Jump to content

Should the Lore be the Law?


265 replies to this topic

Poll: Should the Lore be the Law? (399 member(s) have cast votes)

Should the Lore be the Law?

  1. Yes, the events in MWO should play out exactly as they do in the established canon. (128 votes [30.26%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 30.26%

  2. Voted No, lore should be adhered to loosely but affected by the actions of the player base. (237 votes [56.03%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.03%

  3. No, the lore after launch date should be entirely dictated by the actions of the player base. (43 votes [10.17%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.17%

  4. Don't care. (15 votes [3.55%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.55%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#101 Tryg

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 160 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 01 April 2012 - 03:50 PM

I think an aspect of this discussion being overlooked is "The other guy." Yes, I understand people like to feel near-to Omnipotent, and want their faction to push onwards to conquer the vast majority of the inner sphere. But no one is stopping to think of the /other guy/ in their faction. The one who goes afk at a key-point in a pivitol faction battle, causing the loss of a crucial munitions factory.

Do you want your entire faction to be paying a premium on AC ammunition cause this guy's beer ran out mid-round and he had to go fish around the garage fridge for another? The problem with full conquest games is after a certain point, you lose a majority of your player base. In some games, adherance to what happened is irrelevant, there are plenty of WWII era FPS games out there, or RTS or Turn-based, and the outcomes can go in favor of any individual side. What these games all have in common...they're not persistant. Germany just repelled the D-day invasion. Allies lose, next round, it was as if the previous one never happened.

In a persistant world, you have to be VERY careful about allowing total conquest, cause the actions of one faction can spoil the game for every other faction out there. The Battletech universe is large, but limited still. There are only so many worlds to go around. The more you have open to conquest by a single faction, the less fun other factions will wind up having. Especially if you factor in elements such as cost increases/decreases based on control of certain worlds. We'll exagerrate it a bit for the sake of the argument, but say through control of various key manufacturing worlds, the CC is now paying half as much for munitions and the FWL is paying double. How easy is it going to be for FWL players to retake those worlds? Every match they're running is burning their coffers down lower and lower, especially losses. Now, at this point, a new player joins the FWL, he's going to have a steep learning curve, cause every mech he loses (and since we're assuming he's new to the franchise and has no experience...there will be a lot of them) is costing him more and more to repair and rearm. How likely is it he decides to either jump factions to the CC where the costs will be less harmful, or just out and out leave?

And in allowing the major factions to not just push borders, but near-eliminate another faction, where does that leave the mercs? Since the devs have already stated they'd be pushing border worlds, what happens when you have a few hundred merc corps all battling over a half dozen border worlds? Mass populate those worlds with battles? Or do Queue times go through the roof as each group waits their turns?

The Canon lore makes this game what it is, eliminating it entirely in favor of player decided events would ultimately end poorly, the least of which is chasing off the hardcore fans, more of it would be those unable to fight back because one faction simply grows too large. Sad but true fact of gaming, players will jump sides towards the winning faction, so before long you have a single faction which numerically dominates the rest. And through that advantage, can field more units into more battles, allowing it to take more and more territory until it controls everything it's permitted to contest. Other factions might win here and there and take planets back...but it would be short term, before the mass-numbers of the now-uber-faction can retake them.

#102 HighlandWolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 04:27 PM

They shouldnt mess things up by letting players decide anything, this is battletech/Mechwarrior which is based on battletech. There is a history/timeline and there are things that happen when they happened. If you start letting people just change things cause "they know how things SHOULD be" then its going to get messed up and ruined. It's great as is, the creators did a great job..nothing needs to be changed

#103 Dragon Lady

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 06:21 PM

One of the things that initially attracted me to MWO is the possibility of changing the course of the clan invasion. To be the pebble in the ocean that results in a rogue wave off Hawaii instead New Zealand.

I mean, I already know what happened in canon. Why play at all of canon is doomed to repeat itself? It would mean that no matter how well the FRR plays, no matter how much the FRR energizes its members, and no matter how lackadaisical Clan Wolf plays and how apathetic their members are, the FRR will lose, and Clan Wolf will win.

It's far more fun to fight a battle where the odds are against you, than one where you have no chance at all.

