155 replies to this topic

[MadPanda]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

I really never have understood the love for MWLL.

It might have something to do that it is not made by pgi .

[Bishop Steiner]

MadPanda, on 04 August 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

It might have something to do that it is not made by pgi .

all well and good....if it were anywhere near as good as people try to make it out to be. Since in almost all aspects, it got the feel totally wrong for MW, can't say I find it a compelling argument. Always felt more like an update to MW4 or worse, MechAssault.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2014 - 11:04 AM, said:

all well and good....if it were anywhere near as good as people try to make it out to be. Since in almost all aspects, it got the feel totally wrong for MW, can't say I find it a compelling argument. Always felt more like an update to MW4 or worse, MechAssault.

And this isn't an upgrade to MW4, and I mean at the core gameplay level?
Pinpoint FLD, still a problem.
Jumptards, were a problem before they became hovertards and certain land pigs/whales got bigger alphas
Heat System, problematic just as with MW4
Missiles, still worthless at the competitive level (if we aren't counting MP2.1a)
Coolant and 3PV, still exist YAY!

[Zervziel]

Vassago Rain, on 04 August 2014 - 07:39 AM, said:

FF14 did the redesign after they booted out the old dev team.

It's basically an all new game, and not a redesign - is what I'm saying.

You have my attention.

[Bishop Steiner]

majora incarnate, on 04 August 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

And this isn't an upgrade to MW4, and I mean at the core gameplay level?
Pinpoint FLD, still a problem.
Jumptards, were a problem before they became hovertards and certain land pigs/whales got bigger alphas
Heat System, problematic just as with MW4
Missiles, still worthless at the competitive level (if we aren't counting MP2.1a)
Coolant and 3PV, still exist YAY!

MW4 felt like a console video game.

This while having it's issues, at it's core, is actually, on base mechanics, much better than all previous MW titles. Go play some stock mech matches, and you will see exactly what I am talking about.

It's the crap jury rigged on top,. and the idiot decisions made along with (Ghost Heat, unlimited mechlab, too generous skill unlocks) that are the issues. Oh, and deciding to use a visually great engine that is mechanically horrible for the job at hand, and then cluttering all the great visuals with some much visual detritus as to not only negate any value to the great visual capability, but also make it even more resource intensive than needed.

That said, even with the bad window dressing, it's still a better game than MWLL.

[Lyoto Machida]

Dawnstealer, on 04 August 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

It does seem like the level designers in LL were quite a bit more skilled than the group doing MWO's maps (they outsource this, right?). I never played LL, but some of the videos I've seen look really amazing.

I do like MWO and I'm still having fun playing it. Like many of you, the maps have become so monotonous that I'll usually only play a few drops before going and doing something else, whereas before I'd play a few hours.

The number and variety of mechs is pretty good right now (even though there are a few favorites of mine I'd love to see); the mechanics are pretty good; the idea is good. I've said this elsewhere, but the place that PGI really needs to step up is the maps. There are not nearly enough maps to pull off CW successfully and if the existing maps are any indicator, they really need to up the design, too.

The current maps feel like arenas more than lived-in worlds. Even Crimson Straits seems a little lifeless.

Edit: thought - PGI should hire the guys who were making maps for LL. For example, imagine if Terra Therma looked like this:

Man...this makes me hate Terra Therma even more.

[Zervziel]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

MW4 felt like a console video game.

This while having it's issues, at it's core, is actually, on base mechanics, much better than all previous MW titles. Go play some stock mech matches, and you will see exactly what I am talking about.

It's the crap jury rigged on top,. and the idiot decisions made along with (Ghost Heat, unlimited mechlab, too generous skill unlocks) that are the issues. Oh, and deciding to use a visually great engine that is mechanically horrible for the job at hand, and then cluttering all the great visuals with some much visual detritus as to not only negate any value to the great visual capability, but also make it even more resource intensive than needed.

That said, even with the bad window dressing, it's still a better game than MWLL.

That's my main problem with MWO. It could be very good if someone punted the idiots out of the driver seat. My dream game would be MWO mixed with the map veriety and sizes, game modes, and combined warfare assets of LL.

And no, MWO is not better. The only thing MWO has that MWLL didn't is a mech lab, and look how that has turned out. LL had better, larger maps, rewarded scouting, and emphasized team work a lot more than MWO.

[Bishop Steiner]

Zervziel, on 04 August 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

That's my main problem with MWO. It could be very good if someone punted the idiots out of the driver seat. My dream game would be MWO mixed with the map veriety and sizes, game modes, and combined warfare assets of LL.

