258 replies to this topic

[Marmon Rzohr]

Honestly, I don't know why people get so upset. When I first started dropped after the patch I had to look for the change to see it. You can notice it, but it doesn't interfere with aim or detecting targets or anything.

So I think it's exactly how it should be. People who appreciate some extra "feel" might like it and I don't think it intereferes with everyone else.

Having said that, a toggle would be okay, since it's a cosmetic feature and nothing else. Having someone turn it off wouldn't give them an advantage or anything.

[Praehotec8]

I wouldn't mind if there was a toggle for people who don't want it - I doubt it makes much real gameplay difference, so I don't think removing it would give an unfair advantage.

However, despite the fact I feel the greenish tint could use toned down just a bit, I think some people need to consider that sun glare and debris from the battlefield certainly would occur, and could in fact make seeing more difficult. Just think of how hard it can be drivng while facing directly into the setting sun, or other examples driving a car.

If people think the tiny specks on the cockpit now are bad, I can imagine the tears if/when cockpit glass damage is implemented. (Just picture getting a large stellate crack from an AC shell right in the center of your cockpit and having to finish the remainder of the match that way...very immersive but quite difficult and distracting - snipers beware!)

[DAYLEET]

Can we now remove film grain? If im looking through a dirty smeary scratchy glass, where does the filmgrain come from? i got 1940 era bionics eyes?

[Turist0AT]

Dont mind cockpit glass at all. Looks quite nice.

[Commissar Aku]

Void Angel, on 24 January 2014 - 08:21 PM, said:

So, you're angry over a fairly minor feature - which I dislike as well - on the basis that you could buy better futuristic armored glass... "at walmart[sic.]" (No armored glass in the world today will stand up to a directed energy weapon - that's why people use EFPs on armored vehicles.) You conflate hypothetical technologies for crossing the stars with unrelated technologies related to de-fogging and de-frosting glass - neither of which is at issue here. You also make grandiose claims about how it's unrealistic to have tech loss because"only total collapse of civilization can lose tech and even then not in the way this game does [citation needed.]" However, even given the absurdity of this hand-waving claptrap (no war in history has had the capacity to destroy social infrastructure on the level of unrestricted nuclear war or orbital kinetic bombardment,) you even demonstrate that you know your argument on that point is silly for a game set in the Battletech universe - by your attempt to poison the well against "cannon[sic.]"

None of the alleged reasons you've shotgunned at the forum hold water when examined. In reality, you've just demonstrated two things:

• You dislike the cockpit glass effect for aesthetic reasons (this means you think it looks bad.)
  
• You're having a screaming hissy fit about it, and thinking up rationalizations for your anger after the fact.

For the record I complained before hand too. PGI doesn't listen to constructive criticism, I have tried that route many times, doesn't work. If anything gets them to do anything it is stupid hissy fits and I am sorry that it has come to that. Please don't take my hissy fit as anything other than trying to get a company that never listens until people cry, ***** and moan.

[Void Angel]

Simply the fact that you gave what you felt to be constructive criticism and didn't get your way doesn't mean they don't listen - and if you "have" to throw temper tantrums on the forums to get the company to "listen," wouldn't your time and effort be better spend somewhere else?

[Commissar Aku]

But I want Mechwarrior to succeed, because otherwise i will have to wait another what 15 years to play one again? I have always loved Mechwarrior since I first played MechWarrior 2. Think about it how long did it take to get third person, but there still aren't adaptive weapons on all the old mechs. Hissy fits get things done, if constructive criticisms worked don't you think we would something better than ghost heat and third person?

[Strum Wealh]

DAYLEET, on 26 January 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

Can we now remove film grain? If im looking through a dirty smeary scratchy glass, where does the filmgrain come from? i got 1940 era bionics eyes?

The "film grain" could be attributed to the visor of the neurohelmet, upon which the HUD is projected.

