37 replies to this topic

[Denolven]

Durant Carlyle, on 14 February 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

We already have a simplified version of this on the radar screen.
(...)
There should be no confusion at all, especially if there was a one-minute (hell, even 30-second) tutorial going over it.

Exactly, should. But the reality is that newbies have trouble, no matter how much you tell them they shouldn't "because it's all there". The simple fact that they have trouble is proof for a not good enough design. Nobody has a problem with complexity, but it doesn't mean it has to be complicated.

Victor Morson, on 14 February 2014 - 09:37 AM, said:

In short, 3rd person is absolutely and entirely unplayable as a primary view.

No it isn't. Just because it doesn't meet your expectations, doesn't mean it's unplayable. And it doesn't need to meet your expectations. Because it's not made for the pros, it's made for the newbies, and I'm pretty sure it helps them. You know why? Because when I started playing, the first thought I had was "ok how do I get an outside view, so I can actually SEE something?".

[Durant Carlyle]

Denolven, on 14 February 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Exactly, should. But the reality is that newbies have trouble, no matter how much you tell them they shouldn't "because it's all there". The simple fact that they have trouble is proof for a not good enough design. Nobody has a problem with complexity, but it doesn't mean it has to be complicated.

That's the problem right there. It's NOT complicated.

An average 12 year old should be able to figure out the "complexities" of having legs and torso that can be pointed in different directions, just from the cues on the compass and radar screen. Only press A or D, and the line moves. Only move the mouse, and the cone moves. Do both, and they both move independently. A tutorial shouldn't be necessary -- it should only be used as a confirmation that they had it figured out correctly already.

But no...

Today we have people who need to be led by the nose each and every step of the way. They don't want to have to LEARN how movement works, they want to be SHOWN how so they don't have to figure it out.

Games have gotten so damn simple that I don't remember the last time I read a manual or even a game guide. Around the time of Falcon 4.0 maybe?

[Victor Morson]

Denolven, on 14 February 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Exactly, should. But the reality is that newbies have trouble, no matter how much you tell them they shouldn't "because it's all there". The simple fact that they have trouble is proof for a not good enough design. Nobody has a problem with complexity, but it doesn't mean it has to be complicated.

And ultimately, it's NOT complicated. A little tutorial would have been fine.

People have been playing MechWarrior games since 1989 and have figured out torso twist successfully since then. Are you saying people today are too dumb to figure it out if they're given a 5 minute tutorial?

Denolven, on 14 February 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

No it isn't. Just because it doesn't meet your expectations, doesn't mean it's unplayable. And it doesn't need to meet your expectations. Because it's not made for the pros, it's made for the newbies, and I'm pretty sure it helps them. You know why? Because when I started playing, the first thought I had was "ok how do I get an outside view, so I can actually SEE something?".

It is an outright handicap to newbies though. Again, no radar. I honestly wish if they were going 3PV they went full out with it, but instead they tried to please everyone and pleased noone.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Jarek Kain, on 14 February 2014 - 01:21 AM, said:

Was looking everywhere for the option, thanks for the help guys, going to have to find some 12 man groups.

Why? If it is so powerful, why do only newbies use it or want it? Anyone can flip flop between it, so again this is mostly e-peen and hysteria.

[Victor Morson]

Nick Makiaveli, on 14 February 2014 - 11:46 AM, said:

Why? If it is so powerful, why do only newbies use it or want it? Anyone can flip flop between it, so again this is mostly e-peen and hysteria.

Not a face palm big enough for how ignorant that statement is.

The argument is that 3PV will "help newbies." But they gimped it terribly to make it utterly useless for playing the game, hurting newbies. Newbies lose.

On the flip side of that is that 3PV also lets you see around corners, over hills, etc. You can line up shots that you could not possibly see without it, while being more or less invisible to the enemy except a blinking dot they can't shoot.

Practical example: The capture point on Caustic near the "pillar." You can stand at the cap point, position yourself to be out of view of both approaches, and then turn on 3PV and SEE both approaches. Nobody can ambush you because you can see twice as much as someone with even wide FOV enabled could see.

