14 replies to this topic

[feeWAIVER]

A while ago Russ or someone asked for ideas on a pvp MWO 2.0 that isn't just MWO2.

Previously I suggested a top-down twin-stick shooter.
I also suggested an Autobattler, like Mechabellum.
I stand by those suggestions.

Today I will suggest Mechwarrior Fighterz.
How cool would it be to have a 2D Mechwarrior fighting game?
You could even build a lance and make it a tag fighter.

Imagine like Street Fighter, but an Atlas would play like Zangief and a Jenner would play like Cammy.

[1453 R]

feeWAIVER, on 06 December 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

A while ago Russ or someone asked for ideas on a pvp MWO 2.0 that isn't just MWO2.

Russ Bullock is traumatized by Player Feedback and I doubt he will ever solicit it again. But just for shits...

feeWAIVER, on 06 December 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

Previously I suggested a top-down twin-stick shooter.

There was actually a BattleTech game vaguely like this on the Sega Genesis, I think. I remember playing it, where its "multiplayer" mode was one player controlling the legs and the other controlling the torso. It was a trip.

feeWAIVER, on 06 December 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

I also suggested an Autobattler, like Mechabellum.

No.

feeWAIVER, on 06 December 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

Today I will suggest Mechwarrior Fighterz.

Cringe meter...buzzing...

feeWAIVER, on 06 December 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

How cool would it be to have a 2D Mechwarrior fighting game?
You could even build a lance and make it a tag fighter.

Imagine like Street Fighter, but an Atlas would play like Zangief and a Jenner would play like Cammy.

The one thing this suggestion even remotely has going for it is the idea that it might show off what most MechWarrior games don't - the idea that 'Mechs are actually quite nimble and agile for their size and move more like common depictions of heavy battle armor than like the huge, stiff animatronics they're often portrayed as. 'Mechs duck and twist and shift as they move, like Jaegers from Pacific Rim, rather than just standing straight up and down and making minimal use of their otherwise extraordinarily inefficient humanoid(ish) frames.

Would this game actually be fun? No.

feeWAIVER, on 06 December 2025 - 10:02 PM, said:

A while ago Russ or someone asked for ideas on a pvp MWO 2.0 that isn't just MWO2.

What Russ meant by this was "What do you guys want other than a head-to-head arena TDM shooter?" The PGI at the time was uninterested in just making another MWO when the first one was so divisive. The problem is mostly that PGI couldn't figure out anything interesting by way of objective scenarios that remained balanced for wildly mixed teams of individually piloted 'Mechs, which is also why Faction Play fell short. Piranha couldn't figure out objectives that worked for two mostly-equal teams of human opponents. They were fine with humans vs. A.I., which is why the MW5 games were surprisingly good. Anything PvP and they don't have a good idea of how to do it beyond well-established basic game modes from other games.

Any prospective MWO 2 would need to be more than a largely empty arena TDM to be worth making. It would need an entirely different monetization scheme, this pseudo-World of Tanks **** ain't gonna cut it a second time. It would, essentially, need an entirely new value proposition, as it has been determined that BattleTech/MechWarrior is kind of a fair-at-best match for an arena shooter.

If someone did make a new BattleTech arena shooter, frankly I don't think it should be a MechWarrior game as we currently understand it. The 'Hero' 'Mechs should be the only 'Mechs, with relatively minimal customization. There's a potentially interesting hero shooter-style game in there somewhere when you don't have 1400+ 'unique' 'Mechs you have to try and find 1400+ unique builds for when the players can change almost everything about each of those 'Mechs, but I also think basically no one who is already a BattleTech person would buy it. BattleTech people are basically Pokemon players except with giant robots instead of increasingly outlandish weird critters, which is the only reason MWO is still kicking. It got PokeMech mostly right, even if it didn't get nearly as much else right as anyone would like.

[Ilfi]

Would it sell? Keep in mind MW5 Clans (something that stuck to the script and should have sold like hotcakes) barely moved the needle.

It's fun to fantasize, but outside of small budget maintenance for existing titles, the only way forward I personally see doing well is a properly-executed official MechWarrior: Living Legends-style release with a persistent world (or at the very least, long matches focused on territory control).

[dario03]

You say Fighterz and bring up tag but then only compare to Street Fighter which in non crossover games is typically a non-tag game. But you didn't bring up Dragon Ball FighterZ as an example..

But in any case I'd be all for it. I always thought it would be cool to have one with a battle value system. So different mechs are worth different points and you build teams based on a total amount, some other fighters (including some other DB fighters) have that. Could also have assists and something like an LRM mech would be great for fire support while not being the tagged in fighter but weak when tagged in, others could be good when tagged in but weak in assists and some more balanced. Though I feel like it wouldn't have very wide appeal so would probably need to be a lower budget kind of game. Though that doesn't have to mean bad, I'm pretty sure theres been some good fighting games made on a budget that went on to be successful. And could be expanded upon if it did.

Other option would be something that is 1v1 or at least more 1v1 focused (could still be tag) but from a third person perspective. Kind of like Arena fights in Armored Core but with multiple mechs that can switch out. Or to go back to Dragon Ball, be like in DB: Sparking Zero (which also has a points system for different character strengths to build a team).

