3696 replies to this topic

[DraigUK]

If I wanted to play WoT I would. No to 3rd person. One of the reasons (one of the main reasons) I bought into MWO was because they kept going on about how true they were going to stay to it being a sim and not dumb it down. This made it different, this made me join and pay.

Splitting a small playerbase into two camps would make it even smaller.

I won't even get into the advantages it gives you in 3rd person compared to 1st person.

And the reasons given for wanting to do it in the first place "new people can't drive a mech, this would make it easier" make me sick to my stomach that they are pandering to windowlickers who wouldn't know which end of a pen you write with and have trouble finding their own country on a map.

[Smoke39]

I think 3rd person is a terrible idea. I can understand concerns over new players, but 3rd person isn't the answer. Mechwarrior's a complex game; 3rd person isn't gonna change that. It'll also split the player base, and split development efforts across two different play styles that'll have their own unique balance considerations.

If new players are having a hard time getting to grips with the controls, then teach them. You can start with simply allowing players to run around in an empty map to play around with controls, then gradually build up to a proper interactive tutorial. Frankly, I'm kind of baffled that a 3rd person option would be considered as a solution before any kind of tutorial or training mode has even been implemented.

[Vollstrecker]

No.

If you need detailed reasons why, you can use your own forum search feature as this has been discussed to death 50+ times in Beta.

[Jetfire]

This should be limited to the implementation of REPLAY, Post Death and Training Simulations with ONE caveat. If you implement a UAV pilot skill and System that can be balanced, then you can add it to the in game experience.

Otherwise you are driving a fundamental rift in the community. Please consider the UAV as the ultimatum. It can be made balanced versus other systems with weight, duration and video feed lag. Without a trade off it is a serious problem and dividing a F2P community is a death knell.

[LogicSol]

From the Pod Cast Russ implied that 3rd person was coming to help new players figure out how their mechs work.

That the biggest problem new players had was figureing out the relationship between their torso and their legs.

If that is the case, restrict 3rd person view to trial mechs.
This way new players can have an additional view to help them along, while keeping 3rd person from becoming a requirement in normal play and preventing a splitting of the player base.

3rd person should also be HUDless, maybe with the radar view so they can see the relation between the minimap indicators and their legs.

[Virisken]

pls pls plllls dont do it..

[Kill3rAce]

No please do not bring 3rd person to this game. Mech Assault was one of the worst games ever in the Mech Universe Overall, you have a done a wonderful job with 1st person. The game needs plenty of work. Please do not distract from your originals goals for the future. I paid $60 bucks thinking it would be 1st person for life and you had a direction you would stick with. Please do not stray to far from that.

Thanks, Paying Customer

[Purlana]

Taizan, on 14 November 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

Well - it seems this is a major problem to players introduced to the game and they are taking a solution to introduce these players to the game, which will automatically increase the longevity of MWO. I think everyone who is enjoying the game no matter what "skill" should embrace this approach.

Add a tutorial, 3rd person view is just a baindaid fix for the syptoms.

A tutorial is the correct solution to the problem. As a bonus a tutorial covers several issues, not just torso twisting.

If PGI thinks that torso twisting is the only issue new players have trouble with they are saddly mistaken!

Edited by Purlana, 14 November 2012 - 01:21 PM.

[Kargush]

My opinion on the question of 3rd person view is this:

Short answer, no.

Long answer, nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

[Soy]

Alois Hammer, on 14 November 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

Cuts both ways- don't ruin it for the people who have supported Mechwarrior in its various incarnations for decades just to try and coax a few console twitch junkies (who'll leave as quickly as they show up next week when some new game comes out) on board.

Was MechCommander in FPS? Heh.

Vollstrecker, on 14 November 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

No.

If you need detailed reasons why, you can use your own forum search feature as this has been discussed to death 50+ times in Beta.

That's like saying every single thing that was important was discussed in beta and only players from beta had any input worth merit.

PS - Anyone arguing about "I PAID MONEY SO XYZ" that argument is asinine - you can make this exact same argument the other way around.

Edited by Soy, 14 November 2012 - 01:22 PM.

[Tickdoff Tank]

Kribson, on 14 November 2012 - 04:47 AM, said:

They should absolutley introduce 3rd person for the people that have problems steering their mech. Moreover there should be an option to activate an aim bot for people having problems with that. Another great idea would be a to add an infinite ammo and armor mode, cause i noticed some people find it difficult to evade enemy fire...

Whatever you do...in the end the game should become as boring and least challenging as possible

You forgot about respawns.

[Attalward]

My feedback is NO to 3RD person.
Many posts in this thread explains why: Loss of immersion, game imbalance, splitting player base if option to chose, etc etc.

And many others give solutions: like the training area, include a tutorial, give players a free mech so they get hooked and want to learn by themselves, etc etc.

So please do not include a 3rd person view.

[TruePoindexter]

DeathofSelf, on 14 November 2012 - 12:42 PM, said:

At first I thought you were advocating how the controls were not that hard, then I got to your second paragraph. Then I laughed, and cried a little. Really? Is it that hard to have and understand weapon groups? And a torso that can twist independently from your legs? Is it that hard to understand the difference between the 2 reticles? It seriously blows my mind that any of this is too complicated for people.... "Oh my god, you mean I have to think about what I'm doing? Screw that, this game is too hard"

Seriously. Read what you just said out loud to someone else. Doesn't your tone and dismissive language make you feel just a little uncomfortable? It certainly made me cringe. Just because it's straightforward and easy to understand for you does not make it easy for someone else. Put yourself in someone else's shoes for a minute and you'll appreciate a very different view of the world.

