2926 replies to this topic

[Inkarnus]

why 3d is baaaaad and just is forced upon us because of ppl that want that ****
to own ppl that didnt


ps
Yeah make thousend different ques
FP que
Mixed que
3D que
CW FP que
CW Mixed que
CW 3D que

open up servers around the world too throw in ELO
and you have a dead game in my POV

[Filter41]

Ignatz22, on 12 June 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

If none of this makes sense to you, consider this; they promised it would never happen.

i absolutly understand your point and it makes sense! PGI broke their promise and every player has to conclude now, what that means for him...

I am interested in participating in the developing process. PGI will do the 3rd PoV and the only question is how they implement it in the game. My statement is similar to CyBerkut:

CyBerkut, on 12 June 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

One of the devs recently indicated in an interview that there were thousands of games going on at any time. Conservatively call that 2 thousand, and you still have plenty of people playing... and apparently PGI expects to pick up even more players with this 3PV play. Give 3PV players their own CW universe. If the dev's statement in that interview is correct, then there shouldn't be a problem with that split in the player base.

Let us push the process in this direction!

[CyBerkut]

pow pow, on 13 June 2013 - 01:28 AM, said:

Sorry, no authoritative source (don't trust those) just common sense, logic and a vast experience of nearly 20 years playing video games. I ve also dabbled into 3d modelling so I know a thing or two about cameras.

Plenty of other people have a good bit of experience with seeing 3PV screw up a MechWarrior game. MW4 was a stellar example of how 3PV players have an advantage over 1PV players. Pop Tart'ers had a distinct advantage. Being able to look around building corners without exposing yourself to enemy fire was a distinct advantage. No Thanks.

The very fact that you can see things in 3PV that are not visible to you in 1PV gives you an advantage. Close positioning of the camera can reduce that somewhat, but the fact remains that you can see things via 3PV that you can not see from inside the cockpit. They do not belong together in the same match.

[pow pow]

imo mw4 died because it was a heavily outdated and unsupported game. 3pv screwed it? don't think so.

you talking about view advantages again. Does seismic give a higher advantage to veterans (with cbills/gxp to spare) over new players?? very much so. Did seismic ruin the game? not really, or at least I haven't noticed diminishing player numbers since last patch.

can't argue with doom bringers of the apocalypse type comments. I like progress, i want this game to get big and have esports.

[Inkarnus]

esports means 3dpov?
i concur exakt the opposite
would be hillarious if cs / cod or such
had 3dpov
there are games when you play them
for competition you mostly dont
touch 3dpov in anyway except
you want the competition
to be casual and low
priority

[pow pow]

Inkarnus, on 14 June 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:

esports means 3dpov?
i concur exakt the opposite
would be hillarious if cs / cod or such
had 3dpov
there are games when you play them
for competition you mostly dont
touch 3dpov in anyway except
you want the competition
to be casual and low
priority

no Inkarnus, I never said 3pv will bring esports. I inferred that it will help make the game grow by bringing in new people.

[Grimmnyr]

Well, after following this debate for weeks, I have read one good arguement by the pro-3PV crowd. the pro-3PV bring up the point that CW will not be possible if we have separate queues for first and third person. This is a very good point and probably an irrefutable truth. If 3PV is unavoidable, then I hope PGI locks the camera, so it can not be rotated and only faces where the mech is facing (limited zoom up and down, may be ok, as long as it does not allow a far greater range of vision). Also, the HUD should not be visible when 3PV is active. This may be the only way to implement 3PV in a way that will not break the game, or make first person a disadvantage.

[Doktor Kloetenstein]

Competitive Gameplay -> Cockpit view only. Period.

This game needs some more promotion and active advertising to acquire more players. The core MW fans don't have a problem with cockpit only play.

The problem may more the nowadays common "Instant Reward" player type who simply doesn't have the patience getting used to a game that requires a bit more thinking than triggering. Bend a game to their will? No way! While a locked 3PV may not be gamebreaking...if it STAYS locked it is completely unnecessary. There are other priorities. If you want more players spread the word. Maybe ask Wargaming.net if they will buy you...ok, that was mean. But anyway you get the point.
Blending a game to satisfy anyone won't do in the long run. Hawken is there. Don't like MW:O? Go play that one, 3PV included...