In other words all 3PV is good for is wall hacking, just like how the only thing arm lock in is good for is 100% perfect sniper convergence. PGI is really bad at putting in newbie features that actually benefit newbies.

Edited by Victor Morson, 14 February 2014 - 11:58 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Redshift2k5, on 14 February 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

It seems that not shutting down for sales hasn't actually been integrated yet

Om the upside: http://mwomercs.com/...xp-weekend-love

Double XP weekend!

sweet

[Davinelulinvega]

uhm, idk, but I have seen a tutorial and played a tutorial before making my first drop.

are they gone now or do people just not find them?

edit: btw my first impression was "how can I turn off 3PV, I can't see a thing"

Edited by Davinelulinvega, 14 February 2014 - 12:25 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Davinelulinvega, on 14 February 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

uhm, idk, but I have seen a tutorial and played a tutorial before making my first drop.

are they gone now or do people just not find them?

edit: btw my first impression was "how can I turn off 3PV, I can't see a thing"

F4

[Denolven]

Victor Morson, on 14 February 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

People have been playing MechWarrior games since 1989 and have figured out torso twist successfully since then. Are you saying people today are too dumb to figure it out if they're given a 5 minute tutorial?

No, I'm saying people nowadays are not willing to spend an hour just to figure out how the damn thing moves. You can keep saying "it's not complicated" all you want. Doesn't change the fact that it is. Everyone who has ever teached a newbie knows this. Everyone who saw someone play the game for the first time knows this.

(Wall of rambling about your assumptions about dumb/not dumb)

Spoiler

I have seen it with quite clever folks with high university degrees and whatnot. It has nothing to do with intelligence. Every single one, including me, wanted the possibility of a 3rd person view right from the first seconds. And all of them would have loved to play a stompy robot with lasers shooting each other. Out of 7 people only 2 stayed. One didn't even last 5 minutes, because the game pushed her back and said "study this 300 page encyclopedia to learn how to start a match, or leave". And she left before even touching any game mechanic at all. There could be 5 more people enjoying the game right now, spending money right now, if the interface was designed to be more engaging and less frustrating. We are loosing more than half of the new people simply because the game doesn't allow them to play it despite them wanting to.

And don't get me starting on the "tutorial", because it's not better than the rest. All it does is shoving text into people's faces while force-pausing the game, when all they want to do is run around and shoot stuff. It drove me nuts. "Hey cool, let's see how this works. Oh ok, no playing for me *reads text* Ok got it, let's rumble! Aww common, let me shoot stuff already! *reads more text* Ok you know what? If you don't want me to play the game, I won't! *exits the game*"

Why are you so mad about this one feature that you don't even use? Why do you have a problem to allow newbies to enter the game? You don't even acknowledge the existence of normal people it seems. This is a game, supposed to be fun, engaging, challenging. Not supposed to be some kind of entrance exam that you either study for or fail at even entering.

If you are willing to broaden your horizon on that matter, I recommend the book Design of Everyday Things. Here is a little excerpt:

Spoiler

"You would need an engineering degree from MIT to work this," someone once told me, shaking his head in puzzlement over his brand new digital watch. Well, I have an engineering degree from MIT. (Kenneth Olsen has two of them, and he can't figure out a microwave oven.) Give me a few hours and I can figure out the watch. But why should it take hours? I have talked with many people who can't use all the features of their washing machines or cameras, who can't figure out how to work a sewing machine or a video cassette recorder, who habitually turn on the wrong stove burner.
Why do we put up with the frustrations of everyday object, with objects that we can't figure out how to use, with those neat plastic-wrapped packages that seem impossible to open, with doors that trap people, with washing machines and dryers that have become too confusing to use, with audio-stereo-television-video-cassette-recorders that claim in their advertisements to do everything, but that make it almost impossible to do anything?
The human mind is excuisitely tailored to make sense of the world. Give it the slightest clue and off it goes, providing explanation, rationalization, understanding. Consider the objects - books, radios, kitchen appliances, office machines, and light switches - that make up our everyday lives. Well-designed object are easy to interpret and understand. They contain visible clues to their operation. Poorly designed objects can be difficult and frustrating to use. They provide no clues - or sometimes false clues. They trap the use and thwart the normal process of interpretation and understanding. Alas, poor design predominates. The result is a world filled with frustration, with objects that cannot be understood, with devices that lead to error. This book is an attempt to change things.

