3696 replies to this topic

[Gaan Cathal]

Jake Wolf, on 21 November 2012 - 09:17 AM, said:

All because some CoD-Kids are whining?

The Call of Duty franchise is, of course, well known for it's heavy reliance on Third Person perspective.


On topic, wouldn't replacing the damage paperdoll with a 'static walking' wireframe of the mech do the job of displaying torso twist just fine? Certainly look more immersive and sci-fi than glancing down at a badly sketched Dragon diagram to check the condition of my Raven.

[RedDragon]

The game may have many flaws and I'm willing to put up with all of them, but if the Devs decide to implement 3rd person, then I'll really feel let down by them. They can say that it's optional all they want, but the fact remains that 3rd will give you advantages. And people see those advantages and want to use them. It doesn't matter that other people get the same advantages. As long as you think that you can play "better" with 3rd, you will use it most of the time. So the playerbase for 1st only will dwindle and become a niche like it was in MW4. Not to talk about new players who start out in 3rd - by no way will they suddenly decide to switch into a restricting cockpit later on. And that doesn't even take into account that the playerbase as a whole will be fragmented. How do you plan on implementing community warfare when there are two types of players that can't be put into a single game together?

The community has spoken (poll with over 3500 users (90% and more) who don't want third), so you should respect that. Most of those guys are the ones who made the founder program such a huge success. Don't let those people down.

[xImpalerx]

I'm usually pretty indifferent on things like this in most games, but this isn't a normal first person shooter, it's a mech simulator. To add a 3rd person view takes away from the experience of the game. For those of you who say "don't like it, don't use it" I say that allowing others to use a 3rd person view allows them to see things from a higher perspective thus letting them see over hills and such better and those of us who want to counter that advantage will be forced to adopt a very un-sim like option, taking away from the feeling of actually being in a mech.

[KovarD]

Garth: "Very emotional reaction from users in forums, we suggest they look at this logically like we have, and understand from a profit viability view that by having 3rd person view we may then be able to appeal to WoT's player base.."

We not have given enough logical reasons to not use 3rd person view?????

[martius]

KovarD, on 22 November 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Garth: "Very emotional reaction from users in forums, we suggest they look at this logically like we have, and understand from a profit viability view that by having 3rd person view we may then be able to appeal to WoT's player base.."

We not have given enough logical reasons to not use 3rd person view?????

They want money. They don't give much about pleasing the current player base if milking other players promises to be more lucrative.

They also do not understand that I don't care about their logic.

This game makes no money for me at all. I want fun.

[Kauhava]

KovarD, on 22 November 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Garth: "Very emotional reaction from users in forums, we suggest they look at this logically like we have, and understand from a profit viability view that by having 3rd person view we may then be able to appeal to WoT's player base.."

You've got to be kidding me. YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME

[Dechan Fraser]

Man, that really makes them seem desperate. There's so much other stuff that makes this game unfriendly to new players and a third person camera is definitely not a magical solution that will get new players to flock to the game.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Logically speaking Garth and Russ, you are going to LOSE money hand over fist if you do something as asinine as add 3rd person perspective. will it make money in the short term? probably, BUT, and here kind sirs is where logic stands up and bit&h slaps you: those who come in because of 3rd person will leave in short order, but, you won't just lose them, those of us, who WOULD have stayed who WOULD have given you money hand over fist with big dumb smiles on their faces will leave as well. Why?

1. Most who came from WoT to join this game did so because it promised to be NOTHING LIKE WoT. Period.
2. You guys sold us a bill of goods stating this was going to be a Tactical MechWarrior Simulator that was 100% First Person. We gave you our money hand over fist to support this, as the last several games to soil the Name: MECHWARRIOR had 3rd person, and in Multi Player, this is as bad a thing as you can do, short of opening up a nuclear reactor and HOPING to give everyone in the area super human or mutant powers. We gave you money because you soothed our worries that we would have to deal with another PopTart MechWarrior, and when you PGI said we would not, you opened our wallets, and for a lot of players, BEFORE they even had a chance to PLAY the game.
3. We had TRUST in you guys, NOW? When you openly claim you are even CONSIDERING violating a KEY DESIGN PILLAR, Well, we are not happy. It is NOT financially sound or logical to upset the long run for extremely short term limited gains when such a move will cost more in the long run.

