MW5: Clans - too much MWO in it?

[P.J]

The more reviews I check about MW5: Clans, the more it looks like MWO.
And I hate MWO for being a COD-like copycat but with a "robot-suit" instead of being a soldier.
When I see 40t+ Mechs stopping on a dime and reversing, then forward almost full throttle again just under 1 sec like it was COD or Fortnite or PUGS, that is not a Mechwarrior game about giant robots fighting each other.

[Hykril Tynyx]

Erhmm... you might have some wrong expectations. This is a very casual FPS-like game, but the mechs definitley don't move THAT swiftly - there's a noticeable inertia to movement and it takes a few seconds for a mech to reach full throttle, though it isn't painfully slow. You might be surprised if you find out what these "giant robots" are supposedly capable of in some source books or novels.

[pete]

P.J님이 먼저 게시:

The more reviews I check about MW5: Clans, the more it looks like MWO.
And I hate MWO for being a COD-like copycat but with a "robot-suit" instead of being a soldier.
When I see 40t+ Mechs stopping on a dime and reversing, then forward almost full throttle again just under 1 sec like it was COD or Fortnite or PUGS, that is not a Mechwarrior game about giant robots fighting each other.

Dude wrong Forum

[Hykril Tynyx]

pete님이 먼저 게시:

...wrong Forum

Oh yeah, that too.
Here you go, OP -> https://store.steampowered.com/app/2000890/MechWarrior_5_Clans/

[Explore]

I wasn't aware of any significant difference in movement in this game vs MWO. Maybe someone here can educate me - admittedly it has been a while since I played MWO.

I think some of the gameplay videos of Clans are done with FPS movement control, but we have been told this will be an option (like in this game). The thing is, most of the feedback they'll be getting will be telling them to make it more like COD etc., but I don't think the games that try that with fighting robots are particularly successful either, because they just get drowned out in the competition. Better to be MWO than Hawken.

For some of the novels, I think they might have gotten a bit carried away, if the novels are meant to be based on the tabletop game. I would argue that as Jordan Weisman (co-creator of tabletop) was involved in developing MW1, 2, 3 and 4, the movement style you see in the games is more like what they envisioned than in the novels.

[Stalectos]

Explore님이 먼저 게시:

I wasn't aware of any significant difference in movement in this game vs MWO. Maybe someone here can educate me - admittedly it has been a while since I played MWO.

I think some of the gameplay videos of Clans are done with FPS movement control, but we have been told this will be an option (like in this game). The thing is, most of the feedback they'll be getting will be telling them to make it more like COD etc., but I don't think the games that try that with fighting robots are particularly successful either, because they just get drowned out in the competition. Better to be MWO than Hawken.

For some of the novels, I think they might have gotten a bit carried away, if the novels are meant to be based on the tabletop game. I would argue that as Jordan Weisman (co-creator of tabletop) was involved in developing MW1, 2, 3 and 4, the movement style you see in the games is more like what they envisioned than in the novels.

technically the mobility OP complained about is possible in MWO via skills and especially MASC. you can take skills that increase acceleration, braking ability, and turning rate which are sometimes used with or without MASC to move erratically and throw off people's aim.

[P.J]

Come on guys, just look at the leaked video reviews of Clans and you will see what I mean.

[Ironlegion]

P.J님이 먼저 게시:

Come on guys, just look at the leaked video reviews of Clans and you will see what I mean.

Could you at least present us one? What if I watch one and it doesn’t have WTF you’re talking about…

[Ironlegion]

Also this is mercs, not clans.

[P.J]

Ironlegion님이 먼저 게시:

P.J님이 먼저 게시:

Come on guys, just look at the leaked video reviews of Clans and you will see what I mean.

Could you at least present us one? What if I watch one and it doesn’t have WTF you’re talking about…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OALBjThClhA
And check right at the beginning that Viper mech that defeat any physic laws by going from 129km/h to -86 km/h in less than an eyewink. This is completely bs and that's what I don't want to see in Battletech computer game.

[Ironlegion]

P.J님이 먼저 게시:

Ironlegion님이 먼저 게시:

Could you at least present us one? What if I watch one and it doesn’t have WTF you’re talking about…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OALBjThClhA
And check right at the beginning that Viper mech that defeat any physic laws by going from 129km/h to -86 km/h in less than an eyewink. This is completely bs and that's what I don't want to see in Battletech computer game.

Oh, I thought you meant the leg walking was off. Which would bother me tbh.

I don’t really see a problem? Keep in mind, I somewhat agree with you. Unfortunately, the game comes out soon so don’t know what to tell you?

[Ironlegion]

After taking a couple of minutes to find where the kph meter is. Yeah, seems a bit much, but these are clan mechs so idk. How different is it in the older games?

[phfor]

No different to MW5:M with the classic and FPS movement options, which looks like are called classic and modern in Clans

[Explore]

phfor님이 먼저 게시:

No different to MW5:M with the classic and FPS movement options, which looks like are called classic and modern in Clans

Yes, what I was trying to explain. I don't think it will look anything like that so long as we use "Classic".

[Shadow King]

I hate that they refer to the modes as 'classic' and 'modern'.
There's nothing modern about the 'modern' movement style. It has been around as long as the 'classic', just not normally in Mechwarrior.

Really should just be named 'simulator' and 'action', as that would be more descriptive for the player and accurate to their purpose.

[Slavbringer57]

Shadow King님이 먼저 게시:

I hate that they refer to the modes as 'classic' and 'modern'.
There's nothing modern about the 'modern' movement style. It has been around as long as the 'classic', just not normally in Mechwarrior.

Really should just be named 'simulator' and 'action', as that would be more descriptive for the player and accurate to their purpose.

An alernate naming scheme that works better than modern/classic might've been "Mechwarrior" and "FPS."