140 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

Tech doesn't really matter. MWO is a great looking game today, the problem has always been core gameplay design. PGI doesn't design around human psychology. People like being challenged, and like winning, but usually hate losing badly (rage quit) and winning easily (bored). 1v1, 4v4, 12v12 etc are just favors. The cool element is just sugar coating on top. A MMO company that doesn't understand how to mathematically deliver the appropriate difficulty experience from the day 1 play to the day 1000 player will never be successful in growing its player base. Being a niche game is just an excuse, the sci-fi game genre has huge revenue potential and Battletech has a much more compelling back story than other big name games out there.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Greatest problem for PGI ...nothing experience to make (sucessfull)modern Games and to find People with experience in Gamemaking and hold this People.

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 21 October 2018 - 10:21 PM.

[HARDKOR]

Vellron2005, on 11 October 2018 - 11:11 PM, said:

- If you spent less than 10$: carry over one dropdeck of mechs into MWO2
- If you spent 10-30$: carry over two dropdecs of mechs into MWO2
- if you spent 30-50$: carry over 3 dropdecks into MWO2
- if you spent more than 50$: carry over 4 dropdecks into MWO2

LOL?

Most of us spent already $200+ while it was still in beta... plenty of people have dropped $500 on this.

[HammerMaster]

Should have been done last year. At zero cost to us. The retention and new influx with new engine would have easily funded it.

[MechaBattler]

I don't think they could have monetized retention and new influx fast enough to make up for costs. I do think that MW5 having already many of the mechanics and mechs would reduce their development cost and MW5 sales provide funding for the development into MWO in unreal4.

However given that MW5 won't launch this year. But some time next year. And their license renewal is in 2020? I wouldn't be surprised if MW5 is just their attempt to cash in before they let their license expire and drop MWO altogether. Which would be really sad.

[JediPanther]

Nightbird, on 21 October 2018 - 01:05 PM, said:

Tech doesn't really matter. MWO is a great looking game today, the problem has always been core gameplay design. PGI doesn't design around human psychology. People like being challenged, and like winning, but usually hate losing badly (rage quit) and winning easily (bored). 1v1, 4v4, 12v12 etc are just favors. The cool element is just sugar coating on top. A MMO company that doesn't understand how to mathematically deliver the appropriate difficulty experience from the day 1 play to the day 1000 player will never be successful in growing its player base. Being a niche game is just an excuse, the sci-fi game genre has huge revenue potential and Battletech has a much more compelling back story than other big name games out there.

Core game play was fine until they shoe honred in the clans then it became non-stop power creep since. The quirks were originally designed solely for the IS to have any chance at all of fighting clan mechs. As for graphics i'll take fun game play over graphics. I still play the older mw titles,emulate older game systems like snes,maime,c64, mac,apple 2 etc.

Tech does very much matter today. Look at the difference between minimal and recommended specs of games. Often times there is a significant difference between them in actual game play performance. Just because you can get a c64 or dial up modem to go online mean that it's the best choice of hardware to get online. Game developers design for current most widely available tech people have, they don't design games for older outdated tech like ms-dos,win 7 or win 98se any more because it's not current.

[Nightbird]

JediPanther, on 22 October 2018 - 10:41 AM, said:

Core game play was fine until...

Tech does very much matter today...

Due to budget, can do only one of the two. What now?

[MechaBattler]

MW5 already has the gameplay mechanics, mechs, and map biome assets. So that cuts the budget needed down.

[Nightbird]

MW5 doesn't have any MP mechanics, it has single player mechanics good for 1 or 2 play through. The art assets are also minimal, with fixed loadouts, no customization via mechlab. I'd say it cuts the budget needed down by 5% or so?

[Koniving]

I would, F2P or otherwise... as then PGI would stop having its excuses for why this game is so bad and lacking in content.

Nightbird, on 22 October 2018 - 12:28 PM, said:

MW5 doesn't have any MP mechanics, it has single player mechanics good for 1 or 2 play through. The art assets are also minimal, with fixed loadouts, no customization via mechlab. I'd say it cuts the budget needed down by 5% or so?

MW5: Mercs has "1 to 4 players", full mod support, "granular customization" (swap equipment, weapons, TARGETING SYSTEMS, COMPUTER equipment, etc..) (so more than any MWO in the past)... but lacks "drastic changes" such as swapping armor types, engines, heatsink types, or changing that AC/20 to 6 medium lasers.

In place of major weapon changes, it has weapon variants. On the bootup screens you can see the targeting system installed, whether it is NV/Thermal enabled, etc.. and on different bootup screens for the Shadowhawk in a few videos, you can see the targeting system has been changed out. Weapon variants we don't know the specifics of, but there are screen shots of full auto ACs doing sprays of shells and ejecting casings.
o.O;

Edited by Koniving, 22 October 2018 - 12:38 PM.

