I would rather still only play 1PV with other people only playing in 1PV. Please consider turning on "hardcore" mode on at launch. The community would rather have that option than just merging everyone. I don't care if the 3PV people have a handful of people in their queue.

Ngamok, on 21 August 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

3PV isn't game breaking. But I would rather still only play 1PV with other people only playing in 1PV. Please consider turning on "hardcore" mode on at launch. The community would rather have that option than just merging everyone. I don't care if the 3PV people have a handful of people in their queue.

3PV is game breaking and will completely change how MWO will be played.

http://www.youtube.c...d&v=v7zoVIsIT2A

[Kwea]

This is a bunch of {Scrap}. You are lucky to have gotten any money from the player base at all for a buggy game still in beta. Now....you lie to us about one of the features that has killed more mech games than any other.....3rd person view?

You have pretty much proved very one of your detractors right. Even the most obnoxious PGI hater can now point to this as an example of why you can't be trusted, and there will be a glimmer of truth to their statements.

I like this game, and have given you quite a bit of money up to this point. That's over. You aren't getting another dime from me until we have separate drops from 3PV players. And if we don't get them fairly soon you risk the chance that your most profitable group of players to date....the people like me who are in a group of more than 500 players, and who spend cash on these types of games often....will leave.

Fool me once, shame on you. You won't get a second or third chance.

[Barrett]

Quote

PGI is a great company. Everything is fine. PGI knows what they are doing. It's just a beta.

This game is excellent.

Can't.....tell....if....it's....sarcasm.....or....truth...AAARGH!

[Pyrrho]

So.. all Canadians aren't well-to-do, honest, maple syrup infused people?

[skamage]

Barrett, on 21 August 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

Can't.....tell....if....it's....sarcasm.....or....truth...AAARGH!

It's obvious sarcasm. Look at the link in his signature. Even if it was a troll on me, it was a good one.

[N a p e s]

Pyrrho, on 21 August 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

So.. all Canadians aren't well-to-do, honest, maple syrup infused people?

Well we are maple syrup infused...

[Skyraxx]

Well it's a nice bait and switch. Tell everyone there won't be 3pv, then tell them there's going to be separate queues and don't follow through with that.

It's fun being mislead!

[Ranik Selesky]

crabcakes66, on 21 August 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

PGI is a great company. Everything is fine. PGI knows what they are doing. It's just a beta.

This game is excellent.

We have always been at war with oceania...

[MajorBorris]

BLUPRNT, on 20 August 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

I understand the argument of 3rd person view from both sides.

But I got to side on the idea that for MW to be appreciated for what it is, it should be played as a simulator.

To accomodate those that need to learn piloting a walking tank through 3rd person, make it a consummable external UAV and allow that UAV to be destroyed. This will give the new comers a chance to learn as well as encourage them to learn to adapt to a simulator.

In order for one to become stronger and wiser one must learn to overcome and adapt.

Do people ever really get better at things if its always easy.

PGI never wanted a mech simulator, look at the hud and cockpit instruments. The HUD blocks the cockpit view and the instruments have not been implemented properly. If I knew this game was a 3rd person shooter I would have declined the founder package. Thanks PGI for crapping on the founders and kowtowing to 12 year olds I wish the Mechwarrior Living Legends guys would have done a kick starter.