2926 replies to this topic

[cyberFluke]

Bhael Fire, on 19 November 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

The fact is, I'm playing this game because it's the closest thing to a mech simulator out there. If they make 3rd person an option, I will have to play in 3rd person to maintain equal footing with other pilots that are using 3rd person due to the tactical advantage gained by 3rd person perspective. Because of this, the game will no longer feel like a simulator....and it would not be the game I signed up for.

While other versions of MW had 3rd person and it worked fine in single player campaign games, it did not work in multiplayer games for the exact reason mentioned. There is no way around the inherent problems 3rd person cameras present when dealing with multiplayer games...unless they just intend for the game to become entirely 3rd person.

This. A perfect summation of the root of the 3rd person problem.

[OneManWar]

I really dont care if people agree with me at this point, I'm so damn sick of all the threats on here. Every change they make or thing they tweak results in a bunch of people coming on here calling the development team morons and threatening for a refund. It's gotten out of hand, WAY out of hand. Nothing I say will change this, so as much as they vent about these changes I felt the need to vent against one of these people. As a programmer and general IT guy with VG design experience (as well as a big Battletech fan) it is DEPRESSING and EMBARASSING to even come here. You know what one of the main things that probably chases new players away? Any one of them that comes on the forums and sees the CONSTANT negativity from all the people here.

[Gunny McDuck]

I'd really like someone that thinks this is a good idea to answer my list of questions honestly and accurately.

[malibu43]

Gunny McDuck, on 19 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

I'd really like someone that thinks this is a good idea to answer my list of questions honestly and accurately.

Where is your list of questions?

[cyberFluke]

OneManWar, on 19 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

I really dont care if people agree with me at this point, I'm so damn sick of all the threats on here. Every change they make or thing they tweak results in a bunch of people coming on here calling the development team morons and threatening for a refund. It's gotten out of hand, WAY out of hand. Nothing I say will change this, so as much as they vent about these changes I felt the need to vent against one of these people. As a programmer and general IT guy with VG design experience (as well as a big Battletech fan) it is DEPRESSING and EMBARASSING to even come here. You know what one of the main things that probably chases new players away? Any one of them that comes on the forums and sees the CONSTANT negativity from all the people here.

You can surely understand my frustrations at being promised something, then that something being changed to something else, and I'm expected to be happy? As I've said this isn't the sole reason I'm flipping my desk, this is the "final straw". Where's my proper joystick support? Multi-monitor support? TrackIR? All these things were ***promised*** a long time ago, but have been overridden by the things that might bring in more cash in the short term. At the current rate of disappointment, the game will have no long-term future, simple as that.

[Bhael Fire]

OneManWar, on 19 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

I really dont care if people agree with me at this point, I'm so damn sick of all the threats on here. Every change they make or thing they tweak results in a bunch of people coming on here calling the development team morons and threatening for a refund. It's gotten out of hand, WAY out of hand. Nothing I say will change this, so as much as they vent about these changes I felt the need to vent against one of these people. As a programmer and general IT guy with VG design experience (as well as a big Battletech fan) it is DEPRESSING and EMBARASSING to even come here. You know what one of the main things that probably chases new players away? Any one of them that comes on the forums and sees the CONSTANT negativity from all the people here.

I'm not being negative when I say 3rd person option is a bad idea; I'm trying to give constructive criticism. I love the game because it's the best mech sim to come out in over a decade. It's exciting. I just would hate to see a good game get mired down with bad executive decisions.

There really is no way around the inherent problems that having multiple perspectives brings to multiplayer games; they need to decide if MWO is a 1st person game or a 3rd person game and build around that.

I suppose they could make it so players could decide which perspective they wanted to play in if they made separate match categories; one for 1st person and another for 3rd. So if you have your camera set to 3rd you can only play in matches that are set to 3rd person perspective. But this is still problematic because most players will use 3rd person because of the advantages it provides, thereby reducing the number of 1st person matches available. That would be bad for players that like 1st person.

At the end of the day, it still boils down to this; adding a 3rd person option would be a very bad business decision.

[grayson marik]

OneManWar, on 19 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

I really dont care if people agree with me at this point, I'm so damn sick of all the threats on here. Every change they make or thing they tweak results in a bunch of people coming on here calling the development team morons and threatening for a refund. It's gotten out of hand, WAY out of hand. Nothing I say will change this, so as much as they vent about these changes I felt the need to vent against one of these people. As a programmer and general IT guy with VG design experience (as well as a big Battletech fan) it is DEPRESSING and EMBARASSING to even come here. You know what one of the main things that probably chases new players away? Any one of them that comes on the forums and sees the CONSTANT negativity from all the people here.

