3696 replies to this topic

[Kunae]

DraigUK, on 16 November 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

Anything to split the player base in its infancy is bad. No.

I agree.

[Pappy]

I beg of you not to do this. You will be upsetting the true player base that is willing to invest in the game. In my unit alone you are talking about 50 to 75% of our players ready to move on.

[Randall Flagg]

"Please give constructive feedback by being clear and concise on what your opinions/concerns are about this feature."

No 3rd Person view.

"Leave the Mechwarrior 4 ER Large Laser Nova Cats in the past. "

If you implement 3rd Person in any form, refund my money.

GG.

[Bogsveigir]

When I first heard of this, my initial reaction was that I am completely against it. Bad memories of 3rd person cheesings past.

When I finally got a chance to hear Russ talk about it, and his reasoning, and the option to not launch against people playing in 3rd person, I had to change my opinion.

I am completely neutral but supportive of it. I am neutral on the issue, now, because while it doesn't sound appealing, I won't be forced to use it, or to play against people using it. It makes as much difference to me as if I were playing against someone wearing a salad bowl on their head.

I am supportive because the reasoning behind the decision is sound.

• It allows people to see the mech they are piloting.
  
• It allows the new person to see what torso twist means as they learn.
  
• It shows why you need to learn to pilot well, when they can see that things happen behind them as well as ahead.

Practice radical lagom.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Eisenkopf, on 16 November 2012 - 08:11 AM, said:

How about you vent your anger in another direction, aka as PGI, instead of making baseless accusations (where's the arrogance when I insist that a minority opinion is just as valuable as that of the majority?) and assumptions (where is the info that you will have to play against arrogant 3rdPV noobs like me at a disadvantage?). And yes, much to your relief, I am strongly considering not playing MWO. Now, does that save your weekend?

WoT has 3PV and so this game is not for me and I'll never play, but I'd never come up with the idea of going to a WoT forum and scream for a FPV only mode!
I supported PGI financially because they promised a simulation with only FPV, if I pay a hot coffee, I will not get a glass of cold water because cold water is easier to drink, and they wanted to attract new customers

Edited by Ghost, 16 November 2012 - 12:08 PM.
Snip!

[Freeride Forever]

IceSerpent, on 14 November 2012 - 10:47 AM, said:

*sigh* Would a simple "worst idea ever" suffice, or does PGI really need us to elaborate on the reasons despite the fact that those reasons have been known for at least a decade?

Ice, you've already said all that should need to be said, but PGI seems to be lacking in the clue department. Maybe they should hire more people in that area. So even though I figure there's a high probablity that the 1790 posts on the topic have covered all I'm about to say, I also figure the more they hear it, the more likely they are to get it.

I just listened to the bogus interview where the game was being praised & how the launch went so well & all that bull$h|t. The argument for 3rd person perspectives is that the torso twist is the hardest thing to learn. PGI, you were even told in the interview that all you have to do is explain that it's a walking tank & you still think that that's not good enough?

The problem is not a lack of 3rd person view, the problem is NO FU<KING TUTORIAL!!! How many times do you have to be told?!!! Are we talking to a brick wall? New players are more frustrated & turned off by a lack of complete information on the game, INTEGRATED INTO THE GAME, game breaking bugs & no content!

Why with all that is wrong with this thing are you talking about something so stupid? Is it because you don't really know how to fix all the bugs in it? So you're going to waste some more time on some more dumb $h|t?

Is this supposed to be a sim? People don't float behind things they pilot, they pilot from inside. If you want to put something like this in the game then you either integrate it into the (currently non-existent) tutorial level where it could be helpful to new players & leave it in the tutorial, or you keep those players out of the matches where all the real MechWarriors are. A 3rd person view allows a level of awareness that 1st person can't. In 3rd person you can see around corners without exposing yourself, you can see where enemy fire is coming from all around the mech & you can see what the terrain is like all around the mech.

If you want to enable it for trial mechs while keeping trial pilots in matches only with other trial pilots then fine. Keep it out've the real battles with real MechWarriors. If you did nothing more than fix your broke as fu<k matchmaker so that trial mechs only went against trials, and/or skill/XP/play time were the primary criteria for matching mechs then you'd have a more satisfied group of new players right there. They can't learn much if I've killed them in 60 seconds or less 'cuz I'm a fu<kin' baws.

Even just stressing the importance of PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE would be a huge leap forward. First time the game starts up for a newly created account, stick it in their face. Just a page that explains what we're all about. BAM! Right there you've given new players a piece of a first impression that will stick with them to induce a level of patience that probably doesn't exist very often otherwise. Then accompany that with a tutorial level & a test arena for builds before buying & proper stats in the ML.

