40 replies to this topic

[VIPER2207]

Blurry, on 07 December 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

That is my cynical conclusion about it.

and the sad thing is, your cynical conclusion has some truth in it =/
i rember myself when i started playing MWO and started using the forums back in march or april this year (got a closed beta invite before, gut couldn't play the game because of graphics bug with the geforce 600 series, no textures and stuff), i was some kind of the so-called "white knights" and i told people "dude, it's beta, calm down, they will fix it before release, and they will add this and that and everything before launch"... now i'm one of the guys who sais "no more money for PGI until they bring UI2.0, CW, self-explaining game or at least good tutorials, and until they change their minds about releasing unfinished products"... the overlod pack from project phoenix was the last thing i bought, i got a refund for my sabre pack. some contents included in the phoenix packs are still not delivered (ingame-tag, i'm looking at you, and don't tell me anything about "can't do that without UI2.0, you should have thought about that before selling stuff"), so they delivered another unfinished product after MWO itself...

[Agentpony]

Katkon, on 06 December 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

....Most/many reviews talk of steep learning curves, complex controls and lots of complicated customizability, but I honestly don't find it any more complicated than a typical MMO (e.g. GW2, SWTOR), skill-tree-type shooter (e.g. Borderlands 2), or combat simulator (e.g. Arma 3). ...

But all the games you mention are already complex on their own. (though even CoD is complex not through its "rules", but through the way people find and use their advantages)

I´ll just tell you 3 specifics that automatically make MWO harder to learn than generic action sim/ FPS:

• Weapon placement (Weapons often do not even closely align with your line of sight)
  
• Strong range discrepancies and how they interact with map design
  
• localized health vs. unified health, i.e., how you deal with damage through torso twisting, presenting a favourable side, protect your weak or precious parts, while most shooters just have one "health". You can actually elect to sacrifice parts of your armor or mech in order to gain an advantageous position.

And that doesnt even touch on the deeper rules like heat, crits, mech building etc.

Edited by Agentpony, 07 December 2013 - 08:28 AM.

[Burke IV]

VIPER2207, on 07 December 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

to be honest, i think that's not a problem with the game, that's a problem with modern players.
today's players

So true. Back in the days when games were made to retain players and give a good long term experience, the learning curve could be quite steep. When a game is made for maximum profit it has to be playable by the widest possible audience, this means you aim it at the lowest common denominator. Im trying not to use the r word here. What learning curve this game has is very small and would be almost non existant with in game voip. "learning curve" is advertising talk in this case, imo, aimed at people who wanted to avoid the lowest common denominator. Is walking one direction and looking another really so difficult? i do it every day.

VIPER2207, on 07 December 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

some contents included in the phoenix packs are still not delivered (ingame-tag, i'm looking at you, and don't tell me anything about "can't do that without UI2.0, you should have thought about that before selling stuff")

Well, well, isnt that interesting. So anybody that wants a refund actually has a valid case of non delivery of product? I think PGI ought to be giving something free to every person thats quietly waited for the stuff they have already payed for. Something significant aswell not a cockpit item or some rubbish, hows about 200k gxp? or 4 free mech bays? not like it costs them anything is it?

[VIPER2207]

Burke IV, on 07 December 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

Well, well, isnt that interesting. So anybody that wants a refund actually has a valid case of non delivery of product? I think PGI ought to be giving something free to every person thats quietly waited for the stuff they have already payed for. Something significant aswell not a cockpit item or some rubbish, hows about 200k gxp? or 4 free mech bays? not like it costs them anything is it?

when i asked the support for the refund of the pack, it was not because of the missing ingame-tag (really don't need it for showing other player "hey look how cool i am, i got a overlord pack" or something like that), it was because i have several issues with the game and how it is developing.
and to be honest, i (personally) don't care about gifts like gxp or mech bays (but yeah, would be nice if the had offered something like this without asking for it), just give me the stuff i paid for. and that's something i can expect as a paying customer.

