250 replies to this topic

[ScarecrowES]

GRiPSViGiL, on 13 February 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

It certainly is...it is a priority thing that people seem to not get. Yet here we are PGI fixes something not actually broken that adds essential NOTHING to gameplay nor immersion for those that think watching the same start up sequence a kajillion times is immersive. Like many have said they didn't even put the proper outfit on the pilot.

So, again... the folks who handle stuff like the pilot model have no connection whatsoever to the folks doing gameplay stuff... or mech models, or maps, or anything else.

The actual personnel and resources required to accomplish the pilot model change, thus, are not being diverted from any team that is working on other issues you may place priority on.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand here.

As far as "not the proper outfit," I suppose that depends on what resource you're looking at. Novels (non-canon)? Sourcebooks (canon)? Looking at Sarna, for instance, most uniform representations for mechwarriors are full suits of varying configurations. Both the new and old pilot models fit this representation. They also fit the reality of what's typically worn by crews inside military vehicles in the real world. Why would the pilot model represent otherwise?

[Felicitatem Parco]

I would much rather wear aramid-fiber pants imbedded with coolant tubes rather than shorts. At least I could disconnect from the chiller lines and wear them as armor if I had to, and they would provide protection from spalling while I'm still in the cockpit.

But, you know, science...

[GRiPSViGiL]

ScarecrowES, on 13 February 2016 - 12:34 PM, said:

So, again... the folks who handle stuff like the pilot model have no connection whatsoever to the folks doing gameplay stuff... or mech models, or maps, or anything else.

The actual personnel and resources required to accomplish the pilot model change, thus, are not being diverted from any team that is working on other issues you may place priority on.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand here.

I understand it....however it is irrelevant concerning how PGI has prioritized development.

I am not sure why that is hard to understand.

[Juodas Varnas]

Prosperity Park, on 13 February 2016 - 12:37 PM, said:

I would much rather wear aramid-fiber pants imbedded with coolant tubes rather than shorts.

Which is why it could be a monetized customization option!

I'd buy the hell out of a pilot skin consisting of boxer briefs and the hairiest legs imaginable.
.
.
PGI gets money - I get hairy legs, it's a win-win situation!

Edited by Juodas Varnas, 13 February 2016 - 12:47 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Johnny Z, on 13 February 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

I bet you never read a book in your life?

The start up animation is the coolest thing about MechWarrior Online to this day. A proper eject animation would be just as cool as well as other in cockpit animations, maybe being able to give the other team the finger and it play on comms in the top corner of the screen, via a comm wheel.

That's just some in cockpit improvements they could make. Out of cockpit game play is whats missing in a big way though.

Down playing Battle and Omni mech scale? are you serious?

MechWarrior is way cooler that the competition if they ever get around to getting some of this stuff done. Star Citizen can have its working in cockpit displays to a level that really isn't going to help game play. MechWarrior Online can put the MechWarrior in the game.

Star Citizen and Elite Dangerous cant do what MechWarrior Online can do. Maybe EA using Mass Effect series going Online could.(they wont if they are smart, if they are smart they will stick to the one title that will actually make them money) Aside from that MechWarrior is untouchable because SC and ED listened to idiots that said "Open World" is where its at. Maybe in 20 years but for now load screens are needed to have a proper level of detail.

MechWarrior Online is using a similar system to the Mass Effect system, not the open world system. Its better. If anyone didn't catch that.

All the games will be using this system and the loading areas and amount of players will grow with technology rather than saying "Derp, Open World, Derp".

Uhm... open worlds are awesome. If Mechwarrior Online had procedurally generated planets like Elite Dangerous or Space Engine have... this would be an entirely different (and better) game.

[ScarecrowES]

GRiPSViGiL, on 13 February 2016 - 12:45 PM, said:

I understand it....however it is irrelevant concerning how PGI has prioritized development.

I am not sure why that is hard to understand.

I suppose it's because you've presented a non-argument.

The skills required to, for instance, build a simple model and do texture work are vastly different than those required to, for instance, code hit detection for PPCs. You can't merely take the guy off projects like the pilot model and put them on coding.

