

Community Warfare Clarity (P2P/f2P) - Feedback
#141
Posted 08 April 2013 - 12:54 PM
Is it a requirement to give these 3rd party sources "exclusive" news-breaking opportunities in order to get an interview? Cause... I can kind of understand that if that's how the business works, if you gotta play the game or be ignored.
But if that's not the case, why aren't we hearing stuff from you guys before some article starts another forum meltdown?
#142
Posted 08 April 2013 - 12:57 PM
Holy **** balls batman this is a game! Calm the **** down!
You may need to find a new hobby if you devolve into sending personal threats over it...All for a few bucks too.
#143
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:01 PM
The only problem I foresee here is, as time goes on, subscribers will likely fall off, meaning prices will need to go up, and this will further scare of subscribers leading to an eventual collapse at some crucial point. I wish there was some way to tap into the entire community when it comes to paying for the game. Unfortunately the prices of some of the items prohibit many people from spending money on MWO, which is sad, especially when those people want to support the game in some way. There needs to be some way to allow those player to get payed for content. More sales are a good way to achieve this IMO, and make them more accessible. You need to tap the entire player base in order to survive, or else I predict this wonderful project might not last.
#144
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:05 PM
Nikohki, on 08 April 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:
Don't know if you tried this, but If you put in the ark codes you get 6 more slots free (plus other stuff). Also, you can't sell the starter items, but you can break them down in the salvage matrix. I'm sorry you had to lug that stuff around all this time, bud. Lastly, as you level up, your inventory gets additional slots.
good to know and thanks. I did see the codes. Not a terrible game. I have a friend to play with. I hope those cars eventually get some guns to shoot the big guys with.
#145
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:10 PM
Krzysztof z Bagien, on 08 April 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:
I don't mean to be picky, but why couldn't the developers release info on community warfare here in parallel with the interview? If you know you're in an interview and you're going to talk about community warfare or clans or some other detail, an official post should also be made in these forums.
#146
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:14 PM
Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:
the pot to grow your competitive community in
Well it is a matter of cost... It is hard to guarantee the extra income to cover the cost of the private matches (as it sees to be a cost for PGI to do that right now) from a financial pov it is much better to risk loosing a little in the grand scheme but know that you at least remain in the black per match then to give all the matches away and hope that the people will be nice enough to put forth the extra money.
#147
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:16 PM


Edited by Jojobird, 08 April 2013 - 01:17 PM.
#148
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:17 PM
That being said, a certain amount of customer service is appreciated insofar as information on game progression and timely resolution of issues. Which in turn gives us the confidence to keep spending real money and convincing others what a great product this will be.
Edited by Phalanx100bc, 08 April 2013 - 01:31 PM.
#149
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:25 PM
Really sorry to hear you had to deal with that sort of crap.
#150
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:26 PM
#151
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:28 PM
#152
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:30 PM
I would disagree however and say that people who want to be in factions may also want to battle for territories. Without being in a merc corp I still want to be battling the enemies of my house for territories and benefits.
#153
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:33 PM
I only have one major concern with what is being said though:
You mentioned that to be part of a privately hosted game, you are planning on requiring an individual that may be part of that game to be a premium member. My gripe with that is not all members of a unit may be premium, and restricting that is counter-intuitive to setting up a match with like players.
i.e. Team A has 12 members, and team B has 12 members, all wanting to setup a custom match in CW for territorial control. Team A has 6 premium members while team B has 7 premium members. All others are non-premium. You are now forcing these teams into a situation where they cannot use their full base of players to play a match for CW.
I can't say I'm very happy about that idea at all. I can understand requiring at least the match hosts to have premium time, or perhaps even a minimum of a lance as premium for each side, but to require both sides to have complete premium membership might as well require all members of a unit to be on premium time just to play the game.
Everything else is superb, and I see no issues at all with requiring a fee for unit setup and such. Excellent post otherwise.
#154
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:35 PM
Darkfire66, on 08 April 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:
I find it interresting that dirty laundry like "death threats" can be divulged, yet game progression and a buisness-like explanation of why so many problems have yet to be tended to are kept so close to the chest.
#155
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:35 PM
#156
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:37 PM
Bryan Ekman, on 08 April 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:
- A small one-time MC and/or CB fee to create a Merc Corp*.
- Some aspects of CW will reward players with MC, we are considering a Premium Account requirement to participate in these rewards. This will not prevent non-paying customers to participate in all aspects of CW with their friends and teammates.
- If we decided to launch Private Matches, they will likely require a Premium Account to cover costs of hosting a match on our hardware.
Instead of straight up blocking or segregating the player base into those who pay, and those who don't, what you should be doing is grouping everyone into "People who MIGHT pay", and then make the game something worthy of our money. Doing things like offering a MC reward to subscribers who take part in CW, but none to non-subscribers will just further the gap between these two groups, and eventually, those who don't pay are going to get bored, and leave. What you should do instead of offering MC is to actually create content that people would happily spend money on, like cosmetics and shortcuts, and then offer these as rewards for CW, while still requiring MC to apply them. Then you can have all the tournaments you want, and still make money off of people who buy MC to slap on their shiney new decals.
And charging for private matches? This is probably the final nail in the coffin for any sort of competitive environment MW:O could have had.
Oh well, game COULD have been good, but PGI is more interested in the quick buck they can make now, rather then looking at the big picture. Have happily spent $0 on this game, and after all this underhanded activity from PGI, I never plan to change that.
#157
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:37 PM
PropagandaWar, on 08 April 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:
Um no they don't. PGI's closest competitor is HAWKEN and that game is Shmeh beyond Shmeh sooooo..... Yeah have fun with that one.
P.S. LoL is not MWO.
umm hawken is definitely not their only competitor, they have many and they ALL offer free private matches, and currently Hawken is off to a much better start with their game. The reason i'm here instead of there is i have faith in PGI, but their are certain things that will alone make me not want to play this game, having to pay for private matches is one of them (at least if i can't get a 3rd party alternative, without third party matchmaking having to pay would be an immediate shut off got me.)
#158
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:41 PM
AlexEss, on 08 April 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:
Well it is a matter of cost... It is hard to guarantee the extra income to cover the cost of the private matches (as it sees to be a cost for PGI to do that right now) from a financial pov it is much better to risk loosing a little in the grand scheme but know that you at least remain in the black per match then to give all the matches away and hope that the people will be nice enough to put forth the extra money.
private matches don't cost extra, they would just be launching in public which would take up the same resources. end of story, there are no buts.
#159
Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:55 PM
MrPenguin, on 08 April 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:
I sometimes browse MWO forums (as well as many others) on my Nokia E52. It's 2013, any semi-decent phone can be used to browse the internet.
I don't use twitter, facebook and other simillar stuff and I come here know what's going on with the game. But what seems to be most obvious place to look for MWO info - www.mwomercs.com is actually the last place that kind of info is posted. Many times not by the staff, but by players themselvs. See, there's a forum made especially for posting devs interviews, where last post has been started almost exactly a year ago.
#160
Posted 08 April 2013 - 02:01 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users