655 replies to this topic

[Ragotag]

MaddMaxx, on 10 April 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

Sadly more often than not, what you state is what results. The bigger issues and is way OT here is why gamers have consistently put up with it of the last 1/2 decade or more.

It's the Sheeple mentality that I credit the console industry with; been rampant for a while now and developers are just taking advantage of it. I really hope that upcoming F2P triple-A titles can change this mentality.

Edited by Ragotag, 10 April 2012 - 08:26 AM.

[Jiynx]

i like the hardpoint system that's been established as how it'll work. it allows for some neat tricks and surprises as well as going for some genuinely unique loadouts over time.

while it'd be nice to order a fully custom mech, it should happen in real-time, i agree. six months lead time, runs you severall MILLION c-bills because of the unique tooling and loadouts, and dammit i better be able to get stuff like special running lights/trim lights and hydraulics.

and let's base them off pre-existing chassis, but with enhanced options like completely different loadouts(LRM rack where there was originally an AC, etc), different engines, even jump-jets added on.

a fully-customized mech should be the mark of a highly skilled/successful(and thrifty) pilot who's run a lot of lucrative contracts and has earned the prestige of taking the field in something unique.

while there should be some form of restrictions on loadouts, say, minimum armor amounts, minimum engine sizes(restricts available weight for weapons), being able to come up with something outside the norm would make for a really interesting game after the first year.

[Suskis]

Clans should not be allowed to modify anything, besides changing from alternate configurations wit their Omnimechs.
IS, at the opposite, should be allowed to rewire everything in any mech. This would help balancing the game

[Red Beard]

Ragotag, on 10 April 2012 - 07:48 AM, said:

In the past decade, especially the past five years, the gaming industry seems to have interpreted "Balance" as "instant satisfaction for all"; this only makes games that end up with a very short player shelf-life and only provides further incentives to developers to wash and repeat old formulas with new packaging for a quick $.

It would be helpful if u gave some examples of what u mean here...

I am very pleased with the gaming industry as a whole, even over the past few years. It is up to the gamers to choose the games that they want to play, and if they want more of what works, why begrudge a player base further content? I think I see your large point here, but it seems to have become all too common for folks to blame the gaming industry at large for not producing the exact game that they are looking for. The video game market has never been so saturated in mediocre titles, but then again, that has ALWAYS been the case. And companies will ALWAYS continue the "wash, rinse, repeat" formula, so long as they are making the games that the players want to play. Look at Street Fighter, as a series. It has been the same basic formula, over and over again, but players still line up to play. Even games like Ridge Racer still have a strong following, and that is because the company has found what works and is driving it home. Look at it this way...MW:O is being made in a market like this, so the market muct have something positive going on for it, even if that positive thing is the fact that games are so generally awful that a few folks are driven to make the higher quality games in order to be able to stand out of the pack.

EDIT: I love coffee.

Edited by Red Beard, 10 April 2012 - 09:57 AM.

[Helmer]

Red Beard, on 10 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

It would be helpful if u gave some examples of what u mean here...

I am very pleased with the gaming industry as a whole, even over the past few years. It is up to the gamers to choose the games that they want to play, and if they want more of what works, why begrudge a player base further content? I think I see your large point here, but it seems to have become all too common for folks to blame the gaming industry at large for not producing the exact game that they are looking for. The video game market has never been so saturated in mediocre titles, but then again, that has ALWAYS been the case. And companies will ALWAYS continue the "wash, rinse, repeat" formula, so long as they are making the games that the players want to play. Look at Street Fighter, as a series. It has been the same basic formula, over and over again, but players still line up to play. Even games like Ridge Racer still have a strong following, and that is because the company has found what works and is driving it home. Look at it this way...MW:O is being made in a market like this, so the market muct have something positive going on for it, even if that positive thing is the fact that games are so generally awful that a few folks are driven to make the higher quality games in order to be able to stand out of the pack.

EDIT: I love coffee.

Well said. And i just spit up my coffee......


Cheers.

[Ragotag]

Suskis, on 10 April 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

Clans should not be allowed to modify anything, besides changing from alternate configurations wit their Omnimechs.
IS, at the opposite, should be allowed to rewire everything in any mech. This would help balancing the game

Someone wrote a terrific description of how Clan omni-tech worked in another thread (wish I could find the post), but it essentially illustrated the MechWarrior community's general lack of understanding of Clan-tech largely due to how past MechWarrior titles have implemented it.

According to poster, Omni-tech consisted of specific-purposed modules that could be swapped on the 'Mech chassis. In example, Clan 'Mechs did not have Omni hardpoints, they had Omni arms. A given set of chassis-specific arms were designed for a specific weapons system, and Clan pilots often had extra sets of arms; the arms of the 'Mech chassis could be swapped, not the weapon systems in the arms. The same applied to chassis pods; pull the armor, swap out an entire chassis pod containing a different weapon system or equipment, and then bolt the armor back on. While this is the flexibility that past MechWarrior titles emulated, those games "implied" it was the hardpoints that were Omni which is not the case at all. Just something to consider with regard to possible future expansion into the Clan Wars and the use of a mech-lab for Clan chassis.

[Ragotag]

Red Beard, on 10 April 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

It would be helpful if u gave some examples of what u mean here...

