740 replies to this topic

[Adridos]

TheMagician, on 31 July 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

I can name a bunch of recent games I've played where the devs had far less interaction with the community, took forever to support their game once released, and put out little initial content only to charge you for all additional content.

Everyone can. And if they were just the average nothing that somehow got rights to an old franchise and did a new version of it that frankly sucks (like Tribes: Ascend, for example) and isn't worth it for franchise fans, then we'd be long gone and no big deal about it.

The thing is, these guys did things right before. They did interact with this community to hell and back, they did act upon lots of our feedback and many things in teh game today would have been totally different if they never even touched the suggestions forums, etc. They showed us they are capable of making a quality MW title we all dreamed of and can do so in a fashion that rivals that of the highest names in the industry... that's what people are mostly asking them to do again. Be the developer that created a working, beautiful, fun as hell game in less than 6 months with a tiny dev team again, not the dev that deleted the General Discussion, et cetera.

They are capable of doing it the right way... they just aren't doing so for whatever unimaginable reason.

[RG Notch]

jozkhan, on 31 July 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

yeah thats QA testing you're talking about (the fun bit)

To be honest this whole year long plus 'BETA' phase has been squandered so badly, it should have been set up from the outset to be a test environment with channels for feedback built into the process - which were all readily identifiable during the closed Beta phase.

Was it Russ or Bryan who used the term 'beta fatigue'? - it was used to describe the player base when they didnt like what they were hearing. Just look at the constructive feedback still pouring out of the playerbase, sadly it was never us who had this so called 'beta fatigue'

I believe the "beta fatigue" was being suffered by IGP who wasn't see enough money. Once they opened beta, actually once they let people buy their way into the beta early with Founder's packs this stopped being a beta for all purposes but excusing it's unfinished state. Not that taking money in a beta is bad, but taking the money with no intention of wiping and resetting set them up for the awful situation where they need an actual test server in a beta to actually test things.
You'll notice also that dev interaction and communication dropped off the table at that point too. Since then they don't really interact with us so much as tell us what we're getting and that they hear our complaints but there's no evidence they are being responded to. Something really scared them because they don't even dare to give the vaguest hints about the future anymore. Sadly, it didn't scare them enough to listen to the people who are paying for the game.

[SgtKinCaiD]

/signed

I'm forwarding it to our leader.

[Polojilarious]

Signed.

And yet, between the lack of an official response and the mess that is the latest patch, I'm cancelling my pheonix preorder and I'm not going to bother downloading the latest patch.

MWO was, at times, one of the most fun games I have ever played. It was also completely terrible at times, but despite that I figured I'd draw something in memory of the good times.



So, farewell for now, mechwarriors. I'll be keeping an eye out for any progress made with #savemwo, but as it stands I can't justify spending any more money or time on MWO.

[Gwaihir]

The most cicada.

[Dustmuffins]

Their new spectator mode looks so cool.

I'm still holding out that they'll wake up and realize that the people that the people that have been playing mech games at the top levels competitively for the past 10+ years might know what they're talking about.

Please PGI. Let us help you make this game as cool as it deserves to be!

[xZaOx]

Sad thing is there aren't many games where people are yelling at you that they want to throw A LOT of money at them ,if they just fix the game, instead they ignore us and throw the money back.

I really had high hopes for this game and planned to spend a lot of money. Clearly we are the minority, and we don't matter. Funny how most of us are Legendary founders, that helped them get a kickstart, and now shunned.

Edited by xZaOx, 31 July 2013 - 06:46 PM.

[N0MAD]

Garth Erlam, on 31 July 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

I really do appreciate their efforts, and have informed them as such. Comments like yours aren't adding to the conversation, so either state something, or let people who are giving their (respectful as always, right gents?) opinions do so.

