342 replies to this topic

[Zeus X]

I like this, it works well.

[N0MAD]

So what you are saying PGI is that you want to cash in on others work ? you want to cash in on the 3rd party leagues that kept MW2-3-4 alive long after the games themselves had become obsolete. The leagues themselves were the ones that recruited the players that thought the games were shallow with little or no content and made them avid MW fans bringing in friends and new players to an interesting and competitive MW universe. Consider this IF you had given MWO the game lobby it desperately needs and Third party leagues were now in place and growing I would bet my left ******** you would have twice the number of active players you currently have buying your colors and hero mechs bugs and all. I dare you to prove me wrong. To make people wanting to play these Leagues pay for premium will bring you in some $ but it will be from the dedicated MW fan base not the new player AND by your own words we are not your target audience the new players are. So by my understanding you want the Loyal Veteran MW community to finance a game which you are screwing up with features that are driving them away but supposedly bringing in new players. I can see how that's going to work out for you.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

N0MAD, on 08 April 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

So what you are saying PGI is that you want to cash in on others work ? you want to cash in on the 3rd party leagues that kept MW2-3-4 alive long after the games themselves had become obsolete. The leagues themselves were the ones that recruited the players that thought the games were shallow with little or no content and made them avid MW fans bringing in friends and new players to an interesting and competitive MW universe. Consider this IF you had given MWO the game lobby it desperately needs and Third party leagues were now in place and growing I would bet my left ******** you would have twice the number of active players you currently have buying your colors and hero mechs bugs and all. I dare you to prove me wrong. To make people wanting to play these Leagues pay for premium will bring you in some $ but it will be from the dedicated MW fan base not the new player AND by your own words we are not your target audience the new players are. So by my understanding you want the Loyal Veteran MW community to finance a game which you are screwing up with features that are driving them away but supposedly bringing in new players. I can see how that's going to work out for you.

While I would choose to use more paragraphing...this is spot on.

They are TOTALLY missing out on a huge resource, they could have done this game in such a way that the players would pay for and do the hard work of running CW.

And they'd have more people playing now.

[Slater01]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 08 April 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

While I would choose to use more paragraphing...this is spot on.

LOL
I didn't read it because of that. Good for letting him know.

Its not what you say, its how you say it

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

First and foremost ... @Bryan ... thanks for the clarification ... I can't wait to see the upcoming Command Chair posts.

Please keep communicating with us ... we want the game to be great, and we signed up to help you get there.

...

Now, this is the moment I've been waiting for: when the "competitive" "private match" players find out that "Community Warfare" is not tournements ... when they find out that MW:O is not about their team, but something bigger ... when they find out that if they want to play private matches, that either they will get no XP or C-Bill rewards (which I think would be appropriate) or they will have to pay (which makes perfect sense), or both.

If you could download the game (for free), grind up the C-Bills to get any mech you want (for free), and play team vs. team with who you want, when you want (for free), instead of participating in the greater Inner Sphere House vs. House (and later Clan Invasion) timeline, what return does PGI get for the service they will be providing you?

[RoboPatton]

Not sure what all the hub-bub is about. I see legitimacy in the fear of alienating future players, by barring them from certain features. I can't complain, I always play with premium because I believe in the game and I want it to succeed (thanks for the 30 day sale this wk end, just purchased two more months of prem).

I'd like to threaten, with violence, the people who threatened you, with violence, but I'm pretty sure that's against regulations, so I won't.

[Mitchpate]

N0MAD, on 08 April 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

Consider this IF you had given MWO the game lobby it desperately needs and Third party leagues were now in place and growing I would bet my left ******** you would have twice the number of active players you currently have

The fascinating thing is that new leagues are cropping up and old ones being refreshed despite the high level of uncertainty as to whether or not there's a place for them in this game over the long-term.

What made the online aspect of previous mechwarrior games so popular was the freedom these games gave the community to innovate and expand. To remove that freedom is to thrust the franchise into unknown territory and the last time a developer did that we got MechAssault.

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 08 April 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

what return does PGI get for the service they will be providing you?

Nothing? This is a free to play which means the majority of players are going to play for free. What PGI has to do is entice us to become paying players and charging for features that the previous 3 games in the franchise made freely available isn't the best way to do that.

Edited by Mitchpate, 08 April 2013 - 05:06 PM.

[Krzysztof z Bagien]

Slater01, on 08 April 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

Commercial Break / Reklama

Why in Polish?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Hungry Hungry Hobo, on 08 April 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

Sorry to hear you guys had to deal wtih some crazy people.

Yeah, crazy like stalking twitter/youtube accounts?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

von Pilsner, on 08 April 2013 - 10:24 AM, said:

Good to see you take some responsibility rather than just blame the interviewer.

I thought that too

[N0MAD]

Actually I have a new recent problem while posting here..I hit the Enter key to drop into a new line/paragraph but it wont. Is it a setting or something? Hitting the Enter key has no effect.

