140 replies to this topic

[BlackWiddow NZ]

I feel there are two sides to this post.

I agree that the game does currently have serious issues, BUT I also agree with Russ that the game is currently (last 3 patches) in the best state it has been in. Obviously there are issues like the HSR issues and boating PPC/Gauss as the win all combo. But look back...

Remember BlueWarrior Online (Previous heat vision)
Remember LRM warrior Online (LRM SuperBuff)
Remember StreakCatWarrior Online (Before ECM)
Remember BlindWarrior Online (Immediatly after ECM)
Remember CrashWarrior Online (Crash to Desktop phase)
Remember BugWarrior Online (HUD bugs everywhere)
Remember Remember the LagShield (Beofre HSR at all)
Remember RavenWarrior Online (Super OP Ravens)

So cummon guys, they have been doing things that we all have wanted, they have been working on things that were needed and made vast improvements on the game throughout beta. We as a community seem to be short sighted on what problems are facing us right now and forget the things they have done right.

Credit where credit is due, but the thing that I do have to include in this (Mostly) Pro PGI post is I am very disappointed in the state of the communication from PGI to the community. I feel that one person who dedicates them self to just giving us updates.
Even if PGI miss a deadline, miss a feature from a patch, introduce a bug, anything all the community wants is a small note left for us (Post it on these forums and link to it in twitter and facebook) on WHY and what is happening because of it. Not even a paragraph in most situations, just someone taking 5 min to write it up and let your community have a window looking in.

For example, this morning on the topic of the Sarah Jenner, a small post saying "We had a problem and it is delayed until next patch" would have done the trick rather than Garth positing it on twitter and everyone having to find it out that way.

But keep it up PGI, I have faith that you actually want a game that is of a quality that both you and the community will enjoy. Just please start talking AT if not TO us.

-BlackWiddow NZ

[Victor Morson]

While they have made some good moves, Blackwidow, this goes back to what we were saying about "Two steps forwards, three steps back." I could count all the things they way over nerfed and the list would be much longer than that; and could likely find examples of bad changes slightly more frequently than good since just before ECM got put in.

ECM is an interesting one, because it's been nerf'ed really, really hard and it's still not fun because the core system was bad to start with.

[Tekadept]

The biggest failing point is community involvement and the scattering of information definitely . Yes I remember all the fun eras you mentioned, yes they "eventually" "Fixed" them, however some of them required people on the forums chucking massive kiddy tantrums for them even to take notice and think they needed fixing (again this is all based on the feedback and information from PGI, perhaps it wasn't like this, but based on teh lack of feedback its all that i can assume), and the time it to for them to patch them let alone even address them was far longer then could have been for some of them.

With the last 3 patches being the "best state" I take it you are ignoring the last 2 just gone? HSR was working great, now its regressed back to a buggy POS requiring fixes, more lag overall.

I'm not a twit so your mention of the sarah post on twitter was my first of hearing about it, This is a prime example of the problem you are talking about.

[Valore]

Victor Morson, on 25 June 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

While they have made some good moves, Blackwidow, this goes back to what we were saying about "Two steps forwards, three steps back." I could count all the things they way over nerfed and the list would be much longer than that; and could likely find examples of bad changes slightly more frequently than good since just before ECM got put in.

ECM is an interesting one, because it's been nerf'ed really, really hard and it's still not fun because the core system was bad to start with.

I'd go with the traditional 2 steps forward, 1 step back, just because for those of us that have high ping, the HSR changes were really revolutionary.

Then the one step back was when hitreg issues suddenly spiked.

Fortunately on that end, Karl Berg seems to be quite happy to engage us on a semi-regular basis, which has really helped.

The rather halfarsed proposed fixes to boating and heat management are going to be a major step back if they don't think through it more carefully though.

[BlackWiddow NZ]

I agree that they can be heavy-handed with their nerfs, and yes I am ignoring the most recent HSR issues and taking a step back to look at the game as a whole rather than the "current meta" we are facing. But balancing must be done somehow and sometimes a big sweep of the brush can be what it needs in beta so they can balance it from another point of view. Little tweaks to damage and other components would indicate they were happy with how it performed, which was obviously not the case with the SuperLRMs and their insta-core. So there was a super-nerf and they have been rebuilding them from the ground up until now (Which is arguably the most balanced they have been in a long time, apart from their tenancy to still core opponents quickly.)

I also think that the 2 steps forward and 1 step back is a good analogy, since they are moving in the right direction (albeit slowly).

But the main point in my previous post that I would like to stress is the communication. The game is getting slowly better, but it also seems to plough on blind. A big black box which community forum support/suggestions/rage/complaints go in, and patches come out. I for one think we should have a little window to see the whirring gears inside, I am confident that I am not alone in this.

If it is not Garth, then why not someone else who they can re-allocate time enough to write a quick paragraph for us.