[twizzlebix]

1453 R, on 07 December 2025 - 08:55 AM, said:

BattleTech people are basically Pokemon players except with giant robots

You know what? Why not? Team of four mechs, each move is associated with a weapon type, hardpoints and tonnage limit how many moves a PokeMech can use and damage dealt, heat stands in for PP, and the Great Houses/Clans are PokeMech teams. A batchall is basically a Pokemon match between military commanders already.

Ilfi, on 07 December 2025 - 10:15 AM, said:

It's fun to fantasize, but outside of small budget maintenance for existing titles, the only way forward I personally see doing well is a properly-executed official MechWarrior: Living Legends-style release with a persistent world (or at the very least, long matches focused on territory control).

Persistent world MMO with player driven economics and player guided politics.

[kalashnikity]

I've previously posted at length about how to do a Massive Multiplayer Online version of Mechwarrior.

[kalashnikity]

Cliff notes, FPS, combined arms (infantry, Tank, VTOL, Tank, Aerospace, etc)

Basically do the same thing that World of Warcraft did to Dungeons and Dragons, plus throw in some Eve Online and a big dash of Star Citizen.

There are less than a handful of games that even try to go that far, but it allows a niche for all play styles, I know this is shocking, but... not everyone wants to pilot big stompy robots 100% of the time.

[pbiggz]

MMOs are wildly expensive to produce and maintain.

There's a small handful of MMOs because very few survive, and because very few survive, very few make it even close to production. Mechwarrior is far too niche an IP to get an MMO made for it. A niche audience wont generate close to the kind of revenue they'd need to cover operating and content creation.

[kalashnikity]

pbiggz, on 15 December 2025 - 11:35 AM, said:

MMOs are wildly expensive to produce and maintain.

There's a small handful of MMOs because very few survive, and because very few survive, very few make it even close to production. Mechwarrior is far too niche an IP to get an MMO made for it. A niche audience wont generate close to the kind of revenue they'd need to cover operating and content creation.

I get it, giant stompy robot is a niche, but as I described... I have a vision of a game with a lot more options for play styles, everything from elementals and infantry, even Word of Blake Cyborgs and creatures, to jump ship captains and asteroid miners. Lets you pull from a greater pool of players.

Y'all need to read more lore, big robots are far from the only fun aspect of this IP.

[kalashnikity]

In theory, if done right, you could pull in players from many different MMOs and IPs. I know I'm talking to people who think Battletech is only big stompy robots, but if you get on sarna.net and start digging, you'll see it's got a massive range of possibilities.

If you want a big player base, you need more variety, and... maybe think about a serious game engine update, LOL.

[kalashnikity]

Not everyone's sole goal in life is to spend 10 minutes at a time running around sniping like the main character, some people actually enjoy things like crafting, mining, building.

Eve Online maintains 25,000 to 40,000 players. What if we could find a way to combine our player bases? Not neccisarily kill Eve, but lure some of their players here occatioanlly?

Same with Star Citizen, it has a pretty big overlap of technology paradigms.

[pbiggz]

kalashnikity, on 16 December 2025 - 05:23 AM, said:

I get it, giant stompy robot is a niche, but as I described... I have a vision of a game with a lot more options for play styles, everything from elementals and infantry, even Word of Blake Cyborgs and creatures, to jump ship captains and asteroid miners. Lets you pull from a greater pool of players.

Y'all need to read more lore, big robots are far from the only fun aspect of this IP.

I dont dispute that it would be cool because the potential is absolutely there, just not the broad appeal you need to make it a real thing that would turn enough of a profit.

[LordNothing]

what we need isnt so much an mmo, but a continuous battlefield. just a large map that can support a large number of strategic locations. dynamically generated missions that advance a tug of war victory mechanic. emphasis on controlling territory vs smashing mechs. players can come and go as they please, play as long as they want. the whole battle may take hours though.

perhaps not full on base building (you need a scale of player base that a mechwarrior game just cant obtain), but procedural bases based on mission progress. you may be asked to secure a landing zone, doing this gives you a spawn. supporting logistics to that base levels it up with more defenses and facilities (which can be destroyed by the opponents).

maps may be quasi-procedural based on a hex grid with both generated and modeled tiles being available. hexes can be replaced with structures as needed by the mission generator. they would be larger than in tt, its more of an homage really, but also a way to organize the battlefield. a small base would take up a tile and larger bases would just be a composite of those tiles. tiles can also contain roads or other infrastructure. these can also be tied into the mission generator, eg defending industrial mechs while they build stuff.

[Xypherious]

I just want an online Battletech simulator with full joystick support.

[LordNothing]

Xypherious, on 22 December 2025 - 01:55 PM, said:

I just want an online Battletech simulator with full joystick support.

joystick support is lostech. its all either kb/mouse or gamepads. there isnt even an api that can handle a hotas right, you have to go straight to the hid class drivers now. i miss the controllers we could get in the '90s, and its amazing what you can get/build now. of course none of it is supported in anything but the most die hard simulators.

Edited by LordNothing, 22 December 2025 - 05:07 PM.