483 replies to this topic

[Destructicus]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 09:50 PM, said:

To an extent they HAVE to care about money, as video game development is not funded by happy thoughts and positive forum threads. And how does PGI have loyal customers yet? If you guys are serious about "making your voices heard" then how about you do something beyond what every Net Spartacus has done before you. Organize a boycott, seek attention from the media, do something! Because complaining and petitions is old hat that never worked in the first place.

That's a given
Let me use EVE as an example
It's a successful game with an immense learning curve
Still
It does fine
Because the dedicated player base spends {Richard Cameron} loads on it
Pgi's loyal customers are those have spent a great deal of money on this game simply because we wanted it to be more than it is
A boycott would never work because people like you would make it impossible, people who are content with being spoonfed the dumb downed garage PGI is feeding you

Edited by Destructicus, 12 August 2013 - 09:59 PM.

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

So are you going to address the arguments and specific points that #savemwo brought up, or are you just going to keep posting this ad hominem trash?

Nice deflection from the fact your arguments didn't pan out. I cannot respond to the #savemwo concerns as I missed the town halls and the open letter is about as vauge as they accuse the AtD answers of being.

Destructicus, on 12 August 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

That's a given
Let me use EVE as an example
It's a successful game with an immense learning curve
Still
It does fine
Because the dedicated player base spends {Richard Cameron} loads on it
Pgi's loyal customers are those have spent a great deal of money on this game simply because we wanted it to be more than it is
A boycott would never work because ep0oeple like you would make it impossible, people who are content with being spoonfed the dumb downed garage PGI is feeding you

AND in EVE Online they are posting THIS EXACT SAME STUFF! There are thousands of threads over there about how CCP doesn't listen to the players, are selling out, and have destroyed the game. So how about you get some perspective!

[Thomas Covenant]

I don't know why but I love tutorials(like Spetre's MW4 tutorial). I hope it will be repeatable.

[Wales Grey]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

It's not really informative at all. Many companies have to get their starts doing grunt work for bigger firms. This leads back to my point that it's not fair to compare their unfinished project to games made by one of the biggest names out there. Is MWO perfect and the greatest game out there? God no. But not even the Devs are claiming that.

My point is this: PGI have never really developed a competitive multi-player game before. They are working with an engine that lacks extensive and in-depth documentation and support. Don't get me wrong, they do have experience with the technical side of networking systems, and they seem to have a firm grasp on art (mostly thanks to Battletech having an established stable of artists and FDB's phenomenally good work), but they are awful at design and implementation of just about everything else.

[Erata]

Arrachtas, on 12 August 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

The 'whining' around here is often overly-emotional, and comes loaded with the belief of the 'whine-ees' that PGI is 'not listening' simply because PGI does not implement the 'whine-ees' suggestions. People can listen to you, or me, or whomever WITHOUT doing what they hear. That does not mean what is said is not considered, evaluated, and used as an alternate source of ideas. Jump-jet shake is one such example; it was a community proposal and was implemented.

You need to do your research more, buddy. I'm not attacking you, but you are filling the thread with a lot of misinformation that, while is well-meaning, is just as misguided. It's ok to be wrong. I've been wrong plenty of times, too. Just take a step back and look at some of the arguments and accept some of the evidence. You're dangerously close to coming off as a white knight to people.

----

There is a quantifiable problem with the weapon metagame that increasing the skill ceiling on does not fix until they break even further from lore and make close range weapons worth bringing again.

[Kaio-Kerensky x10]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

AND in EVE Online they are posting THIS EXACT SAME STUFF! There are thousands of threads over there about how CCP doesn't listen to the players, are selling out, and have destroyed the game. So how about you get some perspective!

Except that one time, they did manage to **** off the bulk of their community, ran into horrible reviews for their new expansion, and had to turn the whole cart around.

So I don't even know what you're on about.

[Imp Mcsmackens]

Slapfighting over which developer is better is certainly a thing you could do. It would be pointless and distracting to no real purpose, but you could do that I guess.

The game is it stands has substantial balance and technical issues. Nobody can really credibly argue the technical ones. Hits not registering is universally seen as bad I think. Balance wise I don't think you can at all make a valid argument that everything is fine unless you're playing in a seriously low elo. The gauss rifle and ppc are absolutely the best weapons to take provided you have the tonnage. They fire barely slower than medium lasers, have a vastly larger effective range and do damage in a single shot rather than dot. If you feel the need to say ppc minimum range here you're just trolling, that "drawback" is negligible and easily overcome in practice. There is no downside and rather than address that by adjusting the numbers on those weapons they added "ghost heat" which is badly conceived and the worst way possible to balance things. It also makes absolutely no sense and is arbitrary. On top of that it does nothing to resolve the 2 ppc 1 gauss optimal setup most mech will run if able anyways. PPC/Gauss are excellent weapons at long range and continue being excellent weapons in a brawl. Other weapons simply can not compete on merits and they refuse to even discuss the issue or engage the community. Why are we in a beta if nothing we say matters or is acknowledged?.