#104 rafgod

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 119 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 06:26 PM

'Lore' and 'canon' cover major events that occur on a only a few worlds in the BT universe. There's plenty of room for MW:O to operate.

#105 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,022 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 01 April 2012 - 06:31 PM

Interestingly, I happened across an article on Giant Bomb titled "Sticking the Landing" describing a conversation between G.B.'s Patrick Klepek and Jeff Jensen, a senior writer at Entertainment Weekly.
Also of note, IMO, is the companion article, "When It's Over, It's Over".

Both are related to the general reaction to the conclusion of the Mass Effect series, but there are some of the statements that, IMO, seem to particularly resonate with the current discussion of canonicity's role in MWO from a narrative standpoint, such as:

Quote

Jensen: You felt burned? Were you burned, personally?

GB: Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that. A lot of people play these games to be the good guy that accomplishes everything, and video game endings, as a whole, the trope is that you’re the hero that’s unbeatable and everything turns out alright in the end. They went for something a little more mixed: things are out of your control. Bad things are going to happen no matter what you do, what choice you make. People have some real trouble processing that. Some wanted this “you saved the princess” ending that games have always have. Personally, as a player, it’s really important that they’re having this reaction. You don’t see that very often with a video game.

Quote

Jensen: There’s something that you’re also touching on here that I really like, which is a really good point. Regardless of your story, whatever medium you’re experiencing a story, what do we want from endings is a really big picture topic here. Some of the themes that you talked about at the beginning of our conversation here come into play, things like the video game experience offers you the chance to be a hero, and hero stories are all about taking their fate into their own hands and are able to impose their will on a world. They may succeed, they may fail, a lot of that depends on skill, but they get to impose their will on the world for better or worse. You go into a very long journey in which you are executing this kind of heroic function--you expect the opportunity to save the day. You think that should be an option that’s available to you, and, in this case, that’s not. In that way, a traditional ending, or what we want from an ending to that kind of story, is subverted. In other ways, just in general, what we want from endings is catharsis, especially a series finale.



We already know how the canon story plays out - the FRR is gutted and eventually merges with the Ghost Bears, the St. Ives Compact is reintegrated into the CapCon, the FedCom splits back into its constituent parts after a long and bloody civil war, the Clans are halted by ComStar and eventually defeated by the Second Star League, and so on.

The thing is, we as players are generally going to be fighting over Border Worlds and Faction Worlds, with the occasional Core World thrown in for special "historical events" (as per Dev Blog 01).

As I understand it, our stories are meant to be side-stories - we may win a battle or two here or there, but the factions will ultimately lose (or win) the wars they're "meant" to lose (or win).
As indicated in the G.B. article, it's become a trope that people want to "be the hero", to "save the princess", to claim the sanctimonious title of one to (as another poster put it) "make everything better".

But that's not what we are, or (it seems) what we're meant to be - we're not meant to be the Justin Allards, or the Grayson Carlyles, or the Victor Steiner-Davions, or the Archer Christiforis, or the Aidan Prydes, or the Natasha Kerenskys.
We're the ODSTs to the Master Cheifs, the redshirts to the Captain Kirks - the relatively minor players and pawns that, while perhaps making some difference, ultimately populate the footnotes and endnotes of history.
Granted, some may ultimately become more significant footnotes than others... but those lucky (or unlucky?) few will still be footnotes all the same.

And really... that's okay.
Not every story needs to - or can - have a happy or heroic ending.
Not everyone can "be the hero" and "save the world/universe".
Que sera, sera - "whatever will be, will be".

Your thoughts?

-----

From a gameplay standpoint, I tend to agree with the likes of Tyrg's post and Exilyth's post - the established backstory/lore is a major part of what makes BT/MW what it is, and that it should be generally-but-not-necessarily-too-religiously adhered to if MWO is to retain some crucial parts of its identity as taking place in the MW/BT universe (as opposed to becoming "a generic bipedal tank game"), especially in the long term...

#106 Turbo Corvair

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 211 posts
  • LocationLake Ariel, PA

Posted 01 April 2012 - 06:54 PM

The lore should be adhered to completely, but new storyline can be introduced based on how things are going in game as long as it doesn't change the known history of the BattleTech universe.

Here is the thing, we are going to be living in "real time" as we play the game. This means that events as we know them will play out VERY slowly and there will be a LOT of room to write new sub-plots etc.