So speaking of the matchmaker, broke as fu<k, like so many other things in this seemingly dev forsaken mess. If you're gonna integrate this bogus idea (3PP) so that it's not as fu<ked up as possible, can you even do it without fu<king the MM even more? It already doesn't work, it already doesn't make matches based on skill & experience & it still can't manage to reliably put together 2 teams of 8. If it does then 1 person on either team DC's to take care of that (probably from CTD).

You have CTD, freezing, broken & incomplete MechLab, maps with base outlines where a base isn't supposed to be, memory leak, disappearing HUDs, huge amounts of missing content, only one game mode with fu<k all to do, only 4 small maps, no lobby, broken in-game chat window while spectating, do I need to keep going here, because YOU BETTER BELIEVE I FU(KING COULD!!!

Fix your broken $h|t first. Then what you do if you have a clue is you start a poll, or a thread, or both, asking new players what their greatest concerns are & what they'd most like to see, if new player opinion has now become a concern after ignoring what you were told by all of us prior to OB. You present that feedback opportunity via a big fat button in-game (like maybe next to the "BUY MC" button?). You need to make it easy for new, less concerned players to give their feedback. They likely aren't a fu<king crazy zealous mouthpiece about this thing like I am! I'll bet you a 3rd person perspective isn't even on the list for most of them compared to everything else that this thing lacks right now.

I want to clarify some things here that I think you need to hear if you haven't already.

MWO is compared to Hawken, agree or disagree it's the way it is. Hawken is a simpler Q3 Arena kind of game with goofy magical BS that is easier to learn & although I play it very little, what it looks like to me is that they've watched the way you are fu<king up & making sure not to do the same. Hawken will have on 12/12/12:

- In-game integrated VOIP that works, despite not being a team only game.
- Tutorial level (not movie, A LEVEL!!!) despite being an easy game to learn. (A movie is good, but players learn better when they can "feel" it, accompanied by instruction. Same as learning anything. Experience with instruction, followed by PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE FTW!
- Chat window in their mech lab. Just noticed it last time I played.
- At least 4 maps (even though they all look the same) & 4 modes.
- Skill based match making, selectable servers & it looks like EU servers as well.
- Most importantly, a stable platform. I don't play it much 'cuz I find it boring. I like MW & that's why I b|tch so much here, but Hawken works with no major issues every time I play it. When it opens as a beta, it will be a real beta. They will probably deliver new content similarly as MWO does, but their beta is a real beta & their new content will come in finished form without the eternal excuses about why the FUBAR. Their Alpha worked far better than MWO does right now. Even MWO worked better in August than it does now. As time progresses, Hawken progresses. 2 days pass, 2 steps forward. For MWO, at worst, 2 days pass, 2 steps backward. Commonly in MWO, 2 days pass, 2 steps along the circle back to where it already was.

All I can do is observe & then formulate my own thoughts, but from what I've been seeing, it looks to me like Adhesive games might be paying better attention to the MWO community than you are. You guys have spent what I suspect to be way too much time fu<king with weapon & equipment balances that new players will never really give a $h|t about. Once they know how to play, they'd know how to handle those things that the fanatics b|tch about. Too much time on too many things with too little relevance to the biggest problems the way I see it. 3rd person perspectives are just another example. Even if MWO were feature complete & bug free, it'd (3PP) still be needless, unrealistic & therefore dumb as dumb can be.

Sometimes I wonder if this isn't more like politics than game development. Maybe even a bit of "magic" thrown in for good measure. Some misdirection accompanied by some new info & comforting words to try to quell the outrage at issues appearing to be ignored. What's the deal? Do you feel you've actually got a polished piece of work here that really only lacks something it doesn't need in the first place? Get off of it. It's a dumb idea & a stupid question.

Just 'cuz it's a stupid question doesn't mean I'm not glad it was asked. Just because we all b|tch about what's wrong doesn't mean we don't appreciate what's right. If you weren't doing anything right, none of us would be playing & we certainly wouldn't be posting our sometimes harsh opinions.

So why don't you forget about this 3rd person bull$h|t & go adjust some more weapon values or something?

Edited by Freeride Forever, 16 November 2012 - 09:13 AM.

[Skythe]

First off, please do not implement 3PV. It has been said many times by many people this just opent the doors to the peeping around corners and rear view which gives tactical advantage to those using it over those of us who won't.

I completely agree that what we really need is a training mode / tutorial if the new player experience is what you're looking to improve. I started playing at the beginning of Open Beta and I will admit, my first few games I had a horrible time with torso twist and moving one direction while looking another. Given just a short time from then until now with some practice I have learned to take full advantage of this feature and I absolutely love being able to use it. A tutorial would have made this learning curve (which is extremely steep as is) much smaller where I would have been able to practice for a time instead of dying 15 seconds into a match because I walked straight into the enemy while looking at my own hind end. It's all about practice and while I had to get mine in full on combat the opportunity to do so without getting shot would alleviate most of the problems. Enough beating the dead horse.

