2926 replies to this topic

[Viper69]

xxmythirdeyexx, on 11 June 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

But it seems that most true fans of the franchise are against this? Unfortunately, pro-3rd person players have money too. Maybe a third person view could work as a "death screen" of sorts, allowing you to view your teammates still alive in a close-up, out of cockpit view. Seeing as most proponents of this viewpoint will spend a lot of time on this screen anyway, it makes sense.

Its coming as a separate queue system (so they say but then again they said it was not coming so take that as you will)

Also they are trying to give people more reasons to buy paint. People love to see what something they are driving looks like from the outside. Have you not seen all the people driving cars riding on a 13ft tall boom above and behind their cars?

Edited by Viper69, 11 June 2013 - 09:41 AM.

[Danimrath]

TheBuxDLux, on 16 November 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

Uhm how about 3rd person after you die?

How about after EVERYONE dies? Rather than just sitting in your cockpit until the end game leaderboard, you zoom out of cockpit and do a pan around your mech. That way you can see all the battle damage inflicted on you that match.

[Normon]

^Excellent idea.

[Blaze32]

dont do it! i have seen enough games become un-fun because people can see behind them when in 3rd person and no matter what you do 3rd person can let you see behind you; although, you will be able to fix the looking over things behind you can be fixed (this is called 1st person view) and if the looking over thing is fixed then the mech you are piloting would be filling the entire center of the screen.
THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN ADD THIS WITHOUT CHANGING THE GAME AND LOOSING OVER 80% OF YOU PLAYER BASE! (polls where over 84% against before you locked them in January) http://mwomercs.com/...s-poll-revived/ <-- poll

ThatPrimeGuy, on 16 November 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

If I wanted a third person camera I'd play ******* Hawken, I come to this game for a sim, third person view isn't Sim, I'd be fine with a third person/free roam for spectating but players being able to use third person and peek over hills while still in the game is insane.

Holy Crap there is 3rd person in HAWKEN!!!! No wonder i keep dieing and can kill anyone!! And how people "see" me before i am in the mechs FOV (field of view)

EDITED for spelling

Edited by Blaze32, 11 June 2013 - 10:15 AM.

[Coolant]

Viper69, on 11 June 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

You are Assuming the queues are divided evenly and apparently Bryan is too. Also neither of you are even factoring ELO into the equation. So yeah...

Ok, so we'll tip the balance in favor of the 1st Person modes since a notorious certain poll(s) overwhelmingly favor it. Oh wait, that would mean there is no argument against implementing 3rd Person since most would play 1st Person anyway. Hmmm...so what are people arguing about again?

Edited by Coolant, 11 June 2013 - 10:36 AM.

[Viper69]

Coolant, on 11 June 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Hmmm...so what are people arguing about again?

Didnt know we were arguing merely having a discussion. At any rate I think the root of the problem is they (PGI) have gone against their word of what they adamantly said was against their pillars of design. I think that is the root of a few people(including my own) disappointment with their business practice.

[Coolant]

Viper69, on 11 June 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Didnt know we were arguing merely having a discussion. At any rate I think the root of the problem is they (PGI) have gone against their word of what they adamantly said was against their pillars of design. I think that is the root of a few people(including my own) disappointment with their business practice.

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 $$ funds more features. And, a broader audience offer the potential of greater $$

[MWHawke]

Pando, on 11 June 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

I'll make the comparison easy for you MWHawke,

Drop modes for example;

1st v/s 1st conquest
1st v/s 1st assault
3rd v/s 3rd conquest
3rd v/s 3rd assault
1st v/s 3rd conquest
1st v/s 3rd assault
any

In all of these game modes the player first has to select a game mode knowing what each game mode entails. If someone decides to play in a que where 3rd person is available it is in no way an advantage because everyone is playing by the same rules.

If you have a glock 20 and I have a glock 20 as far as equipment is concerned there is no advantage. The same is for MechWarrior: Online because the equipment IE; game mode is allowing everyone to play with the same rules. If everyone is playing with the same rules, the only advantage is in the ability to USE the equipment that is provided. Right? Is any of this sinking in?






I'll leave this here for you.

http://mwomercs.com/...095-3rd-person/

Also this,



Enjoy the new thread!

And let me make it easy for you Pando. Your argument is based on simple comparison. What is to stop people from arguing the same for hacking? There will be no end to it if you use this form of simple-minded comparison argument.

Pando, on 11 June 2013 - 09:17 AM, said:

That was an example just for you! So you could grasp why it's not an advantage. It seems "why" it should or shouldn't be done changes with every reply....way to be....solid in your stance

Circular argument. You put forth a point, then say it's an example. Not even close to solid in your own stance. Sorry, try again.