Building maps, even though it requires a similar basic training set as building a pilot model, requires a completed different set of tools and completely different thinking. You can't take someone off a project like the pilot model and throw them into map making.

You could argue that instead of hiring people with the skill sets for the teams doing stuff like the pilot model, they could have hired more coders and map makers. This is true. But there are a large number of projects other than the pilot model that this particular team will handle. Those projects, while not as important to the community as issues like SRM hit reg, are still fundemental to MWO in the long term, and thus require dedicated personnel. If you're going to require dedicated personnel, you might as well fill their time with as many useful projects as possible, including an update to the pilot model... which has been on the list of fixes since the very beginning of MWO.

So saying something akin to "we're getting a new pilot model instead of whatever unrelated thing I want to prioritize because PGI is PGI" is a tremendous non-argument. How would you prefer they prioritize development? How would you re-arrainge their development structure to better fit your personal desires without driving the company to bankrupcy and ultimately killing the game?

[GRiPSViGiL]

ScarecrowES, on 13 February 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

Stuff

PGI has a well known mode of operation to this point so pointing that out is a fine argument to explain why they do something that is pointless in the whole scheme of things. Also, the argument that they are not prioritizing properly irregardless of what resources they do or do not have is in itself one that doesn't need explained in detail because it is inferred and obvious.

Re-arrangement has an obvious answer that doesn't need stated either but here goes: Artists need to be replaced by people developing and fixing code to resolve the current and persistent issues.

[ScarecrowES]

GRiPSViGiL, on 13 February 2016 - 01:10 PM, said:

PGI has a well known mode of operation to this point so pointing that out is a fine argument to explain why they do something that is pointless in the whole scheme of things. Also, the argument that they are not prioritizing properly irregardless of what resources they do or do not have is in itself one that doesn't need explained in detail because it is inferred and obvious.

Re-arrangement has an obvious answer that doesn't need stated either but here goes: Artists need to be replaced by people developing and fixing code to resolve the current and persistent issues.

Fine... except you still need those artists for other necessary projects... so given MWO isn't a particularly profitable game and has a limited availability of personnel, you can't merely replace artists with coders. Especially when the artists are responsible for the content that provides the only real income stream PGI has. So sure... devote all your resources into coding, for instance, and watch the game disappear in 3 months when the money completely runs out.

Again, the ignorance of the process is showing in the non-arguement.

And the argument, even discounting the lack of merit it has in practicality, is one based on a flawed premise to begin with... that PGI is incapable of making proper progress with the game with the resources it already has. Looking at the progress of the game from the full beta days, to the end of the old "outside money" days when the game was produced by another company, to today... the game is very different than where it was at even a year ago. Hell... 6 months ago. Not only is there vastly more content, but it's being produced at a much higher quality and a much faster rate. Gameplay changes and fixes are coming faster than ever. Issues from years ago that have been on the backburner are finally getting the chance to be addressed, and the overall game is moving forward at a rate that would have been unthinkable 2 years ago.

But you'd argue that priorities are not where they should be? Fine. I'd ask how you'd do better? Fire the artists and add coders instead? Thank goodness you're not the one in charge here.

[Johnny Z]

Mister Blastman, on 13 February 2016 - 12:48 PM, said:

Uhm... open worlds are awesome. If Mechwarrior Online had procedurally generated planets like Elite Dangerous or Space Engine have... this would be an entirely different (and better) game.

That's worth a chuckle. MechWarrior Online maps or perfected millimeter by millimeter by hand. Yet some have the nerve to complain about it. The trash that would be produced by procedural generation would get epic complaints and screen shots making fun of them.

What game makes maps via procedural generation? Only space maps that are 99.99% empty. X-Com 2 did it but they cheated to a large degree. They did it in the way that MechWarrior joining the snow maps together in different ways would be called procedural generation.

Games that havnt been made yet but say they will have procedural generation? Well that's a wait and see sort of thing isn't it.

