70 replies to this topic

[DaZur]

I like my chocolate... I like my peanut butter. Seems foolish to deprive oneself of either under some implication that I can't enjoy both.

Side note: I chuckle at the premise that there has to be an all or nothing outcome... I recall a Star Citizen discussion under the same inference that time has proven to be untrue.

Edited by DaZur, 05 July 2016 - 07:49 PM.

[AWOL 01]

Juodas Varnas, on 05 July 2016 - 11:40 AM, said:

That depends if it has quads or not.

You are my new favorite forum member. Every post I look at I laugh at how you incorporate quads into the subject.

In all seriousness though, we should at least get the Scorpion and Goliath...

And yes, I will most likely be playing the game when it comes out.

[slide]

I'll be gone at least until I get bored of the BT game.

But considering the potential for leagues and user made campaigns (ie Praxis done by our very own Multitalented), because it will have multiplayer, the potential shelf life could be quite long.

However whether MWO will have the ability to draw me back in remains to be seen. I recently played the latest user made campaign for Mechcommander (2) Omnitech and it reminded me of just how far away from "simulating" the BT universe (economy, lore, feel etc) that MWO really is. If HBS gets the feel right so that it appeals to a large audience then I think MWO is certainly going to feel the loss (at least for a while) of a lot of players. There is already a large number of MWO veterans who are very active on the HBS forums and have bought into the game (myself included).

I have $1000+ invested in this game, I have had my fun from it, certainly, but the appeal for it gets less everyday. PGI's vision for the game in too narrow minded and too long winded. They fail to understand and fix it's issues time and time again. Despite protestations other wise, it is not a Battletech game, is is a FPS masquerading in a mechwarriors clothes. I have not bought anything since the Archers came out (possibly my most disappointing purchase to date) and I didn't by the Rifleman before that. I have no intention of ever spending money on MWO again, unless they seriously do something about FW to make it more compelling to more people, something which is way of the mark ATM.

I will gain some small satisfaction that money I have spent on MWO will continue to entertain me in the BT game, as the MWO artwork and mech models are really PGI's only redeeming feature at this point. HBS's use of them is a wise move IMO.

[Davegt27]

How Many Will Go To The New Battletech Game When It Is Out?

not me

it would be missing the point of having a computer game

[wanderer]

Yeonne Greene, on 05 July 2016 - 07:29 PM, said:

Well, to me turn-based is the domain of board games. Those games are typically turn-based by necessity. The unique quality of computer simulation is that there is no need for such an abstraction because it can represent actions as they are envisioned. Ergo, if I'm going to play a computer game, I want it to take advantage of the medium's most powerful feature.

Oddly enough, BT in part survived as long as it has thanks to programs like MegaMek- because BT is capable of hitting levels of complexity that would be ridiculous to do any other way despite being a turn-based game.

Solaris VII scale pretty much ends up at the level of unaugmented mental overkill beyond 4-5 units, for example.

slide, on 05 July 2016 - 08:12 PM, said:

I will gain some small satisfaction that money I have spent on MWO will continue to entertain me in the BT game, as the MWO artwork and mech models are really PGI's only redeeming feature at this point. HBS's use of them is a wise move IMO.

More appropriately, that's trying to get things unified as far as visuals are concerned, and Alex is definitely the bedrock upon which that effort rests.

[Thorn Hallis]

I will play it, but I'll also continue to play MWO. Both are two totally different games.

Some people seem to forget that even a match with only one lance per side can go on for hours.

[Kotzi]

Gone whenever there is a playable version. Actually, i am already almost gone like most of my mates.

[Kubernetes]

Dude, when you start dating a new girl do you dump your old girlfriend?

Heck no, you just two-time it.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Coralld, on 05 July 2016 - 01:00 PM, said:

Still want my succession wars or star league era battle tech on HBO.

Oooh! An adaptation (and improvement) of the old Succession Wars tabletop game would be awesomeriffic!

And yes, an HBO Battletech TV series (with at least a Game of Thrones sized budget) would be all kinds of cool!

[Tordin]

Yeonne Greene, on 05 July 2016 - 07:29 PM, said:

Well, to me turn-based is the domain of board games. Those games are typically turn-based by necessity. The unique quality of computer simulation is that there is no need for such an abstraction because it can represent actions as they are envisioned. Ergo, if I'm going to play a computer game, I want it to take advantage of the medium's most powerful feature.

Ah. I understand. I havent played any board games beside chess. D&D and Battletech seems interesting but also complex to get into.

[crashlogic]

Charlie Grant, on 05 July 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

I do not see it as an either/or conflict. I plan to play both games.

What he said