211 replies to this topic

[jay35]

Jade Kitsune, on 21 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

I see this a lot by company's that, are not quite in touch with their actual "Target" demographic.

A company is out there to make money with a product, even with games this is true, but I want to bring attention to something, in a recent post made by Bryan,





This is a fundimentaly wrong mindset, especially considering your initial marketing pushes for this game, and promises made 2+ years ago two a very different demographic, a demographic that is in an age range far beyond what you're looking for here.

Basically with your statement Bryan, you're looking for gamers aged 15-25+.

Your fundimental flaw in this is that you should be targeting gamers aged 20-45+. Now before you freak out and wonder why I'm saying this. Let's switch to another area of media that tries to get a demographic that just, isn't interested, comic books.

Comic book companys are always looking to draw in new readers. And who can blame them, however comic book companys seem to have this idea that if they keep restructuring their business to try to draw in a demographic that just, isn't interested in reading comic books the 10-20 year old age bracket. Now there WAS a time this was a viable age range, but that time is long past, especially considering the distribution of comic books is relegated primarly to niche comic book stores and the average kid is more interested in playing X-box 360 than reading a comic book. No for comic books, their "niche" is the 20-35 year old that grew up on comics back in the 80's 90's.

Let's flash forward to how this relates to mechwarrior. Those with a vested interest in mechwarrior are *ghasp*20-40+ year olds that grew up with Battletech/mechwarrior in the 80's-00's that have fond memory's of it.

can I fault PGI/IGP for trying to branch out and get more users? No far from it, however there's a proper way to do it, and the way they're going about it is far from it. they are going to be primarily alienating their "core" userbase to try to draw in new players.

steady money is better than a rush of new cash PGI/IGP, you need to understand that. And you won't always be getting NEW players to spend on the little bits of content you have currently. If you restructured your focus on the content delivery, and not trying to milk the game for every cent, you'd be seeing much more in the way of MC buying.

I've talked to several people today alone who would have spent money on more MC but have not because of Consumeables, rumors of 3rd person view [which we've basically been told is happening weather we like it or not] and overall mis-handling of what was promised and why many people bought founders to begin with.

But you know what, it's ok, you guys are going to do what you're going to do in the hopes of getting new players... unlike the comic book's I referenced, you'll simply loose players instead of gain them, where as with comics I can follow a writer they moved off Iron Man to X-men for example... with MWO... I'll simply walk away when my premium time is up. And many other's will do exactly the same.

I feel bad. Because I paid for gold founders, in the hope I was helping this game grow... instead, I get broken promises, and a company that ignore's it's CORE users.

Well written. The only thing that wasn't stated: If they want to make Mech Assault 3 (consolized, 3rd-person mech combat), they should go make that, i.e. a separate product with a separate team. Stop trying to turn MWO into a product that hopes to attract console kiddies and youth gamers with no interest in BattleTech or previous MechWarrior games. It will only end badly and ruin what could/should otherwise be an awesome MechWarrior product, by cannibalizing it, watering it down, and listening to feedback from people with no interest in the authentic product.

There's a fundamental difference between easing the learning curve for a product by providing a training ground, tutorials, etc, and altering the gameplay to change how the game looks or works.

Also, this isn't Words with Friends. This isn't ever going to be a product that appeals to a massive majority of the game-playing population. They knew this when they decided to take on the IP and build MWO. If they really think their primary audience or target demo should be something as vague and generic as "male action gamers", they may need to remind themselves what IP they're working with and adjust target accordingly.

Edited by jay35, 23 March 2013 - 10:42 PM.

[Thorqemada]

The problem with the "Target Demographic" is that the "Target Demographic" is everybodys darling!

Its like overfishing the seas what happens in the mmo business - everybody hunts the same sort of prey...

Since WoW market research produced one failure of a game (mmo) after another and only those who had aimed for a different sort of prey (geographical, seasonal, mental) had some success.

MWO is very beginner unfriendly, a below minimal value product for non-IP-Fans, with an expensive shop, some questionable game mechanics, a questionable balance, missing basic socializing features.

For that the game is surprisingly successful atm.

I appreciate the work the devs do and i feel they work the hardest to achive success but the state of the game is as it is and while they can be proud about some things they should be aware that there is still some mileage to go.

