55 replies to this topic

[King Arthur IV]

i feel you bro
scale is messed up in this game.

[Galenit]

This Video shows a mech against a human.
Its also a good track and one of the few cgi videos with mechs.

The scale is matching for forestcolony.
The mech looks like a maddog or maybe a vulture ?

Anne Clark - Sleeper in Metropolis 3000

http://www.mtv.de/ar...metropolis-3000
http://www.viva.tv/a...metropolis-3000
http://rutube.ru/vid...0246e5baac1024/

But for most maps, they still feel like being a human, not in a mech.
Dont know why, the scaling is wired ...

Edited by Galenit, 17 September 2015 - 01:37 AM.

[Mazzyplz]

Galenit, on 17 September 2015 - 01:36 AM, said:

This Video shows a mech against a human.
Its also a good track and one of the few cgi videos with mechs.

The scale is matching for forestcolony.
The mech looks like a maddog or maybe a vulture ?

Anne Clark - Sleeper in Metropolis 3000

http://www.mtv.de/ar...metropolis-3000
http://www.viva.tv/a...metropolis-3000
http://rutube.ru/vid...0246e5baac1024/

But for most maps, they still feel like being a human, not in a mech.
Dont know why, the scaling is wired ...

the game looks exactly like that already, the reason you can't see the scale in human terms is because there are no humans in the game, the tutorial will have some tiny humans though

seriously though drive mad dog through the new forest colony and tell me it's not very much like in that video?

[xengk]

From human point of view

[Otto Cannon]

A large part of it is maps having to conform to gameplay requirements. You'll always get massive objects of some sort for use as cover, and roads will always be wider than people would actually make them to let you move around easily during combat.

They should totally fix the gravity though.

[Red Shrike]

The issue I have is not so much the size of the mechs, but rather the size of the cockpits and the map assets along with the speed and walking animations. (both in 1st and 3rd)

[LordBraxton]

WHY DID THEY SPEED THE ANIMATIONS UP?? I was pissed for months when they ruined the animations. Yet another terrible decision from beta that made the game far worse looking for no reason.

[Impyrium]

Whether or not the trees are realistic or possible is more or less irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The fact is, it's all about contrast- if you see 'mechs walking alongside huge trees like the ones shown in Forest Colony, obviously it's going to make the 'mechs feel tiny. That's just natural.

IMO there's just a tad too much contrast between the regular props in Forest Colony and the larger trees. They're just huge compared to anything else in that map. So it just feels out of place.

[Almond Brown]

l33tworks, on 16 September 2015 - 05:27 PM, said:

I just don't get it. Why not try your hardest to make it feel like you are piloting big machines, even go out of your way, eg,depth of field, small terrain features etc, instead of actually go the other way on purpose?

MWO never had a good sense of scale to begin with, but the more and more time passes the worse it gets. Look at the new Forest colony for example. Why have trees the size of skyscrapers? Why have rocks and terrain that make it look like you are a tiny person going for a stroll in the woods? I get that there are really massive trees on earth, close to that size, and these are "alien" planets so anything is possible, but the argument could be made why cant alien planets also have maybe smaller natural features, smaller trees, normal sized creatures not skyscraper bones like in viridian bog etc?.

Small trees are present in MWO, smaller than your mech, and they look like regular trees, but then right next to them are trees 100x as big. It looks odd. Terrain usually have uniform sized trees, not a bit of everything. It really makes my brain very hard to get a sense of scale when everything is just randomly scaled.

Just pretend your mech is person sized next time you play in any of the new maps, honestly it feels somewhat natural that you are person sized.
The movement of enemy mechs against the environment is also incredibly fast for the scale. you could easily pretend you are watching human sized objects moving and interacting. Watching videos of people doing parkour, they don't move as fast as mechs do in this game.

For example, this could easily be a family picture of my cousin hiking in the woods when he was 12 and chubby.

Cover? Maybe... Perhaps...

[Mudhutwarrior]

The game is way to sped up. Just like TTK. It's supposed to be a thinking mans game but its just another twitch shooter. If your not into hardcore consumerism and buying every bit pattern they want to sell or your not into twitch shooting the game is ultra boring and repetitive.

