565 replies to this topic

[QuantumButler]

I wonder how long before this poll gets deleted too, like the last one.

[Darius Deadeye]

QuantumButler, on 21 March 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

I wonder how long before this poll gets deleted too, like the last one.

The poll speaks for it self at this point. If it is so blatantly ignored and walked over by the developers... Well.

I have been very pro-developer in everything I've discussed so far, and I would willingly remain patient and understanding of most of the development processes that take place behind the scenes - BUT. Should they decide to implement 3rd person view in SPITE of opinions shared on these forums, I'll start leaning towards the sceptics.

[Cairbre]

I don't care. If it is implemented, I think it should lock you into 3rd person for the match, or 1st person. That way it does enforce a tactical choice.

[Keigo]

I voted no. If they want to add things like this in anyway, they should make seperate game modes similar to the 'hardcore' modes on other games. BF3 for example, normal game modes show icons above enemy units and allows third person view in (certain) vehicles. Hardcore mode doesn't.

If they want a dumbed down or easier mode, I got nothing against it as long they're split between the classic/hardcore and the new one. I understand the concerns regarding having a small development team and prioritizing features/fixes, though. Same with splitting a playerbase that's relatively small to begin with, although different modes could attract more players and earn them more money without ruining the game for those of us who oppose all these features.

However, all of that should be a long-term idea if you ask me. I think it'd be wise to fix all the bugs and get the basis properly worked out and running solid before adding more features/content.

Edited by Keigo, 21 March 2013 - 06:00 AM.

[Tragos]

There is a huge list of features a majority of people wants (CW, Clans, balancing, new mechs and so on). Normally I belong to the "different programmers do different stuff" crowd...meaning that I totally understand that the "map-guy" doesn't work in the "code-fixing" department and so on. But here we have a feature that SOMEONE has to work on and in any given poll 80-90 percent DON't want it and PGI even stated that it is one of their KEY DESIGN PILLARS not to implement it. So...is this really what PGI uses their time for?

I can completely understand that there are some "features" (like arm-lock) which are meant to make it easier for new players - but why the hell a 3rd person view? It is either completely bogus and unusable in which case it doesn't help new players - or it is gamebreaking.
"Oh great, now I see the Jenner advancing behind me...yay! And since I now see where he is going to move..."

The only way I can imagine a third person view would help is if it would be for your first 10 matches - or training grounds only. Therefore probably again a waste of programming time.

Edited by Tragos, 21 March 2013 - 09:02 AM.

[0X2A]

Tragos, on 21 March 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

DERP

MW:O Facebook page has 56,000+ likes
=> Lets say roughly 30,000 of them actually play on a regular (weekly) basis.

So... ~1,200p/30,000t = 4% of the total MW:O regular player population.

Not everyone visits the forums kiddies.

Edited by 0X2A, 21 March 2013 - 09:09 AM.

[Alois Hammer]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 17 March 2013 - 02:54 PM, said:

so theyre what sending them emails?

Nah, they're telling the devs in person while hanging out at their homes.

See, you have to think in terms of "weighted votes." You say no, that's one vote against. I say no, now we're up to 2 votes against. Then a dev's drinking buddy says he'd like 3rd person while watching the game at said dev's house, that's 50 votes for. Couple dozen drinking buddies, and we're all outnumbered by that mysterious "large number" of requests they keep alluding to but refuse to elaborate on.

[Ignatz22]

Rejarial Galatan, on 23 January 2013 - 10:30 PM, said:

I say, if they make this one vanish, we just keep this up, this is beyond important that they know just how polarized we are against this.

Sirs;

I emailed all the Developers listed in the now-locked Third Person thread flaming late (East Coast) last night. Two replied that it's not in their area of the game, but at least someone heard. Also, if you check the LAST (page 45) post it is PGI saying this is a "misunderstanding" and that third personfor the TRAINING GROUNDS ONLY is/may come SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE. But I voted "no" now, too.

Edited by Ignatz22, 21 March 2013 - 09:16 AM.

[Kriestov]

3rd Person View is where I 'Draw the Line'. I don't really need to explain the reasons, seeing as how they're 19 pages of reasons. Simply put, if it's ever included, they'll be one less customer.

[Alois Hammer]

Rejarial Galatan, on 17 March 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

Honestly? kind of. I expected a ton more from a company so young and that was willing to tackle a monumental project like this.

You really expected more from this bunch? Does "Duke Nukem Forever" ring a bell?

[Corvus Antaka]

in communist China, this means the boss can still implement it, because 1% voted for it.

[Rift Hawk]

It seems that from reading these latest posts, that they're still considering bringing out 3rd person ?

Well if they do, I'm done. Simple as that. I refuse to play a game that caters to the borderline r*tard*d that can't figure out simple controls.

All in all the devs have been doing a good job on a lot of things. There are some things however I consider major flaws in this game. Like boating and missile damage. Streaks and SRMs. LRMs don't really bother me much at all to be honest. These major flaws have caused me to barely play lately because I don't find it fun. Adding a 3rd person view will change the game experience completely and will destroy this game for me forever. Sad to see we might be going in this direction.

[Ignatz22]

Edward Steiner, on 20 March 2013 - 09:14 PM, said:

Please vote on my poll as well: http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1 .

I can't vote there; it's locked. Why is our opinion being shunned and even blocked out? We give them money, why not just hear us out, and respond?
Disturbing...

[Lord Banshee]

There's NO reason to even include 3rd-person in the Training Room.
You're training them to...what? Enjoy a view They'll Have No Where Else?
What will they *learn* from that? How easy MW4 was? What their paint scheme was?

Hey cool... I can look around this corner. Too bad I can't do that in a *real* game...

[KingCobra]

Please tell us again why we cant have freedom of choice to play 3rd person or not?

Edited by KingCobra, 21 March 2013 - 09:31 AM.

[BoPop]

just chillax people, and get some perspective.

[superbob]

IMO 3rd person view Y/N is NOT a valid way to approach this. This is more complicated than that.

3rd person view is fine for replays.
3rd person view is acceptable (even if prone to abuse) for spectator mode.
3rd person view is NOT ACCEPTABLE in play,
however, 3rd person view is justifiable in training mode, private matches and otherwise non-public games.

While I believe that people ought to have much freedom in how they play a particular game, there must be some limits that shape how the game can be perceived. One such limit should be that during actual gameplay, the player views the battlefield from the cockpit, either directly or through their 'Mech's instrumentation.

I've no problem with well designed features that will allow the player to view their mech from the outside, such as probes (like in the trailer), lancemate cameras, satellite imaging, ie. justifiable reasons to look from different perspectives during battle. These might improve immersion and enrich gameplay. However I cannot accept being able to look through a invisible camera magically suspended over my 'Mech, not during actual battles.

I think my biggest fear is that most people, when given an easier choice, such as 3rd person view, will stick with it despite a more rewarding alternative being available. This will lead to majority of the playerbase remaining ignorant to the simulation aspect of MWO, demanding increasingly casual balancing and control options, eventually dumbing the game down to the point its little more than a giant robot FPS with some fancy weapon selection.

I know PGI are trying to find the ideal ratio of complexity/accessibility, which will attract most new players while alienating as few core mechwarrior fans as possible... But I fear they might miscalculate where their point of no return lies, leading to a downward spiral, where there's too few player who want Mechwarrior and too many who want a simpler, more generic shooter.

[von Pilsner]

For the love of God, no 3pv!!!!!

[Zenthious]

I voted no, but I would totally have NO problem with third person spectator view.

[Boss Awesome]

More simulation, less arcade please! NO 3rd peson view!