Edited by Denolven, 14 February 2014 - 02:04 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Answer 1: It's odd they can, again, handle it just fine in games like Battlefield, Planetside, hell, ARMA, etc.. A MUCH harder thing for them to grasp is locational damage being so important and think just doing "% damage" matters.

Answer 2: Because it's a cheesy wallhack that screws new people over with missing information they should have.

[TheCaptainJZ]

I don't know what they saw that led them to this conclusion, but for whatever reason, the new players they tested didn't realize that mechs work like tanks and instead thought they worked like people, maybe because mechs have arms and legs like people. They felt the best way to show movement would be a 3rd person camera. I agree that a proper tutorial would have been the way to go, but they probably didn't have the time or resources to do that. I doubt they do now.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Davinelulinvega, on 14 February 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

uhm, idk, but I have seen a tutorial and played a tutorial before making my first drop.

That would make you 1/1,000,000

Most people object to playing tutorials, even for games they haven't played yet.

That's why they don't even bother with manuals anymore.

[xMEPHISTOx]

Really should not need tutorials nor manuals to understand the torso/leg movements, it is very simple and anyone who has gamed (or moves their own body) should be able to figure it out in short time. The fact that 3pv helps in no way is making it more complicated than it has to be at the same time as it was a bold face lie to the promises they (pgi) had made in CB.
Now as there will surely be those who do struggle with it in the beginning I recommend more than anything to drop in training grounds to get acquainted with the movements and controls to not put your team at a disadvantage while learning in an actual match.
It is basic common sense really, the fact that this is such a issue shows the general lack of in the gaming community, and it is sad.

[Denolven]

Victor Morson, on 14 February 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

Answer 1: It's odd they can, again, handle it just fine in games like Battlefield, Planetside, hell, ARMA, etc..

Actually it's not odd. Good design works on a subconscious level. That's the whole point of it. You don't have to learn anything, it simply works because you automatically do what is needed to do the task - you don't think about it, you do it.
As soon as you become aware of something that doesn't simply work, that's where the problem lies, because it forces your brain to actively spend a large amount of resources to figure out the magic trick. And if it is really bad, you won't even find out what is happening, and why this or that doesn't work, and you get frustrated over a supposedly simple thing.

Wherever you don't notice anything, the designer has done an excellent job. It's a bit sad that our work is never seen, but that's how it is. We are invisible guardians of happiness
The reason why the same people perform differently in different surroundings is because those surroundings are different. Design quality difference is one of the more likely possibilities.

Quote

Answer 2: (...) screws new people over with missing information they should have.

It might sound harsh, but they definitely should NOT have all information. In your first 2-3 games, all you need to know is how to get to your opponent (left, right, forward, backward - no more is needed), and how you can shove your lasers in other people's face (a single button - no more is needed). From there, things start to evolve. Info availability is important to advance once they are hooked, but overloading always scares people away.

If a newbie gets stuck on the very basics of what is essentially your game (moving and shooting), then you did it wrong. And that is exactly what happened to me and my 6 friends. One didn't even bother to start a second match.

[Denolven]

xMEPHISTOx, on 14 February 2014 - 03:05 PM, said:

Really should not need tutorials nor manuals to understand the torso/leg movements, it is very simple

It is very simple for you, and for me, and for many others. Also, it's very confusing for many people. Just because I can write Java code doesn't mean everyone can do so easily. Just because hundreds of people have no problem doing astrophysics, doesn't mean it's easy or simple.
Don't assume you are average. You probably aren't (and in Victors case I'm very sure he isn't).

Quote

The fact that 3pv helps in no way (...)