SendMyRegards, on 14 November 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

Whoa now, this is not "Worlds more complex." We're talking the difference between a game where you look, move, and shoot all in the same direction and MWO introduces a definitely not new concept in "you can aim in a direction different than you are looking." Does this concept seriously confuse people? You bring up a good point though, the arms is definitely something that you have to get used to but as I originally said: Getting used to the arms is not best handled by 3rd person, it is better handled by tutorials and a robust newbie friendly introduction.

You see, none of this is really explained by PGI in the game environment. You have to go to a website and watch videos to have it explained to you. But people don't want to do that, they hop into the game like most people and go "damn this is confusing and hard." If instead there was a tutorial leel where you could go and learn and have BB explain **** to you it would be different. So I understand their concerns, but that doesn't mean the controls are difficult by any stretch of the imagination.

So stop blowing the controls out of proportion like operating a mech with a mouse and keyboard is the gaming equivalent of open heart surgery.

it's the sum of the whole system that makes it complex. My example was about aiming because that honestly was all I was willing to type. A full description of all of the game controls would take awhile to type and still not handle concepts like heat, weapon loadout, and role warfare.

PGI does need to add more tutorials and training but that doesn't change the fact that Russ's first hand experience says it all. He noted that time and time again at trade shows where media and new players who had no experience with prior Mechwarrior games played MWO the invariable struggled with movement. He then noted that World of Tanks addresses the same issue simply with the ability to toggle the camera. That's all that's being proposed.

[Tumal]

I'll be honest here, I'd never use it...Ever. The big concern really boils down to an issue of balance. Is the 3rd person view going to have a better view of the battlefield? will they be able to see over a building in front of them that a 1st person view wouldn't? Are they going to be able to pilot an Atlas and see the Jenner at their feet clearly? Are they going to have an edge seeing over the hill in front of them, or seeing more real estate to their sides than a 1st person view?

The answer should be no to all of these questions, which in turn makes it hard to build such a view. Such a view providing a visual advantage would be wrong, though I find it unlikely that the design would end up that way.

As far as the other complaints I have heard here and elsewhere:
-Unwieldly: Don't use it.
-Catering to Bads/Casuals: They're going to be "bads/casuals" in the eyes of the judging either way, I fail to see how this is a problem for anyone that's "Hardcore".
-Diminishes Immersion: Don't use it. Let's face it, immersion is very low on the priority list for a lot of players who just want to make jokes in /all and fire big guns.

Anyone that would be flagged by a competitive player as "non-challenging" in 1st person view isn't going to be more or less challenging in 3rd person view as long as the view is balanced. It becomes a video settings preference at that point. I think a lot of the people requesting a 3rd person view are expecting a wide-angle 3rd person view. This is a view that shouldn't be allowed for visual advantage reasons, and simply changing matchmaking to reflect a grouping of 1st only, 3rd only, or both as choices seems like a poor way to mitigate the problems that can be caused by this.

TL;DR - Never going to use it, probably should be scrapped.

[zorak ramone]

Just wanted to add, in case it hadn't been mentioned before, that the Battlefield games had tanks (and mechs in 2142) with a turret that rotated independent of the body, and no 3rd person. People figured out how to use those just fine. Noone was asking for 3rd person.

EDIT: in fact, I can't think of a modern FPS-ish game with vehicles that allows 3rd person. Maybe this is just my lack of game playing depth. Can anyone else think of one?

Also, if 3rd person is added, I'd probably give up entirely on MWO.

Edited by zorak ramone, 14 November 2012 - 01:23 PM.

[BellatorMonk]

Simply put.."No". This is supposed to be a cockpit view based mech simulator. Not a 3rd person drop down RTS.

Being able to see 360 around your mech completely changes the dynamic of the game play.

Avoiding radar as tactic would become useless.

[endeceive]

One other idea - how about a more explicit torso angle display, like what WoT has? They show you a top-down icon of your tank, and then draw your turret on top of it.

See the bottom left corner of this image:
http://i82.photobuck...02/shot_096.jpg

That is much more user-friendly than the current triangles on the screen.

This would of course be incorporated into the in game tutorial

[Tickdoff Tank]

3rd person view would be detrimental to the game. It is not needed, nor is is wanted. There are far more important issues to be addressed than 3rd person view. Make this game the best that you can. If that means including 3rd person view, then it will not be the game for me, nor for most of the people that I see on the forums or in the game itself.

[Z0MBIE Y0SHI]

'No' hit quad digits before anything else hit triple.

I know the forums can't always accurately give the opinion of an entire player base, but this should say something.

[Soy]

zorak ramone, on 14 November 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Just wanted to add, in case it hadn't been mentioned before, that the Battlefield games had tanks (and mechs in 2142) with a turret that rotated independent of the body, and no 3rd person. People figured out how to use those just fine. Noone was asking for 3rd person.

There WAS 3rd person camera in BF series, in addition to another "seat" (you referred to as a turret that could be swung around).

Edited by Soy, 14 November 2012 - 01:25 PM.