304 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Give us a well-written, involving co-op story campaign that delves deep into lore, uses creative in-mission plot twists, and carries immersive consequences like permaloss, repair/rearm, salvage, and realistic class progression (you start in a light and work your way up to an assault over the course of six months, thank you very much), and not even the naysayers in this thread would say no.

First, however, PGI needs to spend a good solid six months addressing the following things:

* Community Warfare Phase 3 (logistics, dynamic pricing, etc.)

* UI improvements

* New player experience

* Graphical quality

* Better and more varied microtransaction content (skins, colors, decals, all that stuff)

* Map fixes

* Mech efficiencies/progression rework

* Mech hitboxes and hit detection improvements (these are happening)

* In-game polling tools

* Spectator tools

* Gifting

* Cinematics and animations

* Better social tools


And that's just to get the game Steam-competitive, and doesn't include anything on balance or the four pillars. After that, I personally would like to see:

* AI consumables - tanks, elementals, aerospace, Urbanmechs(?)

* Command flower, VOIP, and battlegrid enhancements

* MASC

* Collision and knockdown


In other words, MWO needs a good solid polish pass before anyone starts to think about actually expanding the game. Probably the first half of 2015, while design stays in dialogue mode with the community on improvements to CW and potentially single-player.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 10 October 2014 - 12:29 PM.

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

MoonfireSpam, on 10 October 2014 - 02:47 AM, said:

Sounds good, but not at the cost of taking dev time and dollars from PVP.

Also +57000 hours logged on GW1. That'd explain the spelling.

LOL gee thanks ^^

[wanderer]

Quote

The only folks that wouldn't want PVE are the ones

That play PvE games for PvE, and find that games that attempt PvE and PvP in the same playerbase inevitably sour one or the other.

Here's a dirty little secret- when you can get to the same places with PvE vs. PvP, people will choose PvE in large numbers, because PvE enemies are stupid.

There's a reason PvE servers bear the slang name of "carebear" or worse. There is no comparison in the difficulty from other humans vs. the inevitably inferior fight a computerized opponent will put up- unless the programmers cheat.

Unless you intend to mean that PvE will only deliver massively inferior rewards vs. real opponents?

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

wanderer, on 10 October 2014 - 10:32 AM, said:

That play PvE games for PvE, and find that games that attempt PvE and PvP in the same playerbase inevitably sour one or the other.

Here's a dirty little secret- when you can get to the same places with PvE vs. PvP, people will choose PvE in large numbers, because PvE enemies are stupid.

There's a reason PvE servers bear the slang name of "carebear" or worse. There is no comparison in the difficulty from other humans vs. the inevitably inferior fight a computerized opponent will put up- unless the programmers cheat.

Unless you intend to mean that PvE will only deliver massively inferior rewards vs. real opponents?

Thats not true at all, Games like Guild Wars 2 has a HUUUUGE range of both PVE and PVP mixed together and it attracts all kinds of players. It even has World Verse World where its PVE and PVP mixed together where you can kill creatures, roam huge maps, capture posts, towers, and castles or keeps. Its huge 50-200 players duking it out in 1 massive battle sometimes, killing each other. Games like that are very VERY addicting and this is why MWO HAS TO GO PVE. Its not a matter of "should we?" its a matter of "we Must". PGI stands to make more cash from PVE than any PVP game. They can make FUCKTON of $ money by incorperating a Co-OP PVE invironment just like in gw2. Why the hell do you think Arenanet is ROLLING in it $? Because theyre game is second to NONE! It has all levels of player interaction, including their chat system which this game is still sorely lacking in.

[cSand]

Powder Puff Pew Pew, on 10 October 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

Thats not true at all, Games like Guild Wars 2 has a HUUUUGE range of both PVE and PVP mixed together and it attracts all kinds of players. It even has World Verse World where its PVE and PVP mixed together where you can kill creatures, roam huge maps, capture posts, towers, and castles or keeps. Its huge 50-200 players duking it out in 1 massive battle sometimes, killing each other. Games like that are very VERY addicting and this is why MWO HAS TO GO PVE. Its not a matter of "should we?" its a matter of "we Must". PGI stands to make more cash from PVE than any PVP game. They can make FUCKTON of $ money by incorperating a Co-OP PVE invironment just like in gw2. Why the hell do you think Arenanet is ROLLING in it $? Because theyre game is second to NONE! It has all levels of player interaction, including their chat system which this game is still sorely lacking in.

So play GW . I do not see the need to cater to people who can't handle fighting other players, in such a niche game as this


You can't even compare an online shooter like MWO to a cookie-cutter MMO RPG like GW.

And mixing the two is great, I mean, just look at how well 'Destiny" is doing?