I am very pleased with the gaming industry as a whole, even over the past few years. It is up to the gamers to choose the games that they want to play, and if they want more of what works, why begrudge a player base further content? I think I see your large point here, but it seems to have become all too common for folks to blame the gaming industry at large for not producing the exact game that they are looking for. The video game market has never been so saturated in mediocre titles, but then again, that has ALWAYS been the case. And companies will ALWAYS continue the "wash, rinse, repeat" formula, so long as they are making the games that the players want to play. Look at Street Fighter, as a series. It has been the same basic formula, over and over again, but players still line up to play. Even games like Ridge Racer still have a strong following, and that is because the company has found what works and is driving it home. Look at it this way...MW:O is being made in a market like this, so the market muct have something positive going on for it, even if that positive thing is the fact that games are so generally awful that a few folks are driven to make the higher quality games in order to be able to stand out of the pack.

EDIT: I love coffee.

My statements are simply my opinion based upon my gaming experiences, both console and PC, since the early '80's. However, my comments apply to the longevity of a single game title, not a franchise per say. I can agree that mediocre games have always existed, I just feel that they are today more the norm, and have been over the last decade, than they used to be. I agree that it is up to the gamer to choose what they want to play - that's obvious, but from my point of view the games of the last decade have chiefly (not all, just most) been the difference between choosing from dirt and mud, with a few exceptional gems thrown in. In effect, I have had the choice between what amounts to undesirable options. I'm sure others like you have very different opinions on the subject, which is okay with me. ...again, just my opinion as a "seasoned" (hate "old") gamer.

[SlagMaster]

I am all for customizing mechs. I feel it gives ownership to the pilot and their mech.. I feel though the ability to do that should come after some type of "Growth or Promotion".. Some green guy that never played MWO shouldnt be able to pilot a new Atlas just because he wants too!!!

[Terbius]

I am terrified of having to learn the intricacies of fitting a mech properly. I want my mech pre-assembled so that I have no choice in my personal playstyle. I dont want to think for myself. Its hard.

[syngyne]

Terbius, on 10 April 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

I am terrified of having to learn the intricacies of fitting a mech properly. I want my mech pre-assembled so that I have no choice in my personal playstyle. I dont want to think for myself. Its hard.

...you do realize that adding hard point restrictions adds another layer of complexity to 'Mech loadouts, don't you? Instead of being able to pick a generic 50-ton bucket to cram with whatever your heart desires, you now have to take into account that not all buckets can be filled the same way, and learn to work around each one's limitations.

[Terbius]

sarcasm fail, sorry.

I play eve-online, where tweaking ship fittings is at least half the game. the more customization options, the better, imo.

[Red Beard]

Terbius, on 10 April 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

fitting a mech properly.

That's the job of the developers. A mech-WARRIOR simply takes whatever he is given and takes it into battle. Does a commander of a tank stop the battle so he can eff around with his barrel, or adjust his loadout? NO! Thats the engineer's job.

Quote

I want my mech pre-assembled so that I have no choice in my personal playstyle. I dont want to think for myself. Its hard.

It has been my observation over the years that mechlab guys tend to really suck in battle. While not true of ALL players, I would say that more than 90 percent of the players that spend copious amounts of time in the mechlab will flat out suck at the game.

If you find yourself thinking..."man, if I could just switch this AC out for a couple lasers, then I would be winning...", chances are...the lasers won't help.

[Myst Lynx]

I enjoy mech lab, but for the most part I think we should get factory standard at first with option to custimize, but if omnimechs are coming in the future, they are supposed to be easily modified. I think we need to come up with a way to reflect this, perhaps non-omnimechs can be custimized but they need to make it so that if origional had say 10t of wepons in right arm it would only be able to have that and omnimechs could be made so that per bt rules equipment could be balanced anywhere they would normally be allowed.

[Stone Profit]

Pht, on 28 March 2012 - 06:11 PM, said:

So, basically, you're equating anarchy (everyone does as he pleases) with freedom?

... Or did I read you wrong?

Yeah, people do that a lot. If you cant do whatever the hell you want, you are'nt free. Its just not true, but have fun trying to convince some people of that. How about the freedom to not have to deal with every jackass in his own custom Mech that doesn't work with a lance and so puts the match in jeopardy? Or the freedom to stay immersed in the BT universe. THAT is the freedom I want.

[grimm69]

I'm with Holmes. Mechlab is half the fun. if it is available to all players then we're is imbalance. Due to hardpoint limitations you can't go hog wild on lasers. if you did strip down atlas of armor and speed for tonnage crit slots and hardpoints still limit you.good luck trying to build 4xGauss Rifles and 2x ERPPC's in anything. not enough slots or hardpoints. i think balance is fine for designing. every build has a weakness. that is part of the balance as well. tired of people feeling that anybody can build a mech that is overpowed. overpowered is great armor,great speed and great firepower. can't happen good luck trying though. if it did i'd see alot more of "one mech killed 6 or more" in the final tally doing all the damage.

[Culler]

grimm69, on 16 January 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

I'm with Holmes. Mechlab is half the fun. if it is available to all players then we're is imbalance. Due to hardpoint limitations you can't go hog wild on lasers. if you did strip down atlas of armor and speed for tonnage crit slots and hardpoints still limit you.good luck trying to build 4xGauss Rifles and 2x ERPPC's in anything. not enough slots or hardpoints. i think balance is fine for designing. every build has a weakness. that is part of the balance as well. tired of people feeling that anybody can build a mech that is overpowed. overpowered is great armor,great speed and great firepower. can't happen good luck trying though. if it did i'd see alot more of "one mech killed 6 or more" in the final tally doing all the damage.

Holy thread necromancy, batman. The last time this monstrosity was updated was April 2012, that is, before you grimm69. Bravo, sir.

This topic has been long-dead and the matter of how to implement the mechbay decided long ago, let it rest in peace.