Jump to content

Mwo2 - The Fresh Start We Need?

General News Social

173 replies to this topic

#1 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,446 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 12 October 2016 - 02:48 AM

I think it's safe to say that MWO has MANY things wrong with it. A great deal of things simply don't work as intended, and can never be fixed within the confounds of MWO..

Here's an idea:

Why don't you, our beloved and often misunderstood developers at PGI simply don't say OK, let's take what we have learned and make a fresh start?

Make MechWarrior: Online 2

Here's how you could do it:

1) Greatly reduce R&D on MWO, and use those resources to build a new game
2) Use the finances derived from MWO to finance MWO2. Supplement these with Kickstarter.
3) Use what you have learned so far.. take the time and effort to "reboot" and not redo the mistakes of the past.
4) Talk to the community and figure out what the players want, and what we would pay for.
5) Then achieve that. Nothing less. No minimum viable product. Make it awesome. Take your time and do it. The fans deserve that.

Here's a few things that I've figured from the features suggestions we would like:

1) A whole bunch of awesome mechs, properly balanced, and true to BT lore.

2) A galaxy at war. Not just dots. An actual galaxy, true to BT lore.

3) Player based economy

4) Realistic Battletech warfare, melee included.

5) Open world / universe with random or proceduraly generated maps

6) LOTS of descriptions, immersion, lore, and fluff. This means we want to climb into our mechs, we want to see the ammo loaded, we want to micro manage every single little thing about our mechs, we want to read up on the history and lore of the planet we're about to crush, and yes, we want to get jiggly with Natasha Kerensky. Or Katrina Stainer. Or Adam.. if you like that sort of thing.

7) Pilot, not mech, oriented skill progression. Meaningfull RPG like character generation. Make it about the pilot, not about the mech.

8) More things to do than just shoot mechs over and over.

9) PVP and PVE. Give us a story we can enjoy in between shooting eachother.

10) Prescision. If you release something, TEST THE SHAIT out of it. Don't embarrass yourselves with mandatory post-patch hotfix.

11) Play the game you make. Often.

12) Give us many "you don't see that every day" moments. Make a universe true to all the glory and all the grime of Battletech. Make us go WOW from seeing the sights, and doing what ever we want. (Think Skyrim and the feeling you had when you saw a mountain and knew you could go there.)

13) Give us secondary distractions - bars with gambling, mini-games, easter eggs, and lots of it. (Think SC2 "The lost viking" game)

14) Top2Bottom design - That means let us feel the scale - by making it about the pilot that can just as easily climb into an elemental, a mech, a tank, or a aerofighter.

15) Attention to detail. Make the game immersive and fluffy. Make us feel that we are in a Battletech universe AT EVERY TURN.

And here's the kicker... the hardest thing to do..

16) Make all of this ready for CLOSED BETA. Not for "after 5 years finally Steam launch"

There.

The challenge is given PGI.

Are you up to it?

P.S.

Sorry for the long post. Here's a text of a potato:

POTATO.

Edited by Vellron2005, 12 October 2016 - 02:53 AM.


#2 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,967 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 12 October 2016 - 02:52 AM

MWO development is at a snail's pace.

There is NO WAY PGI are going to walk away from the existing code base and start afresh.

The very best you can even hope for is that they will continue to bolt on new features and tweak old ones for the game as it currently stands.

Edited by Appogee, 12 October 2016 - 02:54 AM.


#3 627

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 4,571 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:04 AM

And you think people will buy all their mechs *again* ?

#4 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,446 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:07 AM

View PostAppogee, on 12 October 2016 - 02:52 AM, said:

MWO development is at a snail's pace.

There is NO WAY PGI are going to walk away from the existing code base and start afresh.

The very best you can even hope for is that they will continue to bolt on new features and tweak old ones for the game as it currently stands.


I know many think this way.. its exactly the reason why I posted this.. MWO is an old game, and simply bolting on new features and reworking old ones won't get it nowhere in the long run.

