22 replies to this topic

[Lord Ikka]

Hi all. For those of you who don't know me I'm Lord Ikka, Sho-ko (personnel NCO) of the 9th Sword of the Dragon regiment in House Kurita. I've been playing MWO for over a year at this point, having joined back in June/July of 2012 and getting in Closed Beta early August '12. I went from a no-nothing newb to a fluff-crazy BT junkie. I played a little of MW2, had the BT card game, and read a few of the books before joining up on mwomercs; I'm basically judging MWO on its own merits, not on previous MW games. I wrote this post/rant/thought blurb last night for my regiment, and after some responses, was told that posting it on NGNG and the main forums would be a good idea. I've edited out the regiment specific text but here goes the rest of it.

I haven't been happy with MWO/PGI/IGP for about a month or so, but I decided to take a good, hard objective look at the reasons for my unhappiness and then integrate/analyze it and the current "meta" of MWO.

Forms/Mods

To start off with, I've been extremely unhappy with IGP's moderation of the mwomercs forums. From back in I think February when they removed the General Discussions and re-arranged the entire forums to last week's moving of House recruitment threads (not even all of them, mainly HK threads) to Merc Outreach, I have been less than impressed with the current moderation on the forums. I have seen a lack of moderation skill and a fair amount of biased moderating.

Now, as the 9th's recruitment officer my anger at our recruitment thread's moving is understandable. As I've spelled out in our protest threads on the forums, Faction-specific units are not mercs and forcing us to compete with merc corps for a limited selection of recruits hurts everyone. At least, after a week, we have a little traction on this with the poll that they put up- which overwhelmingly has sided with making separate Faction recruitment threads. If they actually do it- great, but I still have some major issues with the moderators.

As a forum mod (which I am on the 9th and have been before on a minor EVE corp, so I have a little understanding of what it involves) I expect you to delete/lock/merge repeat or similar threads as soon as possible instead of having an entire subform page contain mostly the same issues. I understand that IGP provides moderators for a couple of game sites (MWO, MW Tactics, Shadowrun I believe), but having multiple whine threads up in the Gameplay forum (which has basically replaced General Discussions) all concerning, or devolving into, the same topic is intolerable. After the breakup of the General Discussions forum, which was done to make everything easier apparently, monitoring the 2-4 bigger subforums should not be difficult. Just my opinion.

The biased moderating is worse. I've seen threads locked based on nothing more than who posted a new comment (typically Goons/KONG, but not always), threads moved to minor subforums for "relevance" (typically K-town or Periphery- which the bulk of MWO stays away from due to the standard content of those forums), or threads deleted without explanation that don't violate any forum rule. Now I understand that it might be better to erase or minimize damaging criticism to the game from the Devs/Mods point of view, but from a player point of view it comes off as high-handed and hypocritical-especially when the thread does not violate rules. Moving a thread to K-town or Pheriphery is a good way for it to die, but some of those threads are actually useful and helpful to the game. I don't have a problem with the mods moving threads that devolve into flame wars, threats, rules violations (Name and Shame primarily) or threads that are simply more of the same.

The current state of the mwomercs forums is very toxic, with tons of whine/hate threads found throughout, so I do have some sympathy for the mods/devs. What I would like though, is some damn consistency and standards. Taming the beast, so to speak, after letting these threads go on will be rough, but there needs to be something done. If I was a new player, I am sure that I wouldn't want to join the game based on all the vitriol that is spewed all across the boards. Hell, that is killer to games- who wants to join if everybody playing the game seems to be a "hater" and complains.

This leads me into my next "topic" of sorts.

Dev and Player Base Communication

This has been a sore spot for many players for a long time. It has caused forum storms, pre-order refunds, and apologies. It is something that needs to be fixed, or at least needs to be addressed in a visible way.

The core complaint of many players is that PGI is not listening to any feedback we give them. For those of us that were in Closed Beta, we got used to the Devs responding to posts, playing with us, and in general being very open to players' comments and suggestions, even if they weren't implemented. Fast forward to today, with the very visible lack of information and seemingly indifference to player prospective, and you can clearly see why so many players are upset. There are a few major issues that need to be addressed.