Just my 0.02

[Viper69]

I dont understand if 3pv is to be implemented as a training tool, what will train people to use FPV? All that will happen is you have people dependent on a 3pv and never giving up their training wheels. I thought for sure someone told me this generation of gamers was savvy, lately all I see is people wanting more and more crutches. So much for the savvy gamer, sounds more like an infant refusing to use the toilet because diapers are easier. If PGI wants to lure in infants who need the crutch of 3pv to play their game then so be it. But I dont want to hear anymore about how elite people are if they cant figure out how to drive in Fpv.

[Grimmnyr]

@Blizzardjunkie

I completely agree with you and if you have ever read my previous posts on this subject, you would know that. But, to paraphrase PGI, it is not about whether 3PV is implemented, just how it is implemented. So we really have no choice, other than quitting when 3PVI is introduced.

[Pihoqahiak]

Ed Steele, on 14 June 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

@Blizzardjunkie

I completely agree with you and if you have ever read my previous posts on this subject, you would know that. But, to paraphrase PGI, it is not about whether 3PV is implemented, just how it is implemented. So we really have no choice, other than quitting when 3PVI is introduced.

"So we really have no choice, other than quitting when 3PVI is introduced."

Had to quote that line a second time for emphasis, as this is what has already happened for me (and I'm sure others as well) due to decisions made by PGI on third person view and similar actions on their part. They have long since lost my trust and confidence, and have appropriately lost my business. If this had happened while they were still allowing Founder's refunds, I certainly would have gotten a refund, but they conveniently waited long enough to drop this bombshell on their customers that the refund is no longer an option.

Edited by Pihoqahiak, 21 June 2013 - 07:35 PM.

[CyBerkut]

Ed Steele, on 14 June 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Well, after following this debate for weeks, I have read one good arguement by the pro-3PV crowd. the pro-3PV bring up the point that CW will not be possible if we have separate queues for first and third person. This is a very good point and probably an irrefutable truth.

It's actually not a particularly good point. Per a dev in an interview recently, there are 'thousands' of matches going on at any given time. Even if you interpret that conservatively as two thousand, that translates to many, many players.

The NBT planetary league ran and thrived for many years as 1PV-only, in league play. We don't need 3PV players in our 1PV Community Warfare play to have enough players. If PGI is convinced that 3PV is going to bring in a large number of players, then give them their own CW universe.

Quote

If 3PV is unavoidable, then I hope PGI locks the camera, so it can not be rotated and only faces where the mech is facing (limited zoom up and down, may be ok, as long as it does not allow a far greater range of vision). Also, the HUD should not be visible when 3PV is active. This may be the only way to implement 3PV in a way that will not break the game, or make first person a disadvantage.

It's actually much easier than that. If PGI keeps to their latest version of statements on the matter, 1PV will never have to play against 3PV. There is no need to balance one style versus the other... give them their own matches/ELO, then those of us playing 1PV have no need to be concerned about what the 3PV players can, or cannot see.

[CyBerkut]

pow pow, on 13 June 2013 - 10:27 PM, said:

imo mw4 died because it was a heavily outdated and unsupported game. 3pv screwed it? don't think so.

That is an easy straw man to setup and knock down, but it doesn't actually address what I said.

"Plenty of other people have a good bit of experience with seeing 3PV screw up a MechWarrior game. MW4 was a stellar example of how 3PV players have an advantage over 1PV players. Pop Tart'ers had a distinct advantage. Being able to look around building corners without exposing yourself to enemy fire was a distinct advantage."

I didn't allege that the game stopped being played altogether due to 3PV. If that is your only measure on whether a game is being screwed up, that is your prerogative, but many others can recognize when something is fundamentally flawed or unfair in game play. Fortunately, with MW4 we had a solution available to us. Just play on 1PV only servers and 1PV only league play, such as the NBT league. The NBT league continued on for a number of years after M$ stopped releasing any new material for the game... partly due to being able to offer quality game play by excluding the 3PV BS.

The potential problem here has been that it has not been reliably clear whether comparable mitigation methods would be available to us in MWO. We have read/heard claims that 1PV will never have to play against 3PV... but then we also heard there would never be coolant flushing, etc. Some of us get a bit jaded about trusting what devs say after such things have occurred.
Since MWO game servers, unlike MW4, are completely under PGI's control/administration (at least so far)... the options for players to avoid undesired game modes may, or may not, be available to us.

Quote

you talking about view advantages again.

Uh-huh. Because it is a problem. It creates an opportunity for tactics that could not theoretically exist in the MW universe. Being able to see and target mechs on the other side of a hill from you (or around the corner of a building), when you don't have a line of sight upon each other (and have placed no destructable drones in the air to deliver that view perspective), is viewed by many of us as problematic/wrong/irrational/unfair. It gave pop tart'ers an advantage that should not have existed.

