1443 replies to this topic

[Heffay]

Duppie1974, on 31 December 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

If it is, so what, I could not care less. It is as far as I know still up for decision if you would be able to use it in land combat, in space combat it should be useless. Like I said in my previous post, you must have replied while I was editing, I knew that 3PV would be in SC before I pledged.

You can use it just like you can in MWO: You can look around asteroids to scout risk free, eh?

In any event, it's a non issue in SC, much like it is in MWO. Just irrationally annoyed people with over inflated sense of entitlements. Just like it will be in SC, once they find out their $5000 game package is useless for doing any real combat.

[Icould]

Heffay, on 31 December 2013 - 09:17 AM, said:

Besides you not answering the question, there was no need to continue. I read it for the angst now. It's quite delicious.

The thread is self feeding now. I will watch it as people see the same things happening in SC that happens in MWO and wave it off as "Oh, Chris Roberts". Case in point: 3PV.

So, what do you think of CIG's implementation of 3PV, being identical to MWO's version? If we want to use the format of the SC thread, can we say that it is one thing that CIG successfully copied from MWO?

The difference is that CIG never touted themselves as strictly a 1st person shooter, never promised to never implement 3pv, never took a vote from the community that said 90%+ NO, and then never completely disregarded the community and went ahead with 3pv anyway. Typically, I would say your fractured connection with logic and reality is formidable, but I know you are well aware of the differences between PGI and literally any self-respecting developer, and are merely trolling on PGI's behalf. For what purpose you do this is undiscernable, but I know you are thankful only your forumwarrior account looks imbecilic when making your comments.

[Heffay]

Icould, on 31 December 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

The difference is that CIG never touted themselves as strictly a 1st person shooter, never promised to never implement 3pv, never took a vote from the community that said 90%+ NO, and then never completely disregarded the community and went ahead with 3pv anyway. Typically, I would say your fractured connection with logic and reality is formidable, but I know you are well aware of the differences between PGI and literally any self-respecting developer, and are merely trolling on PGI's behalf. For what purpose you do this is undiscernable, but I know you are thankful only your forumwarrior account looks imbecilic when making your comments.

You're right, they never should have said they weren't going to implement 3PV. However, any company is allowed to change their mind, especially for something as much of a non factor is that 3PV ended up being with how they implemented it.

People who can't let go of change have a rough road in life.

And you never answered the question posed a while back: What was the name of your original account that got banned?

Edited by Heffay, 02 January 2014 - 06:37 AM.

[Icould]

Heffay, on 02 January 2014 - 06:37 AM, said:

And you never answered the question posed a while back: What was the name of your original account that got banned?

That is absolutely none of your business. Even your red herrings are shallow and laughable like your support of PGI/IGP.

[Rebas Kradd]

Icould, on 31 December 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

The difference is that CIG never touted themselves as strictly a 1st person shooter, never promised to never implement 3pv, never took a vote from the community that said 90%+ NO, and then never completely disregarded the community and went ahead with 3pv anyway.

Is it hurting the game?

[Icould]

Rebas Kradd, on 02 January 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

Is it hurting the game?

Hurting what game? Star Citizen? I don't know. For some crazy reason, the Star Citizen developer will not take the game out of beta so we can have an unfinished game full of bugs, missing content and cash grabs before they deliver core game mechanics. It's like they want to give their customers their best effort or something. So, I can't really say if 3pv is hurting SC. The only thing the SC developers ever tell us is how much money they have collected, what they are using it on, and constant updates on game mechanics, lore development, concept art, in engine playable module showing the proof of their progress.

Edited by Icould, 02 January 2014 - 05:07 PM.

[Heffay]

Icould, on 02 January 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

That is absolutely none of your business. Even your red herrings are shallow and laughable like your support of PGI/IGP.

You could PM me. I won't tell anyone. I promise.

[Rebas Kradd]

Icould, on 02 January 2014 - 04:01 PM, said:

Hurting what game? Star Citizen? I don't know. For some crazy reason, the Star Citizen developer will not take the game out of beta so we can have an unfinished game full of bugs, missing content and cash grabs before they deliver core game mechanics. It's like they want to give their customers their best effort or something. So, I can't really say if 3pv is hurting SC. The only thing the SC developers ever tell us is how much money they have collected, what they are using it on, and constant updates on game mechanics, lore development, concept art, in engine playable module showing the proof of their progress.

What I meant is, is 3PV hurting MWO?

[Tekadept]

Rebas Kradd, on 04 January 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

What I meant is, is 3PV hurting MWO?

I know a few people who stopped playing because of it, and some who haven't spent a single cent on the game since, not directly BECAUSE of 3PV itself, but because of how it was handled. Is that hurting MWO? Those small handful of people leaving I know? NO that won't make a difference,
But if a lot of old timers knew of a few people each that left, or stopped paying money, then yes 3PV hurt MWO. Not the view itself, but the leadup to it.

