Jump to content

Mwo Should Have Not Been A Bt Game


108 replies to this topic

#1 Shiroi Tsuki

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 1,205 posts
  • LocationCosplaying Ruby from Rwby in Aiur, Auckland, GA America, Interior Union, Mar Sara and Remnant

Posted 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM

Imagine MWO, but it's not a BT game. Imagine all BT stuff are removed, but the concept and premise stays the same.

-Giant stompy robots
-Slow paced, "A thinking man's shooter" and is closer to simulation that it is to arcade
-Massive depth on customizations
-Role warfare
-Faction battles in a galactic scale
-Tech differences that offer different playstyles
-Role play elements

What do you see?

What I see is a great potential and a LOT of opportunity

"But Shiroi, MWO ISN'T a BT game, PGI killed all BT elements and turned into a complete monstrosity"
No


IMHO, making the game into a BT game and following the lore is more of a restriction rather than a potential in the grand scheme of things. While following the lore, you don't really have to worry a lot about creating new things as the stuff you already need are already there; the weapons, damage values, mech designs, their loadout, factions etc. That's like half the game right there.

By lore, the Clans have the better equipment, hands down. The way PGI balanced this is by making IS more "tanky" (inb4 XL balance hurr durr) and the Clans better at DPS.

Instead of having a bajillion factions and ~2 base techs, what if we only had ~5 factions but each faction plays a lot differently from the other?

For example;
Faction A relies on ballistic based weapons. Cannons, shells, stuff like that. While they have to aim a little higher above their target to compensate for bullet drop over long distances, they can also use this to their advantage by firing them like mortars, being able to shoot behind cover and damage enemies without LOS. Their support weapons will include artillery strikes that can do a lot of AoE but may have little effect on targets hiding behind a hill

Faction B emphasizes a lot on energy based weapons, stuff like lasers and plasma rifles. Gameplay wise, they do a lot of LOS.
Support wise, they can have an orbital laser platform that can shoot targets hiding behind a hill, but will have no effect against those that have cover above their heads.

Just by these 2 different examples, I can already see a diverse gameplay that can rival the IS/Clans that we have right now. Now add 3 other factions each with their own unique play style, gameplay depth and variety increases a lot. Of course, they will have to introduce new mechanics and new weapons as well to add more to what we already have.



One of the problems with MWO's current state is that it's a modern game with modern players with ~80's gimmicks. The lore balance doesn't also translate well to game balance. I guess part of this is because table top that heavily relies on RNG won't necessarily be the same for players with reflexes and quick thinking. Without quirks, an IS Gauss is pretty much superior to an IS AC/20. Less slots, practically has no heat, and most importantly, SUPERIOR RANGE. This is especially important since MWO/BT has quite a few weapons that literally do no damage at certain ranges. That sort of restriction is not really common in a lot of modern games of the same genre.


Like most other games, there has to be a story or a background setting. Like the gameplay, this also opens up a LOT of potential and opportunities to create a great universe. While they may not be able to create one that is as deep as BT in a short period of time, they can add to it as time goes on. They can even introduce new factions with new tech, making the game more deeper. By following the lore, MWO is RESTRICTED to what BT has laid out a few decades ago.This means certain factions will be **** on simply because lore said so lole.
The FRR was fighting 6 other factions at once and we were down to two planets at some point in Phase 1. Factions like Liao on the other hand only have 2 Factions to go up against at the start (though I think they manage to fight Steiner too, can't remember) This might be interesting on the political and narrative side of things, but in the end, MWO is a game, not politics.


While I understand that PGI is a small team, I do believe that with proper investments, decision making, marketing and funding, they could have developed an even better game and a new IP.

TL;DR: More freedom and variety, less BT restrictions

Edited by Shiroi Tsuki, 18 February 2017 - 11:51 AM.


#2 Lupis Volk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 2,126 posts
  • LocationIn the cockpit of the nearest Light Battlemech.

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:01 PM

View PostShiroi Tsuki, on 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:


TL;DR: More freedom and variety, less BT restrictions

yeah that'd happen, don't forget we'd have better balance.

But it's because this is linked to BT that it's gotten me interested in the BT lore.

#3 Roughneck45

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Handsome Devil
  • The Handsome Devil
  • 4,452 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:03 PM

If it wasn't BT related it may have never got off the ground in the first place.

#4 Spheroid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 5,060 posts
  • LocationSouthern Wisconsin

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:08 PM

If there was a market for such a product it would have made already. Let that sink in.

#5 Shiroi Tsuki

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 1,205 posts
  • LocationCosplaying Ruby from Rwby in Aiur, Auckland, GA America, Interior Union, Mar Sara and Remnant

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:11 PM

View PostLupis Volk, on 18 February 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

But it's because this is linked to BT that it's gotten me interested in the BT lore.


Same

View PostRoughneck45, on 18 February 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

If it wasn't BT related it may have never got off the ground in the first place.