And no, MWO is not better. The only thing MWO has that MWLL didn't is a mech lab, and look how that has turned out. LL had better, larger maps, rewarded scouting, and emphasized team work a lot more than MWO.

I'm talking the core mechanics of the mech design and combat. MWO smokes MWLL in that. Maps.... MWO could have many more, if they were willing to push out low fidelity crap like MWLL did. I do agree the that MWLL did a better job on rewarding roles.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

MW4 felt like a console video game.

This while having it's issues, at it's core, is actually, on base mechanics, much better than all previous MW titles. Go play some stock mech matches, and you will see exactly what I am talking about.

Agree to disagree, while it did simplify some things to more console-esque level, I think it was for the better mechanic wise especially considering all the convoluted mechanics with MWO (ECM/TAG/NARC, Ghost Heat, PPC/Gauss Link Lock). The only thing MWO really did right was maneuverability and torso causing arm loss, that's about it and I don't really count the former because that's just a bunch of numbers that can be tweaked.

Edited by majora incarnate, 04 August 2014 - 11:29 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Zervziel, on 04 August 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

You have my attention.

The artists can stay. I like their work. And the engineers are probably just understaffed. I think the game design department could use a kick in the pants though.

[Zervziel]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

I'm talking the core mechanics of the mech design and combat. MWO smokes MWLL in that. Maps.... MWO could have many more, if they were willing to push out low fidelity crap like MWLL did. I do agree the that MWLL did a better job on rewarding roles.

I agree with you on that one. The mech combat in LL did need some work, but given the fact they had three other combat modes, I can understand that somewhat.

Plus remember LL came out before MWO, using the original Crytek engine. Plus MWO's maps are hardly lookers themselves.

[Augustus Martelus II]

I miss fighting some AI....i don t know but with good AI battle would be massive and more team play....

Would like to fight huge massive waves of clans or IS mechs.... Adaptive AI existe in many games so why not in MWO?

MW:LL objective would be pretty nice with huge maps only...lot of people don t like huge maps but tactic would be the key to succeed.

Falling mechs parts other than the arms....Example i shoot an AC/20...i would like to see a huge chunk of armor falling off (disappearing after but still would be really nice to see). A lot more details on damages parts...and many new stuff like be able to disable a mech by damaging is legs by melting some parts or destroying its mechanisme. Shooting some part of one mech and make him shut down till forever (you wouldnt need to destroy the mech, disabling a mech would count more in XP) and etc...

Thats how i feel how MW should be today

[Zervziel]

Kaeb Odellas, on 04 August 2014 - 11:29 AM, said:

The artists can stay. I like their work. And the engineers are probably just understaffed. I think the game design department could use a kick in the pants though.

Yeah the artists can stay, though whoever designed the hit boxes can follow the game design devs and those in charge of mech scaling out the window.

[Angel of Annihilation]

MeiSooHaityu, on 04 August 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

Nah, I don't think the game needs an overhaul. I actually think the core mechanics are solid. The game (controls wise) is probably the best and most intuitive control scheme for a Mechwarrior title to date.

The graphics (and overall performance) is ehh, but I still think it is a descent looking game. If they can honestly deliver some mild destructable enviroments (crushed cars, falling trees, etc...), I think that will go a long way. Some optimization to the performance would be nice too.

The Weapon balance and convergence is more of a PGI preference and less of them unable to deliver or lack of capabilities. They just want it to work the way they want it, so there.

Lastly, content is the real big sticking point for people. People want things like CW and Maps. Starting a game over from scratch would get us even farther from content.

Overall, the game has an excellent framework IMO. The core mechanics and bare bones product is solid. Most of the problems lies with PGI's slow development times and balancing decisions. That goes beyond the core game itself.

Just my 2 cents.

I guess honest, this is kind of what I meant. The core mechanics except for a few things like JJs is pretty solid, the mechs are really good as well. Weapons balance isn't all that bad either aside from some of the wacky mechanics like ghost heat and the Gauss rifle.

What I would like to see them do is take these things that they got right and then re-do everything else from the ground up.

They could leave what they have currently in game as an arcade mode so to speak but for the core game go with much, much larger maps with multiple objectives that have to be accomplished to win.

Basically make it so you can't just blob up and win but rather have to split up into lances to take multiple objectives at once. Also the large maps would make it so that fast lights and mediums would be in high demand so as to find the enemy and/or take and hold distant objectives and make it feel like a real battle. Also extend battle times to encompass meeting specific objectives.

