3696 replies to this topic

[Tickdoff Tank]

The poll numbers are about what I would have expected. Even though we have a rather small sample size compared to the whole player base, the sheer amount of negative votes is impressive.

[Xantha]

AA Yeti, on 15 November 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:

I voted Yes
It's going to be a setting, in matchmaking.

If you toggle it on you will play against people who also use 3rd person settings.
If you leave it off you will only play against people forced into first person view.

So we'll have:

1st person 4 man queue
1st person 8 man queue
3rd person 4 man queue
3rd person 8 man queue
then eventually we'll add

1st person 4 man EU queue
1st person 8 man EU queue
3rd person 4 man EU queue
3rd person 8 man EU queue

Soon we'll all be sitting in queues waiting for enough people to log on to our specific shard/instance/finite settings group wishing we could play against anyone.

Segregation like this is a BAD thing PERIOD.

[AlanEsh]

Splitting the player base is a horrible idea for match making and for the meta game Coming Soon™.

So if you absolutely must add 3rd person view, make it PURELY navigational.
- Give the mech a grainy chase cam that is stuck in forward/torso view arc.
- Don't allow weapons fire from 3rd person.
- put a 1-2 second delay in when switching to or from 3rd person view.

If this is truly only to help newbies learn how to drive, my 3rd person camera features should suffice.

[Dimento Graven]

Nomorga, on 15 November 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

While at first it scared me, it's obviously lame and not realistic to have 3d view, and now i'm happy we don't have one. I remeber the time when we had jump-las snipers that watched beind the wall. Pretty lame and broken.
Still it could be nice to have simething that gives you a quick idea of your mech torso/leg/arm indicator (aside from radar torso/leg indicator).

Here's my contribution: i think can be very effective, do not give a (lame) edge and also maybe adds some nice look to cockpit (and possibly is not that hard to develop/implement):
Make a "ghost" 3d image of your mech , that shall be displayed on a small screen in the cockpit (that you can also switch off), featuring it walking, torso /leg align, arms etc.

what you guys think? come on devs, please give us the 3d ghost.

thank you all (devs and contributors) for this important feature.

ah , did i already mention? , NO external 3d view please.

This is a great idea, but, too much work as there's already THREE indicators of torso vs leg positioning in game now.

First off, the top of your hud there's a line with a connecting top triangle and bottom triangle. As you torso twist, that line lengthens and the triangles get farther apart. If you see a line, you're twisted.

Secondly there's the mini map at the bottom of the screen. The high lighted triangle is the direction of your torso, the LONG LINE is the direction of your legs. If the LONG line is not going through the middle of the lighted triangle, you're twisted.

Lastly, PRESS C, and if your torso suddenly swings left or right, you were twisted.

Yes, this requires skill, and being conscious of your 'mech and surroundings. It's not easy. Even now, after months of BETA, I still forget sometimes.

[Dimento Graven]

First off, the top of your hud there's a line with a connecting top triangle and bottom triangle. As you torso twist, that line lengthens and the triangles get farther apart. If you see a line, you're twisted.

Secondly there's the mini map at the bottom of the screen. The high lighted triangle is the direction of your torso, the LONG LINE is the direction of your legs. If the LONG line is not going through the middle of the lighted triangle, you're twisted.

Lastly, PRESS C, and if your torso suddenly swings left or right, you were twisted.

Yes, this requires skill, and being conscious of your 'mech and surroundings. It's not easy. Even now, after months of BETA, I still forget sometimes.

[Blixx]

With only 4.5% of the population wanting a 3^rd person why are you wasting resources. If PGI wants more players add more content. “Missions, Maps, Role Warfare” I expected to have 20+ maps by now and mission goals. 100% of the players want more content, 4.5% want 3^rd person…

[Mavairo]

Coralld, on 15 November 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

To be perfectly honest, I don't really buy into "1st person is hard, give me 3rdPV... waaaaaa." crowed. What I think is really happening here is that some noobs out there are so use to their COD and Halo 360 radar that when they turn a corner they are suddenly surprised when a wild Atlas appears and then they frantically try to get away from said Atlas. I call this the T-Rex chase as seen from the movie Jerassic Park. And so they want to mitigate that by being able to see over hills and around corners.



The thought "Must go faster" and screaming in terror and running into things usually happens when a Atlas-saorus-Rex appears. I look back and laugh at all the times that has happened to me.

I suspect that about 1/3 of the "I want 3rd person!" crowd really just wants this. The other 2/3s really are that uncoordinated.

[Horrible N00b]

I too am posting to just say NO to third person view mode while in a match. However, I saw it mentioned for a third person view mode for watching replays, and I thing that would be a good idea. However, to reiterate, NO third person view mode while playing a match.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

As a spectator view sure why not.

As a game play mode, why would you do this, why would you throw in a game mode that has to be separated from 1st person, the two cant co-exist together in the same match.

All it achieves is player base segregation, the same as what happened to MW4. That is not a good thing

[KovarD]

Card, on 14 November 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

We are men of action. Let us be direct with each other.

Those of us who were in the Closed Beta practically begged you to divide matchmaking into 2 pools - one for Grouped players and one for PuGs. Why? Because PUGstomping was going to drive off new players. What we got was some kind of half-baked solution that doesn't solve the problem and just makes everyone unhappy.