Right?





I'd be all for a new single player MW game, even with a coop mode. But not here, and no, we don't need it. And I certainly haven't been paying hundreds of dollars into a game to be used for any PvE

Edited by cSand, 10 October 2014 - 11:11 AM.

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

cSand, on 10 October 2014 - 11:04 AM, said:

So go play GW.


You can't even compare an online shooter like MWO to a cookie-cutter RPG like GW.

And mixing the two is great, I mean, just look at how well 'Destiny" is doing?

Right?





I'm all for a single player MW game, even with a coop mode. But not here, and no, we don't need it. And I certainly haven't been paying hundreds of dollars into a game for any kind of carebear experience.

You seriously are dumber than a box of rocks! lol wow. You've never played Guild Wars 2 have you? Probably not, its not an RGP at all its MMO. Guild Wars was a RGP you *******! Go back to WoW. I've put thousands into this game, I'm sure other people becides you can relate. Ya, its true anet is full of loser carebear support but their game is insanely good. I play it all the time, and when I get bored there I come here. Everyone has more than 1 game they play even you I'm sure. I rest my case.

[Jetfire]

PVE sure, sounds like fun. Campaign mode.

[Hospy]

I'd like PVE sure, but I think that's probably asking too much of PGI at this time.

I think PvP with AI armor, infantry, VTOLs and aerospace would be a ridiculously fun game though.

[Nathan Foxbane]

wanderer, on 10 October 2014 - 10:32 AM, said:

That play PvE games for PvE, and find that games that attempt PvE and PvP in the same playerbase inevitably sour one or the other.

Here's a dirty little secret- when you can get to the same places with PvE vs. PvP, people will choose PvE in large numbers, because PvE enemies are stupid.

There's a reason PvE servers bear the slang name of "carebear" or worse. There is no comparison in the difficulty from other humans vs. the inevitably inferior fight a computerized opponent will put up- unless the programmers cheat.

Unless you intend to mean that PvE will only deliver massively inferior rewards vs. real opponents?

Or you could bring your PvP stuff too PvE within the constraints of the mission and what happens in PvE stays in PvE except for certain rewards like skins, patterns, colors, cockpit items, and such. Completion and achievement reward type things. Even if you can get the Timber Wolf in PvE you cannot play it in PvP unless you have it by MC or by C-Bills earned in PvP. "Collect the all." is a very powerful phrase.

Powder Puff Pew Pew, on 10 October 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

Thats not true at all, Games like Guild Wars 2 has a HUUUUGE range of both PVE and PVP mixed together and it attracts all kinds of players. It even has World Verse World where its PVE and PVP mixed together where you can kill creatures, roam huge maps, capture posts, towers, and castles or keeps. Its huge 50-200 players duking it out in 1 massive battle sometimes, killing each other. Games like that are very VERY addicting and this is why MWO HAS TO GO PVE. Its not a matter of "should we?" its a matter of "we Must". PGI stands to make more cash from PVE than any PVP game. They can make FUCKTON of $ money by incorperating a Co-OP PVE invironment just like in gw2. Why the hell do you think Arenanet is ROLLING in it $? Because theyre game is second to NONE! It has all levels of player interaction, including their chat system which this game is still sorely lacking in.

This too. Before the Lord bannering nerf you could get pretty epic three way fights for Garrison lasting several hours. So. Many. Bags. Or you can tip the scales by havocking.

GW2 does not quite compare well being an open world game. Then again there are people who like to play PvE for the story, not just so they can bum rush to the best gear for PvP. Besides GW2 balances PvP differently. All your stats get equalized, so that common drop white gear is every bit as effective as Ascended gear. You even pick slotted stat adjusters like Runes differently. I still play both because I cannot get PvE here, and because the people in ESP are a great bunch. For the Toast!

[Xtrekker]

cSand, on 10 October 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:

Can we have like, dropship boss fights where we need to group a 40 man together to fight them, and have a chance at getting a purple-level AC10?

If you're suggesting a salvage system then I'm all for it.

But...I'm guessing you're one of those who forgot about all that core BT stuff.

[cSand]

Powder Puff Pew Pew, on 10 October 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

You seriously are dumber than a box of rocks! lol wow. You've never played Guild Wars 2 have you? Probably not, its not an RGP at all its MMO. Guild Wars was a RGP you *******! Go back to WoW. I've put thousands into this game, I'm sure other people becides you can relate. Ya, its true anet is full of loser carebear support but their game is insanely good. I play it all the time, and when I get bored there I come here. Everyone has more than 1 game they play even you I'm sure. I rest my case.