If it is found to be avsolutely necessary that you introduce a 3PV, several things to consider. MWO is a game all about tactical advantage from what I have observed. If you give advantage to one playstyle, i.e. the ability to see behind and around corners then to even the field they should also lose the advantage we get from a first person view. Remove the radar, the armor readout and the enemy mech status indicator. While retaining the ability to lock on a target those in 3PV should have none of the advantages a HUD brings so there is no way to determine if that Atlas just locked on to is full armor or 1 shot away from being cored. Third person view should be cut down to a very minimal HUD, showing only crosshairs, Compas and weapon groupings (remove ammo counts here as well). While they gain the advantage of wider view they also gain the disability of losing all the tech we who are looking out of our cocpit retain.

[RaNDoMPReCiSioN]

To play in 3rd person view would spoil the game. It's only pandering to the console jockeys. A single player story mode would be more interesting I guess. No problem using 3rd person in SP mode, just for the videos, but multiplayer must remain a 1st person sim.

At the end of the day it won't really put me up or down as I'll only be using 1st person view. It's the way it's meant to be. Take this from a massive fan of MW3. Also agree the 3D moving paper doll from that version would work well in this one.

Edited by RaNDoMPReCiSioN, 16 November 2012 - 08:57 AM.

[Ornonge]

Since most of the points i would mention for not implementing 3PV has already been said i just go with:

I'm against 3PV.

[AvatarofWhat]

Is it really so hard to understand what we have been saying all along? Put in an actual tutorial, not just some video. Players learn by practicing, and nothing is better for a beginner then practicing in a stress free environment like a tutorial. 3rd person view is a horrible mistake that is going to alienate the current fanbase that was promised a 1st person mech simulator. I doubt it would even help a person that can't understand torso twisting learn how to do so much better. 3rd person isn't needed and over 91% of the current playerbase does not want it. If you want new players to learn to play quickly, then put in a real tutorial.

[Buckminster]

I completely understand why the "new player experience" isn't as good as you'd want. MWO incorporates a lot of play elements that people don't find in most other shooters. Someone coming from Halo or Team Fortress or World of Tanks is going to have a hard time adapting to the controls.

Most games don't use a throttle.
Most games don't have a torso twist.
Most games don't require different keys to fire different weapon groups.
Most games do have a play-through tutorial to teach you the controls.

So I can totally see the confusion of the new player. You drop into a trial mech, and hit "W" to tear off running. You pan your mouse to turn - only you don't actually turn. You let off "W" to stop, and you keep on running. Every time you left click you fire EVERYTHING, and in two to three shots you've already overheated. You hit 'Q' to try and change weapons, and it doesn't work. You don't realize "R" actually does anything - why do I need to target lock when I can just look at them, why are my LRMs missing?

But I don't think the answer is to simplify the game. The answer is in a training mode tutorial. Something that explains what all of those lights and symbols in your cockpit mean. And I know that there is a lot of good info in the forums, but who wants to read a bunch of forum posts just to play a game? I want to be able to download it and go.

[WolfinExile]

Squidhead Jax, on 15 November 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

And how long until the people who supposedly can't learn to drive from a 1st-person perspective* start ******** en masse about not being able to see and shoot partial and distant 'mechs like you can from 1st person as implemented, and we end up with WoT's braindead ghost-tanks system in all views? Not a solution.

*I guess they walk into walls and such a lot IRL, if they lose track of torso and legs...

I am addressing the issues inherent with adding 3rd person perspective, not judging newbies or whether they'll get the hang of first person mech piloting or whether they'll complain about not being able to see enemies not in their LoS while in 3rd person view.
YOU might personally have no problem with the mech's handling, but new players are very frustrated over this, system, who are used to FPS games being like counter-strike or CoD, being able to turn on a dime and not having to deal with torso twisting.

I have a couple of IRL friends who lost interest after a few matches because of this problem, not to mention being destroyed repeatedly while trying to fight the controls, heat management, weapon groups and everything else.

Like it or not, PGI also has to make allowances for new players to expand their player base as well.

[Teirdome]

A large portion of the Mech vanity that third person view supports is achievable without allowing the player to play in third person. The easiest example is the countdown at the start of a match. Prior to the match starting, the camera should be in third person slowly circling the Mech as it does basic movements such as minor torso twisting and arm adjustment as if calibrating. As the countdown nears completion, the camera should circle up to the head and settle back (literally backwards if you don't want to have to model the 360 degree cockpit) into first person.

A simple introduction each match gives a player:

• Some idea that the torso, arms, and legs all work independently of each other.
  
• A view of their sick-*** Mech that they worked hard to purchase and customize.

