659 replies to this topic

[hammerreborn]

White Bear 84, on 17 June 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

Well this is a thoroughly interesting conversation, i love teh good banter and a bit of QQ'ing... ...but...

MrTarget: Why ditch the Orion from June's update?
A: We wanted to offer a mech with a slightly different meta game.

It's really quite simple. You're focusing on JJ balancing patches for the month. Which mech do you go with? The one with no JJs, or the one with, for testing a beta?

InRev, on 17 June 2013 - 08:23 PM, said:

May I use a strawman? Just for fun? It's really hard to resist . . .

GAH I'm going to do it!

If my mother was murdered, I would eventually get over it. That still doesn't mean it should happen!

Wheeeew, I needed to get that out of my system.

Ya but the analogy should really be...

I was told my mother had cancer and had a while to live, but not forever. Then a year later, you mom died of cancer. You immediately scream why were you never told, you were promised she was immortal!

Then the doctor and all the other medical practitioners just shake their heads, and you call them the doctor defense force and insult them.

Edited by hammerreborn, 17 June 2013 - 08:48 PM.

[BlackBeltJones]

hammerreborn, on 17 June 2013 - 08:44 PM, said:

It's really quite simple. You're focusing on JJ balancing patches for the month. Which mech do you go with? The one with no JJs, or the one with, for testing a beta?

I dare say you actually make a good point. After reviewing the exact wording of the reply I appreciate the logic you present however you should appreciate how it was seen as a perpetuation of the current, highly criticized 'meta',

[InRev]

hammerreborn, on 17 June 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

Ya but the analogy should really be...

I was told my mother had cancer and had a while to live, but not forever. Then a year later, you mom died of cancer. You immediately scream why were you never told, you were promised she was immortal!

Then the doctor and all the other medical practitioners just shake their heads.

Strawmen aren't supposed to be good or equivalent analogies! That's what makes them dastardly and fun!

It's the "will he see through my shallow ruse?" element that gives them their excitement.

Or maybe I enjoyed my Logic class in University a bit too much . . .

[Scarcer]

CutterWolf, on 17 June 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

Ok, let's do that shall we? "These others" who are outside of our peripheral vision the ones that don't get on Facebook, Twiter and the MWO forums or if they do they don't post or vote. Why should "we" who do post and vote consider them at all since they have so little concern for this game that they can't even be bother to post their concerns (good or bad) or vote? Answer: We should not consider them at all. I know that sounds hard but you know what life is hard and if you don't stand up for yourself and voice your concerns then you get whatever those who do want. Why? Because we have no idea what they want and assuming what it is they want is a no go since "we", you and anyone else can make up whatever they want and claim it is the wants of this group outside of our peripheral vision.

So since you have already told us that you did not care to vote on 3PV you have no dog in this fight. You placed yourself in that very group outside of our peripheral vision which means now you can't voice your concerns over a clearly overwhelming vote for no 3PV. I'm sorry you want 3PV but if you really wanted it that bad then why did you not take the time to click the "yes" vote and aply the passion you have showen in this thread in that one back then?

I wont be bothering to write a thought out reply to this. You're just trying to make an excuse for your position by criticizing what ever position you assume I have. You'll have to go back 8-10 pages to find it. I'm not explaining it again.

What you just said means jack squat; it's completely immeasurable and full of assumptions. At least I got your attention and you're trying to put more thought into responses now.

I don't even use Facebook or Twitter. I like it from the horses mouth where I'm less likely to see outrageous headlines, 16 year olds & that people don't make emotional responses to. Regardless, you are entirely welcome to link me to the content I love being proved wrong; but hyperbole wont work on me.

Quote

Now on with player ques. Let's see now, we have 3PV view, 1PV view, and 1PV hardcore merc vs merc. So that's 3 gues, and then lets throw in NA & UK server splits so that's 3 ques per server that brings us up to 6. And then lets throw in the PUG game vs normal 3PV & 1PV 12v12 drops (non-merc vs merc games) thats another 2 ques per server. So let's see, that 10 total ques on average running. Anyone see an issue getting games? OOOp's forget about ELO and weighted drops into that mix that should making find games really fun!