Well thanks to your brilliant response there's no real need for any more evidence as to which group of players we should not be catering to

FTR If you want a real RPG, with real PvP. Play Dark Souls like a man.

Xtrekker, on 10 October 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

If you're suggesting a salvage system then I'm all for it.

Hey me too.

I'd be into R&R costs in CW as well.

Against other players.

What's the point of salvaging a large laser when you can just buy one for a few hundred K cbills though?

Edited by cSand, 10 October 2014 - 11:25 AM.

[Nathan Foxbane]

cSand, on 10 October 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

If you want a real RPG, with real PvP. Play Dark Souls like a man.

Well, this statement is just all kinds of silly. Read the OP again and think about what you just typed.

[cSand]

Nathan Foxbane, on 10 October 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

Well, this statement is just all kinds of silly. Read the OP again and think about what you just typed.

He was taking about GW.

Which is all fine and dandy.

I'm just pointing out that Dark Souls is like Hulk Hogan, and GW is more like My Little Pony.

Which admittedly is pretty off topic here.


For bonus points I managed to do it without calling anyone "dumber than a bag of rocks" or whatever was hidden behind the *******

[Nathan Foxbane]

cSand, on 10 October 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

He was taking about GW.

Which is all fine and dandy.

I'm just pointing out that Dark Souls is like Hulk Hogan, and GW is more like My Little Pony.

Which admittedly is pretty off topic here.


For bonus points I managed to do it without calling anyone "dumber than a bag of rocks" or whatever was hidden behind the *******

There was a reason I underlined the word "man". Reread the original post.

As for Dark Souls, never tried it, never heard of it. As I pointed out earlier you do not have to link much PvP content to PvE content. Since you seem to be all about the rewards one gets instead of the fact that it is Single Player or Co-Op and people are playing to play a story. They are not playing to compete against each other except maybe for leaderboard score stats or speed runs.

[cSand]

Nathan Foxbane, on 10 October 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

There was a reason I underlined the word "man". Reread the original post.

Oh I got it.

Real woman then.

W/e, just a figure of speech. No offense meant in that regard

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

Nathan Foxbane, on 10 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

Or you could bring your PvP stuff too PvE within the constraints of the mission and what happens in PvE stays in PvE except for certain rewards like skins, patterns, colors, cockpit items, and such. Completion and achievement reward type things. Even if you can get the Timber Wolf in PvE you cannot play it in PvP unless you have it by MC or by C-Bills earned in PvP. "Collect the all." is a very powerful phrase.


This too. Before the Lord bannering nerf you could get pretty epic three way fights for Garrison lasting several hours. So. Many. Bags. Or you can tip the scales by havocking.

GW2 does not quite compare well being an open world game. Then again there are people who like to play PvE for the story, not just so they can bum rush to the best gear for PvP. Besides GW2 balances PvP differently. All your stats get equalized, so that common drop white gear is every bit as effective as Ascended gear. You even pick slotted stat adjusters like Runes differently. I still play both because I cannot get PvE here, and because the people in ESP are a great bunch. For the Toast!

LOL you're from TC too!??? WOOT! I love TC, its dah best!!! <3

[terrycloth]

They should start with AI units in PvP matches. Instead of turrets guarding your base, say, have a Catapult and a Jenner that try to prioritize targets and take cover. They'll probably suck at first, but you can work on that. Or have outlaw units that spawn on certain maps and give a bonus to the team that kills them. Squirrels that *both* teams can chase!

Once the AI isn't a total joke, you can offer co-op vs bots. Probably for less reward than PvP but not by a huge margin -- maybe a win in co-op (which will happen almost every time) is worth halfway between a win and loss in PvP.

Having AI planes, tanks, and infantry would be cool too. The AI would probably not have to be very good.

Then you can work on a single-player/co-op campaign.

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

As a reply to that post how would you feel about a AI Mercinary unit guarding the bases instead? Like just 1 lance of mechs and a couple turrets instead of 8.

[Kjudoon]

AgroAntirrhopus, on 10 October 2014 - 09:28 AM, said:

Kinda shocked by the number of no responses.

I'd love some PvE content, personally.

I'm not.

It seems the Elitists don't seem to want it and because they don't want it, they don't want anyone to have it because then their game suffers because people they normally beat up easily won't be their punching bags in most cases preferring to beat up less than perfect AIs.

Please note some of the angriest voices against PvE are ones that are regularly on leaderboards for challenges and tournaments.

Edited by Kjudoon, 10 October 2014 - 04:59 PM.

[zortesh]

I really wouldn't mind a fight off increasing waves of ai enemies mode, like last stand in dawn of war 2.

Yknow especially if the first few waves are stockmechs, and it slowly ramps it up.