172 replies to this topic

[MeiSooHaityu]

As bummed as I am about that Hatchet Man model (and an Axman would be similar), I can't say I would expect anything different from MWO with no melee.

Melee would be interesting though. I would just set my Atlas to "windmill" and start tromping through the enemy .

[Water Bear]

This is OT but this thread made me just realize why we aren't getting new weapons in this game any time soon.

They'd have to add new geometry for every. existing. mech.

Edit: Maybe that's why they're normalizing the sizes? Wait, are they normalizing the sizes?

Edited by Water Bear, 07 July 2015 - 08:22 AM.

[Escef]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

Which is why, they need to listen. When this many people have repeatedly told you that your Green Pants are actually purple, it's time to admit you are colorblind, and let your wife/girlfriend dress you, lol. It's is apparent this is a blind spot to the Modelers and at least some of the other Devs, including, apparently, Russ. Mind you, some of it is subjective. So you have to mix that in.

Therein is the problem. They listen, but they are utterly confused because they honestly see nothing wrong. They KNOW the pants are orange and the shirt is plaid. Orange is a happy color, and plaid is a crazy mesh of colors, so they think they are projecting fun and spontaneity, when the message they send to normal people is that they should never be trusted to dress themselves. It would be like if someone walked up to you and said, "Why are you wearing those socks on a Tuesday?" Their sense of aesthetics is so... Well, virtually non-existent (or bizarre) that when people tell them something is wrong they just can't see it.

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

But at this point I think they need someone, Alex, anyone with an eye for the form, to be doing QA and overwatch on these things. Some concessions have to be made (for instance, some mechs might simply not have the required real estate, and I can get where adding more bolt on geometry might be an issue (especially as people will likely want it all affected by their paint, too.

What's the saying, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have it?

Oh, I would be ALL OVER the idea of a few sketches and polls before they make these kinds of revisions. Would it slow the process down? Absolutely. Would it be worth it? Eh, at this point I think it's at least worth trying.

[Bishop Steiner]

Hit the Deck, on 07 July 2015 - 08:15 AM, said:

Hollander is such a glorious 'Mech. Her sole purpose is just to carry that single *gun*! Too bad that many can carry the gun with ECM and/or JJs unlike it.

I still remember meeting the Hollander for the first time in Mech Commander. If your Commandos and Firestarters get shot by her, it could be the end of their career.

FTFY......

And why the heck did David remove the right arm, anyhow?

Water Bear, on 07 July 2015 - 08:21 AM, said:

This is OT but this thread made me just realize why we aren't getting new weapons in this game any time soon.

They'd have to add new geometry for every. existing. mech.

Edit: Maybe that's why they're normalizing the sizes? Wait, are they normalizing the sizes?

Sort of. But ..... yeah. I don't know anymore, it's a mess, lol. And I probably am contributing to keeping it that way.

[TheCharlatan]

Well... we made them fix the cent (i like it a lot more now!). Maybe it ain't perfect, but it's a step in the right direction.
We are almost there in making them fix the Catapult (I hope).
And the Awesome is bound to be top of the list when the rescale poll ends. Maybe we can ask for bigger PPCs when they rescale the mech?

[o0Marduk0o]

Maybe the old ppc were too big? Ideally they have one weapon size for all mechs.

[mark v92]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 08:24 AM, said:

And why the heck did David remove the right arm, anyhow?

i dont think he removed it or anything. Im guessing as viewer you have to assume its behind the torso/legs

[Bishop Steiner]

o0Marduk0o, on 07 July 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

Maybe the old ppc were too big? Ideally they have one weapon size for all mechs.

Rule of Cool overrides, brah.

[Spheroid]

Perhaps in the far future the large lens model will come back when heavy PPCs are introduced. The poor scaling could be falsely used to save face.

[Novakaine]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 08:13 AM, said:

didn't the Supreme Court just make the big phallus OK for everyone?

ROFL I stand corrected good sir.

[Juodas Varnas]

Spheroid, on 07 July 2015 - 08:34 AM, said:

Perhaps in the far future the large lens model will come back when heavy PPCs are introduced. The poor scaling could be falsely used to save face.

5-7 ton Large lasers use the same model as the 0.5-1 ton Small lasers.
Do you really ******* think, they'll make new models for Heavy PPCs? Or Snub-Nose PPCs, at that matter?
You're just fooling yourself.

[Sarlic]

o0Marduk0o, on 07 July 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

Maybe the old ppc were too big? Ideally they have one weapon size for all mechs.

What are you smoking man. 'Too big'. Are you serious?

Do you even know the iconic Awesome?

Edited by Sarlic, 07 July 2015 - 08:39 AM.

