2926 replies to this topic

[JadeViper]

According to the podcast, when Pirahna has taken MWO to conferances and demos, the #1 failing for new players has been observed to be the lack of meaningful visual feedback to the movement systems. New novel (novel meaning completely new to MW) players have thrown their hands up because they can't comprehend leg/torso. The dev's said they tried the 'tank' analogy and others, but those movement comparisons offered little mitigation to novel-player frustration. Don't call these players pithetic or dumb. They are just different players without our strong MW backround.

As to those saying they would quit or want a refund, you guys should really, really listen to the podcast... because they address the psychology and demographic of "[forum] players who cry ragequit and 'I want my money back' " which I now endlessly chuckle at new posts that do just that. Peeps who claim to quit over something rarely do, and those who cry refund tend to ultimately spend more. Its a beautiful, comic irony. The small, small minority of players who do read the forums, and even smaller minority who post, seem to think "the skweaky wheel gets the grease." Please keep in mind MWO, I think the podcast say, has over a million registered players. The 'phantom fanbase' is the majority of players, not the forum-goers. Please keep perspective. An 'overwhelming majority' here in a forum thread only indicates a majority of this extreme minority demographic... which is ultimately a blip on the map.

Not to say our opinions don't count (Well, statistically, the aforementioned skweaky wheels don't, and are largely ignored lmao). I still can't see why you would quit because of something that you wont need. They are NOT changing the game, they are adding a completely optional feature. IMO, its like taking Grand Torismo, and screaming ragequit becasue they introduce an automatic tranmission. We'll all still play manual, but why rage out at the game for offering something that mitigates an generally counterintuitive mechanic? Can you drive a manual in RL? I sure can't! But I can in a racing game. It's not the same.

So please keep the perspective that we here are a minority, those who are indifferent (aka not against nor for 3rdp) are likely to never visit this forum, and even less likely to post. You can tell from my tiny number of forum posts that I'm generally part of the non-forum demographic. So there is probably a few hundred thousand people out there who have no issue with other players using a new feature. It like saying "OMG Artemis I quit I don't want them! Refund!" Uh, don't equip them if its not your style. I hate to be snarky, but people claiming I, or much moreso the Devs, as ignorant is illogical, aggrivating, and downright dense.

I spam Cockpit Free-look. I doubt you guys do. It gives me an 'unfair advantage' over players who don't as I can see far more than just straight ahead; 360 with twisting and free-look. I see 180 degrees at any given time. You see 80. I don't need the 360 sensor. Am I unfair because I choose to optimize my cockpit in a way that you choose not? I see 100 degrees more than you do. If you have a fixed 3rd person cam, I still see more than you.

Most all of us in here like 1st person infinately more than 3rd. Put on the other guy's shoes for a sec and try to see why he/she wants it. Heck, I personally would never use a 3rd person cam (except for appreciating the beauty of the game and being in awe of myself XD)! Yet I'm all for it, 'cause there are people out there who want it, and more out there who need it. If you disagree with that point, you need to start reading press releases. Why shut them down just because we use 1st? I still submit "don't knock it before you try it." Playing other 3rd person games isn't trying it.

Additionally, on the separation of servers remedy, BF3 did this wonderfully with tanks. the vast majority of servers allow 3rd person. Harcore servers force 1st. If we let our fanbase grow (MWO already has all the MW players recruited with the founders program. the font has run dry...), if "RAAAGE omg they use 3rd eprson camera despite it having no impact on my experience!" cool their jumpjets, we too could potentially support players who want to play or want this feature, and the hardcore players can be segregated if they want.

I still say this is BETA and we should doe everything in our power to playtest new ideas, not shoot them down because other companies failed. BF3 did it. Rainbow 6 (who has abusible 3rd person by design, yet makes it work in MP) did it. Let Pirahna try. Them trying cannot hurt. I'm all for shooting down 3rd person... but only after they have been given the opportunity to try to prove they can develop appropraitely.


...I look forward to chuckling at the skweaks in reply, and actually having a discussion with those who are thoughtful.

Edited by JadeViper, 27 November 2012 - 06:11 AM.

[Firefly]

JadeViper, on 26 November 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

I submit to those who shout "NO!" to helping us grow MWO and open the game to players with other backgrounds, to give an example, specifically, in MWO, of how you've seen 3rd person abused. Yeah, no examples yet are out there...

Third person, by the very laws of physics and pure common sense, is a specific feature, just as first-person or top-down is. You cannot really change it. Yes you can alter what you can do with it, but third-person is... third-person. Its fundamentals haven't changed much, if at all, since introduced to gaming.