[Peter2k]

Nightbird, on 22 October 2018 - 12:10 PM, said:

Due to budget, can do only one of the two. What now?

Yeah, but PGI hasn't done anything for either since closed Beta

[MW Waldorf Statler]

question is what PGI understand with "Full Mod support" all what PGI say is editing of Missions, Maps and Algorithms for it ...deeper Modding in the game structures not what PGI will in moment

Quote

Will there be any multiplayer beyond the co-op, or will that be something people could mod in later?
I won’t be giving away any secrets about future or possible future updates to MW5. As to the initial release of MW5, yes, it’s a single player/co-op PvE experience. I suppose it might be possible for mod teams to put in basic PvP gameplay but nowadays PvP experiences are extremely complex undertakings that now are no longer viewed as a throw-in to every FPS product. A proper PvP experience like MWO has a central database and server infrastructure that controls and even simulates server authoritative hit detection. MW5 won’t have that kind of infrastructure upon release and 100% of our development time is going into making the best PvE game we possibly can. Who knows how future plans for MWO might evolve.

https://www.gamingne...ries-Interview/

Quote

MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries will also receive full mod support, empowering fans to customize their own missions, contracts, planetary systems, biomes, and much more, via powerful toolsets and Steam Workshop integration.

https://www.moddb.co...ull-mod-support

[Koniving]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 22 October 2018 - 10:20 PM, said:

question is what PGI understand with "Full Mod support" all what PGI say is editing of Missions, Maps and Algorithms for it ...deeper Modding in the game structures not what PGI will in moment

Two things to remember:
1) mwo is monetizeable. Pgi won't want to jeopardize that so naturally it won't be in MW5.

2) they are right, MW5 doesn't have the infrastructure. For modding at least they are honest... Mwo has a lot of anticheat measures. Most likely a modded MW5 will not have anticheat measures. It will not have server hosting, etc. It will be like Gears of War on consoles and PC. It runs off the host's computer. Good thing is that doesn't really on servers that might not be there in ten years. Bad thing is it's hard to run high player counts... But given it's nature why would you want to? High numbers of strangers lead to cheaters and trolls. But a tight knit multiplayer setup could be neat.

Personally I'd like to see 2-4 players and AI against each other.

Edited by Koniving, 22 October 2018 - 10:40 PM.

[JediPanther]

Nightbird, on 22 October 2018 - 12:10 PM, said:

Due to budget, can do only one of the two. What now?

you or pgi? Because we know what pgi's choice already is. As for budget pc that can run mwo I've gotten pawn shop $200 laptops to run mwo. As long as you have minimal hardware specs and don't give a dam about fps or 4k resolution many pcs and laptops can run mwo. I've got a youtube channel that has a laptop running mwo at 6 fps in testing grounds. You can't even lrm at that fps. You need 20-35 fps to actually play mwo.

newegg,pc parts picker and amazon all have $400-500 pcs that can run this game. Even walmart has a few $350-450 ones.

[Nightbird]

Are you saying the minimum spec is too high or low?

On the high end, I can't get this game to even run at 60 fps consistently with top of the line cpu and gpu. I can get 100fps for the most part, but when the action starts it can drop to 40.

[Koniving]

Nightbird, on 21 October 2018 - 01:05 PM, said:

Tech doesn't really matter. MWO is a great looking game today, the problem has always been core gameplay design. PGI doesn't design around human psychology. People like being challenged, and like winning, but usually hate losing badly (rage quit) and winning easily (bored). 1v1, 4v4, 12v12 etc are just favors. The cool element is just sugar coating on top. A MMO company that doesn't understand how to mathematically deliver the appropriate difficulty experience from the day 1 play to the day 1000 player will never be successful in growing its player base. Being a niche game is just an excuse, the sci-fi game genre has huge revenue potential and Battletech has a much more compelling back story than other big name games out there.

Tech does matter, slightly, but its not about the graphics.

The game engine we're using currently is extremely outdated, buggy, and NOT designed for what MWO is trying to deliver. The game can't even produce visuals out to 200 meters without decreasing the LoD (level of detail) even at the highest graphic settings. For an Atlas in MWO that's barely four-arm-lengths. That's a huge issue.
Even worse instead of fading in, it literally pops in, you can go a length of less than 400 meters and see something in the medium-distance pop and change shape no less than 7 times. SEVEN TIMES.. (Specifically calling out Frozen City here) You'd hardly notice going insanely fast, but if you're going 64.8 kph you're gonna notice as the fabric of reality shifts and mutates so many times in the span of seconds.