Sure you have some point there. And by all means there would not be such an uproar if there would be an honest official statement from the management.

IF PGI would even insist to implement it, but AFTER bugs are out and all game modes in, and community warfare in... ok, hard to swallow but then they have the development time to try to do it right....

If they insist in implementing it now for no other reason as the "maybe" help to new players ( which is a really REALLY weak argument)
Then they deserve any s.hitstorm that they get... and they well deserve it then!

Not because they try to get more audience in - everyone can understand-... but because they add features that do nothing good to the core gameplay at all!
And because of skipping the real addictive features in favour of something that thousands of players told them would not work out by vote.

Maybe more new players take a look with nice eye candy 3rd... but that's not the reason they stay with a game!

Its story, atmosphere and entertaining gameplay what makes people to stay with games for years! And those are exactly the things that are skipped in order to investigate ways to get new people to have a look.

Go ahead, add 3rd...but first make sure there is an actual game to play! The current state is by all means not more than a demo version of a full game yet to come!

If you cannot go along with the desire to keep this more sim like at least keep the right ordering of things to be done:

- game first
- bugs bugs bugs fixing
- eyecandy LAST!

This looks all like mounting the horse from rear right now...

[Gunny McDuck]

malibu43, on 19 November 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

Where is your list of questions?

Do you consider yourself a casual or hardcore player?

If you play by yourself, do you plan on continuing to play this game by yourself once the meta-game and community warfare comes out?

Or are you just here as a casual player, dropping in occasionally with random groups?

Is this your first Mechwarrior/battletech game, or have you played other MW games or titles?

Would you rather play a game mode with no ammo, no heat, and a 3rd person view?

If available, would you always pilot in 3rd person?
Would you use it to look around corners and over hills or other terrain features?

[Atayu]

malibu43, on 19 November 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

They've said they're very aware of the ways that 3rd person was used as a cheat in the past and that they will ensure it won't result in an advantage if they put it in.

So WTF does everyone have their panties in a bunch about? This is the most over-dramatic, self-entitled, elitist group of people I've ever seen.

Because lots of games have tried to add a 3rd person that was not a advantage in game. None of those games succeeded and became primary 3rd person view games because it is the only way to be competitive in the. If they did find a way to do this they would be the first gaming company in history to do this witch is not going to happen.

[JP]

at least charge 40000 GXP or 20000MC for 3rd person per mech.

[malibu43]

Gunny McDuck, on 19 November 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

Do you consider yourself a casual or hardcore player?
- Somewhere in the middle...? I guess probably more casual. Some days I don't play at all. Some days maybe a couple of hours.

If you play by yourself, do you plan on continuing to play this game by yourself once the meta-game and community warfare comes out?
- If I have time, I play on TS. If I'm really short on time, can't commit, or can't find any dropships quickly on TS, I play by myself.

Or are you just here as a casual player, dropping in occasionally with random groups?
- See above.

Is this your first Mechwarrior/battletech game, or have you played other MW games or titles?
- I've played MW2 and MW3, but not much/any multiplayer. I played Mech Assault on XBOX a little but didn't like it.

Would you rather play a game mode with no ammo, no heat, and a 3rd person view?
- No.

If available, would you always pilot in 3rd person?
- No. I would probably only use it for taking screenshots when no combat is taking place.

Would you use it to look around corners and over hills or other terrain features?
- No.

Edited by malibu43, 19 November 2012 - 10:12 AM.

[malibu43]

Atayu, on 19 November 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

Because lots of games have tried to add a 3rd person that was not a advantage in game. None of those games succeeded and became primary 3rd person view games because it is the only way to be competitive in the. If they did find a way to do this they would be the first gaming company in history to do this witch is not going to happen.

So basically everyone's upset right now because we don't think the devs are going to do what they say they're going to do? All this arguing is based on assumptions (different assumptions, at that)? That seems like a silly waste of time to me.

*edit - I understand that in some people's eyes the devs have a track record of not doing what they say they're going to do. But the bottom line is that the cores of both the arguments for and against 3rd person are based on big assumptions at this point. So how about we stop wasting our time right now and wait and argue about it after we no longer have to make assumptions about how 3rd person is or isn't implemented?

There are plenty of threads in the "New Players" section and in the "General" sections that need constructive input.

Edited by malibu43, 19 November 2012 - 10:20 AM.

