2926 replies to this topic

[Lord Rip]

Stickjock, on 17 November 2012 - 05:20 AM, said:

I really wish people would stop saying over 90% of the community are against it... the poll everyone refers to, yes, shows as of this morning 91.55% (even better for you stat spouters...)... but...

3,244 members have cast votes
2,969 voted No... 91.55%
401,128 total registered users on the forums...

So, that 2,969 isn't close to 90% of the community... it's more like .007%, so less than 1% of the community... yes, I know, most of those member that haven't voted probably don't even use the forums, but still...

If you knew anything about statistics and polling you would realize that the opinion of all the users would not be far from that of a small sample. With 90%+ saying no in the poll the chances of it dropping below 80% given a full survey would be slim to none. Face it a very small minority would want 3rd person. End of discussion.

[DirePhoenix]

Lord Rip, on 17 November 2012 - 02:29 PM, said:

If you knew anything about statistics and polling you would realize that the opinion of all the users would not be far from that of a small sample. With 90%+ saying no in the poll the chances of it dropping below 80% given a full survey would be slim to none. Face it a very small minority would want 3rd person. End of discussion.

If you knew anything about statistics, you'd know that "representative samples" are complete bull****. Polls only reflect the people that participate in them.

EDIT: Not to say that I am for a third-person combat view because I'm not. I would, however, accept a third-person NON-COMBAT view.

Edited by DirePhoenix, 17 November 2012 - 02:39 PM.

[Lord Rip]

Stickjock, on 17 November 2012 - 08:43 AM, said:

Again... that 90% number... those that voted on that poll are NOT 90% of the players... they represent less than 1% of the total registered player base... but either way... it's as Prosperity said...

Tho' no one seems to want to read and comprehend what Garth posted...

Honestly this thread should be locked down as well... far too many disrespectful, flame filled comments by far too many posters...

Fine then next patch MAKE every person who logs in vote on it. If even 33% vote for it I am ok with it. Do you think they will do that? Hell no, because they KNOW most of us oppose it. It really isn't even a contest.

[Shredhead]

Tzarbomb, on 17 November 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

i understand that with a dev team so adamantly against 3rd person to suddenly change their mind on the subject is extremely upsetting to the sim playerbase. but would you rather bite your tongue and allow 3rd person to be implemented and let the game survive, or thrive for that matter, or would you still stand fast on your opinion and watch the game crumble around you?

with piranha changing their standpoint on this 3rd person thing must obviously mean they're backs are against the wall and they need to do something drastic to bring more players in.

i've played mechwarrior since the beginning. put hours upon hours upon hours of time into these games. spent most of my teenage years glued to my computer competing in MW4VL. still had hundreds upon thousands of tactical battles with 3rd person view. 3rd person may break alot of players connection with the game, but it will not with me. mechwarrior is mechwarrior no matter how it is played to me.

If they are backs against the walls then that's because they didn't listen to the community in the first place! We told them to integrate VOIP, to make a training mission, to segregate newbs from veterans months ago! What happened? Nothing! They rushed out to go Open Beta with hoping the community would be able to hold all those new players so that they wouldn't have to invest time in programming all that stuff.
Now that it turns out too less, too late they want to p*ss off that very base that provided them with the biggest crowdfunding ever? They should feel extremely bad about this!

[shotokan5]

It should have been Joystick friendly when it started months ago. But now how smart an idea was that? DOH its low priority. Remember that also. What difference would it have made. Well if I had to explain then someone besides me is really Stupid.

[Lord Rip]

James Rydak, on 17 November 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:

Third person doesn't freak me out as long as its segregated. For example, have a set of Solaris maps and matches where you can expect coverage from every angle. I'd gladly play both styles.
--
TAZ

Just segregate it all together. Keep making our game and let some other group raise their own money and GIVE them permission to work on a totally separate MOD version of the games that has third person view, secret power-ups, and turbo chargers. Call it MWOjr and let them have their own play land. But this one is ours and it is for a sim not another 360 port.

