1555 replies to this topic

[Nekki Basara]

You sister actually understood the maths AND the reasoning behind it AND saw some good in designing a system that specifically penalised a large number of stock loadouts?

Can PGI hire your sister to explain it to us then please?

[Alaskan Nobody]

Nekki Basara, on 21 October 2013 - 06:13 PM, said:

You sister actually understood the maths AND the reasoning behind it AND saw some good in designing a system that specifically penalised a large number of stock loadouts?

Can PGI hire your sister to explain it to us then please?

I never said she understood the maths or anything like that - I said the general mechanic made sense to her.

I redact most of my post though - Wintersdark said what I wanted to much better than I did - you want to argue? Take it up with him.
You have made enough of your point that I doubt you and I will ever have a real civil conversation: and with that I move you to my ignore list, where I will not have the frustration of trying to argue with you.

I very honestly wish you much enjoyment in whatever game you chose to play: as it appears this one brings you mostly grief.

[Nekki Basara]

What a mature response. Well played sir, I have been rightly told!

[MechFrog1]

Shar Wolf, on 21 October 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

When all we hear is negativity, that is all we can work with.
When all you post is "X Sucks!!!!" .... what do you expect those of us who would respond to that to post?

When all you read is the negativity, that's all you choose to work with.

I've already posted my list of positive constructive ideas several places on these forums and in my mittani.com articles.

[Alaskan Nobody]

mint frog, on 21 October 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

When all you read is the negativity, that's all you choose to work with.

I've already posted my list of positive constructive ideas several places on these forums and in my mittani.com articles.

And perhaps therein lies the real problem: how much of that is PGI reading and how are they reading it?

you will note I did not quote you as one of the pure negatives Mint: and there is a reason for that, but you cannot deny the sheer negativity in the forum no?

Or have you missed the reaction to Q#5 in the last ATD?
The death-threats they used to get? (do they still? I largely have avoided those parts of the forums since)

The more negative things get, the less we can expect PGI to listen.

My big point is that: for all we have no control over how anyone reads things, if we do not strive for constructivity in our criticism, we cannot expect them to listen.

Had a thought on top of that though: it would probably help if we kept track of what features we hate, that we know they are not going to remove, and work around that?
(that is meant in a general sense, and if you get offended by the above.... I cannot help, sorry)

Edit: I feel like I sound like a booping Hippie with all the positive and negative talk >.<

Edited by Shar Wolf, 21 October 2013 - 07:44 PM.

[Vaderman]

Shar Wolf, on 21 October 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

I never said she understood the maths or anything like that - I said the general mechanic made sense to her.

I redact most of my post though - Wintersdark said what I wanted to much better than I did - you want to argue? Take it up with him.
You have made enough of your point that I doubt you and I will ever have a real civil conversation: and with that I move you to my ignore list, where I will not have the frustration of trying to argue with you.

I very honestly wish you much enjoyment in whatever game you chose to play: as it appears this one brings you mostly grief.

People who complain about something they play for free, with no intent to contribute to it in either money or non-judgemental feedback do not matter.

Why they stick around is just to get attention for themselves, for whatever reason. I'm sure PGI would love to lose that segment of the freeloader customer base. Not sure why people who don't like a game would play it so much, and talk about it so much on the forums. Makes no sense does it?

Don't let the trolls bother you, that's their goal in life.

[Chronojam]

Wintersdark, on 21 October 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

PGI has the test server set up, but I feel they are really, really neglecting a powerful tool they could be using. Just running a couple brief tests will show if there are game-breaking bugs, but they could simply run the test server continuously for a while to test out new systems under live conditions.

It's pretty clear that QA has limited capabilities (I don't mean this in an insulting way, but rather that there are only so many of them and they only have so much time) so PGI could essentially vastly increase their effective QA staff by doing that. Create a Test Server feedback forum for each specific build, and let us break things.

It's really absurd that they'd finally make a public test server, but still gate access and limit its usefulness by restricting its availability to a scant couple hours per month, if we're lucky. Exacerbating the problem is that tests are held on weekdays during work hours for the North American audience (come to think of it, their launch party was awkwardly scheduled on a weekday during work hours for the local timezone).

It's also got the same problem their not-public testing has. From what I've heard from internal testers drawn from the community, they are not allowed to actually make suggestions or give mechanic/use feedback. Acceptable feedback is limited to "Did it work" versus "Did it not work" instead of "Will this solve the problem?" or "Does this make sense in the context?"

If that's incorrect I would not mind a developer straightening out this perception, but that's the report I've heard from then-current testers, former testers, and those that had been vying for access to their private test server.

[Chronojam]

Shar Wolf, on 21 October 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

I personally have no way to say Ghost Heat isn't stupid, without being an ***, so I have not. On the other hand, as for it being counter intuitive... what is intuitive for one person is not necessarily intuitive to another. For me the actions required for driving a car are about as counter-intuitive as it gets. (and yet this game isn't funny world no?) PS: I explain most of the mechanics to my very-not video-game oriented sister to check on stuff like that: Ghost Heat makes sense to her. (but that would be hearsay, and not stand up very well in a forum wouldn't it?)

It's literally based on unpublished charts that must be piped into various equations, and these charts have been updated several times without clear explanation. PGI's staff have disagreed on the impact of these values and their mechanics, and have alternated from saying things are working as intended or are faulty or are there to reduce alpha-strikes or are there to reduce chain-fire -- all within the same thread about the same single weapon system. Most recently we've had a moderator saying that ghost heat is an "anti-trolling" mechanic.