Oh, then you can surely tell me what evidence this conclusion is based on. I prefer real data over opinions. How many newbies and first-game-players have you accompanied/watched? (people who played mech games before don't count).
I may very well be wrong here. But opinions alone are not going to convince me. I have too much experience in this field to blindly trust your assessment.

[xMEPHISTOx]

Denolven, on 14 February 2014 - 04:16 PM, said:

It is very simple for you, and for me, and for many others. Also, it's very confusing for many people. Just because I can write Java code doesn't mean everyone can do so easily. Just because hundreds of people have no problem doing astrophysics, doesn't mean it's easy or simple.
Don't assume you are average. You probably aren't (and in Victors case I'm very sure he isn't).

Fair enough, but we are not talking about astrophysics or coding...we are talking about movement of torso and legs which mocks our own bodies movements, it is a matter of common sense as I am going to assume that 98% of people understand how their torsos movement differs from that of their legs.
But hey, maybe I am giving the gaming populace to much credit in assuming this.

Edited by xMEPHISTOx, 14 February 2014 - 04:22 PM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Victor Morson, on 14 February 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

Not a face palm big enough for how ignorant that statement is.

The argument is that 3PV will "help newbies." But they gimped it terribly to make it utterly useless for playing the game, hurting newbies. Newbies lose.

On the flip side of that is that 3PV also lets you see around corners, over hills, etc. You can line up shots that you could not possibly see without it, while being more or less invisible to the enemy except a blinking dot they can't shoot.

Practical example: The capture point on Caustic near the "pillar." You can stand at the cap point, position yourself to be out of view of both approaches, and then turn on 3PV and SEE both approaches. Nobody can ambush you because you can see twice as much as someone with even wide FOV enabled could see.

In other words all 3PV is good for is wall hacking, just like how the only thing arm lock in is good for is 100% perfect sniper convergence. PGI is really bad at putting in newbie features that actually benefit newbies.

Umm yea. So what exactly did I get wrong? It's not that OP, or else you would see people other than newbs using it. Sure every once in a while someone uses it, but hey everyone has access to it.

Oh and it's easier to spot people using it than those that aren't.

So again, you run off at the mouth without thinking about what I said because you assume I am not as smart as you therefore I can't possibly be using sarcasm and implied meanings etc.

[Denolven]

xMEPHISTOx, on 14 February 2014 - 04:21 PM, said:

But hey, maybe I am giving the gaming populace to much credit in assuming this.

Well, it's hard to argue when you see loads and loads of newbies get stuck on the same things over and over again. It's pretty much a proof of how reality looks, both on the human end and on the game end.
And since I think the machine should bend to the human needs and not the other way around, I dare to say that MWOs usability sucks. I might change my mind when the game becomes sentient and asks me to stop dissing it

personal anecdote:

Spoiler

The book I mentioned above actually fields a number of real life examples where highly intelligent and skilled people fail to do very simple tasks. I myself once failed to switch the lights on in my parent's house. It's one of those turn-switches that can set the light to the desired brightness. So I turned it right, to ioncrease brightness - nothing. Turned it left - nothing. Turned it left, right, left, right... nothing. That damn thing wouldn't turn the lights on. How am I supposed to turn it on if the only possible operation is rotation, which clearly did nothing at all?
It took me 10 minutes to figure out that you actually have to push very heavily to activate it, because the rotation only handles the brightness, but not the on/off status. Now that is bad design, making the obvious you believe that turning is the thing to go, but it's NOT, and even obscuring the push operation even more by making the resistance so tough that with normal pressure nothing moves at all.
I spent the rest of the day cursing that damn thing

As I said, it has nothing to do with intelligence or common sense. It's more of a psychological and cultural thing. The shape of the knob was well done, I instinctively tried to turn it.
If that subconscious approach doesn't work, the culture may compensate to a degree. If you happen to grow up in a culture where such stupid switches are totally normal and you learned it as a kid by watching your parents, then no problem. But if you happen to be born outside of the magic circle, you are totally lost.

The same principles can be applied to games. Because it's still us humans who operate them.

Edited by Denolven, 14 February 2014 - 05:19 PM.