2926 replies to this topic

[DeaconW]

DirePhoenix, on 02 August 2013 - 05:44 AM, said:

Also, a game's forums are rarely ever a good representation of the actual playerbase of the game.

Yeah...it's normally the people who are most passionate about the game...so we can't be listening to THEM.

BTW, PGI let us forumites vote on SRM damage changes so the "polls don't represent the community" argument is now bovine excrement.

[DirePhoenix]

DeaconW, on 02 August 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

Yeah...it's normally the people who are most passionate about the game...so we can't be listening to THEM.

BTW, PGI let us forumites vote on SRM damage changes so the "polls don't represent the community" argument is now bovine excrement.

I guarantee you that any options presented were decisions that were going to be made anyway and doesn't preclude them from changing them to whatever they deem is necessary in the future.

EDIT: Also, any poll here is still unrepresentative of the playerbase, and any poll where a user has an option to participate or not, or even if they're aware that they're being polled is inherently biased. You can get an unbiased "poll" by taking a sample of what all players are doing in-game and taking the metrics of their actions.

Edited by DirePhoenix, 02 August 2013 - 07:00 AM.

[Belorion]

Any serious competitive player will never run run 3pv except maybe to test a new build. Having the blinking here I am above their heads isn't something a competitive player wants.

Moreover the highest level of MWO will be FPV so you are going to want to practice in the mode you will be playing competitively.

[AaronWolf]

3pv should be kept in a separate bracket in comparison to FPV players. Since 3pv gives a tactical advantage with seeing over terrain and around yourself which FPV does not.

Also it's not the true "Mechwarrior" experience if its in 3pv.

So, just have the two separate-if anything. If you don't, well. I'm still gonna play either way. Love Mechwarrior in general. So it's not gonna stop me from trying to stomp 3pv users into the dirt with my mech.

[Belorion]

AaronWolf, on 02 August 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

3pv should be kept in a separate bracket in comparison to FPV players. Since 3pv gives a tactical advantage with seeing over terrain and around yourself which FPV does not.

Also it's not the true "Mechwarrior" experience if its in 3pv.

So, just have the two separate-if anything. If you don't, well. I'm still gonna play either way. Love Mechwarrior in general. So it's not gonna stop me from trying to stomp 3pv users into the dirt with my mech.

They are implementing a hardcore option for FPV only...

As far as being more "mechwarrior". That's just from your point of view. The previous games had 3PV so that statement isn't universal by any means.

[PropagandaWar]

From the vids it did give a big tactical advantage. Scouts will see stuff they wouldn't normally see. Camera needs to be closer and you should have to choose as a 3pv or 1st person no switching.

[Belorion]

PropagandaWar, on 02 August 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

From the vids it did give a big tactical advantage. Scouts will see stuff they wouldn't normally see. Camera needs to be closer and you should have to choose as a 3pv or 1st person no switching.

I see no reason for that at all...

Just stick to the hard crop mode if that is what you want

[Fire and Salt]

Really? You can't see that being able to look over a ridge without getting shot conveys a huge advantage?


P.S. there is NO disadvantage, you can just switch back...

[PropagandaWar]

Belorion, on 02 August 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

I see no reason for that at all...

Just stick to the hard crop mode if that is what you want

Because the community if fraggin small. Fine if you want to be in CW make it hardcore only. People talking about 3pv being in every other MW game Thats why generally full servers had force 1st person selected. 3pv has disadvantages but if you can flip between the two then it really doesn't. I understand why PGI's doing it but they really need to hinder it.

[Belorion]

PropagandaWar, on 02 August 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

Because the community if fraggin small. Fine if you want to be in CW make it hardcore only. People talking about 3pv being in every other MW game Thats why generally full servers had force 1st person selected. 3pv has disadvantages but if you can flip between the two then it really doesn't. I understand why PGI's doing it but they really need to hinder it.

Its not all that small. Both queues will be plenty full, but if you listen to the people on here then the bulk of the forumites will all be in the Hardcore mode along with the people training for CW.

[Sean von Steinike]

DirePhoenix, on 02 August 2013 - 05:44 AM, said:

It's silent to the public. You're assuming that the feedback you read is the only feedback they receive.

Also, a game's forums are rarely ever a good representation of the actual playerbase of the game.

Yeah, the forums are just for people that are passionate and care about the game.