You could always look in your car's manual to learn how to drive it, or perhaps even call the group that manufactured it or sold it to you. With ghost heat you're operating off the charts, with no clear indication why some weapons are grouped and some aren't, if some have an impact or if some don't, why the numbers are different, and why it handles worse for chainfire for some weapons or alpha-striking for another. You can't effectively google it, because the current behavior is not published all in one place. The responses from the creators also are self-contradictory.

That's why people say it's unintuitive.

Edited by Chronojam, 22 October 2013 - 12:46 AM.

[Texas Merc]

Chronojam, on 21 October 2013 - 01:37 PM, said:

we get stuck with bad things for a very long time.

This is the crux of the entire argument over anything PGI has said or ever done.

Some people are more patient than others but I dunno if thats really good for a F2P model and I know damned well its not good for a game I have been waiting on for more than a decade.

[The Unknown Pilot]

Using the ghost heat analogy and motor vehicles, it's as intuitive as having no under the hood access, and guessing fluid / coolant/ lube levels based on running noises.

The "fans" of calling it intuitive compare it to me shifting my panhead solely on engine sound vs. the tachometer....not even remotely the same, and no middle ground.

[Heffay]

Warge, on 21 October 2013 - 05:59 PM, said:

If devs call hardcore fans "minority", "just buzz" or "u r on island"... do I need such game?

P.S. There will be another MW:LL game if MWO falls...

Hardcore fans? I'm here, and most of us are in game playing and having fun.

Maybe hardcore isn't the word you want to be using.

[Warge]

Wintersdark, on 21 October 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

I don't care what the devs say, to be honest.

That's the problem: u don't care...

Wintersdark, on 21 October 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

And keep in mind what you yourself and many others have said about the devs... They're substantially more polite..

Wintersdark, on 21 October 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

people do not have the right to make MW games without paying Microsoft for the privilege.

I'll gladly give money for project to buy rights form M$ and make BT-universe freeware... anyone with me?

[Geek Verve]

Chronojam, on 22 October 2013 - 12:45 AM, said:

It's literally based on unpublished charts that must be piped into various equations, and these charts have been updated several times without clear explanation. PGI's staff have disagreed on the impact of these values and their mechanics, and have alternated from saying things are working as intended or are faulty or are there to reduce alpha-strikes or are there to reduce chain-fire -- all within the same thread about the same single weapon system. Most recently we've had a moderator saying that ghost heat is an "anti-trolling" mechanic.

You could always look in your car's manual to learn how to drive it, or perhaps even call the group that manufactured it or sold it to you. With ghost heat you're operating off the charts, with no clear indication why some weapons are grouped and some aren't, if some have an impact or if some don't, why the numbers are different, and why it handles worse for chainfire for some weapons or alpha-striking for another. You can't effectively google it, because the current behavior is not published all in one place. The responses from the creators also are self-contradictory.

That's why people say it's unintuitive.

Ghost heat and it's particular implementation doesn't bother me one bit. The concept makes sense. I'm no scientist, but I would guess there are principles of thermal dynamics that support the notion. At the very least, I can see it for what it is - a tool they have at their disposal to balance weapon systems.

As for making the rules known to us, I don't care about that, either. What's the big deal? Set your loadout and take it to the training grounds to see how it runs. If a particular weapon set runs hotter than you would like, try something else. Whether you understand why, isn't really all that relevant. We all have a pretty good idea of which weapons are hit hardest by it. The differences between them aren't great. If it changes later, adapt. This part isn't rocket science.

I'm as big a fan of the meta game as the next guy, but the whole uproar over ghost heat just strikes me as a bit unreasonable.

[Nekki Basara]

You know the training ground and the game run differently right? Training ground is essentially useless for testing builds.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

Nekki Basara, on 22 October 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

You know the training ground and the game run differently right? Training ground is essentially useless for testing builds.

Not all modules seem to work in the TG, but otherwise it's fine for testing builds. AFAIK the heat model (which is the bit you really want to check) is identical between the online game and the TG.

[BlueVisionWarrior Online]

Warge, on 22 October 2013 - 06:02 AM, said:

...<snip>...
I'll gladly give money for project to buy rights form M$ and make BT-universe freeware... anyone with me?

Bah ha ha! Oh man, thanks for the laugh I hope your pockets are deeeeeep.

[Warge]

Geek Verve, on 22 October 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

the whole uproar over ghost heat just strikes me as a bit unreasonable.

Ghost heat is unreasonable even if it semibalanced MWO...

BlueVisionWarrior Online, on 22 October 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

I hope your pockets are deeeeeep.

Ask PGI about sum of founder's money...
And by the way I'm not talking about "real plan to get lisence from M$". But if this will ever happen I'll gladly give 1k$ or more. Got the point?

Edited by Warge, 22 October 2013 - 08:16 AM.

[Heffay]

Warge, on 22 October 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

Ask PGI about sum of founder's money...

What does this even mean?

[BlueVisionWarrior Online]

Warge, on 22 October 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

...<snip>...
Ask PGI about sum of founder's money...
And by the way I'm not talking about "real plan to get lisence from M$". But if this will ever happen I'll gladly give 1k$ or more. Got the point?

So you wanted them to take the founders money and secure the ip, then have nothing left to make a game with? Brilliant!

Your 1k$ wouldn't even be a whole percent of what it would take.

The point is there is no point because it won't happen. Got it, thanks!

Edited by BlueVisionWarrior Online, 22 October 2013 - 08:24 AM.

[stjobe]

Warge, on 22 October 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

Ask PGI about sum of founder's money...

$5 million, most of which went to IGP, not PGI.

You think $5 million is anything but chump change in this context?