139 replies to this topic

[MeiSooHaityu]

I myself wouldn't really want a hardcore simulator out of Mechwarrior per se, but something like MW3 but with this game's mechlab restrictions. Maybe something more restrictive than MWO, but not quite as restrictive as MW4.

Something along those lines I think.

Oh, and MWO's controls too.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 11 July 2016 - 11:53 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MeiSooHaityu, on 11 July 2016 - 11:52 AM, said:

Maybe something more restrictive than MWO, but not quite as restrictive as MW4.

MW4 wasn't restrictive enough if you ask me, I get that customization is meant to be a thing, but for a game to survive on a MWO's current mech release time frame, it has to be very restrictive or suffer the redundancy issues we currently have.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 11 July 2016 - 11:55 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 11:54 AM, said:

MW4 wasn't restrictive enough if you ask me, I get that customization is meant to be a thing, but for a game to survive on a MWO's current mech release time frame, it has to be very restrictive or suffer the redundancy issues we currently have.

Redundancy issues compared to what? Get real. This game has by far the most customization and unique playable vehicles of any game. EASILY.

Most MMO's have ONE suite of armor for all top lvl players or something similar.

How many different tanks does WOT have for top lvl play? Or warships for WOW?

This games got improvements to make but I really wish some of these complaints were not from some alternate reality. Seriously GET REAL.

Edited by Johnny Z, 11 July 2016 - 12:02 PM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 11:54 AM, said:

MW4 wasn't restrictive enough if you ask me, I get that customization is meant to be a thing, but for a game to survive on a MWO's current mech release time frame, it has to be very restrictive or suffer the redundancy issues we currently have.

I posted this from a single player point of view (just like my previous post), so I'm not looking at it from a MWO aspect. Just FYI.

Anyway...

You can always equip your mech the way you want to regardless of what the game can allow you to do.

If you want to run a more stock load out, you can. If you want to run a more custom load out, you should be able to do that as well.

More customization should allow you more options in how you want to play, not less. Especially in a single player environment where there is no outside pressure to run absolute min/max meta.

The kicker is though, you need good game design to go with that philosophy as well. MechWarrior titles tended to force a player to progress towards assault mechs and load them down with min/max builds to be successful in the last few missions. This mentality needs to be addressed and a different form of difficulty created. Ideally you should be able to defeat a campaign or possibly the entire game without HAVING to run an assault mech with a ton of LPLasers. That's where the real skill in crafting a game comes into play IMO.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 11 July 2016 - 12:05 PM.

[Johnny Z]

MeiSooHaityu, on 11 July 2016 - 12:03 PM, said:

You can always equip your mech the way you want to regardless of what the game can allow you to do.

If you want to run a more stock load out, you can. If you want to run a more custom load out, you should be able to do that as well.

More customization should allow you more options in how you want to play, not less. Especially in a single player environment where there is no outside pressure to run absolute min/max meta.

The kicker is though, you need good game design to go with that philosophy as well. MechWarrior titles tended to force a player to progress towards assault mechs and load them down with min/max builds to be successful in the last few missions. This mentality needs to be addressed and a different form of difficulty created. Ideally you should be able to defeat a campaign or possibly the entire game without HAVING to run an assault mech with a ton of LPLasers. That's where the real skill in crafting a game comes into play IMO.

100% true and MechWarrior Online has put nearly every other game ever made to shame. Seriously, and that isn't an exaggeration. Seriously the makers of other games should be hiding in shame in comparison. Balance is amazing and improving in the most difficult game to balance ever made.

Now if they would get onto some other game play additions, that would be wonderful.

I need to add there are MMO's with amazing graphics, music and budgets. They have 45 suits of armor and 150 weapons. Somehow they are so far gone, they make only 1 of those suits of armor usable and one of the weapons usable to players, all top lvl players forced to use the same weapon and armor, when so much variety is available..... I could go on about the stupidity of lvl and item grind game design in length.

