304 replies to this topic

[R Razor]

cSand, on 11 October 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Passing some prety big judgements here boy

No, please, do go on

There are two T's in PRETTY and thank you for validating my point with regards to attitude.

[Kjudoon]

cSand, on 11 October 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

OK so would be there some kind of form that I sign, so that all the money I have spent on this game can't be spent on PvE elements? Cause then that's fine.

Cause I don't want it, and won't pay for it but by all means you are welcome to.

But if you think it would be any better than say, MW4 or MW3 or 2... then you are lying to yourself in a big way.

If they ever did do a PvE game, it should be separately funded and separate from this game completely. Because people have spent a lot of money for this PvP game, and like me, would be pissed if that money went towards... uh.... care-mech online

But I guess not wanting my future and already-spent funds in this game to go towards a game that has nothing to do with what I paid for.... that makes me an elitist who loves to beat up on n00bs

Caveat emptor

Look at how DC Universe Online runs their PvE/PvP worlds.

Edited by Kjudoon, 11 October 2014 - 04:20 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Diablo Intercepter, on 11 October 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:

No. Fix the current game first.

PvE WOULD be a fix to the current game's deathmatch, rinse, repeat tedium.

[Astrocanis]

KraftySOT, on 11 October 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

Meh...I disagree with the OP that much has changed over the years. Its MW2 with a different business model, and DX11. Thats pretty much it. Oh yeah theres hardpoints now And PVE to be "worth it" would need more resources, talent, time, money, and energy than PGI has. It would be really, really cheesy. If you want to play MW2 again, download DosBox and get to playin. I promise itll hold up better than any PvE we'd have. Oh and infantry in cities in the Table Top are completely and utterly useless. When a building collapses...they all die. Most building CV is pretty low in the TT, and infantry just dies like crazy when mechs stay out of their range and just level the buildings. Unless youre playing a noob, infantry work best in the open in hills, dropped off by apcs, when theres more targets that are more worth shooting at, than the infantry. But really the point of infantry, is initiative. Having more units means even if you loss the initiative roll, youll probably still have something usefull moving last.

Pucky. I won 1986 nationals TT with a combined arms team.

[Kjudoon]

Quote

[color=#959595]but what's being discussed here is basically another game entirely.[/color]

I am curious, and this goes to all the PvEhatorz too:

What precisely is this game supposed to be? What we have? Deathmatch after Deathmatch? Is there to be nothing more? Even CW is just "Deathmatch with Consequences".

I don't see PvE as 'another game entirely', but a necessary expansion of the MW universe.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Missions would be awesome. I would be all for it!

Better than 12 vs 12 and then having to come here and fight to try and keep your preferred setup from being nerfed into the ground cause you are good with it.

[Dock Steward]

Kjudoon, on 11 October 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:

Even CW is just "Deathmatch with Consequences".

That's a bit reductive isn't it? Super Mario Brothers is just "jumping with mushrooms?" Zelda games are just "walking with elf ears?" Halo is just "3rd person shooting with vehicles?"

Maybe if the MW:O devs can focus basically just on CW, it will be something meaningful.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

I could not make it through this thread, it reeks of stupidity and entitlement and my brain just tunes out when I try to read more than a paragraph.

I suppose my main beef with this thread is the title. You all think this is a democracy, that somehow words from somebody with no power will change anything. Nobody in this thread is anyone of importence in regards to this game's development, and posting selfish reasons for things that would suit your idea of fun. which includes the "i spent money on this!" argument which is one of the most entertaining faux arguments in this line of business - oh and not to mention another one of my favorite arguments "other games do this so why doesn't this game?" You want to know why? because it's not that game. This argument is also used in the name of "realism" as well, another stupid plebian thing which I hate in games.

if you want a mech game with pve then make it, don't move into someone else's country because yours is **** and then institute sharia law.

Edited by Battlecruiser, 11 October 2014 - 05:28 PM.