[PropagandaWar]

Belorion, on 02 August 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

Its not all that small. Both queues will be plenty full, but if you listen to the people on here then the bulk of the forumites will all be in the Hardcore mode along with the people training for CW.

They probably will. Don't know about training for CW. Seems like cap a planet defend a planet get a bonus move on. Simialar to Planetside. I just don't see why it would be a problem to force people to choose one or the other when they enter the game. Then everyones playing against each other.

[Belorion]

PropagandaWar, on 02 August 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

They probably will. Don't know about training for CW. Seems like cap a planet defend a planet get a bonus move on. Simialar to Planetside. I just don't see why it would be a problem to force people to choose one or the other when they enter the game. Then everyones playing against each other.

If the whole idea behind it is to draw more people in, and have the end game be FPV, then such a move would be counter productive to moving new players to end game. They would never get the chance to be eased into FPV.

[Flying Blind]

I have put my suggestions regarding how to handle 3pv in the ATD: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2616834

basically:
1-force mode choice before match and lock for duration
2-make camera drone killable and targetable much like the UAV
3-limited number of matches it can be used in to help the new players adjust then gone.
I have put my suggestions in ATD: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2616834

[Chrithu]

Haha. Funny to see this discussion alive and breathing again. Haven't tested it myself but what I hear and read just confirms that alle the fears/cons brought up by the communit are in fact true. But hey those that have some knowledge knew all along that those very problems simply are NOT solveable without making the view uncomfortable to play in.

That aside I acknowledge that there are 33% that want 3rd person that are ALREADY IN this community. Fair point. But it is the answer to the WRONG question.

The question is NOT: Are there people in the community that want 3rd person?

The questions are:

• Are there people NOT in the community that would play MW:O if it had 3rd person?
  
• Are there people that tried MW:O and stopped playing because it had no 3rd person?

The numbers for both should be considerably small because viewpoint for the majority of gamers is VERY low on the priority list of things that decide wether you like or do not like a game. At least that's what I believe from reading peoples opinions in gaming forums for over decade now. Someone seriously expressing the opinion of not liking a game because it has the wrong perspective would be totally new to me.


General Gameplay, Stability, Balance, Look and Feel (which admittedly also includes perpective, but there is MUCH MORE and MORE important things to this) in that order are what determines wether people like a game or not.

Having that said I am one of those against 3rd Person and angry about it coming. Not so much because I don't get my way but more because the fulminant one-eighty PGI pulled on that topic is really mind boggling. Even more so if you have to read a myriad of excuses and made up reasons for it that are easy to argument against and partly make NO SENSE AT ALL, when trueth most probably is that someone in IGP's marketing said that people want 3rd person, so MWO must have it.

And because there's a chance that this conspiracy theory of someone from the "money-side" pulling strings in the backround without having the slightest idea what he's talking about really has some trueth in it, this is why I am angry. I wittnessed too many games being ruined by the ambitions/goals/motivations of the people that gave the money.

Edited by Jason Parker, 02 August 2013 - 09:09 AM.

[Belorion]

Jason Parker, on 02 August 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

The numbers for both should be considerably small because viewpoint for the majority of gamers is VERY low on the priority list of things that decide wether you like or do not like a game. At least that's what I believe from reading peoples opinions in gaming forums for over decade now. Someone seriously expressing the opinion of not liking a game because it has the wrong perspective would be totally new to me.

This is very untrue. There are plenty of gamers that simply don't play FPS games. I happen to be one of them. I wanted to play MWO again so badly though I tried it anyway. I am glad I did because the normal issues I have with FPS games aren't present in MWO.

I know quite a few people from my WoW days that don't play FPS games either. Being an FPS game simply limits your target audience. The other main tank from my WoW guild specifically said he would really like to play MWO, but that he doesn't play FPS games.

Now that I am used to the FPV in MWO I am fine with just playing that, and the draw backs from 3PV would prevent me from ever playing in that mode. The solution they have come up with though is a perfect way to attract additional players who would otherwise not play the game.

[Chrithu]

Belorion, on 02 August 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

This is very untrue. There are plenty of gamers that simply don't play FPS games. I happen to be one of them. I wanted to play MWO again so badly though I tried it anyway. I am glad I did because the normal issues I have with FPS games aren't present in MWO.

