740 replies to this topic

[RG Notch]

John Norad, on 29 July 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

Agreed.

Yet before they start fixing this, which is fixable, IMHO they have to fix something equally fundamental - their own attitude and professionalism.
From the time of MW:O development, one thing seems pretty clear to me: communication with the (future) customers is not straightforward, and there seems to be a lot of (dev) ego and bias involved.
They have to change that.
Being professional means staying focused, staying objective, being critical, being open, having a working QA (not only for development, but also for the company), not taking things personal, not laughing at customers and fans (even on the quiet) but taking them seriously if necessary.

From my point of view it seems PGI hasn't really adhered to all these aspects. But that's just my 2 cents worth.

You mean for example if people post something that doesn't agree with you, you shouldn't attack their intelligence, tell people to ignore them and not try to get their feedback censored?
It's truly funny to see these folks in the place of PGI and how they deal with criticism. No big egos here or stubborness, or we know better than other people right?
This thread should be educational for some as to how hard it is to calmly communicate their ideas in the face of what they consider non constructive feedback. But I figure it'll be more along the lines of, if I can't retort, I'll report.

[Ramblin]

Protection, on 29 July 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

Maybe I'm alone on this, but I am against any idea that would lock out free players from a core gameplay element such as a basic lobby. People with 0 mc should still have opportunity to play organized games with friends and guildmates.

Gwaihir, on 29 July 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

I don't think you'd be alone there at all, personally.

While I wouldn't mind paying a token amount of MC for a lobby game, I think there's a huge number of our people at least that would say no, **** that.

I agree it would alienate some people and may not be the answer. (Probably isnt actually but, I wanted to throw it out there for discussion.) It may be enough to inspire them (PGI) to push something like this through on a quick rail.

[John Norad]

RG Notch, on 29 July 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

You mean for example if people post something that doesn't agree with you, you shouldn't attack their intelligence, tell people to ignore them and not try to get their feedback censored?

Of course. Though I take it that question was purely rhetorical ;-)
The thing is, PGI is a company. They're supposed to be professionals. Not us. Yes, they're all just human and they have feelings, too. But it's part of the job to ignore the mob and the fact that the internet is full of 'nasty' people is not ecxactly big news.
Plus the BT franchise is quite old and has some die-hard fans. Getting into rough waters at some point was to be expected.

[Chavette]

Ramblin, on 29 July 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

I agree it would alienate some people and may not be the answer. (Probably isnt actually but, I wanted to throw it out there for discussion.) It may be enough to inspire them (PGI) to push something like this through on a quick rail.

Its simply mind-boggling that PGI response to custom games is they make for server overhead, when it add so much to the game and makes it tons more fun.

It seems like they'd be much more content with people who want custom games rather not playing and paying at all.

[Stalkerr]

Chavette, on 29 July 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

Its simply mind-boggling that PGI response to custom games is they make for server overhead, when it add so much to the game and makes it tons more fun.

It seems like they'd be much more content with people who want custom games rather not playing and paying at all.

Is it wrong that every time you post I sing in my head the line "In my Chevette!" from this song?

http://www.youtube.c...ht3pgS2L7M&t=84

</offtopic>

[fil5000]

Chavette, on 29 July 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

Its simply mind-boggling that PGI response to custom games is they make for server overhead, when it add so much to the game and makes it tons more fun.

It seems like they'd be much more content with people who want custom games rather not playing and paying at all.

Don't forget that as well as being a customer in an F2P game, you're the content. If you're off in a private server playing against each other, you're not providing entertainment/opposition for the rest of the players. I think a lot of people have expressed the concern that 3PV will split the player base up, much like the 8v8 queue did - private lobbies will split the player base up even more.

That's not to say I wouldn't LIKE them, just that I can understand why they're hesitant to actually do it.

[Thepotatomasher]

Nekki Basara, on 28 July 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

The next step, if PGI ignore the feedback entirely and the game does not improve is to stop playing. **** it, SEP at that point.

