53 replies to this topic

[Cy Mitchell]

Cathy, on 05 December 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

I don't care, it looks terrible

I think the design is fine. It diverts from the traditional images of the Union DropShip but I do not have a problem with them exercising some creative licence and making those 1980 images looks a little more practical and functional.

What the model in the image is missing is some texturing. At this stage in the BattleTech universe, DropShips were a limited resource. Most of the ones in service were hundreds of years old. A brand new shiny DropShip was as rare as a unicorn. The models needs to be textured to show this age and the wages of war along with the effects centuries of weather and atmospheric reentry. Scar it up a bit. Add some peeling paint and faded decals and it will look good and add to the feel of technological decay that was so much a part of the Succession Wars.

[Bud Crue]

Cathy, on 05 December 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

Much rougher but due to time and not your skills i'm sure, but even in it's current state about 400% better looking than the P.G.I butt p...*cough* union drop ship.

Thanks for that Cathy. Now that image it is stuck (pardon) in my head.

[Cy Mitchell]

Bud Crue, on 05 December 2017 - 03:38 AM, said:

The reason my friend that MWO lacks what MW5 has is because MW5 is the game where Russ has decided to give "players what they have always wanted" (see PCgamer article) and what "they've dreamed about" (see polygon article), whereas MWO was apparently some sort of lack luster effort where he gave us the game that he wanted and where he knows best (see April 2016 townhall).

So MWO is apparently Russ's game and in Russ's game their are no Union dropships. MW5 is, again in Russ's word the game "for MW fans" where he "must give MW fans what they've always dreamed about", and thus it will apparently have Union dropships. Hope that clears things up.

Listen to the most recent pre-MechCon podcast again. If anything, he said that MW5 was the game that he always wanted to play and make. He believes that what he has always wanted is also what most MechWarrior fans have always wanted. If anything, it sounds like MW5 is Russ's game or at least the game he always hoped to make, not MWO.

This is not to say he is not proud of what PGI has accomplished with MWO but it sounds like it was a means to get him where he really wanted to go.

Edited by Rampage, 05 December 2017 - 03:51 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Rampage, on 05 December 2017 - 03:48 AM, said:

Listen to the most recent pre-MechCon podcast again. If anything, he said that MW5 was the game that he always wanted to play and make. He believes that what he has always wanted is also what most MechWarrior fans have always wanted. If anything, it sounds like MW5 is Russ's game or at least the game he always hoped to make, not MWO.

Yes. That is exactly what he said in the articles as well. MW5 is the game he claims he is giving fans what they have always wanted in a MW game. MWO on the other hand is clearly not that game. MW5 will thus have the Union (something fans apparently want and/or dream about) and MWO does not, because MWO is not the game...at least according to Russ...for MW fans. It was for him.

I don't care either way, I'm just quoting him to answer the OP's question.

[Lily from animove]

Dakota1000, on 04 December 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

It could have something to do with MW5 being a totally different game engine than MWO that PGI is better at editing and that they have a different dev team on MW5 than MWO.

Just wait until MW5 is done and all of its features are finalized before wanting them to port a bunch of half baked assets over to MWO. Maybe they'll go ahead and change MWO's game engine too at some point.

But why si the MW5 HUD so horrible?

[Cy Mitchell]

Bud Crue, on 05 December 2017 - 03:53 AM, said:

Yes. That is exactly what he said in the articles as well. MW5 is the game he claims he is giving fans what they have always wanted in a MW game. MWO on the other hand is clearly not that game. MW5 will thus have the Union (something fans apparently want and/or dream about) and MWO does not, because MWO is not the game...at least according to Russ...for MW fans. It was for him.

I don't care either way, I'm just quoting him to answer the OP's question.

MWO became a FPS with Mechs not a MechWarrior game in the likeness of any previous MechWarrior title. Some of that is because that is what the modern non-BattleTech players wanted. Russ chose to cater to that market. That is fine, I have had some fun playing it and if the money it has brought in allows PGI to make a real MechWarrior game now then I will happily play it when it is released. A side benefit is a resurgence in the entire BattleTech IP which has risen from the almost dead with promising new titles on the horizon. For those reasons, I am thankful for MWO.

Edited by Rampage, 05 December 2017 - 04:10 AM.

[Tier5 Kerensky]

Well originally PGI was the developer, not publisher.

[Alkabides]

Does OP know what he is talking about? There is a union class dropship on tourmaline desert. Open your eyes son!

[Almond Brown]

UnofficialOperator, on 04 December 2017 - 11:51 PM, said:

Wow what's the difference between an optimist and the clinically insane?

Your Signature Block? LOL!

Old MW4 Ranger, on 05 December 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

5 minutes Work go bring my own Low Poly union in the cryengine SDK

Wonderful. Now can we see the Take-Off and Landing animations please.

[Armored Yokai]

In all fairness, PGI was working on a engine that has many limitations because of the EULA and the fact that the Coder for MWO got fired or quit is a even bigger factor as to why we dont have many things.