[Augustus Martelus II]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 October 2014 - 10:18 PM, said:

MWLL is like what MWO shoulda been. It had many bases to attack, a main base for the different teams, repair, rearm, tanks, infantry.....it was kinda neat. Onlything I really didnt like was the having to get the next class of mech through playing the weaker ones and working the way up....never got past the Vulture before the game ever ended.....

but funny thing is....its completely free. The one who mod it did it for free (no salaries i think, since its a mod).... But damn the maps, objectives, bases and etc made me feel i was driving a MECH

And MGs had a range of 1600 m lol

Heat system was giving more penalty while firing than the one in MWO....so no ghost heat needed...because i remember, you had to chain fire bigger weapons to don t shut down or damage your mech....only smaller weapons could be alpha...and even there...

[LordKnightFandragon]

Just as a starter, if PGI was to add PVE, they should work with that they have.

Take the map, say Crimson Strait, move the current spawn point to the middle of that mountain range in the middle of the water(seems like a good spawn point). Then, line that dock area with some current base turrets, maybe change the guns to LRMs and PPC. Place a Conquest style cap zone on it, apply some AI to the lance of Light mechs who start shutdown(just to kinda fool the players, making themthink nothing else is there). Then, simply make the objective, secure the city docks. From there, the objective is scripted to spawn several more mechs, some come from the left and right of the spawn zone out of the city, some heavy and assault mechs to counter your zone. New objective, Defend dock area. Upon wreckng all the enemy mechs, it opens up a new objective...gotta take the train station....or the area across the river in the back of the map...scattered around are various turrets, some shutdwon sniper mechs on the ridge line, a few shutdown CQC mechs in the city, behind buildings.....

Just start with some basic missions and stuff to test it out and give PVE players a glimpse and semi demo of what PVE could be like in this game. Doesnt have to have tanks, planes, men, turrets, dropships and the whole gambit.

Then, apply a CoF type thing to the AI, green mechs, they get a fairly wide array, unable to PPFLD anything, Regulars are a bit better, and so on, to where Elites almost PPFLD, but not quite. maybe a spread as wide as the inner portion of our Torso mounted weapon reticule.

Finally, upon taking the final objective, it just tells us we won, grants us maybe 50K cbills, but no xp or anything. let PVP be where we grind our xp, mechs, modules nad the like, let PVE be where we go to play the game wihtout having to wokr overly hard. BF2142 and BF2 did that, PVP is the grind, PVE is the arcade lol...

[Kjudoon]

Dock Steward, on 11 October 2014 - 05:23 PM, said:

That's a bit reductive isn't it? Super Mario Brothers is just "jumping with mushrooms?" Zelda games are just "walking with elf ears?" Halo is just "3rd person shooting with vehicles?"

Maybe if the MW:O devs can focus basically just on CW, it will be something meaningful.

There's reduction and then there is Redacto in Absurdum. Your statement is the latter.

How is 12v12 'mech smash' meaningful if there is nothing beyond consequences for pew pew?

Technically, all games by your RiA analysis is just button clicking to colors on a screen, and why do we play at all. Let's keep this to be somewhat reasonable, okay?

Right now, MWO is the immersion level of a boardgame... maybe a step or two above because it's a very complex board game... like if monopoly had a version where you could customize your pieces to do different things. To continue this analogy, this isn't Settlers of Cataan, Civilization or a short game of Axis and Allies here. CW will barely get this game up to Settlers of Cataan level or Small World where there is more strategy, but the immersion isn't there because there is no storyline, no missions, no campaigns... just the next drop. Till such time as there is a vigorous 'Out Of Mech" experience, immersion and richness of the gaming universe will never be felt.

[Dock Steward]

Kjudoon, on 11 October 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

There's reduction and then there is Redacto in Absurdum. Your statement is the latter.

How is 12v12 'mech smash' meaningful if there is nothing beyond consequences for pew pew?

Technically, all games by your RiA analysis is just button clicking to colors on a screen, and why do we play at all. Let's keep this to be somewhat reasonable, okay?