Edited by Johnny Z, 11 July 2016 - 12:40 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Johnny Z, on 11 July 2016 - 12:00 PM, said:

Redundancy issues compared to what? Get real. This game has by far the most customization and unique playable vehicles of any game. EASILY.

Yes, there are billions of different configurations, but how many of them do practically the same thing and how many are actually competitive, and how many of those configurations have broken balance and ruined it for all other users of some piece of equipment?

MeiSooHaityu, on 11 July 2016 - 12:03 PM, said:

Ideally you should be able to defeat a campaign or possibly the entire game without HAVING to run an assault mech with a ton of LPLasers. That's where the real skill in crafting a game comes into play IMO.

So you want a game to be easy then?

Johnny Z, on 11 July 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

100% true and MechWarrior Online has put nearly every other game ever made to shame. Seriously, and that isn't an exaggeration.

If you have to confirm for everyone it isn't an exaggeration, especially when using 100%, then odds are you are full of hot air, which most of us already know considering your hackusation claims.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 11 July 2016 - 12:10 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

Yes, there are billions of different configurations, but how many of them do practically the same thing and how many are actually competitive, and how many of those configurations have broken balance and ruined it for all other users of some piece of equipment?


So you want a game to be easy then?


If you have to confirm for everyone it isn't an exaggeration, especially when using 100%, then odds are you are full of hot air, which most of us already know considering your hackusation claims.

The only one full of hot air is you. Balance was a complete mess quite a while ago, but its getting super close now and only improving. It has never been as badly done as ANY other online game ever made, at any point.

Yes Clans were pay to win/easy mode for a while but that was at least quite a few mechs, not a single class in a single suite of armor using a single weapon like every other game out there milking players for millions and billions, switching to FOTM to continue to make players grind to keep up, etc etc etc.

When I said other game makers should be hiding in shame I meant it in complete seriousness. If consumer protection meant anything the would most likely be hiding from being sued. That's a joke sorta.

That lvl and item grind design makes so much content completely useless, as in 40 sets of armor or weapons, and leaving only 1 or 2 usable is a waste of epic proportions. Waste with a capital WASTE and its only because they were able to take advantage of players with their scams for so long that they could afford to be that wasteful. Basically control freaks completely off the leash making video games. Hard to believe I know.

Meanwhile this game goes through great efforts to make all its content available for FREE and usable in all lvls of game play. Yet still gets trolled about it. Hard to believe I know.

Edited by Johnny Z, 11 July 2016 - 12:20 PM.

[Metus regem]

Spleenslitta, on 11 July 2016 - 11:45 AM, said:

You know what i want? It's only a farfetched dream...something that might happen in 5-10 years.
A proper mechwarrior simulator. Imagine a DCS (Digital Combat Simulator) version of Mechwarrior.
All those buttons in the cockpit has a function.

- Gotta go through the startup procedure for the mech to power it up. Bringing the reactor online. Gyro, cockpit monitors, targeting system, testing arm/torso twist response, weapons online....imagine being responsible for all that.
Trust me....it's a rush.

- If your left torsos internals are on fire you press the emergency fire extinguishers button for that body part.
- The cockpits monitors display everything from the damage on your mech as well as your locked on target, ammunition and it's location.
Radar and map display. Weapon status.

Imagine how cool it would be to really reaalllly feel like your stomping around in a giant robot.
I remember the first time i managed to take off in DCS Black Shark....i had a wide grin on my face. I could almost feel the combat helicopters power.
First time i unleashed a volley of rockets....all those switches, toggles and buttons i had to go through to get all the safeties off.
Looking at the monitors...watch where i'm flying, watch the instruments, look at my aim again...all those procedures made it feel so real.
Then i pulled the trigger and saw smoketrails going towards the trucks i targeted.....lots of explosions.

I've never been so exited for such simple things during my entire gaming career and i hadn't even seen combat. That was just practicing take offs, landings and basic targeting in the tutorial.

heh, you played it on a computer, I lived it.

