27 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

First off, a shoutout and thanks to the devs for the hard work you're putting into the game. I love that MWO is being envisioned as a true simulator, and I find a great deal of promise in the upcoming features (Community Warfare, expanded teams). It's all right up my alley. Perfect or not, I appreciate everything.

I have been a PC gamer for twelve years, almost always in an organized club/clan/group. I've played games competitively from almost every main genre: X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, Jedi Knight, Star Wars Galaxies, Counter-Strike, and now MechWarrior Online, in addition to MechWarriors 2 and 3. Obviously, these games are vastly different, and I'm claiming no special MWO expertise because of them.

But I've always been struck by one thing that links all these games: their typical "shelf life" and popularity period have been radically extended by one aspect: community-driven content, the key to which is a "lobby".

TLDR: I'm here to opine that the benefits of prioritizing the development of a lobby would be universal, extending even to PGI - even if the lobby still required choosing your Mech before knowing the map. It's about enabling players to choose the environment, people, and content in which they wish to play. I see benefits to four specific parties.



SOCIAL AND CREATIVE PLAYERS

This is the group to which I belong.

You know all those fiercely independent lone wolves who reject the idea of in-game voice chat because it exposes them to slur-flinging kids and screaming bullies? Well, no kidding. Nobody wants that. Given the immature nature of online gamers, a considerable group of folks in every game are forced to be picky about their friends. It's about the environment they want - casual or heavy role-playing, relaxed vs elite, maybe even family-friendliness considerations.

This is the void that clubs/groups/clans end up filling. For folks like this, "club life" serves as an endgame unto itself, letting them play in the setting they prefer, with the people and features they like.

At the moment, the lack of a lobby system makes it a little tough for groups to do their business. Sync-dropping is...kinda working, but it could be a lot more optimal and leaves out a lot of options.
And it doesn't stop with just a preferred environment. It goes even beyond the commonly voiced desire to play with favorite mechs and weapons (because the needs of the beta might infringe on that). There's so much sheer content that groups can create with customizable options. I appreciate PGI's events, like the recent tournaments - people have enjoyed them despite differing opinions. But I think it's fair to say that the community would rather not be limited to just the frequency and ideas that the devs come up with. They'd like room for their own.

A few examples of what community groups can do regularly, more optimally, and with wider variety if equipped with a lobby system (NSFW, ironically).

Kong Interstellar vs. Eridani Light Pony: Trebuchet Trouble


The Remnant & Ghost Warrior Brigade - River City Duels


Trial of Grievance


Equestria Royal Guard Conquest Mini Tournament First To 3 Wins!


For a sizeable portion of the community, THIS is the ultimate goal: creative gaming with friends. How else can one explain organized clubs springing up before the open beta even arrived?

With a lobby, each controllable factor (opponent, map, weight limit, weapon limit, even "easymode" features like 3D-person view, etc.), while perhaps bad for pubs and for testing (at least I'm guessing that would be the devs' argument), also opens up another permutation of events for clubs to run privately. How about a "Lights Only Night" for players to enjoy? Coming up on Saturday. Who's up for a "Caustic Valley Chaos" event? You got it. "MissileMania Monday"? Sounds great. A night to test out the newest Mech or hero variant? Carpe diem. And it can happen without the entire community needing to do it.

Add to that various degrees of role-playing, from a simple military structure denoting seniority to those clubs that actually feature "trials of refusal" in order to join. Independent websites. Internal rankings systems and tourneys between sub-units. Internal ranks are awarded, prizes are handed out. Recurring events ("Get ready for Trebuchet Trouble XII!!!"). Story-driven campaigns can be written. The sheer history that these groups create! MWO regiments out there already pride themselves on 12-year histories. Internal friendly rivalries, battle tales, practical jokes...there are people out there who eat this stuff up. It's part of the culture.

Seem corny, Mr. Average Pugger? Not up your alley? Fair enough, but different strokes for different folks, right? This chunk of the community is considerable and worth accomodating.



COMPETITIVE PLAYERS

As far as the conflict between competitve and casual players - well, that's nothing new. That's in every game. Ordinary CS players don't enjoy "pugstars" coming in, lighting up everyone like it was a professional match, and chewing out those who didn't share the mindset. The "pugstars", on the other hand, grouse about oblivious teammates who expose their team. Nobody's happy all the time, nor do they need to be, because you can't please everyone. We're talking about toning the friction down, not eliminating it entirely.

