614 replies to this topic

[Mechko]

It seems to me that the ability to have third person would not take away from the realism if done properly. MW4 is not proper. With the advances in unmanned vehicles today the third person view is not only possible, but undeniably necessary, otherwise BT would be taking a step backwards in the technological evolution of mankind. With that said, ideas as to properly doing this would be to actually hinder the pilots view point rather than help him, but also make more of the field visible through a satellite Birds-eye-view. This could be achieved by splitting his screen with satellite imaging on the top half and a smaller fuzzy cockpit camera view on the bottom center half. All fighting of course would be done through the fuzzy camera view, which would actually still be FFP. Electronics on scout mechs could be used to render them invisable to the satellites view at a certain range of the enemy mech. All this could be introduced through gained skills, not necessarily handed out the first time a warrior fires up a mech.

[Pilot Revant]

Mechko, on 19 January 2012 - 04:36 AM, said:

It seems to me that the ability to have third person would not take away from the realism if done properly. MW4 is not proper. With the advances in unmanned vehicles today the third person view is not only possible, but undeniably necessary, otherwise BT would be taking a step backwards in the technological evolution of mankind. With that said, ideas as to properly doing this would be to actually hinder the pilots view point rather than help him, but also make more of the field visible through a satellite Birds-eye-view. This could be achieved by splitting his screen with satellite imaging on the top half and a smaller fuzzy cockpit camera view on the bottom center half. All fighting of course would be done through the fuzzy camera view, which would actually still be FFP. Electronics on scout mechs could be used to render them invisable to the satellites view at a certain range of the enemy mech. All this could be introduced through gained skills, not necessarily handed out the first time a warrior fires up a mech.

But nobody pilots/drives a vehicle using a UAV. I can see a top down UAV display in the cockpit, but that's it. Over the should view has no place in Mechwarrior, but UAV information warfare, definitely.

Justifying third person with 'orbit drone cameras' or other some such forced justification just doesn't fitting in, not only with the lore and fluff but with the whole aesthetic.

[Havoc2]

Chuckie, on 19 January 2012 - 04:18 AM, said:

. . .THis of course I would assume would only be possible if you had the Drone mounted to the mech, it wasnt shot down and you had the module for it in your skill set..

See Paul some of us do get what you guys were talking about yesterday

I like this suggestion as a compromise.

3rd person is only available if the 3rd person module is equipped. Call it drone view, satallite view, whatever makes you feel better to keep it "canonesque".

3rd person people are whining, "but I need to use a module slot for it!!". Too bad. As already stated, 3rd person view gives more information than a FFP view. For it to be an "advantage" you need to use that information. This should be true for any of the information modules.

This would give people who WANT and others who NEED (due to motion sickness or whatnot) 3rd person view the option, and would placate the FFP advocates as it is only available through an information module. 3rd person users would have the "advantage" of 3rd person view, but the "disadvantage" of a lost module slot.
To be fair, this drone/satellite/whatever could NOT be destroyed.

Edited by }{avoc, 19 January 2012 - 09:30 AM.

[Tannhauser Gate]

No one needs 3rd. People are just used to action and arcade games. You don’t play *with* mechs you fight *in* mechs. The mech is your vehicle and your point of view. It’s not your avatar. You aren’t picking up gold rings and candy mushrooms. You are looking down the barrels of your weapons. Also, 3rd gives too much field of view, overhead parascoping and advantages that are abused. If it’s in "option" then people will use it for the advantages which means other people must use it to compete and then it’s no longer really an option.

3rd is just another way to reduce intensity and immersion in favor of fragging and unrealistic combat.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 19 January 2012 - 09:47 AM.

[Chuckie]

}{avoc, on 19 January 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

To be fair, this drone/satellite/whatever could NOT be destroyed.

Satellite I can see as not being destroyed.. the Drone on the other hand, would be much more valuable. As you could zoom and fly it around. But it would also be seen in the battlefield (like the initial video we saw in 2009). So for balance it should be possible to destroy it..

LakeDaemon, on 19 January 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

No one needs 3rd. People are just used to action and arcade games. You dont play *with* mechs you fight *in* mechs.

3rd is just another way to reduce intensity and immersion in favor of fragging and unrealistic combat.

Look above.. as a "3rd person Drone" view its not how you fight.. but it does give you more battlefield information.

Edited by Chuckie, 19 January 2012 - 09:48 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

}{avoc, on 19 January 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

I like this suggestion as a compromise.

3rd person is only available if the 3rd person module is equipped. Call it drone view, satallite view, whatever makes you feel better to keep it "canonesque".

3rd person people are whining, "but I need to use a module slot for it!!". Too bad. As already stated, 3rd person view gives more information than a FFP view. For it to be an "advantage" you need to use that information. This should be true for any of the information modules.

