Who Is Actually Responsible For The State Of The Game? Pgi Or Igp?
#1
Posted 26 August 2013 - 08:33 PM
IGP
- First round of p2w consumables that are thankfully no more
- 3rd person (Appeal to the masses instead of what MechWarrior actually is)
- Rushed Mechs (Holy shet, didn't know the Kintaro, Trebby and Quickdraw were Assault mechs!)
- Rushed content to meet mile stone deadlines (Do they even pay for a QA team?!)
- Redistributing Founder/Phoenix funds to other dead-end games.
PGI
- Utter ongoing struggle with how to get missiles to work in every way (LRMs, SRMs, Streaks)
- Ghost Heat, Gauss Rifle breaking
- Bad Hit Detection (although possibly IGP by not paying for better servers)
- Slow Development Cycle
- Complete incompetence in terms of equipment/weapon balancing on a competitive level
Does PGI rightfully earn ALL of the flak they receive (sure, they at times are definitely fanning the flames) or is there some corruption going on with IGP that is causing the massive backlash in the community. I'm in no way defending PGI, as I'm often one of the first to point the finger, but I'm really starting to have this sneaking suspicion IGP is probably just as if not more to blame with why MW:O is starting to give a very direhard/loyal community ire.
P.S. (In case its not all PGI to blame) There are many things they've done right, but unfortunately for most things done correctly, its always -- always one step forward, two steps back. Plus their PR is probably the worst I've seen in some time. But hey, the mech designs are good, right?
#2
Posted 26 August 2013 - 08:38 PM
http://kotaku.com/we...shers-472880781 (<---Not specifically related to IGP/PGI)
Edited by FupDup, 26 August 2013 - 08:39 PM.
#3
Posted 26 August 2013 - 08:45 PM
now look at them.... blocky as hell, and flat as what. they all look the same really! it's like they got suuuuuper lazy (or rushed due to IPG??)
I dont know, but you are right.... both are to be equally criticized. GGRRRR!!!!
#4
Posted 26 August 2013 - 08:51 PM
Quickdraw:
http://www.sarna.net...U_Quickdraw.jpg
Trebuchet:
http://www.sarna.net...U_Trebuchet.jpg
Highlander:
http://www.sarna.net..._Highlander.jpg
Kintaro:
http://www.sarna.net...50U_Kintaro.jpg
Jagermech:
http://www.sarna.net...U_JagerMech.jpg
In regards to the original post, I hope it's IGP that caused the current debacle. I don't want to believe that it was PGI, but it's entirely possible.
I find it interesting that "3rd person must be implemented for the health of the game" (paraphrase from Russ' post) would cover a threat from IGP to shut the game down if 3PV wasn't put in.
Edited by Wrayeth, 26 August 2013 - 08:54 PM.
#5
Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:08 PM
but seriously look at the dimensions from the sides on the newer models... they're all flat (in the kind of way that screams "we were rushed!). they dont have some of the details and creative afterthought like the catapult (latter on the legs that have more substance than just 4 corners, with very detailed missile doors, retained the canon shape with more defined edges) or my personal favorite the cent (with the left arm not being canon, but so cool. the fine details in the mid torso).
looking at the newer models, they lack that certain detail oriented sculpture. Hell, I loved the concept art for the treb, but the 3D model looks nothing like it. (the cent is pretty spot on though).
I don't know, but those models were rushed. It took them 3 months to push out the raven, but look at the details in it! it shows in comparison to these mechs that came out bi-weekly.
#6
Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:21 PM
Why are they being rushed? What difference does it make if a feature is made by Sept 17th? Who actually set Sept 17th as a deadline?
I truly believe sometime ago IGP said "Ok, you guys are going too slow, we're giving you until <XX DATE> to do <IRRELEVANT MILE STONE> because we pay the bills." In order to do this, PGI is rushing even more and their once half decent quality is now down the tubes.
So... why? Was the founder package not wildly successful enough? Are their Hero mechs not selling in enough oodles? Does PGI need to pull even more money to fund that pos Sins Of The DarkAge? Or are they just in the end greedy inept, and clueless run of the mill gaming publishers that will inevitably run PGI and MechWarrior (mostly MechWarrior is what we actually care about) into the grave -- and this will merely add to the unforgivably long list of publisher horror stories?
(Or maybe those conspiracies that PGI created IGP are true. Idk, discuss. I need more infoz)
#7
Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:22 PM
Wrayeth, on 26 August 2013 - 08:51 PM, said:
Quickdraw:
http://www.sarna.net...U_Quickdraw.jpg
Trebuchet:
http://www.sarna.net...U_Trebuchet.jpg
Highlander:
http://www.sarna.net..._Highlander.jpg
Kintaro:
http://www.sarna.net...50U_Kintaro.jpg
Jagermech:
http://www.sarna.net...U_JagerMech.jpg
While the scale/hitboxes of some mechs are totally borked, I think they're doing a great job capturing the actual look of each mech so far. The only one that really needs an actual model modification is the Awesome, because they made it way too fat.
