162 replies to this topic

[Aesthetech]

Amro One, on 26 March 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

Not Beta you say, so you suggest its a full game now. . . . Funny, they only have 1/3 of the games content out.
Seems like a Beta to me.

Actually, 100% of the game's content is out now and anything that is added further is just an addition to the existing content. Unless someone here specifically paid money for a feature that has not been added yet (for example, let's say they were taking pre-sales on a hero Highlander), then they are under absolutely no obligation to release any content than what exists at the moment and could at any moment declare this the final product (at least insofar as the consumers are concerned). They could close doors tomorrow and their only financial obligations would be in regards to those who have purchased premium time (in fact, I haven't looked at the language so even that may not be guaranteed), and whatever agreements exist between the developer and the publishers.

Edited by Aposiopesis, 26 March 2013 - 10:13 AM.

[Coolant]

Ack! Another "not a beta" thread. I absolutely did not read the OP's post because the OP could not possibly bring up any new point that hasn't already been discussed to death...

[Roadbeer]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:05 AM, said:

Exactly, yes, I do not disagree.


Actually, when buying the Founders program it was very clear what you got:

Immediate access to closed beta.
Some doodads
MC
More doodads
Stuff

Anything past that point is hope, but you aren't buying hope. You can attach hope to it if you want. What you are actually getting for your $ is what was defined on the sales page.




Incorrect. You are simply buying a feature. Whether there is any investment into the development in the game or not is at the discretion of the publisher/developer. The $50 you spend on camo could be put into the development of the game or it could be put into a pair of new tennis shoes. As the end user buying a product, you have no say on how/where/if that money is invested unless the terms explicitly state so. We have indications that the money you spend may or may not go towards the development of the game, which is a far cry from a legal guarantee that it will. Buying camo is much different than investing in ENRON.

I have to disagree. As with all things involving money, there is a risk/reward. When I invested in ENRON, I was taking a risk that I would be rewarded of growing my economic wealth.

When I buy a cockpit item knowing that the game is in BETA, I am taking a risk that my financial investment will be rewarded with future entertainment wealth.

I don't care if the money I pay goes towards an employees salary, the power bill, waste management, new ping pong balls or a team building exercise on a paintball course. It is a holistic investment in the continued success of the product.

Once BETA is removed, the money I spend becomes exclusively discretionary and is weighed by the value of entertainment I am getting for my money.

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

Actually, 100% of the game's content is out now and anything that is added further is just an addition to the existing content. Unless someone here specifically paid money for a feature that has not been added yet (for example, let's say they were taking pre-sales on a hero Highlander), then they are under absolutely no obligation to release any content than what exists at the moment and could at any moment declare this the final product (at least insofar as the consumers are concerned). They could close doors tomorrow and their only financial obligations would be in regards to those who have purchased premium time (in fact, I haven't looked at the language so even that may not be guaranteed), and whatever agreements exist between the developer and the publishers.

100% of the content has been released? I ask again, which patch did I miss that had Community Warfare?

[LordRush]

Roadbeer, on 26 March 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

I have to disagree. As with all things involving money, there is a risk/reward. When I invested in ENRON, I was taking a risk that I would be rewarded of growing my economic wealth.

When I buy a cockpit item knowing that the game is in BETA, I am taking a risk that my financial investment will be rewarded with future entertainment wealth.

I don't care if the money I pay goes towards an employees salary, the power bill, waste management, new ping pong balls or a team building exercise on a paintball course. It is a holistic investment in the continued success of the product.

Once BETA is removed, the money I spend becomes exclusively discretionary and is weighed by the value of entertainment I am getting for my money.

Dont forget...funding for other games

[Aesthetech]

Mercules, on 26 March 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

Technically... as long as PGI considers it a Beta... it is Beta.

They are free to call it what they want, but that doesn't necessarily change the perception of what an outsider sees.