This is what we fear, one view/game mode is going to win out over the other. PGI beleaves from their own statements that it will be 3PV So why should anyone at "this" time taking into account their known track record think for one min that CW will not end up in 3PV with the option to switch between 1PV and 3PV at anytime during the game? It only make since that this is what will happen since PGI has clearly stated that 3PV is where they fill will be their biggest player base. Why would they go threw all the trouble to making CW to limit it to the smallest player base which is what "they" think is true?

Think about it......................

I've already thought it through because I've already had this argument with the people who made the graphs; in the end it was quite pleasant and they understand me, I understand them.
At least you're presenting an argument without much fluff.

First though, half the people arguing against 3PV are saying that because it's popular to hate it, just like there if a boycott for the XBoxONE, with the silly comments that only amount to 'screw 3PV, COD players are going to get an unfair advantage,' or acting like 'Normals' will be 3PV only. Then there are those who use the logic regarding player-base segregation etc.

Okay, yes the qeues will be split. That can't be helped. Furthermore, the game will already be segregated 6-10 times due to clans, houses and merc units. 3PV will divide that again. It's not going to be a '3PV' game, its going to be a game with 3PV. Hardcore = Core Gameplay = 1PV (How it's meant to be), depends on how you look at it.

I see 2 possible scenarios.

First possibly PGI introduces 3PV, like they claimed it will be a good experience, it is implemented well, and the community will see there is nothing to complain about after all. The experience is good and the player-base thrives after launch with PR in full force. Rough core game-play elements are finally in the game, and with the dev team less segregated on developing sub-projects they can focus more on refinement. They have gotten a little better at communicating lately. (This is one of the things you fail to take into consideration making it an incomplete argument.)

Also half of the game-play imbalance like weak ECM, missiles, low heat PPC's wouldn't of happened if PGI Had NOT caved in on community complaints and left things alone while simultaneously introducing new features. The changes stack up on each-other and compound the issues. Missiles, ECM, Improved AMS, Seismic sensor, easier to manage heat, etc.

The second possibility is that the naysayers are right, and I'll say oh well, play occasionally and probably move on to something else.

Edited by Scarcer, 17 June 2013 - 09:06 PM.

[CutterWolf]

Scarcer, on 17 June 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

I wont be bothering to write a thought out reply to this. You're just trying to make an excuse for your position by criticizing what ever position you assume I have. You'll have to go back 8-10 pages to find it. I'm not explaining it again.

What you just said means jack squat; it's completely immeasurable and full of assumptions.



I've already thought it through because I've already had this argument with the people who made the graphs; in the end it was quite pleasant and they understand me, I understand them.
At least you're presenting an argument without much fluff.

First though, half the people arguing against 3PV are saying that because it's popular to hate it, just like there if a boycott for the XBoxONE, with the silly comments that only amount to 'screw 3PV, COD players are going to get an unfair advantage,' or acting like 'Normals' will be 3PV only. Then there are those who use the logic regarding player-base segregation etc.

Okay, yes the qeues will be split. That can't be helped. Furthermore, the game will already be segregated 6-10 times due to clans, houses and merc units. 3PV will divide that again. It's not going to be a '3PV' game, its going to be a game with 3PV. Hardcore = Core Gameplay = 1PV (How it's meant to be), depends on how you look at it.

I see 2 possible scenarios.

First possibly PGI introduces 3PV, like they claimed it will be a good experience, it is implemented well, and the community will see there is nothing to complain about after all. The experience is good and the player-base thrives after launch with PR in full force. Rough core game-play elements are finally in the game, and with the dev team less segregated on developing sub-projects they can focus more on refinement. They have gotten a little better at communicating lately. (This is one of the things you fail to take into consideration making it an incomplete argument.)

Also half of the game-play imbalance like weak ECM, missiles, low heat PPC's wouldn't of happened if PGI Had NOT caved in on community complaints and left things alone while simultaneously introducing new features. The changes stack up on each-other and compound the issues. Missiles, ECM, Improved AMS, Seismic sensor, easier to manage heat, etc.

