15 replies to this topic

[Varent]

Had to take abit of time away from MWO recently because I was abit burnt out with guild stuff. Decided I would explore the old tittles for abit of fun, playing from mw2 and then moving up through 3 and 4 and then fiddling with Living Legends abit.

Honestly..... Though cutting edge for there time and fun in there day and age. I must say even taking the graphics out of it.... They were pretty wonky games. Most of them had alot of poorly implimented systems that worked out ok for those that simply were playing them for the mechwarrior feel but that kinda failed to supply the rush I was looking foreward to from playing the games themselves. LL was about the closest out of all of them that I would say was a truly good game as far as quality goes in todays standards.

And yet most of the time all i hear is complaints about how horrible mwo is on these forums. I think some people might want to take a hard look back at where we have come from...



Either way just a thanks to the dev team so far. Its not perfect but its a ton better then the predecessors.

[Mystere]

For many people, the grass is always greener somewhere else.

Edited by Mystere, 24 January 2014 - 05:48 PM.

[ReXspec]

I have to be honest, I have expressed a fair amount of hatred and bile against the devs. But I can't deny that Mechwarrior Online, based on core gameplay, is possibly THE BEST 'mech simulators in the gaming industry right now.

But for me, that is why I'm so angry... the devs have made a lot of choices that, if anything, has sparked huge controversy in the community. And that is what old mechwarriors like myself DON'T want. We don't want this game to get bogged down by developer/player stupidity, we don't want to see a game like this die off. Above all else, we WANT to see this game to become what, I think, the developers wanted to make this game in the first place: The best g*dd**m incarnation of the Mechwarrior series of all time.

Edited by ReXspec, 24 January 2014 - 06:00 PM.

[Dymlos2003]

ReXspec, on 24 January 2014 - 05:59 PM, said:

I have to be honest, I have expressed a fair amount of hatred and bile against the devs. But I can't deny that Mechwarrior Online, based on core gameplay, is possibly THE BEST 'mech simulators in the gaming industry right now.

But for me, that is why I'm so angry... the devs have made a lot of choices that, if anything, has sparked huge controversy in the community. And that is what old mechwarriors like myself DON'T want. We don't want this game to get bogged down by developer/player stupidity, we don't want to see a game like this die off. Above all else, we WANT to see this game to become what, I think, the developers wanted to make this game in the first place: The best g*dd**m incarnation of the Mechwarrior series of all time.

It's mostly just player stupidity though. I like every mechwarrior that has come to past.

Edited by dymlos2003, 24 January 2014 - 06:12 PM.

[Dudeman3k]

The issue is.... if you look at all the titles in sequence, the MWO is MW2 with better graphics in hindsight.

MW3 and MW4 had game mechanics that still put this "modern game" to shame (mind us all, these games are OLD):
- destructible atmospheres that Impact the players
- Physic like weapon hit detection, weapon Knockdown
- Multitude of game modes, mechs, and really... better balance (as off balanced as those titles were)
- $50 for a complete game............ completed....... like....... done...... good...... very playable..............

Cons that STILL exsist with this "modern" MW that failed to change thought out ALL of the titles:
- single point convergence.... seriously... with the technology and CryEngine, this should have been the very FIRST modification done to any MW title. The Pin-point hitting was the biggest offenders to "instant kill" Meta we experienced in the past, and encouraged Omni-mech superiority. The bigger the better, with no real "role-warfare".

- heat.... In the old engines there was only so much code that could be inserted into a single instance... so they used the "flush" to compensate for the script overload..... but now.... no excuses. This needs to be looked into.

- Tech. Obvi, clan tech ruled every build... Everything I ran had CLan tech, IS tech was just stupid. We wont know how PGI will implement this, but I hope it works.... really.

This game is a good MW title yes... but seriously, if you look at the Progress it's made in comparison to other titles.... its still the same chick with a better flashier dress.... I was really hoping it would have deviated from the past and fixed everything that was wrong with a $50 one time purchase one and done game.... but they just made it look pretty... and thats about it.

[RG Notch]

This isn't about Gameplay balance.

[Sandpit]

Build it and they will com
plain that is

[MisterFiveSeven]

MWO is the best balanced, best looking stompy robot simulator to carry the Battletech IP.

However, it utterly fails at immersing the player in the BT universe. This is my primary concern, because it really is nothing more than a deathmatch stompy robot simulator. The push to include the clans so early cuts off at least 25 canon years of intrigue and depth from the Succession Wars. This is why the game is stale, not the gameplay. While anyone who has played long enough understands the meta and its limitations (Ghost Heat ), the real problem has nothing to do with simulated stompy robot combat. It is due to the simple question of:

Why bother?

PGI: Why buy moar mechs, of course.
/end interest in game

[Wolfways]

MWO:
Pros - Mechs look good. Many(?) players.
Cons - Tiny maps. Very short battles. No learning curve. Customization causes balance problems.

MWLL:
Pros - Lots of mechs, vehicles (ground and air) and infantry, Huge maps that look great. Long battles.
Cons - Big learning curve. Not many players.

Imo...

[Dymlos2003]

Wolfways, on 24 January 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

MWO:
Pros - Mechs look good. Many(?) players.
Cons - Tiny maps. Very short battles. No learning curve. Customization causes balance problems.

MWLL:
Pros - Lots of mechs, vehicles (ground and air) and infantry, Huge maps that look great. Long battles.
Cons - Big learning curve. Not many players.

Imo...

No learning curve in MWO? Uh what?

[Wolfways]

dymlos2003, on 24 January 2014 - 06:46 PM, said:

No learning curve in MWO? Uh what?

You don't think that's a bad thing?

[Alaskan Nobody]

Wolfways, on 24 January 2014 - 08:56 PM, said:

You don't think that's a bad thing?

More he disagrees - there are a lot of people who feel there is to MUCH learning curve.

As for a Con (IMO ) to LL....

It was a FPShooter with Mechwarrior painted over it - it lacked a LOT of those little details that made it a Simulation rather than a FPShooter.

[Wolfways]

Shar Wolf, on 24 January 2014 - 10:18 PM, said:

More he disagrees - there are a lot of people who feel there is to MUCH learning curve.

Oh...
Well maybe it's because i've played a lot of pc games that i consider MWO one of the most simple games i've played.

Quote

As for a Con (IMO ) to LL....

It was a FPShooter with Mechwarrior painted over it - it lacked a LOT of those little details that made it a Simulation rather than a FPShooter.

Well tbh i don't consider MWO to be a sim either. Not even close to a sim, and apparently for many people that's a good thing.
But BIG MAPS and LONG MATCHES!!!

[Alaskan Nobody]

Marack Drock, on 25 January 2014 - 09:13 AM, said:

I kinda agree with the notion of MWO not having a Learning curve. It is simple for me. Just shoot.

I would agree....

But I am the only one I know IRL (that is still up here in Alaska ) who plays, because of the "Learning Curve"

One man's simplicity is another's tough learning curve.