117 replies to this topic

[Nauht]

Huge, on 30 June 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

Same reason as you.

....

You mistake me - I don't love the game.

I play it to enjoy my spare time and easily the amount of money I've sunk into this has given me that return and more.

I'm too old and grizzled to take up crusades against games. Used to do it the past then got to a point where I realised all the ranting, forum posting about changes, imbalance, blah blah was really all for nothing in the end. A light just clicked and it dawned on me that I was getting frustrated over nothing and I'd be going to sleep seething that other forum posters didn't have the same view i had.

Well now I just play games to enjoy my free time and it's so much simpler and far more enjoyable.

Besides, even if I did "love" the game the way you do, your version of the game I might hate. So I don't envy game devs - they make great products for our enjoyment but along the way need to make some money out of it.

You can't please everybody.

I'm enjoying the game and if it were to die tomorrow I'd just be playing another game. It would be a shame not to pilot the Battlemaster but I suspect I'll get over it. I don't see MWO going anywhere soon.. at least another year but most probably more. That's a great return over a relatively small amount outlayed.

I bought Overlord because I can afford it and I still enjoy the game.

Anyway, that's all I have to say about it.

[Assiah]

Alistair Winter, on 30 June 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

How many Mechwarrior games have been released over the last 10 years? How many are likely to be released the next 10 years if this game dies shortly after its release?

People are saying that we should wait for PGI to deliver a good product before we pay, but since I stopped playing Mechwarrior 4, I have done my share of waiting for a promising Mechwarrior title. I want the series to stay alive, so I'm supporting PGI as a means to an end. I'm in this to keep Battletech alive in the video game format, not to help PGI or this game specifically.

Hexenhammer, on 30 June 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

That's a great idea. Lets totally boycott the Phoenix project. That will send a clear message to PGI to fix their game. It will also send a clear message to IGP that MWO is dead and the sooner they pull the plug on MWO the sooner we get back to playing Multiplayer BattleTech 3025.

I've noticed this argument come up a lot, and it really seems like a false dichotomy. The fixes needed for MWO to succeed are not that difficult, its just that PGI for some reason seems adverse to using them. They also seem adverse at keeping to time tables, promises, and often dismiss our worries and concerns with snark and trolling.

But if we keep paying into these kind of "deals" they will just keep that same attitude, but if we cut them off for a bit they might shape up and make the game we have all wanted. The game will only fail if PGI fails it, paying them to keep doing things you do not like will just mean they keep doing more of the same. I personally am holding off on purchasing this current grabdeal until I see some progess from PGI. They still have not talked about any good long term solutions to problems like boating, lack of diversity in the upper tiers of game play, community warfare, role warfare, ect. I could write a term paper on the multitude of issues in this game, and most of the issues are not hard to address, but PGI has yet to address many of these issues in an meaningful way. Until they do, my wallet is closed to them.

I understand you are worried about this game going under and never getting a mechwarrior game again, but that is not a good enough reason to keep feeding bad habits.

[Dudeman3k]

I also love MW.... but I loathe MWO. So many things should/could have been better. A lot better. The idea was there, but no real goal. Like i've said before, everything is already in the books. If you calculated dmg with a literal 10 second round with EVERY weapon, you wouldn't have to double the armor like they did (I.E. each PPC shot = 3.33 dmg per shot, 3 shots per 10 sec = 10dmg in one round). It would allow for original armor values, and less 2 second matches. Also, movement and fire is penalized, why not here? cockpit shake makes sense, why not 100% throttle shake? When was the last time you on purposely set your throttle to 60% to get consistent DPS on a guy?? never right? because it's either 100% or 0% all the time every time.

it has been just about 10 years since the last MW title.... but were grown men now, so what stopping us from trying our hand at making a MW title ourselves, using this game as a prime example of do's and donts?

