29 replies to this topic

[DER3Z]

What do you think About MWO_ Seem's really really slow in my opinion, i'm all for mechassault but just don't see the hype over it. This is what people said about hawken.

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

MWO Trailer:
Garage mech selection video:

[SmaCkexe]

It is too slow.  It was very boring.   The customization was cool but it was sooooooo slow. Not saying it needs to be Hawken fast but, it needs to be a bit faster.

[DER3Z]

i know seem's like they were going in slow motion lol. It need some side boosting or something, and i agree with you on the customization i liked that a lot.

[DER3Z]

When i play hawken i get that post apocalypse feel to it, like half of the mechs are pieces of other mech put together. As for MWO i don't feel that engrossed in the gameplay at all.

[D20Face]

MWO is nothing compared to its predecessors. It's prettier but it's stripped a lot of the fun in order to make the game matchmade f2p.

MW4 is free. If you want a real Mechwarrior experience, play that instead.

[Roundlay]

Have no doubt that my critical aptitude has been compromised by Hawken in a number of ways. Nonetheless, will attempt to avoid getting entangled in a this-game-is-terrible-because-I'm-a-fan-of-that-other-game circlejerk.

With that said, I think this game looks terrible and I'm a fan of that other game.

Hyperbole aside, a few things stood out to me. I think the art direction shaping the mech design here is aweful. The necessary reliance on Mech Warrior's visual lineage leaves everything looking unwieldy, chunky, obtuse, like mechas from a generation or two ago. Hawken on the other hand presents itself as fresh, agile and contemporary.

The ability to customise each mech sounds cool on the surface. Directly impacting a mech's functional attributes in this way — tonnage, armour, etc. — could lead to scenarios in which players generally gravitate towards an 'optimal build' instead of experimenting. I think Khang Le touches on this idea briefly here: http://youtu.be/TSvL4qFocvA_hd=1

Apologies for being an irrationally biased negative Nancy.

[blurryhunter]

I am a fan of both games and as such I like to believe I have a very non-bias approach when looking at them. Here are some points to remember when you look at both.

MechWarrior and, more importantly, Battletech are two very, very well known (not necessarily understood) names. Battletech is more obsecure in that regard simply because MechWarrior is the name many know it as, but traditionally, the universe has always been realized in a table top game sense while being seen as sort of bastardized in the gaming scene. MechWarrior Online is trying to take an approach where they make a game stay as true to the table top scenarios, universe, and values as possible. The Microsoft versions of MechWarrior were nothing close to what many fans of the series consider true MechWarrior.

Battletech/MechWarrior were always slow, planning, thinking games. Again, it was based largely around a table top game scene. You have variants of various battlemechs and rarely strayed from that. The idea of the full customization is actually extremely rare in the universe lore, because it wasn't like these mechs were using hot swap, plug and play mechanics. The entire chassis of the warmachine needed to be rebuilt to handle entire ammunition loading systems, heat dissipation, electronic suites, armor, etc. What Microsoft and WizKids did was put a more user friendly approach towards the game with simplistic values on much of it, using hardpoints and the like, but it just wasn't really true to the full experience. Not like the majority of fans wanted.

MWO is pulling, or trying to pull, most of its information directly from the table top. Variants of battlemech, heat values, weapon damage, armor values, speed, etc. Going so far as to try and keep the available technology even in line with the current timeline of the game, using it as real time (1 year real life = 1 year in game; this is why you don't see the Timberwolf/Mad Cat, or any Clan mechs or tech; the Clans haven't returned in the timeline).

This is both its blessing and its curse. When you're trying so hard to stay true to such a well known, but misunderstood (I'd go so far as to say misrepresented) universe, you have the hardcore Battletech, table top fans arguing that some things aren't the way they should be, and fans of the Microsoft games saying how slow it is, how overwhelming it is, and the like. On top of that, you're taking a game that worked with table top mechanics where every turn is suppose to represent ten seconds of 'real time' and putting it into a real time game. What results are balance issues. In MWO you see 'builds' that would never work in true, table top fashion, and the other way around. It is simply the issues that come with trying to do what Piranha is trying to do. So far they're doing a really good job of it and better than anyone did before.

