2926 replies to this topic

[Neozero]

obviously you guys did not see the feed back 3rdPV is unacceptable in any manor we are mech pilots. people want other views give us more information on our mech displays. Let us have a toggle feature to cycle thru different views for damage like previous MW titles.

Edited by Neozero, 16 November 2012 - 04:04 PM.

[Rokuzachi]

Star Hammer, on 16 November 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

I'm thrilled by the idea. It's unfortunate that so many people are so insistent that everyone else has to play the way they want to play themselves, but that does seem to be the way many people are thinking about everything in the world, not just gaming I guess.

Yup, gets pretty old. The consensus seems to be that even if they could implement a non-exploitable 3rd person, that it'd still be horrible and immersion breaking (I don't know either why people care so much about other people's gameplay).

The whole idea of immersion is lost on me anyways. I'm not in a mech. I'm at my computer, playing a game against other people that are doing the same. No amount of sound, VFX or little extras will make me think otherwise. Game is fun either way, I don't care if its in or out.

Now, if you'd asked me about immersion when I was 10 and playing Rambo with toy guns with my friends...

[JoolNoret]

Spectator 3rd person would be a very good way to ease it in. Let people see it, get feed back on the view, and make adjustments until a majority are comfortable with the addition. I'm game for anything that will expand the player base. Still think a play ground is the better option.

[EvilBenspants]

Personally, I would love to see a controllable 3rd person death cam, for a more enjoyable viewing experience after i get killed, but not for actual game play. In my opinion, it would completely ruin the simulator feel of the game, would give light mechs even more of an advantage against heavies/assaults and cut down the amount of skill needed to successfully pilot and be aware of team mates

[nitra]

B B Wolfe, on 16 November 2012 - 03:44 PM, said:

This implies that your statistic is free of confounding factors.

I dont care how many if and or but variables you throw into the mix .. its going to take one hell of a ratio to put the number in favor of, over those who are against .

and regardless if these unknowns were truly fans i would suspect we would see more of them in the forums.

i would hazard to say we have seen them in the forums and the poll is probably accurate whithin an acceptable margin of error.

because we are still talking about a relatively unheard of game followed by a large number of fans.

and the number of people in that pole reflects the last seen player base numbers when you was in game of between 2000 - 3000+ people online.

I think PGI is fishing for more players and for some reason thinks 3PV is STANK BAIT BOYS !!!

Edited by nitra, 16 November 2012 - 04:09 PM.

[CrayTrashfire]

i dont have a problem with the feature at all and i love this game. That being said it seems like you guys might want to work on the game as is to get rid of some major bugs instead of adding a feature it seems no one wants.

[Egomane]

Sorry Garth, but this is the first post of you I realy see no way of liking.

We had a dozen or two threads, that inquired about a 3PV from just as many forum users. I do not know how many requests you recieved by PM or email, but my guess is, that it weren't many more then that. Right now you have thousends of users who are strongly against it. We have created more threads against 3PV in just three days, then I have seen in favor of it in the past 12 months. This should be able to tell you something.

The reason in the podcast, why you plan to implement a 3PV was at best ridiculous. We have told you, since the start of the closed beta what would be a better approach. Any reason you come up with now, will just look like another lie to us if it isn't "we do it for business reasons" or an improvement of the former statement.

In both cases we, the players, will not like it. If it is business reasons, we will feel as if you had lied to us from the beginning, when you told us this game would be 1PV only. If it remains "rookie pilots", we will tell you again and again and again, that this is the wrong way to adress it and we will still feel that you lied to us.

Your promise wasn't that the 1PV players would not be disturbed by the 3PV players. Your promise was, that this is a 1PV game only and that 3PV would only be implemented if it had no effect on gameplay what so ever. If we have seperated player groups, it is affecting our gameplay. If that is your solution, it is not what you promised and we will not like it.

Your post here tries to calm the waves the podcast created. You do it by telling us nothing we didn't already know except that Bryan will write a bigger post on the topic later.

Please consider this: Even if 3PV will bring in more players, you will lose some of the hardcore fans that backed you through the founders program. It is not good press, if you alienate yourself with those, that should be your biggest fans.

Garth Erlam, on 16 November 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

Just to make sure everyone, well, actually read that and listened to what Russ said, we don't plan to add 3rd person. We're looking at what it would require of us if we did.

Why spend resources on something you don't want to implement? This is a contradiction in itself. It is soothing to the masses and at the same time it leaves a backdoor. It is the same kind of talk managers use to tell their employees that no job is in danger, while at the same time they are planning on closing down the department.

Edited by Egomane, 16 November 2012 - 04:37 PM.

[zer0imh]

make the MFDs inside the cockpit functional.

put left/right/rear cameras, satellite view/top view, 3d hologram of your mech(replace the bobble head) showing leg direction/torso facing, a drone with camera(can be destroyed by enemy fire) launched from your mech feeding 3rd person view on your MFD.

...but pls no 3rd person view.