[Paewen]

My only question is if you implement 3rd person, how will I see my bobble-heads?

Bad idea for all of the reasons posted. I'm sure you guys will recant after 78 pages worth of posts - 90%+ against. Listen to the majority of your fan base. Arkani had some great ideas in his early post.....

[Terror Teddy]

So, how will this be balanced out if it is made optional.

1. A Hunchbacks vision is severely limited to the right due to the shoulder - What would the 3rd viewer see?
2. I cannot see behind me from the cockpit - How will this be handled from those with an outside view

Unless the following parts are applied it would actually imbalance the game:

1. Both teams must be either 3rd person or not, nothing in between
2. Matchmaking would have to split the players between those two views

[Johnny Human]

Ghogiel, on 21 November 2012 - 08:42 AM, said:

Single out the most popular/profitable game mode and see which camp to focus more efforts on. There really wouldn't be much sense catering to a niche group of mechsim fans if PGI, well ok it's IGP in this instance, if the game becomes far more popular with say arcadey shooter types. Then they can shift towards that and be more profitable.

PGI designed the game from the beginning to focus on the 1st person simulator group. If they had designed it from the start as an arcadey 3rd person shooter, then that'd be one thing. But they didn't. It's a bit late in the development cycle to reshape the concept of the game, while at the same time infuriating the fan base you've built the game around. The same fan base you rely on to spread their opinions about how great the game is.

Edited by Johnny Human, 23 November 2012 - 05:06 PM.

[Billygoat]

KovarD, on 22 November 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

Garth: "Very emotional reaction from users in forums, we suggest they look at this logically like we have, and understand from a profit viability view that by having 3rd person view we may then be able to appeal to WoT's player base.."

We not have given enough logical reasons to not use 3rd person view?????

(Where did this quote come from?)

The problem with this approach to trying to appeal to World of Tanks' playerbase is that trying to 1:1 emulate World of Tanks is probably the wrong way to do it. Why? Because World of Tanks players already have World of Tanks. Why would they want to switch to a cheap imitation with WAY less content, much slower pace of development, more technical and balance issues, etc. when they already have the real McCoy that they are already invested in? You might get some who are really dissatisfied with WoT, but are those players really going to stick around in the knock-off World of Tanks-with-legs when they probably had good reasons for not wanting to play WoT anymore? Think, McFly, think!

It's like THQ pushing out Homefront as a cheap knock-off of Call of Duty and wondering why it failed when all the CoD kids didn't move to their game.

When I hear devs here talk about WoT and see the direct copypaste of pricing structure, client layout, game mode, etc. I actually cringe and feel genuinely embarrassed for PGI. It's that white kid at high school listening to Cypress Hill, talking like a "gangsta" and dressing in FUBU gear. It's just sad.

[Samantha]

Billygoat, on 23 November 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

(Where did this quote come from?)

The problem with this approach to trying to appeal to World of Tanks' playerbase is that trying to 1:1 emulate World of Tanks is probably the wrong way to do it. Why? Because World of Tanks players already have World of Tanks. Why would they want to switch to a cheap imitation with WAY less content, much slower pace of development, more technical and balance issues, etc. when they already have the real McCoy that they are already invested in? You might get some who are really dissatisfied with WoT, but are those players really going to stick around in the knock-off World of Tanks-with-legs when they probably had good reasons for not wanting to play WoT anymore? Think, McFly, think!

It's like THQ pushing out Homefront as a cheap knock-off of Call of Duty and wondering why it failed when all the CoD kids didn't move to their game.

When I hear devs here talk about WoT and see the direct copypaste of pricing structure, client layout, game mode, etc. I actually cringe and feel genuinely embarrassed for PGI. It's that white kid at high school listening to Cypress Hill, talking like a "gangsta" and dressing in FUBU gear. It's just sad.

quoted from deleted post probably, just like the post where Bryan E had a go at Kell Drayson for complaining. Otherwise would of been scrubbed long ago.

Amen to your post, couldn't of said it better.

[CutterWolf]

Billygoat, on 23 November 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

(Where did this quote come from?)