Another problem is that when people think mechs they tend to think in two camps: Battletech/MechWarrior or Japanese Animation. More people have been exposed to the sleek, fast, Armored Core/Gundam sort of mech idea than the slow, lumbering pace of the grounded, walking battlemechs of the Battletech/MechWarrior universe.

To address the 'optimal build' part, you have merit there, Roundlay, but that comes with anything that has a lot of customization. However, MWO has started to pull in better values and more 'true to table top' situations that are changing up what you're able to use realistically, verse what looks great on paper.

Example; for the longest time the 'prime' thing was to take the largest engine you could and slam it into the biggest mech, getting things to go faster than was ever possible in the universe lore. Again, in the table top, this wouldn't have happened, but in the real time of MWO, this was something that was possible and, unfortunately, became one of those 'only way to play' ideas. Eventually a limiter was placed on mechs based around the stock engine of each variant that limited the speed to be in line with the original intent of these battlemechs. For example, a Hunchback was never intended to go over 100 KPH in universe lore. A medium mech going 100+ KPH was a problem. It ruled out any reason for most, or all, light mechs as the Hunchback has more firepower and armor available to it than a light mech, effectively removing an entire weight class. The limiter means that light mechs are now more than viable, while not removing that feeling of a medium mech versatility. Each mech, and its respective variants, were built with specific reasons in mind for the Battletech universe and it has, for the most part, largely been upheld in MWO.

To reference the above, though, you have people that look at numbers and think 'this is best, ever and always', but in practice fall every time to someone who really knows the table top strengths and weaknesses of various mechs. My brother, for example, can eyeball a mech and tell you immediately whether the pilot is using a XL engine or not based around the weapon configuration, variant, weight class, and it's relative speed. Once he's done that, he aims for the left or right shoulder and places all of his shots there, because XL engines are fast and light, but use up so much of the mech's resources that punching out a shoulder will detonate the mech. The moment he brings that mech's armor down, the engine criticals, and the mech is done. So you have these people that think speed is king and try to apply that, but then they face people, like my brother, who look at them and simply think: easy kill. Interestingly enough, you have a lot more of the 'this is better/best' MMO crowd than you do the real, table top, canon players (like my brother) playing and that experience and knowledge really, really shows.

Hawken's biggest benefit, and I've said this on the MWO forums too, is that it isn't trying to draw from any established canon/universe/mechanics. It is free to essentially run its own show. While there's nothing wrong with what Piranha is doing with MWO, it is, for better or worse, a burden. They have to double and triple check everything they're doing to try and get things to fit the canon and, in some cases, have to actually break their own 'timeline' rules, because a mech would be introduced with too few variants and be seen as weak or underpowered; or the values, while working for the table top, just don't ride in line with what is fair or balanced in a real time game. Hawken doesn't have any of that to worry about.

Both games are marketing to completely separate audiences. The only real thing they have is common are the words mech and some shooting. MechWarrior has a lot of advanced planning, strategy, and configurations prior to putting a mech into a fight. Lining up shots over hundreds of meters, lances flanking, light mechs scouting, entire formations, and battle lines. It is meant to be a slow, purposeful fight, and when you go down in MechWarrior, you're down. There is no respawn (eventually the idea is to put in place a drop ship loadout, of sorts, where you select up to a certain amount of mechs, in order of first, second, third, etc. and as each mech is disabled/destroyed, you are fielded in your next selection [in order of second, third, fourth, etc]).

Hawken is all about dirty alleyway fights, cutting across rooftops to drop into a quick skirmish, street from street urban brawls, and nimble knife-fights. Granted there are actually ways to play a more supportive role, but it is all about the action. Immediate, fast, and hard hitting.

MechWarrior is a much more calculated, methodical approach.

Neither are wrong. Both are just games made for different audiences and lore built and derived during different times in history.

Edited by blurryhunter, October 08 2012 - 05:27 PM.