The game engine has so many limits on the coding side of things. For example, missiles used to use the "Grenade" script in order to have explosions do splash damage. But a limitation there is that it can't do total damage, it must do multiplicative damage. As such a single LRM missile... not the launcher just one missile doing 0.8 damage could actually do up to 25 damage if you were unfortunate enough to be too small, thus the mechs were made MUCH larger than their canonical versions to make up for it, and for years we've suffered with these huge monstrosities due to that ONE problem. In the end? We lost the beautiful missiles we had...


In favor of "herpaderp lets fly in a straight line." That's because they no longer run off of the grenade class in CryEngine, and instead just...got recoded with no splashies.

The splash damage of the Clan ER PPC isn't real splash but very strictly coded spread.

There's a plethora of issues and limitations in this game engine and it can't be updated because it is so heavily modified, and the engine itself is abandoned the company that makes it is horrible, it genuinely does not live up to its previous version CryEngine 2 which is far superior... and then... there's the fact that people that know how to use CryEngine are hard to find... and PGI's longstanding employees are just far more experienced with UnrealEngine. Its what they used before MWO, in the original MW5... and in MW5: Mercs you can see their knowledge and prowess with the engine.


And then you look at what the same people did with MWO...
MWO was a passion project.. And the passion you can see is in MW5 because they can make Unreal do what they want.
They struggle and grind and complain and have so many issues with getting CryEngine to do what they want... and though occasionally they try...they just can't. 3 years ago they wanted to try a level with moving platforms. Couldn't get it to work. But you can see these in MW5: Mercs.

And if you don't believe it was a passion project for MWO....

None of this made it into MWO, but you might notice a good chunk of this stuff is actually already in MW5: Mercs and is not dissimilar to HBS' Battletech.

I should note: Bryan Ekman though rare to see, has been at the presentation for every MW5 Mercs trailer, and being the creative director, I think its fair to say we know what he's been doing... Because it certainly hasn't been MWO.

Edited by Koniving, 23 October 2018 - 08:59 AM.

[JediPanther]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2018 - 08:37 AM, said:

Are you saying the minimum spec is too high or low?

On the high end, I can't get this game to even run at 60 fps consistently with top of the line cpu and gpu. I can get 100fps for the most part, but when the action starts it can drop to 40.

Nightbird, on 23 October 2018 - 08:37 AM, said:

Are you saying the minimum spec is too high or low?

On the high end, I can't get this game to even run at 60 fps consistently with top of the line cpu and gpu. I can get 100fps for the most part, but when the action starts it can drop to 40.

That's due to technical issues from how mwo is coded. Minimal specs works for the 30-55 fps range with most settings on low. My old rig from 2012 was purpose built at the time for mwo and able to run 40-55 fps most of the time on medium until pgi's latest batch of patches and 'known issues' they left in forced the fps drop rate to increase.

Since you have top-of-the-line hardware iId have expected no issues with mwo. I'm so use to playing on the low end anything above 60fps would seem pretty amazing in mwo. Ironically my rig can do games like msgvttp and skyrim still pretty decently until a power failure took it out.

My old rig specs were great for a $1,300 2012 budget pc.
1 x Processor AMD FX-8150 CPU (8x 3.60GHz/8MB L2 Cache)
0 x Data Hard Drive None
0 x iBUYPOWER PowerDrive None
1 x Processor Cooling Liquid CPU Cooling System [AMD] - ARC Dual Silent High Performance Fan Upgrade (Push-Pull Airflow)
1 x Memory 8 GB [4 GB X2] DDR3-1866 Memory Module - Corsair or Major Brand
1 x Video Card AMD Radeon HD 7870 - 2GB - Single Card
1 x Video Card Brand Major Brand Powered by AMD or NVIDIA
1 x Motherboard ASUS M5A97 R2.0 -- AMD 970
1 x Power Supply 650 Watt -- NZXT HALE82N 650W
1 x Primary Hard Drive 1 TB HARD DRIVE -- 32M Cache, 7200 RPM, 6.0Gb/s - Single Drive
1 x Optical Drive 24X Dual Format/Double Layer DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Drive - Black
0 x 2nd Optical Drive

[Nightbird]

Koniving, on 23 October 2018 - 08:51 AM, said:

Tech does matter, slightly, but its not about the graphics.

The game engine we're using currently is extremely outdated, buggy, and NOT designed for what MWO is trying to deliver. The game can't even produce visuals out to 200 meters without decreasing the LoD (level of detail) even at the highest graphic settings. For an Atlas in MWO that's barely four-arm-lengths. That's a huge issue.
Even worse instead of fading in, it literally pops in, you can go a length of less than 400 meters and see something in the medium-distance pop and change shape no less than 7 times. SEVEN TIMES.. (Specifically calling out Frozen City here) You'd hardly notice going insanely fast, but if you're going 64.8 kph you're gonna notice as the fabric of reality shifts and mutates so many times in the span of seconds.

