1251 replies to this topic

[Lord of All]

FactorlanP, on 22 September 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

That's very true. I bought a game I wouldn't have otherwise purchased because of MW:LL.

You don't even need to buy it.

[Chavette]

Lord of All, on 22 September 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

You don't even need to buy it.

While true, thats a pretty recent development.

[Ghogiel]

Slaytronic, on 22 September 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

nope in fact a lot of them are working on star citizen now win for me bet they get paid better then going to piggi also

One isn't a lot of them. But it's definitely cool.

[MustrumRidcully]

Heffay, on 22 September 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

Lend?

Did you lend money to PGI, or did you purchase a product from them? And that product you purchased... was it exactly as advertised?

You focused on the wrong part of the analogy.

1) Plan of Action was Described
2) This made you comfortable going forward with the deal.
3) Plan of Action was not fulfilled.
4) Apology is about how you forgot to tell everyone that you didn't go with the plan.

[DrxAbstract]

Draconis March, on 22 September 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:

Wow. The massive quantities of hypocrisy in this post are staggering.

Is trolling not a moderation-worthy offense anymore?

I'm not interested in whatever warped logic lead you to that conclusion.

Since i happen to have all of them available:

Paul Inouye - March 11th, 2012 - 10:13 PM
"No no no... no MW vs MA threads please. We've already stated that this will be a first-person perspective game."

MA = Mech Assault. Primary view: Third Person Perspective
MWO = Primary view: First Person Perspective

Did Paul say it will be a first person game? Yes. Do you see the word/word combinations 'Only' or 'Will Only Be'? Nope. What is the primary view mode of MWO? First Person.

--Next quote--
Paul Inouye - July 17th, 2012 - 10:36 AM
"Mechwarrior Online is being designed to put you the player in the seat of the pilot. It is 100% first person 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."

Well let's break it down...
1."It is 100% first person view only." - English 101 = present tense, which was over a year ago when the statement was made.

2. He admits implementing 3rd person goes against what PGI wants for the game, but they will look into it anyway because people asked for it.

3. MWO will be 1st person out of the gate... That 'gate' meaning Open Beta or Official Launch is debatable. Assuming it meant Launch, was it? Primarily yes, however 3rd person was still an option. Was it 1st person in the near future (back then)? Yes. This leads directly into the next quote...

Garth Erlam - November 16th, 2012 - 2:59 PM
So Russ let slip in an interview with No Guts No Galaxy we are looking into a 3rd person view option. It seems a lot of people are unhappy with this, so we'd like to explain our thought process here.

For reference, we also strongly recommend [listening to Russ's comments], as he provides a clear case for our approach.

Over the course of development, we've had a huge number of requests for a 3rd person camera option. At this early stage, it's something we feel warrants further analysis, understanding and exploration.

Mechwarrior Online is, and always will be, a game focused on 1st person combat in Mechs. That experience is sacrosanct to the classic Mechwarrior experience.

If we find that there is a relevant role for an optional 3rd person camera mode, then then would simply be an additional option that, if you don't want, won't affect you."

Now i snipped out the rest of that one since it pertained to them being aware of and fleshing out potential issues with 3rd person feasibility, however this post is the most critical of them all because it's the first time they used an 'will always be' line... As in 'will always be focused on 1st person view'... And is it? Yes, it most certainly is focused on 1st person view. Is 3rd person an optional view mode? Yes. Is it true if you dont want it, it wont affect you? No.

And those are two separate topics - Did they ever say never vs The manner in which it was done. And this is where a few of you have confused my position on the subject - I wholeheartedly agree they messed up with adding it; Both in how and that they did it at all. Do i agree they never said they wouldnt? No... because they didnt. They even admitted that, due to community demand, they were pushing up their investigation of 3rd person much earlier than they anticipated, which is probably why we had it for the assumed 'out of the gate' moment of Launch. So did Paul lie about that? Not exactly... Garth clearly stated a heads up that, again, because of the community, they moved up their 3rd person investigation which, and this is purely speculative, may or may not result in the implementation of 3rd person much earlier than they anticipated should it ever happen... and it did.

