25 replies to this topic

[Dartan]

For the game to be successful I think it must be animation, detailed and fluid animation.

For example, I never played MMOs before but after I tried Vindictus it captured me due to its excellent animation.

Superb animation upgrades any game, it is the foundation on which everything is built and on which enjoyability of playing depends.

Rage is another good example...


It would be nice if we could know something about the quality of animation in Mechwarrior Online..

Edited by Dartan, 11 November 2011 - 01:45 PM.

[Dartan]

post links for videos if there are any leaked..

[Creel]

Fun.

[Dartan]

Creel, on 11 November 2011 - 01:54 PM, said:

Fun.

Yes, which mainly comes from good animation, and notice that games that have good animation yet poorer graphics have greater longevity since good animation can't get outdated.

[Omega59er]

Good animation adds to the immersion, which is in my opinion the key element to a game. To immerse the player into the game makes the player not want to leave that world and return to his/her own.

[Creel]

good animation is key, but I don't think that it's definitive. wonky graphics with good mechanics is preferable to perfect representation but unplayable.

[Stormwolf]

Creel, on 11 November 2011 - 01:54 PM, said:

Fun.

This

[CeeKay Boques]

Dartan, on 11 November 2011 - 02:28 PM, said:

Yes, which mainly comes from good animation, and notice that games that have good animation yet poorer graphics have greater longevity since good animation can't get outdated.

Fun...comes from animation? Hmm... not feeling you there. A million things can be fun, animation is graphics. I hope the animation is really good! But Chess is fun for me, and not much animation happening there.

Same with Machinarium. Jagged Alliance, Total War... Arma 2 has horrible animation but is a great, great fun game. I really think the Animation in Mechwarrior, ragdoll (or slagdoll I guess) should be fantastic to sell the battle to me. But it sure doesn't equal fun.

[Dartan]

I wish this company would do the animations, they did the Might & Magic Heroes VI animations and the result is amazing, best animations of units I have seen in a game, makes the whole game so much more enjoyable.

[SwordofLight]

One of my benchmarks - and it probably wont figure into this game - good voice acting. Arcade games dont often need these, but even fps games these days have voice actors of some sort. So, GLaDOS made Portal because of her voice, Dr. Breen - my God, frikkin' Dr. Breen, I used to shoot out monitors he made me so **** angry - Valve got pros, actual really real actors, and it showed. When WoT switched voice actors to a bad John Wayne impersonator, the backlash was immediate and loud. It wasnt a day into the patch before people were posting the file for the old voice.

Another benchmark - it works. This isnt such a huge one, but glitches and bugs can really take away a lot. I have to really love a game, it has to grab me, before I'll forgive bugs, and egregious bugs - bugs that make the game impossible? Thanks, I've got a large enough game library that I can just toss a seroiusly buggy game aside. I'll be forgiving for a Mod - the LoTR mod for Mount & Blade is buggy, but its a mod, and the bugs dont seem to affect the game play too too much. But the bug that made Black & White impossible to play? I dont care how many iterations of that game have come out since its inception - I've never gone back.

-Don

[Hans Von Lohman]

What I would like to see in the game most of all is a lot of non-combat elements. If the game is just going to be multiplayer deathmatch with slowly, upgradable mechs, then I can't say that the game would be interesting for very long.

I would be happy to see that some form of meta game is included, and most battles are scenarios games with goals other than score the most kills in x amount of time. For example, attackers need to blow up a bridge or a power station. Just getting your team up to 200 kills to win the match sounds dull.

Edited by Hans Von Lohman, 12 November 2011 - 01:50 AM.

[Mchawkeye]

I don't think animation is key at all. I've been playing a lot of MW4Mercs recently and, being as the game is ten or so years old, the animation is far from great. however, the game is still as much fun now as it was then.

Immersion is a key element, especially to a simulator style game, and these days, expectations being as they are, I don't thinking a new product could come out with ten year old graphics and have the required effect. In that respects, animation/graphical fidelity is important, but not top of the list.

But, as Creel basically said, I would rather have a game with slightly less gorgeous graphics and slightly more gorgeous gameplay; that's what is going to make or break this game.

