177 replies to this topic

[Jadel Blade]

Sean von Steinike, on 12 December 2012 - 10:38 PM, said:

I think Call of Duty stinks though. Absurdly stupid series of games. Popular though, because they cater to the lowest common denominator of players.

lol what? Massive generalisation ftw.

I dont like X game = All people that play it are scum.

Good one.

The post you quoted is a bit harsh but there is some truth.
The main thing I notice is polish and presentation. In those areas.

Hawken: Amazing
MWO: Zero

[Sean von Steinike]

Jadel Blade, on 12 December 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

lol what? Massive generalisation ftw.

I dont like X game = All people that play it are scum.

Good one.

The post you quoted is a bit harsh but there is some truth.
The main thing I notice is polish and presentation. In those areas.

Hawken: Amazing
MWO: Zero

Did I say they were scum? No, I don't think so.

[Jadel Blade]

Sean von Steinike, on 12 December 2012 - 10:56 PM, said:

Did I say they were scum? No, I don't think so.

Yes you did.

Thats what "lowest common denominator" means.

Either way it was a stupid thing to say.

[Sean von Steinike]

Jadel Blade, on 12 December 2012 - 11:13 PM, said:

Yes you did.

Thats what "lowest common denominator" means.

Either way it was a stupid thing to say.

They cater to people that like mindless twitch action where teamwork is secondary. It's like comparing the game of Risk to Advanced Squad Leader. Risk will always be more popular because Advanced Squad Leader is complex and requires much deeper thinking and planning. Far fewer people will play Advanced Squad Leader or even find it interesting because it is a much more in depth game. Risk caters to the lowest common denominator of war-gamer, Advanced Squad Leader, among the highest.

[GalaxyBluestar]

Lin Shai, on 12 December 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

The "casual" customer, that PGI so desperately wants, is not attached to the BattleTech IP. They don't care about iconic mechs or how much heat a gauss rifle produces. They just want to stomp around in robots and shoot other robots. Whichever game gives them the best experience is where they're going to spend their time.

THAT

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 12 December 2012 - 11:29 PM.

[Jeff K Notagoon]

lol @ whoever said hawken has more customization. You get to pick 1 of 6 chassis and then you pick 1 of 2 primary weapon for that chassis.

[valrond]

Sorry, but you can't compare Hawken to MWO more than you can compare, say, BF3 or Planetside 2 to MWO. The robots move like humans, they accelerate and stop instantly, the turn in a square foot, they don't turn torso, etc. And they're barely bigger than humans. You're not piloting a Mech, you're just playing yourself with a robot avatar.

And like the one above me said, very few customization options.

[anonymous175]

Edison Chen, on 12 December 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

No desire to be anyone or poster, just posting same as the others. Having tried both now, It's easy to see why Hawken is going to be the more successful mech combat game, and why they have so many awards from the public when PGI has none.. They got right so many things where PGI broke or went the wrong way.

Some people will play MWO to the end and defend it no matter what, but I play most games that are released, and MWO is in a failed state.

Yes it's a beta, but so is Hawken and Planetside 2, Hawken went open beta today, and if you were to compare MWO and hawken in a showroom, the public are going to go for hawken, every time almost. The ones that put up with the crap quality that is fed them are the ones with a loyalty to MW or BT, and not many others.

We all had high hopes for MW, now only the most fanatical founders and new luvvies are not disappointed.

Oh well, just a game, just like all the other games, maybe it become more fun later, or maybe it dead, in the meantime, so many good games to play now, mwo, just average now.

That's the spirit.

[MadcatX]

Just tried out Hawken that everyone's been talking about now that it's in Open Beta.

It's not a bad game for what it is, a fast-paced FPS. The only characteristic MW:O and Hawken share is "mechs" and that's about it. A mech sim it is not.

[GioAvanti]

Ultrabeast, on 10 November 2012 - 04:41 AM, said:

So let's say you play a brawler Atlas. You wouldn't like a skill tree where you had to choose between offense or defense or extra ammo? That would mean you could customize your skills to your style of play. If you were a heavy hitter you could choose offense to give you like 10% extra damage or whatever to your weapons, but be more vulnerable because you wouldn't have the 10% bonus to armor, and run out of ammo faster because you didn't choose the 10% bonus to ammo capacity.

If you chose defense, you would have lower damage but could tank longer, but would also run out of ammo quicker. If you liked to be out on the front lines taking hits for your unit, that would be a great little bonus.

If you're a dedicated LRM boat or gauss sniper, then you could sacrifice the extra damage and defense for extra ammo capacity because you'd usually be sitting in the back so you could fire longer.

Those kinds of choices are what I'm talking about.

Those choices do not belong in this game... how does being a good pilot fit more ammo in an ammo bin? This isn't a fantasy game where more skill makes your fireballs hit harder.

