3696 replies to this topic

[Terran123rd]

Like a Sir, on 15 November 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

That word immersion, I don't think it means what you think it means... We are playing as the mech warrior, the guy that drives giant stompy robots, not the guy who sits on top of the giant stompy robot, or a giant stompy robot that became self aware.

YOU are playing as the meat-puppet inside the giant stompy robot. I'M playing as the giant stompy robot itself; I don't care about the meat-puppet inside. That's like telling me that I play Halo to be the jelly inside the skull of the super-soldiers, when in reality, I'm playing it to be the super-soldier. Same thing here.

If you think that's wrong, be my guest. I care about how you immerse yourself about as little you probably care about how I do it, because that's your business. But you don't tell me how or what I play. That's my business.

[Leggin Ho]

1st or 3rd, so long as they are not allowed on the same server, as far as league drops go, that should be set up for that particular league or game types so that teams can choose, the hard core FFP teams will stay in FFP, the 3rd person teams will stay in the 3rd PV can play in 3rd PV. The truely hardcore MW pilots will play in both types and everyone will be happy.

A 360 strip would be awesome for FFP to help with that blind spot behind you, of course it should nto be as clear as the view screen. Then again 3rd PV should not allow you to see what's on the other side of the hill or arouns corners untill your sensors actually are above or around said obstical.

Let's see what the DEV's can come up with that would improve the diversity of game play and things that work we keep, things that don't we let them know and usually they will fix or scrap them.

[Ziko]

Can I report Russ for trolling?

This is just such a bad idea, I cant even beleive for a moment that he was seriuos about this.

The poll has spoken, over 91% of your player base says NO.
If you have such time and resource to spare on such a bad idea, how about using it instead on fixing the memory leak issue?

I did not complain about...
being force to group with strangers, LRM buff-nerf-nerf, no directX 11, game crashing bugs, PPC issue, MC being sky high, repair bug, armor bug, rearm bug, the double heat sinks, hit detection and the other 99 problems but I will sure in the world complain about you even bringing this up, let alone thinking about it.

Edited by Ziko, 15 November 2012 - 05:03 PM.

[Czardread]

Terran123rd, on 15 November 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

Your point, sir? Do you have one or are you just interested in flaming me? I have no intrest in "drolling' over my "paintjob". I have an interest in what allows me to immerse myself more in the game. I care about the 'mech, not the meat-puppet inside. The 'mech is my avatar, and I like to be able to see my avatar every once in a while.

However, an option in the mechlab to be able to just look at a mech would also be splendid.

I have no problem if said 3rd person view is done in a limited way (no special vision modes, small FOV, etc., etc.) Hel, that's how Battlefield does it.

I suggested adding the viewscreen as a way to counter the people who would inevitably try to use even that limited 3rd person to try to gain an advantage (because a munchkin is a munchkin is a munchkin) (which could easily also be countered by only showing the player what the pilot would see, ala World of Tanks. That way, there could be a whole furball going just beyond the ridge, but you wouldn't be able to see until you popped up or around.). It was also a way to nod to the canon (which PGI seems to want to hold to as closely as possible), and I even suggested paring it down to as little as 120 degrees, to still allow people to sneak up on you.

Hel, the viewscreen could probably stand to be implemented any way (and the ability to knock it out, of course).

I'll even understand if said 3rd person is taken away, or not implemented, and keep on playing anyway. I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't b|tch and moan like a lot of people seem to want to do about everything PGI does these days.

a view mode in mechlab would indeed be the best way to be able to enjoy the sight of your mech, but i really disagre about adding 3rd person view helping in immersion in any way, but okay, that's just my view.

but but as far as to implement 3rd person view ala WOT, might be a solution to people like you who just want to enjoy seeing its mech in action. to the people that "supposedly" want it to "enhance" gameplay, it will work the other way around. if he is so lazy as to not get the grip of torso twisting in a few matches, he will also be too lazy to figure it out that "hey, there are ghost mechs popping out of nowhere, what a cheap bugged game this is".

Not to mention that implementing the view system of WOT will take some netcoding, which is already full of holes as it is, until they make a viable 3rd person detect system, the error and bugs will problably take its toll on the number of players, wich will already suffer from the implementation itself, given the massive negative feedback of the voicing community.

in short, adding 3rd person view to "help" newbies learn to play will not work. adding a detect system ala WOT will take to long to work, and adding it just as it is will kill the game.

so, NO.

[wpmaura]

while your att it add aim bots too. Otherwise Horrible idea. for reasons stated.

[Mounty]

HELL NO. Page 81 How late am I.

[Billygoat]

FactorlanP, on 15 November 2012 - 04:48 PM, said:

Almost 2500 NO votes... I wonder if that is a big enough response yet? Or is it just that because we read the forums and care enough to participate in this discussion, that means we are just a vocal minority and the Devs will just ignore us and put 3rd person in anyway?

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.