This is not to be confused with the finer points of their other quoted texts which include falling into player traps (Poor Matt), community polled demands not being valid and the failed follow-throughs of 3rd person implementation. None of those being a topic i feel like discussing, merely that im pointing out where i stand, why, and the facts backing it up concerning whether they said '3PV - never gonna happen!' or not... and they didnt.

Hypocrisy...

[Gamgee]

Well here comes the inevitable iceberg. Good thing Star Citizen adopted me so I can watch the show from orbit. When I insisted others leave they said they would rather stay.

[Apoc1138]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 12:03 AM, said:

Did Paul say it will be a first person game? Yes. Do you see the word/word combinations 'Only' or 'Will Only Be'? Nope. What is the primary view mode of MWO? First Person.

Actually, 3PV is turned on by default, you have to change the options or press F4 to switch to first person, so in effect the devs have made 3PV the PRIMARY view mode, it is just that most people switch to the secondary first person mode... nearly every match at least one person asks "where is the mini map" or "how do I turn off 3rd person"... so the devs have made 3PV primary and not even told you how to switch to the secondary mode, that's how secondary to them it is

Edited by Apoc1138, 23 September 2013 - 03:35 AM.

[Riptor]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 12:03 AM, said:

Hypocrisy...

Lawyerspeak...

The Devs laid down a card face down and we activated said trap card

What was a promise thought and a written statement was that part about not being forced to play against people in 3rd person view.

Wich has now become true with the 12 vs 12 que being 1st person only.

This ladies and gentlemen is how you pull you head out of the sling and get away with the money you robbed from the bank by giving only part of it back.

Are they liars? No

Are they con artists? Yes

They said what the people wanted to hear while at the same time made sure to not be able to be nailed down on their words. Hate to do this but Mythic did the same with warhammer online (yeah i know im going on way to much about WHO but these cases are soooo similiar)

Thought that doesnt change the fact that people feel lied to and will take their business elsewhere.

All your berating and belittling and insults wont change the fact that alot of people wont put any money into this game anymore, so stop complaining.

Unlike giving negative feedback to a company giving negative feedback to negative feedback wont change anything.

[DrxAbstract]

Riptor, on 23 September 2013 - 02:02 AM, said:

Lawyerspeak...

The Devs laid down a card face down and we activated said trap card

What was a promise thought and a written statement was that part about not being forced to play against people in 3rd person view.

Wich has now become true with the 12 vs 12 que being 1st person only.

This ladies and gentlemen is how you pull you head out of the sling and get away with the money you robbed from the bank by giving only part of it back.

Are they liars? No

Are they con artists? Yes

They said what the people wanted to hear while at the same time made sure to not be able to be nailed down on their words. Hate to do this but Mythic did the same with warhammer online (yeah i know im going on way to much about WHO but these cases are soooo similiar)

Thought that doesnt change the fact that people feel lied to and will take their business elsewhere.

All your berating and belittling and insults wont change the fact that alot of people wont put any money into this game anymore, so stop complaining.

Unlike giving negative feedback to a company giving negative feedback to negative feedback wont change anything.

1. So telling you the conclusion people came to was an assumed one based on their on their misinterpretation of past statements due to any number of self-imposed reasons, much less pointing it out in a clear and concise manner, is Lawyerspeak... /thumbs up.

2. Again, not here to discuss how they implemented it.

3. The reasons behind how and why they've done what they have are speculative at best, which makes statements like this: "This ladies and gentlemen is how you pull you head out of the sling and get away with the money you robbed from the bank by giving only part of it back." Biased, baseless opinion derived from who knows what kind of thought process. Also, see #2.

4. My slew of 'berating, belittling and insults'? I challenged your reading comprehension and knowledge of literary structure... Which, posting things like "so stop complaining." and "giving negative feedback to negative feedback" or continuing to justify how you or others feel concerning subjects i've already stated im not here to discuss (See #2) will earn you. Stating your opinion in an attempt to reason is not complaining, you may want to double check your definitions. Posting 'negative feedback of negative feedback' would require actually posting feedback... .

[Nekki Basara]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 12:03 AM, said:

Man you sure do like to misuse tense a lot eh? Good thing Garth said "Over the course of development, we've had a huge number of requests for a 3rd person camera option." and that was past tense, thus we can safely say that there are no current requests for it, amirite?

Seriously, you are terrible.