This would give people who WANT and others who NEED (due to motion sickness or whatnot) 3rd person view the option, and would placate the FFP advocates as it is only available through an information module. 3rd person users would have the "advantage" of 3rd person view, but the "disadvantage" of a lost module slot.
To be fair, this drone/satellite/whatever could NOT be destroyed.

Which Skill Set/Tree would they put this 3rd person Module in? Command, Scout, Generic?

I don't see a Slot lost making up for such a huge advantage, one which would in the end, would have ALL players taking the module to compete and back around we go. Pop and Tart and done...

The only true compromise I could see would be the total loss of any chance to get some other highly sought after Module. Something, that after the Beta, 98% of pilots would take as their very first Module, other than 3rd person view. Whatever that might be.

[UnseenFury]

I am personally a casual player, I want a 3rd person camera, I like to enjoy my mech's back view.

While it's awesome sometimes to switch to 1st person if it have proper sound and well made cockpit I prefer to see what I'm operating.

Also I guess if a game more like a simulator - mw3 - I'd choose 1st person. If more like arcade mw4 - 3rd person.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Chuckie, on 19 January 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

Look above.. as a "3rd person Drone" view its not how you fight.. but it does give you more battlefield information.

I read it. Some people want 3rd so they can see their mechs like avatars and have all the combat advantages of an unrealistic point of view. What you are suggesting isnt actually 3rd. Its a tactical isometric view. You and I have the same point of view on this except Im telling them to shut up and embrace 1st and you are giving them a non 3rd option. lol

[Pariah Devalis]

I'm extremely happy with locked first person gameplay. The only gripe I have is that I won't be able to external camera and salivate to the appearance of my mech or take easy self screenshots. It's a loss I'm willing to take, though, to keep everyone in their cockpits.


I'd bet real money, though, that one of the first attempts to hack the game will involve enabling a third person camera.

[Sajuuk]

Why not have have the option for a 3rd person cam on non-ranked matches. I for one would love to look at my mech walking around, but i also understand the importance of a locked first person view.

[Chuckie]

LakeDaemon, on 19 January 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

I read it. Some people want 3rd so they can see their mechs like avatars and have all the combat advantages of an unrealistic point of view. What you are suggesting isnt actually 3rd. Its a tactical isometric view. You and I have the same point of view on this except Im telling them to shut up and embrace 1st and you are giving them a non 3rd option. lol

Ahh... true.

I guess I was addressing 3rd person perspecitive from a tactical viewpoint and they from playing aspect (ala MechAssault) Yep. 1st Person all the way on that..

As for screen shots, I assume in the Mech Lab we can see our mech in 3rd person and rotate it.. much like NFS when you custom your cars in the shop.

[Rune Scorpio]

I like having the option. Navigating tight quarters quickly is limited in first person because getting the dimensions of your mech isn't as easy as RL would be. A more immersive cockpit might solve that but it would require alot of attention to detail while not taking away from the game itself. An outside view of a mech that far into the future isn't unrealistic either. That technology could easily be available now if you were willing to shell out big $$ for an antenna with a camera going to a helmet with screens.

[Mechko]

LakeDaemon, on 19 January 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

No one needs 3rd. People are just used to action and arcade games. You don’t play *with* mechs you fight *in* mechs. The mech is your vehicle and your point of view. It’s not your avatar. You aren’t picking up gold rings and candy mushrooms. You are looking down the barrels of your weapons. Also, 3rd gives too much field of view, overhead parascoping and advantages that are abused. If it’s in "option" then people will use it for the advantages which means other people must use it to compete and then it’s no longer really an option.

3rd is just another way to reduce intensity and immersion in favor of fragging and unrealistic combat.

This is a very closed minded point of view, its like saying battletech cant and never has evolved. "You don’t play *with* mechs you fight *in* mechs" its not really feasible in a real time combat strategy game. Any unit would want to save valuable pilots whenever possible. You ask for simulation but only if its your idea of a simulation. A UAV option would not give an avatar view point just a little more range of view around the mech. The UAV mech could be something earned as a unit as the guys with the most money would have the best tech and only experianced (higher lvl) pilots could/would have the ability to know the workings of a mech well enough to use this tech. As I stated before this option wouldnt give a 3rd person view as all combat would still be FFP.

[Yogibear24]

3rd person, because you don't get to see how cool your mech looks from first person view, all you get is the view of the cockpit.

[DEVASTATOR]

Its hardly a mech sim if you can have an "out of cockpit experience" floating outside the mech seeing all thta goes on around you. I trust these guys will know that a 3rd person view can be a game wrecker. Look what it did to MW4. I'd like to see the old MW2 "satellite uplinnk established" view that gave you an overhead view but consumed your entire screen. Good to see what's going on but you couldn't really fire at anything while using it.