[Jackie Butters]

Hot, +1 for CW ... Yes there are, and always will be fools, (read r3tards), who act "type" without thinking, but threats are too far. .... Now I have a question. Did you enjoy your vacation?

MWO

Edited by Jackie Butters, 08 April 2013 - 05:27 PM.

[Mystere]

Darkfire66, on 08 April 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

Just ban people who made threats and suck it up. You make choices that make people that angry, you have to wonder if you are making the right choices.

Wrong developer choices on a video game justifies threats of physical violence?

[Jason1138]

not sure what you can really base on this since they explicitly said "no coolant flush, ever" and we got it anyway

guess we'll see though

[Jason1138]

Mystere, on 08 April 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

Wrong developer choices on a video game justifies threats of physical violence?

not saying its ok to threaten people but when people sink $120 into a video game with the expectation that it will be one thing and then the devs change what its going to be after taking the money, some people can't handle it and flip out

i think if there were a more liberal refund policy you would see less complaining. I'm not saying "make the return policy more liberal!", i'm just saying when people feel that they were misled into spending money and that they have no recourse, some of them lose their cool.

obviously 99% of people would never threaten someone over a video game but the devs of Space Command just threatened to beat up a customer the other day for asking them for a refund so i guess you get that 1% of crazies on both sides of the dev/customer dynamic

[Purplefluffybunny]

Threats against staff!?! Damn, sorry to hear that.

[Xander Pappyson]

So much bashing Ugh <sigh>....really?

PGI is not government funded. This isn't a charity project either. These are game makers who have chosen the path of programmer and 3D graphics artist to make a living. They need to make money to provide this product. All of you "free to play" players, PLEASE tell me how, HOW does PGI make money to provide us this product if it all must be free to us? How?

In truth "free to play" is a false primes. This game is not free to make so it can't be free to play. It can be mostly free to play and patterns and colors will only go so far. This is really a subscription based game with free to play aspects. If you see it any other way then this world OWES you a hell of a lot more than a free game. Everything should be giving to you freely with little effort on your part, Right?

No.

Also, "free to play" does not mean decision by communal forum council. It pain me, and those that I play with, deeply when PGI "caves" to what the forum "masses" cry for. It doesn't happen much (thank god) but it does happen.

"FREE to PLAYer" This isn't your game your not paying for it's development so quit with the QQ'ing already. You can't demand and change the course of something you don't OWN or haven't investedcapital in. Really?

For those of us that have paid for something we thought worth paying for, we invested in an idea we didn't by a chair on the council. Threatening hostile action to get ones way is ignoramus and primitive. If you are able to write on the forums you are above that. (<sigh> but apparently not)

It doesn't matter what I say we all have our opinion I just hope PGI keeps the open channels to the community even though we seem to bash them every time they give us something to chew on.

[Xander Pappyson]

Jason1138, on 08 April 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

not saying its ok to threaten people but when people sink $120 into a video game with the expectation that it will be one thing and then the devs change what its going to be after taking the money, some people can't handle it and flip out

i think if there were a more liberal refund policy you would see less complaining. I'm not saying "make the return policy more liberal!", i'm just saying when people feel that they were misled into spending money and that they have no recourse, some of them lose their cool.

obviously 99% of people would never threaten someone over a video game but the devs of Space Command just threatened to beat up a customer the other day for asking them for a refund so i guess you get that 1% of crazies on both sides of the dev/customer dynamic

We invested into a concept...not a fully developed game. We all had the option to invest or not, and the level at which to invest. We didn't buy part ownership so we have no real say. Think of it like a stock investment it might pay off, it might not. Either way you spent the money. Right? I think so.

[Purplefluffybunny]

Bryan Ekman, on 08 April 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

• If we decided to launch Private Matches, they will likely require a Premium Account to cover costs of hosting a match on our hardware.

I am glad you said that nothing is final. I have a worry on how this would be precisely done. If it is the case of every 'invited' player having to have a premium account, you run the risk of splitting parts of the player base, or at least playing on that fact to boost sales. Friends invite one another and are MORE likely to want private matches and if one or two do not have premium, they cannot access the social space. The driver for sales would play on people's social and emotional attachments? It would be a pay wall in a more truer sense than often used on these boards?


I hope this concern makes it to the edited version that the bosses see.

EDIT: I just realized that you, Bryan, said 'There is no pay wall here but there is indeed one over there' *points to private matches*

Edited by Purplefluffybunny, 08 April 2013 - 06:08 PM.

[Purplefluffybunny]

Prosperity Park, on 08 April 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

I knew that my time spent camping on that original Polygon response thread wasn't in vain!

See...? I told ya'll there might be a light at the end of the tunnel (that wasn't just an ERPPC bolt).

Much of the anger was at the fact that there was a pay wall. This is regardless of which particular gaming and social space was to be walled off. Consequently your valiant attempt was in vain, as Bryan says they are 'likely to require' and we all know how language is important, Bryan said so himself. Then again, we may not see that feature.