152 replies to this topic

[Thirdstar]

PhoenixFire55, on 26 February 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

All my examples have everything to do with teamwork. And teamwork is what this game is, if you refuse to see it, crawl back to CoD.

How about no, is no good for you?

I don't really even have to argue with you, absolutely no one in either thread has agreed with anything you've said.

You don't even realize how rediculous you sound when argue that 50/50 WL is unfair or that unskilled players should both lose more often than skilled players AND they should receive less rewards.

You've also repeated that casuals and PUGs should simply leave the game if they don't want to team.

Your views are nonsensical and downright dangerous to the continued health of MWO.

[Terror Teddy]

I dont see the problem.

Had a PUG match 10 minutes ago or so and we walked right over the enemy with about 1-2 losses and hardly spoke to one another apart from stopping a 40 tonner from plucking the base.

[Zeh]

Galenit, on 26 February 2013 - 03:03 AM, said:

A lot of pug-players would not use it. Most play the few moments they have just for fun and relaxing.
Not all can and will use it. The chat in game is often enough for me to say, i dont want to go on coms with this kids, half my age, talking ****. Just want to log in, do a few games for fun and thats it.

What are you, 70 years old? The vast majority of people on Comstar and other servers seem to be around 30+.

[Rebas Kradd]

Thirdstar, on 26 February 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

No sorry. It won't. This has never been the case with any MOG in the history of gaming. It won't be here either.

WoW - majority are casuals
WoT - majority are casuals
LoL - majority are casuals
LoL, DoTA, TF2, Battlefield, Call of Duty, STO, DCUO, CoH, LOTRO

The ONLY exception I can think of to this rule is EVE

And it's probably instructional here that EVE is the closest thing to MWO in terms of learning curve. Even if you disagree with that, MWO is still not a mass-appeal game like WoW, Battlefield, or Call of Duty. It's a simulator, a complicated niche game, designed to promote customization and teamwork. It likely has a lesser shelf-life by default and could really use player-controlled matchmaking, IMO, as a primary feature.

Competitive leagues are already springing up, in open beta, without controlled matchmaking even enabled yet. They're trying to get their thing going even if they can only try to sync-drop and hope they end up facing the other team. The market is obviously there. MWO only stands to benefit and last longer from actually accomodating this. If you can explain to me how the game stands to lose more than it will gain, then that's another matter. And maybe it could. But I have yet to see a convincing argument as to why.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 26 February 2013 - 10:43 AM.

[Tarman]

grayson marik, on 26 February 2013 - 02:30 AM, said:

And for this exact reason, I cannot understand why in every thread where a lobby or team matching feature is discussed or suggested, som lamer gets in and restarts the fairy tale of "All team players just want to drive with the easy mode on."

As stated above, the request for such a feature is also in the interest of players, who only want to play pug matches as it would even out the path for removing the groups from the pug queue.

So I am all on your side. ^^

The same reason some teamguys claim all puggers suck and can't nor will ever learn.

Because there are hyperbolic mouthpieces in both groups of players, being the poosticks and stirring up troubles.

[Screech]

Teams can play teams only, for the most part they choose not to. Pug can not play Pugs only, there is the main gripe. Pugs can live without teams but I am not sure if the converse is true. Maybe CW will solve some of this but probably not.

[Thirdstar]

Rebas Kradd, on 26 February 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

And it's probably instructional here that EVE is the closest thing to MWO in terms of learning curve. Even if you disagree with that, MWO is still not a mass-appeal game like WoW, Battlefield, or Call of Duty. It's a simulator, a complicated niche game, designed to promote customization and teamwork. It likely has a lesser shelf-life by default and could really use player-controlled matchmaking, IMO, as a primary feature.

Competitive leagues are already springing up, in open beta, without controlled matchmaking even enabled yet. They're trying to get their thing going even if they can only try to sync-drop and hope they end up facing the other team. The market is obviously there. MWO only stands to benefit and last longer from actually accomodating this. If you can explain to me how the game stands to lose more than it will gain, then that's another matter. And maybe it could. But I have yet to see a convincing argument as to why.

I think if you told some EVE players that you equated that learning curve to the one here, they'd have a right good laugh at your expense.

MWO is not a sim, no matter how much you may want it to be. It's an FPS with a slower pace, that's it, end of.

Complicated niche games do not survive in the F2P space. The Devs know this, the investors know this, savvy players know this. Many of changes made to MWO over the last 3 months point towards a game that is at least attempting to be more casual.

I'm not trying to be mean, I'm just point out the reality of the situation.

I don't understand what your second paragraph has to do with what I pointed out. Gaming populations do not magically become more hardcore/serious as a game matures. I'm not sure where you got that idea.

[Rebas Kradd]

I'm sorry, I simply disagree with your assessment of this game's appeal.

