296 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

@Buddahcjcc

I certainly am not making fun of those who raged off the info that was at hand. I was one of you. I am, on The other hand, calling BS on the people who are still trying to stir up trouble over it, AFTER the tweets and such. At this point in time, it is only being done to stir up the community, because we have our own little core of wannabe internet anarchist, and ******** people whose sense of entitlement was wounded.

Story broke, rage was unnleashed, mediocre reply was given, expect further details later this week. So until we have those, pretty much any overt response is based off of eronious assumptions, good or bad.

Instead of beating a dead horse, how about we see what comes along and if need be scourge and flagellate fresh leat, if needed?

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Gremlich Johns, on 01 April 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

They cannot even do combined arms, what makes you think they have the skill to pull anything you propose off?

They're not going to let us pilot anything but mechs, but from the beginning they have said that there will probably be some kind of deployable sensor, UAV, turret, etc.

"cannot do" and "will not do" are two different things ... Not doing combined arms is a choice that was made early in development.

I would just rather give them ideas for things that I think would make the game more interesting ... I still have hope (a very small bit) that they will start communicating with us again.

[Cur]

PGI.

Impliments 3rd person when noone wants it.

Refuzes to impliment team deathmatch mode even tho the community has been screaming for it since CB.


PGI Knows what's best for its players and what it's players want!

Edited by Cur, 01 April 2013 - 07:54 PM.

[Ryvucz]

Cur, on 01 April 2013 - 07:54 PM, said:

Impliments 3rd person when noone wants it.

Is it in-game right now?

No?

Okay then.

[Bishop Steiner]

@Buddahcjcc

You mean the interviews done at GDC, which happened to be the 25-29th of March? Those old new ls interviews in San Francisco, which put them an hours flight from their egregious money grubbing vacation? The interviews done in the same basic hatch as the one with the Polygon guy? The same guy who says Bryan is full of it, but hasn't actually posted any proof, be it by putting the recording on Youtube or anything else? Yeah, because his credibility is backed by what?

Yeah, wow, 2-3 days ago... Those are some dated interviews alright, especially on a story that broke..... Oh, 2 days ago, thereabout?

Yeah, excuse me if I wait til AFTER I have some definitive proof of chicanery BEFORE I lead a lynch mob after the guy.

Way to stay objective.

[grayson marik]

Ok, nice info and overall promising, if there would not be that one question left:
Will it only be random mariks against random davions/mercs or groups of mariks against random other groups of davions/mercs ?

Ah well ok, given the player numbers for an MMO, I think it has to be that way in todays games... unfortunately, THAT is the biggest point of boringness, that sticks around.
Combined witht he fact that house units somehow magically only indirectly influence the war ...

Guess we will see.

[Xendojo]

Thontor, on 02 April 2013 - 04:58 AM, said:

Wait... Has the guy who wrote the polygon article Actually commented on this controversy?

Really?

Links please?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I talked to him on twitter about it.

you can look for me @ankolod if you want.

It wasn't anything major. I just asked for some clarification on the comments. He said they were taken word for word and not out of context. He has reached out to PGI for further clarification. And he does have an audio transcript...but he's not willing to give it to us on a whim which is understandable.

[Bishop Steiner]

Supposedly so, on Facebook or Twitter.

I have not seen the comments, nor links to them, so for all I know the people referring to him as calling Bryan out could be using as "well documented" of info as the "fact" IGP took half the Founders Pot and spent it on Tactics and DOTA (which I have also yet to see links too).

Is it possible that both bits of info got buried somewhere in the previous threadnaught? Certainly. I still would like ALL relevant articles, tweets and other info tied to the OP, be it good, bad or ugly. Cuz the worst part of all this rage is there seems little concrete to actually back it. (also love how it was "days" withoutnabresponsento this travesty of justice..... Even though Bryan tweeted out the day the shitstorm broke. )

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2013 - 05:09 AM, said:

Supposedly so, on Facebook or Twitter.

I have not seen the comments, nor links to them, so for all I know the people referring to him as calling Bryan out could be using as "well documented" of info as the "fact" IGP took half the Founders Pot and spent it on Tactics and DOTA (which I have also yet to see links too).

