42 replies to this topic

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

I like games with multiplayer because I enjoy battling with live people, AI gets predictable much faster than humanity and even on the hardest levels it just doesn't feel as satisfying to beat, even if you don't ever see the reactions of the other person.

I like single player games for the story or as a relaxing, low input type of thing when they have no story as if it was solitaire. I go through a game to enjoy the writing of the story, find all the paths it can go, see the ends, the options, all that. If I can build out my own character and loadouts I often have little care for the looks, but often do multiple runs with different builds, skill focuses, or equipment to try the different combat mechanics and look at stats.

If MW5 has a mechlab then I'll likely buy it and go through the campaign. After that I'll go ahead and do what I do with MW4 to this day and try out a bunch of challenge mode type of restrictions on myself like only using one weapon type or only mediums and under or only salvage, no market runs. Hope its fun is all.

[Old-dirty B]

Im here for the vehicular combat and its the closedt thing around nowadays to ChromeHounds. Aso the challenge to outplay my opponents and play mindgames is equally important. No computer / AI is able to replace the challenge that (some) players offer.

I couldnt care less about battletech to be honest, as far as im concerend it has caused nothing but ballancing/gamelay issues and wacky / fantasy / eighties sifi looking mechs that seem to be far away from any possible future reality.

Edited by B3R3ND, 26 January 2017 - 04:51 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Tristan Winter, on 26 January 2017 - 12:19 AM, said:

There's at least a few people who keep saying they'll be out the door as soon as the Battletech game arrives. Battletech is why they're here. So I would imagine there's even more people who are here for the 1PV Mechwarrior.

I came for an immersive Mechwarrior/Battletech experience. The community aspect was secondary. Now, having found immersion of any kind to be utterly lacking (lets be honest this is an FPS with trappings of MW/BT...oh and dots...but nothing more) now the primary reason I play is for that community. The actual game is of secondary, albeit necessary, consideration.

I do believe that the community draw, and even the multiplayer aspect, remains tangential to a large contingent of the population (e.g. seriously disappointed lore nerds, BT fans, soloists, etc.) and a lot of those folks will indeed leave when Battletech arrives. Most however will just play less. Even if the latter is all that occurs, I think the community and the game will feel the impact of a good portion of the population suddenly, and perhaps consistently, reducing their play time here all at once when BT arrives.

[Idealsuspect]

Scout Derek, on 26 January 2017 - 12:15 AM, said:

I sure as hell will tell you what will happen to MWO; It'll still be around, it'll get a game engine upgrade, preferably MechWarrior 5's engine, you'll play it and MWO.

LOL






....

[Acenan]

I will play the new Battletech game and MW5, and most probably still continue to play MWO..


Over the many years the game have been out, it haven't changed that much. The gamemodes IMO is still lackluster and the TTK has become way to fast IMO.. I am very much looking forward to BT/MW5 and maybe an engine upgrade and/or even more content for MWO in the future..

Unless MW5/BT turns out to be completely shite, i can see a lot of people leaving MWO (atleast for a while) unless it's a major content update for MWO. That is, not just more Mechs/tech. But also better gamemodes..

Will be interesting to see how Incursion will turn out...

Edited by Acenan, 26 January 2017 - 05:31 AM.

[Pjwned]

The biggest appeal of MWO to me is finding various builds that I like and seeing how much *** I can kick on the battlefield against other players, and MWO is rather unique in this regard which is why I've stuck around the community for so long instead of just disappearing completely after seeing the developers screw up nearly everything.

I wouldn't care nearly as much, if at all, if my only opponents were just boring AI, and I certainly wouldn't have an extensive posting history on the community forums for a single player game.

[Deathlike]

The multiplayer aspect of any MW game is important. The fact that MWO is supposed to be updated for the sole purpose of PvP (not that PvE is bad, but usually the AI has always been inferior in a MW game), you would hope the game would be held to the same standards as every online PvP game.

The problem is that PGI hasn't really put in the work that an online game needs and runs at a pace that a single player game in development would have. That's the actual problem.