I spent 6 years flying AH-64D Longbow Apache gunships, in Iraq during active conflict, I was the P.I.C. (Pilot in Command), so I was found in the second seat doing the actual flying, my gunner handled the weapon systems. I've seen rounds from the M230 hit everywhere but the guy my gunner was aiming at. I've seen the rocket salvos going off at trucks, cars, tanks and people.... Trust me, when I say that the only thing in MWO that feels realistic, is the SRM salvo pattern, when I think back to when my Gunner would launch Hydra 70's at something, they would spread out like SRM's do here.


Trust me, I'd love this to be full sim, but I understand that it would be a very, very tiny market, so concessions need to be made, to try and expand that available market.

[Bishop Steiner]

Johnny Z, on 11 July 2016 - 12:00 PM, said:

Redundancy issues compared to what? Get real. This game has by far the most customization and unique playable vehicles of any game. EASILY.

Most MMO's have ONE suite of armor for all top lvl players or something similar.

How many different tanks does WOT have for top lvl play? Or warships for WOW?

This games got improvements to make but I really wish some of these complaints were not from some alternate reality. Seriously GET REAL.

And yet the vast majority of that "diversity" is an illusion. Just because you can build it doesn't make it viable. Open mech lab has always simplified streamlining things to the bleeding edge of meta. ID the best blend of Hitbox and Hardpoint location, then load it to the gills with the Flavor of the Month Weapon.

More restricted customization actualyl preserves FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY because Mechs like Panthers and Wolfhounds have a purpose because your Firestarters wouldn't be packign the PPCs and Large Lasers.

But the reality of MWO is that without Ludicrous Level Quirks, there is really no reason to run a Panther because the FS9 can do everything it can do, better, and ditto the Woflhound.

Buh buh buh CHOICE!!! you cry! Bad choices are really no choice at all. And that is what your feigned diversity from open mechlabs leads to. You have the Meta, and then the bad builds for individualism.

Johnny Z, on 11 July 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

When I said other game makers should be hiding in shame I meant it in complete seriousness.

We know. Which is why it's hard to take your other claims seriously. *shrugs*

[Johnny Z]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

And yet the vast majority of that "diversity" is an illusion. Just because you can build it doesn't make it viable. Open mech lab has always simplified streamlining things to the bleeding edge of meta. ID the best blend of Hitbox and Hardpoint location, then load it to the gills with the Flavor of the Month Weapon.

More restricted customization actualyl preserves FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY because Mechs like Panthers and Wolfhounds have a purpose because your Firestarters wouldn't be packign the PPCs and Large Lasers.

But the reality of MWO is that without Ludicrous Level Quirks, there is really no reason to run a Panther because the FS9 can do everything it can do, better, and ditto the Woflhound.

Buh buh buh CHOICE!!! you cry! Bad choices are really no choice at all. And that is what your feigned diversity from open mechlabs leads to. You have the Meta, and then the bad builds for individualism.



We know. Which is why it's hard to take your other claims seriously. *shrugs*

I am not going to argue the fine details of balance. Its well known that balance is a goal though. Also it has been steadily improving.

I am stating facts. Your saying some other game offers more choice for players for all lvls of game play? Name the game please.

I will say again, every other online game I know has gated their content to FORCE players to grind endlessly to keep up or pay to win. Period. They should be ashamed. Maybe they should try making an entertaining, worth while, game instead? Or maybe they are so accustomed to scamming, they know no other way. (harsh but maybe all to true)

Edited by Johnny Z, 11 July 2016 - 12:36 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

Buh buh buh CHOICE!!! you cry! Bad choices are really no choice at all. And that is what your feigned diversity from open mechlabs leads to. You have the Meta, and then the bad builds for individualism.

That illusion of choice is also what hampers new player experience since it is extremely easy for new players to go completely uninformed about what makes meta mechs meta in the first place, meaning they will run horrendously builds at the start.

[Cy Mitchell]

It is the sad truth that while the MechLab is one of the most innovative and fun things in MWO it is also the one thing that allows the players to break the game and make it so one dimensional.