Hubis lays out the goal nicely, but really the "nuclear deterrent" we have is just not providing targets for the paying customers to shoot at. Why make threats when that's the worst we can do? Far better to just try build up a community consensus and hope PGI will trust in the playerbase to know what the playerbase enjoys. We've been pretty open about getting this out to as many people as possible to be as representative as we can manage, so please turn up next time and add your voice.

i stopped playing months ago. Good job PGI

[Stalkerr]

Stimjunky, on 29 July 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

Yeah that doesnt seem possible

Welcome to the thread for your very first post! Glad to have you here and I look forward to your input. I'm also hopeful this isn't a troll account.

EDIT: Also! We now have 666 signatures.

Edited by Stalkerr, 29 July 2013 - 02:14 PM.

[keith]

i wonder if PGI has ever heard of this
http://www.dfma.com/...CFdGd4AodZngAgA
i know i learned it in colllege about 3-4 years ago, it was big then. mind u i was in a manufacturing major. in a nut shell was design ever thing on paper or digital first. then bring it out into production. idk how it would work in game design. another interesting thing with it was rule of 10. ever extra process or step u took the cost went up by 10 times as much. lets say they decide to take away the heat system. going off my limited knowledge of game design. u have design system, programing it, QAing it, then explaining it to us, then finally bring it out into the game. thats 5 steps, any costs of making that system would cost 100000 the amount money put in to change it.

[scJazz]

I've learned over the years that agree with anything on the Interwebz that Goons say is at best considered carefully.

Having said that... I support this post.

PS: If Goons start abusing the Lobby with Teaming Horde vs Atlas matches in order to "Level Up" I'm gonna be mad.

NOTE: This is my only real point of concern. Private Lobbies = Insane Game Abuse. Perhaps I've missed it but I've never read a serious thread about what a Private Lobby should enable while preventing us the deviant abusive misguided players from doing things we know we shouldn't. But we can.

Also... I don't really hate Goons. I've spent countless hours shooting at them. For entertainment alone I owe them big time!

[Stalkerr]

Another update!

In addition to having more individuals signing the letter, we now have 21 groups signed up, some of them representing the largest organized groups currently playing MWO. These groups represent a little over 3600 players (I'm missing good unit counts on some of them, which I've left blank until I can confirm them. In the meantime, I've counted them based on my most recent available information):

EDIT: Unit leads, PM me if you want to be added to this list or if you have a correction/addition to your unit count.

• Blazing Aces (~40 members)
  
• The Fallen
  
• 9th Sword of the Dragon (~100 members)
  
• House Marik (~200 members)
  
• cReddit (~200 members)
  
• Word of Lowtax (~1500 members)
  
• Clan Smoke Jaguar - Beta Galaxy (~20 members)
  
• 25th Marik Militia
  
• KaoS Legion (~50 members)
  
• Zero Fox Mercs (~10 members)
  
• Last Mech Standing
  
• Eridani Light Pony Merc Corp (~200 members)
  
• 1st Royal Guards (~50 members)
  
• 1st HeadHunters of Davion RCT (~500 members)
  
• Omega Defense Corps
  
• Ryuken-Ni-Sorei
  
• ZhiZhu Merc Corps (~80 members)
  
• Clan Snow Raven
  
• MWO Arena League (~150 players)
  
• 6th RCT
  
• ARMD (~400 members)

Edited by Stalkerr, 29 July 2013 - 02:43 PM.

[BlacKcuD]

Sign me in.
Especially the point about no private/custom lobbies is disgruntling. Implementing such a function is harder than it looks (I speak from a sh!tton of indie game programming experience), but it is a f*cking priority. I want this to become an e-sport or at least community driven events. Every single minuscule unimportant f2p game has private lobbies, tournaments and somewhat of an e-sports scene, but not my beloved Mechwarrior Online. Why PGI WHYYY? Please don´t kill this game!

Edited by BlacKcuD, 29 July 2013 - 07:40 PM.

[Gwaihir]

scJazz, on 29 July 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

I've learned over the years that agree with anything on the Interwebz that Goons say is at best considered carefully.