The second possibility is that the naysayers are right, and I'll say oh well, play occasionally and probably move on to something else.

LOL nice try, did you or did you not say you did not vote? A simple yes or no will do. But let me save you the time you said you "did not vote". So bye bye you can move a long now Nice reply on the rest thow, but they "can" avoid some of the split by not spliting up NA & UA and maybe even Aisa servers and use a globa account which they don't want for whatever reason.

Edited by CutterWolf, 17 June 2013 - 09:15 PM.

[Scarcer]

CutterWolf, on 17 June 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

LOL nice try, did you or did you not say you did not vote? A simple yes or no will do. But let me save you the time you said you "did not vote". So bye bye you can move a long now Nice reply on the rest thow, but the "can" avoid some of the split by not spliting up NA & UA and maybe even Aisa servers and use a globa account which they don't want for whatever reason.

GOSH! Why make me repeat myself! No I did not Vote. Gosh it matters so dang much with Bush's fourth term and all, all my fault.

Eh sure, I see the point, though I'm sure they would appreciate less lag; I can't say because it hasn't been implemented. Profile migration, server hopping in the future? PGI likes to change their mind after all.

But noo don't go! I'm disappointed. Hurt, and lonely now. I automatically lost as soon as you said "LOL nice try,...So bye bye you can move a long now "

so vulnerable...

PS... you're still ignoring the entire possibility of the player actually increasing. But no one knows what will happen because it hasn't actually happened yet.
Except me, I have a time machine... NO SPOILERS

Edited by Scarcer, 17 June 2013 - 09:19 PM.

[InRev]

Scarcer, on 17 June 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

Except me, I have a time machine... NO SPOILERS

[Scarcer]

InRev, on 17 June 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

BEST REPLY EVER

Awe he loves me

Edited by Scarcer, 17 June 2013 - 09:27 PM.

[Lord Rip]

Scarcer, on 17 June 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

GOSH! Why make me repeat myself! No I did not Vote. Gosh it matters so dang much with Bush's fourth term and all, all my fault.

Eh sure, I see the point, though I'm sure they would appreciate less lag; I can't say because it hasn't been implemented. Profile migration, server hopping in the future? PGI likes to change their mind after all.

But noo don't go! I'm disappointed. Hurt, and lonely now. I automatically lost as soon as you said "LOL nice try,...So bye bye you can move a long now "

so vulnerable...

PS... you're still ignoring the entire possibility of the player actually increasing. But no one knows what will happen because it hasn't actually happened yet.
Except me, I have a time machine... NO SPOILERS

The is this guy that you are starting to remind me of....DANG can't remember his name.

Quick someone remind me.

[CutterWolf]

Scarcer, on 17 June 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

GOSH! Why make me repeat myself! No I did not Vote. Gosh it matters so dang much with Bush's fourth term and all, all my fault.

Eh sure, I see the point, though I'm sure they would appreciate less lag; I can't say because it hasn't been implemented. Profile migration, server hopping in the future? PGI likes to change their mind after all.

But noo don't go! I'm disappointed. Hurt, and lonely now. I automatically lost as soon as you said "LOL nice try,...So bye bye you can move a long now "

so vulnerable...

PS... you're still ignoring the entire possibility of the player actually increasing. But no one knows what will happen because it hasn't actually happened yet.
Except me, I have a time machine... NO SPOILERS

LOL! Well at least you know problem so you can fix it And nope not ignoring a possibility of an increase at all. What I'am saying is that increase could swing the game into a full time mix of 3PV and 1PV. After all PGI claims 3PV is where the major player base will be.

Come on, you can show the SPOILERS

[Lyoto Machida]

OvenRude, on 14 June 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

Well given that this game relies on players to pay the bills, player count is a pretty valid rough estimator of how well the game is doing. More players online = more potential item sales for PGI = more money for PGI. How is that invalid? I run e-commerce sites for a living, and trust me, how many people visit your website is a valid way of telling how well you're doing. More visitors at a rough conversion rate of 2-10% whatever the case may be....more people....more sales....more mooohhlllaah.