[Fentus]

If you add 3rd person make sure it is only able to be used in easy mode and never ranked matches.

[Oy of MidWorld]

OneManWar, on 19 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

I really dont care if people agree with me at this point, I'm so damn sick of all the threats on here. Every change they make or thing they tweak results in a bunch of people coming on here calling the development team morons and threatening for a refund. It's gotten out of hand, WAY out of hand. Nothing I say will change this, so as much as they vent about these changes I felt the need to vent against one of these people. As a programmer and general IT guy with VG design experience (as well as a big Battletech fan) it is DEPRESSING and EMBARASSING to even come here. You know what one of the main things that probably chases new players away? Any one of them that comes on the forums and sees the CONSTANT negativity from all the people here.

You come in here calling people names (crybaby, thug, fool, even using "nerd" as if it's a bad thing...), then complain about negativity on the forums? Are you for real? You feel it's gotten out of hand? It's depressing you? You don't care if people agree with you any longer? Have you considered that you might value your own opinion too high? That refined opinion you clearly must have as a programmer and general IT guy?

Threads like this one have a certain kind of democratic quality. People have the right to voice their concerns. So do you, but please do so politely. People are worried about spending development time on a feature which is not easily implemented and possibly game-breaking, when the game that was promised (and paid for by many on these forums) is in the state of a team-deathmatch demo. Because that's what it is right now. A great one, but a demo. The devs desperately need this devolopment time to start shelling out content. Larger maps, gamemodes, stuff like that.

Furthermore I think collisions must be back in the game.

[grayson marik]

malibu43, on 19 November 2012 - 10:16 AM, said:

So basically everyone's upset right now because we don't think the devs are going to do what they say they're going to do? All this arguing is based on assumptions (different assumptions, at that)? That seems like a silly waste of time to me.

Nope we are upset because the devs exactly DON'T do what they stated they'd do!

It was stated, even promised, this would be a first person only simulation based title.

Now the course changes and we are fed up with absolutely nonsense about new players struggle with torso turning vs leg movement. And THAT'S what is most annoying!

The assumption a 3rd person view cannot be implemented properly preventing abuse is only the cherry on top of the cake!
And the cake is the exact time, they come around the corner with that stuff - before all the good things of mechwarrior are in... they got everybody's mouth watering with descriptions of different game modes, community warfare, bit.ching betty, large scale team fights... skill based matchmaking, even custom matchmaking for coordinated team vs team drops aside from the automated matchmaking.....

And what do they come around with, without even going hard on the current bugs? 3rd!

THAT is the core of the anger! We do not say they are incompetent ( except some angry venting side notes maybe, which are not to be taken over serious)
We are saying they investigate the wrong thing for the wrong reasons at the wrong time and breaking promises at the same time doing so.

And I think that the players at least deserve an honest explanation of the reasons behind this if nothing more. ( without ifs and whens and contradictions ...)

Edited by grayson marik, 19 November 2012 - 10:36 AM.

[LynxFury]

The only real question would be whether there's an option to turn it on and off for matches. As long as 3rd person wasnt' forces as an option on the majority of players here it wouldn't effect them.

To me much of this is like a new model of truck.
I love green trucks...that's the color I always buy. I always ignored red truck drivers other than give than an occasional scowl when I met them as stop lights.

The company promised they'll make a new model in green--I'm happy :-)

Later the company announces they are considering making a red version because it's been a common request.

A poll goes up among green color truck drivers...and low and behold 90% don't want a red truck.
Some are even claim because they purchased a green truck, they have some special right to deny others that want red trucks and the company shouldn't offer the trucks in red. (It's the silliest of arguments really.)

As long as the company doesn't come up with green trucks with red quarter panels or some other in between hybrid that forces those green truck lovers to use partially red trucks...or visa versa, honestly who gives a crap.

Keep driving your green trucks. The company gave you what they promised. Be happy to have a new model truck to drive.

[malibu43]

grayson marik, on 19 November 2012 - 10:29 AM, said:

Nope we are upset because the devs exactly DON'T do what they stated they'd do! It was stated, even promised, this would be a first person only simulation based title. Now the course changes and we are fed up with absolutely nonsense about new players struggle with torso turning vs leg movement.

Well, they made that promise early in closed beta, and now that the game is open to more casual players in closed beta, they are getting new feedback from potential customers about a way to improve their game-play experience. I doubt anyone here has access to their market research (the forums are not necessarily representative of their true market), so we have no way of knowing how many players have asked for or would benefit from making a change to camera view options. If they've received significant feedback on the issue, it would be downright stupid of PGI not to consider it (and that's all they're doing at this point, CONSIDERING it). They need to attract lots of players to this game. The hardcore forum members are not nearly enough to support the game.

