Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
HBS stated themselves earlier that if it was a FPS game they would struggle a lot with melee and such, it is much more easier in a RTS or TTS game. You can't really say anyone would do it better in the FPS field. Mechwarrior 1, 2, 3, 4, Mechwarrior living legends, etc all never had melee, besides Mechwarrior 4: Mercs with Mektek mods at best. Which had the Battlearmour claw which in terms of 'animation' and in technicallities in play was a "Gauss rifle" that had like 5 meter range with high damage. It isn't satisfactory at all for Mechwarrior Online and neither was it that much of a satisfaction in MW4, it mainly gained it's coolness to the stretch that Mekpak 3.1 put to the game however Mekpak 4 which never was released had much more interesting features such as directional jumpjets, more armour types, Multiplayer redo, better aimming with arms and stuff, etc. if MP4 came out there was a posibility that MW: LL would not be around, at least as soon as it came out as with the high graphic mods and new features for MW:4M MP4 it was going to be quite a blast.
Anyway, PGI is doing good for there pace, they are doing better then Star Citizen, Star Conflict, War Thunder, World of Tanks, etc. Taking PGI's origins with MW: O into account it does show quite well...
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
Not sure about you, but many people including PGI do. Let's see...
Both mechwarrior games; check, Both FPS's, check, MW: O using inspiration from MW4's unique hardpoint system, check, map designs inspired from MW2 maps? (Frozen city specifically, Terra therma specifically, Alpine peaks specifically, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there a map in MW2 literally called frozen city or was that Mw3?), check. both use 6 buttons for 6 weapon groups? check, both have many of the same controls? check... PGI still lacks crouch, spot lights, etc for a 3051 game, but I think it makes up for it for the ability for easier chain fire, change weapon groups bid game, EXTREMELY better arm movement, turn ECM modes, turn AMS on and off, etc...
if MW2-4 didn't exist, MW: O could probably be more like mechassault but more as a simulator version with torso turn limits and real weapons... just the thought makes me want to be sick...
The only major part that isn't an improvement that differs MW: O and the other MW games is the fact the other games had a way better trailer... MW2 mercs, 31st centuary, ghost bear legacy, intros, outros, trailers, etc were all amazing, MW4 vengence trailer was great, MW4 vengence and mercs intro was great but MW4 Mercs trailer is probably a disapointing on par with MW: O's... for those who haven't seen it.
I have seen fan movies using MW4 mercs better then this trailer =l they
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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! <.<)
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.
And you vastly underestimate the Mechwarrior crowd. Which a large bulk of the active playerbase came in around Mechwarrior 2 era while another not as big peak accured in MW4 era- Mechwarrior 2 still holding a title of bieng some of the best music in videogaming for a long time to the point that the person who did it is still in business and introducing the old MW2 elements and aprts of the songs into his futrue works it did heavily inspire the scene of soundtrack in video gaming compared to most games of the mid 1990's.
Speaking of which, an honorable mention, Timothy Seals. Who has done modernised covers of all tracks from Mechwarrior 2 31st Centuary combat as well as doing remixes/ original tracks using elements from MW2 to make new tracks that is MW2 inspired and is now working on MW2 Mercs. He is quite an awesome guy and quite tallented.
No- timothy seals isn't a 'big evidence' for me to support MW2's greatness as evidence of a fanbase source, I was just on the topic of soundtrack and how could anyone with a brain not even mention timothy seals with the key words "mechwarrior 2" and "soundtrack"... now back to topic...
Was a very successful game and due to that a lot of people who are interested in Battletech (as an the whole franchise, not the upcoming game... I will mention the franchise as "BTF" on this post while 'BT" will be the game...) will still pick MW: O over BT anyday. Not that I am saying the MW fans are greater then the TT/ BT fans, I am saying that this large chunk still exists and that you missed my whole point on this scene. For instance ignoring the fact the two games, BT and MW: O are on nearly complete opposite ends of the spectrum! A F2P FPS Multiplayer is not compariable to a P2P TTS Singleplayer. You forget how big the BTF community is. There are people only here for the story and doesn't care less about the TT, MW, MC, MA, etc. That or they randomly like one or all of those- possibly mow MW due to the more ease, simplicity, etc.
There are people who are only here for the FPS aspect of it or is mainly playing that and didn't play more then 1 hour of TT related content. People here who love it for the Mechcommander series and wants BT but does not like TT/ megamek. etc. Hell there is even people who are brought in by the animated series and got into the books that way. etc. The TT folks may be the 'original' as the origins of BT is Battledroids, a TT 'prototype' game for Battletech tabletop, but it is NOT the only thing of this whole franchise.