If you'd be so kind, remind me once again, Thirdstar, why are you so rigidly opposed to competitive matchmaking? Your absolute determination here is striking.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 26 February 2013 - 10:59 AM.

[Thirdstar]

Rebas Kradd, on 26 February 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:

Thirdstar, why are you so rigidly opposed to competitive matchmaking? Your absolute determination is striking.

You'll have to quote where I said this. Because I didn't. Go on, i'll wait.

Here, i'll help. From page 1.

Thirdstar, on 26 February 2013 - 03:23 AM, said:

I'm quite confused. As far as I know, no one has ever said a Lobby SHOULDN'T be implemented.

Heck, I've been asking for one since the start of Open Beta.

Edited by Thirdstar, 26 February 2013 - 11:01 AM.

[M4NTiC0R3X]

one time, in middle school.. I wore a jacket that said stop the hate.

it didn't work.

[FupDup]

M4NTiC0R3X, on 26 February 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

one time, in middle school.. I wore a jacket that said stop the hate.

it didn't work.

Don't hate, appreciate.

[Thirdstar]

Whelp I'm off to bed, Phoenix is boring me now and Rebas seems to be arguing with BizzaroThirdstar.

Cheers folks.

[Karl Split]

Pugs gonna pug. And cry and whine when they die and demand every mech fit bar their own is nerfed. Every match I play at least 3 team members decide to get themselves killed in moronic fashion, I can only assume those are the forum posters in the team.

[Rebas Kradd]

Thirdstar, on 26 February 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

You'll have to quote where I said this. Because I didn't. Go on, i'll wait.

Here, i'll help. From page 1.

Very well, I apologize for misinterpreting your stance.

It would be really nice if you could be less abrasive about it, of course. I'm not sure why that's necessary.

[grayson marik]

Screech, on 26 February 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

Teams can play teams only, for the most part they choose not to. Pug can not play Pugs only, there is the main gripe. Pugs can live without teams but I am not sure if the converse is true. Maybe CW will solve some of this but probably not.

They chose not to do so because the current 8v8 queue does not what it is supposed to do!

[SlXSlXSlX]

When the majority of Thirdstars non-abrasive posting has been replied to with abrasive/inflammatory counter-post comments, I can see/empathize with his his present abrasive tone.

[Terror Teddy]

Zeh, on 26 February 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

What are you, 70 years old? The vast majority of people on Comstar and other servers seem to be around 30+.

So? There are 65+ year old veteran 0.0 EVE online players.

Karl Split, on 26 February 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Pugs gonna pug. And cry and whine when they die and demand every mech fit bar their own is nerfed. Every match I play at least 3 team members decide to get themselves killed in moronic fashion, I can only assume those are the forum posters in the team.

Funny, I never do that - I do see a lot of premades complaining a lot about Pugs all the time.

I prefer to adapt and overcome and change my playstyle.

[Zeh]

Terror Teddy, on 26 February 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

So? There are 65+ year old veteran 0.0 EVE online players.

I doubt he's really 65 or 70. I was just pointing out his claim that he'd be on voice comms with kids half his age is pretty damn unlikely.

[KKillian]

Thirdstar, on 26 February 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

I think if you told some EVE players that you equated that learning curve to the one here, they'd have a right good laugh at your expense.

MWO is not a sim, no matter how much you may want it to be. It's an FPS with a slower pace, that's it, end of.

Complicated niche games do not survive in the F2P space. The Devs know this, the investors know this, savvy players know this. Many of changes made to MWO over the last 3 months point towards a game that is at least attempting to be more casual.

I'm not trying to be mean, I'm just point out the reality of the situation.

I don't understand what your second paragraph has to do with what I pointed out. Gaming populations do not magically become more hardcore/serious as a game matures. I'm not sure where you got that idea.

Considering All Points Bulletin (most people still have not heard of it, cops and robbers niche) pretty much killed Realtime Worlds as a store title before it was scrapped and picked up by a free to play publisher who then went on to make a killing with it, and still is, I'd say free to play niche games are quite capable and a much more effective strategy then a shelf release.

Not considering this game a simulator but a slow fps really have you spent much time playing this? Nothing else in the world since the Navy Pier Battletech setup when I was a kid makes me feel more immersed in a battlemech. I suppose CS:GO is just another shooter and not a simulator. That's like trying to argue the call of duty series is the same as the battlefield series. One is a total arcade game with powerups, other is a versatile multiple aspect simulator, but ya know both are FPS war games so they must be the same? There are many first person simulators and many first person arcade-style games, if you cannot tell the difference, I do not know what to tell ya but you're missing out.

[Terror Teddy]

Zeh, on 26 February 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

I doubt he's really 65 or 70. I was just pointing out his claim that he'd be on voice comms with kids half his age is pretty damn unlikely.

Trust me - SHE is.