42 replies to this topic

[ocular tb]

RedDragon, on 02 May 2017 - 01:56 PM, said:

Then you shouldn't watch this video from Closed Beta, or you might weep a bit (I do everytime, at least inside).

I miss the old Forest Colony. In fact I miss all the old maps (yes, even Terra Therma) and it's a shame that they removed them. See my proposition to PGI in my profile message thingy <----------

Aside from the maps, I feel like the game is much faster than what I would like it to be. And anytime I see an old MWO video like this it makes me sad that I can't play that kind of game here anymore.

[Mcgral18]

Zigmund Freud, on 02 May 2017 - 11:59 AM, said:

Ah, and of course in mech screens that were actually informative.

Well, kind of
I remember my ThunderWub having a half ton of AC2 ammo, ton of AMS ammo, and some UAC5 ammo...I didn't have any ammo mounted


They did sometimes work, heatsink counter less so...but they were a heck of a lot better than the GIFs they were replaced by

[sycocys]

The only thing I'll comment on is the sound because most people will comment on the rest - it is worse. A lot of that has to do with piss poor processing when they started feeding more and more sounds into the game. There's a ton of inaudible frequencies that cause a lot of saturation mess with drivers (speakers, not computer drivers) and their ability to mechanically reproduce sound well.

There's also not roll-off or timing adjustment for when multiples of the same or similar frequency range sounds trigger which takes the above problem and spreads it across the audible spectrum. Lots of phasing and saturation issues that degrade the quality of sounds.

I've offered to reprocess their sounds many times over the years free of charge so at least the inaudible saturation is removed. The sound engine part is just their inability to code well enough to modify the Cryengine sound routines. Can't blame them for not doing that since they don't really have the skillset to program the game out with the team they have left anyhow much less start working on actual technical things.

[Anjian]

If the game engine or the way this game is driving its graphics isn't so inefficient, you can retain texture resolution and detail even on lower hardware.

This game is quite clearly, unanimously the worst looking of all the games I have installed on my hard drive and running on the same hardware. Even if I bump up the graphics mode higher, it still looks horrible. This looks like a game made in the previous decade.

There is definitely good reason why the game needs to move to a new game engine like Unreal, not to mention get overhauled in the process.

[Marius Romanis]

Ah nostalgia

Edited by CadoAzazel, 02 May 2017 - 07:26 PM.

[dario03]

Knockdowns just never worked right. Sometimes you would be 20m from another mech and then just somehow end up teleporting into each other then all around the map and then when getting up. Was also great getting ran over by your own teammates constantly because they just had to be in the exact spot you were instead of one of the other 50 perfectly good paths that they could take.

I do like how the streaks actually missed sometimes though. They don't work like they do in lore anyways so why not make them miss a bit. Yet another way to re balance them so they could be a all mech weapon instead of anti-light weapon.

Graphics I can't really say since I keep most settings turned down in a futile attempt to keep my fps up.

[A Really Old Clan Dude]

RedDragon, on 02 May 2017 - 01:56 PM, said:

Then you shouldn't watch this video from Closed Beta, or you might weep a bit (I do everytime, at least inside).

Did you see how slow the Jenner moved. OMG It looked liked something out of the 6 million dollar man.

[Karl Streiger]

dario03, on 02 May 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

Knockdowns just never worked right. Sometimes you would be 20m from another mech and then just somehow end up teleporting into each other then all around the map and then when getting up. Was also great getting ran over by your own teammates constantly because they just had to be in the exact spot you were instead of one of the other 50 perfectly good paths that they could take.

I do like how the streaks actually missed sometimes though. They don't work like they do in lore anyways so why not make them miss a bit. Yet another way to re balance them so they could be a all mech weapon instead of anti-light weapon.

Graphics I can't really say since I keep most settings turned down in a futile attempt to keep my fps up.

First you would need to tackle the other guy.

You were not able to tackle a light mech that did know what he was doing.

The warp effect - this might have been an issue - but it was very simple to tackle the bold Jenner with your Atlas, wait until he stood up and in the moment before his Hitboxes begann to warping (sorry he did start to move) you alpha striked his leg off.

Brawling was more intense - getting to close to a bigger Mech an did run over you. But on the other hand I've fought two Atlas in a Hunchback this was a dance on the knifes edge. Pure thrill. On the other hand also fought 2 Hunchbacks in a Atlas and this was ever more thrilling.

Later after the knockdown was gone - i fought two catapults with my Raven - this was not so much fun. Simple because i went nose to nose with the first catapult and used him as cover... would have been impossible with knockdown.

Look when we had at least physical combat this running in enemys would stop

[HGAK47]

Judging by the amount of times team mates run into me / damage my legs I think I would be on the ground for half of the start of the match! lol.

[Karl Streiger]

HGAK47, on 02 May 2017 - 11:20 PM, said:

Judging by the amount of times team mates run into me / damage my legs I think I would be on the ground for half of the start of the match! lol.

