3696 replies to this topic

[Czardread]

MacKoga, on 15 November 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

PART TWO:
All that said about ambushes, I would fully support the concept of drones with cameras or detection equipment, if implemented as an extension of what is going on / being juggled inside the cockpit. It would need to be something that could be shot down, or be out-of-range, and take up weight and space. But I would like that tactical option to be used, even if I'm the one doing the sneaking, and it's being used against me. I am OK with side-screens inside the cockpit showing rear/side/top/arm/gun-mounted views, though this is something I am much more neutral about, rather that being simply positive about the aerial drone concept.


Thank you for all your hard work. I recognize that the new-player training and retention issue is complicated.

though not cannon (mostly cause UAV where not a general public concept in the 80's), it would make a coll feture to add to the whole role warfare idea. it would need larger maps to be really worthy, but it think that is just a matter of time.

instead of allowing you to view the surrounding are, it could instead scan the AOE and ping the enemies that are on it, just like regularscouting do. what do you think?

side view could be worked on with the pilot view in my opinion, it would just need to make the cockpit with side view areas (maybe another advantage to certain mechs with wide glass cockpits in contrast with eye cockpits). it would be cool owever if they did a button press rear camera, it woul allow the implementation of rear mounted weapons and wouldn't downright screw the sneak around tactic, since the pilot would have to be in rear view mode to notice you getting on his back before taking at least one salvo.

[Dewil]

Let me paint you a picture...

A hunchback walks up to the ridge in Frozen city to take a peek over it. He is using 3rd person view and is hoping to take a pot-shot at someone when gathering some intelligence for his team.

When he arrive at the ridge, he sees that there are 4 enemy Mechs just waiting for that first target to peek over the ridge. He sees this thanks to his 3rd person view (because no matter what you do, the 3rd person camera must be placed a fair bit above the mech or else the Mech will entirely cover the screen).

What will our Hunchback do? He wont cross that ridge because it would be suicide! His main objective is achieved without even exposing himself to enemy fire.

Fair? No.



Or imagine an Atlas that have engaged an enemy Centurion and is happily blasting away using 3rd person view when he notices that 2 Blue Lasers hit him in the back. In first person he could very well believe that it was a small Jenner taking a shot at his back with puny small lasers but something that carries two Large Lasers is obviously a threat and he can turn around and face this new threat.

Fair? No.


And the reason you give us that "new players have problem with torso twist, legs and movement and the coordination required to pilot the mech" is just a crappy placeholder reason. Just tell us the real reason because any player willing to spend a single $ on the game is smart enough to figure this out in less than 30 minutes. And that is not a very steep learning curve if you ask me...

Since I heard about 3rd person I've had a hard time motivating myself to play the game. The game is not fun enough that I can stand bad netcodes, disconnects, lag-shields AND a product that does not give what it said on the box!

[Volkite]

>Original idea for game was forced-1st-person perspective 'mech sim. People's ears perk up at the mention of a new mechwarrior game.
>Free-to-play, would feature online community and battle would be 12v12 and the result would actually possibly shift borders. Gain massive and eager fanbase.
>Flyingdebris concept art. Gain players.
>Founder's packages. Gain players
>Suddenly get into beta mode, wild bi-polar patches of "balance". Lose players.
>Gold founders by and large start turning into yellow-skinned rabid Baboons defending the stupidest things; ruining the community. Lose players
>3rd party video tutorials, 3rd party team speak servers. Golds say it's how the game was meant to be played. Lose only a few players.
>More bi-polar patches. All along have claimed to be the 'perfect game'... which still needs patches and hasn't delivered on any of the promises yet. In fact, gets rid of a lot of the once good things. Lose a few players.
>Open beta... Gain a few players. Let's face it, NDA was nearly meaningless in this forum, just about everyone here was in the closed beta.
... It's been a hell of a ride. My point of the current idea is:
>Create 3rd person mode to appeal to... someone? Gain 50 players. Lose 1000.
>Game of the year all years.