Pando, on 11 June 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

Crap, got you confused with MWHawke. What is "goon" slang for now?

Really mature.

Blaze32, on 11 June 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

Holy Crap there is 3rd person in HAWKEN!!!! No wonder i keep dieing and can kill anyone!! And how people "see" me before i am in the mechs FOV (field of view)

EDITED for spelling

You should take a look at WarFrame for a cool 3rd person shooter. Storyline and community missions all included.

[FEK315]

If 3rd p places you outside your mech then why not make a 3rd person that you can't shoot from?

Or make it take up Hard Point Spaces by making it an aerial beacon?

[Grimmnyr]

FEK315, on 11 June 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

If 3rd p places you outside your mech then why not make a 3rd person that you can't shoot from?

Or make it take up Hard Point Spaces by making it an aerial beacon?

We have seismic and UAVs, and 360 target retention, there really is no need or purpose for 3PV, other than to see around corners and have an advantage.

[pow pow]

Ed Steele, on 11 June 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

We have seismic and UAVs, and 360 target retention, there really is no need or purpose for 3PV, other than to see around corners and have an advantage.

well you said it, this game has 400m esp now. But noone seems to be bothered by it... hypocrites?

3pv can't come soon enough, i would rather glamour on my badass mech trotting along alien planets than do any kind of shooting.

[Grimmnyr]

pow pow, on 11 June 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

well you said it, this game has 400m esp now. But noone seems to be bothered by it... hypocrites?

3pv can't come soon enough, i would rather glamour on my badass mech trotting along alien planets than do any kind of shooting.

None of the modules that I mentioned give you the advantage that 3PV would. You can see your mech all you want in the camo screen. Hell, if they put 3pv in training ground, then you can take vid all night. Like I have said before, if they do force 3PV and first in the same game, then I hope they show some icon over your heads so I know who to shoot first.

Edited by Ed Steele, 11 June 2013 - 10:28 PM.

[pow pow]

could you care to elaborate how seismic does not offer you a similar advantage?

I carry seismic and can spot enemies without even turning to look. I am guessing with 3pv, the POV will actually be quite near your mech so you wouldn't be able to see stuff behind you without actually turning your mech.

I think you are confusing 3pv with a free look outside camera.

[Mahws]

Seismic doesn't tell you what's behind a hill, just that something is. It also doesn't let you know if they're facing you or not. Or let you pre-aim for a specific component to hit when poptarting, or coming out of cover. Nor does it do these things for an increased area to each side. Or directly behind you. Or directly above or below you. Or when the enemy is standing still.

Which is all a moot point because people did complain about seismic and it's being nerfed in the next patch cycle.

[pow pow]

3pv won't let you look at stuff behind a hill... again the misconception that you will have a massive field of view from 3pv similar to mwtactics or some mmorpg and as if the camera is high up in the air.

Nor will you be able to look to your sides and front at the same time. The camera will probably be placed just over your shoulders so that if you wanted to check out your left, you would still have to turn your mouse to the left and give up some of your front view.

Ever dabbled in competitive 3rd person pvp? doubt it since what you are suggesting is pretty much impossible (even in free look games) to be looking at 2 different fov (front and back for instance) and taking aim. Yes you can keep track of people on some level, but others can also keep track of you. The fact that you can keep track of people easier -being able to get glimpses of them behind hills- does not mean you will be able to fire at them without having LoS or without turning to face them.

[Filter41]

i read little bit across the debate and a question grew in my mind: what is the prob, when you have complete seperated games for 1st and 3rd Person view? you have to decide what kind of perspective you want to play BEFORE entering the queue. same thing like assault/conquer... would that be a problem? 1st play against 1st and 3rd against 3rd... a bit unusual to have two games in one, but like this, everybody can try his builds for different game situations. and every hardcore supporter gets his will...

[CyBerkut]

Filter41, on 12 June 2013 - 01:35 AM, said:

i read little bit across the debate and a question grew in my mind: what is the prob, when you have complete seperated games for 1st and 3rd Person view? you have to decide what kind of perspective you want to play BEFORE entering the queue. same thing like assault/conquer... would that be a problem? 1st play against 1st and 3rd against 3rd... a bit unusual to have two games in one, but like this, everybody can try his builds for different game situations. and every hardcore supporter gets his will...

The problem, even with that, is in Community Warfare (as PGI has indicated that 1PV and 3PV will be in the same CW universe). Let's say that PGI actually fulfills that later version of claims (ie. 1PV players will never have to play against 3PV players). Sounds pretty good... but what happens when a 3PV playing team is holding a planet that a 1PV playing team attacks? AFAIK, we still don't have an official explanation from the dev team on how that will pan out... but a moderator did suggest that perhaps the best answer was that the home team gets to choose the PoV to be used for any battles there. If *that* solution is implemented, then yes, as a 1PV player/team you will not be forced to play against a 3PV team... but in order to attack that planet / facility you'll just have to resign yourself to playing it in 3PV...