I would bet on this one maintaining players years longer than that one would (till we all started dying off).

[Robottiimu2000]

Umm.. how about a tutorial?

[Smudge]

Tzarbomb, on 17 November 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

with piranha changing their standpoint on this 3rd person thing must obviously mean they're backs are against the wall and they need to do something drastic to bring more players in.

They don't need to do anything durastic just fix the bugs and add the content that they have promised. I'm sure completing those tasks will make masses of people come, and still keep the player base they already have.

[Kavoh]

This number debating is really making my head hurt. When people do a survey, they take a decent sample size and go off that. It generally reflects the opinion of the population as a whole.

For whatever reason you people defending third person think that 3000 is a small number... WELL GUESS WHATS SMALLER? Yea, the 150~ that were FOR it. If a "huge number" of people were asking PGI for it, you can be DAMN sure that there would have been more defense for the implementation, instead of 150 people.

It was a decent sample size, and because it was such a ridiculously one sided poll, I am failing to even begin to imagine how suddenly, despite the poll being 150 to 3000, that you all just know for SURE, that the 90% of the rest of the population just happen to be siding with the 150. Get over it, 3rd person is garbage, is should NEVER be implemented, and you are pathetic for claiming that this poll doesn't provide any sort of idea of how the playerbase feels.

We actually HAVE proof that an overwhelming majority of people DO NOT WANT 3RD PERSON at all. So, with all this chest thumping calling us hardcore and out to ruin this game for (lol) "the rest of the population". Where is YOUR proof? Cause this PGI number is complete BS.

[CyBerkut]

Tzarbomb, on 17 November 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

http://www.mobygames...ping-a-tank.jpg

http://www.mobygames...ngs-are-not.jpg

look at those pictures and let me know why 3rd person is such a distinct advantage? unless you have a mech literally sitting on your A** you can't see behind you. as for seeing around buildings? you can't do that either. 3rd person is not an advantage.

Put a hill, wall or building in front of your mech that is a touch taller than your mech is. Now you can see that mech off in the distance, but he can't see you (especially if he's in 1PV mode). In MW4, you can target the mech that way, and if you have jump jets you have a tremendous advantage... you pop up, shoot, and drop back down, exposing yourself to enemy fire for a minimal time, all the while maintaining your target lock. Rinse and repeat.

Put that building, or wall in front of you, such that your are standing right behind it next to the corner. With 3PV you can see around that corner without being exposed to enemy fire from ahead of you, whereas with 1PV you only see the wall.

Quote

i don't want to stare through a cockpit and shoot things. i want to see my mech wreaking havoc on everything. and with visual customization of your mech...what's the point if you can only stare through a cockpit? i want to see my creation. there's no point in customization if there's no way to look at it in game.

You appear to be in a distinct minority in this community. Hopefully, the developers will eventually add in a replay capability where you can watch everything in 3PV glory, to your heart's content.

As to the point of having to stare through a cockpit... that is how sims are done. You are the pilot, you are not the mech. It was a stated goal of the devs right from the start that a player should feel like a pilot, not the mech.

As for customizations... perhaps you could find happiness in doing them for other people to gaze upon in wide wonder. Try to enjoy viewing the other 15 mechs in the game.

Quote

3rd person will bring mech pilots in like a flood...hardcore sim games are a niche and piranha wants to bring the mechwarrior franchise back into the limelight. good luck doing that with a sim game.

Perhaps so, although I happen to disagree. In any case, it was marketed to us as a sim. If the devs lose sight of that, I suspect it would be a mistake. As was alluded to in that recording that touched off this storm, there are people who will puff up their chests and threaten to leave... but in reality will stay and keep playing. However, there are also people who don't say diddly in forums but just quietly vote with their wallets. CCP / Eve Online should stand as an example to anyone in the gaming business who starts to buy into the philosophy of "Watch what they do, not what they say". The hubris of the CEO in dealing with the roll out of the vanity items stores and Captain's Quarters, etc. came back to bite them in the butt. They tried to placate the player base with statements that did not fully commit to ruling something out in a clear, non-evasive manner. [Which sure seems to have some parallels with the statements to date about 3PV...] It didn't work and the players pushed back. That in turn got handled poorly, and then the player base essentially kicked them in the groin. CCP finally summoned the player council, and the CEO eventually ended up issuing an apology and actually laid out what they had messed up on.