[DER3Z]

nicely put blurryhunter, well thought out and Thank you for the insight =) i would of liked your post but i've reached my positive quote today =(

[blurryhunter]

Not at all a worry, Derez. I've been playing MechWarrior and did take part in the Alpha 2 for Hawken, and I can say that they both appeal to me in different ways.

The MWO forums, unfortunately, seem to be populated by some very ignorant individuals (as you're going to find anywhere in a forum eventually), but the vast majority of the older players that really understand the game (and thus the differences between both Hawken and MechWarrior) don't bother with the forums as they're pretty cliche` in terms of the attitudes and responses you'll find there.

My favorite part about Hawken really is the unknown IP. As a veteran of the US Navy, I can say that I'm really interested in the style and direction of Hawken's vehicles and area design. They have that piecemeal practicality to them. They look like, for all the world, that they function. Not pretty, or entirely symmetrical, but they function in that realistic, weighted way.

MechWarrior, well, take one look at an Atlas and tell me as a 12 year old you wouldn't have looked at that and thought: Wow... Hence my love of MechWarrior. The sad truth is that in many ways, at least as far as technology is at the moment, MechWarrior will never be fully realized. One aspect of MechWarrior that has, to this day, remained in table top and books is melee combat.

An Atlas, for example, could literally pick up a light battlemech and swing it at another mech. Use its hands to tear the arms off another one and, should the pilot feel justified, beat it with its own arms. There were several battlemechs designed completely around melee; like the Hatchetman. Using an axe and, if I recall, a shield shaped arm (or a shield outright), it was designed for fast movement to close in and tangle with enemy mechs unable to contend with melee attacks.

And I think that, above all else, is why MechWarrior remains as slow as it seems to many. In the lore there were many instances (and in table top statistics) of mechs sprinting towards an opponent, opening up jump jets and driving their feet clean into the enemy mech; hence the Death from Above mechanic in Battletech. Mechs had that freedom of movement, being able to pivot and sidestep (not all, but things like the Atlas and the more human-bipedal mechs), for all the world looking like huge, metal beasts brawling in combat. Granted, these weren't your speedy, Gundam-style sort of clashes and counter-clashes, but if those things were pulled into the MechWarrior games, I think many people would take a renewed interest and really have a more comfortable approach to the game.

Sadly, as I'm sure you understand, things like melee mechanics that over the top, realistic to the lore as they might be, would appear completely broken and do much more harm than good in any video game. So as it stands, unfortunately, the multitude of ideas and things that Battletech, in many ways started, have to sit out in favor of the traditional robot with guns and that slow and purposeful, lumbering movement. It just isn't a dream that can be realized with technologies limits today (or balancing limits).

Another thing I think many are forgetting is that MechWarrior's scale is much, much larger than that of Hawken. I just got done finishing a match in MechWarrior and thought to myself that my Hunchback didn't seem really that fast while I was getting circled by a light battlemech, a Commando. It struck me, after some allies came in to help remove the pestering thing (I know what I should be doing, but I'm unfamiliar with the game), that the Commando is almost four times bigger than the largest Hawken, but it was running around at a speed, relative to myself, that felt like I had no legs; and I was in a medium mech!

When you've got battlemechs as tall as most buildings and, at the smallest, a three or four floor apartment (in MWO, that is), trying to compare it to a game built around fighting through, in, and around a small market or a city block is something that just going to end in a bias opinion to which ever one 'feels' normal for what you're use to. In the end, you don't really get the opportunity to really appreciate what was done in the other and may very well end up missing out on something new you might have enjoyed.