No. Do not make 3rd person. Do NOT make 3rd person. If you do, I will demand my refund. Why do you continue to do these things?

What we need is fixed netcode, improved game types (maybe just remove the base. Would be a lot better), improved weapon balance... and you guys ask if we want 3rd-person.
Inb4 golds demand it now because you said it was an idea you had.
inb4 they spam the thread with yes, overpowering the rest of the playerbase, which dwindles because of past decisions with this game.
inb4 you say "You said yes, let's do it!"
inb4 worse netcode and lag, forced 3rd-person.
Don't make 3rd-person it will ruin the game in its already worrisome state.

This feature will be cheating. The same thing the cries of which caused you guys to get rid of collisions and knockdown (the thing the Dragon was made for canonically).

Edited by Merovigian, 15 November 2012 - 05:46 PM.

[Czardread]

Boswelli, on 15 November 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

You made the wrong conclusions i guess. What about "BK" produces hamburgers first, but the revenue made with was to low so they decided to make pizza TOO? I said it before it's not "all or nothing", it would be optional! But to translate it back to your example all of these "3rd person view is sa tan"-cryers would say "No, we don't want pizza eaters here in our BK!".

And now? Sounds a bit xenophobic, right? And stupid, too, because such a strong look into the past, and simulation games ARE history and actually only a nieche product, may lead to a dead end. The point is, back to your BK-example, the hamburger-eaters aren't hungry anymore so they won't buy enough to let the business run, so what doing? Right, with new products catch some new customers.

Just a hint to all angry founders: give it a chance, try it for your own and THEN complain if it's as bad as you thought! Not even Nostradamus could really see into the future, he was just silly enough to believe it!

sure, then when the game is ruined cause "hey guess what, the angry founders where right after all" we'all just wait another 10 years to have a new mechwarrior game make the same stupid mistake. maybe you should have thought that maybe, just MAYBE, this whole issue had happened before and thats the reason the people who already shown willingness to invest and spend money on the game don't want it.
but instead, they are trying to please people that usually dont put a dime into the game.

[Insidious Johnson]

Vassago Rain, on 15 November 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

[REMOVED]

I'm not sure they can even play checkers and run a lemonaide stand without assistance. When are these guys who get paid by and in "Loonies" going to respond to the basic heresy they have proposed in this thread which has been resoundingly rejected by the community? Sharpen your torches and light your pitchforks.

Edited by Viterbi, 17 November 2012 - 07:59 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Insidious Johnson, on 15 November 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

I'm not sure they can even play checkers and run a lemonaide stand without assistance. When are these guys who get paid by and in "Loonies" going to respond to the basic heresy they have proposed in this thread which has been resoundingly rejected by the community? Sharpen your torches and light your pitchforks.

I think this is gonna end in someone stealing their source code, and MWO getting ported as an actual crysis 2 mod, then we'll have endless repostings of Garth's 'I'D LIKE TO SEE YOUR GAME!!!!!'-post.

[Gimpy Warpig]

Czardread, on 15 November 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

in that case, have you considered playing ANOTHER mech game? cause this one IS about the meat puppet inside the huge 100 tons thincan. the whole idea of the entire series o mechwarriors games (except mech assault, wich was a mistake given life) has been to put you IN THE SEAT OF THE PILOT.

Whole series of mechwarrior games - as in MW2, MW3, MW4:Veng, MW4:BK, MW4:Mercs - ALL of which were 3pv as well, but perhaps you meant "entire series o mechwarriors games with the exception of the last 20 years worth of mechwarrior games".

[Valsalva]

The Herrick, on 14 November 2012 - 04:26 AM, said:

I don't mind 3rd person for spectator mode but whenever you are in control of your mech it should be in 1st person. Yes, even when you fall over in collisions with other mechs (if they ever add it back in). I don't wanna see my Jenner faceplant the ground, I want to be in the mech watching my pilot brace himself during the fall, get shaken about in the impact and then fumble with the controls in a blind panic as he struggles to get the mech back on it's feet.

