421 replies to this topic

[PappySmurf]

Roland there were over 500 maps for MechWarrior4 Mercinaries many were redone from all the MechWarrior2,MechWarrior3,MechWarrior4Vengeance + expansion packs and the rest were community made, I should know I still have them all installed and on PC disks.And your right MWO does not even have weather variables but then again MWO is not MechWarrior or BattleTech really.

Edited by PappySmurf, 18 August 2014 - 06:40 AM.

[Roland]

Yeah, I was just including the maps that were widely used, generally for league play.

The thing is, and I know PGI doesn't grasp this.... for fun, competitive drops, you don't need the maps to look super photo realistic. That's all nice and stuff, but it's far more important to have the basic terrain be solid from a balance perspective, with features which are useful tactically.

Having little pieces of trash lying around on the ground, which seemingly serve no purpose other than to make your giant mech come to a screeching halt, is not beneficial to the game.

Anyone who plays the game knows this.

Oh, that screenshot shows another really awesome thing that we SHOULD have in this game, which is a 3D model of the targeted mech, which shows us its orientation, etc.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Would rather have HT AL bars.

[PappySmurf]

What I miss the most about PC MechWarrior was the endless variations of game play MWO represents about 1% of what you could do in MechWarrio4 Mercenaries as far as gameplay. MWO is just a boring grinder FPS and I don't know why I stay around.
Well time to go load up MechWarrio4Mercinaries and play some missions.

Did you know Roland about 100 or those 500 maps were true solo or team mission play maps against AI opponents and bases?The MechWarrior IP has slipped so far from it roots in MWO its scary.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Ofc it has.

MvP to milk as much cash from us as possible before they close up shop.

Edited by DV McKenna, 18 August 2014 - 01:58 PM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

The sad thing is. If maps do in fact cost 250k a map to make, then we will never see a Community Warfare setup worth a hill of beans. It's too expensive to make the amount of maps necessary to mke it really feel like you are fighting in truly varied locations and planets.

Now I have heard that the idea is to limit the cost by using assets from each map and just performing more tweaks to them to reduce cost, but I haven't seen that happen yet (examples like weather or time of day change like River City vs River City Night doesn't really count).

Point is, we are going to have a map (and therefore variety) shortage in whatever our Community Warfare looks like.

Boy this game seems boned the more I think about it.

[PappySmurf]

MeiSoo said
(The sad thing is. If maps do in fact cost 250k a map to make, then we will never see a Community Warfare setup worth a hill of beans. It's too expensive to make the amount of maps necessary to mke it really feel like you are fighting in truly varied locations and planets.

Now I have heard that the idea is to limit the cost by using assets from each map and just performing more tweaks to them to reduce cost, but I haven't seen that happen yet (examples like weather or time of day change like River City vs River City Night doesn't really count).

Point is, we are going to have a map (and therefore variety) shortage in whatever our Community Warfare looks like.

Boy this game seems boned the more I think about it. )

It all boils down to1 bad decision by PGI right from the start of game development called CRYENG. Or in the gamming world CRY ME A RIVER BECOUSE I WAS DUPED INTO USING CRYENG.

[Mott]

Sandpit, on 16 August 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

I have a MUCH better idea

If maps cost $250,000 and take 2-4 months

Fix your process. There's no way in hell that any reasonably intelligent adult believes it has to cost $250,000 for every single map produced. If it DOES? Then that's PGI's problem, not mine. Act like a professional company that knows wtf you're doing instead of an indi developer who is programming their first game ever. You got "15 years experience" then act like it and produce like it.

This x100

The second I read that ridiculous comment by PGI brass i had red lights blinking and alarm bells screaming in my head.

If that is truly the case - and not just a convenient excuse that was grasped at without thinking - then IGP & PGI need an Operations & Resource manager/consultant worse than any company i've ever worked with before.

[Tombstoner]

i'm waiting for the flat grassy plane with gently rolling hills. with no cover what so ever. How about the impassable canyon with only one way across unless you got JJ.

I think way too much time is spent making the perfect map. then tweeking things. jsut add in a specal tag that you check off to play beta maps.

[kuangmk11]

The maps are pretty easy to convert if you are not going for making them exactly the same. The heightmaps are easy to export from the MW4 map editor. The tricky part is getting the scale correct, but still not too hard. MWLL is about 2/3 scale to MWO so those maps would have to be scaled and rebuilt too.



I imported the heightmap for MW4:mercs carps02 (Halloran V -Checkpoint) textured and added vegetation in about 2 hours. I just eyballed the scale so its a bit off. With a proper workflow and just reusing MWO assets you could crank out an initial conversion in a day. Of course building custom assets would take much much longer.

[Mott]

kuangmk11, on 18 August 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

The maps are pretty easy to convert if you are not going for making them exactly the same. The heightmaps are easy to export from the MW4 map editor. The tricky part is getting the scale correct, but still not too hard. MWLL is about 2/3 scale to MWO so those maps would have to be scaled and rebuilt too.


