Let me start off by explaining how I see the distinctions between MechWarrior and BattleTech and how these distinctions (that I perceive) colour my thinking. MechWarrior is a series of computer games that is based off the greater BattleTech universe. This is how I see MechWarrior and that's why I classify myself as a MechWarrior fan more so than a BT fan, however I'm completely aware that the two are mutually inclusive to a high degree since one is a byproduct of the other. Because MW is an interactive game and not just fiction per se, it can/sometimes has to take liberties in order to make the game work. Technical limitations aren't what they used to be however I think the MW series of games should be granted a degree of artistic license in order to suit the mood and feel of the games that are made.
With that said, I think the two major camps are divided by philosophical differences stemming largely (for the sake of overall simplicity here, I'm well aware that there are tons of little permutations) from these:
BattleTech adherents: MechWarrior as an extract of BT needs to be CANONICAL, and that is the overall priority. All other considerations have to be taken as largely secondary.
MechWarrior adherents: MechWarrior is a game, and therefore everything is subordinate to balance and gameplay. It is obviously rooted in the BT universe, but for the sake of certain gaming fundamentals, some aspects of canon or lore may have to be sacrificed in order to allow the game to play better.
I consider myself a member of the MechWarrior camp. I believe MechWarrior was a game that was made with some artistic and pragmatic independence from the IP that spawned it. Look at MechCommander and MechAssault, these are games that are rooted in the overall BT universe but at the same time, they are works of art unto themselves, and I believe their names say a lot about this. They're mech games, but they have obvious differences that the developers had the freedom to make in order to make something different.
As a self-labelled MechWarrior, I have no problem with more of the lore and fictional tech elements making their way into the game, as a MechWarrior, I've already subscribed to the overall BT universe implicitly. However, these elements need to be implemented in balanced, fun and innovative ways, and if they have natural unbalancing effects, the developers should make use of artistic license to modify these elements so that they fit into a gaming environment more organically.
We also have to recognize that the nature of the BT universe, when ported to game, has a lot of natural/inherent imbalance. Are at all surprised that when we ported this universe to a game, that a lot of imbalances emerged, and alpha-striking laser boats dominated the fields? There's a huge variety of weapons but when putting them in a game setting, some just naturally stand out more than others. It's up to the devs to use artistic/pragmatic license to change some of these features in order to make them work as a game. MWO is not only a game, it is a game rooted in a very expansive set of fiction, it's also a business, and it's incorporating a F2P model that is going to have to take into account all of the pre-existing challenges, the challenges to making this game balanced increase exponentially with all these factors layered upon each other. None of these considerations were even remote in the minds of the authors who penned some of the early fiction decades ago that makes up the base of the IP's overall canon.
I notice a lot of commenters here seek immersion via simulation, I seek immersion via flow of game. EVE may have been immersive, but when I was mining asteroids, you can bet your *** I was reading a book every time. I believe some simulation elements have the effect of actually detracting from immersion or attention to the game. We all play games for different reasons and derive fun and satisfaction from different aspects but for me, personally, I always found the idea of a simulation based on things that don't exist to be oxymoronic. However, it could just be a semantic issue, and when people say simulation, they mean something slightly different.
The most common things I take umbrage with that I hear frequently from the canonical/purist camp. These are common issues and by no means wholly applicable to the BT camp.
1.
Lowest common denominator straw man argument: As I've explained, the MW camp (by my definition) is motivated by balance, we don't argue to against canonical items to 'dumb the game down', we argue so these things in order to make the game (IMHO)
work. Like I said, as MechWarriors, we've implicitly subscribed to the fiction too. If the devs suggested adding energy swords to the game, you can bet we'd be just as appalled as the purists.
2.
I know more than you therefore my opinion counts more: I've stated in other threads that I have no problem with people being extremely well-versed in the game, I respect the knowledge level a lot of purists have for this game, I really do. However, spamming the Sarna link makes you look like a dick. Credit where credit is due, wikis are a create aspect of a vibrant and enthusiastic part of any gaming community and my hat goes off to the people who run it. However, just because you know more about the backstory, does not mean (IMHO) you know more about making a better game. I disagree with OP's statement about us being overwhelmed by the BT universe and all its fiction. I simply choose not to read every book. As a MechWarrior, and consistent with the definition I laid out, I'm more interested in the game itself than the fiction overall. I've spent hours on the Sarna wiki, some things I find really interesting, but when it comes to reading books, personally, I read mostly non-fiction. Everyone is different. Also, the BT universe is great, but some of fiction is poorly written in places and not all of it is exciting from my point of view.
3.
Entitlement complex: I think this stems from both 2 and the fact that those in the BT camp simply are more canon-minded. Some players simply do not subscribed to the notion of compromise very much, but this can and does afflict the MW camp too. We have to understand that that PGI is first and foremost,
a business. These guys gotta get paid and have families to feed. They have to make a complex product that has broad appeal and if they can make this a financial success, it will be better for all of us fans of the BT universe in general because it means more developers will be inclined to make content for our beloved IP.
At the end of the day, BT, MW and even MA adherent will at least try this game. We're all here because we've become enamoured with the idea of 100 ton mechs striding across the battlefield, armed to the teeth. I think we'll all probably be pretty happy with this game in the end so long as PGI doesn't design mechs that go ice skating all over the place like their oriental cousins
Edited by GaussDragon, 23 December 2011 - 04:59 PM.
4
). So normally there would be given Mechs with given armament and some variants that have been developed, tested and sold by the actual manufacturer, and that's it. If something got blown up in the field and you tried to repair it with a non standard part, you'd run into problems.