The problem with this approach to trying to appeal to World of Tanks' playerbase is that trying to 1:1 emulate World of Tanks is probably the wrong way to do it. Why? Because World of Tanks players already have World of Tanks. Why would they want to switch to a cheap imitation with WAY less content, much slower pace of development, more technical and balance issues, etc. when they already have the real McCoy that they are already invested in? You might get some who are really dissatisfied with WoT, but are those players really going to stick around in the knock-off World of Tanks-with-legs when they probably had good reasons for not wanting to play WoT anymore? Think, McFly, think!

It's like THQ pushing out Homefront as a cheap knock-off of Call of Duty and wondering why it failed when all the CoD kids didn't move to their game.

When I hear devs here talk about WoT and see the direct copypaste of pricing structure, client layout, game mode, etc. I actually cringe and feel genuinely embarrassed for PGI. It's that white kid at high school listening to Cypress Hill, talking like a "gangsta" and dressing in FUBU gear. It's just sad.

WOW! Just wow, let's see, in WoT's you can't just drive right threw another tank. Your tank "is" effected by terrain. Your weapons fire instantly when you click the fire button. Even the fastest tanks in the game "don't" have lag sheilds. All your "extras" you can buy for your tank function 100%. The tank lab works 100% of the time. It "has" destructible terrain. I could go on and on listing the things I wish MWO had that WoT does. So why as Billgoat state would they ever want to drop playing WoT to come play this? If that is the true reason for trying to add in 3dr person view they better have at least everything I listed above and then some if they want to try to pull that group to this game..........

Edited by CutterWolf, 23 November 2012 - 08:06 PM.

[Livebait]

NO 3rd person view. It is a stupid idea that does not belong in a SIMULATION game.

[Fiachdubh]

His reason is not valid, to help new players understand that the torso can twist? Show them a video or give us a manual, better yet a video manual. Or how about a practice mode where a player can hop in any mech and run around a barren area and see how the mech works, this could also be used to test builds, just throw in a mech mannequin to shoot at.
Sure they say they are only looking into the idea but we all know that means barring a massive community uprising it is going to happen.

I was not against its inclusion because in the podcast it was stated that there would be no advantage from extra view which has since been contradicted in a Dev post which I now cannot find where they discussed the implications of 3rd person. As for splitting the community between 1st and 3rd person there is hardly anyone online during the daytime GMT as it is, keep meeting the same people in drops.

Someone mentioned disabling dead players chat, that is ridiculous unless they can also stop the players on ts3 talking to each other when dead. Besides as you can only see through living teammates eyes there is no advantage.

This is still BETA so now is the time to try out new game ideas and I think people should remember that when going mad over bugs and unbalanced weapons etc., until beta ends and all aspects such as community warfare have been implemented (and fixed) we should give them slack as it is still in the testing and bug finding/fixing phase. Maybe they could do a trial run with various forms of 3rd person and see how it works. If it can be done without giving an advantage or splitting the community I have no problem with it.

Edited by Fiachdubh, 24 November 2012 - 12:13 PM.

[Munkerz]

I was listening to NGNG when I heard this was happening. I would have fallen to my knees as I cried "Noooooooooo" had I not been at work.
But after having the rest of the day to come to terms, I'm willing to see how it goes before I judge.
What I really hope for this is that it's going to be locked at a near-flat angle and maybe slightly over the shoulder as to reduce any advantage. If it's going in, this may need some heavy experimenting with placement to get right.

[Barsov]

UP!

No 3rd person! You guys should better work with game optimization to make MWO playable for more people.
And I am here not for another arcade online roboshooter.

Edited by Barsov, 24 November 2012 - 06:55 PM.

[StreakEagle]

3rd person view when in ride along- OK, not for those actually fighting. You can't see behind yourself in a cockpit, you shouldn't be able to in 3rd person view. Same with peeking over a building or hill in front of your mech.

Kribson, you crack me up, Talk about how to FUBAR the game...

[Broceratops]

new players find this game hard to play because you have no matchmaking, no ui, craptastic trial mechs, no in game lobby, LFG, or decent chat alternative.

i'm okay with 3rd person actually...i don't care about that one way or another. but it's not going to fix the new player experience. I fear it'll just be a waste of time, which PGI doesn't have.