[DrxAbstract]

Apoc1138, on 23 September 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

Actually, 3PV is turned on by default, you have to change the options or press F4 to switch to first person, so in effect the devs have made 3PV the PRIMARY view mode, it is just that most people switch to the secondary first person mode... nearly every match at least one person asks "where is the mini map" or "how do I turn off 3rd person"... so the devs have made 3PV primary and not even told you how to switch to the secondary mode, that's how secondary to them it is

Many options are turned on/off by default, like my founder's tag, motion blur, throttle decay, arm lock, etc. You posit significance based on that? They told us how to turn it off (Those mythical, elusive patch notes people choose not to read).

[M0rpHeu5]

As much i dislike PGI's actions i have to point out that this is a threat about the metacritic reviews and not a 3pv rant threat.

[Nekki Basara]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

Many options are turned on/off by default, like my founder's tag, motion blur, throttle decay, arm lock, etc. You posit significance based on that? They told us how to turn it off (Those mythical, elusive patch notes people choose not to read).

How do you determine primacy/alternate status?

[Apoc1138]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

Many options are turned on/off by default, like my founder's tag, motion blur, throttle decay, arm lock, etc. You posit significance based on that? They told us how to turn it off (Those mythical, elusive patch notes people choose not to read).

You said that the "primary" game mode was first person view... yet the first game mode that you are presented with when installing the game is 3rd person view... so your "primary" is in fact the developers secondary
the very definition of the word Primary is that it is the first one, so yes, if you want to talk about all the other default settings, they are also the primary way in which the developer expects you to play the game as a new player

seeing as the entire rest of your post incorrectly stems from your assumption that the second choice of game mode is the "primary", I thought it worth pointing out

now consider this for a moment, the developer expects new players to play the game with throttle decay, arm lock and 3PV... now see why many of the core original players and backers of the game have their head in their hands about the direction the game is heading

are you also suggesting that new players should go through and read ALLLLLL of the past patch notes in order to learn how to play the game? that is pretty funny, thanks for the entertainment

Edited by Apoc1138, 23 September 2013 - 07:33 AM.

[DrxAbstract]

Apoc1138, on 23 September 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

You said that the "primary" game mode was first person view... yet the first game mode that you are presented with when installing the game is 3rd person view... so your "primary" is in fact the developers secondary
the very definition of the word Primary is that it is the first one, so yes, if you want to talk about all the other default settings, they are also the primary way in which the developer expects you to play the game as a new player

seeing as the entire rest of your post incorrectly stems from your assumption that the second choice of game mode is the "primary", I thought it worth pointing out

now consider this for a moment, the developer expects new players to play the game with throttle decay, arm lock and 3PV... now see why many of the core original players and backers of the game have their head in their hands about the direction the game is heading

By that reasoning, PGI's intention is that people never know i'm a founder... There's a reason they're called 'Optional Settings'. There's also a reason why many of them can be toggled on the move - it's advantageous in some situations. That doesnt make them 'primary' nor does them starting in the 'on' position.

It's what PGI intends vs What PGI suggests.
PGI intends First Person to be primary, however they suggest 3rd Person is primary. That's a failure of procedure. That doesnt mean First Person is the secondary view mode because in reality it is not. How would a new player know that? Well they certainly wouldnt figure it out from PGI, but they most likely would by using the tutorial, as absurd as it sounds, exploring game features and practical application (playing the game). So PGI did not go about it the right way, i definitely agree. Does that automatically make First Person the secondary view mode? Perhaps and most likely to new players, but with application, experience and the fact most of the game revolves around it, proves otherwise.

Also, the definition of Primary is not 'First' - It's a synonym, the criteria of which depending on context. Using the actual definition of 'Primary':
1. of chief importance; principal = First Person.
2. earliest in time or order of development. = First Person.

So ignoring the bigger picture here where 'Primary' in definition means First Person; Zoom all the way down to a smaller picture and specific context, 'First' is synonymous with 'Primary', only so long as the bigger picture and the established are ignored does 3rd Person mean Primary. To summarize: As long as players limit themselves in the scope of their game play does a Primary 3rd Person make.

Im also hanging my head in the direction of the game, but it's also dependent on whether or not PGI fixes it... to me, they appear to be trying. Whether or not they'll succeed in time remains to be seen and i've got nothing to lose by sticking around to see.

