163 replies to this topic

[Pygar]

Roland, on 20 March 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

Dude, you seriously have no idea what you are talking about.

They obviously didn't BUFF missiles... The fixed a bug, and fixing that had an unintended consequence of making missiles far stronger.

If anything, they made an error in not testing this change. But they obviously didn't intentionally create LRM-ageddon.

Well, meanwhile- I hate missile boats, just like I ALWAYS have (for way different reasons than why I hate them in MWO)...and this game keeps punishing me for that mercilessly!

I'm tired of trying to fly direct fire mechs and having it be a headache because missile boats and ECM boats are clearly superior in MWO, and I want to play a game where skill at aiming and maneuvering matters instead... "Missile Boat Warrior Online" is just never going to be fun for me.

Edited by Pygar, 20 March 2013 - 10:47 AM.

[Rozav]

To be honest the FOTM setups don't really require you to invest anything but time.

Raven 3L with med lasers/streaks + ECM? No money required.
LRM woosh woosh woosh and more woosh? No Money required.
Dakka dakka dakka from cataphracts/jagers? No money required.

It's one of the few games where content you have to pay for doesn't really give you any fighting advantage.
(WoT doesn't count. I love my Type 59 and trolltastic dickermax there, and actually do feel like I've skipped content WITH an advantage with those 2 tanks).

[Whompity]

I'm not trying to be insulting, but obviously that founder's tag doesn't mean as much to me as it does to you.

I've probably put only about $80 into this game so far, but I'm pretty happy with what I've seen.

You appear quite upset with the feature/content delivery model. That makes me ask: Why are you still playing? If the direction this game is taking is so fundamentally opposed to your philosophy of what it should be, at what point do you decide enough is enough?

Because ultimately, unless you code your own game, you'll never be 100% happy with the feature-set.

Re: Dabbling in game dev:

No need to be snarky. All I was saying is that I've seen the other side a bit. I never claimed to be an expert, but I DO know what it's like to try to do the right thing for your product/franchise/love-project and still not be able to make some of the most outspoken customers happy. Because as I mentioned before, game balance is very difficult. You want to provide thousands of people with a bajillion different possible ways to "win" without making only 3 of them viable. You think you find it then... nope, someone finds a munchkin setup that blows it all to smithereens. Over and over.

[3rdworld]

Olivia Maybach, on 20 March 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

I'm not trying to be insulting, but obviously that founder's tag doesn't mean as much to me as it does to you.

I've probably put only about $80 into this game so far, but I'm pretty happy with what I've seen.

You appear quite upset with the feature/content delivery model. That makes me ask: Why are you still playing? If the direction this game is taking is so fundamentally opposed to your philosophy of what it should be, at what point do you decide enough is enough?

Because ultimately, unless you code your own game, you'll never be 100% happy with the feature-set.

Never said it meant anything, but it shows I am more invested than simple emotion.

I am not that upset with the rate of content. I mean who wouldn't love it if it were faster. But I can live with 1 map and 1 mech a month.

What I cannot live with are obviously unbalanced and broken features.

Balancing is so slow it's painful. and what balance they have done, has merely changed the meta, making certain weapons/mechs etc just a broken as those that needed fixing.

I decide enough is enough when it is no longer fun, or fail to see light at the end. It is currently dimming but it has not yet been extinguished.

[Whompity]

xhrit, on 20 March 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

I have been involved in a number of game and mod projects over the years, and the most valuable thing to a developer is user feedback.

I'll agree with that. But it's gotta be useable feedback. All of the numbers and figures and screenshots... that's gold. Lots of people pick things apart to that degree and it really helps. Even just saying "hey... this isn't so fun... is it what you intended?" is good too. When "feedback" gets overly emotional and personal and insulting, it's not at all helpful.

[xDeityx]

Sorry OP, but your argument doesn't hold water. I too have been part of development processes for other similar games and understand what is involved. Game development isn't easy but PGI has made many mistakes that were totally avoidable. The balance in the game is so far off that it's unexcusable. The fact that there are only ~6 variants out of 60+ that see the light of day in high level competitive play is embarrassing. The fact that so many of the weapons are unusable in a min/maxed config is sad.

They also overpromised and underdelivered, which is pretty much the opposite of how you should treat your customers.

[CMGrendel]

As someone who has also worked in the games industry, I should also point out that this is a business, not a charity. Nobody is doing anyone a favour.