[Kazma]

tbh I don't like anything about the customization in Hawken...no...can this even be called customization_
so I'll try MWO when it comes out, maybe that will satisfy my needs for customizable mech gaming
if it wouldn't be so slow ... it reminds me so much of World of Tanks :/
I wish someone would make an Armored Core clone for PC

[Wadelma]

Mechwarrior is meant to be more slow paced and it appeals to guys who think of mechs as heavy, pinnacles of war machinery. More thinking is involved when customizing your mech, like where to place ammunition, heatsinks etc and also the places where to aim at in enemy mech. It is good at what it does in terms of realism and should stay that way, separate from these fast paced, quick games. Quick as in matches don't take so long. As a fan of earlier Mechwarrior games this looks quite fun, graphics are stunning, but I hope the gameplay gets more erratic and just slightly more fast paced, then again the slowness is also very appealing because those huge 100ton war machines begin to remind me of 1800 century naval battles, the bigger you are and the more hits you can soak the better. MWO tends to classify the game just a bit too much for my taste, but it does it well enough to stay interesting.

Having not played either, but from lots of watching regarding the material I can say I want to play both. Mechwarrior for that big, bulky, tanky gameplay. And Hawken for awesome skirmishes and that postapocalyptic feel of mix and match scavenger warmachine battles.

Opinions might change since I'm going to play MWO quite soon I hope ^^

[blurryhunter]

To be fair to Hawken, Kazma, the customization was lacking more from the early stages of games and less because it was absolutely absent. Hawken's customization takes a more cosmetic approach. As was stated in an interview, they wanted to avoid customization that had statistical impact with the mechs, as it would lead people to having the same looks due to 'best builds' and such; which I am perfectly fine with.

The real difference between the two can be seen in how they want to approach it. Hawken has you switching your vehicle, should you choose, every time you respawn. MechWarrior Online has you using the mech you chose until the match ends in a one-life-to-give scenario. Because of that, MechWarrior stresses customization from the stand point of predicting your encounters, how you wish to approach the battlefield, and designing completely around team mechanics; which is absolutely key in MechWarrior Online (more so than even Hawken; being down a mechwarrior is almost certainly a loss unless your side can pick their targets well and focus fire). The customization in Battletech has always been very internal, with variants having some alterations (ballistic weapons vs energy or missiles being replaced by energy weapons) which will change the looks a bit (and I believe they're working on things like paint schemes and camo), but you will always know a Catapult when you see it, and certainly know an Atlas. Due to the changes not being so readily identifiable when sitting across the field from your target, you rely on your electronics and lighter, faster mechs to scout out targets, allowing you to gain information before things become a threat.

Hawken has a pick up and play feel, with some learning curves, but rewards teamwork just as well as MechWarrior Online. The customization, however, takes more of a divided approach to the mechs, rather than the singular approach of MechWarrior Online. Because you're able to swap mechs, you can almost see them as loadouts and classes (though to be fair Hawken mech variation feels much different then your simple; I've got different guns and a grenade this time). So you end up selecting from a few options available to each individual mech model, items/boosts (passives) available to all models of mech, and it would appear the vast majority of customization comes in your pilot options; which would naturally be shared between all models as it represents your pilot's skills. There is also a weapon boosting system, though whether that can be seen as a customization or simply a 'level up/progression' system remains to be seen. All told, Hawken has really solid depth of customization for what it is trying to accomplish, but most of it was locked out for now.

Wadelma, you're right, though there is more to it. Matches in MechWarrior Online can last the full duration, which is something around 15 minutes I think, or can end as quickly as half, or a fourth of that, depending largely on how your team performed. The best matches will last longer (which is something that can't be said for many games) simply because the pilots are approaching far more cautiously and trying to gain advantages, flanks, and designating targets for allies (the moment someone targets an enemy mech, it is labeled as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc. based on when it was targeted when the match began; Alpha will always be Alpha for the duration of the match; Teams can call targets even through text chat, though many seem loath to pay attention).

It's just that no game before has managed, or bothered, to try and bring in the real fast paced areas of the Battletech universe aside from 'it's a light mech, it goes fast'. Granted, the majority of the feel is due largely to scale and your perception relative to the mech you're using, what you're watching, and what you're use to playing (both in MWO and other games), but if/when Piranha finally introduces melee combat, you'll see a whole different side of things. Entire battlemechs, and variants of some as well (Centurion variant Yen-Lo-Wang was designed strictly for melee), were built to close gaps and assault enemy mechs in a way many couldn't counter. Piranha has actually expressed interest in bringing the Solaris Arena into the game which pitted mechs one on one, or in teams, in gladiatorial-style combat. The Arena was where most, if not all, the melee specific mechs were born (open field combat wasn't a place for melee short of moments where an Atlas pilot, as an example, would find themselves close enough to strike out with their fist; moments of opportunity or secondary defense; the Pillager, 100 ton Assault mech, carried spikes gauntlets as a backup to it's otherwise long range firepower).