My fun came from building and trying new things in mechs. That's gone now. With the c-bill nerf and meta only playstyle it's COD boring now. I can't stand playing for long anymore. Down to maybe one match every couple of days and that's all it takes to see how pointless it is. I sure as hell am not buying anymore. PGI knows all this and they cannot afford to go back. We can see how trying to go back works with last weeks test. They are better staying with the tryhards and ultra psycho BT fans and milking them for all they are worth. That looks like their business plan anyways. The MC price reduction scheme points in that direction.

[Lily from animove]

bad arcade kitty, on 16 September 2015 - 07:36 PM, said:

calm down, may be their tons and/or meters are not equal ours



working cockpit screens!!

also poor atlas, dropped to its death, atlai don't even have jj

so ist comm star tonnes? and one equals 10tonnes of our current ones?

weight inflation, just wow ^^

Edited by Lily from animove, 17 September 2015 - 06:58 AM.

[LordMelvin]

LordBraxton, on 17 September 2015 - 03:59 AM, said:

WHY DID THEY SPEED THE ANIMATIONS UP?? I was pissed for months when they ruined the animations. Yet another terrible decision from beta that made the game far worse looking for no reason.

When they upped engine sizes/speeds for mechs they had two options: retool the animations to account for the higher top speed or just speed up the animations. They went with the latter option, probably in part to IGP not wanting to spend the time. Of course, the Dire Wolf animation was horrendous for months before anything was done about that. And the Mauler arms have a foot of horizontal deviation when it walks.

[Lily from animove]

KuroNyra, on 17 September 2015 - 01:13 AM, said:

Problem is just like for elite:dangerous.

Since you only have the POV from your mech and jsed to see from above, you can't really see the scale from a human sized guy.

not entirely true, join the academy, well ok ipts is down, but there you have humans standing right next to mechs.

Would be interestin to know how big such a human is, maybe 1.85? then just see hoa many times the mech is bigger and make a rough calcuation.

Edited by Lily from animove, 18 September 2015 - 12:38 AM.

[Nauht]

Lily from animove, on 17 September 2015 - 06:56 AM, said:

so ist comm star tonnes? and one equals 10tonnes of our current ones?

weight inflation, just wow ^^

i know right?

Kind reminds me of that question - what weighs more? A tonne of bricks or a tonne of feathers?

[Bishop Steiner]

l33tworks, on 16 September 2015 - 05:41 PM, said:

Yea but thats going of some Battletech rulebook and its absolutely ridiculous to follow that logic that an atlas is 8 feet and you could high five it if you wanted to or give it a wedgee. MWO doesn't have to follow stuff like that.

I go off what I see, if you look at the cockpit of a mech, for example an Atlas, and imagine the entire cockpit equipment inside and the human pilot has to fit in the left eye, then extrapolate how small the cockpit is compared to the rest of the mech, then the entire mech would be huge. if you think of a car, its ALL cockpit, and they are about 4 meters long, so you cant say a mech is 8 meters tall, its ridiculous and as I said unnecessary to be followed.

so is claiming a 100 ton war machine being as massive as you think....what is it....hollow and made out of aluminum?

[l33tworks]

Just thought I'd throw this out there. The new battle tech art.... Hmm yea, they sure do look about the size of a Ford f-250, which is what is being claimed by some here if you just point to whatever "specs" exists. Even the makers of Battletech, the source of where all the naysayers and rule sticklers are getting their facts from, don't care about following whatever scale is written in the technical specs. Nobody wants mechs the size of hawken, not to mention as someone already pointed out, their units could be different to ours.





Some people just love to fixate on stats and figures and ignore all else around them. I say just have fun with the concept of giant mechs, more so than whatever a 40yo spec sheet says.

Bishop Steiner, on 18 September 2015 - 06:24 AM, said:

so is claiming a 100 ton war machine being as massive as you think....what is it....hollow and made out of aluminum?

Exactly there is no way, so you shouldn't fixate on these specs too much. I have always just been under the assumption that the units have to be different, ever since I was a kid. There are plenty of real world tanks that are close to 100tones and I knew that even when I was 10 years old. So an Atlas was always least 1,000 of our human earth tonnes in my mind, and even then you would need to imagine "space age" materials being used. For example real life ocean cruise ships are in the order of 100,000 tonnes. Yes 100 thousand tonnes.

You can just pretend the readings for mechs were based on a planet with 1/10 the gravity of earth. If you weighted it here it would be 1,000 tonnes. Done. I'd rather justify it that way than HAVE to make an atlas the size of a tank just because a spec sheet says so. Nomsay?

Edited by l33tworks, 30 September 2015 - 06:36 PM.