44 replies to this topic

[GuardDogg]

Video is 90% accurate. Although their is a lot missing in MWO from TT, previous versions of Mech sims (game).

* Heat management is highly missing. When at 75%-80%+. Suppose to be the start of difficulty to aim, shoot weapons. You are wearing a "Neurohelmet", and heat does effect computer elements and brain (static, color view, and more). In MWO you can go to 100%, with a warning, and then pressing "Override" and get away with a lot. And then after you are shut down, your computer does act with static (beeping), but not before the shut down. I have seen players end up in suicide, even after pressing "Override". Today in real situations. A military jet fighter pilot goes over so many G's will soon black out, but has to do heavy breathing procedures to prevent passing out, but does have visual problems, even after pulling out of the G. They have to regain situation awareness (surroundings). So, in MWO every Mech pilot is having it easy when it comes to heat management.

* When getting hit with a weapon (for example; Gauss, or PPC's). It is suppose to knock your torso, either left or right. MWO doesn't have this. But getting hit with Racs, does effect your visual with the sound.

* Dfa (dealth from Above). Yes I have jumped ontop of mechs, but aware it might do some damage (maybe, or doesn't at all), it will be a skill I will not remove from previous Mech sims. But good to have.

* Fall Down: It came out to early, but is needed. If you continuously fall down from being hit from friendlies, or a light or mech. Means you have no piloting skills to prevent this. It is like a baby trying to walk, and then builds skill. Fall down, and then dfa. (this feature will never come back to MWO)

* Crouch: This could be a great feature to build battle formations.
* Mech explosions. When a mech explodes, you are to take damage, depending how much of explosion and how close you are. This helps the enemy or even you face fighting and more.

Edited by GuardDogg, 30 May 2021 - 10:18 AM.

[LordNothing]

Wildstreak, on 30 May 2021 - 05:55 AM, said:

Not if I have anything to say about it.

With the way I test things and now owning MW5, I plan on, "Starting ****," that may lead to people either wanting changes to MWO or MWO2 but that is a big discussion.

I actually feel stimulated enough to try recording videos again of MW5 this time more for discussion than sharing gameplay. I watched videos of MW5 when I did not own it, some in MWO may still not own it but might be interested in at least seeing things not shown so far by other content creators for their own opinions. I admit I also want to see MW5 improve along with using it to either fix MWO or replace it with MWO2 something I said before.

What I did yesterday with a Heavy Rifle and a Hunchback-4H was interesting enough alone, I have not gotten into so many other things.

i kind of like the way pgi implemented mech rifles. i kind of think they should do that with mwo, i was running a firestarter with a pair of light rifles and it would be great for hit and run squirrels.

also thought the chem lasers looked cool but at the end of the day its just a laser with ammo. seems like they run cold though which is different for a laser family weapon.

Edited by LordNothing, 30 May 2021 - 04:48 PM.

[Moldur]

I came back after this giant update, having played off and on since beta, and despite all the balance changes, it still feels very much the same. They can tweak a whole hell of a lot, yet a TDR-5ss pulse boating still kills everything pretty much the same way it did 6 years ago, same holds true with many of the old metas besides the most extreme.

I will use the expression I have used before. MWO is like buying and customizing speedboats, but only being able to drive them in a kiddy pool.

There are only 2 scenarios we use our mechs in (well, 4 if you include solaris and scout FP missions), instanced 12v12 deathmatch (or some slightly tweaked tdm) on a fairly small map, or FP. There is no room for LRRP light or medium mech builds. There's no room for a this or that combination build for a scenario that will never exist in the game. No matter how much the game mechanics are tweaked, we're relegated to playing the same scenario over and over again.

Saying that this is no longer relevant because a few months have passed is missing the forest for the trees. I'm currently still enjoying coming back to MWO and climbing the tier reset, but even I was astonished at just how much has remained pretty much unchanged.

[Kanil]

Moldur, on 30 May 2021 - 05:05 PM, said:

There are only 2 scenarios we use our mechs in (well, 4 if you include solaris and scout FP missions), instanced 12v12 deathmatch (or some slightly tweaked tdm) on a fairly small map, or FP... ... No matter how much the game mechanics are tweaked, we're relegated to playing the same scenario over and over again.

Pretty much this. The QP scenario is always the same, and whether you ask the same question once or a thousand times, the answer never changes.

Adjusting the balance to make terrible 'mechs less terrible is an admirable goal, but those 'mechs weren't the answer before, and they're still not the answer now, so all that really ends up changing is that the ****fitters are a bit deadlier than they used to be.

Edited by Kanil, 30 May 2021 - 05:46 PM.

[PocketYoda]

I know the Cauldron is helping but my opinion is the higher ups in PGI really don't care about MWO, they like the money it generates but do very little to no effort in making it better.. Hell the fact the cauldron even exists is testament to how little PGI does with this game..

Its been literally shelved by the company as a whole, i understand a few people want to make it great but with out the whole company working on it i can't see much ever getting done.

