59 replies to this topic

[SQW]

Check out the latest Battletech pre-beta PVP.



Seriously, this is what BT is all about - not some slow FPS with instant convergence laser boating, assault lights and an alpha-state persistent universe. I don't know if watching HBS's labor-of-love makes me want to play MWO to scratch that itch or become more depressed because MWO got it so wrong.

[kesuga7]

Those mech models look to be straight ripped out of MWO

this is MUCH better looking then Mechwarrior tactics
Which changed the mech designs in such a way that they became abominations

Edited by kesuga7, 12 May 2017 - 05:37 PM.

[Mystere]

kesuga7, on 12 May 2017 - 05:34 PM, said:

Those mech models look to be straight ripped out of MWO

They were not ripped out of MWO. They are MWO models.

[Y E O N N E]

And they weren't ripped, they were shared willingly.

[Summon3r]

kesuga7, on 12 May 2017 - 05:34 PM, said:

Those mech models look to be straight ripped out of MWO

this is MUCH better looking then Mechwarrior tactics
Which changed the mech designs in such a way that they became abominations

lol wtf is that?? that is no HBK, that is disgusting and has no business being called mechwarrior anything

SQW, on 12 May 2017 - 04:21 PM, said:

Check out the latest Battletech pre-beta PVP.



Seriously, this is what BT is all about - not some slow FPS with instant convergence laser boating, assault lights and an alpha-state persistent universe. I don't know if watching HBS's labor-of-love makes me want to play MWO to scratch that itch or become more depressed because MWO got it so wrong.

could not agree more with you especially conncerning pinpoint, HBS has managed more depth and content in a year then MWO/PGI has in 6+

[Alexander of Macedon]

kesuga7, on 12 May 2017 - 05:34 PM, said:

Those mech models look to be straight ripped out of MWO

this is MUCH better looking then Mechwarrior tactics
Which changed the mech designs in such a way that they became abominations

What a ******* abomination.

And yes, PGI shared their models with HBS, which is one of the scant few decisions on PGI's part that I unabashedly respect and approve of.

Let's be real though, the only people naysaying HBS are the ones who don't know who Jordan Weisman is. Of course they were going to do a damn fine job of it, and in the process they've demonstrated precisely the differences between devs who know what they're doing and the usual suspects of Kickstarter game projects.

[EgoSlayer]

SQW, on 12 May 2017 - 04:21 PM, said:

Check out the latest Battletech pre-beta PVP.



Seriously, this is what BT is all about - not some slow FPS with instant convergence laser boating, assault lights and an alpha-state persistent universe. I don't know if watching HBS's labor-of-love makes me want to play MWO to scratch that itch or become more depressed because MWO got it so wrong.

You're right - that is what BattleTech is all about. Turn based combat.
MechWarrior on the other hand has always been cockpit based FPS games.

Totally different genres and catering to different types of game play. BT *should* be turn based. Mechwarrior *should* be a FPS. No reason either one should even try to be something they are not, and no reason they can't coexist.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 12 May 2017 - 05:56 PM.

[Mystere]

Alexander of Macedon, on 12 May 2017 - 05:47 PM, said:

Let's be real though, the only people naysaying HBS are the ones who don't know who Jordan Weisman is. Of course they were going to do a damn fine job of it, and in the process they've demonstrated precisely the differences between devs who know what they're doing and the usual suspects of Kickstarter game projects.

I really wish though that HBS had gone the RTS route a la Mechcommander or the Total War series instead of turn-based.

EgoSlayer, on 12 May 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

BT *should* be turn based.

See above.

Edited by Mystere, 12 May 2017 - 05:59 PM.

[EgoSlayer]

Mystere, on 12 May 2017 - 06:00 PM, said:

I really wish though that HBS had gone the RTS route a la Mechcommander or the Total War series instead of turn-based.



See above.

That would be a new MechCommander game - which I wouldn't rule out. But BT should be turn based.

