2926 replies to this topic

[shotokan5]

Pantherjay you are 100 % right but this is not mw. I might wrong but was their not 60,000 founders sold. Most had read where it was first person only and bla. now either all these people are stupid and you can include me in that. I know I saw and read that it would only be FPO. I am not taking my ball and go home it might be two or three if ever that they even get to it. they have not even started any type of programing in 3rd person. stop those who are acting like they are 12 and pick up your ball and break it because it is not exactly what they want. Shame on you and all who act like that. I don't go to a movie and leave half way to the end. I want to stay and see how the movie ends. Yes , we are allowed to play beta but buy a new mech and other things and say its free? I do agree if I am paying for something it is much different than 3025 where you did not spend one cent. that make the argument wrong. Pay and free are two different things. Legally and MORALLY.

[Impossible Wasabi]

The Space Pope would prefer 3rd person was not added, but if it is then the Space Pope would hope he was offered a refund, as one of the major selling points when he bought his Founder's Pack was in his view the focus on 1st Person/Immersion.

The Space Pope hopes things go well for the developers and the game, but when fundamental/complete changes to the game are proposed then he feels a bit worried about the direction of the game(for him personally, not as a criticism of the game in general or the Devs).

Edited by Merlevade, 04 December 2012 - 01:49 PM.

[repete]

Coolant, on 04 December 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

And, the fact that you have taken a step back about how it is so game-breaking...

I have not taken a step back from anything. I have said all along and continue to say:

A) I don't want 3rd person because it will break things (Talk of 'how it will be implemented' aside - See 'B')

B - It WILL break things (Because, based on what I believe to be a reasonable interpretation of Russ's statement is, it's not about helping n00bs see their torso is pointing in a different direction than their legs, but is about giving a playable 3rd person to those that want it. As has been pointing out by many others, this ruined MW4 multiplayer).

C - That splitting the community between 1st and 3rd person players will hurt the game. It has done so for many other games, and I hate to say it, will be worse for MWO. This game does not have as wide appeal of say CoD for example, as much as anyone would like to think otherwise.

Coolant, on 04 December 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

...because you don't mention it anymore, means you finally understand...

No. My feedback to that specific individual was that in basing his criticism in "You promised you wouldn't change things" doesn't help address the details of the problems with 3PV. My "understanding" hasn't changed.

Coolant, on 04 December 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

...that you never have to play 3rd person or play against another person that is using 3rd person.

Until the day when / if the unintended consequences of splitting the community result in things like:

1) Insufficiently sustainable number of players playing in either perspective requires that they DO bring these two groups together to make the game viable.

2) Responses from players in either perspective saying "I want to play 1st person. My friends want to play 3rd person. Your decision to split the two views means I can't play with my friends", creating pressure and requiring a cost / benefit analysis on bringing the two perspectives together.

Coolant, on 04 December 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

Wow, maybe progress? Doubt it...you like to hear yourself talk

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Edited by repete, 04 December 2012 - 01:58 PM.

[Mad Elf]

Failcube, on 04 December 2012 - 12:39 AM, said:

Wow, quite the responses here. I know for a fact the people complaining didn't even bother to listen to the interview linked.

Maybe some didn't. I did...

Failcube, on 04 December 2012 - 12:39 AM, said:

It explains why the third-person option is important for growing the game, but more importantly, how it won't affect first-person players at all if they don't want it to. If it's added, it'll be a separate game mode of sorts and if you choose to play standard first-person, you'll only play against other first-person players so there's no advantage/disadvantage.

Incorrect. It explained why it's important for growing the game, but they clearly said they might consider some sort of "no 3rd person" switch. There was no promise of a separate game mode. There was, however, the statement that if they didn't give us the separate game mode, we can just "suck it up" (their words).

[Rejarial Galatan]

repete, on 03 December 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

Is your concern REALLY about what was "originally promised" vs. if whether what is changed breaks the game or not? Things change.

Since I like throwing out straw men, I'll throw this one out there. In the United States, as "originally promised" only white, male landowners could vote. But that was improved.

Surely the point isn't "But you promised this would be a sim!". Surely the point is, "3PV has been done before, and it broke things. Don't break things!". Don't resist change to resist change. Resist change when it makes things worse. Focus on the change, not the fact that it is changing.

as originally promised and what breaks this game, in this case are the same bloody thing. There is a logical and very well reasoned reason why we are ALL equal here in the US as far as well, our Rights go, but, not in the case of 3rd person POV, as it fundamentally alters and breaks the game in ways that are well, unacceptable in terms of a TACTICAL SIMULATOR. This is one case, where the console kids <as they are the ones that are the highest probability with those who refuse to flat out learn because 1st person is harder, are the ones begging for 3rd person> are just going to have to learn how to play the game, and PGI is going to have to STOP being lazy and give us a genuine, FUNCTIONAL and PLAYABLE tutorial,