[Czardread]

Terran123rd, on 15 November 2012 - 05:00 PM, said:

YOU are playing as the meat-puppet inside the giant stompy robot. I'M playing as the giant stompy robot itself; I don't care about the meat-puppet inside. That's like telling me that I play Halo to be the jelly inside the skull of the super-soldiers, when in reality, I'm playing it to be the super-soldier. Same thing here.

If you think that's wrong, be my guest. I care about how you immerse yourself about as little you probably care about how I do it, because that's your business. But you don't tell me how or what I play. That's my business.

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.

wpmaura, on 15 November 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

while your att it add aim bots too. Otherwise Horrible idea. for reasons stated.

agree completely. i also have a terrible time figuring out how to make my shoots hit at the target. a aim bot would help my "new player experience" quite a lot.

[MacKoga]

A classic 3rd person mode would negatively affect ambush tactics. I love ambush tactics, so please avoid this.

However, having a "combat simulator," perhaps in which everything is in simple wireframe, and in which game mechanic tutorials, jump jet challenges, and load-out/configuration basic testing could be done, would be a good thing, in which toggling 3rd person mode would 1) not affect PvP gameplay, and 2) make it feel to those who don't use it, that they're doing their entire house/corps a disservice by not using it for the big community warfare picture.

The concept that 3rd person really helps a new player understand mech legs is legitimate. Please just put that in a separate space from the actual, core game.


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.

[Josh Davion]

3rd Person View RUINED Mechwarrior 4: Mercenaries' Competition. It created a problem with Jump Sniping and the ability to look around corners without exposing yourself. It gave a more arcade feel as opposed to a simulation feel. It would take away from what Russ had originally said in his interviews, "This is a mech combat simulator."

[Mr Mantis]

I would love 3rd person... If you could only view it after you die, and there was no spector chat.

[EmGooser]

prox711, on 14 November 2012 - 04:40 AM, said:

Optional 3rd person mode forces everyone into using it for obvious reason. Which means the whiny playerbase wins again.
Solution: give people a TUTORIAL in 3rd person mode so they can get used to controlling their mech. Don't (ever) implement 3rd person view for the PvP part. Tnx.

100% agree here!

[Lane]

Someone link the video of the dea agent shooting himself in a classroom = pGI/iGP on 3rd person view.

Edited by Lane, 15 November 2012 - 05:26 PM.

[Boswelli]

tenderloving, on 15 November 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

Your scenario breaks down because what will happen here is "Burger King" will devote their already limited resources to "pizza," and "hamburgers" will become low priority. There is also the fact that "Burger King" attracted investors and supporters with promises of being an exclusive "burger" establishment, and then suddenly decided to start making "pizza" as well.

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!

Edited by Boswelli, 15 November 2012 - 05:25 PM.

[Windies]

They got your $120 or $60 or $30. Now they want another demographics money, the type of people who will spend spend spend like in World of Tanks. They promised the moon, and ended up going back on most of their promises. They haven't gotten the turnout that they expected at OB, now they think arcadifying the game and making it easier will make it more accessable to new players. If this doesn't rake in more money, expect more arcade implementations like this until the game folds or they get an acceptable user base. With the state of the game as it is and the way it is ran, I would be more inclined to believe it will fold before it gets an acceptable userbase.

[Zeus X]

miSs, on 15 November 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

The only thing I can say, as your Community Rep, is that I read and compile your feedback.

And what is the result of this feedback?

[ManusDei]

It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks if the game developers think it should be in the game it will be....just like when they said people should not be stacking gauss rifles in the catapult or double ac/20 people still do it. And like any other feature they develop people will still always use it to beat the system to get an unfair advantage on the opponent. 3rd person view was a goode idea at the time but really needs to be put out to pasture. Really guys? your only excuse is because people are having difficulty driving a mech? really? Are you listening to yourself? Take away the challenge of the game and it becomes nothing but another watered down wanna be simulator.

[Mongoose Trueborn]

Windies, on 15 November 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

They got your $120 or $60 or $30. Now they want another demographics money, the type of people who will spend spend spend like in World of Tanks. They promised the moon, and ended up going back on most of their promises. They haven't gotten the turnout that they expected at OB, now they think arcadifying the game and making it easier will make it more accessable to new players. If this doesn't rake in more money, expect more arcade implementations like this until the game folds or they get an acceptable user base. With the state of the game as it is and the way it is ran, I would be more inclined to believe it will fold before it gets an acceptable userbase.

So sad but true.

[Targun Darklighter]

well honestly Dev do what u feels need to be done. bottom line is Y'all run the game. if people don't like then they can un install game and go away.

[Brien]

First they split the player base due to unfounded pug QQ, now they want to split the player base because they did not do proper instuctions or make a playable tutorial. Funny how they do this after stating MWO is a mech combat sim and Founders have no recourse to obtain a refund. If they gave a shiat about the players who helped them with a huge influx of cash they would not do it. All we can do is post our complaints in this thread and not show our displeasure in the pocket where it would really matter. Thanks for lying PGI, and telling us this is beta only works in closed beta. My understanding from years of gaming since dial up was that open beta means almost gold or launch ready. What the hell, ceiling mech is watching you kill our game.