EDIT: To expand on that a bit more. BT should always be turn based because that is the only way to adhere to the BT rule set. RTS or FPS pretty much have to throw out the key building block of the game rules which is the 10 second turn and the end of turn heat dissipation.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 12 May 2017 - 06:09 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

EgoSlayer, on 12 May 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

That would be a new MechCommander game - which I wouldn't rule out. But BT should be turn based.

while I don't disagree, doesn't mean a Mechwarrior Title can't share more in common with the base game, though. Most other FPS feature various forms of aiming imprecision.... yet the mere mention of it for MWO gets people apoplectic. Which I find funny when people use the FPS argument as to why it is different, then are vehemently against one of the staple mechanics of most FPS and Vehicle based combat games.

*shrugs*

It is what it is though. MWO is what we got for FPS play, and this will scratch the TBS itch for some. But it is amazing how many backers there, despite it being announced as Turn Based from the first pre Kickstarter pitch, still keep pushing to see it made into a RTS game.

"I gave my money"..... but apparently didn't bother to actually read what they were helping crowdfund. People. I swear they make me want to go beat up grass at times.

[MechaBattler]

Summon3r, on 12 May 2017 - 05:44 PM, said:

lol wtf is that?? that is no HBK, that is disgusting and has no business being called mechwarrior anything



could not agree more with you especially conncerning pinpoint, HBS has managed more depth and content in a year then MWO/PGI has in 6+

Why because they have melee?

[ice trey]

EgoSlayer, on 12 May 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

Mechwarrior *should* be a FPS sim.

ftfy

MWO is the first time that a MechWarrior title was called anything but a sim. People have either forgotten the genre, or maybe it became a dirty word.

Still, the biggest issue is that every mechwarrior title was meant to be objective based, story driven gameplay. Playing MWO is like having nothing but "instant action" forever. Shooting stuff in a giant robot is only half of the fun. It's getting sucked into the setting and the atmosphere, making you feel like a part of the lore, that made the titles so great.

HBS's Battletech might reduce the entertainment value a little by taking you out of the cockpit, but by focusing on story and gameplay, they inevitably are going to make a better product in the long run. I'll be skipping multiplayer, though. I was hoping they didn't make that crowdfunding level, making them focus on making a better single player game.

Unless PGI partner with HBS's writers, I don't think MW5 is going to be that noteworthy. The trailer feels like it's lacking a lot of atmosphere from previous MW titles.

Edited by ice trey, 12 May 2017 - 07:12 PM.

[Valhallan]

EgoSlayer, on 12 May 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

That would be a new MechCommander game - which I wouldn't rule out. But BT should be turn based.

EDIT: To expand on that a bit more. BT should always be turn based because that is the only way to adhere to the BT rule set. RTS or FPS pretty much have to throw out the key building block of the game rules which is the 10 second turn and the end of turn heat dissipation.

Eh the 10 second turn was approximated pretty well in Mechcommander the weapons having their TT stats but spread over 10 seconds (PPC had 9 dmg but fired 1.1 times every 10 seconds, Large laser did 4 dmg but fired 2 times every 10 seconds etc.) the only problem was you couldn't finagle the engines at all since all models were locked at stock speed and the heat system being terrible. If they also did Heat dissipation being spread over 10 seconds that wouldn't be bad either also turn speed and movespeed being based on engine/tonnage and the damage taken is based on where the model is facing ALA COH system when dealing with tanks, which can have parts blown off and rendered inoperable. I can understand liking turn-based better because it's slower paced (i do for that reason too), but i don't think BT would lose anything going Realtime (which i like for the spectacle) like mechcommander if done right.

[Coolant]

I like MWO combat, liked MW4:Mercs even better

[Anjian]

We are seeing a resurgence of turn based, especially on mobile, so the timing is right.

A Mechcommander type MOBA is probably a better format for multiplayer Mechcommander, since you can have a team of different players vs. another team rather than play one vs. one.

Each player will bring in say, a lance of four mechs, or a mixed combined arms unit of the appropriate battle value with mechs, troops and tanks. There will be two to four players in each team. If a player goes AFK or leaves the games, the units will default to an AI controlled mode.

