2926 replies to this topic

[Alek Raynz]

Target Rich, on 15 April 2013 - 05:40 AM, said:

...that's why all successful FPS games have third person view...

FPS

You keep using that acronym. I don't think it means what you think it means.

FIRST PERSON SHOOTER

I don't see the word "third" in there.

Can someone please revoke his internet license?

Edited by Alpha One, 15 April 2013 - 02:56 PM.

[Jarvis Lancaster]

What I heard:

"lots of people asked for it, and though it will make lots of people mad, we're taking it seriously."

Who else has always wanted an Omega?

[Gedeon Kane]

rear view camera.......... oh how i pine for thee.

[zer0imh]

played yesterday with my clanmates in an 8 man group. i was piloting a raven with a wingman(raven also). our job was to scout the enemy base and return to the main group once an enemy has been spotted. the feeling of tension & immersion while scanning the horizon @127kmh was unmatched by any other game.

THIRD PERSON VIEW will kill that experience.


regarding the neurohelmet, it only caters for the balance and upright positioning of the mech not the FOV.

Edited by zer0imh, 15 April 2013 - 11:44 PM.

[Alek Raynz]

Here, have you're 3rd person view:



Now go away

[Dr Monocle]

I for one am very glad to hear about 3rd person view. I have been playing this since it was closed beta, and this was on of my main complaints about the game. I miss 3rd person like we had in MW 3 and MW 4. I thought they where great additions to the franchise besides having a kickass view of your mech while you destroy others. I dont really see the problem. We (The MW Community) has had 3rd person for two games and multiple expansions since then and still lived. This will be a cool option althouigh not a game breaker or OP thing.
Tall mechs will probably not use it due to them not being able to hit lights in the first place with 1st person view. Lights can utilize scouting more. shooting will be no different except when at extremly close ranges. I know I will use it, but if i want to hit with accuracy what I am shooting at I will stay in 1st person (legging and Alt torsoing).

[pow pow]

Alpha One, on 16 April 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

Here, have you're 3rd person view:



Now go away

that looks like more of an rts or action rpg/platformer... no multiplayer and the development team consisting of 3 blokes with no support or plans to market (they should really consider putting it up on kickstarter), makes me think it has a very limited scope without any mass market potential...

does look awesome though!

[Destructicus]

Target Rich, on 15 April 2013 - 05:40 AM, said:

Wow....lets see some basic market demographics here...
This game requires CryEngine 3...and only play on Desktop and Laptop PC's that have serious graphic card capability....Market reduced to 30-40 percent of PC base.

Game has a huge learning curve...and fundamentally discourages new players because the concept of "earning" your basic units is the exact opposite of any other MMP game out there and the opposite of any previous MW game....Market reduced to 30 percent of remaining 30-40 percent of PC base.

Game has a first person shooter view requirement...just like other games...which most players absolutely HATE....that's why all successful FPS games have third person view...Market reduced to 30 percent of remaining 5-10 percent of PC market...

Current game is perfect for obsessive compulsive mecha fanatics...who buy all kinds of stupid equipment...are willing to pay litereally hundreds of dollars in extra equipment like game mouses..obsolete joysticks...etc....and engage in some fairly substantial coding to get said equipment...plus pay beacoup money...like a hundred bucks or so just to get that competitive edge in a beta.

Oh...btw...I have been playing MW since the pen and paper days of the 1970's I have beta tested MW3, MW4, MC1 and MC2 and Played Chromehounds (MW5) until they closed the server on us.

Not ONE SINGLE MECHA GAME HAS EVER HAD COCKPIT MODE EXCLUSIVELY...because it is a seriously stupid way to play.

I have no problem with a matching engine that enables the ultra obsessive mech simulation people to don their tin foil hats and take their hundreds and thousands dollars of add on computer equipment and thousands of dollars in high end multi screen graphic work stations ...and have their fun...BUT

I GET SERIOUSLY OFFENDED by these kind of fools waxing eloquent about the "purity" of their style of play...

This game is based on battletech....I've red the novels...played the pen and paper game....

If you're goal is to simulate the true battletech piloting experience...then the current cockpit view is the OPPOSITE of battletech. A pilot in a battletech mech puts on a neurohelmet...his nervious system is directly linked to the mech and its sensors...it in essense becomes his body.... That is a 360 degree view...and probably best simulated by a 3rd person viewpoint...

The current mickey mouse viewpoint that is restricted by a forward view out of a slow moving cockpit window...is more like a ww2 tank than battletech...or a fighter plane...although they have better vision capability than we see in MWO.

Have the decency to admit your arrogance...there are many styles of playing a fps....which this game is NOT supposed to simulate.... Instead...this is SUPPOSED to be both tactical and commander view...like MW4 there should be the capability for a unit team to be able to easily highlight capture points and give orders....of course this subsumes a turnkey voice communication with the game...which is why Microsoft ported the whole franchise over to the XBOX 360 in the first place...

So to quote Hamlet "There is more in heaven and earth, my dear Horatio, than is contained in your philosophy..."

"Played Chromehounds (MW5) until they closed the server on us."

I laughed at this.
I also laughed at the bogus pc gamer statistics you pulled out of nowhere.

"which is why Microsoft ported the whole franchise over to the XBOX 360 in the first place..."

Also
This did not happen.
The whole franchise?
You mean those 2 terrible shoot em ups?
If they ported Mechwarrior 2 to Xbox I would have been all over that.
Microsoft didn't port crap.

"I GET SERIOUSLY OFFENDED by these kind of fools waxing eloquent about the "purity" of their style of play..."