I imported the heightmap for MW4:mercs carps02 (Halloran V -Checkpoint) textured and added vegetation in about 2 hours. I just eyballed the scale so its a bit off. With a proper workflow and just reusing MWO assets you could crank out an initial conversion in a day. Of course building custom assets would take much much longer.

You're probably about to be killed by a PGI Assassin. Just sayin...

[EvilCow]

Mott, on 18 August 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

This x100

The second I read that ridiculous comment by PGI brass i had red lights blinking and alarm bells screaming in my head.

If that is truly the case - and not just a convenient excuse that was grasped at without thinking - then IGP & PGI need an Operations & Resource manager/consultant worse than any company i've ever worked with before.

The 250k figure is BS, the real question is, who is supposed to believe that?

Current map are way over engineered, cluttered with things that lower the framerate and add nothing to the game play.

May I suggest some ideas and names for maps?

The Desert, nothing but dunes, mostly terrain. Terrain features would be all.
Rolling Hills, just that, sparse trees.
The pass, nowhere to hide except few boulders.
Arctic platform, a huge iceberg.

Keep them simple, large, fun, nothing to debug. Then do night/winter versions.

[Carrie Harder]

Mott, on 18 August 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

You're probably about to be killed by a PGI Assassin. Just sayin...

The Nerfinator will nerf him, permanently.

[Voidcrafter]

kuangmk11, on 18 August 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

The maps are pretty easy to convert if you are not going for making them exactly the same. The heightmaps are easy to export from the MW4 map editor. The tricky part is getting the scale correct, but still not too hard. MWLL is about 2/3 scale to MWO so those maps would have to be scaled and rebuilt too.

I imported the heightmap for MW4:mercs carps02 (Halloran V -Checkpoint) textured and added vegetation in about 2 hours. I just eyballed the scale so its a bit off. With a proper workflow and just reusing MWO assets you could crank out an initial conversion in a day. Of course building custom assets would take much much longer.

You just made my day sir.
It looks soooo pretty...

Edit: Try to imagine if *someone* really had the necessary will to do this sheet with a so-tend-to-be professional touch

Edited by Voidcrafter, 18 August 2014 - 12:00 PM.

[Kyrie]

Voidcrafter, on 17 August 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

See? We agree for once.
I also think that when CW is released they would be more able to focus on some of the shiny stuff.
But yet again I am waiting for CW from the end of the closed beta
Buut that's a side topic.
Peace and stuff and nn.
It's 1:30 here.

I was, about two years ago, a fervent believer in CW. To the extent that I obsessed about it, posted endless walls of text about it, and commented on everyone else's walls of text about it. I amused myself by reading the wall-of-text thread I started back in August of 2012 (see link in signature). I can't believe how much has changed in my perspective on the game since then.

I have come to the conclusion that CW is not going to be the great Redeemer of MWO. I say this in all honesty after having reviewed once again PGI's varied and confusing pronouncements on CW over time; culminating in Bryan's C- powerpoint presentation at the official "launch party".

This does not mean that CW is necessarily going to be terrible, its just not going to be what many hardcore MPBT fans were hoping for. It will, no doubt, add something to the game -- perhaps even do it a bit better than Clan Wars in World of Tanks. I certainly hope so, as Clan Wars in WoT is simply horrible. CW and CW... coincidence? :-) I always did thought the phrase "community warfare" was atrociously awkward...

I've come to a mellow place of understanding and forgiveness regarding PGI and its sad history of not being clear on CW. Its always been a business, and I respect their need to do what they can to keep the money coming in. My last remaining hope is that CW might, over time, evolve into something great instead of a "minimally viable product." But I cannot help but add this note of caution to everyone thinking that CW is going to be all things for all people, that it will Redeem MWO from all of its iniquities. This is not a realistic expectation.

Endless death-matches are likely to be the key element in CW; if you do not like them now, do not expect to like them then.

[MeiSooHaityu]

EvilCow, on 18 August 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

The 250k figure is BS, the real question is, who is supposed to believe that?

I think it is over inflated too.

My guess is that number equates to the yearly salary of the team plus the lost revenue associated with employees working on assets that dont DIRRECTLY generate revenue.

Example...maps aren't saleable items but mechs, skins, and camps are. By allocating artists to map duty, I am taking them away from creating revenue generating content. Therefore I would roll that projected missing revenue into map cost.

Its a messed up system though because maps do generate revenue, it is just intangible because it doesn't directly generate revenue (no MC amount tied to it).

If the game has more content, I will play more and have more fun. If I play more and enjoy myself more, I will be more likely to buy MC and purchase more paid content. Therefore new maps generated revenue. Problem is, it is an intangible amount that bean counters can't put a direct finger on (no way to know if a person bought MC because of maps, or because he was going to for it anyway.