Other introductions that could be done with a third person camera include:

• Stationary glamorous shots of the player's Mech that the camera jumps between. (My favorite is the up-the-nose view of the Atlas from actual human height).
  
• Fly-over of the team.
  
• Moving into the player's mech from high elevation.

Similar third person post-match cameras can be implemented. Shots of the players defeated or victorious mech with the score screen overlaid are vastly more engaging.

These approaches can be easily taken to achieve the vanity portion that is desired of the third person view and do not require third person for play. As an added bonus, they would also greatly improve the game's presentation which can be very flat at the start and end of matches.

[MossDog]

Please do not add in a 3rd person view. All the reasons have been stated before, and other ways to teach new players have been stated as well. It is ALWAYS advantageous to play a game in 3rd person so that you have a better FoV. I don't want to fly off the handle and be like "OMG IMMA QUIT NOW!" but it would certainly make the game less fun for my if it was implemented. This is a strange issue that you (the developer) are having. You have talked about adding a feature. Spending time and money to program and test it, and the player base is begging you not to do it. You should be happy, it's something you don't have to program and implement!

[tenderloving]

Robdillard, on 16 November 2012 - 06:03 AM, said:

I can understand why PGI is looking into this for options. Despite my strong feelings against it.

It clearly worked well in world of tanks. I was very often moving the camera around to get the best possible angle for battle.

If PGI feels this is needed for player introduction,3rd person might have a place in a tutorial section which the game sorely needs.

Handling of these mechs is similiar to tanks. World of tanks had 3rd person view all the time. It also had a training mode. That would be the perfect place for getting people familiar with how their mech handles.

I really do not want 3rd person in the main combat. If it has to be done I wll probably ultimately still play the game but it wouldnt be the same game I have come to enjoy. Which would also result in a careful monitoring or completely not spending my mc I have until I believe the game is where I want to invest further funds.

World of Tanks is not a simulator, it was not billed as a simulator, it never collected revenue from Founders as a simulator.

[Hawker]

3rd person in combat should be omitted. Mechwarrior computer games have been around for a long time and was always and should always be 1st person. 3rd person is not wanted, needed or part of the franchise. If you want to create a 3rd person game, call it something else.

[Like a Sir]

CSJ Ranger, on 16 November 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

WoT has 3PV and so this game is not for me and I'll never play, but I'd never come up with the idea of going to a WoT forum and scream for a FPV only mode!
I supported PGI financially because they promised a simulation with only FPV, if I pay a hot coffee, I will not get a glass of cold water because cold water is easier to drink, and they wanted to attract new customers

nice and brief, and be well put!

[tenderloving]

Bogsveigir, on 16 November 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

When I first heard of this, my initial reaction was that I am completely against it. Bad memories of 3rd person cheesings past.

When I finally got a chance to hear Russ talk about it, and his reasoning, and the option to not launch against people playing in 3rd person, I had to change my opinion.

I am completely neutral but supportive of it. I am neutral on the issue, now, because while it doesn't sound appealing, I won't be forced to use it, or to play against people using it. It makes as much difference to me as if I were playing against someone wearing a salad bowl on their head.

I am supportive because the reasoning behind the decision is sound.

• It allows people to see the mech they are piloting.
  
• It allows the new person to see what torso twist means as they learn.
  
• It shows why you need to learn to pilot well, when they can see that things happen behind them as well as ahead.

Practice radical lagom.

Basically your post reveals that you drank the kool-aid.

Here's what is going to happen in the real world:

1. 3rd person rolls out in a limited "beginner" fashion.
2. 3rd person players begin to whine that they are left out of community warfare and other competitive events.
3. PGI slowly starts taking down the walls between 1st and 3rd person
4. The game is now a 3rd person game.

Don't buy into the PR ********. If you read any of Russ's interviews you can practically hear the buffer machine running as it polishes the ****. Think about the open beta announcement; it was all sunshine and sparkles about what would have been one of the worst decisions in the history of online gaming. (No hyperbole, I'm serious.)

TLDR: Don't believe everything that a PR specialist tells you. Think about their motives for saying the things they say.

[Country Gravy]

decline of mwo. This could be where the game really starts to turn into what the fans were scared of. Armored Core: Battletech Edition. Maybe a playable tutorial instead of youtube vids would fix the problem cheaper and more effectively.

[tenderloving]

Country Gravy, on 16 November 2012 - 09:26 AM, said:

decline of mwo. This could be where the game really starts to turn into what the fans were scared of. Armored Core: Battletech Edition. Maybe a playable tutorial instead of youtube vids would fix the problem cheaper and more effectively.

It's not really a problem though, it's an excuse. A crappy excuse. This is why we haven't seen any response. I'm sure they were expecting backlash, but developers often underestimate gamers' ability to pick apart nonsense.