39 replies to this topic

[Grimmnyr]

Sorry PGI, but caving to whiners, and not making bug fixing your main priority ruins this game. Doubling armor on Lights and removing knockdown is just stupid and unbalanced. If these whiney morons want a more durable mech, make them buy a heavy or assault, don't buff lights.

Goodbye for now.

[Rebas Kradd]

I suppose you think the devs will gasp, drop their Raven models in horror and remorse, and dart to their code compilers muttering "Oh curse me, I never knew" after reading your post.

[stjobe]

Ed Steele, on 12 May 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

Sorry PGI, but caving to whiners, and not making bug fixing your main priority ruins this game. Doubling armor on Lights and removing knockdown is just stupid and unbalanced. If these whiney morons want a more durable mech, make them buy a heavy or assault, don't buff lights.

Goodbye for now.

Wow, you've got a long fuse man. Armour was doubled over a year ago, and knockdowns were removed prior to going open beta half a year ago.

[Tor6]

I for one think that lights should just fall over from CT damage if you so much as look in their general direction for a while, with no effort exerted.

Oh wait, that's called SSRMs.

Lights aren't really a problem anymore due to HST and Streaks being broken.

[Tahribator]

Goodbye. You won't be missed.

[MechWarrior849305]

Angry kid who couldn't kill single light with his assault? Coooool story

[Marcus Cvellus]

You know that every mech got double armor, right? And recently double internal HP?
So, i would say that lights got shorter end of the stick because when you double bigger numbers you get more....

[I am]

Rebas Kradd, on 12 May 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

I suppose you think the devs will gasp, drop their Raven models in horror and remorse, and dart to their code compilers muttering "Oh curse me, I never knew" after reading your post.

Perhaps not. But saying it until they respond seems necessary, and to date, has not sunk in. I'd say tell them with your wallets but, you guys jsut cant seem to resist buying every pink and poka-dotted hero mech they szhit out.

Edited by I am, 12 May 2013 - 04:22 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tahribator, on 12 May 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Goodbye. You won't be missed.

Everyone is missed in a free to play game.

Everyone.

This business model is pretty terrible to begin with, and loss of player-base from closed beta means you are losing players most likely to spend money.

[Rat of the Legion Vega]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 12 May 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

Everyone is missed in a free to play game.

Everyone.

This business model is pretty terrible to begin with, and loss of player-base from closed beta means you are losing players most likely to spend money.

Sorry, I really won't miss Assault mech player number 352,789,243 who hates light mechs. It's not like light mechs are hard to kill anymore. Quite the opposite.

As a remedy for this guy's light mech-itis, I prescribe that he plays 10 matches in the trial jenner to see how easy it is to kill assaults nowdays. Maybe he'd get a bit more respect for lights.
.

Edited by Rat of the Legion Vega, 12 May 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[Nauht]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 12 May 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

Everyone is missed in a free to play game.

Everyone.

This business model is pretty terrible to begin with, and loss of player-base from closed beta means you are losing players most likely to spend money.

So thats why every developers going f2p. So the reports of SWTOR doubling their revenue ever since going f2p was false, not to mention f2p saving LoTR and AoC. And I hear WoT is really a not for profit game too.

Just cos you don't like it doesn't mean it's a terrible choice. Terrible for us as consumers maybe but I'd much, much rather f2p right from the start then pay full price for a game only to have to pay for day 1 dlc or new maps dlc, or new weapons dlc.

At least with a game being advertised as f2p they're being honest about trying to get money from you.

Also there will always be loss of players as interests wax and wane, but there's also new players and returning players. Besides we don't have the data to say how the game is really going.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Nauht, on 12 May 2013 - 04:38 PM, said:

So thats why every developers going f2p. So the reports of SWTOR doubling their revenue ever since going f2p was false, not to mention f2p saving LoTR and AoC. And I hear WoT is really a not for profit game too.

Just cos you don't like it doesn't mean it's a terrible choice. Terrible for us as consumers maybe but I'd much, much rather f2p right from the start then pay full price for a game only to have to pay for day 1 dlc or new maps dlc, or new weapons dlc.

At least with a game being advertised as f2p they're being honest about trying to get money from you.

Also there will always be loss of players as interests wax and wane, but there's also new players and returning players. Besides we don't have the data to say how the game is really going.

SWTOR, AOC and LOTR were all developed as subscription based MMO's. They had people buying boxes and paying subscriptions before going F2P.

They are also games with persistent worlds.

Can't really compare.

There are maybe 2 or 3 F2P games you can really call successful (WoT is one of them).

As a whole though the business model is a total failure.

And due to the lack of constant revenue from subscriptions, retaining and earning new players is much more important.

You don't have the "box sale" retention that some games have, due to people not wanting to feel like they wasted $50.

