OrangeDefiance, on 30 September 2015 - 05:53 AM, said:
It sucks to be a Canadian because that fancy jacket would set me back 425 dollars, almost enough for a new processor. D: Also would be nice to get a colour option for it!
It's too bad we don't have a gifting option so that American backers could help our foreign brothers, I'd love to assist fellow fans so their wallets don't take unnecessary hits.
As for the jackets, Mitch said he's tried one on so I'm assuming they've got a huge batch already made (or at least a handful ready to go,) so I wouldn't expect any color variation. I'd love me an olive drab colored one.
Nightshade24, on 30 September 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:
It's quite a bit more different ,A nightmare to balance. a worse nightmare for hit reg/ animations and directional control because hacking, slashing, jabbing, punching, kicking, at different angles and stuff is quite important and animations to suit it is hard... also we do not want kicks somehow killing a light mechs cockpit randomly...
Death from above? much more reasonable here. Technically already in game but not satisfying and it's hard.
Nightmare for PGI, anyway. Plenty of game achieve physical contact but PGI just doesn't want to touch it because they're still fussing with a shoddy netcode (which goes back and forth from being decent to bad,) and adding melee would be beyond them at this point. At their pace of development, even should they want to add melee, I don't think anyone would see it for years yet.
Nightshade24, on 30 September 2015 - 12:19 AM, said:
Will never happen.
Mechwarrior Online will be still highly popular due to the fact it is a MECHWARRIOR game and not a BATTLETECH game.
People who look at MW: O they see MW2 and MW4 in its history. When people look at Battletech they see the tabletop and the mechcommander games as it's background.
A first person shooter (FPS) free to play Mechwarrior game where you pilot a mech in 3050+ (currently 3051) during the clan invasion of 3050's as a merc unit able to be either clan or inner sphere mechs fighting for the control of the inner sphere.
Will not be eclipsed by a turned time strategy (TTS) Battletech pay to play game where you are essentially a mech commander or a lance leader controlling a group of mechs from typically an above over field view set in 3025 with no clan presence what so ever and a more linear campaign on the IS factions.
I and many others don't see MW2 or MW4 in it's history as both those games played very different and offered many different things that MW:O does not. It's an arena shooter with a tenuous connection to the lore except for reason for them to say "ok, this can go in" instead of being a hard date they have to stick to.
You vastly underestimate the table top crowd. The long term fan grew up on it before the computer games hit the scene and many still use megamek to play it virtually. Most fans would DIE for something that's megamek but fully developed and with a better functioning interface (no offense to megamek, it's STELLARL for what it is and all the work that has gone into it!)
Lacking Clans? Lot of the older diehards are probably incredibly happy about this and I know my entire unit is. While we don't outright hate the Clans, there really hasn't been a game that focuses on the pre-Clan environment in a long time and miss the more tactical/strategic layers you get from the older tech instead of super short Gauss to the head fights that dominated once the Clans hit the scene. I enjoy Clan Ghost Bear myself even though I'm a Davion at heart (and also enjoy Kurita! <.<)
Nightshade24, on 30 September 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:
Fan of any of the clans or the clan invasion? Free rasalhague republic? first person shooter where you ARE the pilot and not some guy looking down from a UAV?
Or are you a fan of taking your time with strategy with more BT elements and like the pre invasion and non FRR time period.
Funny thing is, FRR goes away if they push the timeline forward any. Also...where is St. Ives Compact? The periphery states? There's going to be missing elements from either, it's natural...it's what makes the lore fun because it doesn't just sit and say "Well, nothing changes!" I mean...and if it gets far enough there's no Smoke Jaguar either, Clan Jade Falcon and Wolf have their own issues (I don't see them adding an Arc Royal Defense Cordon and the Wolves in Exile,) so right now MW:O is basically a game with a badge and a powerpoint map.
Nightshade24, on 30 September 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:
MW: O will still be alive, will it have the same population? maybe not because people who love BOTH games can not play both at the same time. But it will not be the same overshadowing that MW: O did to MW: LL.
Another major point is the fact MW: O is a free to play and is ran on microtransactions. This means anyone can play if they got internet and skills. BT? not so much. Not many people can buy a game over the internet. Even steam gift cards can be very tedious for some to get and BT does have a nearly entire global fanbase. So MW: O is more faverable and due to the way it is as a F2P model it is always changing and due to being mainly a PvP game, It means no 2 games are exactly the same, thanks to 1:1 timeline, next year is 3052 for MW: O, it means it will be able to get things like the raptor in (First IS omnimech) and more mechs and stuff, and it will continue to advance and change.
BT may have some changes but not as much ans PvP is possible for BT for a stretch goal keep in mind MW: O is also doing a single player campaign as well.
PGI/IGP snuffed MW:LL (or, Microsoft did, and it's the same thing)...which is why it's gone. Mechwarrior Living Legends was free and overall was more solid than what's been delivered so far in about the same time.