Many outsiders see an incomplete game that you can either grind into or pay money to speed up access to features, and don't want to pay money to a company that is willing to take non-refundable $ for what they call a beta, nor do they have any interest in going through a rather unpleasant grind to play said incomplete game regardless if the features are free if they grind hard enough or not.

[Roadbeer]

LordRush, on 26 March 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

Dont forget...funding for other games

Yeah... don't get me started about THAT. But that's not what we're talking about here... and those threads seem to disappear pretty quickly.

[Hobietime]

Quote

Gmail was launched as an invitation-only beta release on April 1, 2004^[9] and it became available to the general public on February 7, 2007, though still in beta status at that time.^[10] The service was upgraded from beta status on July 7, 2009, along with the rest of the Google Apps suite.

Dude, beta testing isn't instant. Gmail's open beta was around for 2 years. And it's closed beta was easy to get into. You got something like 50 free invites at the end of the closed beta. It's only been a few months. I'd get used to that beta tag being there for a long time. This game has been in a playable state (and by that I mean 'mechs are able to walk around and shoot at each other) for less than a year. It'd give it a few more before asking for that beta tag to come down.

Edited by Hobietime, 26 March 2013 - 10:23 AM.

[Mercules]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

They are free to call it what they want, but that doesn't necessarily change the perception of what an outsider sees.

Many outsiders see an incomplete game that you can either grind into or pay money to speed up access to features, and don't want to pay money to a company that is willing to take non-refundable $ for what they call a beta, nor do they have any interest in going through a rather unpleasant grind to play said incomplete game regardless if the features are free if they grind hard enough or not.

Yes, but perception differing does not alter a fact. I can perceive Red and Green as being the same color but that doesn't change their wavelength.

[Aesthetech]

Roadbeer, on 26 March 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

I have to disagree. As with all things involving money, there is a risk/reward. When I invested in ENRON, I was taking a risk that I would be rewarded of growing my economic wealth.

When I buy a cockpit item knowing that the game is in BETA, I am taking a risk that my financial investment will be rewarded with future entertainment wealth.

Quote

100% of the content has been released? I ask again, which patch did I miss that had Community Warfare?

Where did I miss the guarantee of community warfare? PGI is under no financial or legal obligation, at least from us, to ever release or have such a feature in the game.

Anything that can be purchased in the game at this moment is 100% released. The game is what it is and we may or may not get more.

Edited by Aposiopesis, 26 March 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[Aesthetech]

Hobietime, on 26 March 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Dude, beta testing isn't instant. Gmail's open beta was around for 2 years. And it's closed beta was easy to get into. You got something like 50 free invites at the end of the closed beta. It's only been a few months. I'd get used to that beta tag being there for a long time. This game has been in a playable state (and by that I mean 'mechs are able to walk around and shoot at each other) for less than a year. It'd give it a few more before asking for that beta tag to come down.

I have no problem with the beta tag as long as it's treated more so by the developers. It's treated like a released game with buyable, non-refundable features, damned near every page of the game is trying to sell you something, and that makes much more of an impression on future users than a blue word stuck in the lower right hand corner of a logo.

Edited by Aposiopesis, 26 March 2013 - 10:30 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

Where did I miss the guarantee of community warfare? PGI is under no financial or legal obligation, at least from us, to ever release or have such a feature in the game.

Anything that can be purchased in the game at this moment is 100% released. The game is what it is and we may or may not get more.

http://mwomercs.com/...mmunity-warfare

It is such a core pillar of the game that it is THE topic of the VERY FIRST dev blog.

Edited by Roadbeer, 26 March 2013 - 10:31 AM.

[Aesthetech]

Roadbeer, on 26 March 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...mmunity-warfare

It is such a core pillar of the game that it is discussed in the VERY FIRST dev blog.

But at this moment it's not a feature of the game, just a plan, possibly in development. If the team decides to turn around tomorrow and say "there will not be community warfare" and there's no issue with such from the publisher, then... so what? You didn't pay for community warfare.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

They are free to call it what they want, but that doesn't necessarily change the perception of what an outsider sees.