[Rejarial Galatan]

because to be absolutely blunt the excuse: i cannot figure out why when i move my torso one way my legs do not follow is about as moronic a reason to include a fundamental break to what was a key design pillar as any of us have ever seen. Fact is, this is a skill that, theoretically has been mastered by EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US in REAL EFFING LIFE. Doubt me? here is proof:

1. you are walking with your BF/GF/Husband/Wife/Friend, you are walking side by side. You turn your head to face them to talk, guess what, you never changed the direction of your walking line to turn your head. SHOCK OF SHOCKS, same bloody thing with mechs. Your torso has turned, but your legs did not follow. SIMPLE

2. you are driving in a car, you decide: hey, i want to get onto the high way, and I must use this entrance ramp. I must check my blind spots <this is what the smart and NORMAL driver does>, so, I must look behind me. SHOCK! My car kept going FORWARD, in a straight line!!! Head turned, but, the steering wheel never turned to change the facing of your wheels. SAME BLOODY THING IN A MECH!!!!!!

[repete]

Mad Elf, on 04 December 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

Failcube, on 04 December 2012 - 12:39 AM, said:

Wow, quite the responses here. I know for a fact the people complaining didn't even bother to listen to the interview linked.

Maybe some didn't. I did...

Yup. Failcube 'failed' the second he said "I know for a FACT the people complaining DIDN'T...LISTEN to the interviewed linked". Some might not have. I would imagine many have, including myself. Stunning that some people don't know the difference between facts and opinion based on belief and bias. Perhaps one day I will cease to be amazed.

EDIT: Puncuation

Edited by repete, 04 December 2012 - 04:09 PM.

[Ronin of Ako]

From todays patch notes....
"so let us know how you feel about ECM on the forums because lately I think you guys have been holding back and not telling us how you really feel."


Well, here are a ton of people telling you no 3rd person, no one is holding back, start listening to your users

[Kavoh]

Its astonishing to see people still repeating the same excuses (unfortunately both sides have been...) I don't think there is much of a horse to beat left on the whole "splitting the playerbase" discussion... Let me prod it one more time with (again, for the thousandth time) It will NOT fix ANYTHING and will only make things worse.

[grayson marik]

repete, on 04 December 2012 - 01:53 PM, said:

I have not taken a step back from anything. I have said all along and continue to say:

A) I don't want 3rd person because it will break things (Talk of 'how it will be implemented' aside - See 'B')

B - It WILL break things (Because, based on what I believe to be a reasonable interpretation of Russ's statement is, it's not about helping n00bs see their torso is pointing in a different direction than their legs, but is about giving a playable 3rd person to those that want it. As has been pointing out by many others, this ruined MW4 multiplayer).

C - That splitting the community between 1st and 3rd person players will hurt the game. It has done so for many other games, and I hate to say it, will be worse for MWO. This game does not have as wide appeal of say CoD for example, as much as anyone would like to think otherwise.



No. My feedback to that specific individual was that in basing his criticism in "You promised you wouldn't change things" doesn't help address the details of the problems with 3PV. My "understanding" hasn't changed.



Until the day when / if the unintended consequences of splitting the community result in things like:

1) Insufficiently sustainable number of players playing in either perspective requires that they DO bring these two groups together to make the game viable.

2) Responses from players in either perspective saying "I want to play 1st person. My friends want to play 3rd person. Your decision to split the two views means I can't play with my friends", creating pressure and requiring a cost / benefit analysis on bringing the two perspectives together.



Pot. Kettle. Black.

Thbis, especial the C 1 and 2!

[shotokan5]

Read my lips: . they have not even started any type of programing in 3rd person. the sky is not falling . My Ausie friend you will never stop being amazed, people are just that way. The older you get the more you can't believe it.

[Joe Mugg]

Optional or no, if its there, it will be hard to constrain it not to reveal more info to a pilot than traditional cockpit simulator mode. In the long run pilots will be forced to at least "peek" into 3rd person to compete. My personal opinion is that it would harm the experience, and make cockpit view untenable in a competitive combat environmental Boo.

[Squidhead Jax]

repete, on 04 December 2012 - 01:53 PM, said:

C - That splitting the community between 1st and 3rd person players will hurt the game. It has done so for many other games, and I hate to say it, will be worse for MWO. This game does not have as wide appeal of say CoD for example, as much as anyone would like to think otherwise.



No. My feedback to that specific individual was that in basing his criticism in "You promised you wouldn't change things" doesn't help address the details of the problems with 3PV. My "understanding" hasn't changed.



Until the day when / if the unintended consequences of splitting the community result in things like:

1) Insufficiently sustainable number of players playing in either perspective requires that they DO bring these two groups together to make the game viable.

2) Responses from players in either perspective saying "I want to play 1st person. My friends want to play 3rd person. Your decision to split the two views means I can't play with my friends", creating pressure and requiring a cost / benefit analysis on bringing the two perspectives together.



Pot. Kettle. Black.