[Ultimax]

Tristan Winter, on 26 January 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

In FPS games, there's basically two kind of people. The people who spend a hundred hours decorating a Skyrim house that nobody will ever see and then maybe even delete the game afterwards. And then there's the people who grind World of Warcraft PVP matches because they want to look good in the rewarded PVP armour and earn the adulation of their fellow gamers.

In other words, some people enjoy games as an immersive experience regardless of whether they are alone or with others. Other people want to impress other gamers, share their experience with other gamers or at least be witnessed by other gamers when they're playing.

Of course, there's also the aspect of human players having an intelligence and creativity that you don't get from bots / AI, so PVP is in many ways more challenging and gratifying than PVE for many people. But let's imagine that the AI is so good that you can't tell the difference between bots and people. (Or in the case of solo queue, let's pretend the AI is so bad that you can't tell the difference between bots and taters. Heh. Heh.)

And there's also the social aspect, of course. But imagine MWO didn't have VOIP (easy to imagine) or even chat. So a Turing test would be easier to pass for the bots, as you weren't talking to them.

I'm pondering this because I'm wondering what will happen when MW5:Mercs is released, particularly if it's a very good game with long shelf life due to either modding (a la Skyrim) or DLC or just a good procedurally generated campaign that goes on indefinitely.

I'm not sure what I will do when MW5:Mercs is released. I'm not sure if I'll be content playing that game in my own universe, with no other players around (assuming there's no co-op) as opposed to MWO, where I can show everyone my paint and my decals and my epeen.

I wonder how many people will be content in a single player game if it turns out to be good enough, and how many people will be drawn back to MWO specifically because they don't enjoy spending so much time in a game where no one's watching their accomplishments or paintjobs.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but wow there seems to be an intense bias here on your part.

1) I have yet to play a game where the AI was as competent as an actual skilled player. Usually there are cheat mechanics built in to give the bots advantages.


2) Playing against other players is fun, it develops a very different kind of spirit of camaraderie among team mates and it also brings you into wider contact with others in that community.


In a game like this where mech builds and drop deck design shift according to the meta, and according to the rules of the tournament or league - you would have to have a human mind planning and building those bot teams all of the time.

[MeiSooHaityu]

For any video game in the Battletech universe (Mechwarrior/MechCommander/Battletech), I would rather play Single Player over Multiplayer hands down.

Multiplayer games like this (shooter/simulator based) are fine when it comes to titles that really don't have any story or lore. Games like CoD are fine multiplayer because the story really isn't anything worth playing (except maybe the older CoDs up to CoD:MW4). Team Fortess, Hawken, Overwatch, etc... No really story worth a darn, so multiplayer is what it is good at and what it focuses on.

The Battletech universe though? It has a lot of cool conflicts, factions, and intrigue (novels worth). To me, this franchise is at it's best when it tells a story. MWO does not tell a story. It essentially tries to be an arena shooter/simulator. It IMO, does not bring out the best in the franchise.

[Napoleon_Blownapart]

1) I have yet to play a game where the AI was as competent as an actual skilled player. Usually there are cheat mechanics built in to give the bots advantages

there was a computer Risk game that the AI always made the moves i would have made

[Tristan Winter]

Gorantir, on 26 January 2017 - 07:00 AM, said:

1) I have yet to play a game where the AI was as competent as an actual skilled player. Usually there are cheat mechanics built in to give the bots advantages

there was a computer Risk game that the AI always made the moves i would have made

It was just for the sake of conversation, to investigate how important the presence of other people is, if you exclude their competence as players and the good laughs we have in chat.

[Deathlike]

Tristan Winter, on 26 January 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

It was just for the sake of conversation, to investigate how important the presence of other people is, if you exclude their competence as players and the good laughs we have in chat.

That's a personality thing, less so about the game itself.

I'm sure there's a fair portion of players that have played previous MW games that have not even considered playing the multiplayer/online portion of the game. I think that's pretty common by itself.

For the more social gamer, some people do subscribe to playing games with PvE content, such as Killing Floor 2 or Path of Exile. Games that are built around social interaction is a thing, and trying to build around PvP content in those type of games already designed around PvE usually produce bad to mediocre results (PvP in POE is pretty bad and imbalanced).