Having said that... I support this post.

PS: If Goons start abusing the Lobby with Teaming Horde vs Atlas matches in order to "Level Up" I'm gonna be mad.

NOTE: This is my only real point of concern. Private Lobbies = Insane Game Abuse. Perhaps I've missed it but I've never read a serious thread about what a Private Lobby should enable while preventing us the deviant abusive misguided players from doing things we know we shouldn't. But we can.

Also... I don't really hate Goons. I've spent countless hours shooting at them. For entertainment alone I owe them big time!

You would have to be utterly insane to give rewards from private lobbies to match public ranked games.

[PerryRaptor]

I've read several fantastic, innovative ideas that are of value in this thread. Unfortunately, the letter on Google Docs does not impress me to sign it. I was not able to find a theme in the letter that was consistent. All of these posts on forums does have a consistent theme -- "the community wants to help!"

I believe the first letter to the Devs [PGI] should be that of informing them of our [#savemwo] desire to provide feedback. I do not believe the Devs will care to read it a second time.

Backing up in time, to the beginning of MWO closed beta and the opportunity to purchase a founders package, I can continue to see my opinion holds truth. As you will notice I am not a drinker of the MWO Koolaid; thus, no founder's tag. So here are my points I would like to share.

- No version 1.0 roadmap; list of 'Mechs, Weapons, game features, and etc
- Version 2.0 will be better than version 1.0; not just patch roll-ups
- No community involvement; no PGI-appointed communicator

I would not buy a stock or a fund that did not have a prospectus. I want to see numbers, features, and facts to make an informed decision. I would like to see the version 1.x roadmap; from where I sit this is the starting point for community [crowd funded] communication with the Devs. The focus would be limited to the roadmap; thus, driving production efficiently.

With version 2.0 comes a new roadmap. I do not want to read pages of code, over and over, or code from someone else. Keep what isn't broke, add in the new stuff, and make it work together. Another way to say it "version 2.0" is a 'Mech Pak.

I am rather surprised that PGI had taken in more than $500 thousand dollars and did not get a full time communicator to manage dialog with the community. I do not visit MWO forums because of this very reason. I came today because I learned of this letter from another player.

Thanks for reading my post...I wish the best of luck to you and this focused group in your attempt to open dialog between the community and the developers.


I love this game -- it is the only game I play!


PerryRaptor
housesteiner.com admin
housesteiner teamspeak server admin
6th Regimental Combat Team, Apache Division

P.S. I don't use Skype, but you are welcome to use one of our teamspeak servers to communicate with me and/or other players that hang out at: ts1.housesteiner.com

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Signature #673

Looks like you guys have a very firm handle on the situation and while I doubt anything will come of it I would love to be wrong. Anyways since this looks to be in good hands I'll say this: #saveMWO could easily end up being killed by too many chefs clogging up the kitchen, so I'll help out by trusting those who are participating to carry the day as far as it will go, and stay out of everyone's way.

Otherwise, no matter the results, thanks for the attempt.

[TheMagician]

For the record, until there are lobbies, combining open queue with 8-man queue will end the ability to have league play. So, I can't agree with the letter with that point standing.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Gwaihir, on 29 July 2013 - 03:02 PM, said:

You would have to be utterly insane to give rewards from private lobbies to match public ranked games.

Thank you.

While private game lobbies are one of the major features that can help save and build the game in the long run, providing any in game "rewards" from those matches is just asking for abuse, exploitation, and greifing.

I appreciate all the effort that has gone into trying to open a positive line of communication with the developers and to try and help make this more fun for most people.

[Gwaihir]

If I were a betting man, I would suspect that https://home.eease.c...?id=5977101&t=1 is a position intended to work on lobbies.

[Sybreed]

Gwaihir, on 29 July 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:

If I were a betting man, I would suspect that https://home.eease.c...?id=5977101&t=1 is a position intended to work on lobbies.

I'm surprised Linux is mentionned so often... is it common for devs to work with that?

[Gwaihir]

It is for anyone working on server related things.