1
PGI's continual insistence that those players posting on their forums or that are in non/semi/fully competitive units are a minority/not their target audience. This shows a clear lack of foresight on PGI's part and is very blatantly disrespectful to this group of players. While I understand that PGI wants to attract a larger audience of casual/gamers that don't know about BT, ignoring a large portion of your player base is dangerous. Here's the thing- that "core" base of players are truly the ones that will shell out big, and continual, bucks for the game. Yes, casual players and even those new players who don't know BT may purchase MC, but not at the rate the core group will. These are the guys that have lived/played/loved BT for years and want this game to succeed. Despite the fact that the core players have different ideas and thoughts about the game, they ALL want it to succeed and play it for years. This is the reason something like #savemwo started- the players are worried about the game.

2
PGI's lack of consitant, clear communication on the state of the game- present or future. There needs to be an accounting at PGI/IGP's PR/community relations department. Two problems are present within this issue- what I can Dev brushoff and inconsistent dispersal of information.

Dev brushoff is something like Russ's Twitter dismissal of a player's concerns by saying he's "on an island," or the taunting note about 1PV players early in August. That sort of flippant comment is severely damaging to players, as it is both unprofessional and belittling. It can, and has, cause a lack of trust in the players because they view the Devs as not in touch or aloof.

The inconsistent dispersal of information comes down to the multiple times PGI has stated one thing, like no 3PV or coolant flush, and then changed it (without any notice- which is the important part). The fact that the game changes and decisions have to be re-thought is not unusual or even that big of a deal; the true problem is that there will be either a severe lack of lead-time in-between announcing the changes and implementation (3PV without separate queues for example) or no communication at all after announcing something (the Friday announcements of both 3PV and consumables including coolant flush- with no follow up for at least three days while the forums burned).

I understand that all the Devs are working very hard on the game and don't have time to deal with every little issue that pops up, but these were clearly very large issues that didn't get addressed, or were addressed poorly and confusingly, and need to have some time put in on thinking about how and when to give out the information.

A proper PR department/individual needs to have as much information as possible about future changes, and the ability to disperse that information AS IS NEEDED. Stop throttling TheGarth and making him use "Soon" or "I'll ask" as his only answers. I love the fact that PGI's community manager sits down with NGNG and actually interacts with members of the community, but he needs to have the information to give them. I understand having secret stuff, its fun, but Garth not being able to answer any questions week after week is bad, and even when he answers them by saying "it’s being looked at", the players never see any action being done. Also, continually changing the method of interaction between Devs and players (first having Dev Blogs, then Command Chair, the Ask the Devs and changing AtD format constantly) makes it difficult for a player get reliable information. If you are going to do Command Chair updates on big issues, then actually use it- don't ignore it after a while. Ask the Devs used to be a fairly often answered/free form, now we get it maybe every two weeks and we have to "vote" on questions. Finally, either stop doing interviews/releasing info on other sites (won't happen) or at least also link or duplicate that information on the mwomercs site. It is frustrating and useless for a player to have to go to another site to get new information about a game because it is not on the game's own site. I don't know another game that does that.

3
The entitled attitude of the player base needs to stop. The fact that players have put money into this game does not entitle them to have everything their way. This is a game made by a company that is expected to make a profit, not a piece of perfect art that will satisfy every consumer. I am not advocating that player views should be ignored (1st section) or that PGI/IGP can get away with doing everything without informing the players (2nd section). I am stating that just because the players have paid money does not give them an exclusive right to have their way with the game.

It is PGI's game at the end of the day, and whether or not the players stay will depend on their actions, but the players also need to understand that their own entitled attitude of "I paid money so the game should be how I want it" is complete ********. This game won't be everything everyone wants, it can't. It is its own game, not MW4 or 5 or MPBT: 3025. Some decisions that are not liked by the base will be made, and players need to understand that after a reasonable explanation is given the issue needs to be dropped and the game needs to progress.

