I kind of felt a bit depressed after watching this.. The guy does have some valid points about what this game needs to be a step closer to a polished product.. PGI should take note of this video..
0
Interesting Mwo Critique
Started by ROJ, Nov 02 2013 12:40 PM
1 reply to this topic
#2
-
-
- Overlord
- 1,309 posts
Member
Posted 02 November 2013 - 02:17 PM
I saw sidestrafe on a livestream w/ NGNG, looking forward to this video thanks for posting here! 
complaint #1: Eventually we will have UI 1.5 - 2.0 which will include 1080p. I fully agree that 1080p should have been included since day one. On that note, I have spent at least half on my time in the (IMO) ugly mechlab customizing. I agree that there's a ' jerk ' or ' lazy ' dev, but UI 1.0 has always been a temporary place holder.
complaint #2: Scaling in the game is not correct, trees, cars, buildings... and the new ' and good ' point that it almost does feel as if you're only a few feet off the ground in a taller chassis. It just doesn't feel right and on top of that why do cars not get squished or why does a small post (River City) prevent movement. I understand there wouldn't be much noise from squishing trees in your cockpit, but that's literally one of the first things that people I show the game to say.... and I quote, "So you can just walk right through trees?" I understand in cases where PGI wants foliage that can't be removed, but trees in general should fall down and stay down and buildings (the environment in general) should take damage. It's as if the only thing the developers focused on is 'core game play' and that is it. Not much polish.
complaint #3: I disagree to an extent that maps are bland (although most the time, they are). There are rare cases where battles take place in areas other than ' the regular area ' or the middle. When you do find those rare battles where fights take place in a less common area the fight becomes MUCH more dynamic because it's completely new terrain and cover and tactics. I dig that, a lot. (also, SC and WC map editor literally allowed you to ' create your own game '. They just don't sell that kind of freedom these days because people would pay once and play for 5 - 10 years, irrelevant but still)
complaint #4: I totally agree that sometimes you get a total rag doll death, it looks like {Scrap} sometimes and totally has no physics what so ever and not only that but I believe people SHOULD take damage from a mech ' death ' or explosion. I also think that the screen flashing all white for half a second or so would be a perfect way to convey a ' dead ' mech. Little things like this are very addicting.
complaint #5: Oh yeah, I totally get what you're talking about. Back in the table top (which I never played, too young) you could literally rip another 'mechs arm off and beat them to death with it. And you know what, legging should go away forever, you should have to straight up kill that little turret. I completely agree.. let's start to take things out of the box, let's be innovative. Let's not do the same insane thing we used to, let's improve.
(my own personal feeling about ' immersion '. I think that map destruction, proper scaling... all that stuff SideStrafe covered is very valid. But to me, the REAL immersion, is going to come from purchasing a chassis that comes with a story. Battling on a planet that has a history. Instead of deathmatch left and right, a player would feel like their actions ' good or bad ' would have an affect on the game. So if you loose a ' really important match ' well...... that factory is gone and you don't get no more SRMs with a 10% boost to critical hit until you take it back. That, to me, is what makes players stick around you know, the ' lore aspect ' the story and mechwarrior is a great story so let's show it off eh? And yeah, destructible environments and realism is also a factor in what keeps people playing, so a cool explosive graphic may be so invigorating it becomes addicting.) {yes PGI, your graphics are cool, I dislike the color filters on the maps but I get that they are there for balance and to differentiate maps, but you COULD take it many steps further}
complaint #1: Eventually we will have UI 1.5 - 2.0 which will include 1080p. I fully agree that 1080p should have been included since day one. On that note, I have spent at least half on my time in the (IMO) ugly mechlab customizing. I agree that there's a ' jerk ' or ' lazy ' dev, but UI 1.0 has always been a temporary place holder.
complaint #2: Scaling in the game is not correct, trees, cars, buildings... and the new ' and good ' point that it almost does feel as if you're only a few feet off the ground in a taller chassis. It just doesn't feel right and on top of that why do cars not get squished or why does a small post (River City) prevent movement. I understand there wouldn't be much noise from squishing trees in your cockpit, but that's literally one of the first things that people I show the game to say.... and I quote, "So you can just walk right through trees?" I understand in cases where PGI wants foliage that can't be removed, but trees in general should fall down and stay down and buildings (the environment in general) should take damage. It's as if the only thing the developers focused on is 'core game play' and that is it. Not much polish.
complaint #3: I disagree to an extent that maps are bland (although most the time, they are). There are rare cases where battles take place in areas other than ' the regular area ' or the middle. When you do find those rare battles where fights take place in a less common area the fight becomes MUCH more dynamic because it's completely new terrain and cover and tactics. I dig that, a lot. (also, SC and WC map editor literally allowed you to ' create your own game '. They just don't sell that kind of freedom these days because people would pay once and play for 5 - 10 years, irrelevant but still)
complaint #4: I totally agree that sometimes you get a total rag doll death, it looks like {Scrap} sometimes and totally has no physics what so ever and not only that but I believe people SHOULD take damage from a mech ' death ' or explosion. I also think that the screen flashing all white for half a second or so would be a perfect way to convey a ' dead ' mech. Little things like this are very addicting.
complaint #5: Oh yeah, I totally get what you're talking about. Back in the table top (which I never played, too young) you could literally rip another 'mechs arm off and beat them to death with it. And you know what, legging should go away forever, you should have to straight up kill that little turret. I completely agree.. let's start to take things out of the box, let's be innovative. Let's not do the same insane thing we used to, let's improve.
(my own personal feeling about ' immersion '. I think that map destruction, proper scaling... all that stuff SideStrafe covered is very valid. But to me, the REAL immersion, is going to come from purchasing a chassis that comes with a story. Battling on a planet that has a history. Instead of deathmatch left and right, a player would feel like their actions ' good or bad ' would have an affect on the game. So if you loose a ' really important match ' well...... that factory is gone and you don't get no more SRMs with a 10% boost to critical hit until you take it back. That, to me, is what makes players stick around you know, the ' lore aspect ' the story and mechwarrior is a great story so let's show it off eh? And yeah, destructible environments and realism is also a factor in what keeps people playing, so a cool explosive graphic may be so invigorating it becomes addicting.) {yes PGI, your graphics are cool, I dislike the color filters on the maps but I get that they are there for balance and to differentiate maps, but you COULD take it many steps further}
Edited by M4NTiC0R3X, 02 November 2013 - 03:04 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