Most of the historic events that players are worried about happen MANY MANY years after 3049. This means those events won't ever happen in game unless we are still playing in 50 years or whatever.

So, the problem of knowing how the story ends doesn't really apply =)

#107 Volthorne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,929 posts
  • LocationCalgary, Canadia

Posted 01 April 2012 - 07:43 PM

@Strum Wow, man, great speech you got there. Sounds like you studied William Wallace's speech in Braveheart (just before they fight the English army) and Kirrahe's speech in Mass Effect (on Virmire) extensively. Honestly, You need to start hiring yourself out to give rousing speeches at big events or to soldiers on the frontlines. +1 badassedness to you, sir.

@Turbo No no no, it's not going to be realtime progression. The Devs are doing that for the moment because it's the lead-up to when MW:O will actually START in the BTU. Do you seriously expect that they plan for everyone to play for 20 years straight just to be able to fight against WoB? Obviously some time-jumping is going to occur at some point.

Edited by Volthorne, 02 April 2012 - 10:37 AM.


#108 Paladin1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 836 posts
  • LocationCapellan March, Federated Suns

Posted 02 April 2012 - 05:43 AM

Strum knocked it out of the park, but there's more than one reason to adhere to the Law of Canon.

For those of you who wish that MWO would be an Alternate Universe from the Canon line, I only say this. I'd agree to that if, and only if, Kerensky is killed during the liberation of Terra. If you want an Alternate Universe, fine, but it starts with no Exodus, No Clans, No Clan Ubertech and no future invasions by overpowered big bads.

If you want an alternate universe, that's fine, but beware of what you're asking for as you might just get it.

#109 Felbombling

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,923 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 02 April 2012 - 07:32 AM

PGI can solve the problem with a different game.

Mechwarrior: Online - Clan Space

#110 FallguySoldier

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Messenger
  • The Messenger
  • 162 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 07:33 AM

From Developer QnA 2 - Community Warfare:

Quote

Are you guys going to have special event matches for historically-important worlds that are more formalized, one-off, wave-style matches? –GaussDragon

[BRYAN] The problem with historic battles is they have predictable and necessary outcomes. We are looking at creative ways to involve the community in these key events.


Lore is important but only to an extent. It's not law.

#111 Kargush

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 971 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 02 April 2012 - 08:27 AM

On the one hand, I want the time-line to work in the same fashion. Clans invade at a set point, faction leaders croaking when the fluff says they did, wars starting when they're supposed to, all that jazz.

On the other hand, if I and all the other FRR end up kicking Clanner arse like there was no tomorrow, I'd be a little sore if the FRR was still shafted "because the fluff." If the actions of the players matter not at all, this isn't going to be much fun. "Nah. forget it brah, we'll lose that planet in 2 weeks anyway, when [faction] invades. And no, don't take on the contract on [planet], [faction] nuked it, we don't want to take those losses."

The metagame would massively favour those of us who can name every commander of the 2nd Sword of Light and their battle-honours over those who can barely keep track of what the major Houses are called.

#112 FireNova

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 258 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:00 AM

View PostLucifer Black, on 01 April 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:


Who in their right mind is going to join a faction preordained to be "annihilated"? This is an issue (primarily for Smoke Jaguar players) that will seriously affect the long term viability of the game.


SLIGHT FIX.....but otherwise in agreement.

Canon =/= Faction Balance. Canon and competitive gameplay CANNOT work!
It is because of the lore that VERY FEW if ANY people will join CSJ. I fear that once again, the CSJ fanbase will be marginalized and attacked/demonized as usual and prevented from being truly playable for those who wish to join CSJ. DENYING options/faction choices is not good and only serves to limit the growth and potential that a game can have. This is why I keep mentioning WoW. If WoW can allow you to play as the survivors of the High Elves (Blood Elves) why can that NOT be the same as playing Smoke Jaguars post Bulldog/Serpent? Why take away that which people might want to play as? (To think that back in 1998 I learned about BattleTech and the Smoke Jaguars only to hear that they were being "phased out" was just sad and made me think that a bad precedent was set forth from that point on.....lo and behold Wars of Reaving later on....LOL).

The Blood Elves are not very numerous but yet they are playable, yet the Smoke Jaguars survived in a small number as well and yet they cannot?