Th same goes for posting the same sort of {Scrap} whine/rage threads that go up regularly on mwomercs on other games sites is horrible for the growth of the game. No better way is there for someone to be turned off of a new game than to see tons of comments on a third party site news article blasting the game. That is an instant way to make sure that someone who might have been intrigued by the game and looking to try will not even dare. It's similar to talking about family issues in public- why let everyone know the issues you have with each other when all it does is bring more trouble. Doing it to force PGI to change is even worse than doing it simply out of being upset. I will never agree with that sort of strong-arm tactic, which is also why I don't agree with asking for a refund for pre-ordered items to force changes. It is nothing more than consumer blackmail, and makes PGI less likely to listen to player complaints or give out new deals.

Threats and hate speech also needs to be addressed. No threats should ever be given to a Dev or member of either IGP or PGI. If a player is that upset or invested into MWO, they need to step back and do some thinking and calming. It is unacceptable and downright ludicrous that I even have to address this, but it needs to stop. Behave like a damn adult- if you are that upset with a decision, just walk away from your computer or stop playing the game for a while.

Game/Gameplay

I know, it took me this long to get to the actual state of the game? Really? Unfortunately, yes. After a over a year with this game, riding out storms of LRM over/underpoweredness, PPC uselessness/proliferation, and various other changes in the "meta" of the game, I have some thoughts on how it is now. I'll start with some of the issues that make me unhappy but finish up with what I hope is a look at a promising future.

3rd Person View (3PV)
Simply because it is so divisive will I address 3PV. My personal feelings and testing have made my view of it as both useless and worrying in some instances. My main concern of 3PV was the implementation without warning and the change of queues issues addressed earlier.

As a training/new player recruitment tool 3PV both fails and succeeds. On the general scale of things, most people who haven't played a Mech/tank game have a hard time understanding the movement of the Mechs in-game, this is a known issue. 3PV does allow for the player to see some, if not all, of the Mech and better understand the overall position of the Mech, its lance-mates, and the battlefield in general than the simple 1PV does. The wider angle of view and the more open "feel" of 3PV can be beneficial to a new player. This is combined with some severe downsides though- the lack being able to see most Mechs' legs (thus negating the new players confusion of why the Mech is moving in a different direction than the torso) and the big blinking "shoot me" sign of the drone make life difficult for a new player.

As a tactical advantage, I don't see 3PV being that useful. Yes- I understand that a scout in a competitive match can now hide behind a hill/ridge/terrain feature and feed info to his team. This can be countered by the aforementioned "Shoot Me" red blinker, but occasionally that blinker doesn't work right/is hard to see. To that argument I will simply say that a good ECM-equipped scout could do almost the exact same thing and risk very little by peeking over a hill. While the enemy may sometimes see the scout, quite often it will be missed- especially in the mass of movement that 12 vs 12 has become. Furthermore, this sort of tactical advantage only has any real meaning in the beginning of a match. Since most matches right now are formulaic, with both sides knowing the other's general strategy, this is of limited use.

Whether or not you agree with me, that's my view. I don't see 3PV as a big deal, even in competitive drops. Both sides have it/can use it, it is not just given to one side.

Weapons balancing/Ghost Heat/PPC & Gaussfest
For the most part, I feel that the current weapons balance in MWO is the best it has ever been. Most weapons have a clear use, are regularly used, and the pros/cons balance out well. The weapons I think need some work are these-Flamer: It needs a clear use. Just heating up an enemy Mech is not very useful, especially when your Mech heats up as well. I would also like some additional damage to be done by the flamer, not a lot, but enough that taking it isn't a waste of a ton/crit. A 90m 1.0 dps flamer that can heat up the enemy for a max of 30/40% heat on your Mech would be about perfect.

SRMs: I believe once hit detection is fixed that the SRMs will go back to what they should be- a nasty short-range shotgun that can do decent damage but not be enough to make Splatcats the only Mech around again.

Streaks- Current damage/hit detection is alright, but for some reason I feel that streaks just are lacking right now. Having 3+ streaks on a Mech should make a Light pilot scared- maybe a slightly high fire rate? The reason the Streakcat was so feared was the combo of damage to CT (fixed) and rocking effect of the missiles (lessened), so having the Streaks fire a little faster might be alright. Maybe this one is just in my head though, cause I'm waffling about it.