(honorable mentions: Mechwarrior Knex sets, Comics, Mechwarrior Movie [currently in development hell since 2002], etc)
Keep in mind not all old BT guys hate the clans, there are TT guys who thought the clan invasion of 3050 was the best thing in the franchise and I do not blame them because I feel 3050 is the most important or famous part of the whole battletech franchise to begin with. I should also mention MW2 is set in the decade of the initial invasion as well as MW3 playing a pivitol point with the clan smoke jaguars annihilation post invasion as well as Mechwarrior 4 set in the Fed Com Civil war which had clan influences (specifically wolf) and clan tech is becoming more of a norm across the battlefield... heh... every time I think of the 3060's state of clan tech availability in the IS I always remembers Duncan Fishers rants about that...
Also the fact the Mad Cat/ Timberwolf was the icon of battletech since... 1995 was it? 1998? Good bye Warhammer boxart, Battlemaster icon, and Marauders battlefield apperance, and Hello Timberwolf-everything. Timberwolf box art/ TRO art, Timberwolf icon, Timberwolf this and that...
having a modern Battletech game without a timberwolf is blasphemy- to those who grew up with battletech franchise knowing this as the icon of the franchise, the show-mech, the cover-mech, the icon representative of the 3050's, etc...
I personally am not much of a timberwolf fan, but personally I can never imagine the battlemaster being the icon... by that I mean visually, I know it used to be, but I can't picture it without google.
That out of the way, Many people picture 3050 as the hotspot of battletech, and the majority of new and old people alike, FPS, TTS, TT, or RTS, all think the jihad, 3070's, is where the franchise takes a big dip... personally I wish there was 1 mechwarrior game set in that era and shed more light. where all the mk II, III, IV's, etc of mechs are around. It's kinda cool seeing an Atlas III bash the face in of a Timberwolf IV the same way how 40 years back the Atlas bashed the face in of a timberwolf or how 70 years back from then the Atlas II bashed the face in on the Marauder....
Boy does history repeat itself... Being a fan of history (in sence of past, present, and future), I do really want to play a game of the 3070's, 80's, etc invisionment of the battlefield, what they see an atlas should be or what a timberwolf is. etc... But Personally I still cringe at looking at things in that era... but I an still interested to try... I can imagine how ugly the TT scene got with those mechs however...
Kinda intersting you and I... I'm also a ghost bear fan but also a fan of house davion... however FRR is quickly rising in my appreciation and that's why I am sad FRR is not in BT...
CW is still in the works, the same way BT is in the works, play BT now, try to see how well that new campaign they are now working on is going... well that isn't the most fair comparison but it's an example. St Ives compact is nearly virtualy only an importance in terms of story, from memory it has little to no impact on say the battlefield and they disapear again back into Liao in a few years. Clan Wolfs in Exile I can definitly imagine coming into the game as they had a strong push in the story and lore as well as the battlefield. However this all depends on the community of MW: O... technically PGI wants CW to be an alt history so to say, where the player controls what happens... so unless the playerbase wants more factions there will not be more, if they want less then that may happen. we may not have a clan wolf in exile or many all of clan wolf will be in exile depending on what the players want... beats me.
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
technically not, MW: LL is still alive, you can still play it. But guess what? most people decided they want to play MW: O more and thus the population of MW: LL nearly went extinct, people still play it. But many more preffer MW: O. if people really liked MW: LL more then MW: O, then they would play MW: LL. if so many people play MW: LL, then things would be different and they could possibly get rights to continue development on a successful title such as that.
F2P doesn't mean payways. There isn't much in MW: O to begin with, you can pay 0 dollars and have a good time in MW: O, and buying a packs value is more then just mechs mate, it's a pre order, it's support, it's all the bonuses and premium time and stuff. Fun fact, you need to pay a lot more to get early access to BT as well...