But what if your group just got challenged by another regiment, or is having some kind of dispute. What if they could reach resolution with a dueling system, rather than forum-flaming or other drama? "Settle things with joysticks instead of keyboards" - long an internet mantra amongst mature gaming leagues.

At the moment, however, the only solution is to "drop and hope" - organize two 8-mans, have the leader coordinate drops via Teamspeak or something, and hope that ELO puts the two teams together. Right now, again, the frequency of success here seems...okay. It could be better. And there are very limited options. It'd sure favor a lot of folks (FOX is thinking of having company-vs-company faceoffs) if the participants could be ensured of meeting their intended opponent for a single 8v8, to say nothing of multiple-match tournaments or leagues. (Some also want 1vs1 disputes, though admittedly I don't know the logistics of implementing that).



PGI

At this point, the "endgame" of MechWarrior Online seems to consist of 1) the enjoyment of blowing up big battle robots, 2) modules to be unlocked, and 3) future features whose success is TBD, such as CW and further maps and mechs.

Maybe 3) will go wonderfully; maybe 2) will prove effective at keeping players' interest. I don't know. I'm sure careful thought is being put into CW and the Clans invasion. But nothing is a slam dunk, particularly in uncertain economic times. 1) is powerful because the game has immense watchability going for it, but it does feel like much is hinging on 3). I believe in PGI personally, but I also believe in insurance.

The lobby system, on the other hand, allows a whole creative player-controlled world of MWO content that PGI could never accomplish, all with just one feature. In my mind, one of the greatest benefits is insurance for the game. It takes pressure off PGI, sets another top spinning that will take a long time to slow, puts the eggs in more baskets. Older, much less watchable games have gone on for years and years on the strength of its social scene. If CW tanks massively despite the devs' best efforts, but a lobby remains available, groups will stick around because they can keep generating content on their own, helping dilute any boredom that besets 1) and 2).

I can say with total confidence that there is a demographic who's saying "Community Warfare? Thanks, looking forward to it, but heck, just give clubs a place to do their thing and I'll stay for years." Here's one: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2057899



MISCELLANEOUS

You can stroll through any forum and see the "thrown into the fire" feeling that newbies are experiencing. They come to the forums because it's hard to find anyone to wing them in-game.

Imagine if they could find clubs offering events and training environments - something made feasible only by a lobby system. Personal trainers, help guides written with the club in mind, newer-guy-only events to let the plebes figure it out. Right now, the only way to even grow familiar with a map is amidst hails of LRM fire. (The Testing Ground helps bunches with this - thanks, PGI - but it still lacks the personal touch and the opportunity for group training.)

And what of you who are just fine anyone that the Splatcat premade that just pummeled you 8-0 didn't mean to inflict itself upon you, my unsuspecting pugger friend, but was actually trying to spontaneous-drop with a simlone-wolfing it? You might not realize it at first, but you'd also see hidden benefits. Has it occurred to ilar group from their own club for their "Splatcat Sunday" night? I'll bet things like this account for quite a few frustrated forum posts.

Perhaps one of the biggest perks of a lobby is giving the “gamer classes” some breathing room from each other. Even if tension is inevitable, the current setup leaves every gaming type and skill level thrust together. It feels like it's making things worse than it needs to be. Gettin' crowded in here. With a lobby, both puggers and premades can go in their separate direction, set about their business. If my experience in other gaming communities means anything, you'll still have premades who prefer their action on pubs, especially if grinding is still needed. And if I'm interpreting the devs' intentions correctly, that's exactly what they want. A lobby would separate the two groups without entirely walling them off from each other.



It's for these reasons that I feel a lobby would help everyone, including PGI, if moved up the list of development priorities. The more controllable features, the more player-driven endgame it would create that wasn't so reliant on future features. But even if all it does is allow 8-mans to find each other, it would reap benefits.

Perhaps I'm just preaching to the choir. I'm sure PGI has thought of this, taken lessons from other games. Perhaps everyone is only in the same sandbox right now because of the needs of the beta. I don't know their intent. And I admit I don't know the logistics of all of this.

But I know this: private matches probably wouldn't need rewards like public matches, because for those who use them, private servers are their own reward. They promote:

• imagination
  
• longevity
  
• experience customization
  
• rookie-friendliness
  
• competitio
  
• separation for gamer classes
  
• a backup plan for PGI (in my view)
  
• most importantl,y that monster that's driving all the Internet right now, community-building.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 15 March 2013 - 03:14 PM.

[WolvesX]

Great post!

Good job!