Also I would like to see respawns perhaps up to 5 mechs per player and a requirement that you couldn't take more than 1 of any given variant and repair and re-arm bays at some of the objectives so mechs that are beat up would have reason to withdraw from the battle rather than committing suicide when they are on their last leg just to get a few extra points. Hell make it so that losing a mech costs your team victory points so that there is an element of risk.

Also bring back repair and reload costs and give us real salvage where we are getting lasers and PPCs and such instead of some random C-bill value.

I would also like destructible environments at least to a degree on maps, things like trees getting knocked over and perhaps some lighter buildings getting destroyed. Also I want the maps more realistic that are more flat, with rolling hills, fields and trees rather than mech sized sheer cliffs and hills.

Then change the experience progression totally. Make it so that a mech is always improving with each battle giving each chassis just few 0.001% increase in performance. Maybe give us like 10-12 options where we can slowly buy into like heat management, terrain negotiation, JJ usage, sensor usage, ECM usage, speed, etc where for every 15k XP we get an extra 1% in that give stat or something like that.

Also give us alot more maps or go with a procedural generated maps that change slightly each battle. Then give us about 10 different terrain types that would simulate dozens of planets (figure a forest on one planet would like similar to another on another planet, etc). This then opens up the door for a full, realistic CW campaign mode.

Speaking of CW and campaign mode, give us a full start map of the IS. Then let us select certain hot spots along our factions borders. If our faction wins enough battles on this hot spot, then that planet becomes our factions territory and another hot spot further into enemy territory opens up using a different map. Then make it so each planet a faction owns generates some small amount of C-bills or maybe even a little MC to encourage people to take more territory.

Anyway, this is what I want to see.

[Dawnstealer]

I'd love to see vehicles and especially TOADS/Elementals implemented.

[meteorol]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 August 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

This while having it's issues, at it's core, is actually, on base mechanics, much better than all previous MW titles.

It's nice to see someone looking back at previous mechwarrior titles without rose-tinted glasses.
As someone who plays all kinds videogames for many years now, i can't stand guys who bash anything that is new for the sole reason of not being old. Those amazing games of the past all had terrible, awkward and outright bad mechanics guys tend to blind out because they got used to them. (I know what i'm talking about, i'm spending more money on GoG than on new games... and some of those highly acclaimed titles of the past... gosh they have issues.)

The core combat mechanics in MWO are better than they were in any previous Mechwarrior title, but no one gives PGI credits for that.

Zervziel, on 04 August 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

I agree with you on that one. The mech combat in LL did need some work, but given the fact they had three other combat modes, I can understand that somewhat.

The mech combat in Mechwarrior:LL needed some work but they had three other combat modes? That hardly sounds like a quality award for guys who want to pilot mechs.

[Zervziel]

meteorol, on 04 August 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

It's nice to see someone looking back at previous mechwarrior titles without rose-tinted glasses.
As someone who plays all kinds videogames for many years now, i can't stand guys who bash anything that is new for the sole reason of not being old. Those amazing games of the past all had terrible, awkward and outright bad mechanics guys tend to blind out because they got used to them. (I know what i'm talking about, i'm spending more money on GoG than on new games... and some of those highly acclaimed titles of the past... gosh they have issues.)

The core combat mechanics in MWO are better than they were in any previous Mechwarrior title, but no one gives PGI credits for that.



The mech combat in Mechwarrior:LL needed some work but they had three other combat modes? That hardly sounds like a quality award for guys who want to pilot mechs.

It was a little rough, but not completely unfunctional. Plus it worked well enough for many people. Also don't ***** about stuff you haven't even tried.

[Wolfways]

Well i wish someone would redesign it...just not PGI

[Bishop Steiner]

meteorol, on 04 August 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

It's nice to see someone looking back at previous mechwarrior titles without rose-tinted glasses.
As someone who plays all kinds videogames for many years now, i can't stand guys who bash anything that is new for the sole reason of not being old. Those amazing games of the past all had terrible, awkward and outright bad mechanics guys tend to blind out because they got used to them. (I know what i'm talking about, i'm spending more money on GoG than on new games... and some of those highly acclaimed titles of the past... gosh they have issues.)

The core combat mechanics in MWO are better than they were in any previous Mechwarrior title, but no one gives PGI credits for that.



The mech combat in Mechwarrior:LL needed some work but they had three other combat modes? That hardly sounds like a quality award for guys who want to pilot mechs.

well, in fairness, many were great...for their time. But downright bad by current industry standards. (And others were mediocre even for their time. Anyone really miss softball PPCs?)

[Kibble]

No one will redesign this game and no one will make another.

If PGI closes it's doors and shuts the game down do not expect to see another Mechwarrior game. Ever.

We have to just deal with what we have and thank the people that spend