97 replies to this topic

[MacClearly]

Dino Might, on 19 January 2017 - 04:13 PM, said:

This game has much more in common with the FPS genre than the Simulator genre, without a doubt. I hesitate to say it has any simulation type elements. Movement, aiming, and shooting are all simplified models with goofy physics (so many have complained as much, about hitreg, pebbles, perfect precision). What other elements are there to this game? Mechlab, I guess, but that kind of customization is found in other FPS games, too. Only so many variations of Lg Pulse/Med laser you are going to take...

I agree...and disagree.

This isn't a meta conversation.

The game is listed as an FPS by industry and the creators themselves. So yeah, it has pretty much nothing in common with a simulator which is good since that doesn't seem to be what is is trying for or is it what MW 3 or 4 was.

Edited by MacClearly, 19 January 2017 - 05:33 PM.

[Dino Might]

WarHippy, on 19 January 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

You would be having an easier time discussing this if you brushed up on your terminology. So far as I can tell you keep describing cone of fire mechanics and/or recoil like mechanics but you keep saying auto-aim which is a very different thing. In addition while MWO is a shooter more or less it certainly is not a twitch shooter. Nothing about MWO is twitchy.

You can have auto-aim with cone of fire. They are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the MechCommander series is based on that type of shooting mechanic.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Dino Might, on 19 January 2017 - 05:28 PM, said:

In fact, the MechCommander series is based on that type of shooting mechanic.

Did you really just use an RTS as an example for something that should be in an FPS?

[King Kahuna]

Ummm...no

[Dino Might]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 19 January 2017 - 05:48 PM, said:

Did you really just use an RTS as an example for something that should be in an FPS?

Yes, because it was relevant. Did you, and many other naysayers in this topic continually resort to baseless emotional and trite responses in an attempt to garner support from those on the internet with enough lack of confidence to jump on your bandwagon?

I still can't believe that we are making such a big deal about calling this FPS vs. something else. It is what it is, regardless of your label. And wanting a different game than what we have now is much of the point of any of these threads, so those rebuttals are anything but. *3 snare hits + cymbal*

OP has an idea, you don't like it, we get it. But the idea has some merit, though it lacks a bit on detail. That's fine - that's the point of introducing these ideas in a forum. How about explaining why you don't like it other than using "that's not what this game is," and other sayings that don't even have a well-defined or agreed upon meaning?

Edited by Dino Might, 19 January 2017 - 06:35 PM.

[Dino Might]

MacClearly, on 19 January 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:

I agree...and disagree.

This isn't a meta conversation.

The game is listed as an FPS by industry and the creators themselves. So yeah, it has pretty much nothing in common with a simulator which is good since that doesn't seem to be what is is trying for or is it what MW 3 or 4 was.

I hear you. And I agree with the assessment of the devs' intent. I just wish it were different. We have had countless arcade-style mech games. We have only ever had one mech simulator type game, and I missed it

Edited by Dino Might, 19 January 2017 - 06:37 PM.

[GenghisJr]

So RNG god says your last Gauss round hits the fully armoured leg instead of the bright red torso. I can see why people dont like this idea.

[Mystere]

GenghisJr, on 19 January 2017 - 06:39 PM, said:

So RNG god says your last Gauss round hits the fully armoured leg instead of the bright red torso. I can see why people dont like this idea.

Mystere, on 18 January 2017 - 08:28 AM, said:

This is where I usually step in showing the difference between a normal and an even distribution, the latter of which I know no one calling for, or that the cone size is determined by several in-game variables. Should I continue? Or do you already get the point?

[Dino Might]

"Gaussian distribution," as in the distribution that is magnetically driven to incredibly high means, right?

I do sometimes wonder if these people that hate RNG recognize the modeling virtue of different types of RNGs, that we are playing a computer game that is modeling physical objects and their interactions, and an RNG is the only feasible way to get any kind of realistic variation in such a modeled environment. We really need to teach more mathematics in schools...

