167 replies to this topic

[Conure]

TL;DR - this game is not a sim, please don't treat it as such.

I am curious about this term. Over the months I've seen people throw hissy fits and threaten to leave the game because "it is a sim which doesn't do this is this right" or argue than a third person camera would wreck the game because "it is a sim".

Some even go so far as to put themselves on a pedestal above games like Battlefield, Hawken etc because "those games players are playing games, we are playing a sim".

As a huge fan of the PMDG NGX, DCS A-10c and iRacing, I can pretty confidently stipulate that this game is not only not a sim, it is an extremely simple arcade shooter.

To be a simulation, first of all (I would argue) you have to be simulating something feasible (if not physically tangible at time of simulation). For example, the DCS software simulates the use of a real world aircraft with extreme accuracy. It comes with a 1k page + manual and is extremely complex to master. You can spend a week learning how to switch the aircraft on.

In iRacing, though relatively simple to get going, it will take you months (or years) to master the intricacies of the vehicle setups, carefully changing camber and brake bias, engine power etc to glean the best performance out of you car. A sim in the true sense of word, aerodynamics, mechanical strength, systems and failure, all modelled.

Though a simulation doesn't strictly have to be real world in the right here and right now sense - it is of course completely feasible than NASA would run a simulation using a hypothetical spacecraft landing on Mars - a completely theoretical mathematical model per se, but a simulation nonetheless.

I would love a mech simulator - it would come with a one thousand+ page manual and you could spend weeks learning about (admittedly fictional) leg hydaulics, another 300 pages on the computer systems, autopilot failure margins, IFF systems, radio systems, limits of inertia, the thermodynamic rules behind heat dissipation, logical reasons behind the shape and materials the mech was designed with...

Then, we could look into the interface and startup procedure. I'm reasonably sure to get a mech this size running would need a form of ground power, or maybe something similar to an APU. To get all the systems online and then to check they all work would take, maybe, 10-15 minutes? And what about emergency procedures..Fire in the left engine? Shut it down, initalise the fire suppresent system, initiate the APU because there isn't enough power from one engine to keep the weapons systems online.

The point I am making is, I often see people saying "this game isn't for the COD idiots, it requires brains" and then putting themselves on a pedestal of superiority - sure, maybe it requires more tactical thinking than COD, but I wouldn't argue for a second that it requires more than Counterstrike or Battlefield 3.

The game isn't a sim - playing this game does not make you 'superior' to other gamers. This game is a simple arcade game with robot lasers. A fun one, yes, but an arcade game nonetheless.

Edited by Conure, 26 December 2012 - 05:35 AM.

[The Cheese]

They call it a sim because they don't know what a sim is.

[bug3at3r]

I've always thought of games like this and AC as 'arcade sims'

[Conure]

bug3at3r, on 26 December 2012 - 05:26 AM, said:

I've always thought of games like this and AC as 'arcade sims'

what is AC?

[Horned Bull]

Conure, on 26 December 2012 - 05:17 AM, said:

[color=#959595]The point I am making is, I often see people saying "this game isn't for the COD idiots, it requires brains" - sure, maybe it requires more tactical thinking than COD, but I wouldn't argue for a second that it requires more than Counterstrike or Battlefield 3.[/color]

it requires more - you don't have full control over your mecha. You can't stop immediately, also you have to balance between cruise and fighting speed. Also hitzones - you can abuse them to soak more damage and when fighting someone you have to pick your priorities (like being able to guess "does that awesome has xl engine?!") rather than just PIK DER GUN SHOT DAT GUY.

The game isn't a full scale simulator (like how many players actually use pedals instead a/d and a virtual helmet to emulate neurohelmet?) but still, it's more complex than Armored Core/Hawken (and no, I'm not bashing this two now. They are as a poster above me typed "arcade sims" or just "arcade mecha games" that's all).

Edited by Korm, 26 December 2012 - 05:36 AM.