If the player counts were super high, they would be publishing those numbers all over the place.

I should note, that when you as a business are not transparent, people begin to not trust you.

Is your name a boating reference?

[Sug]

hammerreborn, on 17 June 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

Ya but the analogy should really be...

I was told my mother had cancer and had a while to live, but not forever. Then a year later, you mom died of cancer. You immediately scream why were you never told, you were promised she was immortal!

Then the doctor and all the other medical practitioners just shake their heads, and you call them the doctor defense force and insult them.

No the analogy is...

You were told your mother might need to get tested for cancer sometime in the future because she maybe might perhaps develop cancer at some point perchance.

Then a year later, without a test, the doctors tell you she has terminal cancer. You immediately scream "WHY!?"

Edited by Sug, 17 June 2013 - 09:59 PM.

[White Bear 84]

Sug, on 17 June 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

No the analogy is...

You were told your mother might need to get tested for cancer sometime in the future because she maybe might perhaps develop cancer at some point perchance.

Then a year later, without a test, the doctors tell you she has terminal cancer. You immediately scream "WHY!?"

In the light of recent posted events, is it even appropriate discussing cancer as an analogy?? I know the posters are looking for analogies or whatever but may be a bit wiser and more sensitive to find something more appropriate to use...

Edited by White Bear 84, 17 June 2013 - 10:15 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Coolant, on 17 June 2013 - 07:33 PM, said:

Oops, how come you didn't highlight the, "we will investigage 3rd person in the far off distance..." - post was back in july, almost a year ago....3rd person still not in the game and probably won't till a full year has past since that post.

Well, 90 days after Open Beta, we'll release Community Warfare, was another goal.

Here we are, several months later, and we still don't have Community Warfare. But we hear that the far-future-project of 3rd person might be come into testing before CW.

Well, **** happens, schedules get wrecked. Still, it doesn't really fit nicely together.

I guess PGI schedules are basically like science fiction. Science Fiction also promised me flying cars 10 years ago, PGI promised CW and role warfare by now...

[Oderint dum Metuant]

You guy's still arguing over this?

It's simple.

1st Person Only was PGI's position Last Year.

1st Person and 3rd Person are PGI's position This Year.

3rd Person Only is PGI's position ............................

Ie: They'll do whatever they want, sell ideas, change their minds to sell new ideas because they have no overall concept for the game and where it is going.

End of story.

[jozkhan]

woah! Hold up here a sec and let me get this straight...

Everyone who is playing still - they are the 'hardcore' weird first person players and soon-to-be-minority - right?

Because there was a vote a while back that went 3000+ to about 150 against 3rd person view...

But was discounted because this massive non-forum using, non-voting, non-playing silent majority want 3rd person view and are soon to magically arrive and start playing this game? right?

Bear in mind that try as I might I cannot get any of my gamer friends from LOL, Steam etc to even try this game due to the bad rep it has, even when I say hey its worth a try pretty please etc (and the few that did didnt stick around)... sudden announcement of 3rd person isnt gonna bring any significant player base to this game, no sudden exodus from World of Tanks I'm afraid.

We (you know: the players) WE ARE YOUR PLAYER BASE and you are stuck with us, any imagined 'surge' you think you will get at launch after over a year of Beta is going to be 10-20% at most (and you wont retain that).

There is no imaginary 3rd person dreamland majority of players coming to save you. As far as your sensitive player numbers go you have already launched. The peak is behind you now and you need to start earning that goodwill back as you have a better chance at recovering players you have lost than capturing a mythical surge of new players now.

Edited by jozkhan, 18 June 2013 - 02:25 AM.

[Tolkien]

jozkhan, on 18 June 2013 - 02:23 AM, said:

woah! Hold up here a sec and let me get this straight...

Everyone who is playing still - they are the 'hardcore' weird first person players and soon-to-be-minority - right?

Because there was a vote a while back that went 3000+ to about 150 against 3rd person view...