[Hedonism Robot]

Hawken is quite different from MWO. I probably will be playing it more for a while though cause I hate the current balance in MWO. The ECM and poor netcode just make for a really frustrating experience. I like how mechwarrior lets you customize more on the mech but hawken is very generous to new players and gives them immediate rewards. I think in all regards hawken is probably a better game, but I like the mechwarrior universe and slower combat speed.

[Jaxom08]

Just tried Hawken.........can't say I was impressed with anything in it.......the mech ya start with looked like a microwave with arms and legs.........the game play is just twitch based crap thats been done to death in games like Combat Arms. The map I saw ( i could only deal with Hawken for about an hour ) was ugly as sin.....and what is up with dashing????

Hawken isn't meant for people that enjoy Mechwarrior or Battletech.......It's meant for young teens and it's obvious with ADHD.

I know others will like it and it will probably be around for quite awhile......but it's NOT in the same boat as MWO ( or any other MW game for that matter ). But as for me.....it's already been uninstalled and i feel like I wasted time I coulda used doing dishes or something more fun then Hawken.

[Pr8Dator]

The only thing I like about Hawken is UNREAL ENGINE3!!!! Unreal is still the most PC friendly engine ever...

The "mechs" in hawken are really elementals in the Battletech world. The way they are dying to damage is similar to a well armed assault in COD... so you feel like a really fast and overgrown soldier rather than piloting a mech.

Edited by Pr8Dator, 13 December 2012 - 01:00 AM.

[Kain]

Yep, I also just played Hawken,

and they have mechs indeed...jumping,dashing, dodging...., it is a big flea circus
It is fun for a while, like any another online fps, just grind for skill tree etc.., make some kills (or revenge kills) big +XX Xp signs on the screen etc.

Hawken is for the online FPS players who want something different for a change, but totally not memorable (Mechs and Maps for example),

But to repeat myself;
- comparing Hawken with MW:O is useless,
- MW:O is still a great Mech game in the making,
- and it is a shame MW:O went into Open Beta so early

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Ah, I can see it's that of the... day, where we discuss which of thees totally different games is better. Well, allow me to assist.

[Insert reasons why MechWarrior is better here]
[Insert reasons why Hawken is better here]

*wipes hands* Done.

[Jadel Blade]

Once again the comparison of gameplay isnt necessarily the point.

However its a mech type F2P game with limited budget and staffing in OB stage and it does so many of the basics much better than MWO.

The maps are actually interesting, the game modes are cool. The mech lab looks good, the pilot lab is relevant. The skill trees mean something.

It has a tutorial, the MC costs are reasonable.

Its not comparable gameplay wise nor should it be but its no more or less a sim than MWO its just faster paced. If you like faster style gameplay then go for it if not you are stuck with MWO.

[MadcatX]

Jadel Blade, on 13 December 2012 - 01:27 AM, said:

Once again the comparison of gameplay isnt necessarily the point.

However its a mech type F2P game with limited budget and staffing in OB stage and it does so many of the basics much better than MWO.

The maps are actually interesting, the game modes are cool. The mech lab looks good, the pilot lab is relevant. The skill trees mean something.

It has a tutorial, the MC costs are reasonable.

Its not comparable gameplay wise nor should it be but its no more or less a sim than MWO its just faster paced. If you like faster style gameplay then go for it if not you are stuck with MWO.

I'm going to disagree with it being a sim. Just because it has "mechs" doesn't automatically make it a simulator. If I really wanted to stretch this, I could classify CoD as a sim because it attempts to simulate real-life combat.

[Jadel Blade]

MadcatX, on 13 December 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

I'm going to disagree with it being a sim. Just because it has "mechs" doesn't automatically make it a simulator. If I really wanted to stretch this, I could classify CoD as a sim because it attempts to simulate real-life combat.

Then you arent disagreeing with me. I dont think either of them is a sim. They are both FPS with slightly more complex weapon setups than usual FPS.

As far as the comparison goes I honestly dont care for Hawken particularly, I love BT lore and prefer the pace of MWO. I just wish it was better in so many different areas.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Jadel Blade, on 13 December 2012 - 01:27 AM, said:

Once again the comparison of gameplay isnt necessarily the point.

However its a mech type F2P game with limited budget and staffing in OB stage and it does so many of the basics much better than MWO.

The maps are actually interesting, the game modes are cool. The mech lab looks good, the pilot lab is relevant. The skill trees mean something.

It has a tutorial, the MC costs are reasonable.

Its not comparable gameplay wise nor should it be but its no more or less a sim than MWO its just faster paced. If you like faster style gameplay then go for it if not you are stuck with MWO.

You can say all that stuff all day long but the fact is that those of us that actually want to play a FPS will just go get Planet Side 2 or Battlefield 3. We're here because we wanted something different.

[ELHImp]

Three words about HAWKEN: dirty cockpit glass! It make me feel like I'm inside cockpit, behind some barrier. So immresiony. I want this feature in MWO.