Many outsiders see an incomplete game that you can either grind into or pay money to speed up access to features, and don't want to pay money to a company that is willing to take non-refundable $ for what they call a beta, nor do they have any interest in going through a rather unpleasant grind to play said incomplete game regardless if the features are free if they grind hard enough or not.

And the outsiders, naysayers and "disagreerers" (not a word I admit ) can call it what they want....in the end, it doesn't matter.

Our opinion on whether it's a beta or not is immaterial. It will not change the way PGI is doing things right now. If anything that just makes me curious as to the point of this thread. To rant about the state of the game or its economics? To convince PGI to do business differently?

[LordRush]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

But at this moment it's not a feature of the game, just a plan, possibly in development. If the team decides to turn around tomorrow and say "there will not be community warfare" and there's no issue with such from the publisher, then... so what? You didn't pay for community warfare.

We paid for the DEVELOPMENT of CW, same thing.
If they came out tomorrow and said it wasnt going to happen, you would be hearing birds chirp the following day

[Joseph Mallan]

Tennex, on 26 March 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

i didn't know those games held weekend events.
heck i didn't know it was normal to hold regular events and tornaments for your beta testers.

I think people like you need to stop cutting PGI slack. all your doing is validating slow/poor game development. And thats not doing PGI nor us players any favors.

The Competitives practically demanded The right to tournaments! They get them(Or a close facsimile of them) and that proves its gone live? 5 maps, no real missions, no actual enemy to fight and this is what You paid for? Sorry man I paid for a game with Clanners to kill. I don't have my game yet. With Maps costing as much as they do capital is needed to keep development going. I am good with that. When the game is finished, Then I will consider it released.

[Maxtaltos]

Actually, you are incorrect about MC expenditure. They recently changed the way they did the paint schemes and refunded MC to those who had spent it. So that must mean that the game really is still in Beta per your arguments!

[Roadbeer]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

But at this moment it's not a feature of the game, just a plan, possibly in development. If the team decides to turn around tomorrow and say "there will not be community warfare" and there's no issue with such from the publisher, then... so what? You didn't pay for community warfare.

Now you're just being pig-headed.

Yes, Community Warfare was listed on the Bill of Sale for development. Since you like peppering your posts with legal issues, at that point an argument could be made for malfeasance.

[JTAlweezy]

ffs who cares if its beta or not. IT could be called poopwarrior and i would still play it and enjoy it. As long as my PC/20 is shattering porcelain as it leaves my sewer tube luancher.

[Mercules]

Aposiopesis, on 26 March 2013 - 10:29 AM, said:

I have no problem with the beta tag as long as it's treated more so by the developers. It's treated like a released game with buyable, non-refundable features, damned near every page of the game is trying to sell you something, and that makes much more of an impression on future users than a blue word stuck in the lower right hand corner of a logo.

Being able to buy something doesn't change the state of the code anymore than putting a black piece of paper in a green beam of light changes the wavelength of the light.

[Aesthetech]

Lukoi, on 26 March 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

And the outsiders, naysayers and "disagreerers" (not a word I admit ) can call it what they want....in the end, it doesn't matter.

Our opinion on whether it's a beta or not is immaterial. It will not change the way PGI is doing things right now. If anything that just makes me curious as to the point of this thread. To rant about the state of the game or its economics? To convince PGI to do business differently?

As someone who wants the game to succeed, I would like the devs to show a little more commitment to their 'beta' tag and improve accessibility to new users with a bit less emphasis on trying to sell. I believe that if they find more of a balance point they might find more players willing to stay and pay money.

However, this thread is much more a criticism of the community than the devs. As a previous poster pointed out, the "it's a beta" mentality is much more prevalent among people with gold/orange/blue logos under their name than the devs. It tends to come off as quite elitist and does not do much to welcome new players, or find ways to help them adjust. This is, quite frankly, not a very welcoming community at times.

Edited by Aposiopesis, 26 March 2013 - 10:42 AM.