[Burke IV]

Yes, my bad, i didnt mean to imply anything. I just think that little snippit of info should be somewhere obvious, in big letters, so everybody knows, cause i didnt until i read it here. Thats because i never bothered to read anything i admit

[Katkon]

Lots of good points in this thread. And yes, it's true that I did come to the franchise late in the game so was able to take full advantage of tutorials, youtube videos, this forum, guides and smurfy that didn't exist early on - that makes a lot of sense. I do also agree that there are some nuanced complications in the game (like multiple crosshairs, heat management etc.) that are absent from many others - but that stuff can be learned pretty easily, I think.

It would seem that MWO/PGI would benefit massively from a new set of reviews - to help draw in new players otherwise intimidated from the outdated reviews of just 6-12 months ago.

[Burke IV]

I think that giving out some free mech bays would be a very good idea really. It would reflect well on PGI, an apology without writing an apology and if you accept it you are giving up your right to moan about non delivery. Players can already get 4 free bays if they just sign up for another account, so why not? Its win all round.

[VIPER2207]

Burke IV, on 07 December 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

I just think that little snippit of info should be somewhere obvious, in big letters, so everybody knows, cause i didnt until i read it here.

there's so much info and other stuff that should be highlighted (or at least given somewhere) but acutaly is not... that's one of the biggest problems here

Katkon, on 07 December 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

It would seem that MWO/PGI would benefit massively from a new set of reviews - to help draw in new players otherwise intimidated from the outdated reviews of just 6-12 months ago.

last reviews are dated around the official release date, and the game didn't change too much from there.
These reviews are still correct, if you don't count the 0-ratings from haters and 10-ratings from fanboys who wanted to counter the hater's 0s...

[Lukoi Banacek]

Yet another example. Last night I was playing with someone who's been online with this for about a month. Gifted player, already understands generally why which weapons work and which don't etc.

Thought FF armor provided more protection than regular armor based on the description and that's why he was taking it on an otherwise effective Atlas build in lieu of Endo.

It's tiny little things like that where people get confused because the game has minimal UI information, no ingame manual or effective tutorial on how the bells and whistles work, no clear in-game way of understanding how you earn cbills, xp, how BAP truly works or NARC or TAG, LRMs with LOS/without it, LRMS aimed at a point on the ground, time delays between arty/air etc.

It's all information that has to be farmed from this website, which is haphazard at best and full of inaccuracies. New players who aren't forum-farmers (and PGI has stated time and again that MOST players do not read the forums), have no decent way to learn all of this information. Thus confusion and half-truths. The game doesn't have to be complex to have a steep learning curve. It just has to be opaque, which this game is atm.

[Victor Morson]

Just think about it from the perspective of John Doe here.

John Doe has never played MechWarrior, or remembers it from when he was a kid but never really fully got into the details. He hears there's a big robot sim combat game, and is interested in the idea so downloads it.

Here's what happens next:

• Told to pick a trial from four "classes." As weight classes are not explained their only frame of reference is other FPS game "classes."
  
• Plays the movement tutorial, completes it with no idea there's even a radar in the game or a first person view.
  
• Gets dumped into a game with top meta builds in a purposely handicapped / subpar Champion 'mech, and is blown apart.
  
• Repeat step 3 several times.
  
• John Doe comes to the forums and is only can access New Player Help. Eventually, digging through a forum, John figures out the Cadet Bonus. The game doesn't explain this at all.
  
• John Doe finally buys a 'mech and gets into mechlab....
  
• .... Endo Steel? Ferro? DHS? BAP? XL Engines? Why do I need more heatsinks, what?
  
• John tries to put together a 'mech and is continually thrown back into the death blender. He picked 3 PPCs so now he's also overheating constantly since nothing warned him about Ghost Heat. That is when he's not firing them inside of minimum range, because if you blink, you'll miss the information that informs the player that.
  
• He still doesn't even realize he can use his arms, as they're defaulted off.
  
• John continues to grind money to buy a single gun, not even aware of the other upgrades..

At this point our example John must either:

A. Say screw this mess and leave, never having any idea at all what is going on
B. Get really addicted and throw down some MC for mechlabs and learn all of the undocumented mechanics.