Yep, I'm not saying it doesn't matter. It's only when people say features will solve all the problems, that I say the game today can be a lot better with the same features but catered to the players.

LOD settings can be changed in the user.cfg, it costs performance though.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Koniving, on 23 October 2018 - 08:51 AM, said:

Tech does matter, slightly, but its not about the graphics.

The game engine we're using currently is extremely outdated, buggy, and NOT designed for what MWO is trying to deliver. The game can't even produce visuals out to 200 meters without decreasing the LoD (level of detail) even at the highest graphic settings. For an Atlas in MWO that's barely four-arm-lengths. That's a huge issue.
Even worse instead of fading in, it literally pops in, you can go a length of less than 400 meters and see something in the medium-distance pop and change shape no less than 7 times. SEVEN TIMES.. (Specifically calling out Frozen City here) You'd hardly notice going insanely fast, but if you're going 64.8 kph you're gonna notice as the fabric of reality shifts and mutates so many times in the span of seconds.

The game engine has so many limits on the coding side of things. For example, missiles used to use the "Grenade" script in order to have explosions do splash damage. But a limitation there is that it can't do total damage, it must do multiplicative damage. As such a single LRM missile... not the launcher just one missile doing 0.8 damage could actually do up to 25 damage if you were unfortunate enough to be too small, thus the mechs were made MUCH larger than their canonical versions to make up for it, and for years we've suffered with these huge monstrosities due to that ONE problem. In the end? We lost the beautiful missiles we had...


In favor of "herpaderp lets fly in a straight line." That's because they no longer run off of the grenade class in CryEngine, and instead just...got recoded with no splashies.

The splash damage of the Clan ER PPC isn't real splash but very strictly coded spread.

There's a plethora of issues and limitations in this game engine and it can't be updated because it is so heavily modified, and the engine itself is abandoned the company that makes it is horrible, it genuinely does not live up to its previous version CryEngine 2 which is far superior... and then... there's the fact that people that know how to use CryEngine are hard to find... and PGI's longstanding employees are just far more experienced with UnrealEngine. Its what they used before MWO, in the original MW5... and in MW5: Mercs you can see their knowledge and prowess with the engine.


And then you look at what the same people did with MWO...
MWO was a passion project.. And the passion you can see is in MW5 because they can make Unreal do what they want.
They struggle and grind and complain and have so many issues with getting CryEngine to do what they want... and though occasionally they try...they just can't. 3 years ago they wanted to try a level with moving platforms. Couldn't get it to work. But you can see these in MW5: Mercs.

And if you don't believe it was a passion project for MWO....

None of this made it into MWO, but you might notice a good chunk of this stuff is actually already in MW5: Mercs and is not dissimilar to HBS' Battletech.

I should note: Bryan Ekman though rare to see, has been at the presentation for every MW5 Mercs trailer, and being the creative director, I think its fair to say we know what he's been doing... Because it certainly hasn't been MWO.

MWLL has not the High Grafic (and im hate the spectaculum shining Mech Camoflages by MWO and the MWO Plastic look from the first Day) and not all the problems like MWO and used a Older Cryengine..and the People with Cryengine Experience leaves PGI after the Transverse disaster and PGI found not news thats can fix all the problems and Modified Files from the leaved Guys ...what the next great problem after the Biggest Problem what PGI make with the Cryengine..im Hope thats PGI not make the same Faults now with the UE 4 and holds the guys and have realistic Plans for it ,a nd Russ ask not his Son for Ideas .

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 23 October 2018 - 11:13 AM.

[B0oN]

Eh, I´ve been proposing a tech/skill transaction/cooperation thingie between Wandering Samurai and PGI more or less from the start (I was delivering a PM to one certain CommunityManager at that time about easily possible exploits (thanks for the silly and awesome times Gendo ! <3), especially since I was clanmate with 2 MW:LL devs at the relevant time ( if you really need to know : =CJW= Deathbane and =CJW= Erkittuo) and "might" (a really far fetched might, true, but then again, asking doesn´t cost me anything, so I´d have asked time and time again as the people that know me full well realize) have been able to talk them into it, but PGI thought otherwise and went the infamous "cease and desist" way we all don´t really wanna talk about if we don´t wanna stir up a shitstorm .
So, as I said earlier : MW:O 1.1 ? Yeaaaah, maybe, but not with PGI, since CryEngine needs specialists, and PGI ain´t that, that much is assured by now I hope .

Oh wait … I just typed that instead of just thinking it, didn´t I .
Ah well, suffer in grace with the possible potential at hand, I moved on .
In face of these anecdotes, please rethink your actual and valid possibilities …
















AND DESPAIR .