PGI doomed this game right at the start.. but if a brand new game was made, they could use what they have learned, re-hype the shait out of it, and fix all the mistakes of the past in one fell swoop. And I'm sure people would support them on kickstarter..

They know so much more now than when they first started out.. I'm sure if they could have a do-over, they would make a much better game..

View Post627, on 12 October 2016 - 03:04 AM, said:

And you think people will buy all their mechs *again* ?


Yes. Just like people will buy "Battletech" from hairbrained schemes.. Also, the point is sort of for them to take all the current mechs and resources and re-use them. In a new engine. No need to rework art and 3d model everything over..

Infact, not only will people "re buy mechs", but if they finally get it right, new people will buy mechs too. And then they will tell their friends PGI finally made it right, and even more people will buy mechs.

Edited by Vellron2005, 12 October 2016 - 03:11 AM.


#5 CMDR Sunset Shimmer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 5,341 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:08 AM

HAH...HAHAHA

You clearly have already forgotten about PGI trying to get "Transverse" off the ground, and the huge backlash by the community that basically locked them into supporting MWO to begin with.

#6 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,446 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:17 AM

View PostCMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 12 October 2016 - 03:08 AM, said:

HAH...HAHAHA

You clearly have already forgotten about PGI trying to get "Transverse" off the ground, and the huge backlash by the community that basically locked them into supporting MWO to begin with.


I admit, I was away when that happened, and don't know much about it, but as far as I figure, Transverse was not a Battletech game, and MWO2 would be.. HUGE difference...

Also, times have changed. Battletech is gonna be ready soon. You really think MWO will survive when Hairbrained schemes gets Battletech done?

PGI needs to look to the long term game.. and MWO2 is the logical next step.. you don't expect to be still begging for new mechs and maps 5, 10, or 15 years from now, do you?

Also, show me a MWO enthusiast who would not love a properly made sequel?

Edited by Vellron2005, 12 October 2016 - 03:20 AM.


#7 adamts01

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 3,417 posts
  • LocationPhilippines

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:38 AM

Well.... Most of the things you mentioned you'd like to see are also the things PGI told us they either were going to or wanted to do with this game. After not doing those things the first time, it would just be foolish for the small Mechwarrior community to be fooled again. Also, PGI would have to convince Microsoft to license out their franchise again, which I can't imagine them doing after how this game turned out.

#8 CMDR Sunset Shimmer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 5,341 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:43 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 03:17 AM, said:


I admit, I was away when that happened, and don't know much about it, but as far as I figure, Transverse was not a Battletech game, and MWO2 would be.. HUGE difference...



You're right, Transverse wasn't a battletech game, but no, having an MWO 2.0 wouldn't be a huge difference.

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 03:17 AM, said:


Also, times have changed. Battletech is gonna be ready soon. You really think MWO will survive when Hairbrained schemes gets Battletech done?



Yes it will, why? Because right now Mechwarrior Online is the only FPS "Cockpit Sim" [I use that term VERY lightly.] and while I'm going to be all over Battletech when it releases, it's still a strategy game, and not a cockpit sim. MWO is where I, and everyone else, will be getting their "first person mech action" fix.

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 03:17 AM, said:


PGI needs to look to the long term game.. and MWO2 is the logical next step.. you don't expect to be still begging for new mechs and maps 5, 10, or 15 years from now, do you?



You're right, they do need to look at the long term game, which means fixing the issues that sit with the existing MWO. Even if it came down to a full engine swap and reworking of things... MWO allows for continual iteration on a single product. By making an MWO2, you would only serve to split the existing playerbase, and you punish those who have pumped TONS of money into this game. Not many of us are going to be willing to go put thousands of dollars into yet another PGI venture.

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 03:17 AM, said:

Also, show me a MWO enthusiast who would not love a properly made sequel?


What constitutes a "properly made sequel" because to me, it would be making a full game along the lines of the old Mechwarrior games, and not a pure multi-player focused experience.

Want to know what would get more money from me at this point? A full singleplayer/Multiplayer game that plays similar to Mechwarrior 2 mercs, with an economy that matters.