instead of 'wasting money' on content you obviously do not care about, you can pay for mechbays for the extra slots for mechs, if you only have fun grinding mechs and getting more, this gets you for 35 dollars approxiately 33 mechbays (66 when on sale which happens often), without sale that gives you a solid 1-2 years of play, with sale that gives you a solid 2-3 years of play. I should mention now that you can earn mechbays with CW as well as events, some events basically is play 1 game. I should also mention you can get MC from CW as well and other events meaning theoretically you can get in a few years a total of 20 to 50 mechbays without paying a single cent and waiting for events. (hence why I do not believe in the pay wall excuse, nothing blocks your way from ahving fun with 4 mechbays, I know a few people who have been playing for a long time and never paid for mechbays... 1 guy I know loves his catapult K2 and already got mroe then a few million exp on that after mastery.), however compairing price and content with length of play is hard, because if you suck you will not get that many free mechbays and such, if you are very dedicated to the game to get more then that much free stuff then you probably would pay for the game as well. either way F2P model is wildley popular and many F2P games are shadowing P2P games a lot. (I think Matpat made a video on that recently). It isn't a pay wall if you can walk over ontop of it, nor if it didn't block you from anything... compairing price is also not that fair when both are running on packs/ 'kickstarting' where people happily spend more then 35 dollars so to say, people already spent more then 10 thousand dollars on both MW: O and BT. doesn't mean you need 4+ digits to have fun in either games. but F2P unlike P2P opens the door of availability to people across the world as well as those who struggle with internet related purchases as I mentioned earlier. In some countries that cost to pay for BT may take several months at work to save for it and support themself, for other people that could be just a day or twos work away... currently new zealands dollar worth is getting quite small and it makes it hard for me to support the Kickstarter for Battletech... I would really want to put the 35 dollar pack in but the thing is that's nearly 60 USD worth of money I am putting forward... if I could put it forward... I got no payment method to even support it to begin with... I might have to wait for steam however as usual I do art commisions or some game mod for people and often pay that way towards things like this...r
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
MW:O is going to lose even more steam once this BT game hits.
Not really. As mentioned above, the games can't replace each other. MW: O has quite a lot of advantages over BT that it will not be replaced by a game. I can still see a majority of MW: O population not even touching BT ever in there time. It's really hard to pilot a mech that you are not even piloting. [that is a sarcastic quote saying how BT is not made for someone who actually wants to feel like the mechwarrior and to be in the cockpit where the shacking of the cockpit as it's turns, jumps, buck,s and gets hit affects you and how your gunnery skills is what matters and not what the dice says so. if you take that literally then shame on you. if this meaning I say over and over again doesn't get across then Shame on me for trying 50 times I guess.]
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
You are saying that games in development or already made before SC is already being made purely to compete and not to be it's own game? You do know how narrow minded that sounds right? Also Star Citizen has issues competeting at the momment because just like how people chanted back in 2012 that MW: O is the best game ever and that around when SC game, people chanted SC is best game ever and MW: O/ PGI is ****. Now history repeats, People saying SC is **** and that [x game] is amazing. I think it's World of Warships now, but considering WoT's erm... 'popularity', which mirrors what I just said being the game before WT and MW: O, WoWS will probably lay in the same boat and drown in the negativity in T minus 2 years... hah ,get it? sink? drown? World of war SHIPS?... I'll stop commenting here.
SC's scopes is way larger then MW: O, but there overall development is a snails pace even with like what, a hundred or two hundred times more funding and innitial support? Not hating on it. But I hate the 'playerbase' who was chanting it is the best game ever before it's finished and now I am seeing people asking for refunds and calling it a bad game or bad developers. I pitty them... This is why if I am ever a dev I will not set any benchmarks and big promises. I will first start developing the game on my own terms and say what MAY happen rather then what WILL happen. Which is what I adore with HBS's approach with the Stage 1, 2, 3, and 4. at this rate they may need a stage 5. Transverse was PGI's equivilant of that, they wanted to test CW elements in a public field but as I mentioned before it was a bad time to do so. Kind of like trying to propose to someone who is currently attending there sposes funeral... and ironically now people are sad why CW is going so rusty and slowly. Because the innitial testing was pushed away in favour of doing it right at the time instead... still would have thought that making a BT space game would have been wildly succesful... I mean imagine a game that centred the player as an aerospace dog fighter, an admiral at the helm of a Federated suns warship, or a tank commander in a tank or armoured car.
Hell even an infantry game of battletech would be fun. I do not even care how simular it is to Battlefield, Call of duty, or more simulator like games like Verdun, If it uses heavy inspiration from BT and it's rules. That would at least change half the game, what changes a quarter of it would be the theme, story, timeline, and the rest is up to the developers... would be interesting to see that game still as combined arms (ai) where you can't really camp as those aerospace fighters or mechs would make quick snack of you... wouldn't be to simular to titanfall due to the lack of agility and the huge difference in mech control..
Thinking to much into this.. I am also that one guy who wants much more data on the alien species of battletech as well as more data on the planets behind who controls it, what wars happened on it, etc... like internal matters like countries, goverments, the flags of those countries the native species and ecosystem. Does it rain water? Acid? base? diamonds? rocks? cotten candy? Is it an underground water cycle like mars or atmospheric like terra?.... I am getting of topic on the opertunity PGI could have taken... I know that battletech mainly centred on mechs but it just creates a whole new atmosphere in general and theme and stuff. I'm always a person who likes playing games from different perspectives... Better shut up now. I am now further of topic then what I said earlier........