It's hard to just convert people that already play a PvP-first based game to PvE (and vice versa) due to how core design principles can conflict with each other (it's truly a balance nightmare) as what seems appropriate to one is not quite balanced for the other (it's not like single player or PvE in previous MW games were balanced either).


It's nothing new in the industry, and considering PGI's "progress" on anything, it's just going to disappoint (unless people really like shooting AI that is as good as the potatoes we already have).

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2017 - 07:33 AM.

[Tristan Winter]

Deathlike, on 26 January 2017 - 07:32 AM, said:

That's a personality thing, less so about the game itself.

What? This whole thread is a personality thing. Every game is a personality thing. You can't really separate the issues.

[Deathlike]

Tristan Winter, on 26 January 2017 - 07:35 AM, said:

What? This whole thread is a personality thing. Every game is a personality thing. You can't really separate the issues.

Sure, but my point was more that if you're actually playing MWO... you should (reasonably) expect that the PvP component to actually function better the way than it does now.

It's just that I think some people honestly think this game would be more MMO-like (like Star Trek Online or something along those lines) and honestly seem to get a rude awakening (I don't even think any mention of AI is on the website). There are games like Fractured Space that have both (although the AI is basic enough, but still goes full derp because it has closer to zero intelligence like a new player).

[C E Dwyer]

The multiplayer aspect of M.W.O means zip to me.

I play it because there is no alternative.

I have to say that if it wasn't for the people I've met here I would probably have given up years ago, and some, though I don't play with them anymore I keep in contact with, out the game.

My opinion of this game that I didn't have eighteen months ago is that it isn't worth the pixels it made of, up until that point I felt I was either a supporter or at least neutral.

Despite my intense dislike of where the game has gone, I probably would have continued paying money for mechs if they were ones that could be ported over to HBS's 3025 period. However with the javelin which is so utterly awful, I can only think this was done deliberately in the hope people would give up wanting the old classics, and with many of this games major faults caused by P.G.I pandering to the vocal minority, I can only hope that HBS's game is good enough that I can finally put this into the trash can where it belongs, once I've run down my premium time.

[Mcgral18]

PVP competition is nice, but something I am yearning for is Logistics
Single Player is fine for that, but MegaMek doesn't have the same lasting appeal as manually tearing apart a mech for salvage, and MW2 Merc hitboxes were not exactly very accurate because of the overlapping bubbles. Made going for faces very difficult


But, I enjoyed that gameplay. Sometimes, you need a harder challenge than the PUG LIFE, and Single Player can offer that!
(cue laughter)




If the game is priced reasonably, I'll probably pick it up at launch, assuming PGI hasn't gone and goofed again. Otherwise, maybe a 75% off sale later on. I've got BattleTech, whenever that comes. It will have Logistics, but different type of gameplay.

[WarHippy]

I like both. I like the PVE side of things for the story and because it gives context and flavor to the universe where the PVP takes place. I like PVP because it brings new and real challenges to the game, and it provides longevity. A good PVE game might have me play it a couple times back to back but I am unlikely to play it more than once a year if I play it again at all. PVE for me is kind of like reading a book and I only come back to if it is really good. PVP for me provides more sustained interest.

[smalltrappy]

For all those stating, AI can only do so much - I'd advise you to look to titles beyond the western market, as many titles made for the western market, or made for the western gaming culture, tend to have pretty weak difficulty scaling, rookie is easy mode, easy mode is hard mode, hard mode is insanity and insanity is impossible, generally how it is in the west. AI Enemy now-a-days can be pretty damn complex and life like, not to mention due to the fact the AI is not limited by human reaction speeds and our generally lack luster situational awareness ( In comparison ) - AI can easily be competitive, as EFT can demonstrate, infact in EFT, I spent the vast majority of my time playing PvE, learning the ropes and so forth, only to switch to PvP and find myself utterly dominating ( The AI is insanely smart in that game and insanely brutal. )

But generally, I'd have to say for a 'Mech game, BattleTech world - MWO does not do it justice in anyway, most of the 'Mechs feel light and toy like, the sounds just feel 'meh' ... you don't get that 'heavy stomping' feel when rocking about, but in the slapdash preview they showed for MW5? which by the way is not a trailer, they can name it a Trailer all they want, its just quick 'hey heres what we've gotten upto' and they've made strides in developing MW5, the AI is pretty basic at the moment, but with the Unreal engine, you better believe me, AI will be damn tough.