The same thing applies to the Mercenary system. While it allows the players to have the freedom to chose who to fight with and sample both sides (as in Clan and IS), it also allows the Mercenary units to destroy the balance between the Clan and IS or individual factions by moving their might around the map without restriction.

Both are great ideas and fun for the players. Both, in their own way, end up damaging the game play and breaking the game.

Man, this thread really took off on a tangent.

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 12:25 PM, said:

That illusion of choice is also what hampers new player experience since it is extremely easy for new players to go completely uninformed about what makes meta mechs meta in the first place, meaning they will run horrendously builds at the start.

Other games customization choices:

Edited by Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, 11 July 2016 - 01:33 PM.

[TLBFestus]

I don't necessarily think HBS is the right developer to do a Campaign, but if you could find a developer with experience designing games like that, especially an acceptable AI, then I'd be all for it.

Off the top of my head I'm at a loss for Developers with that resume, but the list would be short, and probably even shorter if they are willing to work with PGI on the project. Perhaps Bethesda (Skyrim, Fallout), or Irrational Games (Bioshock) would be the ones.

Edited by TLBFestus, 11 July 2016 - 03:01 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

TLBFestus, on 11 July 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

I don't necessarily think HBS is the right developer to do a Campaign, but if you could find a developer with experience designing games like that, especially an acceptable AI, then I'd be all for it.

Off the top of my head I'm at a loss for Developers with that resume, but the list would be short, and probably even shorter if they are willing to work with PGI on the project. Perhaps Bethesda (Skyrim, Fallout), or Irrational Games (Bioshock) would be the ones.

As noted, they'd have nothing to gain. You'd need to find another up and comer that benefits from the exposure. Because it won't make em rich, but it might put em on the radar. Plus I don't think I trust a big developer to not want to put their own spin to it.

[Trauglodyte]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 July 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

Some have called for other Studios to simply take over the IP outright, but that simply is not going to happen, bar PGI just suddenly going belly up. And while my wallet is closed, ATM, I'm not advocating any kind of anti-PGI Occupy type movement.

I don't necessarily want to see PGI "give up the title" per se, as MWO for all it's flaws feeds a certain portion of the Mechwarrior fanbase. I would like to see them partner, like they have with HBS, with a more experienced, resource heavy Studio to produce the PvE part though, as I fear PGIs demonstrable lack of understanding of depth, immersion and their own playerbase, as seen through the continued shallowness of FW, would doom any attempt from PGI to make a PvE game worth playing.

This would allow Russ and Paul and company to keep focusing on what they seem comfortable with, the E-Sport FPS aspect, which obviously Russ wants to embrace whole hog, and allow for MW fans of Campaign Play to get a quality game, potentially. Giving us an Online 3 way Fix for our Mechwarrior needs (PGI = ESports, HBS = TBS, New Studio = PvE Campaign Game).

It would also be an efficient use, like with HBS, of the already developed Assets, Mech Models, even a few maps whatever.

And it is the only way the Founders will ever see something remotely resembling an immersive, deep campaign we were sold. The recent Town Halls have reinforced my belief that PGI simply is not equipped to make a good or timely PvE game, but that we will simply see a long drawn out and disappointing result, like FW, which PGI seems to think is a great success and fulfills their original pitch to sell Founders Packs, to a tee.

Thoughts?

I'd be ok with it but I want PvE aspects to be a part of the PvP game too. Artillery/Air Strikes need some level of voice interaction. But, that is small. What I'm talking about is calling for semi-AI guided semi-Player guided infantry/vehicle assistance. I'd absolutely love something like a Close Air Support consumable that would call in either a Mech Buster or a couple of VTOLs to provide 15-20 seconds of added fire support. I'd love for something like an Infantry consumable that called for a couple of Elementals or a platoon of Jump Infantry to get dropped, via a mini-drop ship, on your location that would move with you, or as fast as they could, to help guard you and add their feeble fire power to your own.

PvE is something that I'd love but it needs to bleed between both aspects of the game.