#8
Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:27 PM
Unfortunately that's cold comfort for us, beyond hoping the title stays afloat long enough to get fleshed out.
Edited by Ralgas, 26 August 2013 - 09:31 PM.
#9
Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:41 PM
#10
Posted 26 August 2013 - 10:36 PM
#11
Posted 26 August 2013 - 10:43 PM
#12
Posted 26 August 2013 - 10:56 PM
Khobai, on 26 August 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:
I don't even play a lot of video games and I know that there are publishers that are known to make this impossible, buying up licensing for great IPs and completely destroying them by not allowing their devs the freedom they need to design good games. I just don't know if IGP is one of them.
#13
Posted 26 August 2013 - 11:00 PM
#14
Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:03 AM
OneEyed Jack, on 26 August 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:
I sense EA and Westwood somewhere...
#15
Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:36 AM
Khobai, on 26 August 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:
Ahh, but has IGP provided enough resources at the right time for pgi to do their job effectively? There's plenty of speculation about funding that was taken for use on tactics, entirely possible if that were true igp called in markers early and deprived pgi putting them on the backfoot from the beginning.
As for handing over to someone else, who? Noone's interested, and certainly not any other publishers ( I seem to remember dev blog 0 saying it was a very difficult path just securing igp. Heck, if anyone thought it was worth doing pre pgi all they had to do was suck up to Microsoft. I'm sure if there was a perceived dollar to be made in it they would have held the license and backed it themselves........
#16
Posted 27 August 2013 - 12:39 AM
Quote
PGI has a contract with IGP. Theye well aware of what percentages theyre entitled to. IGP is just taking their agreed upon cut and investing it in other endeavors. There is nothing dubious about that, its how business is done. Again if PGI cant meet the terms of their contract, and produce a profitable game, based on a proven franchise, that is entirely their fault and no one elses.
I understand its convenient to blame IGP because you dont want to believe PGI is incompetent. But the recent 3PV fiasco shouldve put everything into perspective clarity, even for the most fervent supporters of PGI.
Quote
No ones interested? How do you know? I would gather theres plenty of developers that would be interested. In fact mechwarrior tactics got a new developer because the previous developer wasnt getting the job done.
Edited by Khobai, 27 August 2013 - 12:48 AM.
#17
Posted 27 August 2013 - 01:17 AM
Khobai, on 27 August 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:
PGI has a contract with IGP. Theye well aware of what percentages theyre entitled to. IGP is just taking their agreed upon cut and investing it in other endeavors. There is nothing dubious about that, its how business is done. Again if PGI cant meet the terms of their contract, and produce a profitable game, based on a proven franchise, that is entirely their fault and no one elses.
I understand its convenient to blame IGP because you dont want to believe PGI is incompetent. But the recent 3PV fiasco shouldve put everything into perspective clarity, even for the most fervent supporters of PGI.
^The above of which we have no information, on how much they are taking, what pgi is actually working on, how much creative control and direction igp has over the use of their funding. I understand it convenient to place full blame on pgi, but the true story is only known to those in the offices, hence my 1st post in this thread
Khobai, on 27 August 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:
because it took 10 years to get to here from the last one(crappy xbox titles excluded)? And correct me if i'm wrong but PGI was the one who acquired the ip rights, so even if there was someone else out there wanting to build it without them neither game gets made.
#18
Posted 27 August 2013 - 01:48 AM
Quote
Typically publishers get 70% and game developers get 30%. That is fairly standard across the industry.
Based on figures I've read in the past, I would say MWO has cost IGP approximately $15,000,000 to develop to date. Of course it's in IGP's interests to make the game profitable as quickly as possible, because theyre 15M in the hole on it.
Giving IGP flak for spending their 70% of the profits on other games is absurd. That's what publishers do. They take their cut and invest it in developing other games. That is the basis of all capitalistic ventures.
It's PGI that hasnt been doing what theyre supposed to... maximizing the profitability of the game; given how many people have cancelled their phoenix packs lately. IGP may very well have told PGI to implement 3PV, but it was probably more of a broad mandate, and the specifics of how to implement it were likely left upto PGI. Implementing it in a way that negatively impacted the community was entirely PGI's fault though.
Worse yet is PGI wouldnt even man up to it. Instead we got some half-baked apology with absolutely no outline for a plan to resolve the current situation, or how PGI plans to prevent a repeat incident in the future.
Edited by Khobai, 27 August 2013 - 02:16 AM.
#19
Posted 27 August 2013 - 02:21 AM
Khobai, on 27 August 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:
Which circles back to deadlines and who's really making them, they greyed out "hardcore" modes in the launcher have a story we don't really know completely to tell there as well. If they weren't going to implement as 1st intended, why bother with the frontend coding (especially given it would provoke those impacted by it even more). As i mentioned above, it really boils down to some poor decision making early throwing the project way behind, followed by a joint snafu between both companies to this point.
#20
Posted 27 August 2013 - 02:32 AM
Quote
I doubt IGP is making deadlines for PGI other than telling them when they want the game to launch by. Publishers dont want to have to hold the hands of developers and manage their every day affairs. That's actually Russ' job as President.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users