The business works like http://en.wikipedia....i/The_Long_Walk

Edited by Thorqemada, 24 March 2013 - 05:13 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

I still think its funny they specifically said "male" gamers.

[Ralgas]

The only issue i see with the argument is (sadly) that the target demographic as the community perceives it isn't enough to financially support an mmo and keep pgi expanding/innovating.

Outside of asia, as fun as they are big stompy robots just don't seem to hook the size of playerbase we need. As a western developed game it's doubtful MWO will crack it big there.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Ralgas, on 24 March 2013 - 01:45 AM, said:

The only issue i see with the argument is (sadly) that the target demographic as the community perceives it isn't enough to financially support an mmo and keep pgi expanding/innovating.

Outside of asia, as fun as they are big stompy robots just don't seem to hook the size of playerbase we need. As a western developed game it's doubtful MWO will crack it big there.

The only issue I see is that the target demographic for this game doesnt include anyone that posts on their forums.
Wait... why are we here again?

[F lan Ker]

S!

It would indeed be a high risk to make MWO a hardcore game and being modernized to 2013 instead of 1980's mind and ruleset. The outcry would be heard on moon I bet.

[Ralgas]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 24 March 2013 - 02:07 AM, said:

The only issue I see is that the target demographic for this game doesnt include anyone that posts on their forums.
Wait... why are we here again?

the target pgi are aiming at now or the target we perceive..... wait....wat?

Edit: seriously though, My 0.02c is just catering to the TT BT and Mechwarrior faithful, while a great ideal and the original intention probably isn't going to keep the servers running well into the clan wars. Looks to me like PGI is recognizing this and acting accordingly to preserve the title.

As a PC Mechwarrior fan boy since the original do i like it, NO.

If it's a choice between dumbed down optional game modes or having the project fold, well that's another story.

Edited by Ralgas, 24 March 2013 - 04:24 AM.

[El Death Smurf]

what blows my mind here is the foundation for your arguments.
you hate consumables, which if im not mistaken all have a strong TT basis http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Coolant_Pod just that it doesn't cost crit space, or tonnage, and is MUCH weaker. Even if the MC version was more effective by 9 heat, that's enough for 1 more large laser in a tight situation. not a valid complaint in my book, and yet they made free versions compatable and upgradeble to be on par with MC versions to qwell the forum ragers. same goes for off board attacks from artillary and air support. So long as splash damage gets fixed to spread accross, rather than consume completely, the differences are negligable. imo.

you hate 3rd person. if they introduce it, we'll tell them how we feel, but forced first person has alainated people, and will continue to do so, because this isnt COD, and some well inteneding, fans of the franchise have a harder time with their mech without seeing where the hell their legs are pointed, and were the heck they're getting hit from. i for one prefer 1st person, and willl find it more effective since we cant shoot through mountains like you could in MW4, and jump sniping isnt as easy as it was (or as forgiving on the legs) in mw4. really, pop tarts are my only worry when it comes to 3rd person, and all that they'd have to do is keep the camera low, and provide camera lag so that the camera doesn't rise to stay above the mech when it jumps. problem solved.

i am interested, as a beta tester and mechwarrior/battletech/ any thing mech (ya i played dark ages, what's it to you?) fan, to see how PGI impliments their ideas. I am not angry or dissipointed with them thus far. i underestand they define what they have released thus far to be in the Beta test phase, and that things can be buggy, frustrating, and so on. They are aware of a lot of the core issues invloved in their visions, and they discuss them. if 3rd person view never came up in their discussion, then i'd be dissapointed. I bought some cheep PC that met the specs off e-bay just to play this game. that is all that's installed on it, and i'm pretty sure i havent invested nearly as much money into this game as they have, so it goes without saying they want this game to succeed far more than any of us do.

[Noobzorz]

Ignatz22, on 23 March 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

COOL! SAY you're not insulting him, then insult him by noting what he SAYS is "Totally Stupid". That is SO not insulting! I wonder if someone told YOU that nothing you assert without substantiation is of any value, but your mother loves you, so, well, that's SOMETHING...

I say stupid things all the time and I am smart enough not to post a giant passive aggressive message in bold in comic sans. Not only did he try to explain marketing metrics to me, but then he tried to tell me that "male action gamer" is a technical term for 17 year old.