Listen to this man, PGI.

[Squidhead Jax]

Billygoat, on 15 November 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:

To be honest, I also suspect that they're working on a way to broach the subject of scrapping CW to the community at this point and slowly spin this project into more of a random-match deathmatch arcadey game anyway.

Hey, at this point, anything is possible.

[Vapor Trail]

Well, ATM: 2,478 No votes vs 228 yes/don't know/don't care votes.

What is that, 90.997% of the sample NOT in favor of 3rd Person?

Pretty conclusive I'd say: Forum posters do not want 3rd person.

Edited by Vapor Trail, 15 November 2012 - 05:49 PM.

[whiskeyninja]

Initial reaction:



If you want to throw it in as an optional game mode, possibly to accompany some arcadey CTF or Solaris-style battleground, fine, but before you start working on that, I'd like the rest of the Mech sim you promised, please.

Weapon balance, new game modes, new maps, mech customization balance, and basically everything else take precedence over an optional 3rd person camera to me.

Down the line if you want to throw in a third-person UAV or something like the trailer from years ago, fine, but finish everything else first. Quit putting nails in the coffin for your credibility.

[TheGeek]

82 pages and counting.

82 pages of people telling you "NO! DON'T DO THIS! IT'S A BAD IDEA!"

How many people is it going to take for you to change your mind?

Please explain to your money-grubbing pointy-haired boss that 3RD Person will RUIN this game. I don't care how many pushy CEO types tell you, "you have to". DON'T DO IT!

Or else I will quit, and not spend another dime on your silly former-mech sim.

And I doubt I will be the only one.

[Like a Sir]

Gimpy Warpig, on 15 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

It ruined it for those who couldnt compete perhaps. I'm only assuming you were one of those.

And here is where the problem lies, if you wanted to compete with 3pv people, you had to play in 3pv, and use all the cheap tactics that they have been using... Sure you could stick with your cockpit and handicap yourself... That is what we are trying to avoid...

Now I am not going to trash talk you, simply because I am assuming, you are coming from "you can check the box that says you only have to play against 1PV people"... Well you and I had this debate on here last night - It's fine if they decide to try to implement it, AFTER they take care of the things that actually need to be fixed and added, there is no point of trying to expand your player base, if you game is still not a game, but just quick bugged death matches on 5 maps. Even though those matches are fun as hell for the fans of MW/BT, they might not be, to someone who doesn't give a crap about the franchise. Those people will not stick around and support you, especially if they don't need to make any initial investment, that will hold them here.

Also, if the community warfare gets implemented here is a quote from the guy in the poll thread, he raises some valid points about making the 2 parts of the community coexist, what would you say about that?

Billygoat, on 15 November 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:

This is almost certainly what will happen regardless. Whether the poll is like this or if 8000 people had voted 100% NO, it's probably coming anyway. Our input is mostly likely not being genuinely sought over this and the feedback thread in the stickies is just to keep all the ******* and moaning in one place rather than filling the forums up with 100 separate rage threads.

The overwhelming negative reaction may change the way or the timeframe it's implemented in. If I saw this, but was intent on putting it in anyway (or some corporate suit from the publisher had threatened to pull funding if I didn't), here's roughly how I would do it.


-------------------

- OK guys, we're putting it in but it will be inside a tutorial section only! Just to help out the newbies and game journalists! See, we're listening, right? Guys?

- OK guys, um, so... we've decided to expand third person view to special Trial mech-only matches for newbies so they can understand torso twisting while getting a feel for real matches, but YOU GUYS (we love you guys, honest!) won't have to play against them and it won't be allowed in Community Warfare! Be cool, be cool, put that pitchfork away!

- OK guys, so we've had feedback from a lot of players (those who have been playing trial matches in 3rd person and get thrown into 1st for "real game") and they really, really want 3rd person in the greater game. So, we're listening to your feedback and implementing this for the players! BUT, we're separating the 1st and 3rd person queues, etc, so YOU GUYS (we really love you guys) won't have to play if you don't want to!