I know that not very many people like the Smoke Jaguars (for either lore or personal reasons) but having a whole faction singled out while everyone else is assured that they will remain is just not faction balance ( or fun for that matter). And that is what we are here for......FUN.

Being a part of ~SJ~ ( a VERY GOOD group of people not to mention the BEST server in MWLL I might add), I look forward to playing in MWO with my fellow Jaguar friends and comrades. Yet what I do worry about is the predicable marginalization and and constant downgrading (Wolcott, Luthien, Tukkayyid, Turtle Bay, not to mention the countless raids upon the Jaguars by the Wolves, Bears, Dracs, Nova Cats, etc) that the lore will place upon us and other Jaguar fans of any group and the eventual near complete "removal" of us in Bulldog/Serpent. Whether there will be a "survivor option" and be allowed to continue as Jaguars in the Deep Periphery with the Streaking Mist as our flagship similarly like Jim Raynor with his Hyperion battlecruiser and his Raynor's Raiders go around the Koprulu Sector (and yeah I did just make that distinction/comparison).

Canon is all fine and well.....but not when it will take away the fun and enjoyment and simply demonize (because Turtle Bay is so easy to bring up on the Jaguars every time) a whole entire fanbase and marginalize us by discouraging people from joining the Smoke Jaguar Clan/Faction simply because the lore says "its pointless to be a Jaguar" essentially given the lore that punishes the Jaguars and by extension....the fanbase.

It will be very interesting to see how the devs intend to keep the canon/lore from discouraging/marginalizing a SINGLE faction......

#113 FireNova

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 258 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:10 AM

View PostDragon Lady, on 01 April 2012 - 06:21 PM, said:



It's far more fun to fight a battle where the odds are against you, than one where you have no chance at all.


QUOTED FOR TRUTH! :(

#114 Riptor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,043 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:31 AM

Ill leave this vid here to showcase my opinion on this matter;


Edited by Riptor, 02 April 2012 - 09:32 AM.


#115 Volthorne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,929 posts
  • LocationCalgary, Canadia

Posted 02 April 2012 - 10:49 AM

View PostFireNova, on 02 April 2012 - 09:00 AM, said:


SLIGHT FIX.....but otherwise in agreement.

Canon =/= Faction Balance. Canon and competitive gameplay CANNOT work!
It is because of the lore that VERY FEW if ANY people will join CSJ. I fear that once again, the CSJ fanbase will be marginalized and attacked/demonized as usual and prevented from being truly playable for those who wish to join CSJ. DENYING options/faction choices is not good and only serves to limit the growth and potential that a game can have. This is why I keep mentioning WoW. If WoW can allow you to play as the survivors of the High Elves (Blood Elves) why can that NOT be the same as playing Smoke Jaguars post Bulldog/Serpent? Why take away that which people might want to play as? (To think that back in 1998 I learned about BattleTech and the Smoke Jaguars only to hear that they were being "phased out" was just sad and made me think that a bad precedent was set forth from that point on.....lo and behold Wars of Reaving later on....LOL).

The Blood Elves are not very numerous but yet they are playable, yet the Smoke Jaguars survived in a small number as well and yet they cannot?

I know that not very many people like the Smoke Jaguars (for either lore or personal reasons) but having a whole faction singled out while everyone else is assured that they will remain is just not faction balance ( or fun for that matter). And that is what we are here for......FUN.

Being a part of ~SJ~ ( a VERY GOOD group of people not to mention the BEST server in MWLL I might add), I look forward to playing in MWO with my fellow Jaguar friends and comrades. Yet what I do worry about is the predicable marginalization and and constant downgrading (Wolcott, Luthien, Tukkayyid, Turtle Bay, not to mention the countless raids upon the Jaguars by the Wolves, Bears, Dracs, Nova Cats, etc) that the lore will place upon us and other Jaguar fans of any group and the eventual near complete "removal" of us in Bulldog/Serpent. Whether there will be a "survivor option" and be allowed to continue as Jaguars in the Deep Periphery with the Streaking Mist as our flagship similarly like Jim Raynor with his Hyperion battlecruiser and his Raynor's Raiders go around the Koprulu Sector (and yeah I did just make that distinction/comparison).