All a matter of how many people left, or stopped paying for the game because of the mis management. A view in itself cant Hurt a game, its the result of it being implemented.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Tekadept, on 04 January 2014 - 05:34 PM, said:

I know a few people who stopped playing because of it

And yet there are reports (if burried by the anti-3pv crowd) of people who did not play until it was added (if only to use in the testing grounds)

A controversy that goes both ways.

[Tekadept]

Shar Wolf, on 04 January 2014 - 05:51 PM, said:

And yet there are reports (if burried by the anti-3pv crowd) of people who did not play until it was added (if only to use in the testing grounds)

A controversy that goes both ways.

Exactly, Never heard of that report but yes entirely plausible, but are those people still playing the game? LOL. The point I was trying to make, Is that the "View" itself has caused no little to no effect, benefit or detriment.

Edited by Tekadept, 04 January 2014 - 06:06 PM.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Tekadept, on 04 January 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

Exactly, Never heard of that report but yes entirely plausible, but are those people still playing the game? LOL. The point I was trying to make, Is that the "View" itself has caused no little to no effect, benefit or detriment.

Well... I see a lot of the same people, match after match, using it, not playing very well I will admit, but using it

So either:
1) Yes they are still playing
2) The people who had been playing before actually wanted it (whether they knew it or not)
3) The people who had been playing before yet still play are not smart enough to turn it off
4) All of the above
5) None of the above
6) Some of the above
7) PANTS!
8) No one actually cares one way or the other
9) Other

Take your pick

[Tekadept]

Shar Wolf, on 04 January 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

Well... I see a lot of the same people, match after match, using it, not playing very well I will admit, but using it

So either:
1) Yes they are still playing
2) The people who had been playing before actually wanted it (whether they knew it or not)
3) The people who had been playing before yet still play are not smart enough to turn it off
4) All of the above
5) None of the above
6) Some of the above
7) PANTS!
8) No one actually cares one way or the other
9) Other

Take your pick

The answer is always Potato

[Rebas Kradd]

Tekadept, on 04 January 2014 - 05:34 PM, said:

I know a few people who stopped playing because of it, and some who haven't spent a single cent on the game since, not directly BECAUSE of 3PV itself, but because of how it was handled. Is that hurting MWO? Those small handful of people leaving I know? NO that won't make a difference,
But if a lot of old timers knew of a few people each that left, or stopped paying money, then yes 3PV hurt MWO. Not the view itself, but the leadup to it.

All a matter of how many people left, or stopped paying for the game because of the mis management. A view in itself cant Hurt a game, its the result of it being implemented.

Well, people leaving on principle can't exactly be pinned on PGI. We all know exactly what's really hurting the game right now, and my glances at the forums tell me that 3PV's actual impact on the game isn't one of them.

If there had never been any commitment to 1PV only, nobody would care right now about 3PV, because it isn't even remotely close to being game-breaking. And that was the community's justification for rejecting it, was it not? That it would be game-breaking.

Leaving the game on principle over this, I must honestly say, is the equivalent of a 15-year-old kid being promised a Corolla and then pouting because he got a Camry instead.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 05 January 2014 - 03:30 PM.

[Otto Cannon]

Ooh, just found this thread tucked away here. Almost as if Niko doesn't want the games compared.

I think the main difference is that SC will be a full PC game combined with an added mmo for when you finish it, and MWO is just a multiplayer arena based console game that pretended it was going to be more.

Even if it fails miserably to meet its aims SC will still offer more than MWO ever will. The dogfighting module due soon will not be far off the whole game that PGI are making.

The sad thing is that with the rich lore to draw from, this game could have been even better than SC aspires to be but was let down by the lack of ambition and 'minimum viable product' mentality.

We'll soon see what an experienced dev with no publisher on his back can do anyway. Alpha/beta places are running out fast now.

[Sandpit]

Otto Cannon, on 11 January 2014 - 07:28 PM, said:

Ooh, just found this thread tucked away here. Almost as if Niko doesn't want the games compared.

we need a tinfoil hat emoticon
Then I can jsut post that and stop reading

It's in off-topic because oh I don't know maybe it's not on-topic for anything in MWO? Genius is as genius does

[Bagheera]

Tekadept, on 04 January 2014 - 08:57 PM, said:

The answer is always Potato

Well, Pants sure as hell aren't the answer!

[Sandpit]

and i've already seen a lot of the same type of QQ there as I do here

[Roadbeer]

The DERP is strong in this thread.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Bagheera, on 11 January 2014 - 07:46 PM, said:

Well, Pants sure as hell aren't the answer!