Narc: The Narc beacon has been a joke ever since it was put in. There is no way that a 12 shot per ton(up from six per ton!), 2 ton plus ammo weapon that does no damage is going to be used unless it is substantial changed. Easiest change- make it able to have a 45 second timer (30 right now), no damage threshold (30 right now), and make the Mech it is attached to able to be targeted regardless of line-of-sight. Throw in the fact that ECM negates it, and you have a useful weapon. It can be useful for teams simply for the info on where the target is, has a direct counter (ECM), and allows the LRMs enough time for a volley/two to actually travel the necessary time to reach the target (sometimes up to 20 seconds at around 1000m). Otherwise just scrap it, its a useless weapon.

A/C 5: I almost included both the A/C 2 and 10 here as well, but I think both of those are used more and have a little less issues than the 5. It has a major problem- weights as much, with one ton ammo, as a PPC with two heatsinks for half the damage. That alone sinks it. A faster fire rate or more ammo per ton (which I think should be upped on all ACs by 30% in general) would help out this weapon. For 9 tons you can either get an A/C 2 with 375 rounds, a PPC with unlimited ammo and 2 extra heatsinks, or an A/C 5 with 30 shots. Not a real choice, the A/C 5 needs some work. Similar is the A/C 10, but lately it has seen a resurgence as a result of the A/C 20's heat penalty.

PPCs: As much as I hate saying it, the PPC/ER PPC need to have a little more heat- as long as Ghost Heat is removed. Right now the 9/13 is not enough to make triple/quad PPCs rare. Up it to 9.5 or 10 for regulars and 14 or 14.5 for ER and it would be about perfect. Of course, this is without the Ghost Heat mechanism- the inherent heat that 4+ PPCs have will keep even PPC Stalkers wary of mass fire due to the overheat damage.

Large Pulse Laser: This one I'm going to simply say that heat doesn't balance- there is no point to the weapon with the massive heat/lowish damage that is currently happening.

ER Large Laser: I don't even know what to do with the ER large laser to make it very useful. Maybe a slight heat nerf or a beam duration increase- I am honestly at a loss here. The extra range of this weapon is basically negated by the damn high heat compared to a regular large laser.

Currently I feel all the other weapons are decent and have a place in the game.

The Ghost Heat penalty needs to leave. For those of you that don't know what I'm talking about, it refers to the penalty incurred on weapons when you fire above a certain number of them, dependent on weapon, within .5 seconds. While it was a definite winner in discouraging the 4+ PPC stalker/Atlas meta that held the game hostage for a few months, the mechanic should just have been a temporary fix until a real solution was implemented. Whether that solution is re-arranging PPC heat level, hardpoint restrictions, or some other method like Alpha restrictions/timers I don't care, a real solution needs to be finalized and applied. This Ghost heat is really confusing even to experience players, so having new players killed by the overheat penalties (which I am in favor of, consequences are a good thing) is not good.

Dual PPC plus Gauss rifle seems to be the default combo for every "competitive" build/team. You have more of them, you win. And its not hard to see why-an Alpha of 45 without any heat penalty and lots of range. Kills all Mechs, even Atlai, in 4 shots or less. The desyncing of the PPCs and Gauss is a good start, but I'm rather disappointed that the Gauss rifle is the one that gets the charging mechanic added to it. For a new player, an energy weapon seems more likely to need to be charged than a ballistic, so it's hard to see them liking/understanding the change (why won't this gun fire???). For me, having a clear sniper weapon like the Gauss rifle (as opposed to the PPC, which seems to work decently at all distances for hit detection) with a charging mechanic is just clunky.

Community Warfare/Clans/Future
I really, really wish I had good/any news about CW. I do. This is the reason most of us are playing/joined the 9th. We're looking forward to a decently nuanced meta-game that will give us a reason to fight. Unfortunately, we have had almost no newer information about CW than what we had in the spring. The only thing I have been able to gleam from the release of Project Phoenix is that the Faction loyalty points may indicate a more involved game than World of Tank's Clan Wars. I am hoping for something more along the lines of EVE Online's Faction Warfare, where the Loyalty Points you earn not only give you rank, but allow you to purchase Faction variants (with unique bonuses) of commonly produced Faction Mechs. Whether this happens or not remains to be seen. I sincerely hope that we receive something more than merely lines moving on a map, that we get some sort of narrative or reward for doing well in CW that gives the various House something to truly compete for.