If the Solaris Arena is fully realized and melee mechanics (the melee-centric battlemechs) find their way into MechWarrior Online, it will be a radical, and I believe needed, shift in how many view the game and cement MWO as the truest incarnation of Battletech in any medium outside of the Battletech table top and, arguably, novelizations (you know authors and their liberties, lol).

Edited by blurryhunter, October 11 2012 - 12:33 PM.

[Samiam]

It is fun, but also slow. I don't like the throttle control, I would like to be able to move more delicately, like in hawken. I also don't like how the torso twist works.

[blurryhunter]

Yeah, a lot of people expect it to work like other games, where you're facing dictates the movement, but consider when the game's were made too. Battletech was made during the Cold War era where tanks were generally considered the dominate land weapon when armies clash. That translates directly into many of the things about Battletech. Part of the reason why it helps to be familiar with your battlemech is knowing what weapons are mounted where (something I'm trying to encourage they show in the Trial mechs, but can't view at the moment unless you own a non-trial mech), so you know your actual firing arcs.

One of the tactics used by particularly good pilots is to use parts of the mech to intentionally absorb incoming shots to spare the more vital locations, like ones containing functioning weapons, heat-sinks, and such. It is common to see some of the really good pilots engage and turn to sacrifice an entire arm simply because the weapons in it had no ammunition, had no weapons set in it anyway, or to risk losing lesser weapons in order to keep fighting with what they need to stay as effective a force as possible.

The torso weapons will always point towards the cross-hairs (directly towards your facing) with the arm weapons having more mobility (that's the circular lead reticle tethered to the cross-hairs) at the expense of being easier targets to remove for the opponent (taking the connected shoulder off will also remove the connecting arm). It isn't uncommon to see people intentionally target specific portions of a heavier armored battlemech just to remove the weapons they know are there, leaving it partially, or wholly, defenseless and to ignore it so priority can be given to other things.

The throttle took some getting use to for me, but after awhile the entire layout starts to sink it and you get the feel for the little things. It also immediately separates the people that are good, decent and learning, new, or ignorant of game mechanics. When you stand tall in MWO, it's known and immediately visible.

Just a funny story to add: Just as this enemy Awesome starts taking hits from my brother and he's about to move behind a tower, my brother 'head shots' him (taking out the cockpit) and we notice his pilot name is ShootyMcFace. He keeps talking about how he should have Fraps'd it or took a screenshot for the 'Shot of the Week' (Day, Month, can't remember lol) contest they have. I think it would have won lol. Headshotting a guy called ShootyMcFace_ Yeah. That's priceless.

I do agree that the game isn't for everyone, but I feel people should at least give it a good, solid go. The first impressions are going to typically be really, really varied, due in large part to it being a matchmaking system and never knowing how good, or bad, your team is going to do. That said, MWO's Beta goes open on the 16th, and if anyone here wants to have a good, solid run at it, get in touch with me. I'll see if I can get my brother online and we can all go romping around.

Lots of new people are going to mean a lot of miscellaneous skill match-ups, so the more you've got in your corner, the better I think you're experience is going to end up. Especially since you don't really get the real feel for the game until you've purchased your first battlemech and can actually see the customization first hand.

My pilot name on MWO is Vahn. My brother's is Cataphract. Do know that your pilot name (what you pick upon registering for MWO; this is also the name used in forums) is permanent. There is no way to change it at this time (if ever). I hope to help people see the differences MWO brings to the, as of now, stereotypical mech scene in a positive light.