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
I'm pretty sure they got sued, they lost a lot of money, especially considering making those adds to begin with costed a lot of money which should have made them get money and attention to begin with but due to having to kill MW5 as well as lost money due to the trials and lawsuit it just was a bigger sinkhole of cash. Stupid HG... I love that PGI still decided to make another mechwarrior game... the whole BT franchise is always on the fringe of extinction due to legal problems, lawsuits, and economical problems...
For instance the fact we got more then 1 Mechwarrior 2 because the guys was getting poor and couldn't afford to get the copy rights for the 3rd game back then, hence why Ghostbear legacy was so odd, patchy, and glitchy... same story for MW3... and MW4 to a degree... you can see the quality drop between MW4 vengence and mercs in the trailer a lot as well as intro sequences and ai's... I mean I never saw that Talon dropship fly in MW4 mercs nor an APC of humvee fire and looking at some dialogue there seems to be a mission completely cut from the game which seemed to be a very fun one... also I noticed the Eaton desert map is just a de-foilaged version of the tutorial map and also one of the dune maps on New Griffon is just a more yellowy crystal version. And also a certain convoy mission on Hesperus II uses the exact same map but different season and facing other direction compared to one of the first maps you play on Halloran V...
Sorry... I played that game far to much to even notice these simularities between maps... Also there was the fact there was meant to be a game after the MW4 group that got cancelled as well as Mechwarrior Prime and so on and on and on... as well as Mechwarrior Movie and I think there was meant to be a season 2 of Battletech animated series... I am happy MW: O didn't become the next MW:P, MW: T, MW:5(?), MW: Movie, etc...
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
Didn't say that, I said it was a catalyst, it cleared the path, not created it. It also aided the path a lot as it allowed BT guys get good art assets that also make an art continuity in BT never seen before. Thus making connections between MW: O and BT much more stronger and thus getting interests to both games. Unlike MW2 and MC or MW4 and MC2. It kind of makes it feel the same game but different time or different play style... when the renamed MW5 is out this will also add a 3rd game into this pool and I do hope another game from the battletech franchise comes out in this time period... Heh... if someone makes a tank game and shares assets with PGI and HBS that would make things oh so much perfect...
PGI may have touched it. they did take a few baby steps (Project phoenix), the Longbow is a juicy mech to aim for as that is a very reseen mech where the MW4 Longbow is much more prettier then the original as well as not lawsued the ****- that latest "reseen" mech ever used. PGI could have went with the earlier reseen but I do not care. I am just happy the Marauder and Warhammer is getting in either way in both BT and MW: O.
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.
Which doesn't surprised me seeing your whole comment chain. That could be bias to the conversation I would guess. Seeing the majority of your comments and rather over exageration on parts I stated, emphisis on certain points. or commenting on thigns I haven't said. At least this helps me think that I am not lossing it
PGI also didn't want to make a multiplayer game. as there original goal of MW:5, It wanted to be a very good MW game comparable with MW2 in lore and story but best in mechanics, graphics, sounds, etc. Due to lawsuit problems they didn't have the money to do that. They went for a F2P model. Which was a nice save and there aspiring invisionment went from not improving a MW game on it's strength, but rather then improving there weakness... Multiplayer.
MW multiplayer had the worst meta game I think. IT was boating exclusively gauss, ER large lasers, ER PPC's, put jumpjets, ECM, and have armour before 0.5 tons, find a mountain, and pop tart until You win. There was no reason to take anything but an assault. speed didn't matter, you can hit the fastest mech in game as easily as you can hit the slowest. with hitscan weapons it didn't matter to lead your target for gauss or lasers. no speed tweak also meant lights went around 90 to 130 kph instead of 150 to 170. and things like NARC did virtually nothing alone. score system doesn't reward scouting and scouting didn't matter at all, you detect everything in 100 to 1250 meters automatically dispite the use of cover...
Thus MW: O has done amazing work so far. The fact you see more then 1 mech under 80 tons per game is already amazing. Tell me that 10 years ago and I would have perscribed you some medication to get off those drugs. I do hope to a degree some of this form of ballancing will be done in the single player as well as BT taking some inspiration from using lights- considering it's more of a TTS
Also I do not consider this an arena game?... I mean until Solaris VII is added It's not in my eyes....
Jack Gallows, on 30 September 2015 - 06:13 AM, said:
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.)
Ditto, new zealand doesn't do 2 cent coins so I have to drop them by the 10's.
18