For many people, if they become disappointed with the product, they won't bother with throwing a tantrum in the forums... they'll just move on to spend their disposable gaming funds on other offerings. I didn't leave Eve Online over the above mentioned incident, but it certainly set the stage by shedding light on CCP's mindset and methodology. When the game became less enjoyable later on, I saw that much less hope for it getting better later, so I just stopped renewing.

As for the current brouhaha... I would advise PGI to learn from it. Yes, the player base loves to get a heads-up on what is coming. While I admire PGI's willingness to share target dates for upcoming features (with caveats), as they have seen some people just don't seem to grasp the concept of what is in those caveats. If players are going to hammer them over not meeting target dates on some features, then don't be surprised if they switch to a "It'll be in there, when it's ready" approach. [Which has worked pretty well for Eagle Dynamics, btw). As to this 3PV thing... before Russ ever danced into that minefield on a podcast, the forthcoming posting from Bryan that we all await, should have been already written and ready to post immediately. It's not like it's a surprise to PGI that the issue is a lightning rod. Setting off a firestorm like that, and then standing by with a fire hose that hasn't even been charged yet is not the best way to put your business in a positive light.

None of the above is meant as a severe slam upon PGI. I would just like to see them get better at handling this sort of thing. So far, it's probably just another hiccup along the way... but hiccups are still annoying, and they often do not go away as quickly as you would like.

[AEgg]

You can't take a poll on the forms as worth much of anything. Forums are a VERY small minority of the playerbase, and on top of that, they're always made up of the most extreme ends of the spectrum. Since third person was included in all the previous mechwarrior games, and shows up in nearly every game with vehicles of any kind, excluding it is definitely out of the ordinary.

In case no one's noticed, nearly all sim games have a third person view. Sims just tend to be single-player games. Another important point is that the FOV you get from third person is far closer to reality than the FOV you get from first person. In reality, you have peripheral vision and can turn your head and look around, giving you near 180 FOV. In a game, you can't, so you have something like 70-90 degrees of visibility from first person, and around 100-160 from third.

In short, the advantages from third person are a non-issue, the disadvantage is that people who don't like first person won't ever use it. Third person could be implemented well, or it could be implemented poorly.

I don't really care a lot about how or if it's implemented. Third person in the previous mechwarrior games was mostly useful for the downtime you spent walking from point A to point B during single-player missions. Since that doesn't happen here, I don't mind the loss of third person but wouldn't mind it being included either.

[Usagi]

AEgg, on 17 November 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

You can't take a poll on the forms as worth much of anything. Forums are a VERY small minority of the playerbase, and on top of that, they're always made up of the most extreme ends of the spectrum. Since third person was included in all the previous mechwarrior games, and shows up in nearly every game with vehicles of any kind, excluding it is definitely out of the ordinary.

In case no one's noticed, nearly all sim games have a third person view. Sims just tend to be single-player games. Another important point is that the FOV you get from third person is far closer to reality than the FOV you get from first person. In reality, you have peripheral vision and can turn your head and look around, giving you near 180 FOV. In a game, you can't, so you have something like 70-90 degrees of visibility from first person, and around 100-160 from third.

In short, the advantages from third person are a non-issue, the disadvantage is that people who don't like first person won't ever use it. Third person could be implemented well, or it could be implemented poorly.

I don't really care a lot about how or if it's implemented. Third person in the previous mechwarrior games was mostly useful for the downtime you spent walking from point A to point B during single-player missions. Since that doesn't happen here, I don't mind the loss of third person but wouldn't mind it being included either.