But was discounted because this massive non-forum using, non-voting, non-playing silent majority want 3rd person view and are soon to magically arrive and start playing this game? right?

Bear in mind that try as I might I cannot get any of my gamer friends from LOL, Steam etc to even try this game due to the bad rep it has, even when I say hey its worth a try pretty please etc (and the few that did didnt stick around)... sudden announcement of 3rd person isnt gonna bring any significant player base to this game, no sudden exodus from World of Tanks I'm afraid.

We (you know: the players) WE ARE YOUR PLAYER BASE and you are stuck with us, any imagined 'surge' you think you will get at launch after over a year of Beta is going to be 10-20% at most (and you wont retain that).

There is no imaginary 3rd person dreamland majority of players coming to save you. As far as your sensitive player numbers go you have already launched. The peak is behind you now and you need to start earning that goodwill back as you have a better chance at recovering players you have lost than capturing a mythical surge of new players now.

Your sentiment is backed up by the Xfire stats: http://www.xfire.com/games/mwo

Back in January that number averaged around 120 or 140, now it is below 100. While Xfire is at best an imperfect subsection of the gaming community it is still something like 200,000 gamers, and that trend is ignored at the peril of the project.

I think we have all seen microcosms of this play out on our friends lists and it's worrisome that we are 90 days past the 90 day community warfare selling point and the development team is ignoring a 3000:150 poll about what their remaining community wants with respect to superfluous features like 3rd person view.

Do us a favor and defer 3rd person view until zoom is fixed. If you can figure out how to put the camera behind a mech, can you not put it closer to the target....

Edited by Tolkien, 18 June 2013 - 03:17 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Here's one scenario:

it doesn't matter if all the hardcore players go. If they even do that, which still remains to be seen, a lot of us just want our battletech flavored Stompy Robot games with fancy graphics and can swallow a lot.

What matters is attracting new players, because the current community is not sufficient, and it doesn't look like you can recruit more hardcore Battletech fans to the game as we already have.

If 3PV costs some hardcores, so be it, if the only alternative is to cancel the game because hardcore gamers aren't enough, there is no alternative.

Maybe that's pessimistic. Maybe the game could function with the hardcores alone. Maybe they're not even identifying what would really attract new players correctly. Maybe there is just someone greedy at IGP that believes the game can even make more money, even if it could be perfectly profitable as it is.

[carl kerensky]

Rebas Kradd, on 17 June 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

The hardcore, sim-purist sect of an already relatively small player base is not going to be enough to support any game.

WRONG. Let me clarify I'm not a sim purist. I'm not asking for a thousand controls to pilot a Mech. What I'm asking for is to visually immerse me into the game. Its quite simple. PGI has to create REALISM...yes realism within the context of Battletech.
How is realism achieved? It has to be done graphically. The way the mechs move is vitally important. How they interact with ground and environment is so important. Weapon effects and destruction play a big role in that. Its the very small things that immerse you into a game. Mechwarrior 2 had some pretty decent graphics but it excelled at how you felt like you were piloting the thing. It wasn't overly sim it just felt right. MWO is going backwards IMO. The physics of the game is being reduced which leads to loss of immersive game play. It becomes just another generic FPS shooter. I ll bet you dollar to donuts that if PGI were to solidify the realism part the game play balance would work itself out and the audience wouldn't be prone to jump ship at the drop of a game play change.

Ck

[Deathlike]

MustrumRidcully, on 18 June 2013 - 01:20 AM, said:

Well, 90 days after Open Beta, we'll release Community Warfare, was another goal.

Here we are, several months later, and we still don't have Community Warfare. But we hear that the far-future-project of 3rd person might be come into testing before CW.

Well, **** happens, schedules get wrecked. Still, it doesn't really fit nicely together.

I guess PGI schedules are basically like science fiction. Science Fiction also promised me flying cars 10 years ago, PGI promised CW and role warfare by now...

I like Science Fiction. That's why big stompy robots are cool.

With that said, I hate being part of the "fiction" that is called "progress" in this game.