47 replies to this topic

[Ryvucz]

Beo Vulf, on 24 January 2013 - 03:03 PM, said:

EXCUSE!
Just look at the industry, and compare across the board what "Open BETA" is. Call it what they will the fact remains the current level of game development is only at the level of "Alpha", or at best "closed BETA".

Star Wars The Old Republic
Star Wars Galaxies

Those were both LIVE, and considered ALPHA.

M'kay?

[Kristov Kerensky]

Beo Vulf, on 23 January 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

You miss the point entirely. So let me ask you a series of questions.
1) Is the game graphically in your opinion at an exceptable level?
2) Is the game in your opinion at an exceptable level of stability?
3) Are the Game maps as rich and detailed, not to mention expansive enough?
4)Do you feel that the combat is immersive enough?
These are simple questions requiring no other answers other than a simple Yes, or No.

Yes, to all 4, only thing I would add is that the maps could be more expansive, and in fact WILL be more expansive, that's already been stated by PGI and the next two maps we're getting are much larger in area. But of course I also realize this software is still in a beta state and subject to changes both planned for and unplanned.

PS2 is a fun game, it's like a Battlefield game with a persistant world option, but it's nothing like a MechWarrior game and doesn't play like one, it plays more like a Battlefield game on a console. You know, console games, where YOU can be the big bad killer of all that's enemy and win the game single handed! Yeah..see..this isn't that type of game, no powerups, Rambo doesn't get to jump in and blow away the entire enemy team by himself. Now for some totally unknown reason PGI decided to use a totally messed up approach in how combat is done, teamwork is the key to victory and survival, not powerups and health regen. I know, that's just crazy right? Making a MechWarrior game that's based on TEAMWORK!!1!!1! That's just going full ****** isn't it?

Oh..hang on...yeah, that's right, MechWarrior is based on the table top game BattleTech, and that game IS all about teamwork, holy hells, did you know that? So, making MWO require teamwork to actually win instead of allowing for someone with the right powerup to do it, actually makes some weird sort of sense.

[Beo Vulf]

Kristov Kerensky, on 24 January 2013 - 03:51 PM, said:

Yes, to all 4, only thing I would add is that the maps could be more expansive, and in fact WILL be more expansive, that's already been stated by PGI and the next two maps we're getting are much larger in area. But of course I also realize this software is still in a beta state and subject to changes both planned for and unplanned.

PS2 is a fun game, it's like a Battlefield game with a persistant world option, but it's nothing like a MechWarrior game and doesn't play like one, it plays more like a Battlefield game on a console. You know, console games, where YOU can be the big bad killer of all that's enemy and win the game single handed! Yeah..see..this isn't that type of game, no powerups, Rambo doesn't get to jump in and blow away the entire enemy team by himself. Now for some totally unknown reason PGI decided to use a totally messed up approach in how combat is done, teamwork is the key to victory and survival, not powerups and health regen. I know, that's just crazy right? Making a MechWarrior game that's based on TEAMWORK!!1!!1! That's just going full ****** isn't it?

Oh..hang on...yeah, that's right, MechWarrior is based on the table top game BattleTech, and that game IS all about teamwork, holy hells, did you know that? So, making MWO require teamwork to actually win instead of allowing for someone with the right powerup to do it, actually makes some weird sort of sense.

Lol Obviously you don't play and haven't played Planetside. Teamwork is what wins the battle for resources, and control of the map.
1) Graphically planetside 2 is light years ahead of MWO.
2) If the game (MWO) is stable enough how come we are not at the 10 v 10 match level yet
3) Maps are to small for anything other than tactics, no strategy required.
4) It plays like an FPS with big clunky robots. Even MW 3 & 4 played that good 20 years ago.
The color filters are actually hurting the graphics, stability did improve a little with the last patch, but since PGI intended for matches with more than 8 players per side it still is not stable enough to implement more than 8v8. Given current technology the graphics should be much better then they are shadows, textures, colors, etc.

[Flagrant]

You don't speak for anyone but yourself so don't use "we" in your title. And PS2 sucks.

[Mercules]

I played PS2. After a while I realized that shooting people only went so far in the game. If I didn't have 20 guys following behind me, I could kill 20 guys and not make one difference in capturing a point. I literally needed 21 to capture a point from those 20 guys.

I then lost interest

Planetside 2 graphics are mediocre, the game play is seriously lacking, and I wouldn't want anything they do to infect this game.

[GoManGo]

Here is my phrase for MWO (I expected more) its not the game is not fun it is but it is only fun for a hundred or less matches. That being said I really have a hard time justifying a game with (No character creation, No character ground battles,No Pve content, No space battles with aero ships,ETC) I read my first Battletech novel from a free download and MWO is nothing like the book. Mwo is shallow non progressive and down right boring after 20-100 battles.So that's why I say I expected a lot more content then on top of all this there is no matchmaking balance and no chat lobby to talk and learn anything from anyone? So why would the masses like this game? I hope PGI learns a lot from the beta and turns the game around so it will become a game I can stay with and learn and play but if they don't ill move on to better games which there are plenty out there to chose from.

[Mercules]

GoManGo, on 25 January 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

Here is my phrase for MWO (I expected more) its not the game is not fun it is but it is only fun for a hundred or less matches. That being said I really have a hard time justifying a game with (No character creation, No character ground battles,No Pve content, No space battles with aero ships,ETC) I read my first Battletech novel from a free download and MWO is nothing like the book. Mwo is shallow non progressive and down right boring after 20-100 battles.So that's why I say I expected a lot more content then on top of all this there is no matchmaking balance and no chat lobby to talk and learn anything from anyone? So why would the masses like this game? I hope PGI learns a lot from the beta and turns the game around so it will become a game I can stay with and learn and play but if they don't ill move on to better games which there are plenty out there to chose from.

It's not there yet. Probably won't be Character creation, but there is supposed to be Community Warfare eventually that should hopefully tie us all more into the mythos that is Mechwarrior.

[Kenach]

I prefer MWO for three reasons :

- I tried to play Planetside2 but my computer just couldn't handle the graphics and all the players, I had 30 FPS at medium settings whereas on MWO I run high settings at 50-60 FPS. I have 6gb ram and a GTX660m. (medium gc)
- I was quickly bored because it didn't feel like I had any impact on the persistent world at all since there are so many players. In the giant zerg fests there are no real winners, because on every server that I saw territory was always ~33% for each of the 3 factions. On MWO you can carry your team when you PuG, and you see a WIN or LOSE at the end, it feels more rewarding for players like me who can't play all night 24h/24.
- PS2 gameplay, even though it's very good thanks to the ground and air vehicles, felt generic in infantry battles, whereas MWO gameplay is quite refreshing with its slow-paced action, throttle and heat mechanics, and high customization. In the end both are good games but they are completely different and aim for different players.