28 replies to this topic

[Dartan]

After (REMOVED) I wonder how much room there is for Mechwarrior Online and its longevity.

Doesn't absolutely everything look better in that game...combat mechanic, art style, animations, cockpit, graphics, sound?
I guess we have to play both to know for sure, but it certainly seems very clear now, and after a decade of tracking games I'm rarely wrong.

Edited by Mason Grimm, 28 March 2012 - 04:53 AM.
Grimm Wuz Here and Removed My Offsite Link To Sillyville!

[Dlardrageth]

Yeah, nice attempt, like noone tried before linking random **** vids on YouTube...

[Hayden]

As opposed to being unofficially worried?

[LackofCertainty]

I might be preaching to the choir on the mechwarrior online forum, but hawkin doesn't look very appealing to me. It has some nice shake to the camera to make you feel like you have some weight, but it looks more like a battlearmor game to me than a mech game. There's nothing wrong with battlearmor, but I like the heavy, sluggishness of a mech.

[LordDeathStrike]

lets see, mwo battle tech sim

or trashy looking arcade shooter

ill go with the battle tech sim, better luck next time, go back under your bridge mister trollpants

[warner2]

Dartan, on 28 March 2012 - 12:11 AM, said:

I guess we have to play both to know for sure

This is certainly true. Both games have promise, I'll be giving Hawken a try when it comes out.

[William Petersen]

Too fast. No apparent hit-location tracking. /yawn. It's a Mecha FPS. I'll pass.

[LackofCertainty]

LordDeathStrike, on 28 March 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

or trashy looking arcade shooter

I'd say that's a little harsh. Hawken is very pretty.

I think there's plenty of room in the market for a FTP Arcade Mech combat game and a FTP Sim Mech combat game.

[Hayden]

William Petersen, on 28 March 2012 - 12:25 AM, said:

Too fast. No apparent hit-location tracking. /yawn. It's a Mecha FPS. I'll pass.

And almost completely gray, don't forget almost completely gray.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color

[Dimetime]

Dartan, on 28 March 2012 - 12:11 AM, said:

After (REMOVED), I wonder how much room there is for Mechwarrior Online and its longevity.

Doesn't absolutely everything look better in that game...combat mechanic, art style, animations, cockpit, graphics, sound?
I guess we have to play both to know for sure, but it certainly seems very clear now, and after a decade of tracking games I'm rarely wrong.

It's longevity won't be long for someone like you. Just from this post you seem like a gamer that is always looking out for the "next best thing". So yeah, Hawken may may be a shiny enough carrot to crab your attention.

The majority of people, however, interested in a "Mechwarrior" or a "Battletech" type game are in it for the lore and canon. They are here based on an relation with an IP that spans years and years of committment. They aren't just gamers looking for the next best thing. They are Mechwarriors.

Edited by Mason Grimm, 28 March 2012 - 04:57 AM.
Grimm removed the offsite link from the quote here as well. Cause I'm ninja like that

[nodie]

wow reminds me of... ummm quake.. with a cockpit view......

unimpressive.

looks juvenile

[docmorningstar]

It could still be fun - sometimes you want smash-em-up sometimes rich gameplay. It's really...gritty...though

[Kifferson von doober]

Well its pretty, but looks shallow. Also it just isn't Mechwarrior.

[warner2]

Dimetime, on 28 March 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

The majority of people, however, interested in a "Mechwarrior" or a "Battletech" type game are in it for the lore and canon.

I'm really not sure that's true. The majority of the people I bumped into while playing MW4 were not into Battletech much, if at all. It was always a minority that were Battletech fan boys from what I could tell.

It is interesting how active these forums are compared to Hawken's however. Something is pulling people to MWO. It has to be either the Mechwarrior name, the Battletech name, or both.

[Joe3142]

That game looks S%$*! The cockpits look awful, no actually the whole game looks like a waste of time.

[Varro Thaddeus]

There really is no point of being worried (or abusive for that matter). Hawken will get its fair share of gamers, that's a given. But will MWO players really ditch their awesome Mechs for other (unknown) Mechs? Doubt it. Still IMO, I find no issue in playing both games, it's simply a matter of preference. And for us MechWarriors, our preference will (always) be MWO

Edited by Varro Thaddeus, 28 March 2012 - 01:10 AM.

[John Clavell]

Graphics and art direction aside. Hawken and MWO are a billion years apart. The only connection being they both have 'Mechs' in them, and your pilot is sat in a 'Cockpit'. Hawken is a twitch based FPS. Think of it as COD MW in Mechs. MWO is a slower paced tactical action/sim.

[pursang]

Hawken and MWO are both F2P games - why not play both? There's nothing stopping you from enjoying both games at the same time, and hell it will only help MWO and its fans in the long term to have some sort of competition in the barren Mech-based-shooter market. The more people playing and enjoying both games the better I say. Games like this can coexist quite easily - just look at the Call of Duty and Battlefield series.

Edited by pursang, 28 March 2012 - 01:23 AM.

[Cik]

it's a pretty-fied quake clone with a mech paintjob. meh. i'll give it a spin, but i doubt it will supplant mechwarrior.

[Mchawkeye]

Whilst I agree that comparing Hawken to MWO is folly, I am willing to accept that they will each scratch a different itch.
I like twitch based FPS, like CoD and alike. Combined that with mechs, and I am certainly interested.

But

I also like simulator style hard core mech action. Obsessively so.

But which is better? There is only one way to find out...