Edited by DrxAbstract, 23 September 2013 - 08:32 AM.

[ShadowSpirit]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 12:03 AM, said:

Blah bla blah bla blah blah blah

You're defending the developer of this game for saying "it's first person" in the "present tense?"

The wall of text defending that point ..... was it worth it? You must have a lot of free time.

[DrxAbstract]

ShadowSpirit, on 23 September 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

You're defending the developer of this game for saying "it's first person" in the "present tense?"

The wall of text defending that point ..... was it worth it? You must have a lot of free time.

The value of my focus and the focus of my free time are none of your business.

[ShadowSpirit]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

The value of my focus and the focus of my free time are none of your business.

The question was rhetorical. I thought you were a champ at debate? I guess the barb about free time was a low blow. I'll concede that and apologize.

Your defense of PGI is noble yet misguided. To suggest PGI did not mislead the community is a stretch -- at best.

"Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."

I think all in all ... you just need a hug.

Edited by ShadowSpirit, 23 September 2013 - 09:46 AM.

[Riptor]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

1. So telling you the conclusion people came to was an assumed one based on their on their misinterpretation of past statements due to any number of self-imposed reasons, much less pointing it out in a clear and concise manner, is Lawyerspeak... /thumbs up.

2. Again, not here to discuss how they implemented it.

3. The reasons behind how and why they've done what they have are speculative at best, which makes statements like this: "This ladies and gentlemen is how you pull you head out of the sling and get away with the money you robbed from the bank by giving only part of it back." Biased, baseless opinion derived from who knows what kind of thought process. Also, see #2.

4. My slew of 'berating, belittling and insults'? I challenged your reading comprehension and knowledge of literary structure... Which, posting things like "so stop complaining." and "giving negative feedback to negative feedback" or continuing to justify how you or others feel concerning subjects i've already stated im not here to discuss (See #2) will earn you. Stating your opinion in an attempt to reason is not complaining, you may want to double check your definitions. Posting 'negative feedback of negative feedback' would require actually posting feedback... .

1. Lawyerspeak is convincing someone you meant something different while at the same time having the option of "i never said that" and be technically right about it.

Did PGI actually said there would never be 3rd person in the game? No they did not by the letter of the word. Did they conveyed there would not be by the way they talked about it? Hell yes. If you cant see that then im afraid youre blind to the truth.

2. Youre not? Then what are you doing here in the first place? Ah thats right... insulting people that dont like the things you like.

3. Not really. They where faced with claims of false advertisement. And those claims actually held merrit. With the inclusion of 12 vs 12 first person only view they kinda sorta kept their promise without actually really giving the people what they where promised. If that isnt pulling your head out of the sling and making away with founders money then i dont know what is.

4. Boy do you have a superiority complex. You are here telling people how sad they are for not having your level of eloquence and reading comprehension when all you do is insult people. You do nothing else.. youre just insulting people who are of the opinion that PGI lied to them.

The thing thought is: No matter how much you insult these people it wont A: Make them support this game more... quite the contrary infact. B: It doesnt help calm the situation and C: Only makes you look like a womans private parts cleaning supplement.

Any kind of feedback is better then saying: "Well your feedback is wrong cause i said so, and im superior because i use difficult to interpret words.. mwuahahaha... oh im sooooo superior"

Face it man, PGI goofed up and now the balls in their part of the game field. Usually it would be a good point by now to kick it back to the players with all the things they promised. But it looks more like PGI will be picking up the ball and going home because everyones just such a meany head.

Also in a discussion you dont simply get to say "well im not discussing that just because it doesnt suit my argument" i dont care what you came here for to discuss honestly because there was a discussion going on before you arrived and only cherry picking the topics you like and that make you look good and ignoring anything else makes you look like a Creatonist.

Edited by Riptor, 23 September 2013 - 10:33 AM.

[Toydolls]

ShadowSpirit, on 23 September 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

The question was rhetorical. I thought you were a champ at debate? I guess the barb about free time was a low blow. I'll concede that and apologize.

Your defense of PGI is noble yet misguided. To suggest PGI did not mislead the community is a stretch -- at best.

"Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."

I think all in all ... you just need a hug.

I signed in just to laugh at this rofl