[Destructicus]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Nice deflection from the fact your arguments didn't pan out. I cannot respond to the #savemwo concerns as I missed the town halls and the open letter is about as vauge as they accuse the AtD answers of being.



AND in EVE Online they are posting THIS EXACT SAME STUFF! There are thousands of threads over there about how CCP doesn't listen to the players, are selling out, and have destroyed the game. So how about you get some perspective!

But on EVE they're still going strong
MWO is dying the same way a marathon runner dies of cancer

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

My point is this: PGI have never really developed a competitive multi-player game before. They are working with an engine that lacks extensive and in-depth documentation and support. Don't get me wrong, they do have experience with the technical side of networking systems, and they seem to have a firm grasp on art (mostly thanks to Battletech having an established stable of artists and FDB's phenomenally good work), but they are awful at design and implementation of just about everything else.

So what is the point here, that if you never made one you should never try? Not all games get smooth starts, and almost no developers get things right the first time around (especially Blizzard). I have enough patience to wait for them to improve.

Destructicus, on 12 August 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

But on EVE they're still going strong
MWO is dying the same way a marathon runner dies of cancer

And you have numbers to back this up? That's interesting since I don't remember seeing any statistics releases lately. And EVE is NOT going strong, sub rates are stale and Null Sec is their 2PPC+Gauss problem.

Edited by The14th, 12 August 2013 - 10:05 PM.

[Wales Grey]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Nice deflection from the fact your arguments didn't pan out. I cannot respond to the #savemwo concerns as I missed the town halls and the open letter is about as vauge as they accuse the AtD answers of being.

My arguments didn't pan out? You're the guy who claimed that Bioware were some kind of new company when they made Mass Effect and Dragon Age. You're the guy who has only shown up to attempt torpedoing people's criticism with tone arguments and ad hominem attacks. Please tell me how I'm the one who's argument isn't floating more, you knight in ivory mail. Maybe the damsel will favor you with a kiss after you slay the evil, nasty dragon! Oh, hold me I may faint at the thought!

/melodrama


The open letter is vague because it was meant to reflect consensus, not specifics. It's almost like we didn't want to sound like we were dictating specifics to PGI, and instead work as a giant "THESE ARE PROBLEM AREAS, YOU SHOULD LOOK AT THEM AGAIN" sign. It's almost like you missed the entire point of the town hall, or didn't attend!

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

My arguments didn't pan out? You're the guy who claimed that Bioware were some kind of new company when they made Mass Effect and Dragon Age. You're the guy who has only shown up to attempt torpedoing people's criticism with tone arguments and ad hominem attacks. Please tell me how I'm the one who's argument isn't floating more, you knight in ivory mail. Maybe the damsel will favor you with a kiss after you slay the evil, nasty dragon! Oh, hold me I may faint at the thought!

/melodrama


The open letter is vague because it was meant to reflect consensus, not specifics. It's almost like we didn't want to sound like we were dictating specifics to PGI, and instead work as a giant "THESE ARE PROBLEM AREAS, YOU SHOULD LOOK AT THEM AGAIN" sign. It's almost like you missed the entire point of the town hall, or didn't attend!

I wasn't the one talking about Bioware, and I said that I wasn't at the town hall...

[Wales Grey]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:05 PM, said:

And you have numbers to back this up? That's interesting since I don't remember seeing any statistics releases lately. And EVE is NOT going strong, sub rates are stale and Null Sec is their 2PPC+Gauss problem.

EVE has always been in free-fall, its only redeeming grace the freedom it allows its players. Also, I didn't know that Nullsec was the main problem with EVE, I thought it was one of its redeeming features, the absolute freedom that it allowed players. Unless you're one of those carebears who HATES THOSE NASTY EVIL GOONS HOW DARE THEY WIN AT EVE!

[Destructicus]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:05 PM, said:

So what is the point here, that if you never made one you should never try? Not all games get smooth starts, and almost no developers get things right the first time around (especially Blizzard). I have enough patience to wait for them to improve.



And you have numbers to back this up? That's interesting since I don't remember seeing any statistics releases lately. And EVE is NOT going strong, sub rates are stale and Null Sec is their 2PPC+Gauss problem.

Talking points are vague?
Sure thing kid...
The numbers are in the Googledocs link kid
967 individuals and over 5,000 people in collective groups.
Now go ahead and dismiss it just as PGI does.
You're just as bad as PGI when it comes to dismissing people

[Wales Grey]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

I wasn't the one talking about Bioware, and I said that I wasn't at the town hall...

Appologies, it was that other guy, I'm sorry I gave you flak about

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

I said that I wasn't at the town hall...

Wait, so basically you don't have a ******* clue what you're talking about? Thanks for playing "MWO Forums: Act Like You Know What You're Talking About Edition"!

Edited by Wales Grey, 12 August 2013 - 10:15 PM.

[Archon Adam Steiner]

Erata, on 12 August 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

You need to do your research more, buddy. I'm not attacking you, but you are filling the thread with a lot of misinformation that, while is well-meaning, is just as misguided. It's ok to be wrong. I've been wrong plenty of times, too. Just take a step back and look at some of the arguments and accept some of the evidence. You're dangerously close to coming off as a white knight to people.

