Jump to content

Ask The Devs 36 - Answers!


283 replies to this topic

#21 Bagheera

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,920 posts
  • LocationStrong and Pretty

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:00 PM

View PostNicholas Carlyle, on 19 April 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:


I don't think you will like the clarification. I read that one a few times, and unless he really misspoke, we will not be able to change the borders.

Which I kind of suspected...because inevitably one of the houses is going to be the weak one and get owned.


I don't think I will like it either, but I am trying to remain objective. Frankly, "controlling a front" and "unable to directly affect borders" sound mutually exclusive to me.

I'm sure you can guess by my house tag that ForgoneConclusionWarrior:Online is not what I am looking for out of Comminity Warfare.

Edited by Bagheera, 19 April 2013 - 04:00 PM.


#22 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:03 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 19 April 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:


Pakidis79: It has been mentioned before that around the time of the Highlander's release that collisions would be turned back on. Since the introduction of Heavy Metal, is there a more definitive time for collisions now?
A: Not sure who said that. Collisions will come after Launch.


You did, Mr Ekman, you did.

View PostBryan Ekman, on 22 February 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

Chunkylad: Will the Highlander when released be featured with one of its signature bonuses: jump jetting and landing on light mechs? Is the Highlander the face of reintegration of collisions into the game?
A: Close. If all goes well, that would be about the time collisions could make it back into the game.


#23 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:05 PM

View PostKrzysztof z Bagien, on 19 April 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:


You did, Mr Ekman, you did.


LOL

That was better than I could ever have imagined.

#24 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 25,812 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:05 PM

This ATD in a nutshell:

"No plans. No ETA. We're not ready to discuss it yet."

#25 shintakie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 886 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:07 PM

View PostKrzysztof z Bagien, on 19 April 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:


You did, Mr Ekman, you did.


Dood. Obviously his account was hacked and that wasn't actually him sayin it.

#26 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:07 PM

View Postshintakie, on 19 April 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:


Dood. Obviously his account was hacked and that wasn't actually him sayin it.


I heard that he was misquoted by himself. And that he took his answer out of context.

#27 Tekadept

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,290 posts
  • LocationPerth, Australia

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:09 PM

I really have to stop reading the ATD answers, each time I do i just get that little bit more depressed.

#28 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:12 PM

View PostNicholas Carlyle, on 19 April 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:


I don't think you will like the clarification. I read that one a few times, and unless he really misspoke, we will not be able to change the borders.

Which I kind of suspected...because inevitably one of the houses is going to be the weak one and get owned.

Yup.

You won't see borders significantly change, because they cannot allow houses to be weakened beyond a point as it doesn't lead to good gameplay. Individual non-essential planets will change hands, but major borders won't move much.

The reality is that a large persistent map introduces a lot of issues with "The Strong Get Stronger and the Weak Get Weaker" - the factions doing better will see players moving over to their side, and fleeing the losing factions, which just exacerbates the problem.

They've got to design the system in such a way that being on a losing faction isn't terribly depressing. And, yes, before people get all up in arms with there "I love to be the underdog!" while some people do like that, the majority certainly do not. Look at the history of most PvP games with cross server battlegroups, and how that often develops.

View PostNicholas Carlyle, on 19 April 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:


I heard that he was misquoted by himself. And that he took his answer out of context.


I don't have an axe to grind here, but really this was quite lol-worthy.

#29 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:13 PM

This is why I think in the end they should have let the players run their own CW's using tools provided by PGI.

Then you could have multiple CW's going. And the impact in one CW wouldn't mess up the other's.

Would allow for actual changes to happen.

#30 Purplefluffybunny

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:13 PM

Sybreed said:


Let's say A LOT.

Seems like I should stop playing this game now and only come back in September...

Dear god, features are either developping at a slower pace than expected (collisions), or they've simply been completely shelved (ammo types).

I mean, the game is fun and all, but it's hard to stay really interested when most of the recent changes don't affect me (consumables) or simply **** me off. Seems like the devs aren't interested in making the MG, flamer and LB-X into decent weapons either...

Le Sigh...