[GreyGriffin]

I think the most important thing to make Mechwarrior successful is going to be the feel of the 'mechs themselves. Mechwarrior is not an FPS, despite the fact that you shoot and are in the first person. A Battlemech needs to feel like it has weight and heft. Even the lightest 'Mech is essentially a light tank hurtling at high speed.

Some people will complain that the controls are "sluggish." Those people aren't here to play this game. If Mechwarrior sacrifices its real key gameplay distinction in favor of "moar speed," it is going to lose what makes it special.

The different hefts and feel and responsiveness of different 'mechs are going to be what differentiate them. Piloting a Locust should feel much different from piloting an Atlas, which should in turn feel distinct from piloting a Highlander or even a Banshee.

Edited by GreyGriffin, 12 November 2011 - 04:09 AM.

[Dartan]

GreyGriffin, on 12 November 2011 - 04:05 AM, said:

A Battlemech needs to feel like it has weight and heft. Even the lightest 'Mech is essentially a light tank hurtling at high speed.

Oh yes, this is extremely important too, if the game feels arcadey/glidey/jumpy like with Transformers it will just be completely ruined. In my opinion this game should be about customization, microtactics and synergy of team strategy,

Edited by Dartan, 12 November 2011 - 06:02 AM.

[Dartan]

Mchawkeye, on 12 November 2011 - 03:37 AM, said:

But, as Creel basically said, I would rather have a game with slightly less gorgeous graphics

Animation is completely different from graphics and far more important than graphics since solid detailed animation can never get outdated, like graphics can.

graphics=lighting+textures
visuals=graphics+animation

[Beaker]

Creel, on 11 November 2011 - 01:54 PM, said:

Fun.

This, Absolutely this.

Everyone thinks they know what makes a Good Game, but they know what THEY think makes a good game, not what will strike a balance between fun and interesting.

You'll say Fancy Animation, Stunning visuals, A selection of Mechs, Battle Armour, different guns etc etc etc, but the developers are here to make a game that appeals to those people outside the community as well.

Over the years we've all seen games come and go that SHOULD have been awesome, but sucked royally. Or others that were stunning, IF you took the time to learn the back story.

For SHOULD have been good I give you Conan, for stunning but died due to too much Fanboy Slavery I present you with Tribes : Vengeance.

Let the Devs get on with it, and don't scream if your MacCat isn't the killing machine you think it should be. They have to strike a balance between following the Battletech Lore, and making a Great Game (Lets not forget that the games aren't considered Canon).

[Mchawkeye]

Dartan, on 12 November 2011 - 06:04 AM, said:

Animation is completely different from graphics and far more important than graphics since solid detailed animation can never get outdated, like graphics can.

graphics=lighting+textures
visuals=graphics+animation

Sigh.

I am aware of the difference between graphics and animation. If you read my post as a whole, you would probably understand what I was getting across; that game play rather than the more superficial elements of game design was of more importance.

There really is no need to be pernickerty.

Edited by Mchawkeye, 12 November 2011 - 06:38 AM.

[Dartan]

Here is what the quality of animation should be like.

Notice also that Space Marine Dreadnaught and Ork Deffdread in Dawn of War 2 already have that threshold quality of animation that can never get outdated.

We are basically talking about that threshold standard of quality.

[wolf on the tide]

Hans Von Lohman, on 12 November 2011 - 01:48 AM, said:

What I would like to see in the game most of all is a lot of non-combat elements. If the game is just going to be multiplayer deathmatch with slowly, upgradable mechs, then I can't say that the game would be interesting for very long.

I would be happy to see that some form of meta game is included, and most battles are scenarios games with goals other than score the most kills in x amount of time. For example, attackers need to blow up a bridge or a power station. Just getting your team up to 200 kills to win the match sounds dull.

seconded.

sorry for using the same example twice.
but if the match's are just one aspect of the game ( much like JTLS was in the old SWg) and then you got the whole BT/MW universe to play in and explore, sweet.

if it's just a mech grind like world of tanks, i'll close the door quietly on my way out without making a fuss.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Dartan, on 11 November 2011 - 01:44 PM, said:

The most important aspect of the game?

Being able to actually play it.