You, and many other people, seem to not get what 3rd person means. This isn't an attack, I think you just misunderstand the problem. A first person view gives you vision from a single point (your own eyes, basically). third person gives you a field of vision that doesn't come from one central, rotating point. It gives vision from a point originating behind and above you, which can then be moves around where the frist person view originates in an orbital fasion. This is effectivly giving you an orbital ring of first eprson views, that extend beyond what single point of sight gives you.

As a more tangible example, go face a wall, at a convex corner., and look aroind, to see what you can see. YOu probabaly want to squat down a little to make the next part easier. After douing that, move back one foot, and move your head up one foot, and look around. You field of vision is immensly increased. Then, go back to your original position, facing the wall, turn 90 degrees left, then move back and up one foot again and look around. then from the start do the same thing rotating 90 degrees right. One of those directions will have you looking, clearly, past the corner you are facing from the original position.

All of these views are what you get with a third person view. To claim this is "insignificatly" more of a field of vision then first person is, mathmatically, mistaken.

Edited by Usagi, 17 November 2012 - 04:33 PM.

[mekabuser]

Robottiimu2000, on 17 November 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

Umm.. how about a tutorial?

lol. right,
i dnt even cven care about this discussion because the game at this point is and runs so bad its moot.

[Obadiah333]

Yeah, we've read the polls. We've read the forums. We understand that the majority of the players don't want 3rd person view.

Oh, we're putting it in anyway. [ Insert lame @$$ reason why here ]. Isn't democracy great!

[AEgg]

Usagi, on 17 November 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

You, and many other people, seem to not get what 3rd person means. This isn't an attack, I think you just misunderstand the problem. A first person view gives you vision from a single point (your own eyes, basically). third person gives you a field of vision that doesn't come from one central, rotating point. It gives vision from a point originating behind and above you, which can then be moves around where the frist person view originates in an orbital fasion. This is effectivly giving you an orbital ring of first eprson views, that extend beyond what single point of sight gives you.

As a more tangible example, go face a wall, at a convex corner., and look aroind, to see what you can see. YOu probabaly want to squat down a little to make the next part easier. After douing that, move back one foot, and move your head up one foot, and look around. You field of vision is immensly increased. Then, go back to your original position, facing the wall, turn 90 degrees left, then move back and up one foot again and look around. then from the start do the same thing rotating 90 degrees right. One of those directions will have you looking, clearly, past the corner you are facing from the original position.

All of these views are what you get with a third person view. To claim this is "insignificatly" more of a field of vision then first person is, mathmatically, mistaken.

Yes, to an extent. The problem with your argument is that a first person view is NOT a "fixed, rotating point". Because you can't rotate it. There aren't enough control axis to do so without losing control of something else.

In reality, you CAN turn your head in first person. (You also have peripheral vision, which you won't in a game without six monitors). Admittedly, with your example you can do so from the third person location as well, but in theory third person is locked and first person is a freecam. In games, however, they're both locked, which is why first person in games is just as unrealistic as third person is. In one case you see far to little and in the other a bit too much.

It's true that you can see a very slight amount more around corners. The important question is whether or not that even matters. My argument is that it doesn't.

Seeing the enemy first isn't all that important in this game (since it takes more than one shot to kill). And once you've seen the enemy the first time you aren't going to lose it. It's rare that A: you first encounter an enemy at nearly point-blank (which is where this makes a difference) and B: that you continue to fight it in such a way that it's able to repeatedly lose you around corners.

As for looking over hills, that depends on how they implement the camera. MW3 had a third person camera that was at ground level, slightly to the side of the mech. That eliminates any extra vertical view. Other games (particularly some arcade racing games) just move the third person camera backward but don't increase the height at all. It makes for a pretty unplayable view, but it doesn't give height advantage.

Honestly though, I'd love if "true" third person was a spectate feature, while in-game third person was equivalent to the "Enhanced Imaging" view in MW2. In short, you can ONLY see terrain and what you already have targeted, and EVERYTHING is drawn as a wireframe on black background. But if we get full third person, I won't mind it either.

