159 replies to this topic

[Bombast]

Jay Leon Hart, on 09 October 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

Perhaps there's only 1 type of AC ammo and the ACs are now all burst?

Only having 4 kinds of ammo (MG, LRM, SRM, AC) would really sort out that logistics issue. But I guess its kind of fair, in a way.

N0ni, on 09 October 2017 - 01:29 PM, said:

My question is what do they even consider to be the "core Mechwarrior fanbase"? The arcade guys or the tabletoppers that appreciate lore?

I wouldn't read into that statement too much. Standard corporate stuff.

Edited by Bombast, 09 October 2017 - 01:31 PM.

[Composite Armour]

Bombast, on 09 October 2017 - 01:22 PM, said:

Logistics is a huge part of the 'MW: Merc' series. And ammo generally isn't the chore.

As for the screenshots, pretty, but why are the AC/2 and AC/5 using the same ammo?

Looks like a testing thing really, with the ammo count being that high.

They'd have to keep ammo types separate in order to still follow the legal construction rules wouldn't they?

[Jay Leon Hart]

Composite Armour, on 09 October 2017 - 01:33 PM, said:

They'd have to keep ammo types separate in order to still follow the legal construction rules wouldn't they?

I'm pretty sure MW3 and MW4 broke a lot of construction rules, so it doesn't matter that much.

[N0ni]

Jay Leon Hart, on 09 October 2017 - 01:43 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure MW3 and MW4 broke a lot of construction rules, so it doesn't matter that much.

MW2: Mercs broke construction rules as well. Multiplayer being the biggest offender of jumpjetting everything with small/medium pulses anywhere (legs/head/anywhere not normal for the mech in question etc.). Also home to the original 16 MG Mad Dog with an upgraded engine, shreds anything in a mere 3 seconds max.

[Alan Davion]

N0MAD, on 09 October 2017 - 02:03 PM, said:

HG has thru law suit been confirmed to be owners of most BTech stuff specially arts assets till 2021, how is that bad for them?, who hasnt kept up? they are looking in a pretty good position atm as far as theit suit vs PGI, Even the Battletech game have moved their release date of the game till 2018, most likely to see how the suit pans out, looks like they dont wana release disputed mechs in their game. Tin hat i know but just a litle suss?.

Pretty much this.

Bombast, on 09 October 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

That's not what happened. In fact, the last arbitration (Which was the last 'update' in the HG chronicles) specifically says they don't own the stuff they keep suing Battletech/Mechwarrior over.

That being said, the arbitration is not as absolute as people may think. All the same, it's an indicator of what a judge/jury may say - That HG is full of it and FASA and its successors were in the right all along.

But that's the thing though, the arbitration doesn't need to be absolute, it just needs to prove, as you said, that HG is talking out it's backside and they only got away with this crap before by throwing around their financial weight.

With it now proven that HG does not, in fact, own anything they've claimed to own, their lawsuit against PGI and HBS has taken a very big hit credibility wise, and, as I said, throwing a tantrum over Battletech, which is what their lawsuits always are, are counterproductive to their future.

And while they can use the characters and mecha for Robotech until their "license" to Macross expires in 2021, if they have any hope of continuing to promote/sell/use Robotech to make money, they're going to have to negotiate a either a completely new license to the characters and mecha, which I'm sure Big West and Studio Nue will be involved in said negotiations to put the squeeze on HG to prevent any sneaky legal double talk like their original license, or just an extension of their license, which will still likely require some major concessions from HG.

Of course what's best for us is if Big West, Studio Nue and Tatsuonoko tell HG to just piss off and leave them flapping in the wind. Then we can actually get more regular Macross stuff stateside.

[TLBFestus]

Things I read in the article that made me cringe:

Quote

"A significant part of our design philosophy is asking, 'What have players always wanted to do in a MechWarrior game?'" Bullock tells me.

This isn't new. He's asked before, and then done whatever the heck he wants. I believe in the rumour that one of his decisions that was made was based on the opinion of a child.

Quote

Bullock is working to make MechWarrior 5 the ultimate realisation of BattleTech lore.

Harmless enough statement, but again, it's HIS realization and we all know that that doesn't necessarily jive with what many of us would want.

Quote

"Of course, plenty of games have had destructible environments," he says. "But this is the first time it’ll be in a MechWarrior game, and that’s going to be awesome."

I'm pretty sure I'm going to put this comment on the pile alongside the other great quotes of the day such as "No 3rd person ever" and "3 pillars".

Sure they are using a much better engine, but don't be shocked when that environment is only "selectively destructible".