Quote

Does seismic give a higher advantage to veterans (with cbills/gxp to spare) over new players?? very much so. Did seismic ruin the game? not really, or at least I haven't noticed diminishing player numbers since last patch.

It's not the same sort of thing. It doesn't give anyone a shooting advantage without equally exposing themselves to the risk of enemy fire. Increased capabilities acquired by grinding XP through the trees and/or buying modules is not the irrational sort of thing that 3PV's advantages are.

Quote

can't argue with doom bringers of the apocalypse type comments. I like progress, i want this game to get big and have esports.

You want what you want. That's fine for you. Play against other 3PV folks all you want. Just don't expect 1PV players to buy any claims that 3PV offers no advantages against 1PV. It's a plainly false assertion.

Edited by CyBerkut, 14 June 2013 - 02:56 PM.

[Bloodweaver]

Coolant, on 11 June 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

round and round we go...because like I've responded several times in this thread and others to those that say PGI didn't keep their word...businesses adapt to survive. They have employees to pay and those employees support families, oh and also $$ funds more features. And, a broader audience offer the potential of greater $$

The purpose of a business is not to make money. Nor is it to support its employees. Business is not charity, and both of the aforementioned attitudes treat it as if it were.

The purpose of a business is to create a product. When a business starts making a product, gains success in selling it, and then decides to change that product to a less desirable version, it will run into problems. Deservedly so.

[DrBunji]

I also find it funny that this forum even has players discussing or suggesting changes to the game when the devs clearly showed they give zero f'***s about what we think.

Think about it, almost 90% of the forum goers has probably come out and condemned 3PV for the horrible idea that it is, with well reasoned arguments and logic.

Yet the Devs just called us a "vocal minority" and basically told us to show it; so why even discuss game balance or features? Its quite obvious the devs doesnt really care what the community thinks.

[Pando]

DrBunji, on 16 June 2013 - 03:22 AM, said:

I also find it funny that this forum even has players discussing or suggesting changes to the game when the devs clearly showed they give zero f'***s about what we think.

Think about it, almost 90% of the forum goers has probably come out and condemned 3PV for the horrible idea that it is, with well reasoned arguments and logic.

Yet the Devs just called us a "vocal minority" and basically told us to show it; so why even discuss game balance or features? Its quite obvious the devs doesnt really care what the community thinks.

You are truly ignorant if you believe this.

Business's exist to make ________(1)
Customers exist to make use of business _________(2)
Business's will always favor a majority of customers / potential customers over a tiny ________(3) of customers.

1) money
2) services/products
3) minority

Get your stuff straight!

[Prezimonto]

My guess is this decision is something forced on Piranha by IGP. There was no discussion of third person until, what, towards the end of closed beta? They then said it wasn't going to happen, then said it was in something they were thinking about.

The thing that makes me sad is that again business/marketing stats win out over trying to do something original/different (like actually making an online more sim style game). World of Tanks rakes in cash, so lets mimic them.

The only upside I see is that third person view (tight) is more satisfying for melee combat... and wildly easier to make it work well. Darkfall online followed a system where you popped to a very tight 3rd person when in melee, and it didn't give you a serious advantage for lines of sight or seeing much past perhaps a 180° arc(which while better than the current cockpit view isn't wildly better).

What I hope they do is allow a third person view buy only melee combat or very short range weapons(scatter weapons and weapons at 100m or less)(small laser, SRM, machine gun, and MELEE(kick, punch, and WEAPONS)!

[DrBunji]

Pando, on 16 June 2013 - 04:53 AM, said:

You are truly ignorant if you believe this.

Business's exist to make ________(1)
Customers exist to make use of business _________(2)
Business's will always favor a majority of customers / potential customers over a tiny ________(3) of customers.

1) money
2) services/products
3) minority

Get your stuff straight!

No you apparently havent actually been active in the forums during the 3PV debacle, or you would remember the polls that hade the highest turn out of any poll ever posted on this forum and with almost 100% people voting "God please no".

If you are going to stick with your argument, then all of the forums are just a minority, and my point still stands that the Devs gives zero ***** about the forums.

[Bad Andy]

I personally couldn't give a jenner's rear torso if people play in third person or not. But I can't believe anyone a pig thinks splitting the already meagre game queues in half is a good idea.

[Gremlich Johns]

Werewolf486, on 20 May 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

How about having an icon of an eye above the 3rd person mechs, then we can just kill them right off the bat?

you mean a "3rd eye"( and I don't mean the painted hindu eye on a forehead)