GenghisJr, on 19 January 2017 - 06:39 PM, said:

So RNG god says your last Gauss round hits the fully armoured leg instead of the bright red torso. I can see why people dont like this idea.

Yes, that could happen, once in a blue moon. And it wouldn't be all that bad. You are right, the player wouldn't prefer it, just like I don't prefer in my XTC match, when I'm holding the X-ring, wind hasn't changed, and I fire and score a 9 at 5 o'clock. Bummer dude! That's life. Do better next time to control all the variables so that the deviation is smaller, recognizing that there are still some things you can't control perfectly.

Edited by Dino Might, 19 January 2017 - 06:57 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Dino Might, on 19 January 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

Yes, because it was relevant. Did you, and many other naysayers in this topic continually resort to baseless emotional and trite responses in an attempt to garner support from those on the internet with enough lack of confidence to jump on your bandwagon?

Where have I appealed to emotion, maybe some people like 1435R do but I try to avoid that. Don't be trying to lump everybody together.

Dino Might, on 19 January 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

I still can't believe that we are making such a big deal about calling this FPS vs. something else.

Because game design aspects apply differently between an RTS where a player controls 1-many units vs an FPS where you only ever control one at a time. There is a difference between comparing a simulator with an FPS and an RTS with an FPS. Those are two different conversations.

Dino Might, on 19 January 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

OP has an idea, you don't like it, we get it. But the idea has some merit, though it lacks a bit on detail. That's fine - that's the point of introducing these ideas in a forum. How about explaining why you don't like it other than using "that's not what this game is," and other sayings that don't even have a well-defined or agreed upon meaning?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 19 January 2017 - 01:01 PM, said:

You mean moronic charges into the open without a regard for terrain features just to face stare at each other while holding the guns down, because that's exactly what would end up happening.

I may have been harsh, but the idea that auto-aim and CoF together magically make tactics interesting is naive. The comparison to Star Trek Online someone made where the game boils down to maxing out DPS and optimizing buffs/debuffs doesn't interest me where the focus is less on tactics and more about timing of action/buffs/debuffs. To me that feels more like an RPG or DOTA style game without the rest of the stuff that make those games good because it is caught in a weird spot between an FPS and a DOTA opposite to that of a game that tries to blend those things like Overwatch.

With that, I still haven't seen explained to me why this makes the game better other than complaints about how one dimensional play is now and the implication that this fixes it, but never HOW it fixes it.

[Deathlike]

Dino Might, on 18 January 2017 - 09:49 PM, said:

MWO currently is very one dimensional. All the MWOWC talk is pretty overblown. It's kind of simple to set up firing lines with a coordinated team, and that is the most complicated tactic you see in this game.

It's not always that simple setting up those type of firing lines... there is counterplay involved.

I'm not sure I have the best description, but some tactics requires some level of thought, anticipation, and reaction.

The thing about this game is that some people think they can do it all in one go... by themselves and that's not how this game works.

Twitch level shooting doesn't accelerate your cooldown or heat management. It doesn't improve your ability to recognize whether a brawl or snipefest will happen. It doesn't make frankenmechs good or lock on missiles to be good or bad. The only thing it does is ensures that you aren't "spraying and praying". That's it.

[InspectorG]

MOAR STOMPY?

[razenWing]

Dino Might, on 19 January 2017 - 12:26 PM, said:

One thing I want to point out:

In every promo video of mechwarrior ever, you have mechs charging across the field blasting away at each other.
MWO is nothing like that.

The OP has proposed a way to provide an avenue for that style of play to have a place in MWO. I might actually like something that is more akin to the promo videos - I think it warrants investigation and, possibly, development.


Also, the concern about auto-aim jumping everywhere is ill-founded, because the proposal is not for auto-designation and aiming. Designation of the target would still be manual, and so your computer would not switch targets until you told it to do so.

This would provide some interesting options as far as mech control is concerned. Do you want torso slew control to be slaved to your designated target LOS? Do you want leg orientation to be slaved in that manner? Do you want arm slew to be slaved? Maybe there's a reason to do none of the above? What if you want to engage two targets at once? Slave arms to designated target, but leave torso control to the pilot so he can iron-sight those weapons. Fire at two different targets simultaneously, though at the disadvantage of the auto-aim dispersion and the boresight firing with the torso weapons.