[Victor Morson]

Valore, on 25 June 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

I'd go with the traditional 2 steps forward, 1 step back, just because for those of us that have high ping, the HSR changes were really revolutionary.

I guess I feel the steps forwards are almost entirely tied to engine and net code stuff, while the steps back are almost every balance decision. Even the good ones feel like they were stumbled on.

(ED: Please don't nerf the SPL. It's actually a viable alternative to mediums on lights now, PGI. If you screw with pulse lasers, leave it alone!)

[repete]

Dr B00t, on 25 June 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

...new player comes in...buys like 50 bucks in stuff...plays for a while...gets bored and moves on...

Especially when the new player comes in and buys things you've already made, and established players are demanding you make new stuff.

[Lord Ikka]

While the way Russ responded lacks some tack, he is right that the current game level is the best it has been. Its not perfect, and there are definitely some serious issues, but they are not nearly as bad as some of the past issues have been.

[repete]

Roland, on 25 June 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

Without the ability to customize mechs, LL simply sidestepped the source of most balance issues. It's impossible to say that weapons balance was great, because you simply couldn't exploit issues with weapons balance. You couldn't take the best weapon and just boat the crap out of it.

A very interesting point indeed. Pointing out this single detail alone makes me think that comparisons of MWLL and MWO are chalk and cheese. When I asked in NGNG a while back how many people would have played MWO without 'Mech customisation, I think 80-90% of the people said "Yes". I'd fully imagine PGI would say customisation is a key pillar of the game, and it critical to the game's success, but I really do wonder how many people would play without 'Mech customisation. I think it wouldn't really be any different than current numbers, AND we wouldn't have the 8 large laser Hunchback epidemic we have at the moment*.

* Please note, we do not currently have an 8 large laser Hunchback epidemic at the moment.

[Tekadept]

See what happens when you question things

[Victor Morson]

Tekadept, on 25 June 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

See what happens when you question things

Clearly the best alternative if this isn't to be buried is to add links to this thread into other forums, or even profiles. I would do myself if I wasn't trying to keep the tournament link prominent, and will likely do so in the near future.

[repete]

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

While I agree i do like NGNG and what they are doing.

What i do find funny though is that he hosts of the podcast obviously KNOW the issues. I can HEAR them holding back the annoyance with the devs sometimes and not pressing a tender point too hard when the devs are on. They know they owe thier success to being so close to the devs so they cannot appear to be insulting them or questioning them.

Hmmm. Try pressing them outside of the podcast recording. In pressing Phil on issues a few weeks ago his response was:

"Nngggggg! The power of my positivity will outshine your negativity".

Cripes, it was just one notch away from "The power of Christ compels you".

He said "We've set out to do something positive here", and I pointed him towards this:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Optimism_bias

...Now he could of course respond with this:

http://en.wikipedia....Negativity_bias

...but I do consider myself 'objective' since I try to cite facts to back myself up, as opposed to just saying "I want good outcomes so I'm going to be positive about everything". Hell. I had someone tell me the other day "Your problem is you're being too objective". Dafuq?

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

I have heard on some of the non dev attended podcasts a very short discussion about convergence and boating being a problem but it was never pursued with any depth. They even have hardpoint limitation fans - cant remember which one but they certainly do not go down that path.

It must be difficult to hold your tongue like that - they are not journalists just fans though and cannot bit the hand that feeds them basically.

Access has a price. Just like behaving in the White House Press corps.

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Anyway, i am not an NGNG or PGI apologist but...

Something I find myself saying frequently.

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

...it highlights a problem when one of their main interactions with the community feels muzzled - just listen to some of the awkward silences and changes of topic and direction in some of the later podcasts, it is quite telling.

Awhile back (Around the mid-NGNG #50s or so) I had a word with Phil about the biased direction NGNG was heading in and his response after a long discussion was "I hear you. Thanks for the feedback", and I said "Objectivity is a hard road to walk" (Between being overly negative and overly positive). Since then NGNG is doing training and preview videos, and other things. I don't give them any blanket of objectivity now (And nor does anyone else when I have conducted polls in other forums). The Violent Combat Robot Show and Drop Command podcasts give you a very different view on MWO. Words get used like "It's ok" or "Not too bad" or "This bit is broken" will get used. Terms you DO NOT hear on NGNG any more.

[repete]

Tekadept, on 25 June 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

See what happens when you question things...

I'm waiting for the day when my account no longer works, and when I ask why I'm told:

"You were complaining so much in the forums, you're clearly not enjoying the game, so we've done you a favour and terminated your access".