I know quite a few people from my WoW days that don't play FPS games either. Being an FPS game simply limits your target audience. The other main tank from my WoW guild specifically said he would really like to play MWO, but that he doesn't play FPS games.

Now that I am used to the FPV in MWO I am fine with just playing that, and the draw backs from 3PV would prevent me from ever playing in that mode. The solution they have come up with though is a perfect way to attract additional players who would otherwise not play the game.

Hi I got a question, just to clear up something for myself and maybe make my point a bit more clear:

What exactly is it you do not like about FPSs? Is it really about the actual perspective? Or is it about the twitchyness that makes fast reactions and fast precise aim a must?

Aditional question do you like TPSs?


Edit: I also want to note that something in marketing is not yet going right if a vehicle simulation (that is what Mechwarrior is underneath all the pew pew) is perceived as a FPS.

Edited by Jason Parker, 02 August 2013 - 09:36 AM.

[Belorion]

Jason Parker, on 02 August 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

Hi I got a question, just to clear up something for myself and maybe make my point a bit more clear:

What exactly is it you do not like about FPSs? Is it really about the actual perspective? Or is it about the twitchyness that makes fast reactions and fast precise aim a must?

Aditional question do you like TPSs?


Edit: I also want to note that something in marketing is not yet going right if a vehicle simulation (that is what Mechwarrior is underneath all the pew pew) is perceived as a FPS.

They make me nauseous. As it is MWO is on the edge. I think its primarily from the bouncing view that some games have, but even without the bouncing view sometimes I have trouble with Forest Colony Snow if I am in a fast mech.

[Grey Rabbit]

I guess I'm a part of PGI's silent majority that's looking forward to 3rd person view, but not for the same reasons most of you are concerned about. For the record, I'll probably go back and forth between the two views depending on my mood.

I always felt that 3PV was sometimes a little more dramatic and cinematic than 1PV. Sometimes I just like to see my face as you guys are melting it off. Not to mention, I think that an extra POV would make for some of you guys who record movies to pop up on Youtube to be able to have a larger range of shots to work with, making the videos more fun to make and watch.

That being said, sometimes I like to see out of my cockpit. That's will likely be my default view for the same reason that all of you like it.

The part I'm confused about is all of the ranting. If you don't have to play with 3PV players(which I believe that I read somewhere), then some guy peeking around the corner in an entirely different match doesn't tactically affect you. If you're concerned about him, then you're probably getting flanked in your own game and you're doing it wrong.

PGI changed there mind? Eh... If I remember right(and I could be wrong, I think that post went away with the forum changes), they said 1PV was primary for them and 3PV wasn't a concern of theirs at the time of the post. You could argue that the guys programming it could be putting there time in somewhere else, and that's sort of valid. I don't think those guys are the same ones doing game balancing for more fun and memorable matches, which is the issue which should be on most of our minds.

The real 3PV issue, because there is a real issue that I see, MIGHT be match making and load times. Someone earlier in the thread brought this up and thank you for pointing it out. If the community is split in sections of 1PV, 2PV, or Mixed PV, then the match maker will have a shorter lists of people to sort through to find players for good balanced teams. I can't speak for others but it's been rare for me to not find a match, once or twice a month, maybe. To be blunt, they have that somewhat working and I don't want us to lose that.

-Rabbit

[DirePhoenix]

Grey Rabbit, on 02 August 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

The part I'm confused about is all of the ranting. If you don't have to play with 3PV players(which I believe that I read somewhere), then some guy peeking around the corner in an entirely different match doesn't tactically affect you. If you're concerned about him, then you're probably getting flanked in your own game and you're doing it wrong.

The concern is that it will split the playerbase. If you have a mode that is "only 1st-person" and a mode that is not, then the pool of available players is smaller. Smaller pool of available players means less impact of CW (Even if it is just Mercs) and stale gameplay since it will end up being the same small group of people fighting with/against each other constantly.

In previous MW games, the only way you could get a forced 1PV only game was to hunt down a specific server, which was difficult and did not offer the variety or quantity of players to make games interesting. In order to get matches you pretty much had to settle for 3rd person because you'd be stupid not to take the advantages that view inherently offers against other players when they would have that same advantage over you if you were stuck inside your cockpit.

And that is why we rant. We care about this franchise, and have experienced these missteps before. We don't want to see those same mistakes made again.

Edited by DirePhoenix, 02 August 2013 - 02:23 PM.