597 replies to this topic

[HDMan]

The article is accurate in the fact that there is tremendous backlash in the forums by a very vocal group. There have been mistakes made (devs are human as is the publisher). This kind of "entitled" ranting is REALLY hurting the community and the game. PLEASE give them some time to realize their vision and enjoy the game as it is. Community warfare will eventually make it into the game once they bring UI2.0 online. What the article doesn't portray is the HUGE number of folks who DO like the game and don't post their fury in the forums. I have been avoiding the forums because it is soooooo depressing to see all the bashing. I LOVE this game and it's our ONLY shot at bringing our beloved IP back to life. Take a few moments to marvel at what happens in each match you play. The environment, the damage maps to the mechs, the teamwork necessary to pull of a win, the mechanics involved in staying alive while taking out foes. I am terrified that this game might die in a fit of rage that is completely unnecessary. PLEASE give them some time...To clarify what I mean by "entitled": The game isn't even live yet... Give them a chance to right the perceived wrongs...

Edited by HDMan, 31 August 2013 - 11:14 AM.

[Devil Fox]

Well if it ain't another nail in the coffin...

Must say was a good read, and summed up the major developments and issues that PGI have created for itself. No mention of the ECM or Artemis x2 debacles, but they were more gameplay and idea implementation issues, everything else mentioned was the reverse face on many concepts sold to early buyers. I think it's now become find the hay in the needle stack

[chiXnhawk]

LOL...

[Warge]

HDMan, on 31 August 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

I am terrified that this game might die in a fit of rage that is completely unnecessary. PLEASE give them some time...

A totaly agree with you. But no-1PV-only was the last nail into coffin.
We are customers and our money feed game. Someone just forgot it.

HDMan, on 31 August 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

Take a few moments to marvel at what happens in each match you play.

3PV presence in 1PV-matches happens.

[Sam Slade]

HDMan, on 31 August 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

This kind of "entitled" ranting is REALLY hurting the community

The thing is, when you buy something, you are entitled to it. It is absurd that PGI and Co. should show even a hint of incredulity that their 'community' start behaving like customers not testers; particularly as it was PGI who decided to open the cash flow and apply the 'paying customer' lables themselves.

To me this looks like a clear case of 'I'll have my cake and eat it too'... one must wonder just how prepared the team at PGI was for the retail market.

Edited by Sam Slade, 31 August 2013 - 06:49 AM.

[Deathlike]

HDMan, on 31 August 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

The article is accurate in the fact that there is tremendous backlash in the forums by a very vocal group. There have been mistakes made (devs are human as is the publisher). This kind of "entitled" ranting is REALLY hurting the community and the game. PLEASE give them some time to realize their vision and enjoy the game as it is. Community warfare will eventually make it into the game once they bring UI2.0 online. What the article doesn't portray is the HUGE number of folks who DO like the game and don't post their fury in the forums. I have been avoiding the forums because it is soooooo depressing to see all the bashing. I LOVE this game and it's our ONLY shot at bringing our beloved IP back to life. Take a few moments to marvel at what happens in each match you play. The environment, the damage maps to the mechs, the teamwork necessary to pull of a win, the mechanics involved in staying alive while taking out foes. I am terrified that this game might die in a fit of rage that is completely unnecessary. PLEASE give them some time...

This discontent wouldn't happen if PGI actually decided to "communicate" instead of "dictate" the direction they want to go.

TBH, I think this could reach a pinnacle if PCGamer actually wrote something negative about MWO.. then you know that would be this game's deathblow.

I don't think PGI grasps how much a community can actively work to kill a game in the same way they could make it better. It's always has been up to PGI to do what is right, and not do what is most profitable and then ignoring the consequences.

Edit:
It would be nice if there was a conversion or dialog between PGI and the community... of course trust is always a two way street.

Edited by Deathlike, 31 August 2013 - 06:53 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Warge, on 31 August 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

It was good balancing tool. It could be tuned but instead just deleted,

That is a discussion for another topic, but I disagree, and one aspect to look at that is Premium Time granting C-BIll bonuses. If costly means more powerful, then giving players more in-game money for real world money means Pay-To-Win That's not all, but as I said, discussion for a different topic.

[MustrumRidcully]

Deathlike, on 31 August 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

This discontent wouldn't happen if PGI actually decided to "communicate" instead of "dictate" the direction they want to go.

TBH, I think this could reach a pinnacle of PCGamer actually wrote something negative about MWO.. then you know that would be this game's deathblow.

I don't think PGI grasps how much a community can actively work to kill a game in the same way they could make it better. It's always has been up to PGI to do what is right, not do what is most profitable and ignoring the consequences.