[QuantumButler]

Dudeman3k, on 30 June 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

I also love MW.... but I loathe MWO. So many things should/could have been better. A lot better. The idea was there, but no real goal. Like i've said before, everything is already in the books. If you calculated dmg with a literal 10 second round with EVERY weapon, you wouldn't have to double the armor like they did (I.E. each PPC shot = 3.33 dmg per shot, 3 shots per 10 sec = 10dmg in one round). It would allow for original armor values, and less 2 second matches. Also, movement and fire is penalized, why not here? cockpit shake makes sense, why not 100% throttle shake? When was the last time you on purposely set your throttle to 60% to get consistent DPS on a guy?? never right? because it's either 100% or 0% all the time every time.

it has been just about 10 years since the last MW title.... but were grown men now, so what stopping us from trying our hand at making a MW title ourselves, using this game as a prime example of do's and donts?

See Heavy Gear Assault.

[AntharPrime]

Dudeman3k, on 30 June 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

it has been just about 10 years since the last MW title.... but were grown men now, so what stopping us from trying our hand at making a MW title ourselves, using this game as a prime example of do's and donts?

Um, the fact that PGI/IGP have the licence to make this game and you don't.

[Kibble]

Who helped develop Duke Nukem Forever? oh yeah.....PGI

Edited by Kibble, 30 June 2013 - 05:27 PM.

[Clasbyte]

Huge, on 30 June 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

Let me cue you in on a little history lesson. About a year ago MWO was just an idea.

The game was officially announced in July 2009. In May 2012, Piranha Games announced the start of closed beta testing for Mechwarrior Online. It was scheduled to enter Open Beta in early/mid October 2012. However, the date was pushed back due to stability and playability issues. Open Beta commenced on late October 2012. So it is not a project that was rushed out in just an year what by it self would have been an enormous accomplishment.

[Alistair Winter]

Assiah, on 30 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

I've noticed this argument come up a lot, and it really seems like a false dichotomy. The fixes needed for MWO to succeed are not that difficult, its just that PGI for some reason seems adverse to using them. They also seem adverse at keeping to time tables, promises, and often dismiss our worries and concerns with snark and trolling.

You need to explain how it's a false dichotomy. But I agree about PGI's flaws.

Assiah, on 30 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

But if we keep paying into these kind of "deals" they will just keep that same attitude, but if we cut them off for a bit they might shape up and make the game we have all wanted. The game will only fail if PGI fails it, paying them to keep doing things you do not like will just mean they keep doing more of the same. I personally am holding off on purchasing this current grabdeal until I see some progess from PGI. They still have not talked about any good long term solutions to problems like boating, lack of diversity in the upper tiers of game play, community warfare, role warfare, ect. I could write a term paper on the multitude of issues in this game, and most of the issues are not hard to address, but PGI has yet to address many of these issues in an meaningful way. Until they do, my wallet is closed to them.

I don't think that's how the game industry works. I think PGI fails because they lack competence, and no amount of boycotting or petitions is going to change that. They're not really great at what they do. I don't think they will get better unless they can afford to hire people who are more competent. Maybe they won't ever do really well with this game, but if there's enough money in it, someone else will pick it up, like PGI once did.

Assiah, on 30 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

I understand you are worried about this game going under and never getting a mechwarrior game again, but that is not a good enough reason to keep feeding bad habits.

Says who? It's one of my favourite game series of all time. It's up there with the Tie Fighter games, Fallout and Diablo. Not to say that MW:O is one of my favourite games of all time, but each future Mechwarrior game has the potential to be.

[Lord Ikka]

I am seeing steady, abet slow, improvements to the game ever since Closed Beta. Russ Bullock just stated on NGNG podcast #79 that 100% of Phoenix money is going back into MWO.

Bottom line- I am looking to play this game for years and trust PGI to not screw it up, it goes against both their business interests and the love they clearly have for the IP.

Edited by Lord Ikka, 30 June 2013 - 05:45 PM.

[Lucky 7]

I'm going to support MWO with my money as I see fit.
And quite honestly I have a great time playing this game and I have a great time dropping alone or with my WSB Brothers.