----

There is a quantifiable problem with the weapon metagame that increasing the skill ceiling on does not fix until they break even further from lore and make close range weapons worth bringing again.

Where am I wrong? 'Filling the thread'? Do these forums not find themselves filled with doom-and-gloom 'Save MWO' nonsense on a regular basis? Is this not very much like every other MMO out there, where denizens consider anything that isn't what *they* want an abject failure on the developers parts? As the saying goes, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

The game has issues. The game has balance issues to be specific. No one denies this. What people do deny - and I deny - is that this game is even close to as miserable as people seem to love to decry it.

[Kaio-Kerensky x10]

SWTOR was not made by the same people that made Bioware's single-player RPGs and also this doesn't have anything to do with MWO.

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

EVE has always been in free-fall, its only redeeming grace the freedom it allows its players. Also, I didn't know that Nullsec was the main problem with EVE, I thought it was one of its redeeming features, the absolute freedom that it allowed players. Unless you're one of those carebears who HATES THOSE NASTY EVIL GOONS HOW DARE THEY WIN AT EVE!

What do the Goons have to do with anything? The problem is it long ago shifted from wild frontier to near-uninhabited empires, the power blocs and politics keeping the majority of the EVE player population in High-Sec. This just shows how little you know about game balance.

[Wales Grey]

Arrachtas, on 12 August 2013 - 10:13 PM, said:

The game has issues. The game has balance issues to be specific. No one denies this. What people do deny - and I deny - is that this game is even close to as miserable as people seem to love to decry it.

Then refute arguments and don't make fallacious personal attacks. This is logic/rhetoric 101 stuff here.

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:

What do the Goons have to do with anything? The problem is it long ago shifted from wild frontier to near-uninhabited empires, the power blocs and politics keeping the majority of the EVE player population in High-Sec. This just shows how little you know about game balance.

So basically, the freeform element of a game has been claimed and dominated by groups of motivated people? Tell me how this wasn't an expected endgame from day one. How was it supposed to remain as some kind of "wild frontier" when people could claim turf and form teams?

Edited by Wales Grey, 12 August 2013 - 10:21 PM.

[GySgtMurphy]

Gwaihir, on 12 August 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

Ahahahaha, manually desynching the firing of Gauss rifles and PPCs, that is absolutely great.

Seriously, has no one considered that they're fine without all this artificial messing around, and that they just need their numbers changed to be balanced sniper weapons?

If it was absolutely fine and balanced to have them work without any ghost heat, crazy convergence, cone of fire, or "Manual desynchronization" in MW:LL, why won't it work for MW:O? I've yet to hear any good reasoning on this point.

e: For real, because this is getting in to serious and utter comedy time: Why would you waste precious, precious programming time on something that would be an utter non-issue with perhaps 5 number changes in one XML file, at most? Roll back the PPC projectile speed buff, to something other than the exact same speed as a Gauss slug. Drop PPC RoF to 5 seconds. Anything like that would be better than this. Literally anything.

Yes, they could do that, or, if you think about the physics involved, a Gauss rifle requires A LOT of power to drive the EM field in the barrel magnets. While the firing itself does not generate heat (low friction and no propellant waste heat to dissipate), charging the barrel magnets requires quite a bit of power, which is done via capacitor banks. Now, it would stand to reason that a mech pilot could choose to fire both the PPC's and the Gauss at the same time, but for sustained fire, power would have to shunted to one system or the other, as a finite amount power is available for charging the Gauss capacitors and the PPC particle excitement chamber (the "breech," if you will). So, desynching the Gauss firing and PPC firing would likely be a safety feature rather than a "nerf", as trying to draw more power than is available is NEVER, EVER, EVERRRRR a good idea.

So, yes, the devs are looking to remove the current "Whack-A-Mole" alpha build that has become popular, but as a player, I think that is a good thing, so that people have to choose which weapon to fire, instead of making easy crits on other players (like me), which makes for a more tactically involved battle. Keep complaining, and I will just get behind you with my Founders' Hunchback and core you with a few shots from my good ol' Kali-Yama 203mm AC, because complaining is what happens right before the former Cheesers' start dying!

Edited by GySgtMurphy, 12 August 2013 - 10:19 PM.

[Erata]

Arrachtas, on 12 August 2013 - 10:13 PM, said:

Where am I wrong? 'Filling the thread'? Do these forums not find themselves filled with doom-and-gloom 'Save MWO' nonsense on a regular basis? Is this not very much like every other MMO out there, where denizens consider anything that isn't what *they* want an abject failure on the developers parts? As the saying goes, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

The game has issues. The game has balance issues to be specific. No one denies this. What people do deny - and I deny - is that this game is even close to as miserable as people seem to love to decry it.

This is the last official Mechwarrior game in the last 10 years and a lot of people are sad to, they think, see it go.

Competition is very fierce over where gamers' attention spans are going to be placed and where the money's going to flow. Even though the game isn't complete and utter misery, it just isn't as fun as it used to be, and certainly not as fun as some of its competition which changes depending on who you're talkin' to.