They saw a market opportunity and have exploited it. People paid money based on some fairly clear goals. Those goals have not been met. Frustration is growing. Some stated goals have already fallen by the wayside.

Aside from this, you can be giving a game away for free (completely, not as in "Free-to-play" but monetized) and people will STILL come and abuse you for giving them a COMPLETELY FREE GAME (I have plenty of experience of this), so expecting people to behave more rationally when some of them have spent $100+ towards development is an exercise in futility.

Got you a quick fap from the devs though, so I guess job was done. And as a bonus, a PGIs representative got an opportunity to make a sassy remark at a user's expense.

Stay classy, San Diego.

[Whompity]

Quote

I am not that upset with the rate of content. I mean who wouldn't love it if it were faster. But I can live with 1 map and 1 mech a month.

*nods* I get the feeling we're not talking a HUGE team here, so I'm not upset with the pace.

Quote

What I cannot live with are obviously unbalanced and broken features.

Balancing is so slow it's painful. and what balance they have done, has merely changed the meta, making certain weapons/mechs etc just a broken as those that needed fixing.

I hear ya. I don't know if they'll implement any of the changes submitted by people, maybe some would work, maybe some wouldn't. Balancing IS slow and painful. I can guarantee if they knee-jerked and "fixed" broken stuff as quick as people complained, we'd have a slew of other balance issues.

Quote

I decide enough is enough when it is no longer fun, or fail to see light at the end. It is currently dimming but it has not yet been extinguished.

I can respect that. Who wouldn't?

[MaddMaxx]

3rdworld, on 20 March 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

No but I normally get my money back.

or free diner as it were.

Not when that cute little table in the corner, that you just had to have, came with a "time limited" "non-refundable" down payment...

Edited by MaddMaxx, 20 March 2013 - 10:57 AM.

[Mercules]

I completely love your post and I agree. However I do wish to point out one thing.

I too work for a company that develops software. Completely different use as it does physiological and assessment testing but it is software. One of the things I find my company guilty of is assuming their customers need them. We have the exclusive publishing rights to some tests that are used in legal cases and for employment. So the thought is, if they want to use X they have to use our product.

This puts us in the habit of thinking that way and assuming if we make a change they will just have to get used to it. What we forget as a company that while they will grumble, complain, and rant then go use that product anyway because they have no choice... we will sell a lot more usages for that test if we give them what they actually ask for instead of telling them how they will have to use it.

I have heard direct from customers, "You know... I like the test and your product is okay, but I would use it a lot more if...."

Yes, if we want to play a Mechwarrior style game right now the only modern one is MWO. They are it and we love Battletech and Mechwarrior and so for those that want BT/MW they have us stuck. However, we will play it more and thus indirectly invest more into it both literally and figuratively.

I understand from working with Developers, QA, and Tech Support how difficult it can be to get the product out the door in 3-4 months much less an update a month. I also know how easy it is to introduce a bug or even revert to a previous bug you had stomped.

They have a balancing act. They need to make the players happy, make IGP happy, and themselves happy. I don't envy them.

[3rdworld]

MaddMaxx, on 20 March 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

Not when that cute little table in the corner, that you just had to have, came with a "time limited" "non-refundable" down payment...

Which is why I ask to get it sent back and the situation corrected. It is my only way to see it remedied.

[Whompity]

CMGrendel, on 20 March 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

Got you a quick fap from the devs though, so I guess job was done.

Quote

Stay classy, San Diego.

Those were pretty incongruous statements, and the former was a direct contradiction of what I initially stated in the OP.

Maybe I've jumped on this MWO bandwagon so recently that I don't feel as entitled, I guess. I know the franchise means a lot to a lot of people (it's been around so long, and is well fleshed out), but wow... have fun with it. It won't be the last game based on BT ever made. No, it's not perfect, but it's pretty good.

[Felbombling]

During closed Beta there were plenty of people offering up constructive feedback, complete with charts, logical argument and solutions. Now I see a level of anger on the boards directed towards PGI that is rather painful to read, and the really thoughtful threads are rare. I think this is a result of built up animosity over low-hanging fruit that never gets fixed. Tech or weapon introduction that don't seem to have been thought through or tested very well and a cascade of vanity items offered as a distraction. People don't understand that different people work on different items, and you can't get a 3D artist to fix crash to desktop, for example.