Same for them.... but someday they would have learned....
and the good thing is the death ball would automatically be spread on more ground and you would have less blocked firing lines.

[Zigmund Freud]

NT Hackman, on 02 May 2017 - 02:02 PM, said:

So much good stuff from the closed beta. Aside from what's already been mentioned, dynamic cancer tumors weren't a thing, the mech scaling was good and the maps were just right.

It feels like someone else made the game and then PGI stripped out anything with detail and put their own disgusting spin on things (flamers effects, cancer geometry, heinous damage effects) in an effort to cover up anything done better than them.

What's with dinamic cancer? You mean new damage representation on mech?
Probably in the begining Piggy at least partially wanted to create something good, a brand new high quality game, but later some of original enthusiasts quit, some new soulles factory workers were hired, and MWO become nothing more then a money grabbing utility.

[Zigmund Freud]

Xetelian, on 02 May 2017 - 02:09 PM, said:

Knock downs are impossible to balance. No one likes to go prone and unable to fire back, just like stun mechanics in a anything, it becomes a cancer that makes for a not fun experience.
.

dario03, on 02 May 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

Knockdowns just never worked right. Sometimes you would be 20m from another mech and then just somehow end up teleporting into each other then all around the map and then when getting up. Was also great getting ran over by your own teammates constantly because they just had to be in the exact spot you were instead of one of the other 50 perfectly good paths that they could take.

I may be wrong, because i didn't play with it, but how about this: (I mean knockdown balancing):
1) When equal mass mechs collide, the one who was moving faster falls, the slower one have very small chance of falling.
(this ballance out intentional knocking down enemies, because it's more likely for you to fall down, than to stun your foe)
2) When a mech collide with significantly larger mech, first one have way way bigger chance of falling, no matter how fast he was going. Other one also have a chance of falling, it depends on mass difference. For example if locust and atlas collide, later have about zero chance of falling. If jenner and cataputl collide - chance of falling is like 4:1 or 5:1. it is also modified by each mech's speed.
(this would also balance out inntentional ramming, since lights are faster and more maneuverable, and if used properely it's very hard to ram locust with atlas. AND it disable leghumping.)
So basically both participants of any collision have a (different) chance of falling down, but generally initiator of collision and lighter mech have higher chance of being knocked down by a colision, so there would be too dangerous for your own mech to do it intentionally, unless you are an atlas and you ram a locust. But it's so hard to do that it can only counter leghums, and it's a good thing.
PROFITS:
You have to watch where you're going, you have to keep safe distance from your foes AND teammates, lights are still as good (or as bad) as they are today, exept leghumpers.
As a nice bonus game becomes more realistic, more of a feeling of piloting a walking 2-legged robot.

[dario03]

Zigmund Freud, on 03 May 2017 - 01:29 AM, said:

I may be wrong, because i didn't play with it, but how about this: (I mean knockdown balancing):
1) When equal mass mechs collide, the one who was moving faster falls, the slower one have very small chance of falling.
(this ballance out intentional knocking down enemies, because it's more likely for you to fall down, than to stun your foe)
2) When a mech collide with significantly larger mech, first one have way way bigger chance of falling, no matter how fast he was going. Other one also have a chance of falling, it depends on mass difference. For example if locust and atlas collide, later have about zero chance of falling. If jenner and cataputl collide - chance of falling is like 4:1 or 5:1. it is also modified by each mech's speed.
(this would also balance out inntentional ramming, since lights are faster and more maneuverable, and if used properely it's very hard to ram locust with atlas. AND it disable leghumping.)
So basically both participants of any collision have a (different) chance of falling down, but generally initiator of collision and lighter mech have higher chance of being knocked down by a colision, so there would be too dangerous for your own mech to do it intentionally, unless you are an atlas and you ram a locust. But it's so hard to do that it can only counter leghums, and it's a good thing.
PROFITS:
You have to watch where you're going, you have to keep safe distance from your foes AND teammates, lights are still as good (or as bad) as they are today, exept leghumpers.
As a nice bonus game becomes more realistic, more of a feeling of piloting a walking 2-legged robot.

I would add in falling does more damage and/or takes longer to get up for bigger mechs. Not a fan of the bigger means flat out better. And hopefully that would cut down on friendlies just ramming through you.
But my main issue is with knockdowns just working right. So really I wouldn't want it unless we had some major improvements first, like a engine upgrade or something.

[C E Dwyer]

knock downs were just badly done.

Visually this game is very poor compared to closed beta.

Sounds were better, the mechs looked better, the visual effects were better, and were made the washed out things they've become by comparison. P.G.I said they needed to do this so that the game could be played on broader PC specs.

Oh they've added some lamp posts, small trees to knock over, rocks that roll down hills, trees that the branches fall off some birds that fly off and cause graphics lag, the very thing they made this game look bad to avoid.

