18 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

With the introduction of new Terra Therma (loved it, by the way, good job PGI!)

Why not introduce the legacy maps as selectable choices? I think a lot of people would enjoy the old maps. If you feel like they are not up to code with your new ones, just lower the chance they might appear (like maybe 20% for other maps, 10% for the oid)

Instantly, you increase your map pool by like... 30%? And best part? Like ZERO additional coding required.

From some of the old youtube video, I know I love to see the old Caustic Valley (it's like a hot Polar Highlands), love to have the Closet Frozen City, and would definitely love to have Circle Jerk Terra Therma from time to time.

Give them like different environmental conditions so that they play a bit differently, like Terra Therma (Old) is no longer Mordor, it's Super Doom with twice the heat inefficiency.

Personally, I started like 8 months ago. So maybe there are a lot more old maps that I missed out on. I would love to play them all.

[RestosIII]

I'm still placing bets on them having deleted the old map layouts when they made the new versions, because of course they would.

[Jetfire]

I would guess the general reason is that people REALLY disliked a lot of things about particular old maps. Putting them in rotation would just open it up for trolling.

[Deathlike]

I'd say there could be a problem with the old assets on legacy maps as things change over time (especially if things have to be resized and all). I'm not a mapmaker, but I don't think it is good practice to have legacy maps that have objects change since the newer map may tweak said assets that indirectly affect the older one.

[Lyoto Machida]

I think it's dumb that the old maps can't even be used in private matches but I don't run a profitable game studio either.

Deathlike, on 18 October 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

I'd say there could be a problem with the old assets on legacy maps as things change over time (especially if things have to be resized and all). I'm not a mapmaker, but I don't think it is good practice to have legacy maps that have objects change since the newer map may tweak said assets that indirectly affect the older one.

They couldn't have...you know...duplicated the object and then resized the copy for the new map?

Is hard drive space that expensive these days???

[AEgg]

They can't really include them in the rotation because of playerbase size (too many buckets).

But it would be nice if they were still available for private matches. We know they can make maps only available there.

[Bilbo]

AEgg, on 18 October 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

They can't really include them in the rotation because of playerbase size (too many buckets).

But it would be nice if they were still available for private matches. We know they can make maps only available there.

What difference do the number of buckets really make when you can only vote on a small subset anyway?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Bilbo, on 18 October 2016 - 03:31 PM, said:

What difference do the number of buckets really make when you can only vote on a small subset anyway?

maybe they................... . Yea i got nothing

[Felicitatem Parco]

AEgg, on 18 October 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

They can't really include them in the rotation because of playerbase size (too many buckets).

But it would be nice if they were still available for private matches. We know they can make maps only available there.

They always present the same number of maps in the voting screen. It has no association with "buckets."

However, they should be in the private map selection menu. Very much should be.

[Deathlike]

Lyoto Machida, on 18 October 2016 - 01:36 PM, said:

I think it's dumb that the old maps can't even be used in private matches but I don't run a profitable game studio either.



They couldn't have...you know...duplicated the object and then resized the copy for the new map?

Is hard drive space that expensive these days???

It's never really about hard drive space... but more about bandwidth.

Also, you don't want legacy duplicates stored away where the assets are stored... maybe you could have a special copy in the map itself (again, I'm not a mapmaker), but bandwidth isn't exactly cheap.

[Green Mamba]

Minimal Viable Product?

[M T]

PGI will release all classic maps next year as 'new content' I bet

[Tristan Winter]

For one thing, PGI is aware that a lot of people hated certain maps. When they even admit that in the patch notes, you know they got the message. They don't often talk about stuff that the players didn't like. They know that most players don't really prefer bad maps (YMMV) to break up the monotony of the most popular maps.

Another thing is that their art team seems to have a degree of pride in their work. They are really determined to do some cosmetic upgrades of old maps, and they don't really like to keep the maps that look dated. They did a bunch of cosmetic work on old mechs (changing stances, mech geometry, weapon geometry, etc) with no clear economical incentive. Some of it was requested by the players, sure. But sometimes you hear their artists talk about improving older work because they felt they could do better.

