Jump to content

Finally!


232 replies to this topic

#121 Pjwned

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • 4,731 posts
  • LocationDancing on the grave of Energy Draw LOL

Posted 01 May 2016 - 01:42 PM

View PostScarecrowES, on 01 May 2016 - 01:20 PM, said:

Fallicy... Russ actually said in the townhall that roughly 40-50% of the simultaneous player base at peak hours are playing FW. More than I ever thought, honestly, but then again MWO only ever reaches a peak of around 2,000 players. Plenty of reason to make proper changes.

That's not disputing that there aren't enough players interested in FW to make proper changes.

Quote

But what changes should they make? And based on who's feedback?

In what way does FW not interest you? Are there specific actions that can be taken to improve specific aspects of the mode?


Extremely bad maps, Invasion is a bad & uninspired mode in general, respawns with dropdecks are bad and tedious in an already bad mode, queue times are bad and not solely because of not enough people playing it, playing as a PUG is atrociously bad for multiple reasons, etc.

Quote

The problem is, most people can't reason their way out of a paper bag. They have no concept of what is or is not working, and so they can't offer an informed voice on the matter.

An example of this, from the townhall, was the notion that maybe there weren't enough people in dedicated FW matches at a given time to allow for proper influence of the map. So a suggestion from the community was to remove factions and just have the fight between IS and Clan. Of course that's dumb.


So dumb that it doesn't need to be explained why it's dumb! Of course!

Do you even understand why that would improve queue times and such?

Quote

The counter suggestion was... we have an entirely other half of the player base playing Quick Play whose actions don't affect FW at all, and yet most of those players will be carrying faction tags. Why not arrange the modes in such a way that no matter how you play, your actions affect the FW map? Fold Quick Play into FW. This could be easily done in a way that doesn't fundementally change the way players who are only interested in QP play... but both influences the map AND rewards them for that influence. It's easy, and it's smart.


So easy that it can be explained with the most vague of ideas and it will magically be implemented in a satisfactory way.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but it isn't practical and the other still valid (and much more practical) solution is apparently completely dismissed "because I said so."

Quote

But which voice was the one PGI got to hear? The one that said to remove factions from faction warfare. How helpful is that?


More helpful than you think.

#122 Afuldan McKronik

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,331 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 01 May 2016 - 01:47 PM

View PostPjwned, on 01 May 2016 - 01:42 PM, said:

That's not disputing that there aren't enough players interested in FW to make proper changes.



Extremely bad maps, Invasion is a bad & uninspired mode in general, respawns with dropdecks are bad and tedious in an already bad mode, queue times are bad and not solely because of not enough people playing it, playing as a PUG is atrociously bad for multiple reasons, etc.



So dumb that it doesn't need to be explained why it's dumb! Of course!

Do you even understand why that would improve queue times and such?



So easy that it can be explained with the most vague of ideas and it will magically be implemented in a satisfactory way.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but it isn't practical and the other still valid (and much more practical) solution is apparently completely dismissed "because I said so."



More helpful than you think.


Solidifying the queues would have helped, but thats a Good Player Idea™ and as such, will be ignored until Russ convinces himself that he came up with it, then act ignaminously about giving us great queue times.

#123 Kargush

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 973 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 01 May 2016 - 01:58 PM

Posted Image

#124 MechWarrior319348

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 997 posts
  • LocationInside a straightjacket

Posted 01 May 2016 - 01:59 PM

View PostKargush, on 01 May 2016 - 01:58 PM, said:

Posted Image


Yep yep

#125 The Robot Jox

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 72 posts
  • LocationEcuador

Posted 01 May 2016 - 05:20 PM

so devs dont know if to go full left or full right, and player base is in the same boat.

IMO pgi should sell the ip, to EA.

#126 ScarecrowES

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,812 posts
  • LocationDefending the Cordon, Arc-Royal

Posted 01 May 2016 - 06:19 PM

View PostThe Robot Jox, on 01 May 2016 - 05:20 PM, said:

so devs dont know if to go full left or full right, and player base is in the same boat.

IMO pgi should sell the ip, to EA.


Well, as Russ pointed out, Microsoft refused to develop another Battletech game because they never sold well enough to justify the cost. PGI is only able to make it work because Free-to-play games are very good at squeezing a small number of people for a large amount of cash. I don't doubt most people who've been playing this game for more than 2 years have dumped hundreds of dollars into this "free" game. Certainly more than $60.