Canon is all fine and well.....but not when it will take away the fun and enjoyment and simply demonize (because Turtle Bay is so easy to bring up on the Jaguars every time) a whole entire fanbase and marginalize us by discouraging people from joining the Smoke Jaguar Clan/Faction simply because the lore says "its pointless to be a Jaguar" essentially given the lore that punishes the Jaguars and by extension....the fanbase.

It will be very interesting to see how the devs intend to keep the canon/lore from discouraging/marginalizing a SINGLE faction......

You're ASSUMING that the devs will even allow us to play as Clanners at all! For the time that people are (possibly) allowed to play as CSJ, I'm sure they'll enjoy it, and when CSJ gets their s*** wrecked, they'll be given the option to integrate with another Clan/faction or become lone wolves.

Your comparison of a suggested scenario in the Deep Periphery and comparison to Jim Raynor and his merry band of rebels is invalid. Jim defected from Arcturus, who was still a rebel at the time, because Jim was disgusted at leaving Kerrigan behind. Maybe you should actually bother to learn the lore before using it in a comparison.

Edited by Volthorne, 02 April 2012 - 10:50 AM.


#116 Paul Inouye

    Lead Designer

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 2,797 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 02 April 2012 - 12:09 PM

None of the above.

#117 FaustianQ

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 89 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 12:12 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 02 April 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

None of the above.

D:

How cryptic.

#118 Vexgrave Lars

    Former Dictionary

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,119 posts
  • LocationParticle and Wave

Posted 02 April 2012 - 12:15 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 02 April 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

None of the above.


Par and Game...

*Note .. One Hundred Million Points for killing 6 pages of forum guessing, arguing, complaining, pontificating and trolling with 4 words! You sir are a master strategist.

Edited by Vexgrave Lars, 02 April 2012 - 12:27 PM.


#119 empath

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 228 posts
  • LocationUTC - 3:30

Posted 02 April 2012 - 01:15 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 02 April 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

None of the above.


Well played, Mr. Brewster, well played. :(

In all honesty, if you wanna categorize me with regards to 'being a stickler for adhering to canon', you'd better give me a tan blazer, red armband and help me trim my mustache down. :lol:

...but, I didn't vote 'YES'.

I went with what I'd already heard PGI intimating they'll do (at least at launch) with 'staying roughly with canon storyline and leaving the players *some* leeway'.


Because some very valid concerns have been raised regarding the option of 'being a timecop' :lol:

One of which is: Predestination quells interest and excitement. There's the problem of following the timeline strictly in that anyone with the inclination to surf over to sarna.net can see in advance what is going to happen.
  • Everyone and his dog is gonna be hanging around the FRR in August, 3049.
  • Luthien will be hip-deep in lone wolves come New Year's of 3052
  • An obscure FRR world will see the same happen in May of that year
  • Coventry tourism' will go nuts in the first month of '58 (I love the poster who complained that nothing will happen between Tukayyid & Operation Bulldog :rolleyes: )
etc. etc. At the very least, this would make things difficult on the part of PGI if they have any intention of permitting a sort of 'community event' relating to historic battles.



On the other hand, canonicity and 'sticking with the timeline' gives a very powerful and useful 'leash' in restraining the 'steamroller syndrome' I've seen happen in too-lax conquest metagames; one faction starts to gain an edge in battle, grabs a bit more turf and facilities than the others, then the Bandwagon shifts sides to either 'be on the winning team' or even just get cheaper prices on ammo/repairs if they don't care about the overall state of territory control, and next thing you know, any other faction has maybe one or two bases beyond their inviolate HQs, and staffing levels drop with those 'short end of the stick' factions pretty fast, but then the winning faction starts to hameorage players since there's no one to fight, and either the map gets reset by the admins, or they themselves also lose interest and things shut down...


So, all in all, I'm sittin' on the fence, like many (uncomfortable, ain't it?) but I'm perfectly willing to maintain this position with the confidence that I have in the devs that whatever they come up with WILL BE FUN. They've confirmed that faith already several times, even pre-launch. :wub:

#120 SmoesHammer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • LocationDublin

Posted 02 April 2012 - 01:42 PM

Technically the devs said it is set in an offshoot timeline, so in fact they can do whatever they want (it just better be good :( )





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users