Third-person point of view, therefore, makes exploiting and abuse possible the exact same way that it does in every other game that has third-person. I could cite examples all day, but I really don't need to. Whether it exists, currently, in MWO is irrelevant. We can adequately project what abuse it will see by taking other gaming models and predicting their usage here. Especially considering it was in MW4 and all the old faded-glory try-hards like Renzokuken who lack the skill to compete otherwise are practically chomping at the bit to see it come back, for that very reason: so they can wall-hump, switch to 3d-person POV, angle out to the corner and look around, I think you see where this is going.

If there's a way to fix that, I'm all for it. Otherwise, don't put it in. Plain and simple.

[JadeViper]

Firefly, on 27 November 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

If there's a way to fix that, I'm all for it. Otherwise, don't put it in. Plain and simple.

There are, which is why I say let the Dev's give it a go. I can BS a couple simple very viable options.

1) Fixed 3rd eprson cam:
The issue of 'peeking' arises from camera having to much freedom. If you constrict the z axis to a // (// = parallel) plane to the ground, the cam cannot be raised or lowered to look over things. Likewise, peeking in the horizontal is due to cameras being too far from the player. If, as the Pod cast interviewers mention, you have a tight camera to the hip or shoulder (I like the hip option), then the camera could not 'peek' without exposing at least an arm or side torso. We are NOT talking about using a 3rd person orbital camera. The camera is 'locked' to the torso. It is not a free cam. If its kept very close to the rig, peeking still exposes you.

2) Dynamic occulsion:

Occlusion is the the prevention of rendering by the engine based on LOS calculations. A player could have a completely free camera if the world (or just the enemy team) occludes relative to what the 'cockpit' hitbox could see. The result would be a 'fog of war' relative to your rig. Sure, you can peek around all the objects you want with a free cam, the trick is that noone will render unless your cockpit could see it from first person. Occlusion ability is based on on the engine, and I imagine crysis could support dynamic occulsion. I know Source engine can do it, and that much less powerful than crysis. If your sensors have the target, you'd still have the billbaord red box icon which you could see through walls anyway, and when you get the target info on someone you cant draw LOS to, only in that case could that enemy render to the player without a legitimate LoS.

Those are 2 functional options that remove or mitigate advantage. Occulsion removes the advantage entirely, but is more work for the engine and the devs. A tight-fixed-hip cam would provide the desired visual feedback, while still forcing the individual to expose himself to peek, as we do now in 1st person (jousting). He might need slightly less exposure, but not enough to grant an advantage. I can already limit peek exposure; like I said before, I spam Cockpit free look. To peek, you only need to twist a tiny bit, then freelook to the extreme left and right to peek. This way I don't lead with my arm, I need to step out less than someonw who just twists to peek, and only expose a very narrow amount of a side torso. the 3rd person player couldnt do this: I can peek with less exposure in first person then he could with my 3rd eprson cam. *sings "anything you can do [in 3rd] I can do better [in 1st]"

I agree that long distance orbital cams are fail, and the MW4 ones were waaay to far from the rig. It should be attached just behid the hip to show the top of legs at a fixed x and y relative to the rig, and only pitch up and down from that position. That would be very fair.

And I bet the devs can come up with far more clever ways to do it as they know the ins and out and limitations of their system.

Edited by JadeViper, 27 November 2012 - 07:28 AM.

[grayson marik]

Alright, so they got to a gaming convention and there they get the 3rdP demand from new players.... ok.
They try the tank analogy and it does not work on these people... so what?

This leads to the thought: "Give them 3rd and all is solved?"
Rather than to the thought:
"We need a little immersive in game tutorial or a tiny 3D model of the mech viewable on a cockpit screen representing the mech from outside to make 1stP work for new people?"

Well, I really strongly believed that I would never ever say a sentence starting with " The youth of today.."

But if the youth of today cannot grasp a mechanic close to a tank turret or even CoD strafing ... we should just stop anything.
Burn our houses, stop science, stop any development into any direction, kill ourselves because humankind has degenerated in a way, that will mean end of world as soon as the majority of today adults get out of working age.

Ok, that was more the emotional thing... now for real:

Dear dev's, even if you really get that number of requests for a a more "easy" (shiver) view.
Have you really tried anything else like tutorials, little in cockpit screen with small 3d model of the mech or any of the other obvious things suggested here over and over again?

No you have not!
You rather think about breaking one of your primary design pillars before you tried ANYTHING else.

Which brings me to the assumption that your overall design pillars and visions for this game are weak - and that is even more sad than today's young players attitude towards demanding game mechanics.

[McKhaye]

Uhh, what Jade said somewhere in that wall of text.

I think these "complaints" are coming from players from more mainstream sources; players at expos, game journos.

The fact that you guys hear that some people have trouble managing a machine via mouse and keyboard facing two directions simultaneously and start projectile vomiting bile is disconcerting, but whatever.