[Assiah]

Alistair Winter, on 30 June 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

You need to explain how it's a false dichotomy. But I agree about PGI's flaws.

Its a false dichotomy because the argument seems to go that we either pay PGI money and they will somehow figure out how to make this a great game, or it will fail and we will never see another mechwarrior game for a long time. while both of these things are possible, they are not the only options.

Alistair Winter, on 30 June 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

I don't think that's how the game industry works. I think PGI fails because they lack competence, and no amount of boycotting or petitions is going to change that. They're not really great at what they do. I don't think they will get better unless they can afford to hire people who are more competent. Maybe they won't ever do really well with this game, but if there's enough money in it, someone else will pick it up, like PGI once did.

I agree with your points here, and I do feel that this game shows that there is a fan base willing to fund these games, so the outlook is good for future mech games. The thing about PGI is that their issues are really not issues with bad coders and the like, many of the issues seem to stem from the top down. Paul and Bryan tend to come up with quick band aid fixes for issues and seem to hate critical thinking. Also when asked about the supposed 50 new hires they got a few months back, PGI diverts the question to the we're hiring button at the bottom of the website. If there really is not hope for PGI to make a good game to do them being critically incompetent and this game will fail anyway, throwing more money there way will not help that, it will only prolong the time IGP has the mechwarrior IP before it goes to the hands of a company that can make a good game you will be nostalgic about 10 years later.

Alistair Winter, on 30 June 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

Says who? It's one of my favourite game series of all time. It's up there with the Tie Fighter games, Fallout and Diablo. Not to say that MW:O is one of my favourite games of all time, but each future Mechwarrior game has the potential to be.

It is one of my favorite games series as well, but as you have already mentioned, you feel that another company would pick up the pieces if this one falls, better that happen with the fall of PGI than a string of mechwarrior games that are worse than mech assault. Personally I hope that PGI can get their act together and get this ship back on track, I certainly feel this game is still salvageable (then again I'm a battletech fan, I think everything can be salvaged). Currently though I feel PGI needs to go on a diet so to speak, they are asking for more and more money and delivering less. If we keep paying them they might as well keep doing less work for money because you are willing to give it to them, if you hold off and strongly indicate that you want to see more balance and bug fixes, content and features before you start giving them money again they might listen and start to do just that. Its not a guarantee, but its better than telling them its all ok, here have another $80.

Edited by Assiah, 30 June 2013 - 06:06 PM.

[Kyynele]

Assiah, on 30 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

But if we keep paying into these kind of "deals" they will just keep that same attitude, but if we cut them off for a bit they might shape up and make the game we have all wanted. The game will only fail if PGI fails it, paying them to keep doing things you do not like will just mean they keep doing more of the same.

LOL.

PGI is a small dev company working on a multiplayer F2P game they have no previous experience of. Welcome to game development, where everything is more complex than anticipated, dreams turn to nightmares, deadlines come and go. If it was easy, the world wouldn't be full of crappy games.

When something that seemed perfect on paper doesn't actually work in game at all, the only thing you can do to it is work more on it, to make it work. It is broken, and it's already behind schedule since it wasn't anticipated in scheduling that it wouldn't work at all - since it really did seem so perfect beforehand. Oh, and the business guys make you work on something else first to bring in the money or the whole project gets canned. The customers will be dissatisfied either because stuff is late, beause it's horribly broken, or both. Makes you wish you didn't announce the perfect feature in the first place, and teaches you not to tell your customers anything more until it's actually ready, fun, and working as intended.

Now, your customers decide that the only way you will learn your lesson is for them to stop paying. This leads to less resources to work on things, making the problems worse. More effort will be needed to increase the money coming in to keep production going. Fixing gameplay issues will take backseat until game is profitable again.

Seriously, if monetization doesn't work, there won't be money, employees won't get payed. It will be the first priority to fix, no matter how some customers think that there are serious gameplay issues that should be fixed or content that needs to be added. The game will go P2W if there are no other options to keep it going.