It would be kind of neat and certainly a lot more to think about.



Oh my gosh, I WANT THAT more than anything in this game. To each his own, but man, oh man, that would be amazing. To have a mech simulation game. *drool*

Also, I'm on about hour 28 trying to successfully land the Spitfire MkIX. That sucker is a b**** to keep aligned after touchdown!

Glad to see other people with same vision =)
------------------

What I don't understand about a lot of arguments is how this would make the game "not fun." It will be different for sure. But whether it will be fun or not... that's highly subjective. Let me point out that there are more games with auto-aims in whatever genre of gaming than games without auto-aim from the last 20 years. There have NEVER been a complaint that games with auto-aims are not fun because such mechanics exist.

As I said repeatedly, if you don't like it, I am NOT asking for auto-aim to replace the current aiming model. And no, if PGI decides to pursue this, then it would be up to them to allocate resource, why are you doing books for them? What, they have to release 2 less mech paks a year?

Someone brought up, rather than asking for why it won't be fun and why it would be? I think I listed that as well. I think that will revolutionize gameplay into something new. It will change the way we engage combat and strategy. It's an additional option. it can potentially increase ttk. It will bring more immersion and shift the meter more toward simulation. (obviously, you can say none of those are fun... which is fine. don't toggle on the auto-aim. simple as that) it will be more optimize for joystick/controller (which also a point that SO many people fail to engage. the twitch FPS genre also heavily rely on the precision of mouse and keyboard. was mechwarrior supposed to be played on a mouse/keyboard or joystick/controller? that to me, is a VERY important question to ask. and as I recall, when MW4 came out, MS was selling MW4 exclusive joysticks)

(even MW3 try to counter balance pure mouse and keyboard play with a more complex control scheme that cannot be fully utilized unless you play with joysticks with lots of buttons close to you)

There are a ton of reasons why this change would make the game different and potentially more fun. You can choose to ignore them all because none of those reasons are relevant to you. Which is fine. But they might be relevant to others. So if PGI pursue this change as a potential tech test bed, I don't see how this is exclusive, but more engaging to more people. (and add another angle of marketing)

PS a lot of you guys seem to contradict your own counter point on what this game is. we have a contingent of people of clearly wants to shake the label that this game is somehow a FPS game, while we have others that want this game to be more FPS. which as I said, is totally fine. everyone has a vision of Mech combat is like. I personally want Inner Sphere robots to be more like Gundam to pick up hand activated weapons. But to each is their own, right?

Edited by razenWing, 19 January 2017 - 08:49 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 19 January 2017 - 08:48 PM, said:

It's an additional option. it can potentially increase ttk.

If it is an additional option, it only increases TTK against players who get confused on which ones are optimal. Best case it keeps things as they are now, worst case is TTK decreases because it becomes more optimal in certain situations.

razenWing, on 19 January 2017 - 08:48 PM, said:

that to me, is a VERY important question to ask. and as I recall, when MW4 came out, MS was selling MW4 exclusive joysticks)

MW4 was still better played on the keyboard/mouse setup, sure they sold joysticks for that crowd but that doesn't mean it was best played with joysticks.

razenWing, on 19 January 2017 - 08:48 PM, said:

(even MW3 try to counter balance pure mouse and keyboard play with a more complex control scheme that cannot be fully utilized unless you play with joysticks with lots of buttons close to you)

I'm confused, doesn't a keyboard also have lots of buttons close to you?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 19 January 2017 - 09:13 PM.

[razenWing]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 19 January 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

If it is an additional option, it only increases TTK against players who get confused on which ones are optimal. Best case it keeps things as they are now, worst case is TTK decreases because it becomes more optimal in certain situations.


MW4 was still better played on the keyboard/mouse setup, sure they sold joysticks for that crowd but that doesn't mean it was best played with joysticks.