The franchise needs to go back to its roots --- its strategy and tactics roots.

Edited by Anjian, 12 May 2017 - 08:41 PM.

[razenWing]

To the OP, the comparison is extremely unfair. Like, as so many people point out already, like... WTF did you just compared a FPOV game to a turn based strategy game? It's only what "feels" normal because maybe you or a handful of others grew up playing the board game... when electronics deliver gems like Super Mario in it's full 16 bit 2-D side scrollling glory.

A lot of us grew up with the Mechwarrior game. THAT'S how a MECHWARRIOR game feel to us. Pilot giant stomp robits, and kill whatever we see in our path.

Now, you can argue, yea the feel and the atmosphere, which I don't disagree to. Which btw, what is the "right" feel anyways? The original lore stole from so many manga, anime, and other action figures just before international copyright is really a thing, that how can this hodgepodge of stolen ideas have a "right" feel? Some people see BTech as 80's acid rock metal. Some people see BTech lore like a Battlestar Galactica. Some people see it as a homage to action heroes of the 80s. So, what's truly right?

I like the feel and direction that this particular game took, which is very close to my hero Danial Bruins (link below). I don't know if there is any interaction or influence between the 2 parties, but if Weisman said that THIS is the right feel of BTech, then I guess it is, and I'm again, not object to it, but just throwing it out that there have been so many interpretation of the "right" feel by so many different studio with their own respective fan base, that saying one is definitively "it" over the others is kind of undermining a lot of different groups.

In any case, MWO is really an arena shooter. I totally disagree that PGI could have added depth by making a more fan involved FW mode, thus creating an atmosphere that matters beyond repeated 12 v 12 drops against one another and how my missiles are better than your missiles. I don't disagree with ANY of that. But let's give them the benefit of a doubt and compare a REAL single player game against another single player game if you want to talk about lore atmosphere and "feel." I would reserve the comparison until MW5 comes out. But from the direction of the pre-Alpha trailer, it certainly seems to take a WHOLE different feel than what Weisman did with his BattleTech.

So again, what's really "right?" That homage to a bad@ss merc pilot, it's not wrong. I much prefer if they bring the gritty and somber tone of the Battletech to MW5, but to have a more 80s action homage feel to a Mechwarrior game not seen since... well... Mechwarrior 2 and/or to some extenet, MW4: Mercenaries... is not inherently wrong.

PS: Link to Daniel Bruins, I hope he does more stuff. He's one heck of a talented guy. (I mean, he's kinda leaving us hanging with that IS pilot that's trying to survive, first in a HBK, then in a Locust. I want to know the rest of her story!) I wish his vision would come to life beyond a turn-base strategy game. http://dcbruins.weebly.com/

Edited by razenWing, 12 May 2017 - 10:48 PM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Turn based video game feels more like turn based table top game than a real time first person vehicular shooter? Who would have guessed.

[xe N on]

EgoSlayer, on 12 May 2017 - 05:55 PM, said:

You're right - that is what BattleTech is all about. Turn based combat.
MechWarrior on the other hand has always been cockpit based FPS games.

In fact, Mechwarrior was originally a pen&paper RPG

But with this new skill tree that is much complicater than 80% of all RPGs we coming back to this ;-)

Edited by xe N on, 12 May 2017 - 11:17 PM.

[Lily from animove]

because no one wants to play random hit warrior game. mechwarrior was never a battletech game mechwarrior was mechwarrior, not mech commander, not battltech.

[xe N on]

Lily from animove, on 12 May 2017 - 11:29 PM, said:

because no one wants to play random hit warrior game. mechwarrior was never a battletech game mechwarrior was mechwarrior, not mech commander, not battltech.

I think a Mechwarrior style RPG that focus on character development combined with mech vehicles could be more successful than FPS or SIM Mechwarrior, because it's open to a more broader audience. In fact SIm/FPS Mechwarrior games were always more a niche.