6 millions is a nice start for a project, but not really loads of moneys. If MWO got this far with 6m, I'd consider it a good job for PGI.

Business doesn't care about game balance issues. If the game isn't profitable, it will be killed. The fuss about MWO money going to MWTactics is likewise silly. IGP is in the business to make profit, if MWTactics doesn't bring in money and sucks in MWO profits, it will be killed, buried and forgotten shortly.

Overlord package is quite good value for money at least for me. I'd buy the premium time anyway, and even if I'd buy the new mechs with CB, I would need to buy those mech bays since I don't sell away old mechs. Not even the crappy ones. That's quite a bit of MC saved. 4 mechs with CB boosts will provide variety for CB grinds in the future. I'm also happy that people can't select the mechs they get, since it increases the value of the package I'm buying: I get the Battlemasters 3 months before everyone who didn't buy Overlord can get any of them. Well played PGI.

[Bernard Matthaios]

I remember back when I had to go from store to store to find PC games. Pay $60+. Bring it home, and either be highly dissatisfied or beat it within days. Only to repeat this process once a month, or more...


So. Why do I fund phoenix? $80 for another year of entertainment? Count me in, I'm actually saving money.

[Josef Nader]

Kyynele gets it.

[ryoma]

Actually I think it's the two of you who don't get it. Then again you're the kind of people who can afford to throw away 80$ at their leisure.

[MoonUnitBeta]

ryoma, on 30 June 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

Actually I think it's the two of you who don't get it. Then again you're the kind of people who can afford to throw away 80$ at their leisure.

http://www.nogutsnog...b530d8c9046c6f3
Skip to 33:00 if you want Russ to touch on the topic about current problems. They have the right attitude, Holding your money back on the package is your own fault and your missing out on a great deal. Just listen. Go. Listen.

This podcast sheds some light on Phoenix.
100% of funds from Phoenix goes back into the MWO.
They talk about upcoming features, and why they chose the time they did to announce project phoenix. Russ himself mentioning this and saying these features are not forgotten, and the game is continually going strong. Also the reasoning behind why they aren't sticking to the timeline anymore. Their choice to go towards a quality product than content quantity.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 30 June 2013 - 08:49 PM.

[ryoma]

Aside from 3PV I'm not too worried about the state of the game.

On another thread Nader and I have been arguing about Phoenix pack pricing.

The short of it is that the Phoenix packs are only a deal at 80$ and the 20-40 dollar packs actually get you less than their cost in real value. Also that the lack of choice for Phoenix packs drive away customers who would want to pay less than 80$.

[Josef Nader]

I maintain that an 85 ton "hero" assault (that is to say, an assault mech with meta-game boosts, not one with custom hardpoints) sells for ~$35 (That's roughly the cost of a Misery). Considering that you're getting the mech 3 months early, I'd say it's worth at -least- $40, and that's not including the other two Battlemasters that let you grind out efficiencies, or the mech bay slots, or the premium time. A base variant assault costs about half of what a hero assault costs, so that's another $40. So, if you just wanted to buy the Phoenix Battlemaster and the two variants to grind it up with with MC, you're paying $80 in MC. It just so happens that by paying $80 you're also getting 8 other mechs, premium time.

Alright, so you don't want the Battlemaster. The Thunderbolt is ~$30 for the hero variant. Again, non-hero mechs cost roughly half of a hero variant, so that's another $30 for the other two Thunderbolts to round it out. Unless my math is broken, I think that comes to right around $60. I am comparing the cost of the Thunderbolt to the cost of the Firebrand and the other Jägers, as they are the same weight bracket.

So let's look at the mediums. Well, we don't have a 55 tonner, so we'll go off the Centurion. The Wang costs a little under $20. The other two cheap Centurions cost $10 a pop. All told, to buy a Wang and two ordinary Cents with MC, you're looking at ~$40.

