I tried reading everything, I just couldn't (atopped at page 37)
Quote
Hmm, let's see if this works:
PGI, third person view makes me nauseous! The way the camera bounces around while using 3PV also makes my lower back hurt! Get rid of it now!
Yeah, me too! Motion Sickness!
Quote
PGI,
Careful how you tread.
Think about the majority of the players that put money in this game. We are mostly adults with careers and have loved these games since childhood. We are the ones who buy Phoenix etc. Not these "kids" you are trying to grab. Pay attention to your true harcore player base. It is where your money is coming from. We will not be easily fooled or tolerate this behavior.
Please fix.
Already fooled. I logged in today and not only 3rd person was in, but it was the default mode. I was baffled.
It is amazing how quick that got in.
Quote
Well, I guess the product could have been better but.... PGI, you should have worked on FIXING stuff first before new content / ANY new content... and listen to the customers.
theres this old saying that goes "The customer is always right".
I worked at a software company. This was followed to the word, every misstep enraged our clients, similar to these threads, and threats of cancelling the rental of the software were high. No other choice, we had to go with the consumer, they were right.
Our programmers worked their behinds off overtime in order to make the software appeal to our clients, scrapping all the changes made before, wasting precious resources, time, patience and the programmers own lives.
And when we finally released the content, the way the clients wanted, they were so happy, we not only heard "thank you" a lot, but even jokes and beer offers(I was at support center).
This is the way to go PGI, it really is. Look how many are canceling the PP, how many rage quitting. I want to play with people, with friends, but people are going away instead. I actually liked seeing my mech, but that's all, I am a 1st person player.
Quote
Okay, I'm going to briefly play devil's advocate here, then jump on the bandwagon...
At this point, I'm wondering if PGI's being pushed into this by their publisher, IGP, if they've been told that they have to include 3PV RIGHT NOW or else. It would certainly explain why they did it all of a sudden and with little warning, and also without hardcore mode. Lord knows we've seen enough instances of higher-ups pushing their decisions on game developers in the last decade (see: the death of Star Wars Galaxies for one of the most prevalent examples) and ruining games in the process.
The reason this springs to mind is largely due to the sudden and unexpected change of developers for MW: Tactics. One moment MW: Tactics had one publisher, and the next it was a different company, with no prior announcement that I could discern. This is a classic symptom of a publisher who micro-manages the developers they publish for and ruins games in the process. Now it may be happening to PGI.
So, at this point, what would you do if you're Russ Bullock? You've just been told by your publisher to implement third-person view OR ELSE, but it's a.) not ready, and b.) would violate your oath to the players. You could refuse to implement it, but that would get PGI axed just like Roadhouse Interactive was. However, while taking the moral high ground is laudable and the players will love you for it, your responsibility to the customer isn't your only duty. You also have a duty to the employees working under you as well as your own family, all of whom would face hardship and could even lose their homes when the money stops coming in. You then have to decide: is your personal honor and integrity worth the pain and suffering it will cause your family and employees?
Let's say you choose to sacrifice your integrity for the well-being of your associates and family. The players are going to be angry, and rightfully so, and all of that anger will focus directly on you. You now face another decision: implement 3PV while being honest and laying the circumstances out for the player base (which, not coincidentally, will also have the effect of placing the blame squarely where it belongs) or implementing it yet staying quiet and accepting the burden of guilt.
If you do the former, your players will be unhappy, but with IGP instead of you. However, because you pointed the finger at them, justified or not, you and your company may end up facing the same consequences as if you'd simply refused to implement 3PV in the first place. Nobody in authority likes having the blame laid upon their shoulders, especially not when it's fully justified.
With all of the above choices being totally unpalatable, which one do you choose? Refuse and lose your company's income, accept but place the blame where it belongs (and possibly lose your income), or accept and keep quiet, pretending it was your own choice?
As a person who at least attempts to be reasonably moral when it comes to the important things, I'd choose the third option and sacrifice my integrity for the good of my employees and family. My players would be unhappy and many would leave for greener pastures, but at least none of them would be left wondering where their next meal is coming from.
I don't know if this bears any resemblance to reality or not, but it's always best to remember that nobody works in a vacuum.
All of that said, I'm just as pissed as everyone else that 3PV offers a significant tactical advantage in the form of information gathering and, moreover, that this was done without hardcore mode, in direct contravention of a promise made to us by PGI.
EDIT: Just read the apology, and it sounds to me like PGI is saying, "We know what's best for you, and you WILL like it. We're sorry we didn't communicate that fact well, but them's the breaks. We'll be happy to make *minor* alterations in our plan, but that big thing you really want (hardcore mode)? Yeah, no."
I strongly believe this guy is right though. PGI is probably doing this because of the publisher. If that's the case, there's nothing we can do(except, of course, abandon the game unfortunately).
9
MjrPackage, on 21 August 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:
.