That is stupid. Very stupid. There's no need to beat around the bush about it. He may, however, be a clever person.

[Murku]

Jade Kitsune, on 23 March 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

there's no getting burned out at this point Soy.

just another 2 months, and then i walk away, i'm riding out my premium at this point, and fighting the good fight against stupid decisions and a company's lies.

I for one am marking my calendar, if you're still around on April 24th I want a refund.

Oh, and seeing how you've given up on the game, do you mind if we ask you to stop flapping your mouth at it?

Anyone else still thinking about Burritos?

[Nonsense]

El Death Smurf, on 24 March 2013 - 05:04 AM, said:

you hate 3rd person. if they introduce it, we'll tell them how we feel, but forced first person has alainated people, and will continue to do so, because this isnt COD, and some well inteneding, fans of the franchise have a harder time with their mech without seeing where the hell their legs are pointed, and were the heck they're getting hit from.

And Starcraft 2 "alienates" players who don't want to memorize build orders, tech trees, and worry about timing things like "what can he possibly have now given when I saw when I last scouted"? What of it?

Again, if the game can survive catering to a "core crowd" then they're greedy for trying to expand the game beyond that. If it can't, then the game will continually change to cater to new demographics, and that will eventually alienate the core crowd. Do you not understand this process?

Hopefully they can find a nice middle ground...we can all only hope that's what they're shooting for.

[Galenit]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 24 March 2013 - 01:13 AM, said:

I still think its funny they specifically said "male" gamers.

One of the best tribes 2 players i know was a girl.

My girlfriend has better aim in most games then me. I wish i could watch her "discussing" it out with the dev who makes this statement. I think it should be fair, that means the dev can decide if she should wear her rangerboots with steelcap or her 12cm highheels for it, both will hurt a lot ....

Edited by Galenit, 24 March 2013 - 06:34 AM.

[Eric darkstar Marr]

Hrm see its odd. In my house there is me @ 35 my wife @29 and my 4 year old son we all play. Most of my friends play also, not as much as I do but they are between 32 and 38. A few of my wife's friends play and they are 25 to 38.

Now while we may not make up a bulk we fall out of the "CoD" demographic most of the clan I am in is also outside of the younger demographic at least to the ones I speak to.

So I am not sure what numbers Bryan is seeing but for the most part it is the mid 30's range and if the majority is in that range those are the ones you should retain while treading carefully to get a younger group. It is fine to want to get a younger audience in just be careful how it is done so you do not lose your real core and those with the money.

[Murku]

Galenit, on 24 March 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

One of the best tribes 2 players i know was a girl.

My girlfriend has better aim in most games then me. I wish i could watch her "discussing" it out with the dev who makes this statement. I think it should be fair, that means the dev can decide if she should wear her rangerboots with steelcap or her 12cm highheels for it, both will hurt a lot ....

FPS was a step too far for my woman. The training program only stretched solo far:

Tetris, Mario, Zelda, Everquest, Gw2.

Too much gore to make it to AoC, too much motion sickness to make it to MWO.

I tried.

Edited by Murku, 24 March 2013 - 06:42 AM.

[Galenit]

Murku, on 24 March 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

Too much gore to make it to AoC, too much motion sickness to make it to MWO.

I must download and install the "blood and gore" files for fallout 3 for her and for borderlands too.
In germany you can see tittys (this is not cencored, but **** is?) everywhere but we are not allowed to see to much gore, the opposite from the us i think.

I remember the first time she shoot a ghoul in fallout 3 in the face with a shotgun and an eye fly to her, she falls from her chair laughing .....

Edited by Galenit, 24 March 2013 - 06:55 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Mystere, on 23 March 2013 - 09:38 PM, said:

Simply being embarrassed is not enough. I think you should be deeply ashamed for causing all of this.

To be ashamed, I would have to have shame.

I've been married....twice. So many of the higher emotions (shame, joy, rage, etc) have been burnt out of me.

I can muster up a good embarrassed though, and occasionally I can even rally an indignation. but for the most part, I'm dead inside.

[Gremlich Johns]

It struck me this morning after reading this thread again - PGI is moving this game to be another Mech Assault. Only this time, no console is involved and it costs more money that it has any right to.

for what it's worth, my age group probably represents a statistically insignificant segment of the MW crowd. I did start playing TT when it came out and I was an 20+ adult by that time. I am not married to the canon and really wish some change to tech and physics could be brought in by PGI, but the too hardcore cannot let it go for the betterment of the game.

