287 replies to this topic

[Captain Stiffy]

Dr Herbert West, on 09 November 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

This thread, and the poll attached to it prove the exact opposite of what you said.

You are a liar.

Also, knock of the internet toughguy routine. It looks ridiculous.

In what way. Almost everyone says that they don't care. How is that the opposite?

Get angrier.

[Dr Herbert West]

Captain Stiffy, on 09 November 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

In what way. Almost everyone says that they don't care. How is that the opposite?

Get angrier.

Almost everybody is different from "nobody." Nice attempt at shifting the goalposts though.

Also, again, the thread and the poll put the lie to "almost everyone" as well.

You're not a very good liar.

[Captain Stiffy]

LOL the 3PV thing is so, so funny. If it weren't this then it would be something else being blamed. It hasn't changed anything, at all, even a little bit. I guess since this is the internet and nobody here can ever admit they were wrong we're going to have to discuss 3PV into 2018.

[Dr Herbert West]

Captain Stiffy, on 10 November 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

LOL the 3PV thing is so, so funny. If it weren't this then it would be something else being blamed.

.

Blamed for what? Who are you arguing against?

I was merely negating your assertion that nobody or almost nobody cared about 3PV.

Quote

It hasn't changed anything, at all, even a little bit.

How do you know this? What is your evidence for this?

Actually, the thread and poll attached to this thread prove that this is a lie as well. A full 30% of the people who have replied to this thread no longer play this game because of 3PV. That's changing something. Additionally, as I argued earlier, there is no reason to believe that these forum polls aren't a sample of the player population at large. Therefore, the effect is bigger than the raw numbers of this poll.

Quote

I guess since this is the internet and nobody here can ever admit they were wrong we're going to have to discuss 3PV into 2018.

You're free to not discuss anything you don't want. In fact, since you've provided nothing but lies and unsubstantiated claims, maybe it would be for the best. Especially since you seem to be irritated that its being discussed at all (unless this too is a lie, as I suspect).

[Sephlock]

Heffay, on 28 October 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

You can get that info without 3PV and with zero risk, so where's the advantage? And you can get the info while being able to target for LRMs with less likelihood that you get spotted.

So all this mock outrage about 3PV is silly. It's just arguing out of momentum instead of arguing a legitimate issue.



I guarantee that the number is non-zero.

Just make hits on the 3PV drone count as cockpit hits.
Also, make them glow noticeably, especially in vision modes.

[KovarD]

Sephlock, on 10 November 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

Just make hits on the 3PV drone count as cockpit hits.
Also, make them glow noticeably, especially in vision modes.

This is a over complicated solution for a bad implementation, like Ghost Heat.

It would be way better and easier if they simply remove 3PV, since "nobody" uses it and it don't help new players anyway.

Or since the game is going amazing well and the player base is growing like some people say, segregate the playerbase, make a 1PV game mode for PUGs.

Problem solved.

[Sephlock]

KovarD, on 10 November 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

This is a over complicated solution for a bad implementation, like Ghost Heat.

It would be way better and easier if they simply remove 3PV, since "nobody" uses it and it don't help new players anyway.

Or since the game is going amazing well and the player base is growing like some people say, segregate the playerbase, make a 1PV game mode for PUGs.

Problem solved.

You are still thinking logically, which marks you as an outsider.

*HISS*

NOT ONE OF US!

YOU MUST BE INDOCTRINATED IN THE WAYS OF PGI BEFORE YOU CAN TRULY CONTRIBUTE TO OUR LITTLE SOCIETY!

Until then, feel free to keep posting from your island ;P.

[MadcatX]

KovarD, on 10 November 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

This is a over complicated solution for a bad implementation, like Ghost Heat.

It would be way better and easier if they simply remove 3PV, since "nobody" uses it and it don't help new players anyway.

Or since the game is going amazing well and the player base is growing like some people say, segregate the playerbase, make a 1PV game mode for PUGs.

Problem solved.

We can't separate the queues, we don't have enough players!!

[Multitallented]

Leave the 12v12 queue as 1PV only and stop complaining about stuff that doesn't even concern you.

[Dr Herbert West]

KovarD, on 10 November 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

This is a over complicated solution for a bad implementation, like Ghost Heat.

It would be way better and easier if they simply remove 3PV, since "nobody" uses it and it don't help new players anyway.

Or since the game is going amazing well and the player base is growing like some people say, segregate the playerbase, make a 1PV game mode for PUGs.

Problem solved.

Another solution would be to go with a WoT style 3PV where anythink you can't see (i.e. mechs and weapon fire) doesn't get rendered. This is probably more complicated than simply removing 3PV or creating segregated queues, but it would solve all of the issues that anti-3PV people have, while still allowing players to look at their paints and without separating the queues.

Of course, if player numbers are already so low that segregated queues won't work, then chances are that PGIGP have already killed off MWO, and reverting/fixing 3PV isn't going to change that.

Multitallented, on 11 November 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

Leave the 12v12 queue as 1PV only and stop complaining about stuff that doesn't even concern you.

Who are you to say that this doesn't concern us (I assmume you're refering to the anti-3PV crowd).