[PhoenixFire55]

Bud Crue, on 02 May 2017 - 08:00 AM, said:

Knockdowns were removed because the mechanism was easily abused (see infamous Goons Heart Paul video).

Its silly. If everything that hurt poor Paul's feelings was removed we'd be left with no weapons at all and magical force fields would have been preventing mechs from getting closer than 200m to each other. They were removed because PGI was and still is incapable of coding them right.

They've said several times after the removal of knockdowns that they are coming back and that they are an essential part of the game. Another lies. Or rather another It Was Our Position at the Time^TM.

Bud Crue, on 02 May 2017 - 08:00 AM, said:

Everything else you mention regarding graphics, etc. were toned down to make MWO more palatable to lower end rigs, and specifically lap tops. If interested you can google all this stuff and find the forum posts about all of it.

True. The funny thing tho is that even toned down MWO isn't running on older PCs at all. Or rather stopped running due to all the toning down and other "improvements". My 6 year old potatoe PC used to run MWO with all the fancy closed beta graphics just fine (~45-50 FPS), now with it all "toned down" it barely squeezes 20 FPS out of the game on a good day.

Soon^TM.

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 04 May 2017 - 12:54 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

PhoenixFire55, on 04 May 2017 - 12:53 AM, said:

True. The funny thing tho is that even toned down MWO isn't running on older PCs at all. Or rather stopped running due to all the toning down and other "improvements". My 6 year old potatoe PC used to run MWO with all the fancy closed beta graphics just fine (~45-50 FPS), now with it all "toned down" it barely squeezes 20 FPS out of the game on a good day.

Soon^TM.

with all the fancy lamp posts - river city is the worst - followed by forest colony - (I play brawlers usually and I never vote for them)
"but of course they are not part of the map rotation because they are not open and not cold enough stuff"

[Sjorpha]

I get the frustration about the downgraded graphics, some of those changes are hard to understand.

I personally prefer a fast running game to a pretty game since I play on a laptop, but some people are saying that the old graphics ran as well or better. I'm a bit sceptical to that claim, and I suspect the move from 8v8 to 12v12 had a pretty heavy impact on how fancy graphics you could afford to run on any given rig, you also have to factor in the dropships and so on that we have now.

Streaks not autohitting looks nice, it would be cool if they could find a nice hybrid there where streaks require some aiming and also allow you to concentrate fire more so they aren't so useless against heavier targets.

Knockdowns frankly look abosolutely horrible in all videos I've seen. Nothing realistic or immersive when you are zoomed out to watch a glitchy animation with zero control over you mech. I don't understand why anyone would wan't such a horribly implemented feature back.

If it could be done well, then yes. But that would require that you maintain some control over your mech while falling. In TT fallen mechs can prop themselves up and shoot from the ground, and getting up is a manual action that the pilot makes. If that could be done well then maybe it could be good, but the zero control external camera animation? No way josè, that looks more like a forced QT event in some commercial eye candy trash title by EA and does not belong in MWO.

Working HSR also takes precedence over any form of eye candy for me, if they truly stand against each other.

Inverse kinematics have been promised to come back, weirdly postponed time after time. That's the one graphical thing I really want to see come back, the rest I can do without.

[Karl Streiger]

Sjorpha, on 04 May 2017 - 01:27 AM, said:

Working HSR also takes precedence over any form of eye candy for me, if they truly stand against each other.

HSR also disabled the reason why there were no successful poptarters - time to convergence would have ruined each and every snap fire....
for some time you had the convergence solution on the training grounds.... it was strange that it was more difficult to hit a standing target there as to hit a moving target on the life server.

[Satan n stuff]

Xetelian, on 02 May 2017 - 02:09 PM, said:

Knock downs are impossible to balance. No one likes to go prone and unable to fire back, just like stun mechanics in a anything, it becomes a cancer that makes for a not fun experience.

By tabletop rules a prone mech may fire their weapons and turn in place, attempting to stand up costs movement points so faster mechs are typically able to recover faster, failing to stand up damages the mech. Ignoring that last part because we don't have collision damage either, we've essentially got a basic ruleset for handling knockdowns that shouldn't be too frustrating and should allow for some interesting tactics. The tricky part would be to replace the diceroll based pilot skill test with an actual player skill based system and even for that I've seen potentially viable suggestions.

[Lances107]

Since we are taking a trip down memory lane, what is not mentioned is this. If you did not use a Nvidia graphics card at the launch of this game, the game was not playable. Both my brother and I tried this game back then, but both our machines could not get the graphics to work. Both our machines were using Radeon graphics card.

To the point, this posts reminds me of someone saying things were perfect back then, but ignoring there was some draw backs. Me I think swg was a great and amazing game, but it also lacked some serious aspects. My point is I am sure MWO back then had some major pluses, but I am also sure it had some serious issues. Not unlike the issue I named above.