I am also hoping that the Clans will be delayed at least 3-6 months after CW comes out. I know that this seems like a very long time, and it is, but I have some reasons. The various factions need to gain both experience in the CW interface/meta and they need to have some sort of House/Inner Sphere pride that will react to the Invasion. While main of us RPers already take the Invasion seriously, the majority of the new gamers don't have the BT background to really understand/care about this game-changing event. And it should be game changing. It should be brutal and vicious, and damn difficult to deal with for us IS regiments- because that's how it went down in the fluff. Giving that extra time also allows PGI some breathing room in making sure that Clantech is not completely devastating to the game by forcing everyone to only run Clantech, just merely a horrendous challenge to overcome with our humble IS gear. The good news on this front is that I have no doubt the Clan Omnimechs will look incredible. PGI has done a brilliant job of making even crappy looking Mechs (Quickdraw, Cataphract, Kintaro) decent.

The future of MWO actually looks fairly bright to me. As long as some of the issues I mentioned earlier are cleared up, I can see this game as one I'm still playing in a couple of years, with over 50 Mechs in my hangar and a string of 9th Sword victories on my belt. The basic game and gameplay have come a long way from Closed Beta in just a year, and I don't doubt that in another year we'll look back on this time and go "Damn, remember when..." I'm looking to release and the end of the year to judge where MWO is at then, and feeling that if everything goes smoothly this game will go the distance.

Anyway, there’s my long rant/thought blurb about how I’m feeling about the game. Feel free to comment/mock/argue with me- discussion is good.

As always, good hunting and Forward the Dragon!

[tuffy963]

TL; DR Summary: I am disappointed about the game's current state, but still very optimistic about it's future....

[Lord Ikka]

Very much so Tuffy

Sorry about the wall-o-text everybody.

[Thunder Lips Express]

I don't agree with everything you said here, and most of it has been talked about at nauseum.
That being said you have made lots of valid points and have done so in a respectful manner which is refreshing.
Very well written post/rant/thought/blurb

[KharnZor]

You lost me at the entitled bit sorry.

[Threat Doc]

Lord Ikka, I agree with many of the things you've said, here. A lot of folks do feel entitled, but I think a lot of us have a right to be entitled, to a point, as well. Many of us have put hundreds, perhaps thousands of hours into this game universe, and we've put a great deal into this game, as well.

MechWarrior Online would NOT be here without US, because BattleTech, and any concept of it would have died a LONG time ago, had not millions of people, at one time or another, played the BattleTech tabletop game between 1982 and 2001, and then many of us veterans, and good folks like Mektek, the fella's doing MechWarrior: Living Legends, The BattleTech Simulator, AT1:BT, MPBT: 3025/8, The Grand Council, The Combat Zone, The Registry, and all of the other ladder and planetary leagues out in the world, including those who failed or were taking so long they had no ability to complete; had not our love for this been here, PGI might have been able to secure the rights for this game, but they would not then have wanted to produce it, because the game would not have been big enough for them.

Hundreds of millions of individual man-hours have gone into playing and writing for this game... it does NOT belong to FASA or Catalyst or anyone other than the fans, anymore, because the work we have, collectively, put into the game universe outstrips all of the things they have done, including the arrogant stupidity that has gone into various parts of the game universe by the powers that be, by thousands of times over what they have built.

Now, with that out of the way, I will take a moment to agree with you that, at the end of the day, this game has to be built by PGI, and there are a lot of things people are not going to like. However, PGI does NEED to listen to those of us who've been not only with MWO from the beginning, but have been playing since about the same time they were born, or older. They need a viable game... great, get your viable game, but understand who you're really building this for, and do not ignore those who've put in the time.

And, for you naysayers out there who would argue that your opinion is every bit as relevant as that of the veterans... meh!