Free 2 play also means paywalls/etc, lot of people are burnt on the F2P model. As for PVP/Co-op in Battletech...seeing as it's about to hit 1 million in funding in less than 24 hours with 34 days to go I'm fairly certain it'll blow past the 2.5 million it needs for PVP so it'll have PVP and PVE at a better clip then MW:O has done. Also, consider, one mech pack or the average minimum money ANYONE spends on a F2P game (because people always at least pay once,) is around 20 bucks. 35 bucks gets you the Battletech game, so that whole F2P thing isn't the biggest boon you think it is to MW:O and it's longevity. I'd rather pay 35 at a minimum and get a more complete game without having to get nickled and dimed by micro transactions for a fraction of the content.
MW:O is going to lose even more steam once this BT game hits.
Nightshade24, on 30 September 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:
Actually Transverse did not ride the "SC wave" of space FPS, the thing is Star citzen itself was riding on that same wave that many MANY other games occured, Other games that occurred 1-3 years before Star Citizen was Star Conflict, several SW titles, Fractured space, and if you include this one- Space Engineers (kind of mor akin to say robocraft or minecraft, and came around same time as SCi), It isn't that odd to see PGI try to go for another sci fi series... keep in mind, PGI's most successful game (MW: O) is a sci fi game, what better way to work with a new game that continues a sci fi theme and many people often think of space travel for sci fi. Snagged the rights? PGI has the rights to make ANY mechwarrior / battletech computer game at the time and now, they can make a cookie clicker style MW game right now if they wish or make a WoT-like BT game. Not that it is the smartest idea but I am saying they could. PGI's only bad idea on terms of release was not announcing it earlier before everyone was chanting "SC best game of the life time!" or not announcing it much after when people already jumping ship calling SC to slow to develope and full of false dreams (HEY! that's just like MW: O's fanbase 2 years ago... funny how SC and MW: O's history just repeats the same as WoT's, WT's, etc... I am starting to see a pattern here)
Considering one of the most prolific creators of space simulation for the past 20-25 years is at the helm, most current games are trying to compete with Star Citizen as the space sim market was generally dead before it came onto the scene (nothing against Elite Dangerous, different games with a slightly different focus.) Not blindly claiming SC is going to be some epiphany (who knows? maybe it will once it's done,) but Transverse was most definitely trying to get into the space sim action....just no one wanted to back a project from a company they don't have trust in. PGI takes forever to generate MW:O content...how on earth would they be able to handle two projects? They won't try another Sci-fi game for a long while after how shut down Transverse was. Also, SC's scope is WAY larger than what MW:O's was/is. Development is also different, SC isn't a F2P game.
PGI only has the rights to Mechwarrior as that's all that Microsoft has and licensed it to PGI.
Nightshade24, on 30 September 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:
BT Kickstarter is wildly successful, But it is hard to compare it to PGI's MW: O progression. Keep in mind MW: O was originally MW5 and was meant to be a pay to play campaign single player in 3015 time period but they got sued had by harmony gold for the use of the warhammer, the fact that they were very broke is what amazes me how well they are doing today. They still picked themselves up, chin up, got IGP as a publisher and made MW: O. Which paved the way for BT. because not only did it give them resources but it catored a very active BT community to be ready there to donate. MW: O / PGI also did a lot of advertisement for the upcomign BT game with in game client and forums. It was also the fact that the unseen came back when BT was coming up. They also got close help from PGI and CGL that acted as a catalyst in it's advancement... haha... catalyst games lab is a catalyst....
I am also hyped for Battletech, but it ain't replacing MW: O on my shelf.
Less sued and more just a cease and desist. Probably needed to restructure and rethink what they were going to do, and on that I don't blame them one bit. BT looks to be a more complete game in less time and money than what PGI/IGP blew when they first started MW:O. We already know money from the founders program got shunted into other games (as well as later money generated funded in part the generation of Transverse,) but Harebrained Schemes doesn't work that way. Yea some money goes into the pool for running a company, that's just business, but they aren't likely to cache the money for other projects unless they have a surplus AFTER they complete the game...which will likely go to the next Shadowrun and Battletech games.
MW:O didn't create the path to Battletech. They also advertise the BT game because they hope for cross funds to come their way. Catalyst began the unseen/reseen reclamation and without that, PGI wouldn't have touched the issue (again, I don't really blame them on that, HG is a gigantic egotistical money vampire,) but it's still nice to see them return. People have been looking for another Mechcommander or Megamek for a while, it was going to happen it was just a matter of time.
Might seem I have an extreme dislike for PGI, and it's true. I'd rather see a different company that was more competent tackle a mech sim (and not a awkward arena FPS,) and deliver something much better. The only thing that's good about MW:O is the art direction, but then that generally comes from Alex (and the art director, he's awesome,) and Alex works for Catalyst as well.
Hate to drag the thread into this kinda thing, just needed to give out some of my 2 cents (which usually ends up being 4 or 6 cents.)
Hoping Battletech is good and that it gets great funding and paves the way for even better iterations of it!
Edited by Jack Gallows, 30 September 2015 - 06:55 AM.
18
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:
