406 replies to this topic

[LoveLost85]

pass on em altogether, like a pilot said at the start of the thread, its pretty much a highlander. still waiting... for ... orion. I hope they release a hero version off the bat. 70 - 75 tonners are my sweet spot, chaching, sold!

[Viper69]

Rhaythe, on 09 July 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

As someone that generally avoids the forum but got sucked into today... 'the heck is QQ?

the "QQ" are made to look like two eyeballs crying.

[Cubivorre]

Appogee, on 09 July 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

If you go back to the original point I was making, it was that the Star Citizen investors are paying huge amounts of cash for very little content, compared to boxed games or even other F2P games. My concern is that they are driving up the F2P ''economy'' for the rest of us for years to come.

Cubivorre, on 09 July 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

We aren't paying for the game.. We're pledging to it's development. I would have donated the money to their project without receiving anything. It's just nice to get something anyway.

[KitK]

Bunko, on 09 July 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

The Mad PGI Scientists are doing Marketing Experiments again!

LOL! and BOOM up into flames go the forums again. There just isn't enough flame retardant on Earth to contain it all.

[Odanan]

Butane9000, on 09 July 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

I have to be honest. I'd be more interested if the Victor was the ballistic heavy assault it was supposed to be instead of being a watered down Highlander.

Agreed!

They shouldn't have left the VTR-9A out.

About the VTR-9A1, with possible triple-Gauss or AC60, well, that would be the dream of dakka-lovers (and PGI will lose money for not adding them right now), but would probably be too powerful...

Anyway, if double or triple ballistics assaults are overpowered, they should rethink the balance of the game, instead of just avoiding them.

Again, my view of the Victor variants as they should be:

[Rhaythe]

Viper69, on 09 July 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:

the "QQ" are made to look like two eyeballs crying.

Ah. Grazi.

[Grimmnyr]

Why all the whining? If someone wants to spend their money to buy something that they will be able to get for "free" a week later, then let them. It seems like the only people who get upset by this are people who can't afford it, or decide not to spend money on MC (which means that they are the reason that they are not getting these mechs early, no one else).

Edited by Ed Steele, 09 July 2013 - 11:31 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Appogee, on 09 July 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

Dunno what ''people'' thought, but I thought $120 was a reasonable gamble on an IP that I want to survive. I'd have bought one myself if I'd have been paying more attention to the launch etc.

You seem to think it's an insult to be called a whale. I don't intend it that way. I agree that if you love something then spending money on it for the enjoyment it gives you makes sense.

If you go back to the original point I was making, it was that the Star Citizen investors are paying huge amounts of cash for very little content, compared to boxed games or even other F2P games. My concern is that they are driving up the F2P ''economy'' for the rest of us for years to come.

I agree with your Star Citizen fear. Mostly purchased on Brand Name and Promises. I will be interested to see if it actually delivers (15K package? better come with residuals there bub!), but even if it is the most amazing game ever, I fear to see if it has a positive (more user based product, so bigger, better game?) or negative impact on the industry as a whole(spiraling prices, and user made product potentially compromising IP quality as a whole, along with other potentials for cyber screw ups, hacks, security issues to b e introduced, etc)

[matux]

Bilbo, on 09 July 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

If you see no value in it, don't buy it. It really is that simple. If you can get whatever is offered in time, then the game remains free to play.

I think you missed the point... Is it now ok to charge for content as long as its declared F2P content at some time? What time frame is ok?

Is this going to become a trend where everyone who wants the latest toys on the battlefield has to fork out money, how long do those who wish to play the free to play content have to wait, yes they have given an answer here but what about down the line.

[Viper69]

Appogee, on 09 July 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

Dunno what ''people'' thought, but I thought $120 was a reasonable gamble on an IP that I want to survive. I'd have bought one myself if I'd have been paying more attention to the launch etc.

You seem to think it's an insult to be called a whale. I don't intend it that way. I agree that if you love something then spending money on it for the enjoyment it gives you makes sense.

If you go back to the original point I was making, it was that the Star Citizen investors are paying huge amounts of cash for very little content, compared to boxed games or even other F2P games. My concern is that they are driving up the F2P ''economy'' for the rest of us for years to come.