[K1LLFR3AK]

I don't see the issue. My vision is not affected and I wear glasses, almost blind in my left eye. I see everything perfectly fine.

[Cavendish]

Void Angel, on 23 January 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

I washed my armored vehicle's windows when I was deployed, for exactly the same reason people hate the cockpit glass effect. I also used to visit the North Dakota farmers on both sides of my family as a lad - this is why the greenish tint effect reminds me of the cheap plexiglass used in farm equipment and greenhouses.

Honest question, since you obviously was deployed in the US armed forces.

Here in Sweden we had scratches and cracks on our windows on the armored transports and could not get them replaced until they were effectivly useless and next to impossible to see through. The attack helicopters that were in my unit had both a green tint to the armor glass (european helicopters due to a political decission to no buy Super Cobras etc. due to our neutrality) and the cockpit windows also had the scratches and "marks" on them and were never replaced unless they were effectivly broken or deemed dangerous for the driver to execute his job.

Did the US military actually replace windows or armor glass as soon as they had some scratches on them (in my experience about 2 weeks into active use)? Because if they did, Im envious of you guys!

[Mekwarrior]

Yes but someone made a good point before that because the window is close and your eyes are focusing on things more in the distance the window cracks should not be completely in focus as they are in MWO.

My suggestion would be to reduce the opacity of window glass cracks and blur them a bit.

Also you know how one crack might be in the line of sight for one eye but not the other so this is why the effect should be more see through.

Also I like the light on the window effects and reflection effects, just not the cracks effect as they are.

If imperfections were on the helmet visor that should be even more blurred.

Unless you are focusing on the panel itself but there is no feature to choose what distance you are focusing at in Mechwarrior as there would be in real life.

[Void Angel]

Cavendish, on 28 January 2014 - 02:52 AM, said:

Honest question, since you obviously was deployed in the US armed forces.

Here in Sweden we had scratches and cracks on our windows on the armored transports and could not get them replaced until they were effectivly useless and next to impossible to see through. The attack helicopters that were in my unit had both a green tint to the armor glass (european helicopters due to a political decission to no buy Super Cobras etc. due to our neutrality) and the cockpit windows also had the scratches and "marks" on them and were never replaced unless they were effectivly broken or deemed dangerous for the driver to execute his job.

Did the US military actually replace windows or armor glass as soon as they had some scratches on them (in my experience about 2 weeks into active use)? Because if they did, Im envious of you guys!

Well, kinda - I didn't see heavy combat, so I can't speak to the turnaround for actual replacement times. There were scratches on our glass, but nothing like the dings, smudges, and outright dirt on the cockpit glass setups here. If I'd let my vehicle's windows get as dirty around the edges as some of my cockpits are here, my First Sergeant would have made me strong. A uniform tint I'd still disagree with, though it'd make more cognitive sense to me - but really all that's academic. I dislike cockpit glass from an asthetic and gameplay position, and the "immersion" argument is highly subjective - which is itself a good argument to be able to eventually turn the glass (and the fracking film grain) off.

However, as a more complete answer to your question - I wouldn't be surprised if the US's turnaround on materiel was faster and less cost-conscious than yours. Our economy is pretty big, and we spend a lot on our military, so unless we hit a manufacturing bottleneck (like trauma plates for our body armor, and vehicle up-armor kits at the very start of the Iraqi insurgency,) I'd expect a shorter turn-around than you're describing. Now, at home (I'm in the National Guard; if you're not familiar with it, think of it as a provincial military,) we actually lost gear - it got left in theater where it was more needed, and they only gave you new stuff if they were about to throw you back overseas. =)

[Ngamok]

It's not that bad. As someone pointed out, during battle, I barely notice it and it doesn't even hinder me. Here is a shot from my CDA-2B on HPG manifold:

http://cloud-2.steam...E1210B3214F199/

[N a p e s]

Hasn't bothered me since after the first few matches.