Edited by zer0imh, 16 November 2012 - 04:13 PM.

[Hidirian]

If they make it so you can choose to pick 1st or 3rd person view and say that only people who chose say 3rd person view can play against other people who chose 3rd person view you would be dividing your player base into 2 groups and that's not a good thing. And I really don't think you can make 3rd person view without it giving people an advantage by being able to see around/over corners/hills/buildings.

Edit: I would also like to put this here A Collective Big ~NO~ to 3rd Person.

Edited by Hidirian, 16 November 2012 - 04:18 PM.

[GenDread]

so apparently you guys didnt check the following pages where Garth said this :

Posted Today, 03:39 PM
Just to make sure everyone, well, actually read that and listened to what Russ said, we don't plan to add 3rd person. We're looking at what it would require of us if we did.

just putting it out there .... its on page 3 or 4

[Warrior UK]

JoolNoret, on 16 November 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

Having listened to that episode, I totally get where they are coming from. Being able to see your mech could help new players get used to the whole running one direction shooting in another, torso twist mechanic. Personally I think that is a trivial crutch in that instance. What new players (and the rest of us) need is a play ground with an optional tutorial run through. Help new pilots learn their cockpit. Teach them to watch the arrow on the map. Explain weapon grouping. Tell them what the heat meter means. This would also give experienced players a place to set up weapon groups and test load outs. It's a win\win. No one could possibly be upset by that. I think a playground environment is the only place 3rd person would belong. In the end, I'll be in 1st regardless and don't really care if someone else plays otherwise.

Just one more thing to add

A seven year old, could learn this without the use of 3rd person and hold their own with the best of us after a few matches and egt mech advice on builds from vets, perhaps even the other way round on builds

[Like a Sir]

That was a very good way to beat around the bush, good form... I think you didn't miss any spots. Sorry, to me it looks like you are desperately trying to make it look like it listen, without giving us a concrete answer we could quote you on, giving you the option to do whatever you want.

Until you come out and say, we are not putting it in the game, or we are putting it in the game, and here is how. There will be no happy customers here.

Well done

Edited by Like a Sir, 16 November 2012 - 04:17 PM.

[Rokuzachi]

Like a Sir, on 16 November 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

That was a very good way to beat around the bush, good form... I think you didn't miss any spots. Sorry, to me it looks like you are desperately trying to make it look like it listen, without giving us a concrete answer we could quote you on, giving you the option to do whatever you want.

Until you come out and say, we are not putting it in the game, or we are putting it in the game, and here is how. There will be no happy customers here.

Well done

You mean, this?

Garth Erlam, on 16 November 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

Just to make sure everyone, well, actually read that and listened to what Russ said, we don't plan to add 3rd person. We're looking at what it would require of us if we did.

[GenDread]

Like a Sir, on 16 November 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

That was a very good way to beat around the bush, good form... I think you didn't miss any spots. Sorry, to me it looks like you are desperately trying to make it look like it listen, without giving us a concrete answer we could quote you on, giving you the option to do whatever you want.

Until you come out and say, we are not putting it in the game, or we are putting it in the game, and here is how. There will be no happy customers here.

Well done

page 3 or 4 garth posted this ...

Posted Today, 03:39 PM
Just to make sure everyone, well, actually read that and listened to what Russ said, we don't plan to add 3rd person. We're looking at what it would require of us if we did.

[Velba]

Its not a problem for me, but damn the frame rate issues people would have, my god, you guys cant even code in self shadows correctly. This is going to be a mess.

[Percival Hasek]

If they think offering the option brings in more players, I'm all for it. I'm not one of the legion of the outraged that some people frothign at the mouth that someone else might prefer something different than what they like. Listening to the podcast, different servers, not allowing it to be used to an unfair advantage, allthe precautions..sounds like they are carefully considering it, with concerns to protectign the fairness of the playing experience.

Lots of drama queens over-reacting..in other words, buisness as usual.

[SmithMPBT]

Velba, on 16 November 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

Its not a problem for me, but damn the frame rate issues people would have, my god, you guys cant even code in self shadows correctly. This is going to be a mess.

Yup my framerates iffy as it is. Plus I just don't like the idea of piloting a mech from 50 feet in the air above it.

[Stickjock]

This... is my take on the whole outcry against 3rd Person View...

[Almeras]

Card, on 16 November 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

Well, that was so vague that it said absolutely nothing, will accomplish nothing, and makes no one whatsoever feel any better about it at all.

Was that the point?

^This. How about some more marketing vagueness Garth can you tell us that 3rd person will be;

• win-win solution
  
• joined-up thinking
  
• blue sky thinking
  
• cover all directions of the compass
  
• all our Christmas' at once
  
• next generation
  
• seamless
  
• never before
  
• customer-centric
  
• synergize proactive content

[Jonas]

How about we put a pin in the 3rd person view for now ( or for ever ) and focus on Joysticks, and more responsive key board and mouse set ups.