[Waking One]

repete, on 25 June 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

A very interesting point indeed. Pointing out this single detail alone makes me think that comparisons of MWLL and MWO are chalk and cheese. When I asked in NGNG a while back how many people would have played MWO without 'Mech customisation, I think 80-90% of the people said "Yes". I'd fully imagine PGI would say customisation is a key pillar of the game, and it critical to the game's success, but I really do wonder how many people would play without 'Mech customisation. I think it wouldn't really be any different than current numbers, AND we wouldn't have the 8 large laser Hunchback epidemic we have at the moment*.

* Please note, we do not currently have an 8 large laser Hunchback epidemic at the moment.

Pretty sure no customization worked in LL only because it was a mod, and even then its population was tiny. Pretty much nobody i know in game would keep playing without customization.

[repete]

Valore, on 25 June 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

The rather halfarsed proposed fixes to boating and heat management are going to be a major step back if they don't think through it more carefully though.

I have been surprised at the detail of the proposed fix for boating. PGI have said previously they "hate arbitrary things which impact the game", yet basing a solution to boating around the number 6 because that's how many medium lasers the HBK-4P has in it's right torso (I think this was the reason cited by Garth around NGNG #73 or #75, but don't quote me on that). It did seem odd. I'd be curious to see the various range of available options to address boating. Curious, but certainly not something I would 'demand'.

Edited by repete, 25 June 2013 - 08:01 PM.

[repete]

Waking One, on 25 June 2013 - 07:51 PM, said:

Pretty sure no customization worked in LL only because it was a mod, and even then its population was tiny. Pretty much nobody i know in game would keep playing without customization.

Well. Like I said, in an NGNG podcast with about 50 or 60 (Maybe more), When I asked how many people would play without customisation I noticed approximately 25-30 replies, 80%-90% of whom said they would still play. Now is the NGNG audience representative of the whole MWO community? Certainly not. As a matter of fact, it represents a specific portion of the community (Those that care enough to listen to a podcast). But it IS a measure, as opposed to a guess. I'd bet you a fair whack of the community would still play if there was no customisation. But we'll probably never really know, so the point is moot.

[Taj the White Tiger]

Lol you guys realize jettisoning this thread really just proves the point of the OP

[Deathlike]

If you do not lick the feet of PGI, you get nowhere fast.

There's being objective, and there's complete indifference. NGNG has taken the latter to "keep PGI happy". Don't be surprised if people spammed them to not listen to NGNG anymore.. because it's not like I take them seriously either.

[Asmudius Heng]

repete, on 25 June 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Hmmm. Try pressing them outside of the podcast recording. In pressing Phil on issues a few weeks ago his response was:

"Nngggggg! The power of my positivity will outshine your negativity".

Cripes, it was just one notch away from "The power of Christ compels you".

He said "We've set out to do something positive here", and I pointed him towards this:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Optimism_bias

...Now he could of course respond with this:

http://en.wikipedia....Negativity_bias

...but I do consider myself 'objective' since I try to cite facts to back myself up, as opposed to just saying "I want good outcomes so I'm going to be positive about everything". Hell. I had someone tell me the other day "Your problem is you're being too objective". Dafuq?



Access has a price. Just like behaving in the White House Press corps.




Something I find myself saying frequently.



Awhile back (Around the mid-NGNG #50s or so) I had a word with Phil about the biased direction NGNG was heading in and his response after a long discussion was "I hear you. Thanks for the feedback", and I said "Objectivity is a hard road to walk" (Between being overly negative and overly positive). Since then NGNG is doing training and preview videos, and other things. I don't give them any blanket of objectivity now (And nor does anyone else when I have conducted polls in other forums). The Violent Combat Robot Show and Drop Command podcasts give you a very different view on MWO. Words get used like "It's ok" or "Not too bad" or "This bit is broken" will get used. Terms you DO NOT hear on NGNG any more.

I do have some sympathy for them and the position they are in, they genuinly care about battletech in all it's forms. I also appluade positivity in general, it is a much better way to engage people with ... but positivity blinding you to having constructive criticism is a bad thing for sure.

I also think they know if they step out of line in a personal message just once it will flood into this forum and they will lose thier PGI backing so I cannot imagine that what they say is actually what they feel sometimes. The tone of thier voice in some replies to the devs have me really thinking it is getting harder sometimes for them to keep that facade - but maybe i am being too optimistic of thier underlying objectivity

And this got jettisoned huh? interesting ...

[repete]

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

I do have some sympathy for them...

'ish.

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

...and the position they are in, they genuinly care about battletech in all it's forms

Agreed,

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

I also appluade positivity in general, it is a much better way to engage people with...

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

...but positivity blinding you to having constructive criticism is a bad thing for sure...

It's called delusion. But some people like it apparently.

Asmudius Heng, on 25 June 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

...And this got jettisoned huh? interesting...

I suspect that forum moderation is at the moderator's discretion. I can't see PGI having a policy or process which says "Anything less than positive gets jettisonned". I'd expect their mandate is "Keep the comms positive and on topic", and discretion is the measure applied.