[Vandul]

I wonder what the PPC nipples will look like when Light PPC's come out?

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

Yes, dynamic weapons geometry SHOULD be a nice thing. Something that adds immersion and a feeling of ownership to the unique variants you can whip up in the mechlab.

And ye, time and again, PGI gives us Nipple PPCs, Red Ryder BB Gun Autocannons, and little flat Doorbell Lasers. (Missiles..... can't even think of some not so witty thing to label them with atm, sorry).

This is a Giant, Stompy Space Robot Game. Mind you, there is zero logical combat application to said giant stompy robots. We almost certainly all, got into them because they LOOKED FREAKING COOL. Big Robots, BIG GUNS.

Now we aren't having to talk Crazy Gundam Swords and Final Fantasy oversize weapons. But ones that looks proportionate and pleasing, should not be that hard.




These Hardpoints look like an Accountant designed them, not anyone with one ounce of artistic sensibilities.

Example, AWS-8Q as we are getting it:

AWS-8Q that we COULD have gotten


or for comparison sake, how the M1A1 Abrams would look, as designed by PGI


Yes, I know some of the Denizens of Mount TryHard, will dismiss it, as it has no real in game impact on Uberplay. And perhaps that is what this is PGI trying to get the last of us holdouts to cave in and imply embrace Sword and Board Meta LegoMechs. Because only a blind person would drive any of these for their Aesthetics.

It's so dang disappointing to see a patch that is so chock full of apparently great in game fixes and a such, get saddled with such a horrible job of visual customization. Doubly so when it's nothing new, people have been blowing up PGI about this since the VERY FIRST visual customization pass!!!!

Dang it PGI!!!! Hire someone to do some visual QA over this stuff!!! Heck, I'll do it for freaking FREE. But stop shooting yourself in the foot with these ludicrously bad, undersized and generic looking weapon passes. Please? (see, I asked nicely?)

*Edit (just for you Escef)


Happy now?

Because THIS is more important than your feelings.

Edited by 00ohDstruct, 07 July 2015 - 08:54 AM.

[Wolf Nuhts]

I REALLY like the Dragon changes they are spot on, Cicada and Commando look pretty fair also. Poor awesome

[Almond Brown]

stjobe, on 07 July 2015 - 07:56 AM, said:

This is a question I ponder often in relation to PGI and MWO.

The real question is who gets the final decision? The Dev or the 3 Forum goer's who claim to know better than PGI.

Russ's tweet did hint at the Weapons Library still being expanded. Dynamic weapons is not some magic image that one fits all. It would be a "set" that covers the Weight and or Size variations of ALL the Mechs in question. Perhaps when the Library is more complete, things will get better.

P.S. Those Large PPC's on the Awesome look great right? How many more version would be required to accommodate ALL the separate weight classes versus brackets, so these threads can finally end?

4 (L/M/H/A) or 17 (4L/4M/4H/5A)

[Bishop Steiner]

Almond Brown, on 07 July 2015 - 09:30 AM, said:

The real question is who gets the final decision? The Dev or the 3 Forum goer's who claim to know better than PGI.

Russ's tweet did hint at the Weapons Library still being expanded. Dynamic weapons is not some magic image that one fits all. It would be a "set" that covers the Weight and or Size variations of ALL the Mechs in question. Perhaps when the Library is more complete, things will get better.

P.S. Those Large PPC's on the Awesome look great right? How many more version would be required to accommodate ALL the separate weight classes versus brackets, so these threads can finally end?

4 (L/M/H/A) or 17 (4L/4M/4H/5A)

I'm sorry, but are you trying to make this an attack or something? 3 forum goers, lol. More like the 3 blind mice who can't see how atrocious it looks.

[Valdherre Tor]

The Awesome isn't even Awesome nor will it ever be.

[DaZur]

I'm perfectly ambivalent...

Being an "artsy" kind'a guy with a keen eye for aesthetics, I understand perfectly where Bish is coming from. That said, I'm also a dogged believer of functional logic and as such I understand the simplistic logic of how it was applied by PGI.

At the end of the day I don't care enough either way to brandish a pitchfork for either camp....

It's perfectly functional and viable and at the same time it's pretty underwhelming.

"Meh".

[Carrioncrows]

This thread though thoughtful and well constructed is simply a waste of time.

Unless there is a MWO2 it isn't going to happen.

You are talking about a complete redesign every mech weapon designed. These are not re sizing 20 some odd weapons. It's re sizing every weapon per every mech because each mech has it's own weapon slots.

Sorry but the time and money spent to deal with my mechs napoleon complex is far better spent making maps, or CW or hell anything else.