I get you and did take it the wrong way. I just wish I had more money to spread around and support both these titles. unfortunately this title is going down a road I cannot support any longer and Bryans complete lack of customer relation coupled with Pauls...well between those two and their tactics as of late I have decided to not financially support this game any longer.

As for Star Citizen, the wing commander genre was a genre I loved long before the Mechwarrior genre. To be honest the in engine videos already produced were enough to get me to e-cream my flight suit. The crowdfunding in SC is backed up by investors so it would be nigh impossible for the game to fail. That and it is stated to have things I want, a single player campaign and space ships .

[Ralatar]

FrDrake, on 09 July 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

This isn't pay2win or shady, you guys will doomsay anything. I hope the sale goes well so they don't have to monetize in other more unseemly ways.

PGI wouldn't have to monetize in other ways if they made their micro transactions actually micro. The cost is so prohibitive for many many players. If they would bring the costs inline they would make much more on volume but....greed will likely kill them in the end.

[Bishop Steiner]

KitK, on 09 July 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:

LOL! and BOOM up into flames go the forums again. There just isn't enough flame retardant on Earth to contain it all.

and compared to Eve Online, these are positively TEPID.

[Grimmnyr]

Butane9000, on 09 July 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

I have to be honest. I'd be more interested if the Victor was the ballistic heavy assault it was supposed to be instead of being a watered down Highlander.

We are Free Worlds League pilots anyway, we prefer more maneuverable mechs with missiles and lasers anyway. I am still waiting for the Orion. :-(

[ove bababoke]

Looks like PGI is in deep... you know. Now I understand why game has freezed.

[Cpt Leprechaun]

Thuzel, on 09 July 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

This is really good, but step it up. Star citizen is already taking your money.

So much this hahah cant wait for that game and they actually include us in conversation/let us know what the hell is going on, on a DAILY basis not this one post on the forum a month BS(if we are lucky).

[Bilbo]

matux, on 09 July 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

I think you missed the point... Is it now ok to charge for content as long as its declared F2P content at some time? What time frame is ok?

Is this going to become a trend where everyone who wants the latest toys on the battlefield has to fork out money, how long do those who wish to play the free to play content have to wait, yes they have given an answer here but what about down the line.

If something changes between now and down the line we'll have a discussion. At this point, I don't consider a month's worth of early access to be a problem. Any more than that may be pushing it. Wouldn't make it any les free to play but it might make it exceedingly annoying.

[PropagandaWar]

PhoenixFire55, on 09 July 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

Its same thing. Instead of fixing the game they focus their efforts on farming money off people pushing new content.

Do you really think it takes much effort to do a sale. The art department and marketing department are more than likely separate from the Paul has taken 3+ months to fix the SRM department.

[Viper69]

Rhaythe, on 09 July 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

Ah. Grazi.

You are quite welcome. It gets confusing when people say qq instead of QQ or even queue queue or cue cue. HAHA

To be honest it took me quite a while to figure it out, at first I thought it may be the sound a crying person makes. Then I had to think in internet fontage and bam I saw it.

[Rhaythe]

Viper69, on 09 July 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

You are quite welcome. It gets confusing when people say qq instead of QQ or even queue queue or cue cue. HAHA

To be honest it took me quite a while to figure it out, at first I thought it may be the sound a crying person makes. Then I had to think in internet fontage and bam I saw it.

I'm used to military lingo, so I'll have to start spamming "Queen queen" when I get my trollin' on.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ed Steele, on 09 July 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

We are Free Worlds League pilots anyway, we prefer more maneuverable mechs with missiles and lasers anyway. I am still waiting for the Orion. :-(

Orion is going to be LESS maneuverable, on the whole. Same basic performance profile, minus the JJs, and only 5 tons lighter, so handling characteristics are likely to be minor improvements, at best.

Otherwise, hardpoint wise, they are remarkably similar.

PropagandaWar, on 09 July 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

Do you really think it takes much effort to do a sale. The art department and marketing department are more than likely separate from the Paul has taken 3+ months to fix the SRM department.

if you notice his earlier posts, I would be disinclined to add "do you really THINK" to any posts attributed to him.