[Vrekgar]

TLDR: Community desperately wants the ability to match groups against other groups. We dont care about Cbills or Experience gains from it.

This would be a very welcome way to aid the community by giving us the secondary capability of a multiplayer Training grounds environment.

It would allow the formation and efficient running of tournaments and other events.

It would be JUST PLAIN GOOD.

[Uriah Fable]

While I disagree with some of your opening statements, kudos on a well written and thought out post! I, along with most I game with in MWO, would agree with you whole heartedly that a Matchmaking Lobby is greatly needed and would make this game more enjoyable in all the ways stated as well as help sustain it's longevity

[KingCobra]

It wont happen when the MSN gamming zones plug was pulled by microshaft for independant games everyone who had anything to do with the Mechwarrior IP became power hungary as in they did not want independant play unless it was there way.Mektek MWL NBT destroyed the hope of another social gaming platform becouse they would not let control go back to the players.And i see PGI as just more of the same type (control freaks) as mektek and the owners of MWL and NBT leagues were .

Edited by KingCobra, 15 March 2013 - 07:23 AM.

[NightFallsOnU]

I am in 100% agreement with the OP
shameless bump
If i could give the OP C-bills i would

[HighTest]

I don't think that a lot of professional software (game) companies understand the amount of clout that community-controlled input can bring. I think often it's out of fear of losing control over their revenue stream -- if players take it upon themselves to 'make their own fun', then why should they send any further money to the dev? This may in fact be a valid argument.

But, I have to bring up Minecraft. I doubt for an instant that Mojang had any idea that a silly little Java game could garner as big a community as it has. Based on their website, it looks like they are approaching 10 MILLION accounts sold. Even at $10 apiece (It's currently about $27 now, but I know early users paid much less), that's $100 million! Not bad for a bunch of independents.

I'm not suggesting that PGI and IGP allow players to run their own servers and build mods on top of game code. But what makes Minecraft successful in my opinion is the amount of feedback they have incorporated from their players, and how many options they give the players to play in their 'own way.'

I realize that a commercially developed game may never reach the same level of community freedom that something like Minecraft allows -- but, adding a pinch here and a dab there would probably go a long way in driving the popularity of the game. I think that a lobby that allows group gaming would be one way to add a little bit of that to the game.

Great post, OP!

[Darwins Dog]

Great post Rebas. I wholeheartedly agree that we need a lobby for us to arrange games. I hope this is a priority for PGI. I know they have a lot that needs to be worked on, but I imagine a lot of their issues will be eased by the implementation of a lobby.

[Dishevel]

OP is not only correct in 95% of what he says.
It is an absolute crime that we are this far into "Open Beta" and we do not have this.
This is something that should have come before 80% of what they are doing.

[tenderloving]

There is a great current example with League of Legends. There is a custom gametype called ARAM that is the only thing played by many people. I personally don't even play normal games any more in LoL; it's probably been 3 months since the last time I played the "real game."

Custom matches allow a game to broaden their playerbase for literally no cost: There's no whining about elo, there's no need to have a matchmaking algorithm.

[Kogru]

This would help with forming guids and therefore the community, it would also help create a competitive esport scene which is basically free advertising for the game.

[Huoshini]

Very nice post, OP! Although i dont have a group of guys to drop with, i would much appreciate those of you who do,have the ability to do it! I PUG exclusivly with one friend of mine but would love tonnage limit matches

[OneEyed Jack]

I have nothing against a lobby system, per se, but I think the OP is wearing rose-colored glasses when he looks at the majority of people asking for it.

A few points:

• Few of the people asking for it actually want competitive gaming. I'm not saying none, but the mass exodus away from the 8-man queue proved that. Some were willing to put their reps on the line, but couldn't find regular games because most ditched as soon as they realized PUG-stomping didn't actually make them good players. The complaints about all the groups being the same is BS, because min-maxing is a hallmark of competitive gaming and any real competitor knows that.
  
• Lobby games that provided any form of incentive would become giant farms and destroy the any ability for PGI to keep an economy that promoted spending of MC.
  
• Aside from a very few people, the idea that players would be content to forego rewards for playing is pure fantasy. The 8-man queues were hotly demanded for a good long time and when they finally came out, people were demanding not just rewards for playing them (which they were already getting) but actually increased rewards because playing the way they had demanded and claimed they wanted to play took longer, so they felt the deserved more for. Apparently privilege is also supposed to pay more. These demands came within 24 hours of the patch!