It is up to PGI to finally realize that what they do isn't the most profitable. It just is "expanding the audience" with nothing to back it up. "Hey, look, here's another item on this itemized list of game features, that should attract all the people that want this item".

Yeah, it will attract them, perhaps, but then they figure out that all these items on the list are all badly implemented and don't really result in long term fun, and say good bye. All the people that didn't like this item are pissed, and then your great mutliplayer game - a type of game that lives on its community and where every player is part of your content - gets dragged down because people express their negative opinion to everyone, warning them of disappointments to come.

And you're left with a bad reputation and a shrunk community, and will anyone care if you come back later "We totally changed, you know all this disappointing implementations of the itemized feature list, we fixed them please come back" and people go "Yeah, whatever, you had your chance, there is already a new shiny in town." Left behind might be a small the core audience that came for the items on your original itemzied list, all the items you compromised so the other items could be added.

[Evinthal]

DarwinsDisciple, on 30 August 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:

To think 2 weeks ago this could have all been averted without a couple lines of code.

Fixed.

[Sybreed]

PGI did its biggest mistake by saying the core community (founders) are just a minority in the grand scheme of things, that the game is not built for us anymore. We were promised a game, we're getting a different one because we're not so important after all.

PGI should just remember that we, the founders, made them by giving them 5 million dollars. I'm not saying that we can also destroy them... but we can seriously damage them and it's already begun.

It's not a threat or anything, and I don't want to participate in any kind of damaging propaganda, but PGI should respect the people who trusted them at the beginning, the ones who gave them a lot of money to create a MW game. I'm merely giving them a warning of things to come if they don't change their course of action.

I mean, just look at Star Citizen, they keep taking feedback from the forums and when it's good feedback, they actually try to implement it in their game. The relation with the community over there is a polar opposite of what I'm seeing here. PGI should just take notes... and perhaps ask advice from Chris Roberts next time they meet him.

I mean, the patcher and the hangar module are already very impressive.. PGI should really be worried.

[Deathlike]

MustrumRidcully, on 31 August 2013 - 06:56 AM, said:

It is up to PGI to finally realize that what they do isn't the most profitable. It just is "expanding the audience" with nothing to back it up. "Hey, look, here's another item on this itemized list of game features, that should attract all the people that want this item".

Yeah, it will attract them, perhaps, but then they figure out that all these items on the list are all badly implemented and don't really result in long term fun, and say good bye. All the people that didn't like this item are pissed, and then your great mutliplayer game - a type of game that lives on its community and where every player is part of your content - gets dragged down because people express their negative opinion to everyone, warning them of disappointments to come.

And you're left with a bad reputation and a shrunk community, and will anyone care if you come back later "We totally changed, you know all this disappointing implementations of the itemized feature list, we fixed them please come back" and people go "Yeah, whatever, you had your chance, there is already a new shiny in town." Left behind might be a small the core audience that came for the items on your original itemzied list, all the items you compromised so the other items could be added.

Sure, but there's very little proof that will happen. The closest thing that even resembled that was the initial "proposal" of how coolant would work. Having 1 module of paid coolant vs 2 C-bill versions was a serious issue of contention and was never actually equal when you do the obvious comparing.

Here's something to think about.. if you've ever randomly checked the MWO Facebook page... you can see quite a bit of complaining there. Facebook is a lot more "casual" and frankly a crappy tool to get stuff out IMO (not that it can't be effective, but I think FB is terrible as is).. but when you can get those people up at arms.. you're doing something wrong.

[Joseph Mallan]

Thanks John. Good read.

[Stalephreak]

Warge, on 31 August 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

It was good balancing tool. It could be tuned but instead just deleted,

NOTHING would kill AC40 faster than the repair/rearm. You had to win, and you had to do a lot of damage to a lot of people to make those suckers pay.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

RedThirteen, on 31 August 2013 - 03:19 AM, said:

Any other developer would be in damage control .. seriously how collectively juvenile must PGI be to assume the adage "out of sight, out of mind" actually works?

The disquiet and disappointment will undoubtedly ruin the experience of new players.

FOR GODS SAKE PGI/PIRAHNA WHERE THE **** ARE YOU ALL!?

The funny thing is...and I think PGI might be the only Game Developer that does this...

They do not work weekends at all.

Every time something blows up and you get to the weekend, you notice a complete lack of anything from PGI (more so than normal).

They also seemingly (and I noticed this well before the latest finger pointing) are the only developers I know of that takes vacations in the lead up to release.

