96 replies to this topic

[White Bear 84]

Valdez Raptor, on 02 April 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

Ex. The HUGE posts on no third person view ever, massive support of no. What does PGI do, even though there are bugs in the game, and other things to handle? Work on third person view. Despite the minority of people that actual want it.
- Yes they are still bringing it in - But it will not be mandatory so it is designed for those who dont want it, are on the fence and do want it. There is nothign wrong with this, so long as if you dont want to play against 3rd person players, you dont.
Another was when one of the Dev's mentioned (albeit this can be taken out of context and may sound worse than it is) that they'll pay more attention to the person who's posted a few times aka their first post than someone who's posted a thousand times.
- This is sound. Why, because the long term players tend to want things to change more to what they want, call it the rule of entitlement. By following new players they can see what issue people who are new to the game and battletech have.

We talk about bug fixes they add in more content. Not simple bugs but glaring bugs that lead to disconnects.
Coding and content are two different fields. Coders do not make content and content makers do not code!

We ask for the ability to reconnect in our games, we are told no.
Probably a reasonable explanation - most likely something to do with coding.. ..a worthwhile ask the devs questions!

We want an in game system to report bad players/bots/griefers. We don't have that.
-True Dat. Agree

We talk about how base caps are too fast, something mentioned on day 1 of Beta, no change on that.
- Progress has been slow on this, but would suspect this will get modifed at some point, probably not really a high priority given the development of community warface, lobby, certain game mechanics etc etc

[80Bit]

PGI appears to listen fairly well.

However, many seem to have the attitude of a petulant child, in that if their grievance is not addressed or their suggestion not implemented, then PGI must not be "listening" to them. After all, if PGI heard, surely they would see the unparalleled wisdom of the forum warrior and bend the game to their will!

[Sable Dove]

Listen? Probably to most of our complaining.
Understand what we want? A lot, but nowhere near all.
Agree that there's a problem? Very rarely.
Have any clue how to fix the few problems that they acknowledge exist? Hard to say; they only acknowledge a scant handful of issues, and are typically very slow to fix them.

Let's take the 3L problem.
The problem with the Raven 3L has been around for a very long time. PGI listened and understood that we wanted the 3L nerfed in some way. They agreed that there was a problem and actually attempted to fix it. Unfortunately, they didn't understand at all the actual problem with the 3L, meaning that their 'fix' was entirely ineffective in balancing the 3L, and had the bonus of nerfing the other two Raven variants.

So I think they listen, but either don't understand, or can't figure out how to fix the issues. In most cases.
In some cases though, they just refuse to acknowledge problems and try to explain them away, even though this just makes them either seem like liars, or delusional.

Take ECM. There is no reason to take anything over ECM. Nothing that weighs 1.5 tons and takes 2 slots is anywhere close to being as effective as ECM. It is brutally overpowered for its size and weight, and is limited to only a handful of mechs (which are generally already the most effective variant of the chassis before ECM). Any sane person can see that ECM is broken; the game practically revolves around it. I've seen maybe 1 or 2 mechs that chose not to take ECM. Ever. And from their performance, it was clear they were fairly new to the game.

But to the devs, it's perfectly balanced. I mean, it has counters. PPCs can disable it, though in order to even get a missile lock, you have to hit it (And it must be the carrier) with at least two consecutive shots, which is hard to do even when the carrier isn't just hiding in cover while making the rest of their team virtually immune to missiles.
There's increased sensor range, which is a very expensive module that is not reasonably available, compared to ECM, which is cheap as dirt. Also, requires LoS at ranges that make the mech easy to just see out the window anyways, and is still not good enough to allow more than one volley of missiles before the mech is within 180m, if that.
TAG? Okay, if you're allowing an enemy to stand in LoS - with a warning when they target you - for 4-10 seconds, not even ECM can make up for that.

But these things balance ECM, right? Plus, they're going to restrict it to one location. (Which means nothing, because odds are it's going to be LT/RT, and the way the internals system works, the component will be destroyed, and the mech dead, long before you disable ECM.)

These are the things people really hate: when there is obviously a problem, but the devs refuse to accept that there's a problem.