Quote

"It’s important for us to try and be as mindful as we can about a new generation of PC gamers," Bullock says. "But we understand who our community is and who we’re making the game for."

Which community is he referring to? The one that was on an Island? The one that they sold the original vision of MWO on and then casually discarded as "not the target audience" once they had the money?

Quote

That’s not just because Bullock thinks it’s what MechWarrior fans want, but because it’s what they deserve. "We’re dedicated to the core MechWarrior fanbase. They’re the ones that supported us with MechWarrior Online and now we’re making a game for them."

Yeah....like MWO is dedicated to the core Mechwarrior Fanbase. We did support them enthusiastically originally, but soon learned that we weren't truly the "target audience", but we did have money they could use to get kick started.

[Bombast]

Alan Davion, on 09 October 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

But that's the thing though, the arbitration doesn't need to be absolute, it just needs to prove, as you said, that HG is talking out it's backside and they only got away with this crap before by throwing around their financial weight.

What I mean by 'absolute' is that the Arbiter's decision is not automatically 'law.' For it to have an impact on the HBS/PGI case would require a judge to agree, and he'd have to do it based on the evidence, not just because an Arbitration Award said so.

Presumably, if the Judge gets presented the same evidence the Arbiter saw, he'd agree, but you know what they say about assumptions.

Alan Davion, on 09 October 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

Of course what's best for us is if Big West, Studio Nue and Tatsuonoko tell HG to just piss off and leave them flapping in the wind. Then we can actually get more regular Macross stuff stateside.

This seems likely.

[mod]

Redacted
[/mod]

Edited by poopenshire, 10 October 2017 - 06:29 AM.

[HammerMaster]

Russ appealing to the Lore Hounds? The ones been with Battletech for 30 years and TOLERATE his vision for MWO since it is the ONLY game in town? I'll believe it when I see it. Problem is, I'll pay for it. But he will see it as we agree with him. I'm telling you now, I already see too much deviation. What can be done about it? I don't run a gaming company so I'm just the $.

[Bombast]

HammerMaster, on 09 October 2017 - 05:20 PM, said:

What can be done about it?

Well, for starters, you could not do...

HammerMaster, on 09 October 2017 - 05:20 PM, said:

Problem is, I'll pay for it.

... that.

[Stonefalcon]

I've learnt that PCGamer always writes a good review when enough cash has been thrown at them.

[Marius Evander]

umm I thought that lawsuit made it clear that they do own the product until their contract expires in 2021 so everything thats in dispute about infrigement they do own because the infringements occured during their contract of temporary ownership ?

[Bombast]

Cadoazreal, on 09 October 2017 - 06:49 PM, said:

umm I thought that lawsuit made it clear that they do own the product until their contract expires in 2021 so everything thats in dispute about infrigement they do own because the infringements occured during their contract of temporary ownership ?

The Arbitrator determined that HG did not get the rights to 41 Macross designs, including the ones they keep suing over.

[General Solo]

Woo Hoo

[slide]

Russ may very well be trying to build the game fans want, he might also be trying to do justice to the universe it is set in.

I see several problems with this though.

1. Russ has seriously burnt many of the people who this type of game would (and should) be aimed at. It is debatable how many of these he can get back. This seriously hurts MW5's viability which may very well force a change in the target audience (again).

2. Can he actually deliver on what he is saying. History would say no.

3. MW5 will likely gut the number of players in MWO. Could this be when they shut down the servers or go into maintenance mode. Some would argue we are already there.

It is my hope that Russ has done a reciprocal deal with HBS where they supply the sim game in exchange for PGI's models. It wouldn't be difficult to tailor HBS part to suit what MW5 needs with a few minor changes here and there (ie take out the ARGO). If I remember correctly even the number of available worlds is similar at around 300, so the possibility exists. Along with the limited customization, functioning economies ,story driven and random missions, there are a lot of similarities. The sim part of it, "Mech Tycoon" if you will, only requires input from missions, ie win/lose, salvage, mechs lost, pilots injured etc to function. Missions can be real time, FP or turn based it doesn't really matter as long as there are results. I also feel it is redundant for 2 companies to basically develop the same model for 2 games. Anyway might be my wishful thinking.

I really hope he can deliver what he describes, because I will play it. But I am going to have to see it before I spend any money on it.

[Dee Eight]

Davegt27, on 09 October 2017 - 10:38 AM, said:

I see problems already
speed reads left to right
temp reads right to left??