TL;DR PGI sees maps as a cost and not revenue. Maps are revenue generating, but since you can't tie a number to it, it is ignored by the accountants and the wages and lost direct income (by the staff not making mechs, etc..) is factored into total map cost.

Whew, that was a lot of typing.

[Xyroc]

MeiSooHaityu, on 18 August 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

I think it is over inflated too.

I dont think over inflated is quite the right word. They blew up that estimate with c4.

[Voidcrafter]

Kyrie, on 18 August 2014 - 12:03 PM, said:

I was, about two years ago, a fervent believer in CW. To the extent that I obsessed about it, posted endless walls of text about it, and commented on everyone else's walls of text about it. I amused myself by reading the wall-of-text thread I started back in August of 2012 (see link in signature). I can't believe how much has changed in my perspective on the game since then.

I have come to the conclusion that CW is not going to be the great Redeemer of MWO. I say this in all honesty after having reviewed once again PGI's varied and confusing pronouncements on CW over time; culminating in Bryan's C- powerpoint presentation at the official "launch party".

This does not mean that CW is necessarily going to be terrible, its just not going to be what many hardcore MPBT fans were hoping for. It will, no doubt, add something to the game -- perhaps even do it a bit better than Clan Wars in World of Tanks. I certainly hope so, as Clan Wars in WoT is simply horrible. CW and CW... coincidence? :-) I always did thought the phrase "community warfare" was atrociously awkward...

I've come to a mellow place of understanding and forgiveness regarding PGI and its sad history of not being clear on CW. Its always been a business, and I respect their need to do what they can to keep the money coming in. My last remaining hope is that CW might, over time, evolve into something great instead of a "minimally viable product." But I cannot help but add this note of caution to everyone thinking that CW is going to be all things for all people, that it will Redeem MWO from all of its iniquities. This is not a realistic expectation.

Endless death-matches are likely to be the key element in CW; if you do not like them now, do not expect to like them then.

Well I don't mind it either way - that's all I know from this game(death matches) this far so I can live with it.
If they add some purpose to it - be my guest - I'll for once applaud it.
I can kinda understand why there are so many people afraid of going into the deep waters - try something a bit innovative or/and put their backs to some risks for the sole purpose of shining with a bright idea. The punishment for failing in this is ordinary quite painless - I can get it.
All and all I don't think this game's community is the worst in the universe - both in terms of demanding and in attitude - I've played some games that are quite the display for the word "bad" for those...
To me it seems we want soooo, sooooo little from all the words PGI said in the past - I remember those times(though my memory is probably my weakest spot) - talks about CW, maps, universes and sheet - units, clans, "guids", stuff...

Currently most of the folks talk about ~15% of all this - both as observer and participant I feel like I/we are begging for those things, which is kinda pathetic since we pay PGI bills.
That's why I act like a hurt 12yo when I respond to topics like this - cause I really feel like one.
I feel like most of my excitement of playing this game was just stomped over from either empty promises(which is bad) or fear of using the word "promise"(which is worse).
And topics like this one...
250k and stuff - riiiight...

kuangmk11, on 18 August 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

~some pics from that imbah' guy that should really make you feel ashame Pee Gee Eye~

You can always twist it around dear dev staff, but whether you like it or not things would've been waay easier for you in any direction if you've put any effort in staying connected with your community.
That's just a piece of stardust in the air - one of probably hundreds of things a game's playerbase could really help a f2p game getting constantly developing and moving toward something that's attracting people for the wonderful thing it is.

[1453 R]

1453 R, on 18 August 2014 - 10:46 AM, said:

A note, for all those idjits who feel like they could pump out a new map every week if it was just a terrain box with no assets beyond hills and ponds.

The one time Piranha released a map which was pretty much nothing but a terrain box with hills, not even ponds, it was called Alpine. Everyone I know hates it beyond all comprehension. Half the forum wants it pulled from rotation because it offers no real cover, due to being nothing but a hilly terrain box without any concealment or buildup in it, and is a serious pain in the keister for anything but Gausstarts.

Just a thing to remember. Y'know, since everyone on this forum down to the eight-year-olds borrowing their dad's account can apparently program high-caliber maps on their lunch breaks and all.

Jus' sayin'. All of you guys who can convert five hundred MW2/3/4/LL maps into playable zones in the space of a month or two by not putting anything on your basic geometry because PIRANHA SUX...well, neither I, nor you, would want to play on the results, ne?

[Roland]

What's crazy is that, even without ANY clutter or anything, I would play those MW4 maps TODAY. And frankly, I would have no problem at all... i mean, it'd be cool if you put in the destructible tree sprites that we had (which were cool because you could see trees breaking from very far away, and it gave you a visual indication of something happening in the distance), but even without it I'd absolutely love to play maps like Equinox or Timberline.

Of course, lots of ADD kids would hate those maps, since they were HUGE and it took between 30-60 minutes to play matches sometimes. Hell, sometimes we'd run around for 30 minutes without even finding the enemy.