I don't really get offended but I get slightly irked when somebody tries to appear as a true battle tech fan when they clearly have no idea what they're talking about.

You're trying to seem more credible by trying to present yourself as a real Battletech fan who knows what they're talking about.
If you wanna form an argument at least cite the non existent source you got the "1-5%" statistics from and Google what year the first battletech game was actually introduced.
Also realize that Chromehounds is not associated with Battletech in any way.
For your sake I hope that was a troll post.

Edited by Destructicus, 17 April 2013 - 06:13 AM.

[Alistair_Ryan]

honestly I like fps but the one thing i'd ask for is a rear view mirror , that would be very helpful for me so I could see who the hell is shooting me in the back

[CyBerkut]

Dr Monocle, on 16 April 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

I for one am very glad to hear about 3rd person view. I have been playing this since it was closed beta, and this was on of my main complaints about the game. I miss 3rd person like we had in MW 3 and MW 4. I thought they where great additions to the franchise besides having a kickass view of your mech while you destroy others. I dont really see the problem.

If you don't see the problem, you either do not want to, or just have not tried. This thread has many postings in it about why it is a problem. Here's one:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1442472

[Lukoi Banacek]

The funniest thing on this thread is the "all successful FPS games have 3PV" ....really? BF series ring a bell? Simply an uneducated, myopic comment clearly designed to push ones agenda.

[Mystere]

CyBerkut, on 17 April 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

If you don't see the problem, you either do not want to, or just have not tried. This thread has many postings in it about why it is a problem. Here's one:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1442472

Just because the previous MW games had crappy 3PV implementations (i.e. superior advantage when using 3PV) does not mean that MWO will have the same problems.

Alpha One, on 16 April 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

Here, have you're 3rd person view:

We all know that is not the type of 3PV being talked about. So why don't you go away?

Mechcommander 3 anyone? Better yet, how about a Mechcommander mode within MWO?

chewie, on 15 April 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

3rd person will only cheapen the experience for all who play.

This statement is merely a reflection of your personal bias, nothing more, nothing less.


Folks, I will repeat this again:

Attaining visual and sensor parity between 1PV and 3PV is the key to a balanced implementation.

Edited by Mystere, 17 April 2013 - 03:34 PM.

[Predator01]

My opinion on 3rd person view is there is only one reason to ever use 3rd person view in Mechwarrior (just like Mechwarrior 3 and 4 where it was implemented) to see how freaking awesome your mech looks firing lasers at mountain ranges!!!! There is no reason other than that, or will there ever be one.

Soooo, we all want to see how awesome our mech looks stomping around firing meaninglessly at mountain ranges right?

My suggestion, make a 3rd person view only available in testing grounds! And in the future the possibility of going into testing grounds with a group of friends to see how good you all look stomping around aimlessly wondering firing lasers and mountain ranges.

[drixom]

rear view and arm flips Would be infinitely more useful.

[Golfin Man]

Did you have a politician right this post for you? Italics are not convincing. Do not put 3rd person in this ****ing game because it will affect everyone whether they use it or not.

[Alek Raynz]

If you want 3rd person view, you don't want MechWarrior. You want MechAssault.



$5 off eBay, X-Box 360 compatible. Or you can persuade someone to make MechAssault 3.

[DeaconW]

Alpha One, on 18 April 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

If you want 3rd person view, you don't want MechWarrior. You want MechAssault.



$5 off eBay, X-Box 360 compatible. Or you can persuade someone to make MechAssault 3.

Hey...that appears to have destructible terrain...PGI, can we have that instead of 3PV? Pretty Please?

[CyBerkut]

Mystere, on 17 April 2013 - 03:28 PM, said:

Folks, I will repeat this again:

Attaining visual and sensor parity between 1PV and 3PV is the key to a balanced implementation.

Since they have stated that one of the purposes of adding 3PV is to make it easier for people that have trouble dealing with leg turning vs torso twisting... it's intuitively obvious that "visual parity" will not result, and is not their desired goal. 3PV users, at the minimum, will be able to see their mech's legs, the orientation of those legs, and nearby physical obstructions. Otherwise, there is *nothing* at all to be gained for those people having problems, (which is why PGI was looking into it, per their own statement).

If you can see your legs in 3PV, you do not have visual parity with 1PV.
If you can see low obstructions in 3PV that you would not see out of the cockpit in 1PV, you do not have visual parity.
If you can see a Raven-3L humping the side or back of your leg in 3PV, you do not have visual parity.

That's just if they only make the minimal visual information available to the people who don't grasp leg turning vs torso twist.

What are the chances that the implementation will exclude showing damage/impacts of weapons fire upon the legs / rear torso?
Will mechs close behind yours (but not quite touching) be visible?

Will PGI go to the trouble of coding some magic 3PV disappearing scheme for mechs that wouldn't be visible from 1PV? If they do, what percentage of the folks who want 3PV so badly will be satisfied?

[Mystere]

CyBerkut, on 18 April 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

Since they have stated that one of the purposes of adding 3PV is to make it easier for people that have trouble dealing with leg turning vs torso twisting... it's intuitively obvious that "visual parity" will not result ...

Hence the "sensor" part.

CyBerkut, on 18 April 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

Will PGI go to the trouble of coding some magic 3PV disappearing scheme for mechs that wouldn't be visible from 1PV?

That is what I am assuming.

CyBerkut, on 18 April 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

If they do, what percentage of the folks who want 3PV so badly will be satisfied?

I guess we're all going to find out.

[Demoned]

3rd person view, just another reason not to buy the 360 mod
well at least it saves you some cBills lol

Edited by Demoned, 18 April 2013 - 06:01 PM.