​I'm not saying they shouldn't do lobbies, but I am saying that incentivizing lobby games would quickly destroy the game and that a lack of incentives would make the overwhelmingly vast majority of players only use them rarely. It would also create incessant complaining on these boards that incentives were absolutely needed for those games.

The OPs vision of MWO with lobby games is a pipe dream.

[M3atloaf]

JW randomly matached with group of mixed CGB and others and we did Zel combat. It was a welcome change from the regular grind. Lobbies are a must at some point for the longevity of the game. The only games that don't have lobbies are true MMO's and let's face it, MWO is far from a true, persistent, MMO.

[Rebas Kradd]

OneEyed Jack, on 15 March 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

I have nothing against a lobby system, per se, but I think the OP is wearing rose-colored glasses when he looks at the majority of people asking for it.

A few points:

• Few of the people asking for it actually want competitive gaming. I'm not saying none, but the mass exodus away from the 8-man queue proved that. Some were willing to put their reps on the line, but couldn't find regular games because most ditched as soon as they realized PUG-stomping didn't actually make them good players. The complaints about all the groups being the same is BS, because min-maxing is a hallmark of competitive gaming and any real competitor knows that.
  
• Lobby games that provided any form of incentive would become giant farms and destroy the any ability for PGI to keep an economy that promoted spending of MC.
  
• Aside from a very few people, the idea that players would be content to forego rewards for playing is pure fantasy. The 8-man queues were hotly demanded for a good long time and when they finally came out, people were demanding not just rewards for playing them (which they were already getting) but actually increased rewards because playing the way they had demanded and claimed they wanted to play took longer, so they felt the deserved more for. Apparently privilege is also supposed to pay more. These demands came within 24 hours of the patch!

​I'm not saying they shouldn't do lobbies, but I am saying that incentivizing lobby games would quickly destroy the game and that a lack of incentives would make the overwhelmingly vast majority of players only use them rarely. It would also create incessant complaining on these boards that incentives were absolutely needed for those games.

The OPs vision of MWO with lobby games is a pipe dream.

You have a good point about the farming, but I'll just reiterate my final paragraph: that private, reward-less servers would be their own reward for those who want them and would use them the most. I seriously doubt that PGI would suffer by adding no reward to them.

I do disagree that those asking for a lobby are as few as you imply. Other threads have implied a solid enough demand to make this worth the effort for PGI. Perhaps the reason they seem quieter is because they tend to gravitate towards the quieter and more mature group. FOX, for example, is a bunch of laid-back bunch of 70+ gamers who very much want a matchmaking lobby for our purposes but, well, we're just not the type to camp on the forums and bang on the table. Those who are, are actually the minority themselves. Maybe there were some who wanted a lobby for the wrong reasons, as you suggest. But that doesn't mean that community-driven content isn't a legitimate desire, or doesn't hold great potential to extend the game's longevity.

And they're not all asking for competitive gaming at all - they're asking simply for the ability to stick to an environment and group of friends they enjoy. I think it's reasonable to say that this is a prominent goal amongst gamers of every variety.

[Novakaine]

Some of us simple want to play against each.
Proxy Wars if you wish.
Stomping on joe pugster is no fun at all.
Calling up my Marik buddy on the phone screaming.
"Ah ha ya got your Marik arse handed to ya last night!"
Now thats fun.
Sadly people like Oneyed are short sighted.
MWO has the potential to be a fantastic game.
Unfortunatly it's quickly turning into just another fps

[Treckin]

Great post, although I seriously hope they allow for mech selection AFTER map selection.

Thanks for putting in the time to type that all out!

[Kill Dozer]

Great post OP.

[Pal]

Good stuff. Let's make this happen.

[Noobzorz]

Massive ******* wall of text that could've been twice as effective at half the length, but damnit do I ever agree with the sentiment and points you make (though, seriously, it was a chore among chores to read).

We need a lobby. In fact, we should really have a mech-select lobby system. Just ripoff DotA 2. PGI/IGP isn't going to successfully do the World of Tanks thing with the MechWarrior license anyway, so court the intersection of those audiences for $$$. The nice thing about a system like this is that it encourages all players to take the game very seriously and understand the meta and what's going on well. Just look at the kind of coordination that is almost guaranteed in solo queue matches of LoL or DotA 2. I can say, confidently, that the average LoL player is much more competent at LoL than the average MWO players is at MWO. Lobbies and persistent systems encourage that sort of thing.

This burning desire for 8 man queue is not something I share, mind you, and I really think the focus should be on (competitive, but) casual players.

Edited by Noobzorz, 15 March 2013 - 01:03 PM.