Now, the community has concerns, and these concerns are broad enough that PGI will ignore them, and will fail to deliver an answer for these things, AT THEIR OWN RISK! It's not a matter of badgering and never receiving an answer, it's a matter of understanding that we OWN MWO AS WELL! Without our money, this game will not survive. Though I agree that someone making a pre-order or purchasing 'Mechs for their stable, for the sake of mastery and what-not, is on the purchaser, and no refund will be forthcoming, or else this game surely will not exist, the failure of the community to make purchases without answers to the most glowing questions, all of which I believe you've pointed out, Lord Ikka, means fewer people, such as myself, who WANTS to believe in this game and will SHOWER money on it if it's being done properly, will actually make those purchases, and the game will die.

PGI does not have an endless reserve of cash and, in fact, if I have my numbers correct, only about 5% of it has been put into the game by PGI and/or their immediate pre-announcement supporters, which means this game is on life support without us, and without answers that life support will move to death, and then PGI will be stuck with the remainder of the bill. Threat? No. Hard economics.

Though I agree that threats and demands will, in general, not get anyone anywhere, it's mandatory that PGI gives an accounting of where they are spending OUR money; that's just good business. I know there are a lot of people who want to play this game because it's already a blast and, I believe, it's getting better... and I'm sure there are a lot of BattleTech fans out there who are enjoying some of the things they're seeing thus far... but, there are bloody few of us in the whole of this community that want this game to be a true-to-game BattleTech simulator amalgam, without sacrificing fun, as the veterans who've been in this game not for the past two years this coming October 23rd, but who have played the game since the end of 1984 or the beginning of 1985. If PGI screws this up -for the record, I think they have about 85% of this game dead-on-balls-accurate-, the future of BattleTech, itself, may be in jeopardy. So, believe me when I tell you I want them to get this really right, so it's a lot of fun for everyone involved.

[Lord Ikka]

True Kay Wolf- but both the Devs and the community need to understand that while they both want the game to succeed, to have that happen both sides need to work together. The game is PGI's, the community is ours. Both sides are necessary for the game to really work. If either side ignores the other, or responds to any outreach with vehement hatred, then the game will wither away.

[Earl White]

Lord Ikka, on 01 September 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

True Kay Wolf- but both the Devs and the community need to understand that while they both want the game to succeed, to have that happen both sides need to work together. The game is PGI's, the community is ours. Both sides are necessary for the game to really work. If either side ignores the other, or responds to any outreach with vehement hatred, then the game will wither away.

Actually I disagree with that assessment, there are quite a few games where Devs don't really listen to the community but still have a very successful game. I don't know about "hatred" but in pretty much any game forum, it is mostly a place to vent and discuss what you would like changed, at least that's the majority focus.

[Lord Ikka]

But in general those games don't have a over twenty-year universe history that goes with it.

There's a difference between venting and constructive criticism and the current state of rage that is on the mwo forums.

[Threat Doc]

Lord Ikka, on 01 September 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

True Kay Wolf- but both the Devs and the community need to understand that while they both want the game to succeed, to have that happen both sides need to work together. The game is PGI's, the community is ours. Both sides are necessary for the game to really work. If either side ignores the other, or responds to any outreach with vehement hatred, then the game will wither away.

I agree with what you're saying, here. My only true hope is that PGI will take a real first step and explain the various things you've covered in the OP, why they did them, what's coming, etc.

You know, when I was working on EH-60 Blackhawks in the Army, I had it explained to me, once that the intelligence that was gathered was not what was classified, rather it was the methods used to gather it. This came from a now-former Intelligence Captain who now works for FEMA in a position he can't tell me about, hehe. Anyway, if this is the truth for real-world intelligence and intelligence gathering, then why couldn't it apply to PGI, as well. I don't need to know any trade secrets, I don't need to know HOW they intend to adjust programming or databases, etc., to do what they're going to do. I don't think anyone in the community is actually desirous to find out trade secrets; I think all of us are fatigued with the lack of answers for why things were done in the first place, what the general feeling was concerning the direction of the game, how it relates to the BattleTech universe, how unrealistic it can be, if yet amazingly detailed, and what the realism of the game actually brings about, and what changes they intend to use to improve the situation. The general output needs to be detailed, make no mistake, but no one needs to read the mechanics of what they're attempting to do, if those are trade secrets. I hope I'm being relatively clear with this?