I would say that some features and other limitations have been beyond PGI's technical capacity to solve. Perhaps this is why we have seen a series of recruitment drives. Time will tell but I do worry that significant portions of the playerbase will tire and drop MWO for something else. The fact that the game is expensive too, should you decide to buy anything, will add to this possible trend.

#31 shintakie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 886 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:14 PM

View PostTekadept, on 19 April 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

I really have to stop reading the ATD answers, each time I do i just get that little bit more depressed.


Just turn it into a drinkin game.

Every time "No ETA" is said, take a drink.
Every time "No plans" is said, take a drink.
Every time they repeat the answer for a question they already answered in a earlier ATD, take a drink. If they answer the same question twice or more in the same ATD, take 2 drinks for every repeat.
Every time they blatantly make somethin up (6 MG spiders, 3 second Jenners, nobody sayin collisions would be back soon), take a drink.

#32 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:14 PM

View PostNicholas Carlyle, on 19 April 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

I heard that he was misquoted by himself. And that he took his answer out of context.


You Sir, win 1 [one] internet with that!

#33 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:15 PM

View PostTekadept, on 19 April 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

I really have to stop reading the ATD answers, each time I do i just get that little bit more depressed.


While I appreciate the effort they put into ATD, sadly all the things they're willing to talk about have been asked. The first few were really awesome, but the latest ones just haven't been very interesting. I can't imagine anything new coming out before around launch(information wise), so we'll have another few months of No Plans/We Can't Discuss This Yet/Etc. The only new stuff we get coming up is going to be in patches, and won't be talked about until shortly before the patch/monthly updates.

I understand, though, that there's just not that much they can do about it. Things are as they are, and if they're not willing to talk more about major launch features (re: CW, Clans) now, they're not going to in two weeks either.

#34 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:16 PM

That's been my dream all along.

#35 TheJs

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 68 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:16 PM

Clan weapons in development? yay!

Public Test Servers in 30-60 days? Isn't the current servers we are playing on the public test servers. Isn't that what all this 'open beta' business is about?

#36 shintakie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 886 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:21 PM

View PostTheJs, on 19 April 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

Clan weapons in development? yay!

Public Test Servers in 30-60 days? Isn't the current servers we are playing on the public test servers. Isn't that what all this 'open beta' business is about?


So we have a beta in our beta now?

Huh.

Edited by shintakie, 19 April 2013 - 04:30 PM.


#37 Aicarg

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 129 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:21 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 19 April 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:


Pakidis79: It has been mentioned before that around the time of the Highlander's release that collisions would be turned back on. Since the introduction of Heavy Metal, is there a more definitive time for collisions now?
A: Not sure who said that. Collisions will come after Launch.


No more money on mc's or premium time until after the launch ...

#38 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 25,812 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:21 PM

View Postshintakie, on 19 April 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:


So we have a beta in our beta now?

Huh.

I wont complain about that too much though. Perhaps the inclusion of a PTR will bring about more rapid balance changes so that we don't have to wait 8 months for weapons to stop suckin.

We have to go deeper.

We need a beta in a beta in a beta.

#39 Purplefluffybunny

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:22 PM

View PostTheJs, on 19 April 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

Clan weapons in development? yay!

Public Test Servers in 30-60 days? Isn't the current servers we are playing on the public test servers. Isn't that what all this 'open beta' business is about?


Hahahaha...sorry, hahahaa.

More seriously, the game has been released. They only call it a beta to deflect criticism that the game was not ready for release. There has always been other test groups and other servers where a chosen few test new features before they go onto the live server.

Edited by Purplefluffybunny, 19 April 2013 - 04:23 PM.


#40 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 19 April 2013 - 04:22 PM

View Postshintakie, on 19 April 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:


So we have a beta in our beta now?

Huh.

I wont complain about that too much though. Perhaps the inclusion of a PTR will bring about more rapid balance changes so that we don't have to wait 8 months for weapons to stop suckin.


This is honestly all the proof i need to say this isn't considered a beta by them anymore. Having a public test server during a beta is the definition of redundant.

I think the best thing we could do is ALL of us play on the test server at all times. Since, we are suppose to be beta testing anyway.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users