I'm tired of the fact that the economy in MWO means literally nothing, earning C-bills is basically pointless, especially when you have tons of them already, and already own all the mechs/equipment. It becomes just a waiting game for new content. If I was having to fight to keep my mechs repaired, keep my mechs functioning, at least I'd have some incentive to play.

Seriously, like, even if this was a side option for those who are "hardcore" I want a functional economy, i want a CW that matters, that requires factions to take planets to fund manufacturing and offers discounts on some equipment based on what a given faction owns. I want Repair and Rearm mechanics. I want to feel like I'm a merc living in this universe, not someone playing a crappy pc game that's at best, constant solaris VII matches [and don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE a legit Solaris VII mode.]

But MWO2 isn't the way to do that, you can do literally all of those things, in this game... because we HAD some of those functions in prior iterations of MWO... and they were changed for no good reason. [oh, and I want my good Closed Beta graphics back damn it.]

#9 Bud Crue

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 9,995 posts
  • LocationOn the farm in central Minnesota

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:45 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 02:48 AM, said:

I think it's safe to say that MWO has MANY things wrong with it. A great deal of things simply don't work as intended, and can never be fixed within the confounds of MWO..

Here's an idea:

Why don't you, our beloved and often misunderstood developers at PGI simply don't say OK, let's take what we have learned and make a fresh start?

Make MechWarrior: Online 2

Here's how you could do it:...


You forgot funding. Who is going to trust PGI enough, at this point, to open their wallets for this "fresh start"? I know there are still a few white knights who might be willing, but if nearly 6 million bucks in 2011 dollars, and all those mech packs sold since, wasn't enough to get us more that what we have; how on earth would they get the $ for this new game. Even if this new game is already in the hopper, unless they port over existing players accounts, I can't imagine many of the current players even giving it a shot.

#10 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:46 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 02:48 AM, said:

1) A whole bunch of awesome mechs, properly balanced, and true to BT lore.



Properly balanced mechs that are true to lore, is a contradiction in itself.

#11 Bombast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,709 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 03:55 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 03:07 AM, said:

Yes. Just like people will buy "Battletech" from hairbrained schemes..


Oh boy.

There is a huge difference between people buying Battletech, a turn-based RPG, and people rebuying battlemechs from a company that already sold them the same thing.

What you're basically asking is for PGI to pick up the Forza business model - Re-release the same game every year or so and re-release the assets for more money each time. No thank you.

This proposal is just a colossal mess. You want PGI to switch to one of the most despicable business models (Which isn't complained enough about) available in modern gaming. You want them to focus on things they've completely failed to accomplish already, or have ignored purposefully, or have showed zero aptitude for. And you want the playerbase to suck it up and love it because... well, because.

This is a weird collection of bizarre assumptions. Most of them bad on multiple levels.

#12 N0ni

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nightmare
  • The Nightmare
  • 2,357 posts
  • LocationIn a GTR Simulator Cockpit

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:01 AM

Mechwarrior Online: Reloaded

Same game. Same mechanics. Now locking more content behind a paywall with more gamble boxes than Armas Market.


Do we really want this?

#13 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,446 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:04 AM

If they made MWO2, I think the original founders should not get anything than maybe a mention in the lore and the credits..

Cose' if they did, it be like if you bought saaay, Diablo 1, you automatically get cool stuff in Diablo3, or if you bought a 67' Mustang, you get a new mustang every year..

They paid for a game.. when a new game is made - clean slate. (That's the whole point of the MWO2 idea)

And let's face it.. all of you people who would not open your wallets, and feel cheated, I'm sure many of you, if presented with the game that should have been, would still buy into it, regardless of past transgressions.

Yes, they wanted to make many of the stated things in MWO, but guess what - wrong choice of engine, lack of Dev knowledge and sheer experience led them in another direction.

Now they would get the chance to do it better. Also, new technologies are at their disposal now. Better gear. Better know-how.

Sunset shimmer wrote what it would take to open his wallet.. please note that what he described is basically exactly what I suggested?

Call me naive, but I think everyone deserves a second chance. I know many of you don't feel that way, but I implore you, if MWO2 ever gets a chance.. you should give them one too.


