659 replies to this topic

[New Day]

IqfishLP, on 15 June 2013 - 01:29 AM, said:

I read these forums every day and I know about every single mistake they ever made. I Even made a twitter account to get more information. And I still love this game.

Your choice, I still think that the game has been on a downward spiral since the CB. It's not bad but it could have been much better.

Edited by NamesAreStupid, 15 June 2013 - 05:17 AM.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

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

O rly?
Giving us 2 potential jumpsnipers (Quickdraw and Victor) to jumpsniper meta is a way to change meta yea...

[anonymous161]

Lonestar1771, on 14 June 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:

Heads up; the game is in trouble whether you want to realize it or not. Game developers don't make sweeping changes unless something isn't working. The only thing that has actually made it from the dev blogs to in-game, are the mechs.

They reneged on the coolant issue and 3pv. They haven't made a single major deadline. Still nothing to show for CW. Clans will be six months at the earliest after the final phase of CW (sure they said 90 days after but when have they ever made any self imposed deadline). They totally ruined any kind of pilot progression by ditching the trees and making lazy cookie-cutter pilot efficiencies where some don't even work properly.

They blamed closed beta testers for going open beta sooner. Beta fatigue my ***, could have just said they were out of money. Role warfare is non existent. Info warfare has so many band-**** they might as well just rip it out and start over. They have yet to get missiles of any variety working correctly. Don't even get me started on pilot modules...

The only thing that has gone right for them is the mech designs, cause God only knows the rest of the art is un-inspired, what with its three color palette. Thank God for bloom and color filters though.

I find it even more interesting that they have now devolved to blaming Crytek for their engine woes. Must be nice to never be wrong.

No surprise the game is in trouble didn't they have a hand in the Duke Nukem Forever game? The quality shows.

[Pando]

Vulkan, on 14 June 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

A wild pointlessaskthedevsdontgetanyactualanswersthread appeared!

Don't you all remember when approximately 5 questions were going to be answered......in large, long essay style format....and because of incessant whining from (YOU PUBLIK PEEPS) it was re-formed into short and sweet tons of questions with yes or no answers.

Thanks guys n' gals!

I remember how excited I was for 5 long form essay answers. Then, ruined by crybabys. No offence forum users. Just sayin'.

[Lokust Davion]

Tennex, on 14 June 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

LoL doesn't have a player counter dude. and hawken isn't even out of beta

World of Tanks, one of the most popular and successful f2p, has a player count. I'm on WoT SEA server right now and it shows 15,547 players are online.

[DSLow]

You are killing the game. Stop it, please.

Edited by DSLow, 15 June 2013 - 02:11 AM.

[New Day]

Pando, on 15 June 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

Don't you all remember when approximately 5 questions were going to be answered......in large, long essay style format....and because of incessant whining from (YOU PUBLIK PEEPS) it was re-formed into short and sweet tons of questions with yes or no answers.

Thanks guys n' gals!

I remember how excited I was for 5 long form essay answers. Then, ruined by crybabys. No offence forum users. Just sayin'.

It's mostly maybe, I don't know, I'll have to check and I will do a write up which never happens.

[Wieland]

Tennex, on 14 June 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

no other successful F2P games post player counts. they don't need to either

World of Tanks
Atleast they had a playercounter a year ago when i played it the last time.

[Iqfish]

There is a good reason to not show a player counter, because whenever the player numbers would go up or down everybody on this forum would judge the game after numbers. We already have Mathwarrior Online and I guess the devs dont want even more conspiracy on them.

[zgullz]

3PV it`s bad, very bad idea
it`s step to the arcade

Edited by zgullz, 15 June 2013 - 03:32 AM.

[Lokust Davion]

Wieland, on 15 June 2013 - 03:00 AM, said:

World of Tanks
Atleast they had a playercounter a year ago when i played it the last time.

they still do.

[littlelifter]

Bryan Ekman, on 14 June 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

littlelifter: Please could you make a special “headshot” notification and reward like “component destroyed” notification and reward?
A: It’s coming.

Hurray! Thanks for your answer!

To the audience:
People don't get mad and don't be cruel. There is one good proverb: "Сities are not built in a day"

[Leimrey]

IqfishLP, on 15 June 2013 - 03:19 AM, said:

There is a good reason to not show a player counter

Yeah, like hiding a pathetically small number of players, for example. If it is true, then adding 3PV might be PGI's desperate attempt at increasing the playerbase by reaching out to the arcade gaming crowd, except they don't understand that a lot of the core players will not stand for this, possibly decreasing their playerbase even more.

[CG Oglethorpe Kerensky]

Quote

Warge: Are any plans to encourage future 3PV players to use 1PV? Maybe slight XP or/and CB boost, that sort of things...
A: Probably not, however we’re going to emphasize that both view modes are essential to a well-rounded experience, with FPV being something that you use if you are a true sim-head.

So I am not a normal gamer but a 'Sim-Head', I am glad that PGI has a label for me and defines me as something other than mainstream gamer. I am apparently some sort of freak.