[R01D5]

Again, to the point of me being called a troll or just tedious at best, how about a 3rd person view without an advantage over the 1st person view, for example, TUNNELVISION! You can actually view your mech from behind but the flanks remain blanked out viola the new guys get the 3rd person view the veterans cant complain about advantages over the 1st person view. And for those of you without imagination, no the blanked out sides of the 3rd person view would not be, actually blank, but filled with Mech status, weapons, battlefield information, bloddy shoe sizes, you name it they can stuff it in there. Compromise achieved...who am I kidding, certainly you will find something else to ***** about... its easier to complain than put your brains to work on a solution to this dillema. Retain calm, and lets figure it all out in a manner which wont make Kerensky turn in his grave.

Edited by R01D5, 17 November 2012 - 05:44 PM.

[Ninja Penguin]

If you are truely worried about new players getting the hang of the game, instead of making 3rd person... why dont you make a proving ground where they learn to drive the mech on an obstical course where they learn to drive and shoot. Drive in one directioon, shoot in an other.

Further more... make it so they have to pass the grounds before they can actually get into a match.

This map can double as a place to test new mech designs before they take them out or spend Cbills/MC on them

Multipul birds downed with one stone, and not ******* off the community

[Rejarial Galatan]

there is no positive spin you can put onto third person being a legitimate and viable option. No matter how you try to limit third person view, given enough time, players will find a way to make an exploit of the FOV it would give and minimize the risk to themselves in seeing around or over obstacles that other wise are impossible to see around in first person until you risk part or all of your mech to achieve the correct line of sight. The ONLY way to make it so 3rd PV is no more tactically viable than first person view is to slam the camera in soo close to the mech as to be basically FIRST PERSON anyway, as in, perhaps oh, I dont know, a view from only inside the cockpit behind and above the pilots head, so no external view is viable aside from what the windshield shows.

I state this as pure fact now: Paul Inouye of PGI, the LEAD DESIGNER, stated on 12 July 2012 that this game was being designed as 100% FIRST PERSON ONLY. The website itself, under the GAME tab when scrolled far enough down, states a similar thing. These are not guesses on my part, these are easily located facts.
Exhibit A: http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

Exhibit B:
How does gameplay work?

MechWarrior Online puts MechWarriors into a first-person, team-based, tactical battlefield where the victors swim in the spoils of war and are rewarded with the almighty C-Bill (in-game currency).

To do anything other than this at this point, is on the edge of literal false advertising and, well, a HUGE breach of our trust and an open LIE by them, which, as I have said before as have many of us: harms their public image.

Edited by Rejarial Galatan, 17 November 2012 - 07:13 PM.

[shabowie]

They shouldn't devote any resources to adding 3rd person views to the game against their own original vision and the wishes of the vast majority of their users who have responded to it. There are other serious issues which need attention that are driving away players.

Also, saying it's an emotional reaction on the part of the player base is a slander. Logical reasons are given why people are opposed to it. The best case scenario in case 3rd and 1st person players are segregated is a fractured player base and the difficulty of balancing gameplay mechanics that will not be the same from different perspectives. The worst case is playing together in which case 3rd person will provide concrete advantages in performance while lowering immersion and cheapening the game experience.

Edited by shabowie, 17 November 2012 - 07:32 PM.

[Schiz0]

R01D5, on 17 November 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

Again, to the point of me being called a troll or just tedious at best, how about a 3rd person view without an advantage over the 1st person view, for example, TUNNELVISION!

That TUNNELVISON™ isn't really an option, since it wouldn't change anything about the problem, which (according to the podcast) new players allegedly might face and thereby become discouraged - namely maneuvering the Mech.
That means, PGI wants/wanted to bring in 3rd person view just because they want these new players to see more of their surroundings, and thus feel more comfortable while steering their Mech.
So you see, TUNNELVISION® doesn't make much sense in this matter.
Imho, there is absolutely no need to reinvent the wheel. The solution is already ingame - Minimap™

Edited by Schiz0, 17 November 2012 - 07:33 PM.