And focusing on MW5 was a mistake as it was crazy substandard even as a single player game.. Not sure what is going on in PGI these days.

Edited by MechaGnome, 30 May 2021 - 05:53 PM.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Came back just to add one very overlooked sound issue that I realized REALLY bothers me: Gauss charge up and fire sounds are piddly, and easily swallowed up in the heat of combat and I realized I was looking for the sparks of gauss hits to know when I had successfully fired the suckers cause in the middle of a intense close in fight I dont have time to watch the gauge or even divert my focus from the enemy mech.

[TheCaptainJZ]

MechaGnome, on 30 May 2021 - 05:52 PM, said:

I know the Cauldron is helping but my opinion is the higher ups in PGI really don't care about MWO, they like the money it generates but do very little to no effort in making it better.. Hell the fact the cauldron even exists is testament to how little PGI does with this game..

Its been literally shelved by the company as a whole, i understand a few people want to make it great but with out the whole company working on it i can't see much ever getting done.

And focusing on MW5 was a mistake as it was crazy substandard even as a single player game.. Not sure what is going on in PGI these days.

The main problem is PGI is a small studio without the manpower or resources to do more. I don't think it's a matter of not caring as much as it getting bogged down in other things and wanting to do something new or different. For a studio that never had live ops on a game, and never one with player feedback like this, maybe some of them are sick of 8 years of drama over every decision they've ever made. Originally, they wanted to do a single player game anyway. I think they're content with having players control the fate of MWO balance. Frankly, everyone is happier with it.

[Karamarka]

The underlying core of the game is very good, but that's all because it's based on an IP that is really good. Mechs, mechlab, hitbox high ttk mechanics to induce high skill ceiling gameplay which is very good.

The downside here, is the engine is bad, performance bad, visuals bad, ui bad and sound bad. It has received no updates since 2014. I quit in 2016 and came back for 10 games and nothing had changed in those 5 years outside of 'balance' and new mechs.

War Thunder on the other hand since 2013 release = dx12/vulkan coming, nvidia DLSS, nvidia reflex, 200fps and better image quality than MWO, fomod 2021 sound engine vs 2005 version with adjacent sound engineering. ???????????

War thunder gameplay is extremely limited and hampered by realism so MWO could've easily won.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Karamarka, on 01 June 2021 - 05:07 PM, said:

The downside here, is the engine is bad, performance bad, visuals bad, ui bad and sound bad.

Okay, I’ll bite. What do you think is bad about the sound?

[Leone]

Seriously. Double Barreled Lbx 10s and 20s. Or chain fired Lbx 5s are some of my favourite sounding weaponry. Ever.

~Leone.

[Dauntless Blint]

ScrapIron Prime, on 01 June 2021 - 05:23 PM, said:

Okay, I’ll bite. What do you think is bad about the sound?

Well if you watched the video to full,(which I don't blame you if you didn't) the sound examples used with the War-Thunder comparison clips were volumetric (speed of sound simulating) and based on real samples whereas unfortunately MWO's HUD tones and weapon sounds are incredashite in comparison.

The entire budget that went into Faction Warfare and Solaris7 could have gone to upgrading the foundation, engine, maps, dynamic materials physics, textures and sound. If they rangled down procedurally generated maps the game would always feel fresh and unknown.
Anything else could have gone into expanding the arsenals and UI improvements.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Dauntless Blint, on 02 June 2021 - 01:38 AM, said:

Well if you watched the video to full,(which I don't blame you if you didn't) the sound examples used with the War-Thunder comparison clips were volumetric (speed of sound simulating) and based on real samples whereas unfortunately MWO's HUD tones and weapon sounds are incredashite in comparison.

That doesn’t make MWO sounds garbage, it just means War Thunder should have gotten an award.

Dauntless Blint, on 02 June 2021 - 01:38 AM, said:

The entire budget that went into Faction Warfare and Solaris7 could have gone to upgrading the foundation, engine, maps, dynamic materials physics, textures and sound. If they rangled down procedurally generated maps the game would always feel fresh and unknown.
Anything else could have gone into expanding the arsenals and UI improvements.

Doing all that is essentially knocking the building down to make a new one. They weren’t going to invest in that without making a pile of cash from it. Hence Mechwarrior 5... that’s our new game engine. Whether it gets rolled into a “MWO 2” at some point remains to be seen.

[InvictusLee]

Lmfao "BUTTROCK. OHH LORD HOW DID WE GET MECH BUTTROCK?!"

The home depot bit had me rolling and cackling manically because its trueeee!!

[InvictusLee]

Dammit PGI! GIVE US A MACKIE! lol

[Wildstreak]

Karamarka, on 01 June 2021 - 05:07 PM, said:

War Thunder on the other hand since 2013 release = dx12/vulkan coming, nvidia DLSS, nvidia reflex, 200fps and better image quality than MWO, fomod 2021 sound engine vs 2005 version with adjacent sound engineering. ???????????