Is it possible that both bits of info got buried somewhere in the previous threadnaught? Certainly. I still would like ALL relevant articles, tweets and other info tied to the OP, be it good, bad or ugly. Cuz the worst part of all this rage is there seems little concrete to actually back it. (also love how it was "days" withoutnabresponsento this travesty of justice..... Even though Bryan tweeted out the day the shitstorm broke. )

Your posts hurt my brain to read bud.

I don't know about all that craziness. But basically Bryan said something along the lines of "I did 27 interviews at 15 minutes a piece, and it didn't convey my message".

And so I asked Chris whether he took any liberties with his article, and he said it was exactly what was said with no editorializing.

[Bishop Steiner]

@Nicholas Carlyle

I am not doubting you, but I wonder about the reporter, tbh. If I had the transcripts, I would not "hand them over", but might consider posting them to YouTube, Facebook, etc. But in fairness, he might be waiting until he and PGI talk, for relations reasons, or legal. So right now it's. Kinda a he said, she said, without a lot of concrete anything, but even in the polygon interview, things were somewhat vague. And it is also possible Bryan misspoke (having done enough public speaking, I can say, you sometimes listen to the audio afterward and go "I said THAT?")

I'm simply saying until we do have that info, lets put down the torches and pitchforks, and grab some marshmallows and hot dogs while we wait.

[Bishop Steiner]

I'd also love to see the other 25 interviews, since it appears only that one went overboard about monetization

Or the others haven't surfaced to fuel our collective angst. I also get the idea from the GDC one that Bryan is a) easily distracted, and has this huge plan in his head, but precious little seems fully realized and set in stone. I guess I just don't get the instadouche vibes from the guy that some of our community does, or feel everything is a conspiracy. Dunno.

Anyhow, will be absent for a bit, need my morning swim. Not much point living on the ocean in Mexico I'd I don't take advantage.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

No worries, I know no one is questioning me. It's all on twitter to read. I was just trying to get more information.

All I know is the dev's have a spotty past with regards to giving us information. And also on that information being honest.

This reporter guy really has no stake in this and honestly seemed to not want the attention. So I really doubt he was stirring up trouble.

I just think the Dev's are in over their heads at this point. End of story.

[Xendojo]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

I'd also love to see the other 25 interviews, since it appears only that one went overboard about monetization

Or the others haven't surfaced to fuel our collective angst. I also get the idea from the GDC one that Bryan is a) easily distracted, and has this huge plan in his head, but precious little seems fully realized and set in stone. I guess I just don't get the instadouche vibes from the guy that some of our community does, or feel everything is a conspiracy. Dunno.

Anyhow, will be absent for a bit, need my morning swim. Not much point living on the ocean in Mexico I'd I don't take advantage.

It's the "Salesman" vibe. And i don't hate on him for having it one bit. Someone has to sell this game and sell it good, and i think that Bryan is doing an excellent job of it. If it was up to Russ to sell this game, i honestly don't think we would be here talking on the MWO forums.

If you go look at the GDC interviews from last year you can see the same thing. Last years vids look much more relaxed than these.

Edited by Xendojo, 02 April 2013 - 06:33 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Tekadept, on 31 March 2013 - 05:34 PM, said:

Again this doesnt give any answers, it merely gives more questions for me. Why is it that they couldnt do a command post on community warfare, yet happily do this interview, which then mind you Isn't even posted though any of the official channels? Seems like this thread was promoted to try and distract people as it doesn't counter the points in the original thread.

Bryan strikes me as the kind of player who will run off after a jenner the way he keeps looking around in that interview, so easily distracted.. Ok about to engage Alpha awesome. SQUIRREL!!!!!

I'll wait for an official command post clearly stating what is real and what is not. This interview is "nice" but it doesnt change my opinion "at this time".

Ya, it is tough. Once you lock yourself inside the "Grand Conspiracy", even hearing from the horses mouth is never good enough.

That "plan" has been in Print since the CB days ffs. If anyone cared to look, it took me 13 seconds to find btw, here is the same plan. Check the Posted date. Making fun of how a Dev would play the game? Mature dude. Real mature.

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

[Bishop Steiner]

@Xendojo,

Good point... also, in the chance he did float it by, as reported..... as a guy trying to run a business, he may well have floated it out to see the reaction. People overlook that some parts of this game DO have to be monetized, or there IS no game. In our lovely socialist internet world, it seems greedy and dishonest. In reality, it's business. As long as they listen ot their consumer base, they are allowed to (and honestly, from a business perspective SHOULD) float out other ideas for revenue. People saying it hasn't been done, doesn't mean it CAN'T be done.