Firefly, on 27 November 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

If there's a way to fix that, I'm all for it. Otherwise, don't put it in. Plain and simple.

Yeah. That's pretty much what the OP said; We know about that ****, we wouldn't do it if we couldn't get it fixed.

To be frank, I'm actually against the idea of 3rd person making it into real matches. The game just really needs a basic tutorial right now.

But why the hell would I get so upset over them just weighing the options when I know there are multiple ways they could do this.

grayson marik, on 27 November 2012 - 07:15 AM, said:

Well, I really strongly believed that I would never ever say a sentence starting with " The youth of today..."

If it's at expo's it's probably grown up journalists and gamers with the problem, not 'young people'.

Edited by McKhaye, 27 November 2012 - 07:49 AM.

[JadeViper]

Yes, I had considered the possibility on a pip ui screen of youself, but at the same time, that can be jsut as abstract so see a 3d mech walking in place as to the current ui viewarc and dashed arrow of leg dirction. If that simplistic ui can't be understand readily. But its worth trying. agreed.

grayson marik, on 27 November 2012 - 07:15 AM, said:

But if the youth of today cannot grasp a mechanic close to a tank turret or even CoD strafing ... .

And that's the Exact misconception that frustrates new players who do know CoD and shooters: Pushing right strafes you in FPSs! in MW, it Turns you! That's what makes it so utterly impossible to comprehend from long time pro FPS players. Right and left mean sidestep, and camera control turns. In MW it's opposite! in CoD your legs always face your look direction. [w] or forward always moves you the way you look. MW this not the case! TY gray for accidently showing why the gaming community doesn't get it. It's so 2nd nature to you and I that we don't realize FPSs and MW have inversed controls.

Edited by JadeViper, 27 November 2012 - 07:48 AM.

[Gunny McDuck]

At the end of the day, I joined this game to play Stompy Robots on the Internets.

I was excited at the idea of an online mech sim based in this IP.

If 3rd person must be introduced so that the game and the MMO itself can survive, I won't be happy about it, but I will understand.

Having said all of that, Community Warfare can never, ever, under any circumstances, allow 3rd person view.

Have your ladders and your tournaments that may or may not allow 3rd person, but the core meta-game, the reason that so many of us purchased the founders packages (and more on MC), must remain pure for the hardcore fan, the guy that has been playing TT for 20 something years, and can clearly remember installing MW1 on their MS-DOS PC, and for those that have come to love and cherish the MechWarrior franchise for what it was supposed to be between then and now.


I just hope that the developers and the publisher don't tune out the (admittedly) smaller voice of the original founders group in favor of the "new player".


Now having said all that.....
Seriously, people can't understand a tank analogy?
Really?
That's just sad...


EDIT: From what we have heard, this will appear as part of a tutorial or a quick-start.
If it stays there, that would be most optimal.
Something tells me that won't happen, so I'm prepared to see 3PP in a game mode.
As I said earlier, as long as 3PP is NEVER in Community Warfare and the Metagame, I'm pretty sure I can live with that.

Edited by Gunny McDuck, 27 November 2012 - 07:49 AM.

[WildFire ca]

Hell no.. This is not a Xbox game..

[McKhaye]

Gunny McDuck, on 27 November 2012 - 07:42 AM, said:

Now having said all that.....
Seriously, people can't understand a tank analogy?
Really?
That's just sad...

I don't think anyone doesn't understand the tank analogy; it just doesn't help people who have never controlled something like a tank in a video game before learn the controls any faster.

[Firefly]

JadeViper, on 27 November 2012 - 07:42 AM, said:

Yes, I had considered the possibility on a pip ui screen of youself, but at the same time, that can be jsut as abstract so see a 3d mech walking in place as to the current ui viewarc and dashed arrow of leg dirction. If that simplistic ui can't be understand readily. But its worth trying. agreed.

Personally speaking, I just look at the arrow on my HUD and match the big field-of-view triangle when I need to align myself.

This is not a difficult concept. There are, *shocker!*, games that have a steeper learning curve than Call of Dookie and Moderate Warfare. Someone correct me if I am wrong but generally the Mechwarrior IPs have been billed as a simulator, not a shooter. Put in a tutorial and explain that Mickey's big hand is where you're walking, and OMG WHEN YOU MOVE THE MOUSE, the upside-down pizza slice moves around! If you line them up, you're looking where you're walking!

[Mordino]

Quote

Don`t call these players pithetic or dumb.

Call them mentally impaired? People with special needs? How do you call person, who can`t walk one direction and look the other at the same time?




There is a simple solution. Add tutorial. Fix bugs. Make community warfare. Make this game interesting.
There is no need in selling own soul(3pv). If the game is interesting, people will learn to play by its rules, even the dumbest ones.

Edited by Mordino, 27 November 2012 - 08:04 AM.