View PostN0ni, on 12 October 2016 - 04:01 AM, said:

Mechwarrior Online: Reloaded

Same game. Same mechanics. Now locking more content behind a paywall with more gamble boxes than Armas Market.


Do we really want this?


The point of my suggestion is that IT'S NOT THE SAME THING WITH NEW GRAPHICS.

Its a totally NEW thing. Better in every way. Not same mechanics. Not same content, just some reused content (at the scale I envision, mechs are not even half the content)

It's the game MWO should have been.. but never could be.

Also, I hope they would change the business model from selling mech packs, to selling other minor stuff.. mechs are the "main coarse" and should not be for sale..

Edited by Vellron2005, 12 October 2016 - 04:12 AM.


#14 Robot Kenshiro

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 315 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:04 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 03:07 AM, said:


Yes. Just like people will buy "Battletech" from hairbrained schemes.. Also, the point is sort of for them to take all the current mechs and resources and re-use them. In a new engine. No need to rework art and 3d model everything over..

Infact, not only will people "re buy mechs", but if they finally get it right, new people will buy mechs too. And then they will tell their friends PGI finally made it right, and even more people will buy mechs.


Sorry but what? Battletech is a NEW game. Ppl will buy it cos its new and yes it uses PGI's current mech designs etc. But to remake MWO....and ask me to pay well over 2k worth of Australian dollars to rebuy all my mechs thats I've pre-ordered and bought with MC etc...... where does this lead to?
A wallet that used to have a hole in it would surely be just burnt and turned into ash....

I understand the frustrating things that are happening with the game but no. I will not rebut my mechs. If they need money to fund a rework BUT we are able to keep our existing mechs...then yes.

No way is anyone gonna rebut mechs they've forked over for again. That's alot to ask.

I'll throw down 100 for a rework fund. But my mechs come with me. If they don't. Well its been a great ride...

Edited by Robot Kenshiro, 12 October 2016 - 04:07 AM.


#15 BluLight Kinetic

    Rookie

  • Bad Company
  • 5 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:10 AM

It wont work. What this iteration of MWO shows is that plenty of fun can be had without being involved in clan wars so why bother with FW/CW. The fun is building mechs and combat, that is all that is required, nothing more. Something different may have been promised at the start but the PUG game is the game that succeeded, not FW. Complaining about this is kind of like whinging about a child becoming an engineer instead of a doctor.

#16 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,446 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:38 AM

View PostRobot Kenshiro, on 12 October 2016 - 04:04 AM, said:

Sorry but what? Battletech is a NEW game. Ppl will buy it cos its new and yes it uses PGI's current mech designs etc. But to remake MWO....and ask me to pay well over 2k worth of Australian dollars to rebuy all my mechs thats I've pre-ordered and bought with MC etc...... where does this lead to?
A wallet that used to have a hole in it would surely be just burnt and turned into ash....

I understand the frustrating things that are happening with the game but no. I will not rebut my mechs. If they need money to fund a rework BUT we are able to keep our existing mechs...then yes.

No way is anyone gonna rebut mechs they've forked over for again. That's alot to ask.

I'll throw down 100 for a rework fund. But my mechs come with me. If they don't. Well its been a great ride...


By this logic, those who bought MW4 should have gotten all the released mechs in MWO? Or MWO people should get insta-mechs in Battletech? (Cose you know, SAME resources and models ;-) )

Please.. get over it.. Just cose' you bought a sandwich once don't mean you get free sandwiches forever..

MWO2 would be a different game entirely.. jeez.. you people seem to not understand the concept of a "new game in the battletech setting".. it would not be a "please pay us again for the same crap we already sold you".

MWO2 = NEW GAME.

Not MWO with add-ons.

Also.. I can't believe how much negativity you people are putting out.. everybody's saying what PGI CAN'T DO..

Why don't you start saying what PGI CAN do?

No wonder they don't communicate to the community much.. nobody likes to have shait thrown in their face every time they poke their head out..

Damn..

