42 replies to this topic

[Tristan Winter]

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.

[Accused]

Yeah multiplayer is why we're all here.

[Scout Derek]

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.

Now, what happens to the people who don't enjoy mw5 or do? Well, simply put, they'll always come back to MWO. Believe it or not, most communities were brought together with the multiplayer aspect to the MechWarrior games. in this case, mw5 won't have a multiplayer. there's MWO for that.

In short, it will work out either way. MWO will still be around, and people will generally enjoy or not enjoy the new game PGI will be putting out in 2018. Nothing More Nothing Less my friend.

[RestosIII]

I'm a huge SP person myself. I'd literally never touched the other games' multiplayer outside of a couple LAN matches in MW3, and I loved those games to bits. I generally dislike PvP, honestly. Now, co-op PvE? That's my jam right there. My dream Mechwarrior game would be a single player campaign, with PvE co-op as a side campaign/mission system, and completely ignoring PvP. But then I'd feel bad for the PvP nerds and want PvP Solaris for them, since I'm a sucker

TL;DR: Don't like PvP, give SP and co-op.

[Tristan Winter]

Accused, on 26 January 2017 - 12:12 AM, said:

Yeah multiplayer is why we're all here.

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.

[Bombast]

Not very, if I'm honest. SP > MP for the most part, and Mechwarrior is no exception.

Truthfully, I'm more excited about Battletechs MP than I've ever been for Mechwarriors. And I'm not even that excited about that.

[Wrathful Scythe]

Depends on how good the sp part is. If you can spend hours on hours on the campaign with multiple playthroughs and different ways to tackle the game, I wouldnt need the multiplayer. But if we only get an 8 hour campaign thats always the same, then a multiplayer is needed or my money stays in my pocket.

[kesmai]

Well, i found the single player part in mwo, how to describe it, hmmm, a bit lacking.
Don't get me wrong, i really do appreciate all the hard work that went into single player, but sometimes i feel it is just not enough, almost as if there is none.
I'm sorry that i'm so rude to pgi and apologize to them not to acknowledge the achieved progress.

[Vellron2005]

It seems to me that when MW5 hits, MWO will lose half or more of its playerbase..

Many of us play MWO cose' its the most "up-to-date" version of Battletech / Mechwarrior..

Personally, I never liked MMO's.. I dislike epeen-ing, egos, PSR "mightier than thou" ratings, and all of that stuff..

I do like the social aspect, especially when we used to get 12-mans with a good drop commander.. but it's not something that would take me away from a rich immersive storyline and playing "my way"..

I could easily do without PVP, and simply play a single player game, if the game was good..

I put my paint jobs on for me, and me alone.. I don't care if YOU like them or not..

The only thing that would be better for me than a single player game, is a multiplayer game that had all the immersive elements of a single player game.. And played against bots.. Because playing against real people, there will ALWAYS be someone's ego in the way, somebody who will cry and whine the game is not balanced, and somebody who will meta game, and try to outperform all others..

I don't like people like that.. Bots don't cry and whine.. and playing against bots means you can have assymetric, truly challenging gameplay.. not everything has to be even, fair, and bland..

[Bishop Steiner]

Accused, on 26 January 2017 - 12:12 AM, said:

Yeah multiplayer is why we're all here.

Speak for yourself.

I'm here because there is no current alternative Battletech/Mechwarrior game. I honestly could give a crap less about the multiplayer aspect. Once Battletech 2017 and MW5 get rolling, if they are any good, MWO will take a back seat, and then some, unless they make some significant strides worth content admit play modes.

I have no need to show off epeen, nor do I care to see other people's epeen.

[Davegt27]

my hope for MW5 is going way down
they been working on FP since 2014 and it still sucks

[Bishop Steiner]

kesmai, on 26 January 2017 - 12:58 AM, said:

Well, i found the single player part in mwo, how to describe it, hmmm, a bit lacking.
Don't get me wrong, i really do appreciate all the hard work that went into single player, but sometimes i feel it is just not enough, almost as if there is none.
I'm sorry that i'm so rude to pgi and apologize to them not to acknowledge the achieved progress.

Single player party in MWO?

[DovisKhan]

Multyplayer 100% important, I rarely do SP

[RestosIII]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 January 2017 - 01:05 AM, said:

Single player party in MWO?

He's being snarky about how there is none.

[Bombast]

RestosIII, on 26 January 2017 - 01:06 AM, said:

He's being snarky about how there is none.

Well, there's the training area...

[El Bandito]

I'll play MW5, BT, and MWO. They are all different in their own way. No reason to abandon one in favor of another.

A balanced MW multiplayer game is something I wanted from 1997, when I first fought my friend over Netmech. What's the use of being a mech pilot if you can't flaunt your skills?

Edited by El Bandito, 26 January 2017 - 01:23 AM.

[kesmai]

Bombast, on 26 January 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

Well, there's the training area...

And an Atlas, don't forget that atlas...

[LordNothing]

there really hadn't been any options for single player other than go back and play mw2/3/4 some more. mw5 is long over due. mwo is just the leech machine that made it all possible. i suspect mwo will still fill the need for a multiplayer experience. but there is some middle ground between a full online and a full offline experience. for example no coop, no way to play the sp game as a group.

if we ever get an engine port for mwo, and both mwo and mw5 run the same engine, then it actually kind of makes some sense to do a little bit of integration to make the pve experience a reality. mw5 would include mwo client components and allow for people to use their mwo assets in mw5, as well as have those coop games in mw5.

Edited by LordNothing, 26 January 2017 - 01:27 AM.

[kesmai]

LordNothing, on 26 January 2017 - 01:22 AM, said:

there really hadn't been any options for single player other than go back and play mw2/3/4 some more. mw5 is long over due. mwo is just the leech machine that made it all possible.

Haven't seen anything, but a crude trailer yet. And by todays standards that trailer was crude.

But on the topic, without any snarkyness:
I did enjoy the mw2 campaigns, though my hardware back them could barely run the game. Multiplayer in mw2 had always to compete with solaris.(though 2 different kind of fish).
MW 3 campaign (+pirates moon) was fantasic and i played MW 3 a lot. MW 3 multiplayer was crap.
MW 4 ?
I never liked mechwarrior 4. I bought it and played it for 20-30 hours back in early 2002. Shelved it afterwards.
So is the SP in MW important to me?
If it is done well...

Edited by kesmai, 26 January 2017 - 01:37 AM.

[Ascaloth]

I like Single Player for RPGs and Strategy games only. Shooters, simulators, arena-like games, survival, heck even bloody tower defense games are funnier in multiplayer. (Looking forward to the new Legion TD game coming out this year)