So like I said. Every player is important.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 12 May 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[Lefty Lucy]

Rat of the Legion Vega, on 12 May 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

Sorry, I really won't miss Assault mech player number 352,789,243 who hates light mechs. It's not like light mechs are hard to kill anymore. Quite the opposite.

As a remedy for this guy's light mech-itis, I prescribe that he plays 10 matches in the trial jenner and see how easy it is to kill assaults nowdays.
.

Seriously. I was CT-2-shotted by a highlander earlier in my Jenner, and I ain't even mad.

[NRP]

I bought a Cicada because I drank a bit too much and it was on sale. I'm surprised at how fragile lights are. One or two ML grazes and my CT is basically gone. If you can't kill lights now, perhaps it is time to leave?

Edited by NRP, 12 May 2013 - 04:51 PM.

[Nauht]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 12 May 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

SWTOR, AOC and LOTR were all developed as subscription based MMO's. They had people buying boxes and paying subscriptions before going F2P.

They are also games with persistent worlds.

Can't really compare.

There are maybe 2 or 3 F2P games you can really call successful (WoT is one of them).

As a whole though the business model is a total failure.

And due to the lack of constant revenue from subscriptions, retaining and earning new players is much more important.

You don't have the "box sale" retention that some games have, due to people not wanting to feel like they wasted $50.

So like I said. Every player is important.

They failed when they had subscriptions. They didn't just suddenly say "oh wow, we've made so much cash now lets do the players a favour and go f2p". F2p saved their games.

And a game is a game is a game. Whether it be buying new mechs or swords or clothing if you're playing that game then you're playing.

So give me an example of a f2p failure.

Those were the big names I mentioned where f2p saved the developers and brought in cash for them to keep the game alive. There are lesser known games like the Lost World or something like that that started out as subscription, failed and are now alive because of f2p. Hell there's even talk of get ultimate granddaddy of them all, WoW considering f2p. Not likely but the fact that Blizzard are even considering it means there's something to the model worth considering.

Like I said just cos we don't like it doesn't mean it's a failure for the developers/publishers.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Nauht, on 12 May 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

They failed when they had subscriptions. They didn't just suddenly say "oh wow, we've made so much cash now lets do the players a favour and go f2p". F2p saved their games.

And a game is a game is a game. Whether it be buying new mechs or swords or clothing if you're playing that game then you're playing.

So give me an example of a f2p failure.

Those were the big names I mentioned where f2p saved the developers and brought in cash for them to keep the game alive. There are lesser known games like the Lost World or something like that that started out as subscription, failed and are now alive because of f2p. Hell there's even talk of get ultimate granddaddy of them all, WoW considering f2p. Not likely but the fact that Blizzard are even considering it means there's something to the model worth considering.

Like I said just cos we don't like it doesn't mean it's a failure for the developers/publishers.

I'm not about to bother scrubbing up the F2P failures. That's a silly thing to ask.

They went F2P to leech off their remaining player base, it's not as if these games are breaking records.

It's like the games that went onto the Sony Station pass.

Just more crap that couldn't cut it as a real game.

But whatever man, if you are cool with people leaving the game that's up to you.

I think EVERY player is important, and PGI should be doing their best to keep them around.

If you guys think this guy is quitting just because of light mechs, that's silly. There is always more to it than that

[Tennex]

somebody is mad about giant small stompy robots

[Nauht]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 12 May 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

I'm not about to bother scrubbing up the F2P failures. That's a silly thing to ask.

They went F2P to leech off their remaining player base, it's not as if these games are breaking records.

It's like the games that went onto the Sony Station pass.

Just more crap that couldn't cut it as a real game.

But whatever man, if you are cool with people leaving the game that's up to you.

I think EVERY player is important, and PGI should be doing their best to keep them around.

If you guys think this guy is quitting just because of light mechs, that's silly. There is always more to it than that

Rofl - ok, so you're just blowing hot air with no data or examples to back up your claims.

At least read the wiki on the f2p model or doing some research before making your claims, otherwise people might think you're trying to push an agenda or something. /snicker

And no not every customer is important. There are some that are outright hostile and detrimental to a company no matter what they do. As the adage goes - you can't please everybody.
So long as the majority are happy and the company is making money then that's all that matters to a company.

Ever since those games went f2p their profits have doubled or in LoTR tripled. That's a lot of leeching.

[Nauht]

EDIT: though I agree with your sentiments about the model. F2p does suck for us but unfortunately it's track record means we'll be seeing more and more games coming out as f2p.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tripling profits on a failing game. That's awesome.

And yes, I have some kind of agenda, go read my posts. My agenda is to be honest and straight forward.

Going and looking up 5 failed F2P games in google doesn't prove anything. Just like using SWTOR, LOTR and AOC as your examples of F2P successes doesn't prove anything (and in fact is stupid).

But to say F2P is some kind of gaming success story is just silly man.