If someone is not a BattleTech fan already (and thus has a frame of reference for all this stuff) which do you think they're going to take?

This game needs tutorials, not just one half hearted 3PV only movement tutorial.

Edited by Victor Morson, 07 December 2013 - 12:54 PM.

[Mawai]

Hi ...

I think it mostly has to do with the mech looking and firing in one direction while the feet move you in a different one. One set of motions is controlled by the keyboard and the second one by the mouse. In addition, the mouse aims both the arm and torso weapons by including a reaction delay and 2 targeting reticles.

Most FPS games, the character runs and shoots in the same direction .. you can't run forward and shoot behind you the way a Catapult used to be able to do ..

The other complex aspect is setting up weapon groups and binding them to specific keys. It can take some people a little while to get the idea and then set it up.

[Victor Morson]

Mawai, on 07 December 2013 - 08:45 PM, said:

Most FPS games, the character runs and shoots in the same direction .. you can't run forward and shoot behind you the way a Catapult used to be able to do ..

The funny thing is this comes up all the time, and was a huge reason the devs cited that 3PV was needed.

However, this is exactly how FPS tanks work. If you've played a Battlefield game, you should already have the hang of the basics, really.

Weapon & heat management and locational shooting are really the biggest things to throw people, but it almost never gets mentioned.

EDIT: What I'm saying is adding a little icon of your 'mech and a POV box to a display on the 'mech = more useful than 3PV ever was or will be to newbies understanding movement.

Edited by Victor Morson, 07 December 2013 - 11:17 PM.

[aniviron]

Katkon, on 06 December 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Let me be completely clear upfront: I'm not very good at this game - I rarely do more than 500 damage in any game (I mostly do a rather pathetic 200-300 dmg and reside middle of the pack on my team at game's end). So no, I'm by no means great - or even good - at this game. BUT, I'm not particularly good at most games/shooters; I play for enjoyment. Most/many reviews talk of steep learning curves, complex controls and lots of complicated customizability, but I honestly don't find it any more complicated than a typical MMO (e.g. GW2, SWTOR), skill-tree-type shooter (e.g. Borderlands 2), or combat simulator (e.g. Arma 3). Sure, it may be harder than a casual FPS like CoD, but it's not a hard came to play at all. It may be hard to master, but many games are. Certainly not hard to learn and enjoy. Am in the minority with this point of view? Am I missing something?

The answer to your question is that things get compared to other things in their genres in reviews, i.e. a car review doesn't say "but it gets way better gas mileage than a pickup!" it talks about gas mileage compared to other cars. And thus, because this is a shooter, it gets compared to other shooters, which have stupid-easy controls.

Also, don't feel bad about that damage at all. Statistics show that the average player on the winning team does about 300 and the average losing team player does about 200, so after just a month you're already on par for average.

[Vanguard319]

I wouldn't just say the controls contribute to the learning curve, you also have to factor in the team element. Individual skills are important, but if you want to win battles, you have to use your skills in conjunction with the other members of your team. A missile boat must rely on the scouts to find and spot targets, in addition, they have to trust that those spotters understand how to prioritze targets, and those targets can shift over the course of a battle.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Koniving, on 07 December 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

Spoiler

If Doom were made a few years ago.

If Quake were made today.

If Doom were made today.

Modern game design generally blows, and the modern audience is spoiled rotten with them.

I stopped mid way through the third video with the dog; that is some wacky stuff with how you are guided through. The first game I remember doing something like a tutorial that was Opposing Force I guess. At least that took me down memory lane...

Spoiler

Oh boy, I must of started too young to properly remember some of those early examples. But I remember starting with Doom, Marathon, Hexen 2, Mechwarrior 2, Zero Tolerance, Half-Life, Rogue Spear, Star Craft and at least Resident Evil too from maybe 1997 to 1999ish.

I learned how to play those on my own for the most part, ended up leaning towards strategy games like Myth, then the Total War series with mods like Europa Barbarorum along with Diablo 2 and more Tom Clancy stuff as I went through High School and College. It wasn't until I bought Mass Effect and Fallout 3 that I leaned back to Sci Fi around 2008 and eventually found my self playing MWO since 2012.