There wasn't a lot of competition in the market at the time. Hawken was pretty much the only other significant Mech FPS back then. Titanfall that released a few years later was hyped during when the futuristic FPS was the thing.

Only reason why Titanfall 2 isn't doing well than it should be is because people are getting tired of the futuristic FPS setting and BF1 did dominate a bit last year

#6 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,966 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:18 PM

If it didn't have (the very thin veneer of) BT then many of us wouldn't still be playing it, living in hope that it might one day be better than it is.

#7 Nesutizale

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Privateer
  • The Privateer
  • 3,239 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:40 PM

Lets see they want to create a Battletech game so its best to drop the Battletech part...logical.
PGI didn't want to create a Random stopy mech game. Sure they could have but that wasn't the point.

What I can agree with is that the execution of how its done isn't the beste.
Battletech has a lot more to give then what we currently have. Basicly PGI stopped in the middle of the development of the game a few years ago.

See my thread about what kind of weapons are missing (scroll down a bit) https://mwomercs.com...we-need-skills/
and why the new skill system wouldn't be necessary going the suggestet way.

Also most of the appeal of battletech is not just gigant robots but also the story. Here PGI has taken over nothing but some Clan/House names and some logos.
Battltech has such a deep lore that you can even trace back each weapon to a company that builds it.

There is nothing in this game that give people that are new some kind of connection to the Lore...ok some small text passeges but they are kinda out of context.

I think what people don't realise is that, as OP said, there is so much more potential in the Lore that could be craftet into a fine game.
Yet we have skirmish and the other skirmish.

I don't want to say that PGI isn't willing to do something with the IP but I don't know how its on the financial side. Can they even go deeper? Can the pay the people they would need, do they need more people a new engine, upgrade the engine...I can't realy tell what is holding them back.
With MW:Merc5 I hope that they will come around and give us the more meaningfull MW that we are all looking for.

#8 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:47 PM

I've also had some ponderings about what a non-BT giant robot game based on BT would look like. However, the key thing here is that it would need to be a flat-out new IP with completely new mechs/guns/factions/etc rather than a "spin-off" like Mechassault was.

If a developer ever did decide to do this, it would be funny seeing people complain on the forums that it's just a BT/MW ripoff even though those same people complain that MWO is just a generic game like Hawken with nothing in common with BT whatsoever (they're wrong).

#9 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:50 PM

View PostShiroi Tsuki, on 18 February 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

Stuff


The only reason this game happened is because it was a BT frnachise game.

Better bigger companies have made exactly what you are suggesting P.G.I should have done, and been far less successful.

the Wales that get MWO alive are the wales that want a BT linked game, once the last leave this game becomes far smaller, or closes altogether.

#10 Kanil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,067 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 01:28 PM

If it wasn't BT, I never would have played the game.

Would the game have been better? Probably, sure. Would it have been better than the other games out there I can play? Well, it's a matter of taste, but for me, no.

#11 Zolaz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 3,510 posts
  • LocationHouston, Tx

Posted 18 February 2017 - 01:46 PM

You cant have a lore based game ... if none of the devs care about or know the lore.

#12 MechaBattler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 5,119 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 01:55 PM

What was the last successful mech game you've seen? Titanfall? And that's with a AAA publisher behind it.

I mean if you want a example of a mech game without BT restrictions. You need not look any further than Hawken.

The truth is Battletech has a lot of good ideas. That's why I enjoy MWO as much as I have. I'm not a nostalgia player. I came into this game with only cursory experience in Mechwarrior games and no experience in battletech. I've always been a fan of mechs in general. This is the best mech game I've played. Let me frame that with the fact I like mechs that are down to Earth. I love Gundam, but it went off the rails with all the crazy beam spam shet. Similarly the Armored Core series is pretty extreme. Where as battletech, despite all the lasers and ppcs, is still more down to Earth.

There are plenty of things I wish MWO would add that wouldn't require breaking from Battletech/Mechwarrior. Like combined arms, tanks, aircraft, battle armors. A proven gameplay concept by Living Legends and Planetside. Though I wouldn't add persistent battlefield, a lack of quality control makes for even more lopsided fights and situations.

The other thing is that I wish they would add more simulation elements. Like steam in the cockpit when you reach a certain heat. Cockpit glass breaking. Rain or snow on the glass. People complain about visibility on maps, but that's part of the battlefield as far as I'm concerned. I also like that they're looking to improve the crit system, always an interesting match when you come out the other side of it with only a stick and a head mounted weapon.

Edited by MechaBattler, 18 February 2017 - 01:57 PM.


#13 MechaBattler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 5,119 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 02:09 PM

View PostProbably Not, on 18 February 2017 - 01:58 PM, said:


Titanfall is a bog-standard FPS that just happens to have some mechs in it, too. Might as well call Planetside 2 a mech game because it has powered armor units in it.