Most devs I've known work 80 hour weeks in the last 6 months leading up to release. These guys seem to instead work a 30 hour week and take 2 weeks of vacation every month.

It's honestly amazing as someone who works a 50 hour week supporting a family and trying to afford luxury's like MW:O.

These are some of the laziest developers I've ever encountered. Which is a large reason the communication is so bad.

[Sybreed]

and Bryan took what looked like a two months vacation between june and august.... I mean what the hell?

[Stalephreak]

Deathlike, on 31 August 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

This discontent wouldn't happen if PGI actually decided to "communicate" instead of "dictate" the direction they want to go.

TBH, I think this could reach a pinnacle if PCGamer actually wrote something negative about MWO.. then you know that would be this game's deathblow.

I don't think PGI grasps how much a community can actively work to kill a game in the same way they could make it better. It's always has been up to PGI to do what is right, and not do what is most profitable and then ignoring the consequences.

Edit:
It would be nice if there was a conversion or dialog between PGI and the community... of course trust is always a two way street.

Herein lies the problem. Trust is a difficult thing to get back once it's lost. I'm not trying to be mean, but top heads would have to roll, and the beta model change (maybe forced polling at log in to ACTUALLY gauge what players think). D-Day is approaching.

[Liquid Leopard]

Warge, on 30 August 2013 - 07:31 PM, said:

Reverse 3PV? Or ghost heat? Or ECM? Or heat threshold?

MustrumRidcully, on 31 August 2013 - 01:28 AM, said:

They did it with Repair & Rearm, after all. And that was at least a concept you could agree with in principle, just that it was ultimately flawed and broken.

Warge, on 31 August 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

It was good balancing tool. It could be tuned but instead just deleted,

Repair and Rearm could have given old-school 3025 tech a place on the field, if it was balanced right. If your earnings go up because you get an XL engine and pack extra weapons on your mech, but the engine repairs cost more than the new earnings, you have an incentive to go back to a standard engine.

This was something I considered when I started, because I'd seen Repair and Rearm in people's YouTube videos. I wanted to know how expensive it was to repair my busted components (Especially the engine, since it's inevitably what destroys your mech). Then, someone told me R&R was no longer in effect, and stated the reason as being that it made the grind for C-Bills really hard, especially if you didn't know how to work around it.

It sounds to me like R&R didn't ever get tweaked, but was just deleted to make the grind go faster.
...and now there's a new C-Bill nerf to slow down our earnings again, with no effect toward balancing technology or gameplay. I really don't understand what the hell PGI is doing, but I'm sure they don't care.

[DocBach]

Avalios, on 30 August 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

I hate ghost heat more then 3PV, but to each his own. Article is very accurate.

I still really wish they did something else with the ECM/IW mechanics, but that wasn't even covered. I think that was the first glimpse that things weren't going to be like promised when an entire design pillar of the game was actually just an anti-missile lock shield.

Article seemed like a pretty fair account of why people were upset, and agreed that they should be. I really hope PGI can turn some things around, I still have some hope this game can be a good one.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

DocBach, on 31 August 2013 - 07:40 AM, said:

I still really wish they did something else with the ECM/IW mechanics, but that wasn't even covered. I think that was the first glimpse that things weren't going to be like promised when an entire design pillar of the game was actually just an anti-missile lock shield.

Article seemed like a pretty fair account of why people were upset, and agreed that they should be. I really hope PGI can turn some things around, I still have some hope this game can be a good one.

Yeah ECM is really the first battle I dipped my toe into on the forums. And you are right, it really laid the groundwork for how PGI was going to treat the community.

[WM Jeri]

Sybreed, on 31 August 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

PGI did its biggest mistake by saying the core community (founders) are just a minority in the grand scheme of things, that the game is not built for us anymore. We were promised a game, we're getting a different one because we're not so important after all.

PGI should just remember that we, the founders, made them by giving them 5 million dollars. I'm not saying that we can also destroy them... but we can seriously damage them and it's already begun.

It's not a threat or anything, and I don't want to participate in any kind of damaging propaganda, but PGI should respect the people who trusted them at the beginning, the ones who gave them a lot of money to create a MW game. I'm merely giving them a warning of things to come if they don't change their course of action.

I mean, just look at Star Citizen, they keep taking feedback from the forums and when it's good feedback, they actually try to implement it in their game. The relation with the community over there is a polar opposite of what I'm seeing here. PGI should just take notes... and perhaps ask advice from Chris Roberts next time they meet him.

I mean, the patcher and the hangar module are already very impressive.. PGI should really be worried.

Yep just added the Pirate pack to my 325 Aurora 80.00 Pack! Instead of the Sabre pack.