I'm confused, doesn't a keyboard also have lots of buttons close to you?

you remember the default keyboard setup for mw3 right? AT that time, imagine WASD wasn't invented yet, and your best option is a joystick with 10 buttons to map all the core functions.

(fire is top of the flight stick, weapon switch is to the side, some minor piloting functions are on the bottom or ring/pinkie, throttle and direction is controlled by joystick. see what i mean?)

Edited by razenWing, 19 January 2017 - 09:23 PM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 19 January 2017 - 09:12 PM, said:

If it is an additional option, it only increases TTK against players who get confused on which ones are optimal. Best case it keeps things as they are now, worst case is TTK decreases because it becomes more optimal in certain situations.


MW4 was still better played on the keyboard/mouse setup, sure they sold joysticks for that crowd but that doesn't mean it was best played with joysticks.


I'm confused, doesn't a keyboard also have lots of buttons close to you?

im self and all my Guys in two Clans (Smoke Jaguars and Cloud Cobra) played MW4 only with Joystick over ten Years in Leagues with succes...Used real Pilots Joysticks or Keyboards ? Joysticks better for fast manovers and Reaction with only the dominated Hand

[Y E O N N E]

razenWing, on 19 January 2017 - 09:21 PM, said:

you remember the default keyboard setup for mw3 right? AT that time, imagine WASD wasn't invented yet, and your best option is a joystick with 10 buttons to map all the core functions.

Did MW3 not feature the ability to re-bind your keys?

I don't use default key setups for anything. All of my shooter games use E as "Jump", Space as "Melee" or whatever special I need rapid and brainless access to (MASC in MWO), X is "Use", and then everything else is game-specific.

[razenWing]

Yeonne Greene, on 19 January 2017 - 09:24 PM, said:

Did MW3 not feature the ability to re-bind your keys?

I don't use default key setups for anything. All of my shooter games use E as "Jump", Space as "Melee" or whatever special I need rapid and brainless access to (MASC in MWO), X is "Use", and then everything else is game-specific.

Shifting 30 controls from 1 cluster of keyboard to another is not exactly optimizing binding. and yes, it WAS like 30 keys literally. I mean, just count how much key are on your keyboard right now. divide by the number, what's that? like 75%? how does key re-bind help 75% occupancy rate? (admittingly, most of those are not core functions, but still) there's a reason to mimic familiar modern FPS, MWO is playable with literally 10 keys.

[Y E O N N E]

razenWing, on 19 January 2017 - 09:27 PM, said:

Shifting 30 controls from 1 cluster of keyboard to another is not exactly optimizing binding. and yes, it WAS like 30 keys literally. I mean, just count how much key are on your keyboard right now. divide by the number, what's that? like 75%? how does key re-bind help 75% occupancy rate? (admittingly, most of those are not core functions, but still) there's a reason to mimic familiar modern FPS, MWO is playable with literally 10 keys.

I have 108* keys on my keyboard (what kind of slob uses reduced-profile keyboards?). 30 keys is less than 30% of my total available. I currently use about 27 of them in MWO. It's not that much of a difference.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 19 January 2017 - 09:32 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 19 January 2017 - 09:22 PM, said:

im self and all my Guys in two Clans (Smoke Jaguars and Cloud Cobra) played MW4 only with Joystick over ten Years in Leagues with succes...

Unless you were ever at the level of IHx, CJF, CSJ, or SR during the NBT-Mercs days, then you weren't really dominating. Being good in MWL wasn't a good sign of success given that most mid-tier teams from NBT dominated MWL ladder leagues when they played in them. I played during all of HC/MP3 and I certainly don't remember you, maybe Mag might since he and Glory played during the golden years of NBT-Mercs (they went under the names of Methos Furey and Tainted Glory back then).

razenWing, on 19 January 2017 - 09:27 PM, said:

Shifting 30 controls from 1 cluster of keyboard to another is not exactly optimizing binding.

Do joysticks have 30 buttons?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 19 January 2017 - 09:34 PM.