Simulators are a dying genre. In the 90's, stores were packed with flight simulators. Now, the only company make combat flight simulators is ED, who gets most of their money through government contracts. Simulators need new blood (AKA younger players). How do you attract a new, formerly FPS-only, player to simulator? You make it easy for them to get into. If they want a 3rd person view, you find a way to give it to them without completely screwing up the game (maybe compromises are necessary). You don't say "Screw you lazy noob! L2P!" Because if you do that, the "lazy noob" walks away with his "lazy" money (which, BTW, is worth just as much on the open market as "harcore leet" money). And then what happens? We don't get a super hard-core mech simulator. We get nothing. Because there wasn't enough money coming in to justify the expense of developing and maintaining the game.

grayson marik, on 19 November 2012 - 10:29 AM, said:

And THAT'S what is most annoying! The assumption a 3rd person view cannot be implemented properly preventing abuse is only the cherry on top of the cake! And the cake is the exact time, they come around the corner with that stuff - before all the good things of mechwarrior are in... they got everybody's mouth watering with descriptions of different game modes, community warfare, ******** betty, large scale team fights... skill based matchmaking, even custom matchmaking for coordinated team vs team drops aside from the automated matchmaking..... ...

Dude. All that stuff is still coming. I doubt that everyone on the staff dropped everything they were doing to work on 3rd person camera.

Edited by malibu43, 19 November 2012 - 10:53 AM.

[grayson marik]

LynxFury, on 19 November 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

The only real question would be whether there's an option to turn it on and off for matches. As long as 3rd person wasnt' forces as an option on the majority of players here it wouldn't effect them.

To me much of this is like a new model of truck.
I love green trucks...that's the color I always buy. I always ignored red truck drivers other than give than an occasional scowl when I met them as stop lights.

The company promised they'll make a new model in green--I'm happy :-)

Later the company announces they are considering making a red version because it's been a common request.

A poll goes up among green color truck drivers...and low and behold 90% don't want a red truck.
Some are even claim because they purchased a green truck, they have some special right to deny others that want red trucks and the company shouldn't offer the trucks in red. (It's the silliest of arguments really.)

As long as the company doesn't come up with green trucks with red quarter panels or some other in between hybrid that forces those green truck lovers to use partially red trucks...or visa versa, honestly who gives a crap.

Keep driving your green trucks. The company gave you what they promised. Be happy to have a new model truck to drive.

The root of this? The view of the battlefield is a client side thing and mostly done in the MFC model ( Model(data)/ View (eyecandy)/ Control ( things to control the data and to make boom ^^)
these 3 things are to be kept as independant as possible to each other, which makes modular development easy, fast and the code easy to maintain and extend.

on the other hand it opens up doors and gates for abuse since the "View" part is 99.9% done on the client side.
this means: you implement that selectable option ( even if you split 1st and 3rd queues) you open pandoras box for cheaters and lamers, who try to manage to activate 3rd inside the 1st queue - which then leads to a situation where you have to use 3rd in order to stay competitive.

[Usagi]

So, someone mentioned that the 3rd person shift (if it's the worst case scenario many are imagining) is being fuled by the money-concerned parties behind the game, not the developers themselves. Thismay be so, and the lack of response from the official types may be related to that.

I'm just theorizing here, but, what if there has been no response because the developers have been trying to cinvince the investors that doing what they want is a bass ackwords idea and are trying to point to this resposne to say "look at how much you will lose getting what you want".

I have no idea if this is true...but a complete lack of a prompt response that was supposedly only delayed by a flight being in the air needs some explination. I choose to go with a rosy one.

[Oy of MidWorld]

Usagi, on 19 November 2012 - 10:47 AM, said:

So, someone mentioned that the 3rd person shift (if it's the worst case scenario many are imagining) is being fuled by the money-concerned parties behind the game, not the developers themselves. Thismay be so, and the lack of response from the official types may be related to that.

I'm just theorizing here, but, what if there has been no response because the developers have been trying to cinvince the investors that doing what they want is a bass ackwords idea and are trying to point to this resposne to say "look at how much you will lose getting what you want".

I have no idea if this is true...but a complete lack of a prompt response that was supposedly only delayed by a flight being in the air needs some explination. I choose to go with a rosy one.

I'd love that thought.