[Agent of Change]

McKhaye, on 27 November 2012 - 07:51 AM, said:

I don't think anyone doesn't understand the tank analogy; it just doesn't help people who have never controlled something like a tank in a video game before learn the controls any faster.

The problem there is the concept of learning them "faster". It's like people seem to believe they should be able to instantly pick something up or it should be made simpler until they can.

I hadn't played a MW title in years before launching MW:O It took me about 6 games before I could reliably navigate and relearn the controls and a dozen before i considered myself competent. This was in my dark days of pugging and getting stomped as a newb who couldn't avoid walls. I would not wish that on someone with no experience with BT/MW however i'd have gotten down a lot faster if i was given 10-15 minutes to play with it while not in a live fire zone.

The answer is not to "make it easy" the answer is to provide the opportunity to learn without getting frustrated. I have no pity for those people who won't even try to learn the skills because it is different, my sympathies are reserved for those who are forced to learn under fire and are getting frustrated through little fault of their own.

No shortcuts, No 3PV

[MW Waldorf Statler]

If there is no advantage, why does it then?

what is with the netcode, though a 3D models of mechs must be calculated exactly?

What about vibrations and visual effects cockpit by enemy fire at a 3RD view?

the farge is likely why some players absolutely not cope with the 1PV and they absolutely baruchen Droztte one considers just one of the aspects of the MWO Wot or Battlestar Galactica Online is different

Edited by CSJ Ranger, 28 November 2012 - 07:43 AM.

[Thorqemada]

3rd Person is lame imho but if there is a crowd that wants to play 3rd Person and does not interfere my gameplay experience i am fine with it.
I understand that it may be helpfull first to understand the Mech movement, but that could be teached in a tutorial also.

In the end the market decides!

Edited by Thorqemada, 27 November 2012 - 08:28 AM.

[Ransack]

So, if the whole idea behind this nonsense is that people couldn't fight out torso twist, why not just add some helpful tips to the game rather than waste resources? See, you could put something like this



in, instead of wasting time. That took all of 5 minutes to do, and does the same job as your reason for breaking the game. It also helps them to figure out the HUD. I mean, what's next, where there be gridlines and NFL style Down and distance markers because people cant figure out how to read the map?

[McKhaye]

Agent of Change, on 27 November 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

No shortcuts, No 3PV

Again. We're talking about people at expos and shows who typically have, say, five or ten minutes with the game.

Not that that'll change your opinion at all, but.

Agent of Change, on 27 November 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

The problem there is the concept of learning them "faster". It's like people seem to believe they should be able to instantly pick something up or it should be made simpler until they can.

So you're down with setting up a tutorial where people get to practice at their own pace and figure out the mechanics but not with setting up a tutorial where people get to see out of a special camera for a minute or two to figure out the mechanics.

Quote

Piloting a giant robot with a mouse and keyboard in a video game is exactly the same as instinctually learning to walk and look around you and anyone who has any trouble with it is obviously an ***** and I hate them.

Good job putting on your grown-up thinking caps.

EDIT:

Ransack, on 27 November 2012 - 08:34 AM, said:

That took all of 5 minutes to do, and does the same job as...

No it doesn't.

Granted, a splash image would be better than what we have now (nothing).

But a still image =/= giving players direct experience.

Ransack, on 27 November 2012 - 08:34 AM, said:

...your reason for breaking the game.

Also the sky is falling, it's the end of the world, etc.

Edited by McKhaye, 27 November 2012 - 08:53 AM.

[AdamBaines]

I'd be very disappointed if the Devs added 3rd person POV. I still have not heard a good argument that it adds any real value to the game other then game-changing exploits that change the nature of the game.

[Ransack]

Quote

No it doesn't.

Granted, a splash image would be better than what we have now (nothing).

But a still image =/= giving players direct experience.



Also the sky is falling, it's the end of the world, etc.

Please explain how it does not show the way that torso twist works.

Yes the game would be broken. Borken into even smaller groups than we have now. We will have the people that want to drop in 4's or less, the people that want to drop solo, and the people that want to drop in 8's. Three groups already. Then you multiply that by two for each viewstyle, and you have a segmented niche game. That is broken no matter how you want to look at it.

[Livebait]

There is NO reason to have 3rd person view in a SIMULATION game. NONE. it is a stupid idea. Waste of time. Fix stability issues first, warping Jenners,crashing, goldscreen and such. Then work on messing up the game later.

[Chip Danger]

Livebait, on 27 November 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

There is NO reason to have 3rd person view in a SIMULATION game. NONE. it is a stupid idea. Waste of time. Fix stability issues first, warping Jenners,crashing, goldscreen and such. Then work on messing up the game later.

I agree! If something is broken and you break it some more it ends up in the trash. Fix it first add dumb ideas later.