By the way I have done a ton of this for Fallout mods. Its exactly the same for how all games do it except the procedural generation games that don't exist yet, and will be comparative trash when they do.

I can say right now MechWarrior maps will get better and better because of additions of models and textures for them to use. I can see them working with what they have on their maps.

The only fairly badly done items aside from half done maps are the dropship model that needs work and the parked dropship on river city. The blue doesn't look that great. I am sure they will be doing a dropship overhaul though because of this, that will probly include different dropships for clans and maybe the various houses. So they are not improving the in game dropships yet.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 February 2016 - 01:59 PM.

[Paigan]

Hit the Deck, on 12 February 2016 - 04:24 PM, said:

Aren't they supposed to be "half naked" inside the cockpit to mitigate the heat?

Well, IIRC, Lori Kalmar in her Locust ... was ... more than ...

[Mister Blastman]

Johnny Z, on 13 February 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

That's worth a chuckle. MechWarrior Online maps or perfected millimeter by millimeter by hand. Yet some have the nerve to complain about it. The trash that would be produced by procedural generation would get epic complaints and screen shots making fun of them.

What game makes maps via procedural generation? Only space maps that are 99.99% empty. X-Com 2 did it but they cheated to a large degree. They did it in the way that MechWarrior joining the snow maps together in different ways would be called procedural generation.

Games that havnt been made yet but say they will have procedural generation? Well that's a wait and see srt of thing isn't it.

I made a whole thread about it. Come back when you know what you're talking about.

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

[Johnny Z]

Mister Blastman, on 13 February 2016 - 01:59 PM, said:

I made a whole thread about it. Come back when you know what you're talking about.

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

Thanks for proving my point.

Speaking of not knowing what one is talking about. Those procedural maps will be next to useless for AI. Zombies maybe. Which is why zombies are so common in games, its because their ai is garbage. Seriously that's the reason so many games use zombies.

Anyway, MechWarrior is adding ai better than zombie ai and that kind of ai uses nav mesh put onto the maps themselves to do alot of the navigation and actions like taking cover. Good ai can take cover and fire from cover but wont know where that cover is without the nav mesh telling it. This has to be done by hand also to be done properly. Auto navmesh simply cant do it, only some and many times that's counter productive even because auto nav mesh generation can make a giant mess. Over lapping vertexes because of different heights and such.

At the moment it is very doubtfull MechWarrior Online maps have any nav meshes in place, but as players we wouldn't be able to tell even if they did. Making Nav mesh by hand is tough to do but is simple with practice and doesn't take as long as making the maps them selves even with all models and textures done. Coding the ai is another matter entirely and I know next to nothing about that.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 February 2016 - 02:14 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Johnny Z, on 13 February 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:

Thanks for proving my point.

Speaking of not knowing what one is talking about. Those procedural maps will be next to useless for AI. Zombies maybe. Which is why zombies are so common in games, its because their ai is garbage. Seriously that's the reason so many games use zombies.

Anyway, MechWarrior is adding ai better than zombie ai and that kind of ai uses nav mesh put onto the maps themselves to do alot of the navigation and actions like taking cover. Good ai can take cover and fire from cover but wont know where that cover is without the nav mesh telling it. This has to be done by hand also to be done properly. Auto navmesh simply cant do it, only some and many times that's counter productive even because auto nav mesh generation can make a giant mess. Over lapping vertexes because of different heights and such.

You have proved nothing. DARPA has AI that travels across all sorts of terrain--deserts, races, etc. Most flight simulators have AI that can traverse all sorts of terrain, too. But MWO isn't a game about AI, now is it? So your point is moot.

MWO is about PvP.

Humans don't need code to tell them to duck.

Procedural maps would breathe limitless life into this game.

[Juodas Varnas]

Remember when this thread was about the new pilot model?

Pepperidge farm remembers.

[Johnny Z]

Mister Blastman, on 13 February 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

You have proved nothing. DARPA has AI that travels across all sorts of terrain--deserts, races, etc. Most flight simulators have AI that can traverse all sorts of terrain, too. But MWO isn't a game about AI, now is it? So your point is moot.