I certainly am against any required premium to play CW, ESPECIALLY if the Houses are "passive", but I also find teh Dev's "honesty" seems as much as how we want to read and spin their posts. I have seen it taken way out of context by all parties involved, and i have also seen the Dev's have an idea screw the pooch.

Oh well, whatever.

Let the people rage on, I suppose.

[Sifright]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

@Xendojo,

Good point... also, in the chance he did float it by, as reported..... as a guy trying to run a business, he may well have floated it out to see the reaction. People overlook that some parts of this game DO have to be monetized, or there IS no game. In our lovely socialist internet world, it seems greedy and dishonest. In reality, it's business. As long as they listen ot their consumer base, they are allowed to (and honestly, from a business perspective SHOULD) float out other ideas for revenue. People saying it hasn't been done, doesn't mean it CAN'T be done.

I certainly am against any required premium to play CW, ESPECIALLY if the Houses are "passive", but I also find teh Dev's "honesty" seems as much as how we want to read and spin their posts. I have seen it taken way out of context by all parties involved, and i have also seen the Dev's have an idea screw the pooch.

Oh well, whatever.

Let the people rage on, I suppose.

14 pages in 3 days in this thread.

People aren't raging on....

There is also no need to inflame people by making such a statement

[pjnt]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 April 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

I talked to him on twitter about it.

you can look for me @ankolod if you want.

It wasn't anything major. I just asked for some clarification on the comments. He said they were taken word for word and not out of context. He has reached out to PGI for further clarification. And he does have an audio transcript...but he's not willing to give it to us on a whim which is understandable.

This makes sense to me. Why would a reporter burn a story source unless absolute needed to protect his/her own integrity? Lets wait for the official response. Either they will accept the account as accurate and the nerdrage holds, try dodge it and/or deflect the conversation elsewhere and the nerdrage holds or completely deny it - where they reporter will be called a liar. If the proof does not appear then I will apologize first. Otherwise they are playing us for fools, which at times I think we are :/

[Bishop Steiner]

@pjnt,

While I do agree with you in general, I would point out the same reason that no one can admit when they are wrong here, even when proven beyond a doubt. People can't admit when they are wrong anymore.

And, he might not be. But if Bryan gave out 27 interviews that day, and floated a monetization scheme (sorta, kinda in a vague way) and didn't apparently in the other 26, it seems likely he was testing the idea for reactions, or just throwing out possibilities to see what sticks.

End of the day, there first job is to make money, whether we care to admit it or not. Some ideas sound better before you say them out loud, though. If I was to take 1comment at my discretion from almost anyone on here, I could make almost anyone in here seem like a greedy jerrk, lol. Again.... Lets see the official announcement first. We can sharpen our pitch forks until then.

[hammerreborn]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 April 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:

@pjnt,

While I do agree with you in general, I would point out the same reason that no one can admit when they are wrong here, even when proven beyond a doubt. People can't admit when they are wrong anymore.

And, he might not be. But if Bryan gave out 27 interviews that day, and floated a monetization scheme (sorta, kinda in a vague way) and didn't apparently in the other 26, it seems likely he was testing the idea for reactions, or just throwing out possibilities to see what sticks.

End of the day, there first job is to make money, whether we care to admit it or not. Some ideas sound better before you say them out loud, though. If I was to take 1comment at my discretion from almost anyone on here, I could make almost anyone in here seem like a greedy jerrk, lol. Again.... Lets see the official announcement first. We can sharpen our pitch forks until then.

The biggest issue is that there is no context on who should have a premium account, which is why I don't understand the rage. The nearest people described that could be the "people who participate in this" are the merc group creators mentioned in the sentence prior. It's a poorly written article/poorly said quote without sufficient detail as to who is being talked about.

Taking it at face value you would assume that "people who participate in this" would be everyone in CW, not just merc group members, which aren't discussed in ANY of the quoted message (except in the extremely broad sense "merc groups" as a type of player), so I really don't see how so many people believe they are the ones being targetted...

Edited by hammerreborn, 02 April 2013 - 08:27 AM.