[IIIuminaughty]

you know most gaming company such as PGI would of locked or deleted a thread like this. So this makes me believe they do listen to the community.

[DjKonline]

I know its few pages in to the gripe, but the fact is... unless you are a programmer or a game developer the balance ideas that you have may be valid, but not the best for the game, make your feelings known, but realize that like the real world ( and the stones song ) you can't always get what you want. programing issues, game play issues, and the fact that this is PGI's game not yours makes for a different direction that you may want. Enjoy what is provided and learn to work around what you don't like ( I counter ECM with weapons that don't require a lock or target ) yes this game is not perfect, yes I am going to say that This is BETA get over it, yes there will be haters, but even if you give everyone their own fluffy bunny to love and pet someone will always gripe. The real problem is that in a "I want I now " society no one has the patience to see out the final vision of the developers

[armyof1]

Well the amount of people voting 100% made me laugh, thanks for that!

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

I still believe my sig lol

[Hedonism Robot]

Garth Erlam, on 03 April 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

Player numbers skyrocketed as they do every patch. More CTD's, more HUD issues, less FPS drop comments, I think. We're working on the 'disco ball/blackscreen' error, but frankly no-one can repro it over here. So we need to do the usual stress tests till we find the culprit.

Since this issue seems to happen all the time for those on TS who have discussed it, why not use a program like Log me in and remote on to the players system to observe it. When I used to work as a customer support engineer I was able to trace the issue of several hard to reproduce bugs this way. I also found customers were really relieved and willing to do whatever it took to be part of solving the problem.

[Karr285]

would be nice if they put a Poll on log-in to get a 100% player base after every patch asking what you liked about the previous patch, but Feedback from beta testers isnt important in beta.

[JayVrb]

+ popcorn

[Alois Hammer]

Valdez Raptor, on 02 April 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

Ex. The HUGE posts on no third person view ever, massive support of no. What does PGI do, even though there are bugs in the game, and other things to handle? Work on third person view. Despite the minority of people that actual want it.

But..but...the majority of the devs' imaginary friends want it...

[Syllogy]

Garth Erlam, on 03 April 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

I think Syllogys point is that:
"PGI are lazy money stealing jerks who hate us and want to bleed us dry"
is not saying "I don't like it." In fact, comments similar to this are so bizarrely hyperbolic it's tough to answer them seriously. What on earth would I reply to this kind of thing with?

Instead, if you were to say:
"I know this is a Beta, but the following issues should be caught in testing: [EXAMPLES ]"

Then I can reply with why they can get missed, and your blood pressure can return to normal levels.

(obscure quote about Deathmatch)

Like, say, 8 vs. 8 where you can win by killing the enemy team, or capturing their base? Way ahead of you man.

Edited by Syllogy, 11 April 2013 - 08:03 AM.

[Bobzilla]

I think they listen, doen't mean they feel that's what should happen.

The biggest thing that kills me is, how would they know that the fourm polls don't represent the opinion of the majority. Where are they getting this majority feed back from?

[blinkin]

Bobzilla, on 11 April 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

I think they listen, doen't mean they feel that's what should happen.

The biggest thing that kills me is, how would they know that the fourm polls don't represent the opinion of the majority. Where are they getting this majority feed back from?

most likely play statistics. when people don't like the game they play less. the forums just provide some explanations for why people are playing more or less.

[MasterErrant]

they listen but the path of the game is pretty much predetermined. right now their main focus seems to be on sales. not a finished game.

I'll keep playing the game till it chokes on it's own waste and strangles. because I really want a battletech game. not because this game is any good. it's not. it's broken distorted crap/ might as well go play and other shooter and pretend I'm in aa mech.

this game currently has about as much resemblence to Battletech as the Movie "Starship Troopers has to the novel. (Which is, in fact the source point for ALL mecha type games/movies/books.) whic is to say a bunch of names.

Edited by MasterErrant, 11 April 2013 - 10:55 AM.

[Zphyr]

PGI listen to what PGI finds interesting to listen to.
Who and how can we ever know what percentage of thousands of posts/comments/complainings/suggestions/cryings do they "listen" to?

None of the poll options is viable. So did not vote.

[Ramsess]

PGI would like to listen to your wallet more often