I don't find that to be an acceptable solution. You know very well that it will be used in CW to discourage some teams from attacking a certain planet or facility.

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.

pow pow, on 12 June 2013 - 01:04 AM, said:

3pv won't let you look at stuff behind a hill... again the misconception that you will have a massive field of view from 3pv similar to mwtactics or some mmorpg and as if the camera is high up in the air.

Nor will you be able to look to your sides and front at the same time. The camera will probably be placed just over your shoulders so that if you wanted to check out your left, you would still have to turn your mouse to the left and give up some of your front view.

Do you have an authoritative source for those claims about how it will, or won't work?

[Volt Corsair]

pow pow, on 12 June 2013 - 01:04 AM, said:

3pv won't let you look at stuff behind a hill... again the misconception that you will have a massive field of view from 3pv similar to mwtactics or some mmorpg and as if the camera is high up in the air.

What's that? I can change my fov in the user.cfg file and it's perfectly legal? -.- Methinks you forgot that. And I'm pretty sure no one had the misconception of a MWT camera. I think we're all thinking of MW3 and MW4 3pvm cameras. Maybe even MW2 3pvm cameras.

[Ignatz22]

Filter41, on 12 June 2013 - 01:35 AM, said:

i read little bit across the debate and a question grew in my mind: what is the prob, when you have complete seperated games for 1st and 3rd Person view? you have to decide what kind of perspective you want to play BEFORE entering the queue. same thing like assault/conquer... would that be a problem? 1st play against 1st and 3rd against 3rd... a bit unusual to have two games in one, but like this, everybody can try his builds for different game situations. and every hardcore supporter gets his will...

Sir;

The PROBLEM is that you create 2 separate games, one in Third and one in First person. Ignore the facts that PGI told the Founders this would be a first person game, and then (later) that there would be no third person option, which we know is not true. The issue for me is that this is nowhere near a finished product. The game still crashes to desktop. I still have the ALT+Tab problem (happened 1 hour ago) and I haven't touched on Nerfs/Buffs/Balance issues.
There are no Clans. The introduction has been pushed back yet again.
There are few maps, fewer still large enough for 24-mech contests.
The House/Clan systems aren't in place.
PGI needs more employees, the game more players, and the core players more GAME. All of these tax the resources of an admittedly small development team in a potentially HUGH gaming universe. I applaud what has been done, but splitting the development team to write a second game with all the issues imported from this one necessarily slows development of THIS game when deadlines are looming. Splitting the player base between the two player views further lessens the matching options.
Why?
It was not supposed to happen, they said it wouldn't. and now it's sapping resources needed for this game. It will lead to separated gaming groups, which after the European Servers take their toll is going to weaken the available pool of players for both view style groups.
All this, and it's UNNECESSARY. There IS a third person MechWarrior game, it's called MechWarrior Tactics, and MWO will (necessarily) compete with Tactics for third person players.

If none of this makes sense to you, consider this; they promised it would never happen. Now it's not only happening but planned. I don't know about you, but betting real money on a company that breaks essential promises about their product hasn't earned my investment (this is still a BETA) funding.
As I've posted before, I will spend NO MORE until the COMPLETED GAME goes online, as then and ONLY then can their word be evaluated. Any analysis of their plans and promises now can only be hopes, dreams and speculation as they can not be trusted.

Enjoy the Beta.

-ignatz22

[pow pow]

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

Do you have an authoritative source for those claims about how it will, or won't work?

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.

Volt Opt Construct, on 12 June 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

What's that? I can change my fov in the user.cfg file and it's perfectly legal? -.- Methinks you forgot that. And I'm pretty sure no one had the misconception of a MWT camera. I think we're all thinking of MW3 and MW4 3pvm cameras. Maybe even MW2 3pvm cameras.

Does that really give you an advantage? I haven't changed my user.cfg and I don't feel I am at any disadvantage. Yes your view horizon widens, but it also becomes shorter with a more cluttered (cockpit) view.

Do you have mw4 installed? fire it up play a few games, in order to look behind a hill as you say, in the distance, you would have to tilt your camera so far down, that your aim / movement would be completely gimped. And as far as locating enemies, you have seismic which is far better than gimping your aim/movement.

Still not convinced? fire any fps game that has 3rd person spectate and play with the camera. You will see that you can't look around corners without turning it. And if you do turn the camera, you still have the issue of turning your 'body' to take aim at the target or even obtain Line of Sight. for your weapons to actually hit.