Not a problem for folks who don't live in their mom's basement and actually get out and drive their own vehicles, especially modern motorcycles with all digital instrument panels. On space cramped designs, this is actually fairly common. Your brain isn't all that concerned with which direction the dial moves once you have any practical time in front of the display. Airspeed dials on most aircraft start upper left, then sweep clockwise downwards and around to upper left for example. Many gauges are straight up and down vertical bars.

Edited by Dee Eight, 09 October 2017 - 08:19 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Looks amazing.

Stonefalcon, on 09 October 2017 - 05:33 PM, said:

I've learnt that PCGamer always writes a good review when enough cash has been thrown at them.

Only a fool who hates video games wouldn't give what is known so far a thumbs up.

slide, on 09 October 2017 - 07:38 PM, said:

Russ may very well be trying to build the game fans want, he might also be trying to do justice to the universe it is set in.

I see several problems with this though.

1. Russ has seriously burnt many of the people who this type of game would (and should) be aimed at. It is debatable how many of these he can get back. This seriously hurts MW5's viability which may very well force a change in the target audience (again).

2. Can he actually deliver on what he is saying. History would say no.

3. MW5 will likely gut the number of players in MWO. Could this be when they shut down the servers or go into maintenance mode. Some would argue we are already there.

It is my hope that Russ has done a reciprocal deal with HBS where they supply the sim game in exchange for PGI's models. It wouldn't be difficult to tailor HBS part to suit what MW5 needs with a few minor changes here and there (ie take out the ARGO). If I remember correctly even the number of available worlds is similar at around 300, so the possibility exists. Along with the limited customization, functioning economies ,story driven and random missions, there are a lot of similarities. The sim part of it, "Mech Tycoon" if you will, only requires input from missions, ie win/lose, salvage, mechs lost, pilots injured etc to function. Missions can be real time, FP or turn based it doesn't really matter as long as there are results. I also feel it is redundant for 2 companies to basically develop the same model for 2 games. Anyway might be my wishful thinking.

I really hope he can deliver what he describes, because I will play it. But I am going to have to see it before I spend any money on it.

More negative drama seriously? Your not even trying to make sense.

Personal attacks and character assassination is pathetic. Have some self respect.

This may sound harsh to some of the moderators but tame compared to the quotes I am responding to.

Unreal.

Edited by Johnny Z, 09 October 2017 - 10:39 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Trissila, on 09 October 2017 - 04:41 PM, said:

You act as if Battletech hadn't already gone right through the bottom of the barrel and damn near to the core of the planet prior to PGI's involvement.

The last Mechwarrior game was 2002's MW4: Mercs.

Between then and MWO a decade later in 2012, there was nothing (except MechAssault, lol, but who counts that?)

MWO's got flaws. A lot of them, in fact. But it's a good sight better than the alternative, which was absolutely nothing. I think it could be argued that HBS's BT game wouldn't have happened either, if not for MWO proving that there's at least some interest remaining in the franchise. Certainly the TT game hasn't been doing so hot, what with the last real revision of the core rules being back in 2006 with the most recent box set being published in 2011. 11 years is a long time to go without major updates, even for a tabletop game. I don't think you could find someone that would argue that TT rules are flawless enough to have not needed a serious revision in over a decade.

Exactly.

MechWarrior Online is one of the best online games available. Epic pro trolling trying to get players banned or to quit aside.

Edited by Johnny Z, 09 October 2017 - 10:41 PM.

[Elizander]

MeiSooHaityu, on 09 October 2017 - 11:36 AM, said:

It's a cool read. Little tidbits like that article are always fun to read when it comes to the new game.

Still a bit leery about the Mechlab situation (or lack there of), but everything else sounds pretty solid. If there are that many mechs and variants available, that will at least help ease the pain.

I do hope that they might consider some customization if it had to deal with temporary field modifications (like replacing a Centurion's destroyed A/C10 with an A/C5 until a replacement 10 can be found. Something like that, however I feel that is either outside their vision or the scope of what they are trying to do.

I guess we will have to wait for more info to be sure.

If they allow a pilot to dismount and pick his or her ride then this can be a basis for a PUBG type Battle Royale in the future.

I need to budget for this game as well as to toss in for some MC and a pack now that my budget has loosened up a little.

Edited by Elizander, 09 October 2017 - 10:49 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Elizander, on 09 October 2017 - 10:47 PM, said:

If they allow a pilot to dismount and pick his or her ride then this can be a basis for a PUBG type Battle Royale in the future.

Oh yes.

[Shifty McSwift]

Anyone notice it looks like MWO with bigger textures and a new hud (also new units and AI obviously too)? Maybe the simple reason is just building on the same engine, and it isn't a problem as MWO can function very nicely (the server communications seem to be where it has the most issues). But to me it is hard not to see it.