Lord Ikka, on 01 September 2013 - 03:07 PM, said:

But in general those games don't have a over twenty-year universe history that goes with it.

There's a difference between venting and constructive criticism and the current state of rage that is on the mwo forums.

Absolutely agreed on both counts. However, even you have to admit a lot of the rage on these forums, at this time, has actually been building since October 23rd, 2011 -I know I've been plenty angry with the lack of effective communication since then-, and these latest items are simply icing on the cake. Look, I did absolutely nothing wrong when I was writing a post on October 26th or 27th in 2011, but Kyle and Paul banned me, anyway, likely because of the overly-passionate follow-up of the poster after me. What I asked was controversial, make no mistake, but it did not violate anything. I gave PGI hell for the next three days until they put me back on, and Bryan admitted it was PGIs mistake, overzealous moderation; I'm still waiting for an apology from Kyle, though, and likely will never receive it from the prideful young man. From that point to now, customer service has been the lowest priority for PGI, and it should have been at the top of their list, instead.

They can still recover this, they can still get rid of the vast portion of the vitriolic passion evinced throughout these forums, but they're really going to need to pull their heads out of their collective fourth-point-of-contact.

I won't be able to respond for some time... one of our computers is down, and so we're playing hot seat computers, my sons and I.

[Lord Ikka]

As long as there are posters that use professional, constructive criticism I believe that the community and PGI can work together. Unfortunately right now I feel that PGI has to take the first step and extend their hand to the community. A true gesture of goodwill (rather than a rambling sort-of apology) should be delivered.

[Boyinleaves]

I would love to comment more in-depth on this thoughtful and impassioned post, but I need to go to bed. It's great to see people who so clearly care about MWO, and put so much effort into trying to help it get better, and I sincerely hope your voice, and that of your House makes a difference.

[Lord Ikka]

I can't, and wouldn't try to, speak for all the members of House Kurita, or even all the members of the 9th Sword on this sort of an issue. I have had many passionate disagreements with both HK members and 9th members- everyone has their own opinions about many of the points I have addressed.

[Malleus011]

Hear, hear.

I'd love a breather from the Clans so we can play CW with only the Great Houses.

[Scromboid]

I can no longer be optimistic. We are 3/4s the way through the bag of chips, and so far, they are all stale.

[Tsen Shang]

Lord Ikka, on 01 September 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

3
The entitled attitude of the player base needs to stop. The fact that players have put money into this game does not entitle them to have everything their way. This is a game made by a company that is expected to make a profit, not a piece of perfect art that will satisfy every consumer.

Mmmm nope. As an 'investor' of sorts (you know, the guys who put money into something to help out because they want something to succeed or feel they will get a return on their investment), I think I have every right to expect PGI to create the game that I invested in.

I fully expect to see a game realized that contains at least some features originally discussed. CW, no pay to win (whoops coolant), no 3rd person view, tactical warfare with roles beyond poptarting, and lots of mechs.

Well hey, at least we have mechs. If I'm not allowed to be entitled, does that mean I can have my money back to reinvest until PGI decides to deliver on the things that were promised? Or to spend it elsewhere if they never deliver? That'd be grand.

[Lord Ikka]

We aren't investors we are consumers. Founders paid for a promised product- the Mechs and premium time of the packages. Investors would be getting a portion of the company profits, via stock options or guaranteed percentage of profit through a contract of some sorts. The Founders package was similar to an investment, but for PGI and not us. They got a chunk of money but didn't have to give up stock for the money.

You are not an investor. You got something out of the money you paid- the Founders Mechs and premium time. If you think you got a bad deal, too bad- you have had over six months using said product you paid for. No company is going to refund you money after you used their product for six months and you complain about other issues that don't involve what you bought.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Well I had believed that the game was getting alot better, so much so that I purchased the Overlord Package and damn near got Saber. However PGI is back to the same crud that caused me to take a 4 month break back in early open beta.