Right now, MWO is the immersion level of a boardgame... maybe a step or two above because it's a very complex board game... like if monopoly had a version where you could customize your pieces to do different things. To continue this analogy, this isn't Settlers of Cataan, Civilization or a short game of Axis and Allies here. CW will barely get this game up to Settlers of Cataan level or Small World where there is more strategy, but the immersion isn't there because there is no storyline, no missions, no campaigns... just the next drop. Till such time as there is a vigorous 'Out Of Mech" experience, immersion and richness of the gaming universe will never be felt.

They're two different games (this one and the proposed PvE one), while this one might one day extend to the point that it can include the latter, there is no reason to expect that it will nor to expect that it can any time in the near future.

Dream away. Doesn't hurt anything to do so. But if you want a definition of what this game "is suppose to be," ask PGI. Right now their answer, whatever that might be, is clearly not a PvE.

Edited by Dock Steward, 11 October 2014 - 06:27 PM.

[jaxjace]

Battlecruiser, on 11 October 2014 - 05:27 PM, said:

I could not make it through this thread, it reeks of stupidity and entitlement and my brain just tunes out when I try to read more than a paragraph.

I suppose my main beef with this thread is the title. You all think this is a democracy, that somehow words from somebody with no power will change anything. Nobody in this thread is anyone of importence in regards to this game's development, and posting selfish reasons for things that would suit your idea of fun. which includes the "i spent money on this!" argument which is one of the most entertaining faux arguments in this line of business - oh and not to mention another one of my favorite arguments "other games do this so why doesn't this game?" You want to know why? because it's not that game. This argument is also used in the name of "realism" as well, another stupid plebian thing which I hate in games.

if you want a mech game with pve then make it, don't move into someone else's country because yours is **** and then institute sharia law.

**** dude im pretty sure most people who want pve arent that into it.

As for my two cents, i think as an add on to the Assault game mode, two sides also in addition to the turrets got a force of bulldogs, vendettas, harpies, longbows, etc. and for maps with cities or forests, infantry as well.

NOW THAT. ^ is the battletech i know and love and desire this game to be. Also there is no reason for any of you NOT to want that. (but thats just my oppinion.) All of that would make for a true mech sim.

[Kjudoon]

Oggie101, on 11 October 2014 - 10:31 AM, said:

Would be good for the game if they went mmorg, combining pvp and pve.

Oh Dear Lord! Yes this!

Dock Steward, on 11 October 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

They're two different games (this one and the proposed PvE one), while this one might one day extend to the point that it can include the latter, there is no reason to expect that it will nor to expect that it can any time in the near future.

Dream away. Doesn't hurt anything to do so. But if you want a definition of what this game "is suppose to be," ask PGI. Right now their answer, whatever that might be, is clearly not a PvE.

Are you under the false impression I'm for dropping everything and focusing 100% on PvE? Because if you are, you're way off target. This should be the NEXT feature in development after CW is launched. NEXT... not INSTEAD OF.

It's also something started because Russ has been giving the strong impression by his tweets and townhall meetings it's ultimately something he wants too.

Edited by Kjudoon, 11 October 2014 - 06:40 PM.

[Sadist Cain]

I would like to see PVE in the future as a series of clan/faction specific advanced tutorials in which you play out certain scenarios on certain maps against bots in a lance of up to four players.

I woudn't like to see a lot of time and effort diverted away from features such as CW and i don't think itll happen on that scale.

Some single missions folded into tutorials however... is two birds with one stone and would make a lot of people happy and be a lot more beneficial to the game as a whole with the best comprimise for development cost & effort.

Edited by Sadist Cain, 11 October 2014 - 06:42 PM.

[cSand]

R Razor, on 11 October 2014 - 04:13 PM, said:

There are two T's in PRETTY and thank you for validating my point with regards to attitude.

Hey...