- OK guys, we're listening to your feedback and it seems like a lot of 1st person players are complaining about queues being too long and having to wait too long to get into a match, so we're listening to YOUR FEEDBACK and combining the 3rd and 1st person queues so you can get into the game quicker! You can still use 1st person view if you want though, so no worries!

- OK guys, we're hearing some complaining about 3rd person view giving some advantages over 1st and we'd just like to say that the view mode is entirely up to the player. 3rd person is available to everybody, it's free right? So you guys can use it too, cool!

-------------------

Aaaand, welcome to MW4 multiplayer! Hurray!

To be honest, I also suspect that they're working on a way to broach the subject of scrapping CW to the community at this point and slowly spin this project into more of a random-match deathmatch arcadey game anyway.

[Zeus X]

Hey guys the new players can't torso twist, "we should add 3rd person to fix it", Awesome plan to gain 10 new players, lose 1000, it's the perfect strategy.

[Eiki]

I don't like the idea of Third Person being added because it cuts down on how the game is supposed to feel. It also creates the "Corner-Peeking" Situation where player can just sit around a corner and use the third-person camera to see enemies before either peeking out or running away.

[M Jordanus Sicarius]

Like a Sir, on 15 November 2012 - 01:54 PM, said:

So people who will have the "slight" advantage of seeing exactly where they are getting hit from, or seeing that light behind them, or seeing what's just over that hill, around that corner or in their blind spots to the left or right, also can see if their arm mounted weapons will hit or not, don't effect us how?

Developers spending a month or 2 implementing all this, for the "silent Majority", instead of fixing the net code, client crashes, adding game modes and content, does not effect us how?

Way more accurate in first person? Only if they code it to where your weapons sway around while you breathe maybe... Oh and yeah, other mechwarrior games had 3pv, they also had single player where it was perfectly fine to use it... Strap a single player campaign to MWO and throw a 3pv at that, no problem.

If this was in the game to begin with, a lot of us wouldn't be here, sounds crazy I know, but it's dead honest truth. There is nothing wrong with being a hipster and standing up for your opinion, but if you are going to scream; people just hate change, even if that change does not effect them. Please back it up with some good arguments.

It is a slight advantage. I don't know about you, but I don't consider myself more than an average player, and unless the guy shooting me is far away, if I'm getting shot and they're not in my immidiate view, I have a pretty good idea of where they're coming from. They're probably (Shocking I know) in an area that I cannot see. Third person doesn't see that far behind you, unless the guy is right on your ***, you don't have much of an advantage. The HUD shows the direction you're getting hit in anyway.

I'm not sure how much you played the old games with third person (So all of them), but the "seeing around corners" claim isn't a substantive one. So what? What are you going to see in the less than clear view in the corner of your screen that you couldn't deduce before?

Please tell me where you're getting this "spending 2 months or more coding these". Are you implying they spent their entire work for 2 months doing that? I hope not because that's ludicrous. If you think it was a major issue, you're likely wrong about that as well. The technology to do this is already in the game, the work probably didn't take very long, and even if you're "2 month" claim is true (Which it's most likely not), those 2 months of work would be one guy, spending 15 minutes on his coffee break coding it. This was not a difficult addition, and that argument is straw man. You're pre suposing you're claim is true to fit your arguement with includes justifying that. That's pretty ridiculous.

It is way more accurate in first person. In third person you're further back, it's not as pinpoint, larger area for your target to move around. First person is more accurate, and the only thing you could make an arguement for is it's easier to see where you're going, but any player who's mediocre and above know's you can do that just as well with the map.

You're simply making a claim that's highly unlikely. Why wouldn't you play a game with something so minor? Did people not play the other Mechwarriors? Are you new to the series and just being an elitist who thinks something different ruins your expereince even if you wouldn't be able to tell someone else is using it? I call ********, if it was in the game to begin with (Which I bet the basis for it was), most pouring their eyes out wouldn't bat an eyelash.

