#21
Posted 17 July 2013 - 05:37 AM
#22
Posted 17 July 2013 - 05:38 AM
WolvesX, on 16 July 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:
For example:
(x)Do you want to change PPCs to...
... chain damage (50% is transphered to nearby component)
... add heat
... change nothing
SIMPLE AS THAT!
Good for the community -> We get what we want.
Godd for PGI -> Can blame the community.
Greetings
Your free-to-play-player-since-07-16-Wolves
Wolves, normally i think your posts are crazy and that you are way out there S.O.B. But I actually find myself agreeing with this post because at least if PGI gave us poll's that would equate to some form of direct communication with the community as opposed to the no communication we have now. I still think you are crazy sometimes, but now I think you might be crazy as a fox...er wolf.
#23
Posted 17 July 2013 - 05:52 AM
#24
Posted 17 July 2013 - 08:09 AM
The test server will ideally help more also as a buffer to explore mechanics and settings with then some tangible feedback from test game play being observed to help confirm things prior to any use in production. This kind of "safety net" with the use of the test server whilst opening more player interests based on opinion like the test server feedback process will hopefully help PGI/IGP gauge more effectively player interests that have some scope for choice.
Edited by Noesis, 17 July 2013 - 08:11 AM.
#25
Posted 17 July 2013 - 08:19 AM
#26
Posted 17 July 2013 - 08:45 AM
Woky, on 17 July 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:
Seconded..Or since I said that first..third'd
#27
Posted 17 July 2013 - 09:29 AM
Morsdraco, on 17 July 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:
The reason for that might be:
I make serious posts.
Troll posts.
Ironic posts.
Sarcastic posts.
AND I tend to exaggerate.
#28
Posted 17 July 2013 - 09:38 AM
#29
Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:42 AM
#30
Posted 17 July 2013 - 12:12 PM
To put that simply, people who dislike the game are more likely to come onto the forums and complain. This means that people who like the current affair won't get their voice fairly heard
I would much prefer that pgi use in game stat tracking and the like to balance the game, rather than asking a bunch of people who are inherently dissatisfied with how the game currently works
#31
Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:05 PM
Technoviking, on 17 July 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:
The poll is 75% yes, so the community is smarter than you think?
20k, on 17 July 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:
To put that simply, people who dislike the game are more likely to come onto the forums and complain. This means that people who like the current affair won't get their voice fairly heard
I would much prefer that pgi use in game stat tracking and the like to balance the game, rather than asking a bunch of people who are inherently dissatisfied with how the game currently works
I praised PGI for the good things they made! IN the official forums, even the devs LIKED my posts back in the old days.
BUT I'm very unhappy with the balance of the game. Thats it.
I love the art.
I love the theme.
I love the timeline.
I love the currency system.
BUT I ******* HATE THE ********** UP BALANCE. JUST UNFUN.
#32
Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:25 PM
Fundamentally, most of the hard gameplay choices should be left mostly in PGI's control. The vast majority of people have no concept of proper game development or the challenges of making an online game. That bias alone should disqualify a great deal of public opinion on certain topics. However PGI should go at length to discuss these topics and relate to the community the challenges and daily works regarding MWO. Opening transparency would go a long way to helping both sides.
#33
Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:31 PM
#34
Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:34 PM
Usually I'd say ''no, a developer with a unified vision of the game they want to create, will deliver a far better game than a continual democratic committee of players''.
However, in PGI's case, experience shows it's not quite so straightforward. There have been some decisions which remain very hard to fathom.
#35
Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:43 PM
#37
Posted 18 July 2013 - 02:47 AM
You want the testers of a Beta game to play the game, then vote on changes/concepts based on said gameplay/experience?
Wouldn't that be amazing!
#38
Posted 18 July 2013 - 04:56 AM
When it agrees: PGI: "See, we definitely know what we're doing... everyone agrees."
When it don't: PGI: "We read the minds of the silent majority and polls don't mean anything."
All PGI needs is management changes - scrap the noobs with the big egos that fail at their own game, and bring in... damn near anyone else.
#39
Posted 18 July 2013 - 05:11 AM
Amsro, on 18 July 2013 - 02:47 AM, said:
You want the testers of a Beta game to play the game, then vote on changes/concepts based on said gameplay/experience?
Wouldn't that be amazing!
Come on now that would make no sense, because that would mean we would be beta testers for a game that we're playing and testing while it's in beta. That would just be totally wrong.
#40
Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:15 AM
7 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users