Andrewlik, on 16 April 2022 - 04:48 PM, said:
Okay, that's a fair point.
"Mods have already done this" is not a valid complaint. "Mods that have already done this better" is something I'm willing to have a constructive conversation about.
Okay, I'm certainly willing to have a conversation about it. However, also realize that the whole reason people have been bringing up the mods isn't because of your first statement above, but because of the second. Mods have done everything PGI is doing in this update/dlc, but they've done them better than PGI is advertising and/or shown. That is the core point across the board.
Quote
I do definately Mechwarrior 5 is pretty shallow in terms of the whole merc-buisness. I always said that if MW5 was 1:1 with HBS's Argomanagement layer, except with on-the-grounds stompy combat, it would be a much better game, and I do wish there was a bit more to the game outside of "proc gen mission for money, use money for mech, get bigger mech, use it to do harder procgen missions for more money." HBS's Salvage system was better, and while MW5 has more high reward quests than HBS has flashpoints, Flashpoints were on average far more memorable than MW5's HRQs.
It does lack significant depth.
HBS Battletech Flashpoints were more memorable because Mitch and Jordan threw in nostalgia easter eggs
constantly. That's the only thing making them "memorable" overall, in my opinion. Really, and lets be honest here, the majority of gameplay content in both games (especially in each game's respective career modes) is exactly the loop you describe above. It's just are you doing it in a strategy or sim setting. Personally, I'm fine with that, but there's a lot that can still be done to improve the gameplay in both games. Otherwise stuff like YAML, Merctech, BTAdvanced 3062, and BTRevised wouldn't exist to improve both games.
Quote
I don't mind their interpretation of the Hatchetman model. I prefer HBS's, especially because in the process of making a video I found that the hatcherman has quite a few elaborate melee animations which give it alot more life, but PGI's is solid.
Visually, PGI's Hatchetman is the HBS version with a few visual tweaks and without the retracting hatchet, because they can't do that. Give them both a close look and point out the number of differences. You'll see they're very tiny tweaks. I'd call bullocks on anyone who says PGI made their Hatchetman from scratch, without any true evidence; and concept art isn't evidence. After all, HBS made concept art for their game, with PGI mechs, that had visual tweaks to the mechs as well (the HUGE mg's on the Locust, for example). Meanwhile the mod version of the Hatchetman is based on CGL's artwork, which is much more notably different.
As for animations, you can do a lot more with them when you don't care about clipping/collision and you don't have to worry about anything else moving at the same time. Strategy games and Sim games are vastly different critters in that department.
Quote
I do think the melee implementation, though fun, and the melee does have a satisfying amount of weight behind each punch, they could have been alot better.
This is a tricky one, and I'd like to hear how you think they could do better. I'd say the melee is adequate and satisfying to use. As long as PGI is at least competent enough to have different animations for a weapon vs. a fist (something already done by modders, as well), then it'll remain adequate and satisfying to use. Given the clips we've seen, that much at least seems to be the case. Credit where credit is due, PGI's mech melee in MW5 is fairly solid.
Quote
Their Biomes have been unamazing, but not bad as well - uninspired, but functional and consistent (whenever the proc-gen doesn't break that is). VonBiomes has some amazing biomes, but some stinker's as well
The biggest issue here is the lack of "tiles" for the procedural tilesets. However, the fact that ONE PERSON has done more biomes with more diversity and functionality than PGI has across the base game and all DLC's, with at least as many tiles per set, AND done the same way PGI has made theirs (by reusing MWO assets and adding new decorations/destroyables), is far more impressive than PGI's DLC offerings done by an entire development studio's art department . . . who are paid.
Quote
I think their melee interpretation (in addition to equipment like ECM, BAP, MASC / SUPER CHARGER) would have been better if they weren't hardpoint locked. PGI variants with these equipments would still exist, its just the player would be able to put them in anything, such that weapons are the only thing with hardpoints.
For like Melee, I wish it was an option to replace any "hand" actuator with a melee weapon, at the cost of weight and space.
Exactly how it's handled by mods; and exactly how PGI should have done it. However mods have gone the extra mile to actually make all the proper melee weapons and then make them behave as they do according to TT rules. PGI also should have even gone as far as to retcon variants already established (like the YLW) to add in the proper melee weaponry. The fact that they're adding whole new variants adds credence to the belief that there's going to be melee hardpoints, and not just actuator replacement/dependency. That fact alone is a terrible disappointment.
2