Between MechWarrior Online bringing Battletech to a larger audience and Hawken opening the doors for a completely new mech IP, this year is looking to set the bar for any game daring to call itself a mech-based anything. I hope both do well, because I'm rooting for both of them.

[Taidan]

Pretty much what Blurry and Wade have said.

MWO and Hawken, while both being Mech-centric arena games, have very different focusses. (Um. Foci_)

I've not played Hawken yet, but I've spent a few months quality time with MWO, and it's a hell of a lot of fun at the moment, with a lot of potential for becoming something truly special, if it gets the development time it deserves.

One of the main issues I'm finding at the moment with MWO though, is that while its loyalty to the Battletech IP is both admirable and highly appreciated by us long-time fans, it's also proving to be a bit of a noose around the game's neck when it comes to issues of balance.

The developers have made a couple of questionable fundamental design decisions which have... complicated things, and instead of listening to their beta testers, they're still trying to balance the back-end by applying minor tweaks to equipment and weapon values, which is leading to yet further difficulties. Furthermore, they appear to be running behind their own schedule, which is leading towards a premature Open Beta which could end up alienating a lot of their less dedicated potential customers.

I would urge that everybody gives MWO a try when it hits Open Beta in 4 days, if only to see if it turns out to be your thing. Your initial few matches may prove frustrating, the learning curve may seem steep, the latest patch has brought some technical issues with it, and sadly, there are a lot of scumbags who are currently abusing a particularly overpowered build who are intending to cause trouble for the new starters when the game opens up, but you may still find a liking for the style of combat that is on offer.

Most importantly, both Hawken and MWO are both Free-to-Play titles, so there's no good reason why we can't all have our cake and eat it, and just splurge more cash on whichever playstyle we find more compelling.

I sincerely hope that both games succeed financially, and have extremely long shelf-lives.

[T3chnicality]

I would like your posts blurry and taidan, but i ran out of them lol. You guys were able to talk about both without becoming angry or irritatingly negative about the games. When i clicked on the link to the MWO forums i was expecting... i don't know some kind of mech loving camaraderie i guess. (Still naive at 23)  But it was disconcerting, i understand that they don't represent the entire MW:O community but still, their blatant rudeness and lack of critical thinking was appalling.

Personally i really want to try out Mech warrior in general, also I didn't know it was a table top primarily. I've always found table top strategy games interesting. There's this hobby shop in astoria I think they have weekly table top matches. I saw a layout for Warhammer 40k and i immediately wanted to know how it was played. Now that i know about the Battletech Universe i'm definitely gonna look for some youtube vids.

[Wadelma]

Right, after playing a week of MWO I can say it is good, but suffers from several BIG issues with buying mechs and framerates.
It can get quite hectic if you are brawling with mechs, not quite like Hawken though.
I like the slow beginnings and fierce midgames, really gives it a sense of "simulation". The classbased gameplay seems okay to me, dunno how canon it is wit the TT version though. One gamebreakingly bad fault is the way the server handles things, you can hit the enemy on your screen but miss in serverside, it gets really hard to hit light mechs who have got this lagshield :/ Makes light mechs OP in that way.
The mechs feel nice and heavy, looks great and all.
I'd say this game is very, very different than Hawken. You have to aim at specific parts of foes to really hit them hard instead of the spray and pray in Hawken. Not saying spray and pray would be a bad thing, it works in Hawken nicely. Hawken appeals to more casual gamers as it doesn't reguire such in-depth knowledge as MWO, like the differences between mechs and where each has/can have something, the loadout customization (as in where to place your ammo so that it won't explode easily)... Overall MWO is very deep game, it appeals to some and some find it bad.

TL;DR Hawken is more casual pick up game and MWO reguires way more knowledge, they play way differently and can't really be compared as they play like two different genresm, like comparing Need for Speed to F1 (Both have cars=Both have mechs in this case), end of comparison

[Taidan]

T3chnicality, on October 19 2012 - 02:21 AM, said:

When i clicked on the link to the MWO forums i was expecting... i don't know some kind of mech loving camaraderie i guess. (Still naive at 23)  But it was disconcerting, i understand that they don't represent the entire MW:O community but still, their blatant rudeness and lack of critical thinking was appalling.