Yeah, the queue-splitting blandishments are almost reassuring until you think about it a bit. That's why nothing in the 2nd podcast reassured me in the least (and the whining about people not believing what they say didn't help - if we'd hadn't already been given reasons not to believe, it'd be different).

Edited by Squidhead Jax, 05 December 2012 - 07:50 AM.

[neviu]

I hope this wont go true, it doesnt belong into this game

[Like a Sir]

Squidhead Jax, on 05 December 2012 - 07:48 AM, said:

Yeah, the queue-splitting blandishments are almost reassuring until you think about it a bit. That's why nothing in the 2nd podcast reassured me in the least (and the whining about people not believing what they say didn't help - if we'd hadn't already been given reasons not to believe, it'd be different).

I am not reassured by any of the podcasts, because if they weren't going to implement it, they wouldn't beat around the bush, they would just come out and say "Hey, we get it, no worries there will be no 3pv", the way it stands they seem to be doing everything they can, to leave that door opened, so that nobody could quote them on that in the future, for whatever reason...

It's fed up either way, because if they are not going to implement it, they are misleading the people who are hoping that it will be in the game.

If they are, they are bsing us...

Regardless, **** move PGI.

[grayson marik]

Like a Sir, on 05 December 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

I am not reassured by any of the podcasts, because if they weren't going to implement it, they wouldn't beat around the bush, they would just come out and say "Hey, we get it, no worries there will be no 3pv", the way it stands they seem to be doing everything they can, to leave that door opened, so that nobody could quote them on that in the future, for whatever reason...

It's fed up either way, because if they are not going to implement it, they are misleading the people who are hoping that it will be in the game.

If they are, they are bsing us...

Regardless, **** move PGI.

Aye, thats exactly what happens here!

[LynxFury]

[color=#959595]C - That splitting the community between 1st and 3rd person players will hurt the game. It has done so for many other games, and I hate to say it, will be worse for MWO. This game does not have as wide appeal of say CoD for example, as much as anyone would like to think otherwise.[/color]

[color=#959595]That goes of the faulty premise that all the former more relaxed players would be willing to play first person, and that some current players would switch over and play 3 person. In reality all it would probably do is add 3rd person players--not contract the vast majority of current first persons ones. [/color]

[elsie]

shotokan5, on 05 December 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Read my lips: . they have not even started any type of programing in 3rd person. the sky is not falling . My Ausie friend you will never stop being amazed, people are just that way. The older you get the more you can't believe it.

Hmm. Don't see any lips, just text. Did you type with your lips - not that it matters, I wouldn't have seen them anyway.

There seems to be a logic failure with what you have stated (the part I bolded above). I don't know if you were around during the tripping/knockdown era but I'm reasonably sure you have been killed in game at least once (though I can't guarantee it). You will note that the kill event is shown from the third person, just as trip/knockdown was. So they have, in fact, done some programming in third person. They may or may not have done programming to make it so that you can play the game (maneuver, shoot, et al), but I don't know (and I don't think you do either, unless you actually work there) and can't say either way. One thing I am certain about is that I think it is a bad idea.

From the amount of time and effort they have been putting into putting the third party possibility out there, I would say it looks like "setting expectations". I see this in business all the time both internally to employees and and externally to customers. Generally it means that someone fairly high up in the power or money structure has decided on something and it is going to happen no matter what, unless they can be shown that it would result in a major failure (and sometimes not even then).

I would much rather the developers/producers grew a pair and told those who are unable to figure out that their upper and lower facings can be different to "L2P" and then gave them the tools to "L2P", ie a decent tutorial besides dropping them in a regular mission to be ridiculed as "nubs", "n00bs" and "pubbies" in chat when they get killed.


elsie

[Alois Hammer]

shotokan5, on 05 December 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Read my lips: . they have not even started any type of programing in 3rd person.

Fail much?

Were you ever knocked down before the knockdown mechanic was removed? If so, you might have noticed that you viewed the event in- drumroll- third person.

So who added the third-person knockdown/standup sequences- elves sneaking into the office at night? Nope, that would be the developers who obviously have indeed programmed a usable third-person viewpoint.

Like a Sir, on 05 December 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

I am not reassured by any of the podcasts, because if they weren't going to implement it, they wouldn't beat around the bush, they would just come out and say "Hey, we get it, no worries there will be no 3pv", the way it stands they seem to be doing everything they can, to leave that door opened, so that nobody could quote them on that in the future, for whatever reason...

Exactly. Every single denial that they're working on third person has been accompanied by some form or other of "But if we did, we would..." usually followed by much more text about how they'll implement than was used to say they won't implemement it.

Someone, somewhere, has decided we're getting third person view, period and all we're seeing is the scramble to get us ready for its already-imminent arrival.

At this point I've accepted that foregone conclusion, and am only worried about the ability to click a checkbox and never play in a mixed first/third-person match going the way of "First person is a core pillar of our design."

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[neviu]

third person is just like cheating,
so you can see your surrounding better,
than players only using first person,

dont ruin this game whit this,
this is the worst suggestion,