I don't see why EA, a company that's even LESS likely to develop IPs without an installed player base of millions of players than MS is, would even bother paying for the licensing rights.

There's a reason Battletech nearly went the way of the Dodo, both on tabletop and on the screen. It's niche on top of niche.

#127 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 01 May 2016 - 06:43 PM

View PostRedDragon, on 29 April 2016 - 11:35 PM, said:

There were points in MWOs history where even monkeys would have done a better job at designing the game (or communicating with the customers, hello Russ!) than PGI.


Here is where I request the obligatory video or it never happened. Posted Image

#128 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 01 May 2016 - 07:39 PM

View PostLivewyr, on 30 April 2016 - 07:52 AM, said:

You know nothing, Jon Snow.


He's alive!!!

#129 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 01 May 2016 - 07:43 PM

View PostChimera11, on 30 April 2016 - 08:42 AM, said:

"REMOVE QUICK PLAY AND MAKE EVERYONE DO CW"


Actually, eliminating QP while seamlessly integrating improved versions of its game modes into CW is a very good idea. I'm just saying. Posted Image

#130 Accused

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 989 posts

Posted 01 May 2016 - 07:56 PM

View PostMystere, on 01 May 2016 - 07:43 PM, said:


Actually, eliminating QP while seamlessly integrating improved versions of its game modes into CW is a very good idea. I'm just saying. Posted Image


It's a brilliant idea which would solve a number of problems. If handled right.

#131 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 01 May 2016 - 08:13 PM

View PostAccused, on 01 May 2016 - 07:56 PM, said:

It's a brilliant idea which would solve a number of problems. If handled right.


And that, as always, is the key in all things worth doing. Posted Image

Edited by Mystere, 01 May 2016 - 08:16 PM.


#132 KodiakGW

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Jaws
  • The Jaws
  • 1,775 posts
  • LocationNE USA

Posted 01 May 2016 - 09:18 PM

View PostScarecrowES, on 01 May 2016 - 06:19 PM, said:

I don't see why EA, a company that's even LESS likely to develop IPs without an installed player base of millions of players than MS is, would even bother paying for the licensing rights.


You are correct. Unless some big thing happens to make this IP desirable, no big company will touch it. It will probably end up in the hands of GamersFirst or Daybreak Games.

At least we know at that point that none of the "inner circle" will be influencing the product.


#133 Mechwarrior1441491

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 08:44 AM

What you mean to say is that the community doesn't know better how to make a game that isn't even half finished and can't deliver on it's own vision or road path set out years ago.

You are partially right. I would expect that if a team of the best and brightest around here had the resources they would be able to release more than mech packs and 50% off sales.

It's a let down. We all know it's a let down, but since it's all we have it's all we have. Like if all the beer we have is Pabst Blue Ribbon. You make do with the swill.

Remember, PGI was going to start making ANOTHER game, with a terrible concept, before CW was even out of phase one when the game was held together by spit, tic tacs and wishful thinking. Their priorities have never been the vision of the game. A vision long abandoned, but as long as their mech packs were bringing in millions, who cares. Minimal viable product.

Edited by GAGONMYlOCK, 02 May 2016 - 08:48 AM.


#134 Afuldan McKronik

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,331 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 02 May 2016 - 08:54 AM

View PostGAGONMYlOCK, on 02 May 2016 - 08:44 AM, said:

What you mean to say is that the community doesn't know better how to make a game that isn't even half finished and can't deliver on it's own vision or road path set out years ago.

You are partially right. I would expect that if a team of the best and brightest around here had the resources they would be able to release more than mech packs and 50% off sales.

It's a let down. We all know it's a let down, but since it's all we have it's all we have. Like if all the beer we have is Pabst Blue Ribbon. You make do with the swill.

Remember, PGI was going to start making ANOTHER game, with a terrible concept, before CW was even out of phase one when the game was held together by spit, tic tacs and wishful thinking. Their priorities have never been the vision of the game. A vision long abandoned, but as long as their mech packs were bringing in millions, who cares. Minimal viable product.


I think they honestly thought they would get the rights pulled out from under them, not that they would get stuck with this IP, which is WELL KNOWN for having some of the absolute most dedicated fans ever for an IP. Now PGI's future is tied to the success of MWO, due to the fact that they will never get another crowdfunded game off the chalkboard, as shown by their canceled project.

#135 Mawai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,495 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 09:31 AM

View PostAlaric Hasek, on 29 April 2016 - 10:20 PM, said:

Russ finally said it: the player base needs to stop thinking that it knows better than PGI how to develop this game. They don't. If you _can_, let me know when you finish your perfect game and I'll come play it. Until then, put up or shut up.