And I guess that it didn't help that I saw the The Wall by Pink Floyd, and Fantastic Planet too young at that time too.

Oh well.

[Durant Carlyle]

Katkon, on 07 December 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

It would seem that MWO/PGI would benefit massively from a new set of reviews - to help draw in new players otherwise intimidated from the outdated reviews of just 6-12 months ago.

The newest PC Gamer magazine has a review of MW:O in it. They gave it an 83, citing a need for a better new user experience, more modes, and UI2.0/CW.

[Burke IV]

Thats PC gamer who wrote "MUST BUY 94%" on empire totalwar at when it was launched. Lol at whatever that means.

[Hammerhai]

One thing I am taking away from this thread that the sim aspects of battletech such as actuator damage were actually shelved almost in the beginning. The beginnings of a trend now very clear to see. Same that Joystick Fanbois were quietly dropped as an audience from right in the beginning. Loc Nar at least states you either code a game for mouse or for Joystick. There ain't no middle ground. To my knowledge PGI has kept very quiet about such design changes, save for the likes of "Live on an island" remarks, when irritated by the QQ. Need-hatred on both sides of the game pond, there.

Talk about a pig in a poke. For the time being I still find the game quite enjoyable, though. But even trying to be level headed about where this game is headed, and it's life expectancy, are open questions. I certainly feel for the Battle Tech fans, who had totally different expectations. Wonder if there will ever be any middle ground between PGI and the ones who felt they "bought a sim".

Sad.

[Bront]

As someone who doesn't play most FPS games, and has only played Guild Wars (1 and 2) in the modern MMO sense, the controls were a bit tricky in MWO, and there's a lot of information you need to learn to decipher and work with. Throw in that the trial mechs were mostly garbage (When I started, the Trial Champion Atlas was the only reasonable build, and poor noobs were forced to run the stock BJ-1X with flamers worse than they are today).

The other issue is mech customization (TT vet here, so I knew that part sorta), and additional controls (heat/night vision, consumables, weapon grouping, etc). Sure, I expected the feet/legs thing, so that wasn't an issue for me (I'd played the cockpit games a few times over the years), but it was still a lot to soak in, and honestly, it took me over a month to "get" the game really.

It doesn't help that unlike many MMOs, there's no real "beginner" area. Sure, they drop your ELO, but you're still playing against folks with varying degrees of money and time thrown into the game, and there's nothing from preventing a new player from, say, buying a hero mech to start and showing up in the new player section with a Heavy Metal or Misery.

[Ngamok]

Katkon, on 06 December 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Let me be completely clear upfront: I'm not very good at this game - I rarely do more than 500 damage in any game (I mostly do a rather pathetic 200-300 dmg and reside middle of the pack on my team at game's end). So no, I'm by no means great - or even good - at this game. BUT, I'm not particularly good at most games/shooters; I play for enjoyment. Most/many reviews talk of steep learning curves, complex controls and lots of complicated customizability, but I honestly don't find it any more complicated than a typical MMO (e.g. GW2, SWTOR), skill-tree-type shooter (e.g. Borderlands 2), or combat simulator (e.g. Arma 3). Sure, it may be harder than a casual FPS like CoD, but it's not a hard came to play at all. It may be hard to master, but many games are. Certainly not hard to learn and enjoy. Am in the minority with this point of view? Am I missing something?

Most of the learning is control. When I first started playing last year in August, I had a heck of a time learning how to point my legs forward while I was moving and keep my torso twisting. Also, how to use both the o and the + crosshairs correctly to line up shots with which weapons. Also, if you've never played Tribes, the jumping and shooting was hard to grasp as well.

Durant Carlyle, on 08 December 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

The newest PC Gamer magazine has a review of MW:O in it. They gave it an 83, citing a need for a better new user experience, more modes, and UI2.0/CW.

Pretty much. My review on metacritic is a 7 mostly because at this stage, the game is fun to play but lacks some content.