21 replies to this topic

[Dagger6T6]

I gotta say I jumped on the doom and gloom 3rd person bashing along with everyone else yesterday. Instead of instantly gathering up my pitchfork and torch what I should have done was actually go and listen to the full length of the podcast, but no, I caught the forum fever like so many others.

The way 3rd person was brought up in the interview was not quite as sinister and foreboding as it is being made out to be on the forums. Also there was a number of great points brought up, about welcoming new players and their experience, and why new non battletech veteran players are needed. 3rd person happened to be mentioned as one of the POSSIBLE ideas, along with POSSIBLE ways to implement it to make all parties happy. Actually for me that interview restored a little faith in what is going at PGI... I still think they get it, they want Mechwarrior to succeed, they want it to be as popular as it was back in the day.
Maybe Russ is making the good sale and I've got ocean front property in Nebraska, but nothing concrete was stated saying that 3rd person view was going to be a sure thing. and not every little change that PGI does that we may not agree with means PGI is a corporate monster out to destroy the Battletech IP. I know we have been burned by other companies in the past *coughEAcough* so some of us a naturally wary or distrustful. So we come to the forums to feed our conspiracy theories.

Russ also made some very blunt comments about how people behave on the forums and their general attitude behind their forum persona, which also garnered a little more respect from me. That section of the podcast itself is worth a listen. They realize that the fanbase is about as passionate as any out there, but alot of this forum trashing, "the sky is falling, PGI hates me, I hate PGI, I want a refund" mode is not doing any good at all really.

And I myself am going to try my best not to be part of that negative snarky attitude. I'm pretty sarcastic and there is a time and place for it, but I think the best way to change the game, is to first change ourselves. Russ said we need to "take the emotion out of it" and I agree... If we are really interested in making this the game we want and the game PGI wants, and for this game to have longevity and be successful financially for PGI and also have great returns for us as players then it's time for us to do this. If we truly are beta testers interested in making the game better, then we need constructive criticism presented in a professional manner.

Edited by Dagger6T6, 15 November 2012 - 08:07 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Except for the part where they promised and said quite clearly this game would be a first-person, tactical sim-shooter, right?

But now we're getting 3rd person to 'welcome new players.' Oh, okay.

[Aegis Kleais]

The world can use less drama queens. Drama queens use emotion for their responses rather than logic. Whenever a small change comes out that they disprove of, they feel that exploding with insults is the best course of action, when all it ends up doing is (rightfully) getting ignored by the devs, and mocked by the community.

[Scratx]

Okay.

Third Person as presented is a solution to a symptom of a problem that can be solved easily by providing new players with an actual tutorial mission, possibly along with a proving ground type of map for people to practice movement, marksmanship and test mech builds.

Does this work for you? Because I think this is a good summing up of what a LOT of people are saying.

[Arumi Ornaught]

I 100% agree with you.

[RG Notch]

Yes they realize that they got the money from the fanbase and now they can ignore us and what they previously said and look to attract new players no matter what it does to the gameplay most of us signed up and paid for. The more they say how loyal we are the more I realize they think that means we will simply take what they do and say please sir can I have some more. Loyalty is a two way street.

[Lord Ikka]

Meh. I don't really care about the third-person view. If implemented right, it will simply be an over-the-shoulder view without a HUD or reticule. Useful for looking at your Mech, or around in general, but not useful in a battle at all.

I do think the doom and gloom approach by many forum members is depressing. PGI is trying to make a game, not trash the BT universe. Granted, some things will be different or change- that is how the world works. Everyone would be complaining that there is no innovation if PGI just made Mechwarrior 5 with better graphics but no other changes. Let them do their work, post constructive criticism not troll threads, and enjoy what we've got right now.

[Broceratops]

I also think it is highly overblown. Pretty much like the DHS thing last week, which you don't hear anything about anymore.

My only concern is that unless there are a lot of players, splitting the community between 3rd person players and 1st person players isn't a smart thing to do.

[Arumi Ornaught]

Vassago Rain, on 15 November 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Except for the part where they promised and said quite clearly this game would be a first-person, tactical sim-shooter, right?

But now we're getting 3rd person to 'welcome new players.' Oh, okay.

I could see 3rd person not being in ranked or community warfare. Where the majority of people would spend their time. The 3rd person could be just for the people who want a big stompy robot game, while at the same time give us less worry about the 'lone wolf' type of person where it would matter.

I wouldn't want a game that is custom tailored to me because that wouldn't be very fun to play. Mostly because no one else would play it. It is all about compromise and balance with video games.

Chill, nothing is final yet.

PS, if you want a sim mech game I expect a 1000 page instruction manual and it would require to have a POD to play in.

[Taryys]

I lisitened to it as well, but the underlying issue is not 3rd person the answer.

This post is the answer: How To Reduce The Grind And Create A Great New User Experience

[Dagger6T6]

Vassago Rain, on 15 November 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Except for the part where they promised and said quite clearly this game would be a first-person, tactical sim-shooter, right?

But now we're getting 3rd person to 'welcome new players.' Oh, okay.

I agree with you I believe everyone including PGI should stand behind what they say... but no where in that podcast are there any specifics that say that 3rd person would be fully integrated into the whole game. 3rd person was presented as a way for new pilots to get training and learn to control the mech, either restricted to a training area,or segregated and not part of the Community Warfare.

I really don't want this to be another 3rd person vs 1st person thread... we have plenty of those, with many pages.