[Kdogg788]

I think the eventual intent is a more simlike experience once collisions, physics, and other issues are corrected. Will it be a true "sim" in that sense of the word like Flight Simulator is? Most likely not, because unfortunately, mechs are not real and cannot be simmed. We can go into hundreds of replies about the physical impossibilities of battlemech movement and function, but it's not necessary. Even in its current incarnation, one can argue it's less arcadelike than a twitch game like Battlefield.

-k

[PANZERBUNNY]

It does require a tad more brains than COD.

[Horned Bull]

Conure, on 26 December 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

what is AC?

It stands for Armored Core. A PS2/PS3 mecha themed series of games.

[MiG77]

bug3at3r, on 26 December 2012 - 05:26 AM, said:

I've always thought of games like this and AC as 'arcade sims'

That or "light simulator". You dont have to simulate every button or procedure to call something as a "sim" (IE if start procedure is just pressing P -> your pilot does all the correct stuff). More you do, more "heavy" it becames tought.

[Omigir]

this game is not fast paced enough to be an arcade anything. If this game were in an arcade, it would go broke.

As far as this game compared to Mechwarrior 3... Ok i will give that MW:O is more acade like than MW3, but its more sim like that MW4 and MechAssault.

[Adridos]

Conure, on 26 December 2012 - 05:17 AM, said:

I would love a mech simulator - it would come with a one thousand+ page manual and you could spend weeks learning about (admittedly fictional) leg hydaulics, another 300 pages on the computer systems, autopilot failure margins, IFF systems, radio systems, limits of inertia, the thermodynamic rules behind heat dissipation, logical reasons behind the shape and materials the mech was designed with...

If you simulate a world so far into the future they have neurohelmets that directly reproduce input of your thoughts into the mech's movement, it's kinda hard to see a 1000 page manual describing how to move like a normal human + a throttle, 2 pedals, eject button and a joystick. If anything, the amount of buttons in the cockpit is pretty misleading of the actual imput you have on the mech.

[Conure]

Omigir, on 26 December 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

this game is not fast paced enough to be an arcade anything. If this game were in an arcade, it would go broke.

As far as this game compared to Mechwarrior 3... Ok i will give that MW:O is more acade like than MW3, but its more sim like that MW4 and MechAssault.

I completely disagree. A sim can be extremely fast paced, for example, this below link is very much a simplistic "survey sim". It is the absolute minimum the majority of sim fans can enjoy without becoming 'arcade' - I realise 'arcade' is a pretty vague term. I suppose what I mean by arcade is 'simplistic and with very little resemblance to reality' - please bear in mind I do not mean "we don't have robots in real life so MWO isn't a sim" - on the contrary, MWO could be a sim, but it isn't in the same way World of Tanks isn't.



The above link is extremely fast paced, but even for that hugely simplistic survey sim, you'd still need to spend weeks learning manouvres and getting used to aircraft failures, limitations of weaponry, highly realistic ballistics etc.

It isn't the speed that it plays out at which determines whether something is a sim - Formula 1 simulators for example are pretty twitch based, but instead I think being a sim is dependent on the underlying depth and resemblance to real world forces.

Edited by Conure, 26 December 2012 - 05:57 AM.

[Thorqemada]

Its an Action-Sim, its neither a Hardcore-Sim nor an Arcade-Shooter, its somewhere in between both extremes.

[Conure]

Thorqemada, on 26 December 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Its an Action-Sim, its neither a Hardcore-Sim nor an Arcade-Shooter, its somewhere in between both extremes.

It's really not.

[PANZERBUNNY]

We would need permanent weapon destruction or degradation after repair it and other features to make this a more hardcore mech sim.

Taking out R&R sort of helped drift it away from a sim.

[Omigir]

Conure, on 26 December 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

I completely disagree. A sim can be extremely fast paced, for example, this below link is very much a simplistic "survey sim". It is the absolute minimum the majority of sim fans can enjoy without becoming 'arcade' - I realise 'arcade' is a pretty vague term. I suppose what I mean by arcade is 'simplistic and with very little resemblance to reality' - please bear in mind I do not mean "we don't have robots in real life so MWO isn't a sim" - on the contrary, MWO could be a sim, but it isn't in the same way World of Tanks isn't.