The sounds are damn decent, the Shadow Hawk looks bloody beautiful in the Unreal Engine ( Oh look they have allll these 'Mech assets they've made, not to mention all of the mounting variations are done already too! woot woot ) Not to mention, the Shadow Hawk sounds like a big 'Mech stomping around, and the start up sequence? glorious.

So, don't count MW5 out yet, just by saying 'eh the Trailer was crude' - why waste time and money on making a glamoured up trailer of a game in pre-alpha? sort of pointless, wait until its midway through its Alpha build, where plenty of the assets used for MWO ( Master Assets at-least ) have had there textures redone, skeletons redone, animations redone, physics redone. So they can spend money and time on a Trailer thats worth while and show off what they actually envision for the game, not a slap dash preview of 'oh this is whats up btw' - a Dev probably recorded the damn thing whilst testing the animations, walkspeed, feel and etc.

I'm here simply for the 'Mechs - the Multiplayer, eh ... could be way better, problem is, BattleTech was never designed for a PvP FPS styled game, where component destruction was a thing, so it sort of makes alot of the 'oooo scary' mechs from the table top, not so scary, because armour in this game, is pretty much just a stopgap. Whilst I do enjoy MWO, its just not a MechWarrior game, despite having the looks of one, and now they're creating there own 'Mechs.

I'd say its a safe bet, at-least 30% of the playerbase or more, will hop to MW5 and BattleTech when they're released, but they probably wont ditch MWO, sure it has so, so, SO many faults an flaws, its still MWO, its a fun 'Mech bashemup game, no one can deny that, a game where you can rock around as, a Rifleman, spamming quad AC/2's either in group shot, or staggered, shaking and baking, or run around in a King Crab with quad UAC/5, making people regret life choices when they turn a corner and come face to face with you, or again making people regret playing, because they're chasing a locust around, only for it to turn around and core your ***.

I believe, many will just play MW5, BattleTech and MWO, course they'll be a huge drop in the playerbase for the first few weeks and maybe upto a month or so, whilst people smother the new shiney 'Mech games with love and affection if they're good, and even if they're subpar, they'll still be played, so long as its playable, if not? well ... more woe for us 'Mech fans right?

I personally will be quickly hopping to MW5 and BattleTech, I have to - that Shadow Hawk was damned sexy and now I'm hoping we'll start with a Shadow Hawk, albeit ... sorta wish we'd start with a Bushwacker, just for the sake of nostalgia xD but I'll also play MWO still, its fun making CLAN pilot's women lament in terror as I strip they're mechs with UAC/5's and machineguns and SRM's, ehehehehe.

Edited by Verastue, 26 January 2017 - 09:10 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Pjwned, on 26 January 2017 - 05:33 AM, said:

I wouldn't care nearly as much, if at all, if my only opponents were just boring AI, and I certainly wouldn't have an extensive posting history on the community forums for a single player game.

Honestly? Unless I'm playing Comp Players (and usually getting my face stomped) I find AI to be more intelligent and challenging than 99% of live human players. Hell, there's a good chance it'll be les predictable too.... AI doesn't usually cower and wait for the opfor to slowly pick it apart, at least.

[RestosIII]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 January 2017 - 10:16 AM, said:

Honestly? Unless I'm playing Comp Players (and usually getting my face stomped) I find AI to be more intelligent and challenging than 99% of live human players. Hell, there's a good chance it'll be les predictable too.... AI doesn't usually cower and wait for the opfor to slowly pick it apart, at least.

I still love the MW4 AI, that would go from being absolutely terrifying, to randomly spinning in circles. You never knew if it would be dangerous or not.