As for myself, I have started and stopped a handful of those thoughtful suggestion posts. I never get to the end to post them because I feel that, ultimately, the effort is futile. Now I generally post just to kid around, sometimes at the expense of PGI. Let's face it, they are an easy target when you stack up all the evidence from the last year. Still love the game though, and cannot wait until collisions are back in so I can bother to play again on a regular basis.

Edited by StaggerCheck, 20 March 2013 - 11:03 AM.

[akaChrisHimself]

All these analogies made me hungry.

[MaddMaxx]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 20 March 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:

I'm fine with the notion that game development is hard.
Communicating is not hard.
snip (made me cringe)

This is true but also has a limit where said Communications gets directly in the way of doing the actual work. If you want in on the Board Meetings, buy Stock.

Otherwise just read the ticker and wait for your company to come back around with updated info.

3rdworld, on 20 March 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:

<legendary founder

I am also invested monetarily, with a product I cannot return, just like your steak. I can however tell the waiter to take it back and make me a new one.

Or complain to Garth about something being broken, hoping he takes it to the chefs (devs) to get it fixed.

Looks like your metaphor didn't work out so well eh?

So you feel entitled then? Someone coerced you into spending that money on MWO did they? For everyone who says that, if it were me, I would give them their money and tell them to go away and never come back. The less entitled children around the nicer the playground is for the grown ups.

zverofaust, on 20 March 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

Watch out guys he's dabbled

In grade school I dabbled in chemistry by mixing vinegar and baking soda. Clearly this gives me the authority to discuss the racemical synthesization of organic compounds during abiogenesis.

No but really I've also dabbled in online game development. PGI is fresh and new and most of their mistakes can be explained by this. But it's also frustrating for people like me who see a lot of promise in the game and are heartbroken when it stumbles.

Dude. If you don't already, here is the tip of the week. DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN. They stumble too...

[Pygar]

CMGrendel, on 20 March 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

As someone who has also worked in the games industry, I should also point out that this is a business, not a charity. Nobody is doing anyone a favour.

They saw a market opportunity and have exploited it. People paid money based on some fairly clear goals. Those goals have not been met. Frustration is growing. Some stated goals have already fallen by the wayside.

I personally do not care about the money aspect- I just care about the balance and fun gameplay.... last night I spent whole matches cowering from missile boats because even with a AMS and max armor the second I stopped hiding it was game over- very not balanced and not fun... even the matches I did kinda good in ended with me wondering what the hell shot me down so fast.

Hell yeah frustration is growing, this is the second or third time I have experienced this same issue with the same weapon system...and from the way things sound, they aren't going to hot fix this- they are just going to leave it be for 2 weeks instead.

[Rebas Kradd]

Let me see if I understand correctly...

You saw a game that was CLEARLY still in its testing phase...still being built, still sorting the bugs out, still going through all the phases that a gamer typically never sees because they take place before release.

You then decided, on your own volition, with no gun to your head, to spend your own hard-earned money on said embryonic game.

And...now you're MAD that the game is unfinished?

Would you throw a poorly-grilled steak at a waiter who had told you beforehand that their grill wasn't working properly?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

MaddMaxx, on 20 March 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

This is true but also has a limit where said Communications gets directly in the way of doing the actual work. If you want in on the Board Meetings, buy Stock.

That's bull. They pay people to communicate with us.

They just don't do a very good job of it.

How hard is it for the people they pay to be on the boards to come here, scour the major issues and then in the next staff meeting (I'm hoping they have them at a minimum weekly) say "Hey guys, XYZ seems to really be riling up our player base, what are we doing?".

Then come back and say "Hey guys, we brought up your concerns, they are looking into it".

And of course that requires them actually looking into it. Which they don't do, for example, ECM command chair promised 2 or 3 months ago now.

[Stone Profit]

3rdworld, on 20 March 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

No but I normally get my money back.

or free diner as it were.

Your game is already free. Also, your dinner was not improperly prepared, your game had a slight problem which you are blowing WAY out of proportion.

[CMGrendel]

Pygar, on 20 March 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:

Hell yeah frustration is growing, this is the second or third time I have experienced this same issue with the same weapon system...and from the way things sound, they aren't going to hot fix this- they are just going to leave it be for 2 weeks instead.

Have to be fair to PGI here. Unless there's been a further update, they're going to hotfix this once they've identified the specific cause of the problem.