You're welcome

[Dock Steward]

Kjudoon, on 11 October 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

Oh Dear Lord! Yes this!



Are you under the false impression I'm for dropping everything and focusing 100% on PvE? Because if you are, you're way off target. This should be the NEXT feature in development after CW is launched. NEXT... not INSTEAD OF.

It's also something started because Russ has been giving the strong impression by his tweets and townhall meetings it's ultimately something he wants too.

Key word...ultimately.

You seem to be under the impression that I am against the idea. I am not against it in any way. I would love a game like the one being discussed. I would play it and I would enjoy it. I am not holding out hope, nor expecting to see that game be a part of THIS game any time soon. Look at how long we've been waiting for what you call "Deathmatch with consequences." Do you honestly think they're going to roll out a full PvE mode in the next few years? They don't have the resources to make an HSR sweep right now.

I'm not knocking PGI. I am very happy with the work they've done. I'm just not going to sit here and ask that they triple it.

[Kjudoon]

Sadist Cain, on 11 October 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

I would like to see PVE in the future as a series of clan/faction specific advanced tutorials in which you play out certain scenarios on certain maps against bots in a lance of up to four players.

I woudn't like to see a lot of time and effort diverted away from features such as CW and i don't think itll happen on that scale.

Some single missions folded into tutorials however... is two birds with one stone and would make a lot of people happy and be a lot more beneficial to the game as a whole with the best comprimise for development cost & effort.

I know I refer to DCUO as it is the only other online game I play, but they do this very well IMHO. Your entire first mission when you create a character is to escape, and along the way you get a tutorial and build up 3 levels till you're free in the big playgrounds of Metropolis or Gotham. It's not a bad mission either (but does get boring the 10th time you've done it. Also, by the time you hit the streets you often know if you're likely to want to continue that power/weapon/movement set. If not then, definitely by level 10.

PvE can be such a boon to this game, it's really not even debatable.

[Kjudoon]

Dock Steward, on 11 October 2014 - 06:44 PM, said:

Key word...ultimately.

You seem to be under the impression that I am against the idea. I am not against it in any way. I would love a game like the one being discussed. I would play it and I would enjoy it. I am not holding out hope, nor expecting to see that game be a part of THIS game any time soon. Look at how long we've been waiting for what you call "Deathmatch with consequences." Do you honestly think they're going to roll out a full PvE mode in the next few years? They don't have the resources to make an HSR sweep right now.

I'm not knocking PGI. I am very happy with the work they've done. I'm just not going to sit here and ask that they triple it.

Well good to know because I was not under the impression that you wanted PvE.

Yes, I know I've been waiting for CW too, but I'm just being honest on how it's being implemented. Without a campaign mode to have causality for the matches, it does devolve only into a deathmatch with almost no consequences. We only know up to Phase 2 which is going to be the contests where Phase 3 deals in Logistics and the long term campaign game. This is the phase I'm looking forward to most. IF it is rich and varied enough to play and enjoy while never/rarely having to get into a mech, I'd be quite happy and consider it a great success. I like games like that that are strategic, and not pew pew bang bang only. That's my desired experience, and I think PHase 3 will lend itself nicely to going into PvE come 2015.

HSR is an engineering/programming issue, and is irrelevant to this discussion. These kinds of fixes should be done independent of any game development as I would file it under repair/maintenance. If PGI doesn't have enough staff to do this in a timely fashion, they need more people.

Ultimately to me means maybe by 2017 when you put it that way. I'm looking more as 'right after CW Phase 3' as it's development schedule.

[Dock Steward]

Kjudoon, on 11 October 2014 - 07:03 PM, said:

HSR is an engineering/programming issue, and is irrelevant to this discussion.

Russ recently tweeted that they couldn't do an HSR sweep right now because that programmer was tied up on CW development.

I don't think these programming areas are as separate as people seem to think they are. Someone would have to program (not to mention script) all of this PvE content.

Edited by Dock Steward, 11 October 2014 - 07:13 PM.