[Tarl Cabot]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 08:35 AM, said:

Well to be fair, any IP can be a straightjacket, especially one that has been around for as long as this has, which is honestly why I would love to see Battletech "rebooted" for the Mechwarrior series. No IP is perfect, and unless you are the one writing it, adding something awesome to the IP is often seen as blasphemy by its supporters (and even then, it can go bad for you, just look at the Clans/Jihad disdain).

Just to add, of the previous MPBT/MW games, only the original MW/MPBT came close to the purity but then there were no mech labs. Even EA's MPBT version, though it was starting out in 3025, if they had not closed doors on most of the 3rd games they had acquired and eventually advanced the timeline or created a "Clan" theme version, they would have run into the balancing act themselves.

The MW, even though we have mostly fond memories of those games, they were primarily PVE, so the E portion were not grumpy, complaining, etc and they were not in constant development. So, until PGI, the other games/companies never really had to "stepped" very far away from the Pen/Paper rules when translating it into a PVP 1st person PC game.

That PGI is a small company may have hurt it on how to interpret and translate Battletech (10secs)/Solaris(2.5secs) into MWO. They did okay on providing HP to components instead of outright disabling/destroying them w/one crit hit, doubling armor/internal structure. There are other areas where they stood steadfast with Pen/Paper translating without offering a different route, such as isXL vs cXL engine differences - 1 instant death vs heat/moment penalty w/loss of 1 ST, but no actual engine crits from other sections. Or one of the most critical foundations of the IP is no real meaning to the heatscale except for what happens at 100%+.

There is also the FLD/convergance but that is another forum full of threads of its own. PGI is in a position now on how the game can be perceived not just for the players of today, but also for those of the future if the IP changes ever changes hands. We believe we all want the IP to work well in both PVP and PVE but if it only works in PVE while PVP suffers, what type of perception would that generate?

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 12 July 2016 - 03:44 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

So you want a game to be easy then?

Uhh...what are you talking about? Lol.

How does being able to play a game with any mech class equate to being automatically easy? Scalable difficulty depending on you and your team's load out/tonnage has never crossed your mind I take it.

MechWarrior 2 often had drop weight restrictions to allow other mechs to have a go. The trials of position even had you play a light mech against bigger foes (for Khan no less).

Making multiple classes having staying power throughout the game is something HBS is working on for Battletech as well. I'm sure their game won't be an easy walk in the park.

This philosophy is very doable, but it's easier to just spawn more mechs and bigger mechs to increase difficulty. It's lazy, but effective. It just means your favorite medium mech is usable for a whole 2 missions before it is obsolete.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 11 July 2016 - 04:31 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MeiSooHaityu, on 11 July 2016 - 04:28 PM, said:

Uhh...what are you talking about? Lol.

A game that doesn't force you to min/max to beat it means there won't be a serious level of difficulty. If there is no tension that forces you to start tinkering with better builds, then that isn't really good game design.

Tarl Cabot, on 11 July 2016 - 03:53 PM, said:

Just to add, of the previous MPBT/MW games, only the original MW/MPBT came close to the purity but then there were no mech labs. Even EA's MPBT version, though it was starting out in 3025, if they had not closed doors on most of the 3rd games they had acquired and eventually advanced the timeline or created a "Clan" theme version, they would have run into the balancing act themselves.

Don't confuse me for thinking that I want pure stock or think that the IS/Clan balance should be uneven, because I don't believe in either. I just think that for the sake of mech diversity, restrictions have to be made to ensure that mech configurations don't get out of hand, fit the role of the mech, and that the role is unique, or at least there is a large enough difference in how you play that role.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 11 July 2016 - 04:34 PM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 11 July 2016 - 04:34 PM, said:

A game that doesn't force you to min/max to beat it means there won't be a serious level of difficulty. If there is no tension that forces you to start tinkering with better builds, then that isn't really good game design.

I disagree.

I think you can make a title where you could choose to be a medium mech company. You could still have enemies that would challenge you throughout the campaign, and lastly do it with the type of mechlab we have available.

I can imagine a campaign where that could be very intense. That's just me though I suppose.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 11 July 2016 - 04:41 PM.