[Qruze]

HI Guys

First I Must tell you, when y saw this game anounced I thought its about time another mechwarrior game is out. So I put money in to help found the game.

My first suprise is no European servers so I have been unable to play until now and this are the things I see this game needs.

First of all the game mods are quite awfull, and its horrible like wot to join matches the whole day and 80% of them are really bad.

So why is MWO going and just copy and paste all the things that WOT did. Why not make a Battlefield tipe of matches with bases, repair, rearm. Why not copy something like what MWLL (AMAZING MOD LIGHT YEARS FROM THIS).

I what a BATTLE OF MECHS, Big cities, or open maps with aproaches. not a 2 min deathmatch with 90% being absolut crap with 1 or more disconected or even droping less like last night 4 against full other team.

If PGI made a Big Battlefiedl tipe of game where you could drop with your lance mates take ot bases out post and the rest it would be great. People would absolutly love it.

IF you guys just copy a Clan wars sistem like WOT it would not be very succesfull. People would just continue to play WOT.

So in resume this games needs badly:

Regional Servers.

Gameplay or Gamemods different.

Do not pass the limit of PTW (that is death).

Better Balance (Slow but steady little fixes and see comunity feedback on them).
Better Comunication.

More maps without vision optics that drive people mad (Half of mi arma community hated night mission for being green) I dont mind ones in a while.

Take a look at MWLL, cause many problems this game has are solved there already like UAC and AC and much more.

Mech costumization (I think this is on the way) This will give you good income if you do not overprice it.
Dividing the player base with 1º person view and 3º person view its a crap idea any WOW player that played from the start can tell you this. Thats why at the end they worked for a single Battleground queu.

It occurs to me many more. Sorry for my English its not my native tongue.

I havent used any of my premiun time nor MCs yet cause theres nothing I like yet.

[F lan Ker]

S!

The spirit of WoT is strong in this one yes and very unfortunately so. MWO has more complicated controls and a steeper learning curve than WoT among other things. Everyone can like WoT because of TANKS. MWO is about BattleTech not that many are aware of today because it is table top etc. MWO should stand on it's own merits and make BT appealing from what it is: Future is War! But there is much more into it than just smashing Mechs. The source is almost endless, devs just need to pick the stuff that will draw people into MWO and BT, not just copy another game title.

[Dustein]

I gave this game support based on Interviews, and statements given by: Alex Iglesias, Randall Bills, Paul Inouye, David Bradley, Bryan Ekman, Omid Kiarostami, Thad Jantzi, Kevin Meek, Evan Halim, Enrique Barahona Ramos, Thomas Dziegielewski, Dion Linaker, Colin Huang, Stephen Andrusyszyn

and Russ Bullok that this would be a Mech Simulation based on there love of BattleTech and Old School MechWarrior, that they wanted to shy away from MechWarrior 4 and Mech Assault. They wanted a thinking man's shooter not an Arms race. That Community warfare and Roll Warfare would be key pillars of the game.
Based on what was said at the start I signed up and threw money at PGI.

Bryan Ekman, on 21 March 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

Our target demographic has always been (in very simple non-marketing terms): the male action gamer.

Quote

In an action game, the player controls the avatar of a protagonist. The avatar must navigate a level, collecting objects, avoiding obstacles, and battling enemies with various attacks. At the end of a level or group of levels, the player must defeat a large boss enemy that is larger and more challenging than other enemies. Enemy attacks and obstacles deplete the avatar's health and lives, and the game is over when the player runs out of lives. Alternatively, the player wins the game by finishing a sequence of levels. But many action games are unbeatable and have an indefinite number of levels, and the player's only goal is to maximise their score by collecting objects and defeating enemies.

Now I see an Arms Race, Segmenting the player base, Pandering to MechAssault players, Role Warfare limited and degrading, no community warfare despite promised date of 90 days after Open BETA, not listening to forum users feedback and suggestions despite claims this being a BETA.

TL;DR:
I feel as a founder I was lied to, That the BT/MW Demographic kick-started a MA/CoD Demographic game under false pretences.