MWO is about PvP.

Humans don't need code to tell them to duck.

Procedural maps would breathe limitless life into this game.

Your one of the guys that talked Star Citizen and Elite Dangerous into going open world. All I can say is they are limited in the extreme because of going that way and they both know it. Being space games it wont be so bad, but even then there is problems and both those games will rely on zoned maps done by hand fairly similar in size to MechWarrior maps anyway. So your point is just wrong. That MechWarrior Online has this as a foundation of design rather than a fallback when their open world areas simply wont work makes all the difference.

I don't want to disrespect those other games but they got big problems. At the design level. This is why those designers should learn in the trenches building and playing games.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 February 2016 - 02:24 PM.

[ScarecrowES]

Mister Blastman, on 13 February 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

You have proved nothing. DARPA has AI that travels across all sorts of terrain--deserts, races, etc. Most flight simulators have AI that can traverse all sorts of terrain, too. But MWO isn't a game about AI, now is it? So your point is moot.

MWO is about PvP.

Humans don't need code to tell them to duck.

Procedural maps would breathe limitless life into this game.

I've read your posts before. What you always describe is pointless for a game like MWO. Your argument has never made sense for THIS game. Games like these require a smaller number of well-tuned maps. Procedurally-generated maps won't work here.

I'm not against them in general, and I understand how they'd work alright in place of real maps for games like Elite: Dangerous... but NOT in competitive multiplayer games.

[Johnny Z]

It wont be so bad for Star Citizen because they actually have changed their design. Their planet side game play wont be procedural and will be hand done, their original design was to go procedural for both. The space problems because of going procedural still exist though.

I don't want to get to deep but this is just the way things are. Most things even in the real world will be done by hand. It may not seem like it but that's actually the way it is. Common sense explains why.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 February 2016 - 02:33 PM.

[Ratpoison]

Procedural generation would be the most arbitrarily unbalanced and abusable concept to ever be added to MWO. Pray to RNGesus to give your team the side with better cover, because fine tuning the balance of maps wont be possible anymore.

[ScarecrowES]

tortuousGoddess, on 13 February 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

Procedural generation would be the most arbitrarily unbalanced and abusable concept to ever be added to MWO. Pray to RNGesus to give your team the side with better cover, because fine tuning the balance of maps wont be possible anymore.

This, in part.

Plus, having to limit terrain generation only to what would be pathable or unpathable with no variation in between, so that players could actually walk from one end to another without falling into 3-foot pits that you couldn't walk out of due to the slope of the pit... things like that.

[Mister Blastman]

Johnny Z, on 13 February 2016 - 02:17 PM, said:

Your one of the guys that talked Star Citizen and Elite Dangerous into going open world. All I can say is they are limited in the extreme because of going that way and they both know it. Being space games it wont be so bad, but even then there is problems and both those games will rely on zoned maps done by hand fairly similar in size to MechWarrior maps anyway. So your point is just wrong. That MechWarrior Online has this as a foundation of design rather than a fallback when their open world areas simply wont work makes all the difference.

I don't want to disrespect those other games but they got big problems. At the design level. This is why those designers should learn in the trenches building and playing games.

I never talked to anyone. I bought Elite Dangerous when it first went on sale in December 2014 (well, technically I bought it pre-sale in late November). I never paid attention to the Kickstarter beyond that it existed, nor participated in any discussions prior to buying the game and playing it.

As for Star Citizen, I am one of the first backers (5000 number or so), I gave them sixty bucks. I have not given them any more. I don't listen to the weekly casts nor much of anything else. My only beef with Star Citizen is their awful controller support and terrible decisions regarding interactive mode for the mouse making it imbalanced due to my limited (i.e. less than ten or twenty hours) experience in Arena Commander.

Perhaps instead of talking about Elite Dangerous you should play it. I have played over 500 hours of the game. And what they are doing is fantastic but not without flaws. I can say for sure that they have a lot more developers and making things happen way faster than MWO ever has and the Universe they have created so far is nothing short of amazing.