War thunder gameplay is extremely limited and hampered by realism so MWO could've easily won.

War Thunder is probably made on a different engine and really should not be compared to MWO like that recent time someone tried to claim it justified respawns existing in MWO to end Nascar.

I looked over War Thunder and obviously saw what was missed that proved something else, not respawns, prevent Nascar in War Thunder.

[Asym]

I'm am surprised the game is still active at all? I thought the game was sold a while back....? I never even looked at MW5 at all nor have played more than a hand full of times since the Skill Tree Change (STC)....!

Get rid of that mess; up arm all weapons back to where they were pre-STC; and, introduce some new map content and many of us might think about returning.....

Anyway, the lat time I played, I ran into an Old Clan mate........ Sadly, they all went different ways. Good luck all !!!

[Davegt27]

I tried to watch it but the video put me to sleep

no big I been comfortably numb for years

[Vlad Ward]

TheCaptainJZ, on 31 May 2021 - 03:51 AM, said:

The main problem is PGI is a small studio without the manpower or resources to do more. I don't think it's a matter of not caring as much as it getting bogged down in other things and wanting to do something new or different. For a studio that never had live ops on a game, and never one with player feedback like this, maybe some of them are sick of 8 years of drama over every decision they've ever made. Originally, they wanted to do a single player game anyway. I think they're content with having players control the fate of MWO balance. Frankly, everyone is happier with it.

The two bolded parts are very different problems. Lack of manpower is real and understandable and affects timelines and scope. Wanting to do new, exciting things is very much an organizational issue which has always been a bit of a problem for PGI.

I'm a software engineer. I work in an AGILE environment (the same structure PGI uses internally). I know full well that it's always more fun to work on designing and building new product.

I also know that every new product is going to require weeks or months of dedicated support after its launch date. It's unavoidable and it really, really sucks. There's nothing new or exciting about tracking down obscure bugs or tweaking a feature for the dozenth time due to user feedback. It is the absolute worst, but I have to do it anyway. And if a product is panned at launch? Oh boy. I'm not going to be doing anything else until it's stable or my department is shuttered.

PGI, for whatever reason, doesn't seem to commit to the follow-through. They devote plenty of resources to designing, building, and implementing products and then just... stop. If they had already planned a later Release (eg FP Phases), they may try to incorporate user feedback into that. But if their final planned Release is panned? Oh well - time to do something else.

Ultimately, I would guess that it's a monetization problem. I build products for internal customers which are essential to the running of the business. If they don't work or don't work well, the business doesn't operate at peak efficiency and we lose money. In a game like MWO, adding new features is likely being projected to earn more than fixing old ones. It's sucky, but there it is. And hey, is Tech really going to argue if business tells them they don't have to do the ultra-sucky post-launch work and can focus on new product development instead?

Edited by Vlad Ward, 04 June 2021 - 09:30 AM.

[Grus]

justcallme A S H, on 29 May 2021 - 01:42 PM, said:

A video from Feb and we are in June basically...

The difference between has seen a few solid changes with more to come.

Linking that video would seem rather, clueless.

Translation; the past track record doesn't match my current narrative so I'm not going to validate it.

[Khobai]

Vlad Ward, on 04 June 2021 - 09:29 AM, said:

The two bolded parts are very different problems. Lack of manpower is real and understandable and affects timelines and scope. Wanting to do new, exciting things is very much an organizational issue which has always been a bit of a problem for PGI.

I'm a software engineer. I work in an AGILE environment (the same structure PGI uses internally). I know full well that it's always more fun to work on designing and building new product.

I also know that every new product is going to require weeks or months of dedicated support after its launch date. It's unavoidable and it really, really sucks. There's nothing new or exciting about tracking down obscure bugs or tweaking a feature for the dozenth time due to user feedback. It is the absolute worst, but I have to do it anyway. And if a product is panned at launch? Oh boy. I'm not going to be doing anything else until it's stable or my department is shuttered.

PGI, for whatever reason, doesn't seem to commit to the follow-through. They devote plenty of resources to designing, building, and implementing products and then just... stop. If they had already planned a later Release (eg FP Phases), they may try to incorporate user feedback into that. But if their final planned Release is panned? Oh well - time to do something else.

Ultimately, I would guess that it's a monetization problem. I build products for internal customers which are essential to the running of the business. If they don't work or don't work well, the business doesn't operate at peak efficiency and we lose money. In a game like MWO, adding new features is likely being projected to earn more than fixing old ones. It's sucky, but there it is. And hey, is Tech really going to argue if business tells them they don't have to do the ultra-sucky post-launch work and can focus on new product development instead?

Its not a monetization problem.

its a player retention problem. they have to retain players first before they spend money.

this game does not retain players. because it does stupid stuff like force solo players to fight against groups. and its no wonder they arnt retained.

even the players that have been playing the game for years will play on and off and quit after the game gets boring again. return players arnt retained long enough to start spending money on the game again either.

Edited by Khobai, 04 June 2021 - 11:52 AM.