The above link is extremely fast paced, but even for that hugely simplistic survey sim, you'd still need to spend weeks learning manouvres and getting used to aircraft failures, limitations of weaponry etc, highly realistic ballistics.

It isn't the speed that it plays out at which determines whether something is a sim - Formula 1 simulators for example are pretty twitch based, but instead I think being a sim is dependent on the underlying depth and resemblance to real world forces.

If you really want to be honest with yourself for a minute, 'sim' is just as vegue as 'arcade'

Arcade means Arcade games that are known for being simple, quick and able to be picked up by anyone. Often times a referance throw back to the 80's and 90's when arcades were still big.

Sim is short for Simulator Games which basically means, any game to simulate something in the form of a game is a sim.
Games like moon lander and any of those cheesy doctor games where you use the touch screen to perform medical procedures fall under the tittle.

I will give you that sim mostly pertains to real life tasks, like flying fighter jets, air liners, trucking and any other number of mundane real life tasks, I will purpose this to you: A simulator game that simulates tasks or procedures of the use of equipment that is either under development or is planning on development for the purpose of training, is it still a training simulation because that equipment does not exist yet?

Basically all I am saying is that Mechwarrior Online is striving to simulate what it would be like if Battletech and battlemechs were real. Eventual it will be more complex as the game is added onto (I.E. Joysticks, one of the biggest founding aspects of Mechwarrior from the past)

[Elkarlo]

MW:O isn't finished yet.
We had good support of enhanced Controlls in CB till we changed Cryengine 3.0 to 3.4

MW:O goes in the big footprints of the Old Combat simulator Games like MW2 or MW3. And for me it is atm somewhere between MW2 and MW3, the controlls System is a working place and we are back to XML file writing for big controls.

Personally i miss one thing and thats the old throttle Bar and forced firegroups over ins pos1 pgdup del end pgddown
That is the only real thing i am missing but you can do this with good Controls as well..

And thats the point the implementation of the Controls is incomplete and this lets MWO someway Arcadi...
but for several Aspects it is not a Arcade game. Especially the comming back of the Slots Hitzones etc and the Game effects they have... make it back a Combat Sims Programm.
But it is far away from beeing as good as MW2: Mercs which is the best Simulation out of all Mechwarrior parts.
With physical Attacks, DfA, Inferno rockets, proper implemented Flamers etc.

But please remember one thing: You should judge MWO in April after 6 Months of Beta testing and the normal End of the Close Founder Beta Phase. It has opened before to let you experience MWO.

And lot of things that will come are not implemented yet. And controlls had been already better.

I could use my Pedals etc very well, sadly my Stuff has broken down after one Week (wires are internaly broken after 15 years, i am thinking of rewiring it or looking after a g940 set) of cheer fun having good controls. The actual Control states for enhanced Controlsystems are said to be worse as in CB so please be patienced they will be fixed i guess.

[Conure]

Adridos, on 26 December 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

If you simulate a world so far into the future they have neurohelmets that directly reproduce input of your thoughts into the mech's movement, it's kinda hard to see a 1000 page manual describing how to move like a normal human + a throttle, 2 pedals, eject button and a joystick. If anything, the amount of buttons in the cockpit is pretty misleading of the actual imput you have on the mech.

Because, like all systems, the neurolink could and (at times) would fail. At which point it's time to take manual control. A Boeing 737ng can fly and land itself entirely automatically (given an initial pilot input into the CDU) - you could train somebody to takeoff and program the CDU to land in a day - easy, and this could be done in a 5 page manual. In simulations failures can and do happen; and they require an intimate knowledge of every system to operate.

[Dane Dread]

Guys, its OK to play a video game about giant robots blowing each other up. You don't need to dress it up by calling it something else.

[IIIuminaughty]

Only TRUE similator I know of Is Flight Simulator. Thus mechs are not real, so this isnt a TRUE simulator. But it has a little bit of the feel to it. Its mroe of a Simulator than HAWKEN