[Wintersdark]

Ngamok, on 28 January 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

It's not that bad. As someone pointed out, during battle, I barely notice it and it doesn't even hinder me. Here is a shot from my CDA-2B on HPG manifold:

http://cloud-2.steam...E1210B3214F199/

Depends entirely on what mech you're in and where you are. For example:
In the freaking shade:
On that same HPG map in a stalker (and also in the shade):

Edited by Wintersdark, 28 January 2014 - 04:03 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Modo44, on 21 January 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

Love the effect, would immediately fire/shoot any tech who would leave my cockpit that dirty. I see the need for a texture, but it should not obscure view to this extent. Especially with the silly fog effects already messing with MWO visuals, this is too much.

Every pilot that wanted to live more than 5 minutes would indeed transfer censor their tech, ground crew, for leaving it that dirty, it would endanger the pilots life, risk the loss of extremely expensive hardware.

in short the claims its immersive, are counter to sensible thinking of any combat troops who rely on eyeballs to stay alive and gain an advantage.

If I see one speck of sand on my cockpit glass your on a charge mister..

I wouldn't drive my car to the shops in that condition.

[White Bear 84]

Love how in the Battlemaster when you go through the caves in forest colony you cant see out the side because the dirt and glare is suddenly so high...

[Dimento Graven]

Ultimately I'd like to call PGI out on this. I mean seriously, face to face, sit down and try and explain why:

1. They want to make their own game look like {Scrap}
2. How ANYONE can justify stupidity like this

My reasons for saying this:

1. If increasing the 'immersiveness' was what they wanted to go for, why the hell not make the cockpits function like those described in BattleTech rule books, TRO's, and 'MechWarrior novels? I can't recall ANY description of a 'mech walking out fresh on to the battlefield with a scratched up, dirty, smudgy view. Can anyone? What I do find are endless references to 360 views, MAD detectors, vision enhancement of all sorts, up to and including separate rear view monitors.

Yet they chose to throw schmutz all over our windscreen...

2. My paranoia is kicking in and all the various jokes and tongue in cheek comments made previously on the matter aside, I really feel that this is being done ON PURPOSE so that PGI can create MC purchasable consumable cockpit cleanings.

Think about it... Early on we were promised a means to remove the film grain, well over a year ago, nearly two years ago I believe. As I understand it (and anyone feel free to correct me where I'm wrong here) when initially when it came out, a single USER.CFG variable needed to be set to remove the film grain. PGI didn't like that and changed the mechanism by which film grain was delivered into an overlay, which users soon figured out how to modify to remove, where by PGI then changed its user agreement to make modifications of any file, other than the USER.CFG, verboten.

Now, if there was a feature that you TRULY were going to provide a means for users to turn on and off, you certainly wouldn't start out by disabling the ability of users to turn it on and off, would you?

No REASONABLE person would.

So... WHAT THE F PGI?!?!

You're spitting in the face of some 50+ years of gaming industry progress, where it was the goal to deliver stunning, even beautiful, graphics to the users during their play, graphics that make them gasp and say, "HOLY {Scrap} THAT'S NEAT!". Instead you seem to be working your way towards, "Who threw all the {Scrap} on my {LT-MOB-25} pit?" Most other gaming manufacturers, when they used film grain, and visual detractions used in an incidental manner, cut scenes, non-playable monologues to set the atmosphere, but once it was time to play the users were presented with the absolute best view possible.

You're not doing that, you're working BACKWARDS, and the only reasons I can think of are:

1. Whomever is in charge of art direction is an f'ing {Dezgra}.
2. Greed. You're setting us all up for a whole new set of consumable MC purchasable items to improve our view.

So fess up.

[DarthPeanut]

It is terrible on some mechs and bearable or not an issue for me on others.

The Spider for instance it seems to be more dramatic of an effect and makes it much more difficult to focus/ see details quickly. It has made me hate it and I find myself not wanting to use it much anymore.

On my Cataphract it is not nearly as bad although is amazes me how dirty it is right from the drop.