A third reason (and this is where the economical incentive comes in) is that they seem to be aware that the core of this game is 4-5 years old and not as visually impressive as it used to be in 2012. So they're keen to get rid of elements that look dated, because it gives a bad impression to new players. Let's face it, Terra Therma looked extremely dated. Some of those lava rivers had fewer polygons than Quake 1 mobs, and the transition between flowing lava and solid rock was often a razor-sharp edge, 50 feet long and straight as a laser beam. It was not a good looking map, by modern standards.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

I hope they make them available for custom games at some point.

[FallingAce]

Jetfire, on 18 October 2016 - 12:49 PM, said:

I would guess the general reason is that people REALLY disliked a lot of things about particular old maps. Putting them in rotation would just open it up for trolling.

Alpine is still in the rotation and as unbalanced as ever.

PGI claimed technical reason are why the old maps couldn't be left in. We all know how PGI likes being technical.

I still prefer old forest colony and frozen city over the new ones.

[razenWing]

Tristan Winter, on 18 October 2016 - 04:38 PM, said:

For one thing, PGI is aware that a lot of people hated certain maps. When they even admit that in the patch notes, you know they got the message. They don't often talk about stuff that the players didn't like. They know that most players don't really prefer bad maps (YMMV) to break up the monotony of the most popular maps.

Another thing is that their art team seems to have a degree of pride in their work. They are really determined to do some cosmetic upgrades of old maps, and they don't really like to keep the maps that look dated. They did a bunch of cosmetic work on old mechs (changing stances, mech geometry, weapon geometry, etc) with no clear economical incentive. Some of it was requested by the players, sure. But sometimes you hear their artists talk about improving older work because they felt they could do better.

A third reason (and this is where the economical incentive comes in) is that they seem to be aware that the core of this game is 4-5 years old and not as visually impressive as it used to be in 2012. So they're keen to get rid of elements that look dated, because it gives a bad impression to new players. Let's face it, Terra Therma looked extremely dated. Some of those lava rivers had fewer polygons than Quake 1 mobs, and the transition between flowing lava and solid rock was often a razor-sharp edge, 50 feet long and straight as a laser beam. It was not a good looking map, by modern standards.

I agree with you on the last part, except after 20-30 matches in a particular map, no one is caring about a particular polygon in E5. You can only visually stun someone for a while. I would be fine with maps similar to the Test Maps and call it "Cyber Simulation 1" or something like that... and make like 20-30 of those featuring various conditions and platforms.

I have an elite friend that used to say, "Mechwarrior really is most fun when you don't know anything."

And while 20-30 map pools don't really solve the issue long term (which, I believe is procedural randomly generated maps), it has got to be better than the 10 maps we got now. I am for more gameplay diversity. It would certainly be wonderful if there is 1 map for every 1 mech that will excel over all others. Alas, a man can dream, right?

[Mystere]

I'm still waiting for, and I quote:

Quote

But big difference from previous games will be urban combat. "One of the things we can do these days that previous games weren't able to do well is urban combat," Ekman says. "And it's a cornerstone of MWO, this ability to actually fight in detailed urban settings."

which they bragged about here.

The so-called "pillars" are lacking, while the "cornerstones" are missing.

[Davers]

Mystere, on 19 October 2016 - 08:05 AM, said:

I'm still waiting for, and I quote:



which they bragged about here.

The so-called "pillars" are lacking, while the "cornerstones" are missing.

Well, they promised us a gazebo, and they delivered a deck.

[LordNothing]

id do a classic map pack for custom games only. a lot of them are great for 8v8 and should totally be available for those kinds of games. you could even fund it with a little bundle. a stack of banked premium time, and some other map themed goodies. this pays for a bit of refirbishment and the effort to roll out the pack. you dont actually have to pay to use the maps, its just when you do custom games you usually need someone with premium time, and having it banked up sure is convenient.