LOL.

So ... did Russ just offer the IP license to anyone who can go out and build their own game that is better than MWO? Since ... without the license ... other folks can't really go out and build their own game even if they wanted to ... though, to be honest, there are probably those in the community who could build a better game.

Also, is Russ claiming that the best Mechwarrior/Battletech designers/coders in the world are employed by PGI? If not, then there are definitely folks out there who can do a better job ... whether they would want to or not is another question.

#136 Mechwarrior1441491

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 09:37 AM

Some of the best maps in video game history were mods or made by the users across some of the most well known online games.

Thought I'd point that out.

We've known users could make better MWO maps once they told us it cost them 250k and we all had a good laugh. Maybe things have changed in house regarding those costs now.

Also, I doubt the best minds we have around here would have chosen CryEngine. That is also worth noting. How many times have they said that certain things aren't possible because of the engine.

Just because someone doesn't work in a field, doesn't mean they can't comment on it and when it is an entertainment product, they can most certainly point out what is bad and what is good without that understanding.

Edited by GAGONMYlOCK, 02 May 2016 - 09:44 AM.


#137 Livewyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 6,733 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 02 May 2016 - 09:54 AM

View PostMawai, on 02 May 2016 - 09:31 AM, said:


LOL.

So ... did Russ just offer the IP license to anyone who can go out and build their own game that is better than MWO? Since ... without the license ... other folks can't really go out and build their own game even if they wanted to ... though, to be honest, there are probably those in the community who could build a better game.

Also, is Russ claiming that the best Mechwarrior/Battletech designers/coders in the world are employed by PGI? If not, then there are definitely folks out there who can do a better job ... whether they would want to or not is another question.


Yeah. I liked the part where he was like you can't do better.

Oh, we could. Just give us the IP. (And then shut down your development. After all, we wouldn't want to be "Splitting the community..." and "...doubling up our efforts.")

What an asinine remark.


EDIT for kindness and a bit more clarity: "Give us your engineers, artists, and incredible talent- and see the leadership out."

Edited by Livewyr, 02 May 2016 - 10:00 AM.


#138 XxXAbsolutZeroXxX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Stryker
  • The Stryker
  • 2,056 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 10:02 AM

View PostKargush, on 01 May 2016 - 01:58 PM, said:

Posted Image


Is that... Donald Trump's son?

Would be a better meme image if he did the "pay me" thing with his hand.

#139 WarHippy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 02 May 2016 - 10:21 AM

View PostScarecrowES, on 01 May 2016 - 06:19 PM, said:

Well, as Russ pointed out, Microsoft refused to develop another Battletech game because they never sold well enough to justify the cost. PGI is only able to make it work because Free-to-play games are very good at squeezing a small number of people for a large amount of cash. I don't doubt most people who've been playing this game for more than 2 years have dumped hundreds of dollars into this "free" game. Certainly more than $60.
If the Mechwarrior games didn't sell well we never would have had as many as we did. Microsoft deciding it wasn't worth it because of sales has more to do with their decision to change from the old formula and create the MechAssault games, and making them only for the XBox. The reason Microsoft gave up on the IP is because they didn't have a good way of making the Mechwarrior IP into something they could endlessly exploit on an annual basis for the XBox like they do with a lot of their other IPs.

#140 Felicitatem Parco

    Professor of Memetics

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 13,522 posts
  • LocationIs Being Obscured By ECM

Posted 02 May 2016 - 10:34 AM

View PostWarHippy, on 02 May 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

If the Mechwarrior games didn't sell well we never would have had as many as we did. Microsoft deciding it wasn't worth it because of sales has more to do with their decision to change from the old formula and create the MechAssault games, and making them only for the XBox. The reason Microsoft gave up on the IP is because they didn't have a good way of making the Mechwarrior IP into something they could endlessly exploit on an annual basis for the XBox like they do with a lot of their other IPs.


Wrong, Microsoft could easily sell expansion packs on Xbox live for residual income.

Microsoft shelved PGI's first pitch for a Mechwarrior campaign game because 1.) It was pitched during a recession, and 2.) Microsoft was too greedy to allow a PS3 port and decided that an xbox-only title in a recession would not sell enough... Kind of a self-fulfilling prophesy, though.

Microsoft just didn't want to spend any money to support it, marketing-wise.







1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users