Quote

aniviron: You've stated in the past that you don't want to give players using third person view a competitive advantage by being able to see around corners, behind them, or in their far periphery. Do you have any concrete plans for how to do this? It seems like this will be an unavoidable side effect of having the camera located behind the mech, and it is the main reason that almost the entire forum is against having it in the game. You could assuage a lot of upset on the forums if you detailed how you are going to do this.
A: Once players get their hands on 3PV, I think most people will be pleasantly surprised how little the camera impacts gameplay. Early tests are showing that there is not much of an advantage. That being said, until we get this viewmode in the hands of 1000s of players, we’re not going to see how it fully gets used.

In your limited testing you have already identified that there is an advantage. While your testers haven't seen how advantageous it is, the community at large has a tendency to see little unintended flaws and turn them into game-breaking exploits.


I don't know what is worse, being referred to as some sort of odd 'sim-head' or the fact that you want to destroy your game by turning it into just another 3PV shooter.

Edited by CG Oglethorpe Kerensky, 15 June 2013 - 06:08 AM.

[Will HellFire]

Stop the crying babies. Man up. If you dont like this game, theres so many out there for you. Just dont fill our eyes with righteous whining.

Its all much easier: You have fun= you play. You dont have fun= you dont play. I dont understand people that dont play because they are angry at PGI though they still enjoy the game, and I dont understand those that do play without having fun.

Nobody took your money from you, but you gave it freely. If you feel you have been lied to, use better judgment next time around.

This is a game! Its free to play! If somebody had told you 15 years ago MWO was happening FOR FREE, how would you have felt?

[Lonestar1771]

Scarcer, on 14 June 2013 - 11:12 PM, said:

More hyperbole, assumtions.

Wooooh implementing a few new features are sweeping changes!

Wooooh I say the game is failing whether you like it or not because I disagree with something you do!

Wooooh the game sucks but PGI somehow magically is making money! Such a failure.

How about we start calling it improving the game, because all first iterations of any feature are going to be the roughest.

Hey at least my post has factual information, and the rest has been assumed from PGIs consistent track record with some of my personal opinion mixed. I can give a book to an *****, but I can't make him read it.

[Captain Katawa]

What other games?
Armored core is kind of console weeobu thing and heavy gear assault if far from being finished. Living Legends looks like it died before it's birth. Hawken Is tonally not what I want but it looks like PIGGY is going to turn MWO into Hawken.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Prosperity Park, on 14 June 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

I don't understand why you are disappointed about:

• 3PV being excluded from Mercenary Warfare
  
• Additional Info added to Item Descriptions in UI 2
  
• The fact that Lone Wolves will have their own Meta Game rewards, without having to swear loyalty a Faction
  
• The fact that a Large Mercenary Corp won't automatically be able to steamroll through the IS
  
• They plan on making manufacturer-specific weapon tweaks
  
• More significant bases to capture
  
• Base defenses
  
• Introduction of Tonnage Limits for certain gametypes
  
• Headshot notifications
  
• Adding the ability to see friendly loadouts
  
• Reduction of JJ Screen Shake to more acceptable levels
  
• Added Training Grounds functionalities
  
• and more upcoming changes with tournaments, Drop Modes, and info on the Test Server

I mean, if everything I just listed above causes you disappointment, then I am very sorry...

Might want to wipe your nose.

• Is 3PV excluded from CW in the same sense that 3PV was excluded in MWO?
  
• Additional Text? Yippie...a 2 second typing job.
  
• Lone Wolves, the game fillers was it ever in doubt they would get their own rewards..else..what would be the point..
  
• Large merc corps, This is possibly the most positive aspect.
  
• Manufacturer weapon tweaks - like they plan on collisions, and role warfare, and content.
  
• Base Capture/Defences - Should have been in from the start, this isn't good, this is sub par that it's taken this long.
  
• Tonnage - About time again, a feature that should have been in from the get go.
  
• Ability to see friendly loadouts - again it should have taken 12 months for this.

Prosperity Park, on 14 June 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

Public Response: I think it was a perfectly reasonable business decision to remove the Player Count; just look at how many people are judging the game's "viability" based on the player counter, alone.

Er...number of players = viability of the game period. Even a counter for number of unique log in's in the past 24 hours would work fine, a server activity graph.
Simple fact, they removed the player counter not because it's sensitive but because player numbers are low, and ever decreasing, it's painfully obvious just playing the game, and the failed to find matches that occur rather frequently.

Then again from your position, it must be difficult to see.

Edited by DV McKenna, 15 June 2013 - 04:46 AM.

[LtColClaymore]

they did not awsner mine and that was askeding friendly how it's going with themself
to bad

[Xeno Phalcon]

Bryan Ekman, on 14 June 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Warge: Are any plans to encourage future 3PV players to use 1PV? Maybe slight XP or/and CB boost, that sort of things...
A: Probably not, however we’re going to emphasize that both view modes are essential to a well-rounded experience, with FPV being something that you use if you are a true sim-head.

We stand on the precipice (cant believe I spelled that right) of what could be a dark road into the ghetto for MWO, if its some how essential that I play in 3PV to fully experience MWO I worry a lot for the future of this game.

Also if I find my Blackjack on cinderblocks I am going to be upset too.

Edited by Xeno Phalcon, 15 June 2013 - 05:02 AM.