Edited by Vellron2005, 12 October 2016 - 04:46 AM.


#17 RedDragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,942 posts
  • LocationKurpfalz, Germany

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:49 AM

Even if they decided to do this: What makes you think they would be able to pull it through? Apparrently the guys who programmed MWO in the first place (a.k.a. the guys who actually know how to code) left PGI some time ago. That's why they can't even fix things that were already there like inverse kinematiks, or implement "simple" things like changeable LB-X ammo.

So apart from the simple fact that only a fool would "again" give PGI money on a promised product after their history with MWO, they would also simply lack the skills to pull it through.

#18 xWiredx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,805 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:51 AM

I half like and half dislike the OP.

On one hand, I'd really like to see a vastly more full-featured version of MWO and I'd be willing to wait a year or so for it. Doing that with a game that is already live just kills the game. Doing that with something nobody has access to yet would be a release and possibly bring at least a small amount of fanfare to it. My only condition is that, as a whale, I would want in-game launch-day compensation for the ludicrous amount of money I've spent on MWO already (especially since we've still yet to launch some of the chassis I pre-ordered).

On the other hand, I'd really just like to keep what community is left together and keep playing. It seems like if patch development doesn't keep going on MWO, it will just die. If MWO dies in that fashion while attempting to split dev resources between the two games, the second game will have a good chance at not taking off.

So we know this isn't going to happen anyway. PGI simply cannot keep handling a big project like this while squandering the large amount of funding they have (that is continually shrinking because of said squandering). I just loaded up Gears of War 4, so I'll see you guys on patch day to play with my new toys before relegating them to their bays waiting to see if any major new improvements eventually show up.

#19 Bombast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,709 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 04:55 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 12 October 2016 - 04:38 AM, said:


By this logic, those who bought MW4 should have gotten all the released mechs in MWO?


MW4 was a stand alone title made over a decade ago. There was no expectation from the buyer or producer that the games content would stretch on for years after release.

MWO is a F2P game. In this genre, continuity of purchases through the lifespan of the product is expected by the purchaser. Rendering the game defunct to create a direct sequel that renders the previous game unplayable while taking away all the content is not acceptable.

Remember - MW4 can still be played by the purchaser. Once MWO goes, all the content goes with it. If the game was canceled because the model no longer worked, or because it had gone though it's entire life cycle, that's ok. If it just ends so that PGI can reset the wallet train... that is not acceptable.

Quote

MWO2 would be a different game entirely.. jeez.. you people seem to not understand the concept of a "new game in the battletech setting".. it would not be a "please pay us again for the same crap we already sold you".


Actually, it would be 'We ****** up, please pay us to try it again.' Whether you think MWO was a massive screw up is a separate thing, but to make 'MWO2' work, this is an admission that has to happen. Because if they need to reset the whole shebang, that is an admission of failure to produce a viable F2P title.

Quote

Also.. I can't believe how much negativity you people are putting out.. everybody's saying what PGI CAN'T DO..


1,487 posts on these forums. You don't appear to have been paying attention in your time here - Anyone who's posted that much here could see what was going to happen in this thread.

Quote

Why don't you start saying what PGI CAN do?


While I'm not particularly invested in this game, and I wouldn't ask PGI to change anything on my behalf (I haven't payed out a dime since founder times), I think I know what the answer is: PGI can fix this game. They can fix Faction Play. They can fix map rotations, either through a different map selection process or by 'fixing' the maps no one wants to play. They could 'fix' some of the balance issues by releasing the full IS Tech 2 equipment list. They could so something beyond releasing mech after mech after mech.

Quote

No wonder they don't communicate to the community much.. nobody likes to have shait thrown in their face every time they poke their head out..

Damn..


That is the worst excuse I have ever heard, particularly since at least half of the complaints PGI usual gets are based on their non-engagement with the community, or the misinformation they seem to give out every time they do.

Edited by Bombast, 12 October 2016 - 05:07 AM.


#20 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 12 October 2016 - 05:01 AM

@OP PGI could do almost everything you mention right now with MWO. They just don't want to.







1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users