The Economy has been reduced to a grind, Gauss Rifles got nerfed instead of the real issue being fixed and the PPC/ER PPC have been returned to the same state that was universally determined was "broken" way back in Closed beta. It has been a year yet nothing has really changed. Sure we have more mechs, some new maps and 12 vs 12 but we are back to basically playing the same broken game we played a year ago when it was closed beta. Nothing is really changed or different.

I am seriously disappointed right now and having a hard time working up any motivation to even log into the game at the moment.

[Lord Ikka]

Actually, I like the latest patch (Sept 3). PPCs returned to a decent heat level- they still have range/no ammo cost but are balanced with high heat and, for the regular PPC, the inability to deal extremely close-range damage. The gauss rifle firing charge system is strange, but not horrible overall. SRM 2 and 4 got a little love, made them more likely to be used now.

The main issue with PPCs back in Closed Beta wasn't heat- it was a combination of high heat and lack of hit detection. It wasn't just that the PPCs had high heat, it was the fact that the damage from the PPC shot was either not registering or spreading out over more than one section. Now you have a choice- do the damage and suffer the heat, or pick up a ballistic and deal with the ammo issue/charge issue with gauss.

Twin PPC + Gauss snipers got hit hard, now they can't do the same pinpoint damage without using either a macro or decent timing. This encourages learning how to skillfully use the combo- which I approve of. Skill over point-n-shoot is a good thing, and this patch also gives the snipers a bone by making the advanced zoom workable. Now you have a tool to help sniping, and mechanics that make sniping a skilled subsection of the game rather than the easiest way to play. All of that is for the better.

[Tsen Shang]

Lord Ikka, on 03 September 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

We aren't investors we are consumers. Founders paid for a promised product- the Mechs and premium time of the packages. Investors would be getting a portion of the company profits, via stock options or guaranteed percentage of profit through a contract of some sorts. The Founders package was similar to an investment, but for PGI and not us. They got a chunk of money but didn't have to give up stock for the money.

Yes, Founders paid for a promised product, a product we haven't yet received. There are plenty of instances of people suing for either false advertisement or failure to deliver the product in either a timely manner or as promised. How on earth can you justify in your head that PGI received a huge chunk of money "similar to an investment" and not demand that they keep their end of the bargain with the people they received their "investment money" from?! That's like paying a car mechanic ahead of time to replace your radiator and then being ok with it when he only rotates your tires. Are you kidding me? That doesn't fly in ANY industry.

Lord Ikka, on 03 September 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

You are not an investor. You got something out of the money you paid- the Founders Mechs and premium time. If you think you got a bad deal, too bad- you have had over six months using said product you paid for. No company is going to refund you money after you used their product for six months and you complain about other issues that don't involve what you bought.

Actually, both Bioware and Amazon happily refunded angry customers that purchased Mass Effect 3, for similar reasons. Things they felt were promised and talked about for months and years weren't delivered on, and they did get their money back. And guess what, Community Warfare is EXACTLY the reason I became a founder, and absolutely involves what I bought. These are all cop out responses defending someone who took your money and hasn't delivered the promised product. Do you have Stockholm syndrome? How can you possibly be ok with this?

For months and months I told my friends (who are also founders) to just wait, that things would be delivered in time. They said Q1 OR Q2, they said they were working on it, they said this, they said that. The problem is, I'm now at the point they where nothing promised has been delivered a year after 'open beta' started, and I'm not ok with it.

Here's a quote from Adam Biessener from Game Informer on a completely different game, but incredibly relevant:

Quote

Neverwinter is still in “open beta” as of this writing. However, letting the public play, taking their money in the cash shop, and committing to having no further character wipes before “full” release sounds an awful lot like a game being “out” to me.

Neverwinter went into open beta in April 2013. MWO went into open beta almost twelve months ago. This isn't a beta. This is just a cash grab where they can say "Oh it's just a beta" to any and all bugs and/or lack of features.

I held off playing after a brief trial with the beta because I wanted to wait for the finished product. Crazy, right?



Edit: Edited for weird copy-paste issues.

Edited by Tsen Shang, 03 September 2013 - 09:38 PM.