Hmm, I'm seeing a pattern here. Let's look at the Death's Knell and the 'mandos. Again, lacking a 20 tonner we can't get an exact price comparison, but if I'm doing my guesstimation right you can buy a Death's Knell for about ~$10, and a base commando for ~$5. All told, you get all three mechs for $20.

None of the above cost calculations factor in the extra $5 or so for mech bays to put the mechs in or the $10 of premium time that comes with even the most basic pack. The Talon tier of project Phoenix gives you a $10 hero light mech, plus two $5 non-hero lights, plus three mech bays valued at about $5 for all three, plus $10 of premium time if you buy within the month. All told, that is a raw cash value of $35 for $20, which is a few degrees below half off.

The Storm tier gives you a $20 hero, a $10 hero, two $10 standards, two $5 standards, $10 of mech bays, $10 of premium time, and $3 of cockpit swag that also gives you metagame boosts. So, if my number crunching is accurate the raw cash value of the pack is about $83. For $40. You are paying -half- of what you'd have to pay to get the same exact deal in straight cash purchases.

The Guardian tier gives you a $30 hero, a $20 hero, a $10 hero, two $15 standards, two $10 standards, two $5 standards, $15 of mech bays, $20 of premium time, and $6 of meta-influencing cockpit swag. Raw cash value? $161 bucks. You pay $60. We're getting close to a third of the cash value of these items.

The Overlord tier gives you a $40 hero, a $30 hero, a $20 hero, a $10 hero, two $20 standards, two $15 standards, two $10 standards, two $5 standards, $20 in mech bays, $40 in premium time, and $12 of cockpit meta swag. Raw cash value is $272 worth of in-game swag. For $80. You are literally paying a third of what you would pay to buy all that stuff individually.

Now, tell me again how any of the Phoenix tiers aren't worth the money and you'd be better off buying their equivelent value in MC?

[ryoma]

1. Standard variants. Who actually pays MC for those?
2. Awful hard point selection for the medium and light Phoenix Variants. They are not hero mechs because they do not have exclusive hard points.
3. You can pick what you buy for MC
4. You can ACTUALLY buy a hero mech of those chassis eventually.
5. The Locust is a piece of garbage
6. The point of a pre-order is to give the buyer more value per dollar in order to get money RIGHT THEN. So the 20-40$ packs just barely breaking even is not actually fulfilling that.

[AlexEss]

This is why you should never mix idealism in with your spending, because when you do you end up like the op with some severe outrage over small things that are pretty much inconsequential. It is not about what your exact money goes, it is about how good profit margin something have. The money does and will for ever be shifted towards the product that needs it the most. Now i don't say you have to like the phoenix packs, but seeing as one of the most requested things since... well the founders pack closed is a new founders pack i fail to see how it can upset anyone when PGI/IGP steps out to meet the markets demand. After all both are companies and both need to stay in the black overall.

ryoma, on 30 June 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

1. Standard variants. Who actually pays MC for those?
2. Awful hard point selection for the medium and light Phoenix Variants. They are not hero mechs because they do not have exclusive hard points.
3. You can pick what you buy for MC
4. You can ACTUALLY buy a hero mech of those chassis eventually.
5. The Locust is a piece of garbage
6. The point of a pre-order is to give the buyer more value per dollar in order to get money RIGHT THEN. So the 20-40$ packs just barely breaking even is not actually fulfilling that.

1: A fair amount of people actually, especially those who value time over money or want instant gratification
2: I would not say awful, less then optimal perhaps but not awful. I can agree that they are not hero mech though
3: Unless you want to buy a battlemaster.. then you have to wait until january (or god knows how long for the hero version)
4: But the time it will take is unknown and might end up in the YEARS bracket, Some people will not take that chance.
5: That we will have to see, but currently i would say you are right. Things can change.
6: Half price off in my mind is still a substantial saving... The 20$ pack is a bit lacklustre i agree.

Edited by AlexEss, 30 June 2013 - 10:16 PM.