XMLs are the main the PGI are working on and let me tell you, most of the weapons we have are just copy paste...
I.E RAC is just a reskinned Machine Gun with gauss charge

Unreal is a top tier engine with many capablities despite the minor issues it comes with.

Edited by Armored Yokai, 05 December 2017 - 09:05 AM.

[Ghogiel]

I for one am glad MW5 is stealing assets from MWO. If they had to put in the 100s of man hours on just the mech models alone on top of everything else the final game would suffer. A lot.

And that's saying something because really I am kinda worried about MW5 as is. Might be ok, seems a bit like they going towards a MW2 mercs style thing. :shrug:

[Khobai]

there should still be a union dropship defense mode in faction play

faction play should have sequenced battles

where first you have to do siege mode to take out the orbital gun.

then you should have to do dropship defense mode, where the dropship lands and all 12 mechs come out of it, and have to defend the dropship till it takes off again.

then there should be a third objective-based map to take out the enemy capital/palace/HQ

Edited by Khobai, 05 December 2017 - 09:21 AM.

[Mcgral18]

Armored Yokai, on 05 December 2017 - 09:03 AM, said:

In all fairness, PGI was working on a engine that has many limitations because of the EULA and the fact that the Coder for MWO got fired or quit is a even bigger factor as to why we dont have many things.

XMLs are the main the PGI are working on and let me tell you, most of the weapons we have are just copy paste...
I.E RAC is just a reskinned Machine Gun with gauss charge

Unreal is a top tier engine with many capablities despite the minor issues it comes with.

MGs are lasers

RACs are a little different, with an actual projectile
Shares more with MASC than MGs (bar fill and drain)

[Bigbacon]

chances are they are not in the game because:
1. easier to just have mechs drop out of it.
2. no landing animations
3. Players don't need to possible interact with the object on the ground before it lifts off.
4. they dont need to worry about players having to walk out of it or code to force mechs to walk out of it.
5. lazy?

over all a hovering thing that just drops players out means that there is a lot less BS they needed to put up with.

[Armored Yokai]

Khobai, on 05 December 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

there should still be a union dropship defense mode in faction play

faction play should have sequenced battles

Give I.S 1000m Machine Gun AC20s on the Union
and Clan 1m machine gun on the Union.
this ensures perfect balance and I.S 100% winrate

Btw PGI says that the video we saw was actually just a test bed and the real demo is much better.

Edited by Armored Yokai, 05 December 2017 - 09:31 AM.

[Stormfury]

I was so excited to see that there is a Mechwarrior 5, thanks for pointing it out OP. Then I quickly lost all interest when I saw it was from PGI....

[MechaBattler]

MWO isn't the game they wanted to make. It's the game they had to make. Had to make because effing HG sued them over the Warhammer in the promotional video they were using to try to get a publisher. They were even going to work with Jordan on it. But as soon as HG sued all support dropped away. So Russ went rogue. He got friends to start IGP. Probably taking out business loans and whatnot. They used IGP to fund MWO. A barebones MechWarrior deathmatch game in the vain of World of Tanks. But they underestimated how much programming work was going to be needed to deliver on their promises. They spent months just trying fix whatever they'd done to the game engine under the auspices of "UI2.0".

So I'm not surprised that everything they ever wanted to do with MWO is going into MW5. And besides. What makes you think they can deliver more? Look at the modes we got in MWO. Don't expect them to reinvent the wheel in MWO. ;o

I mean that's not to say it wouldn't be cool. Have a union dropship land in the middle of a map. Start disgorging tanks and aircraft. You gotta slog your way through a horde of them to take out the dropship. It might be fun at least the first few times. Perhaps they should have modeled after Warframe. Mindless pve content draws in a bigger crowd.

[Satan n stuff]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 04 December 2017 - 11:53 PM, said:

Is the dropship an Asset frorm pgi ?many assets seeing mir like hbs Assets..like dropship als Tanks ...the cryencryengune has the Mist Dame Features like the ue4 als bring Models in is Not a problem

What are you on about? Most of the assets in the Battletech game were made by PGI for MWO.

[kuma8877]

Satan n stuff, on 05 December 2017 - 02:06 PM, said:

What are you on about? Most of the assets in the Battletech game were made by PGI for MWO.

Only the mech designs are PGI's in HBS's BT. There are more vehicles than just mechs in BT that would be an easy asset trade to keep the overall design aesthetic the same across both games. There's just no reason for PGI to recreate all of those other vehicle assets when a trade is so easy to make.

To the OP's point about where you can find two opposing forces entrenched within walking distance of each other, a good modern example would be the Korean DMZ. Or WWI across the trenches for recent history. So, it does happen.... occasionally.

Edited by kuma8877, 05 December 2017 - 05:58 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

kuma8877, on 05 December 2017 - 05:53 PM, said:

To the OP's point about where you can find two opposing forces entrenched within walking distance of each other, a good modern example would be the Korean DMZ. Or WWI across the trenches for recent history. So, it does happen.... occasionally.

The Iran-Iraq war also consisted of trench warfare. Then there are the urban combat environments in Iraq, Afghanistan, the West Bank...