Edited by DEVASTATOR, 19 January 2012 - 11:48 AM.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Mechko, on 19 January 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

This is a very closed minded point of view, its like saying battletech cant and never has evolved. "You don’t play *with* mechs you fight *in* mechs" its not really feasible in a real time combat strategy game. Any unit would want to save valuable pilots whenever possible. You ask for simulation but only if its your idea of a simulation. A UAV option would not give an avatar view point just a little more range of view around the mech. The UAV mech could be something earned as a unit as the guys with the most money would have the best tech and only experianced (higher lvl) pilots could/would have the ability to know the workings of a mech well enough to use this tech. As I stated before this option wouldnt give a 3rd person view as all combat would still be FFP.

MWO is not a real time strategy game. lol Its an action simulation.

Go back and read my post again. I never said I was against UAVs, drones, satellites or any other shared tactical data. Im all for those. I said I was against the ever present, non destroyable, invisible magic eye that lets you play your mech like an avatar in an action shooter. The same thing that lets you parascope over hills and corners for an unrealistic advantage. Thats very different than UAVs and drones. Those tell where the enemy is. 3rd is a way for the pilot to aim (reticule or not) from outside his mech... unrealistically effective when others are in 1st person. I dont think you are understanding the issue.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 19 January 2012 - 11:49 AM.

[Rune Scorpio]

DEVASTATOR, on 19 January 2012 - 11:34 AM, said:

Its hardly a mech sim if you can have an "out of cockpit experience" floating outside the mech seeing all thta goes on around you. I trust these guys will know that a 3rd person view can be a game wrecker. Look what it did to MW4. I'd like to see the old MW2 "satellite uplinnk established" view that gave you an overhead view but consumed your entire screen. God to see what's going on but you could really fire at anything whiel using it.

Some of us like to watch our mech get trashed shot and knocked down.
This isnt just a mech sim its a game. Also MW4 was an amazing game, not ruined because it had 3rd person. It's still my favorite amongst the others. I spent most of my time inside the cockpit, as it was far easier to aim. But it was handy to have the outside view when sneaking or using something fast to try and evade. And like previously stated... This is WAY into the future so I'm not sure how a drone cam or antenna with a cam is too hard to create.

[KingCobra]

As a 20+ year Vet lets get real i have played bolth first person view and 3rd person view for ever.When i want more simulation i play FPV and waves and 1 life.When i want i play sniping or brawling in 3rd person with respawn i do so lets not make this thread so narrow------- that you all hate becouse of a view or should i make a joke of it and say a narrow point of view hahaha.I hope MW:0 has bolth views in some way just so i have a 3rd person view of my sexy new MW:0 mechs.

[SilentObserver]

When i play in 1st person i feel like i have a box on my head. First person cuts off all periphrial vision and i cant turn my head to look out the side window.

Maybe if MW:O supported 3 monitors i could get the field of view I want without resorting to 3rd person.

some of us 3rd person guys are not trying to look at things we should be able to see we just want to see everything we should see if we where really sitting in the cockpit. (i think i broke the hat switch on my joystick in MW3 using it glance left and right.)

[TRK]

Sgt. Saunders, on 19 November 2011 - 11:58 AM, said:

I recall reading not too long ago that technology- particularly that in the military sphere- has changed more rapidly in the last century alone than in all the previous centuries combined. The next century will undoubtedly see an even more rapid rate of advance (assuming that man survives that long).

It’s been a long accepted concept in armed forces around the world that practicality governs the design and construction of military hardware. In layman’s terms, “you go with what works”- and not with what presents a challenge.

Today, applicable General and Flag rank officers in the U.S. armed forces have access to top-down displays that indicate known strength and disposition of both friendly and enemy formations. Other nations may have this ability as well, although I’m not sure. Regardless, it’s safe to say that if man still wages conflicts by riding war machines into battle one thousand years from now, the technology available to Generals today will be available to the squad, fire team, and even individual combatant in the 31^st century- to say the very least. This isn’t my opinion; it’s a fact. The rate of man’s scientific progress and the “Constant Tactical Factor” makes it one.

So, you are saying that our wolrd/planet/culture whatever has never ever lost any technology?

I don't believe that to be true. Through all of the wars that were fought in the inner sphere, it is quite believable to me that things have been lost. As do other players. For me this is part of the charm of the BT universe.

First person all the way. But again, there is going to be forms of information sharing, tactical and otherwise. Lots of good ideas have been presented here to help make everyone happy. Some of the bad ones (opinion) are splitting the player base with different servers and being able to run your own server. I want the devs to have complete control over our world, the players are there to help shape the destiny with battle. If 3rd person can be accomplished without any tactical advantage I am for it. I can't see this happening due to the nature of the wide field of view 3rd person gives you. Fall Out 3..who in thier right mind plays first person outdoors? You want to see things coming...i personally think this would be bad for this game due to the promoted team work and information warfare.