So i take it that this comment is directed basically at all of us contributing to this thread, so under that assumption i will state my opinion/suggestion.
While weapons/game balance is always debatable and an ongoing task throughout development and even thru the games life, there are certain thing that few can argue against, these are game features that we all expect as default in any game these days, i am going to focus on Chat and Game lobby.
We need these ASAP, while there are many advantages to lobbies, i will only list a couple that come foremost to my thinking.
Community building, it will be a place where the community will integrate, unify and grow.
Great place for the new player to learn, meet others and become part of the community, therefore retaining them longer, instead of them feeling they are on an Island.
Private matchmaking, this is content, i doubt that anyone that played MW2-3-4 can deny that the Leagues kept those games viable long after their expiry dates had come and gone. Will this be competition or detract from CW i doubt it, It will however bring back a huge percentage of the population that has left and give the existing player base content allowing you (PGI) the time to finely tune the game without having to rush. Somewhere i did read that one of the concerns of this was server load/strain and bandwidth, i cant understand this as im hoping PGI has planned to be able to service 2x, 5x, 10x the current population/server load on their systems.
While at this stage of development its hard/impossible to change many existing game features that people are talking/debating about, this is something that should not interfere with current development.
TY.

[Drangon Lee]

Here, in this debate I recall another on a smaller scale.

http://mwomercs.com/...munity-warfare/

A debate which is still without real answers.

Edited by Drangon Lee, 31 July 2013 - 07:27 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

One of the points brought up in the discussion and letter is weapon / game tactics balance ... I've asserted a few times in other threads that part of the problem is that we don't know what features or equipment is coming next.

One example -- the arguement that ECM is OP has died down significantly now that seismic, UAV, etc. are now in the game. I'm not going to try and defend their feature / content release cycle, because I think the relatively long time between new features is part of the reason that the sniper meta has dominated the top brackets for so long.

(I don't play 8-mans, but I do watch them occasionally when streamed, and the competitive meta influences 4-man and PUG meta to some extent.)

How would the sniper meta have changed if MASC had been introduced on schedule -- May, by my estimation -- and not just on the Flea, but available to many/all mechs?

If brawlers and strikers could sprint short distances at 133% max speed, would brawling have died? Would PPC+Gauss sniping have emerged as the dominant tactic for so long?

Sorry for rambling ... my points are:

• we don't know what else we don't know
  
• PGI isn't frakking telling us

It would be easier to be patient if we knew more about what was coming.

[Protection]

I'm not convinced it's Paul that is the problem.

I have been in closed beta since the very start, and I've talked to and played games with Paul. I was even briefly a part of the "squirrel" beta testers.

The impression I was getting was that Paul was getting a lot of directives from above him (I suspect Ekman and/or Bullock), and that his hands are largely tied on a great many things. The amount of things to which he said "We aren't allowed to touch that," when I sprayed balance suggestion after balance suggestion towards him was quite large. I feel like Paul isn't the problem, it that he isn't being given the room to play around with the things we would want him to.

I could be wrong though, just the feeling I'm getting on this.

[Anders]

Protection:

The NDA enforcement lawyers are on their way. I can get you in touch with good civil lawyers in your area. Contact me.

Robotically Yours,
Anders

[Windies]

Protection, on 31 July 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

I'm not convinced it's Paul that is the problem.

I have been in closed beta since the very start, and I've talked to and played games with Paul. I was even briefly a part of the "squirrel" beta testers.

The impression I was getting was that Paul was getting a lot of directives from above him (I suspect Ekman and/or Bullock), and that his hands are largely tied on a great many things. The amount of things to which he said "We aren't allowed to touch that," when I sprayed balance suggestion after balance suggestion towards him was quite large. I feel like Paul isn't the problem, it that he isn't being given the room to play around with the things we would want him to.

I could be wrong though, just the feeling I'm getting on this.

I feel like a lack of understanding of the game and how it even works is the problem. Whether or not that's Paul exclusively is debatable. I would say that with him being a lead designer, some blame does fall on him most likely since I believe he is the man in charge of balance. He also seems to like to take credit for bad idea's, so he either thinks they are really brilliant and is extremely naive, or he's being forced to take credit for terrible terrible idea's.

Most of these balance changes and especially the "ghost heat" feel like a complete stab in the dark towards a band aid solution. Honestly most of the balance thus far has felt like a blatant stab in the dark with little to no understanding of the actual game.