I play (or rather I used to play) with a unit who was around from the very begining of MW4 and who was active in MW4 planetary no-respawn leagues (NBT, UTS, W!O). Even at peak interest in the game, It would be a very rare night were we would randomly have 12 players online. I believe that the same could be said for most if not all of the active units of the time. These days, theres no way we would be able to field 12 players. Again, I'm betting the same is true for most if not all of the units still active in MWO.

I'm betting you don't have much experience in playing with a team or you would know that 12v12 only 1PV queues doesn't help anyone at all.

Even if we could constantly field 12 players (and there were always plenty of other 12 player groups out there to play), it still wouldn't help me. I have an irregular schedule mainly due to work and a 2 year old child. This means I get play time in bits and pieces at irregular hours. If there isn't a 1PV-only PUG environment for pickup games, then I'm screwed.

So yes, the lack of 1PV only in game modes other than 12v12 does concern me, and a whole lot of other people. In fact, its a deal breaker for 30% of the people who voted in this thread!

[Corvus Antaka]

I've lost 1 match to 3PV where it was obviously used to see which way my mech was facing and shoot me when turning on the enemy. the same effect would have occurred had the enemy been on voice comms with the other mech.

3PV is fortunately in MWO no where near the issue it was in mech4. until we see it regularily abused it's really a non-issue. esp if we get options to not fight with 3PV players.

[Heffay]

Dr Herbert West, on 11 November 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

I'm betting you don't have much experience in playing with a team or you would know that 12v12 only 1PV queues doesn't help anyone at all.

Hehehe.... eheh... hehehehe... oh man...

[Multitallented]

Heffay, on 11 November 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

Dr Herbert West said:

[color=#959595]I'm betting you don't have much experience in playing with a team or you would know that 12v12 only 1PV queues doesn't help anyone at all.[/color]

Hehehe.... eheh... hehehehe... oh man...

[Harmatia]

I was opposed to it before implementation, but after using I find there is no total benefit to 3PV in any form. In this I think PGI was incredibly skilful in creating a point of view that helped new players with mech orientation while not diluting the overall goal of mech simulation and the first person perspective.

I think PGI deserves a lot of credit for succeeding in this balance and I frankly don't understand why it is still an issue with some people. Move on.

[KovarD]

Dr Herbert West, on 11 November 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

Another solution would be to go with a WoT style 3PV where anythink you can't see (i.e. mechs and weapon fire) doesn't get rendered. This is probably more complicated than simply removing 3PV or creating segregated queues, but it would solve all of the issues that anti-3PV people have, while still allowing players to look at their paints and without separating the queues.

For the people that want to just look at their paints, a nice solution for them is to remove 3PV and implement a expectator mode for a recorded game on a free-cam. There you can switch the view / angles / pause / turn off HUD / take screenshot without affecting the game balance.

MadcatX, on 10 November 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

We can't separate the queues, we don't have enough players!!

This is not what PGI/IGP and 3PV crowd say. According to them the game is going amazing well and the players numbers are increasing more and more with the time. They can easily provide server space or a thiny island for 1PV-only crowd if that is true.

[Dr Herbert West]

Heffay, on 11 November 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

Hehehe.... eheh... hehehehe... oh man...

Multitallented, on 11 November 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

*.gif*

Brilliant counterargument?

Are you claiming that you're part of teams that regularly have 11+ guys on comms every night you want to play?

If so, do you really think your situation is representative of the player base at large?

[Dr Herbert West]

Harmatia, on 11 November 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

I think PGI deserves a lot of credit for succeeding in this balance and I frankly don't understand why it is still an issue with some people. Move on.

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 11 November 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

I've lost 1 match to 3PV where it was obviously used to see which way my mech was facing and shoot me when turning on the enemy. the same effect would have occurred had the enemy been on voice comms with the other mech.

This is why we won't move on.

Quote

3PV is fortunately in MWO no where near the issue it was in mech4. until we see it regularily abused it's really a non-issue. esp if we get options to not fight with 3PV players.

For one, you're right. Its not nearly as bad as it was in MW4. I think this mainly has to do with the comparative reticule stability and hitscan lasers which let you basically play in 3PV, whereas in MWO, its mainly a periscope.

However, just because you don't see it being abused, doesn't mean it isn't happening. For the one game where you saw the abuse, how many others did it happen, and you didn't see it? You'll never know. The fact that it can happen at all is unacceptable.

[Farix]

KovarD, on 11 November 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

This is not what PGI/IGP and 3PV crowd say. According to them the game is going amazing well and the players numbers are increasing more and more with the time. They can easily provide server space or a thiny island for 1PV-only crowd if that is true.

Spiting the player base has its risks regardless of how big the player base is. However, PGI's judgement that 3PV would not have a huge effect on the game to make it worth spiting the queues has proven to be correct. Better to save the disruption caused by splitting the queues on something more worthwhile.

[KovarD]

Farix, on 11 November 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

Spiting the player base has its risks regardless of how big the player base is. However, PGI's judgement that 3PV would not have a huge effect on the game to make it worth spiting the queues has proven to be correct. Better to save the disruption caused by splitting the queues on something more worthwhile.

What are the risks if they split the queues?

[Farix]

KovarD, on 11 November 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

What are the risks if they split the queues?

One risk that comes off my mind is that one queue may fail do to lack of participation. With fewer players in that particular queue, matches would be harder to fill and you are more likely to play against the same people time and time again.