Magnificent *******, on 28 October 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:
I guess we'll just conveniently forget about how I pointed out that the "inaccuracies" you stated aren't actually inaccurate?
Edited by Suprentus, 28 October 2012 - 07:54 PM.
Posted 28 October 2012 - 03:04 PM
Magnificent *******, on 28 October 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:
Edited by Suprentus, 28 October 2012 - 07:54 PM.
Posted 28 October 2012 - 07:45 PM
Posted 28 October 2012 - 11:04 PM
Magnificent *******, on 28 October 2012 - 10:28 PM, said:
Edited by Suprentus, 28 October 2012 - 11:07 PM.
Posted 29 October 2012 - 12:56 AM
Posted 29 October 2012 - 02:27 AM
Magnificent *******, on 29 October 2012 - 12:38 AM, said:
They didn't say MWO was based on MW2; they said MW2 was the inspiration for MWO. I suppose I can't positively confirm that, but if you look through the developer interviews, most of them list MW2 as their favorite MechWarrior game. So that statement really isn't a stretch.
Correct, that's detailed in this thread: http://mwomercs.com/...rns-oct-122012/
Yeah, that is technically wrong, though I think he meant to say "arm mounted" but had a brainfart moment. On a gameplay mechanics side, the arms do kind of function like turrets in a limited range of motion.
I actually tested this out myself, and I find this statement to be true. Walking around, my Jenner would only generate about 2%-4% heat, while my Atlas or Awesome would generate 6%-8%. That said, I found the bigger mechs to dissipate heat faster, just because they have more room for heat sinks. That detail probably should have been included, but the statement is still not false.
That does tend to be true. On average, lighter mechs are faster. Also, a 200 engine gets you more speed on a 35 ton mech than a 50 ton mech. You could argue that you could slap a crappy engine on a light mech to make it slower than a heavier mech. But really, does it really give the wrong impression to new players if you just simplify it as "lighter=faster?"
To be fair, that appears to be the fault of Gamespot, not those two guys specifically. You can clearly see on their launcher that the Founder's Program was being offered. I think we can surmise that Gamespot just released the video at a later date when the Founder's Program wasn't offered anymore. However, I think you have a point anyway, because they should have mentioned when the Founder's Program would end.
Sure, I'll give you that one. Again, he meant something else, but just chose the wrong wording. However, in this case, I can see that that might confuse someone coming in.
What they didn't know was the MC to Dollar exchange. I think this entitles me to attack you over poor word choice now! Really though, it's not really inaccurate, since they (those two guys) actually didn't know the exchange rate. It's more just an oversight than an inaccuracy.
That's really not a misrepresentation of facts. I think you would have a point here if they said they're not likely to impact the game. However, whether they say speculation or confirmed, new players still get the impression to expect big events to impact the game.
Yeah, that actually is the one part that bugged me. He definitely could have tried to figure weapon groups out beforehand. I'll give you that one too.
But if you're running, you cool slower because running generates more heat. The statement is still accurate. It may be in simpler language, but it's still true that running=more heat. Maybe it might confuse someone, but I think anyone will be able to see that running alone won't overheat you once they jump in a game.
There's not really any misinforming going on here. Most of what you consider misinformation are true statements just put in simpler casual language. I really don't see anyone walking away from that video expecting something totally different from what the MWO actually is. The exception would be one of your few valid points about the Founder's Program, which leads to...
...again, I don't think that's necessarily those guys' fault. Their launcher showed a Founder's Program, so it had to have been made when it was still up. I think Gamespot just took too long in posting it. Still, its outdatedness now is misleading, and they could have mentioned when the Founder's Program would end.
I disagree. Not once did they criticize the game. Even when that one guy tried to suggest it looks like "play to win," the other corrected him, saying that it's not because nothing is locked from free players to acquire. lol, granted that was before Yen-Lo-Wang came out, but still. They also flat out stated that it's not a twitch reflex kind of FPS, and you have to think. I think that's about the most important point you can make in favor for MWO.
Edited by Suprentus, 29 October 2012 - 02:33 AM.
Posted 29 October 2012 - 06:26 PM
Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:13 PM
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users