Those of us who were in the Closed Beta practically begged you to develop a full Training Level. Why? Because the game has a steep learning curve, and we knew it would drive off new players. What did we get? Ignored.

Those of us who were in the Closed Beta practically begged you not to go to Open Beta with an incomplete, almost broken product which is really little more than a Demo for a game that has potential. Why? Because we knew people who weren't already diehard Mechwarrior fans wouldn't find enough here to hold their interest. What did we get? You moved Open Beta back a few weeks and then launched it anyway.

Now your retention rate for new players is lousy. People are signing up, installing the game, trying a drop or two and quitting.

And you've convinced yourself this is because of torso twist? Seriously?
Now you're interested in our opinion? Seriously?

Hahahahhah.
Good post, Card!

[Namikaze]

Aw HELL no!

[tenderloving]

Card, on 14 November 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

We are men of action. Let us be direct with each other.

Those of us who were in the Closed Beta practically begged you to divide matchmaking into 2 pools - one for Grouped players and one for PuGs. Why? Because PUGstomping was going to drive off new players. What we got was some kind of half-baked solution that doesn't solve the problem and just makes everyone unhappy.

Those of us who were in the Closed Beta practically begged you to develop a full Training Level. Why? Because the game has a steep learning curve, and we knew it would drive off new players. What did we get? Ignored.

Those of us who were in the Closed Beta practically begged you not to go to Open Beta with an incomplete, almost broken product which is really little more than a Demo for a game that has potential. Why? Because we knew people who weren't already diehard Mechwarrior fans wouldn't find enough here to hold their interest. What did we get? You moved Open Beta back a few weeks and then launched it anyway.

Now your retention rate for new players is lousy. People are signing up, installing the game, trying a drop or two and quitting.

And you've convinced yourself this is because of torso twist? Seriously?
Now you're interested in our opinion? Seriously?

This is the best response I've seen so far. I say everyone just keep quoting this post from Card over and over until they either lock the thread or respond directly to the points he raised.

[Rokuzachi]

A lot of people seem to say "it would break immersion", when they really should be saying, "it would break my immersion".

Assuming that they developed a way to prevent using it to get around LoS spotting (like masking a mech's physical appearance if a direct LoS check fails to prevent using it to see over hills, etc), why do people care so much about the way other people play?

[Slar]

No 3rd person.

I'd leave instantly, which would be disappointing after waiting so long.

Removes the ability to sneak up behind someone, allows to see over hills, around buildings, and introduces the ability to line up shots prior to spotting (for jump sniping.)

Unquestionably, no.

Edited by Slar, 15 November 2012 - 09:31 AM.

[Icebound]

There are probably hundreds of things that the team could be doing to make the game better that are more important than this.

[Zeus X]

Not only is it a no, but it's a F*CK NO!

• 
  
• Yes (112 votes [4.64%] - View)
  
• No (2207 votes [91.39%] - View)
  
• No opinion (14 votes [0.58%] - View)
  
• Im indiferent (82 votes [3.40%] - View)

Icebound, on 15 November 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

There are probably hundreds of things that the team could be doing to make the game better that are more important than this.

You sir are correct.

[Wolfcp]

Rokuzachi, on 15 November 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

A lot of people seem to say "it would break immersion", when they really should be saying, "it would break my immersion".

Assuming that they developed a way to prevent using it to get around LoS spotting (like masking a mech's physical appearance if a direct LoS check fails to prevent using it to see over hills, etc), why do people care so much about the way other people play?

That is even LESS intuitive for a new player. They would look around a corner, see no one there, then call hacks when someone seemingly teleports as they turn the corner.

[Nomorga]

Dimento Graven, on 15 November 2012 - 09:06 AM, said:

This is a great idea, but, too much work as there's already THREE indicators of torso vs leg positioning in game now.

First off, the top of your hud there's a line with a connecting top triangle and bottom triangle. As you torso twist, that line lengthens and the triangles get farther apart. If you see a line, you're twisted.

Secondly there's the mini map at the bottom of the screen. The high lighted triangle is the direction of your torso, the LONG LINE is the direction of your legs. If the LONG line is not going through the middle of the lighted triangle, you're twisted.

Lastly, PRESS C, and if your torso suddenly swings left or right, you were twisted.

Yes, this requires skill, and being conscious of your 'mech and surroundings. It's not easy. Even now, after months of BETA, I still forget sometimes.

yep i understand there's plenty of way to already monitor about torso/leg align, and i mentioned it (maybe i improperly referred to as bein displayed in the radar screen), but you forget the cool factor

[Dimento Graven]

Nomorga, on 15 November 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

yep i understand there's plenty of way to already monitor about torso/leg align, and i mentioned it (maybe i improperly referred to as bein displayed in the radar screen), but you forget the cool factor

Well, I have to admit, it would be neat...

[tenderloving]

Wolfcp, on 15 November 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

That is even LESS intuitive for a new player. They would look around a corner, see no one there, then call hacks when someone seemingly teleports as they turn the corner.

This is a good Occam's Razor point. (Yes I am technically mis-using Occam's Razor, no I don't care.) If you have to keep adding systems to deal with the change you made, it's a ****** change.