I love how you call me out for "not having any arguements" when really I'm the only one who has them. Good ones anyway. I guess you could say it "abstractly ruins your experience in a incorporeal manner that those who disagree cannot hope to understand", but personally, I don't think that's very good, not sure about you. Also enjoy how you resort to ad hominem, resorting to strawman instead of actually responding.

People are overreacting, of all the things to complain about, the netcode, the unbalanced variants, whatever, that's fine, there's some real problems, but to pounce on this instead, and make it seem far more of an issue than it is. People here make it sound gamebreaking, it's not. I can understand if you think it's an issue, but it's not as bad as people are making it sound. Trying to guilt them into removing it isn't going work, I think the gaming industry learnt that with another major sci-fi game relaesed this year.

[Like a Sir]

Vassago Rain, on 15 November 2012 - 05:42 PM, said:

I think this is gonna end in someone stealing their source code, and MWO getting ported as an actual crysis 2 mod, then we'll have endless repostings of Garth's 'I'D LIKE TO SEE YOUR GAME!!!!!'-post.

I'm sorry, this here, if people know the source, is so full of win!!! ROFL

[Alphawolf]

Well there have been a lot of responses and I am sure more than 5 people have already posted the same thing I am about to post. I just hope what I say will help. There should not be a third person view. No matter how you put it in and what restrictions you put on it you will only make more trouble for programers and then anti-hacking efforts later. PGI you stated in your game description, "MechWarrior Online puts MechWarriors into a first-person, team-based, tactical battlefield where the victors swim in the spoils of war and are rewarded with the almighty C-Bill (in-game currency)." Piloting and fighting in a mech should be a challenging thing. There are games out there that are popular and challenge their players to rise up to the games level.

As far as making it easier for new players to pilot their mech argument. There NEEDS to be a tutorial. It does not need to be a complicated A.I. infused match. A simple scenario with in game text coaching and empty dummy mechs to shoot at will do fine to start. I know that would do wonders to help new players get started. How hard would that be to program?

[Terran123rd]

Czardread, on 15 November 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

in that case, have you considered playing ANOTHER mech game? cause this one IS about the meat puppet inside the huge 100 tons thincan. the whole idea of the entire series o mechwarriors games (except mech assault, wich was a mistake given life) has been to put you IN THE SEAT OF THE PILOT. and guess what, the main critic to that as always been that it was ruined by 3rd person view turning it into yet another arcade shooter.

What other mech game? Hawken? Hawken can't deliver the kind of mech combat that Battletech can, nor can can it deliver what I've come to expect from mech games. Living Legends? A mod for a game I don't have and can't afford. Yeah, that's useful.

Again with the telling me why I play, and completely getting it wrong. For YOU it's about being the meat-puppet. YOU. I'm here to play with big stompy robots in my favorite big-stompy-robot universe. The mechs are what made me a Battletech fan in the first place, are what make me play Battletech games, and are what make me read Battletech books. The universe is just icing on the big-stompy-robot cake.

You keep saying that this is a mech combat simulator, like I somehow don't know that. I do play the big the stompy robot simulator, I just like to cut the meat-puppet out of the equation. If you don't like that, tough.

[Brien]

TheGeek, on 15 November 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

82 pages and counting.

82 pages of people telling you "NO! DON'T DO THIS! IT'S A BAD IDEA!"

How many people is it going to take for you to change your mind?

Please explain to your money-grubbing pointy-haired boss that 3RD Person will RUIN this game. I don't care how many pushy CEO types tell you, "you have to". DON'T DO IT!

Or else I will quit, and not spend another dime on your silly former-mech sim.


And I doubt I will be the only one.

Your only post #1633 with two more after, obviously these numbers do not reflect the fact non of us want this crap. Maybe this a sick ploy to unite us against the clans...3rd person view uniting the inner sphere since the other day.
edit: damn phone put my text in the quote

Edited by Brien, 15 November 2012 - 06:22 PM.