There were so many different ways to balance PPC's that didn't require this horribly convoluted and ill conceived ghost heat system. Lower damage, Increase heat, Lower their RoF etc... The problem is that PGI has taken half the TT rules and then implemented half the rules that they made up. Decoupling heat from rate of fire from damage. The balance existed in TT, I'm not saying it was perfect and I'm not saying it would have to be adhered to 100%. I'm just saying the system FOR balance existed already, and PGI destroyed it by trying to mix their own rules with TT rules and value's. It's a situation of pick one or the other, either adapt TT rules to fit the game in their entirety or completely make up your own rules and then tweak and balance those for a good experience, don't try and mix and match because it won't work. I feel like they did it in a way to try and keep TT purists happy but at this point I think even TT purists would be happy with a game that wasn't utterly terrible.

I don't think they even understand how to balance the game, I think that's the biggest underlying problem. I think the next largest problem is that they are unwilling to admit that and are unwilling to honestly use the feedback from their beta testers in a meaningful and purposeful way. Instead they will continue to look at heat maps and meta data and try to balance from that, all without ever having a single clue as to how their game works or how to balance or fix it.

+1 to the #savemwo initiative. I don't honestly think it will accomplish much, and not from a lack of effort or clear cut communication and direction from the community but rather from PGI being unwilling to listen to constructive and concise feedback, However I think it's the best thing anyone can do at this point. The ball is in PGI's court and has been for a LOOONG time, It would be nice to see them doing something meaningful and constructive with it at this point.

[Shiro Matsumoto]

/signed

[MechFrog1]

Polojilarious, on 31 July 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

So, farewell for now, mechwarriors. I'll be keeping an eye out for any progress made with #savemwo, but as it stands I can't justify spending any more money or time on MWO.

It feels awful to leave... Hell, it feels awful to see that little icon on the desktop and not feel the desire to play all day.

I'm a sadfrog lately.

[Kaio-Kerensky x10]

Windies, on 31 July 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

I don't honestly think it will accomplish much, and not from a lack of effort or clear cut communication and direction from the community but rather from PGI being unwilling to listen to constructive and concise feedback, However I think it's the best thing anyone can do at this point. The ball is in PGI's court and has been for a LOOONG time, It would be nice to see them doing something meaningful and constructive with it at this point.

This is where I am. I didn't expect much from this, and while it was nice to see everyone come out, it hasn't even really seemed to have any impact on the community, let alone PGI. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

[Big Giant Head]

Stats of the weapon doesnt match convergence (FPS). PPCs converegence is similar to projectiles/ ballistics yet they have some laser characteristics like smaller crit size, thats the problem.
Lasers have smaller crit size but they do damage over time and have higher heat output.
PPCs have smaller crit size they do instant damage and have higher heat output (plus they have longer range than lasers and they dont have range falloff)

[Big Giant Head]

And btw i have 4 accounts

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Protection, on 31 July 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

I'm not convinced it's Paul that is the problem.

I have been in closed beta since the very start, and I've talked to and played games with Paul. I was even briefly a part of the "squirrel" beta testers.

The impression I was getting was that Paul was getting a lot of directives from above him (I suspect Ekman and/or Bullock), and that his hands are largely tied on a great many things. The amount of things to which he said "We aren't allowed to touch that," when I sprayed balance suggestion after balance suggestion towards him was quite large. I feel like Paul isn't the problem, it that he isn't being given the room to play around with the things we would want him to.

I could be wrong though, just the feeling I'm getting on this.

He's being told he can't change PPC heat and projectile speed?

But he can come up with some random ghost system that does not solve the core problem instead?

Now i feel PGI are stupid, but they are not brain dead.

(And that's just one example and by no means the only issue)

Edited by DV McKenna, 01 August 2013 - 12:43 AM.

[Erata]

I don't have any alt accounts, but the Kerensky family is quite storied for spreading their seed across the galaxy. Their family is disturbingly large.

I guess on the plus side, they are being more communicative about what their intentions with the game are, like with the early posting of the 3rd person poll, and a couple earlier patch announcements.

There still are a surprises that pop up from time to time, like the vaguely stated buff given to critical damage that a lot of people misconstrue as an addition of piercing damage, when it's probably just a buff to ~crit seeking~ weapons' crit damage. Unfortunately, I'm guessing just as blindly!

Still, the twitter replies from Russ solidify what used to be speculating fears about the direction of the game, and suggest a failure to acknowledge our grievances. Ehhh.. Watch and wait. See you in a few updates!