That kinda reinforces my point. Battletech tries to be a mech game with construction rules and weapon mechanics. Where as Titanfall treats them like scaled up infantry.

There's definitely room to improve though. I would be curious to see someone make a better version of the battletech construction rules and weapons.

#14 Andi Nagasia

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,982 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 03:07 PM

for me all a Mechwarrior game is is a FPS Mech Pilot Game that Takes Place in the BT universe,
the fact that MWO has Mechs / Weapons / Tech / Locations from BT is more than Enough to make it a BT game,

if i make an amazingly immersive game set in the year 3051 durring the clan invasion,
where as you are a Mercenary fighting with the great houses to defeat the Clan Hordes,
(having IS Mechs have Double armor for Balance, wouldnt suddenly make it not a BT game)

;)

#15 FalconerGray

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Messenger
  • The Messenger
  • 362 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 03:52 PM

Been saying this for years...

MWO is a poor battletech game and is a disappointment for those who were looking for / expecting a hardcore, lore rich mech sim.

But it's still battletech enough to be full of restrictions, rules and catches that when held onto - despite being totally irrelevant ( the only BT thing about MWO is the names of all the mechs / items) - hinder the game down below what would be possible if the devs had absolute freedom.

#16 slide

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,768 posts
  • LocationKersbrook South Australia

Posted 18 February 2017 - 04:02 PM

Without BT and the lore that goes with it, this game would never have gotten off the ground. I am confident that 80%+ of the Founders would never have forked over the $5.6m that was raised to keep this game in development. It would have died in beta.

Having said that, MWO is so loosely tied to BT now that it is barely a nod to the lore anyway. So much has been modified to attract the FPS crowd that most Founders and people interested in the lore have long ago left the game. Only a few of the foolish like me remain in the vague hope that this game will amount to anything that was advertised originally.

As for a mech simulation, it's not even close to what most people imagined or what they even advertised. This game has devolved to an arena FPS where the competitive types have made an art form of building mechs that leverage every last drop of performance to conform to what ever the latest meta is. Any build considered lore like or even fun is basically gimping your team. This game has truly become "Alpha Warrior Online".

The OP's suggestions may well make for a better game, but it would be for a game that would never have happened. If there was any demand for stompy robot games outside of BT it would have happened before MWO came along.

IMO the only things that make this game anything like BT is the mech design rules (even those are extremely loose) and the art work which is for the most part a nod to past design work and is truly top notch.

Not that it matters anyway, HBS launches the BT beta in about a month, from most of the names I see on the forums over there, anyone who even remotely cares about the lore is going to be gone from MWO anyway, at least for a while. What remains to be seen is whether any of them come back to MWO afterwards. I know it may well be my ticket out of here.

#17 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 18 February 2017 - 04:07 PM

If MWO was built to be "the next MW game" instead of BT, people would be less likely to be holding onto the lore aspect than anything else.

The problem is that PGI doesn't know what exactly catering to the BT crowd actually means.

#18 Brenden

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,603 posts
  • LocationIS News Flash Breaking [:::]___[:::] News: at morning /(__)\ a patrol unit has (:)=\_ ¤_/=(:) seen the never /)(\ before witnessed [] . . [] strange designed /¥\ . /¥\ 'Mech

Posted 18 February 2017 - 04:40 PM

Yet another idea, PGI will never listen too.

#19 Bud Crue

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 9,882 posts
  • LocationOn the farm in central Minnesota

Posted 18 February 2017 - 04:50 PM

Saw the thread and it read as:
Mechwarrior should not have been a bit game.
Made me think: "geez the graphics aren't that bad." Then I started reading the thread, realized my mistake and then though "oh, this again".

See here's the deal. There's a reason PGI pays all that money for a license to Microsoft for access to the BT and MW video game franchise. There is also a reason HBS is paying TOPS a license to sell BT merch. The collective reason is that is where the value of this game lies. For good or bad, being able to associate you product with a 30 year old well known (to certain segment of the population) IP is the only thing that keeps this game going. Take the BT away and you have Russ Bullocks Robot game. Instead of the Kodiak you have "Bear-like Robot". Instead of the Warhammer, you have Robot with arm guns. Instead of the clans and IS you have team a and team b. Whoopie flucking doo.

To put it another way: no one is pining to play "Russ Bullock's Super Smash Robot Warriors! A Generic FPS with Robots Game" but a lot of folks would really like to play "Mechwarrior Online, 5, mercenaries or whatever iteration of this franchise you care to name...A BattleTech Game." And they are willing to throw lots of cash at whomever gives them that game; even PGI.

Would balance be better if we chucked BT and even previous MW games out the window? Sure, would anyone play that game? No.

#20 General Solo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,625 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 05:05 PM

I thought the game catered more to the mechwarrior crowd than the Battletech crowd
Dat is why I signed up
The games called Mechwarrior Online not Battletech Online





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users