But how many times in life has a promise made to you, been broken? how many times have you broke a promise? how many times has a promise been made and it couldn't be delivered on for one reason or another that is just the nature of things. This game is constantly evolving, just because something is stated early on can't really be taken as the gospel... there are so many factors that are out of our control, and some that are even out of the devs control. What was a good idea early on may not fit or be feasible later. So again I say constructive criticism without emotion will go along way. Everyone has to make their own choice in the part they want to play here.

[Broceratops]

Dagger6T6, on 15 November 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

But how many times in life has a promise made to you, been broken? how many times have you broke a promise? how many times has a promise been made and it couldn't be delivered on for one reason or another that is just the nature of things. This game is constantly evolving, just because something is stated early on can't really be taken as the gospel.

I really like what you wrote here. If tomorrow they said Clan mech are only available for MC, then okay I'd have a problem as then you change the theme from f2p to p2w, but adding a camera angle option ... eh.

I guess its a purist thing, but how many of you were in your cockpits on TT?

[Vermaxx]

I'm tired of the forum drama, but mostly because PGI keeps announcing things that start new Succession Wars instead of fixing the things people generally agree are broken.

They keep saying this is a traditional "open beta," which means things are not intended to be fluffy and perfect; and at the same time they keep announcing things with the clear goal of enticing new business.

Traditional open beta is a time for correction, not sales. They are spending too much time advertising things no one wants to deal with, and not correcting the underlying things everyone wants addressed.

[Dagger6T6]

Scratx, on 15 November 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

Okay.

Third Person as presented is a solution to a symptom of a problem that can be solved easily by providing new players with an actual tutorial mission, possibly along with a proving ground type of map for people to practice movement, marksmanship and test mech builds.

Does this work for you? Because I think this is a good summing up of what a LOT of people are saying.

I see your point, and that was my view for most of the day yesterday. but after listening to the podcast I don't feel like 3rd person was presented as the single answer to the training problem. I felt like it was a possible part of training program for new players that involved in some way a third person view to demonstrate how a mech moves... I don't feel like 3rd person is going to be imposed on everyone across the board.

So i'm staying the course and seeing how things develop and in the meantime I hope to enjoy some great matches with teammates as the game evolves, and providing constructive feedback in areas that i think could use improvement

[Vassago Rain]

Broceratops, on 15 November 2012 - 08:15 AM, said:

I also think it is highly overblown. Pretty much like the DHS thing last week, which you don't hear anything about anymore.

My only concern is that unless there are a lot of players, splitting the community between 3rd person players and 1st person players isn't a smart thing to do.

Because engine dubs are 2.0, while additional ones are 1.4...

Even when they were 'fixing' them, they screwed up.

[Penance]

Scratx, on 15 November 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

Okay.

Third Person as presented is a solution to a symptom of a problem that can be solved easily by providing new players with an actual tutorial mission, possibly along with a proving ground type of map for people to practice movement, marksmanship and test mech builds.

Does this work for you? Because I think this is a good summing up of what a LOT of people are saying.

You mean a MECHWARRIOR SCHOOL?

good idea.

[Taryys]

Sign here please:

HowTo Reduce The Grind And Create A Great New User Experience

Penance, on 15 November 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

You mean a MECHWARRIOR SCHOOL?

good idea.

[Dr Warp Effect]

The idea that very negative opinions expressed on the forum are not valuable paints with somewhat too wide a brush. Yes, constructive feedback is usually to be preferred to bashing. But to claim it does not help ignores two fundamental facts. One, the ultimate negative feedback is quitting, enough people do it and Russ is out a game. Two, one way very negative feedback occurs is that the company brings it on itself. For example, a company can change things it has clearly stated would not be changed. If this happens very infrequently because of unforeseen circumstances or genuine rethinking reveals a better course, then a company may simply weather the storm. Do it too often and the forum community often responds vehemently. Another example, ask for feedback and consistently ignore it or simply ignore mounds of negative feedback and proceed anyway without properly engaging with the community with the reasons.

Plus, when your goal is to take in money and go open beta with a "minimally viable product" then you should know there will be very stormy waters ahead. The competition has mainly gone much farther before open beta and you will be judged accordingly. And before some posters try the "its still beta" line consider the following two things. One, PGI itself has called this soft release in at least one post. Two, and even more revealingly, some of the problems reveal mistakes in the design of the game code that never should have happened in the first place. Apparently, even in cursory testing, there are at least two cases of a mismatch between code calculations not matching when there should have only been one calculation in the first place. For example, consider "hits" that show in the client that are misses according to the server. That should not happen.

Edited by Dr Warp Effect, 15 November 2012 - 08:45 AM.

[Penance]

Taryys, on 15 November 2012 - 08:42 AM, said:

Sign here please:

HowTo Reduce The Grind And Create A Great New User Experience

I support and oppose many things. nothing strong enough to pick up a pen.

Edited by Penance, 15 November 2012 - 08:45 AM.

[RG Notch]

Honestly folks hope for the best but be prepared for the worst. You can try to read what you want into the statement, but to me it seems that they will do whatever the believe needed to attract more players no matter what the cost to the way the game was originally sold. And that's entirely within their rights. By the same token I will not spend money on the game if it is turned into a 3rd person pop tarting cheese fest. That may well attract lots of people and make them more money than appealing to the narrower niche of MW BT fans. It just won't include me.
All I will say is if they make the next announcement and say that they think it's fine to mix 1st and 3rd and that the initial separation was a mistake, just like the initial reluctance to include 3rd person, don't be shocked or threaten to rage quit as you were warned.