The MWO forums are a little... caustic at the moment. It's mostly a mix of just very passionate people with strongly differing opinions about the game's design and the usual unthinking Munchkins trying to defend their favourite overpowered build, but there are also a few genuinely bad eggs running around unchecked. I'm steering well clear myself, until they start moderating the place.

T3chnicality, on October 19 2012 - 02:21 AM, said:

Personally i really want to try out Mech warrior in general, also I didn't know it was a table top primarily. I've always found table top strategy games interesting. There's this hobby shop in astoria I think they have weekly table top matches. I saw a layout for Warhammer 40k and i immediately wanted to know how it was played. Now that i know about the Battletech Universe i'm definitely gonna look for some youtube vids.

There's a really good value Battletech Starter box out there at the moment, the "Classic Battletech Introductory Box Set", which comes with a generous number of (Slightly lower quality) miniatures, rulebooks and maps. Before that even, you can give the game a try with some official, free printable PDF downloads from http://bg.battletech.com/_page_id=400 and http://bg.battletech.com/_page_id=27

Just be forewarned - Classic Battletech requires a fair amount of paperwork and record-keeping. If you're gonna bring a friend or two over to try it, make sure they're the patient sort.

Wadelma, on October 19 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Right, after playing a week of MWO I can say it is good, but suffers from several BIG issues with buying mechs and framerates.
It can get quite hectic if you are brawling with mechs, not quite like Hawken though.
I like the slow beginnings and fierce midgames, really gives it a sense of "simulation". The classbased gameplay seems okay to me, dunno how canon it is wit the TT version though. One gamebreakingly bad fault is the way the server handles things, you can hit the enemy on your screen but miss in serverside, it gets really hard to hit light mechs who have got this lagshield :/ Makes light mechs OP in that way.

Yeah, the problem with high latency has been coming and going all over the place since I joined up. It's bad again at the moment, since they switched to the new engine last patch. It's exacerbated by them authenticating everything server-side, as protection against cheating. Hopefully it will get fixed up at some point, but even then it'll never be perfect without some serious re-thinking, and more local servers for players world-wide. (And despite all of that, it's been sadly confirmed that there is at least one aimbot in the wild for it, although it's reportedly useless with ballistic weapons on anything that's moving over medium speed.)

Edited by Taidan, October 21 2012 - 12:45 AM.

[Saint_The_Judge]

You can't compare Hawken to MWO the same way you can't compare BC2 to ARMA 2. Hawken and BC2 are shooters, good, excellent shooters! ARMA 2 and MWO are good, excellent simulators (although I can't help asking if a nonexistent bipod mech can have a virtual simulator, but wathever)! I'm more prone to shooters, although I love to play some ARMA 2 or JCOVE once in a while.
This said, I tried MWO, really tried hard, but couldn't have too much fun playing it. It doesn't mean it's a bad game. It's a fantastic game a lot of people love, it just won't be in my library.

[mechpilot6666]

I love mech games from the slower paced "sims" to the fast paced shooters such as hawken. I'm sorry but MWO is teetering on the edge of suck and extreme suck.

I could go into it in depth but to summarize me and another forum rat in the closed beta redesigned the entire "pilot XP" table in a few hours and it is being voted for almost unanimously over the current setup.(a dev even gave us a thumbs up when we submitted the email) I just don't think PGI put much effort in. While Adhesive kicked ass!

Oculus rift, Mek-fu, etc etc you can see the hawken devs really care about their product with all their cross market tie ins. while the PGI devs are ho hum. (dual stick would be awesome in MWO but the game cant even support single right now)

Then you look at how long each game has been in development, the payrolls of the two studios, size of the dev teams....... you tell me who put the work in and who's coming out with a better product.

EDIT: I believe Adhesive could put out a "sim" mech game in a couple years that would absolutely WRECK MWO. If MWO is even released in a couple years >.>

Edited by Steel_Jesus, October 21 2012 - 02:41 PM.