57 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

Simply put, forum population does not represent a huge portion of the player population.

No but forum population does represent a huge portion of the paying player population. And thats what matters.

[MonkeyCheese]

So I was pokin my nose in after 2 weeks to see whats changed and goddam you made me actually log in and vote on this wonderful poll.

Short answer is a few undecided and everything else was a truthful disagree.

Still dont plan on loging in or any kind of $ again until things drastically change in game and with PGIs attitude.

Edited by MonkeyCheese, 09 September 2013 - 04:47 AM.

[Egomane]

How is that thread gameplay balance?

Moved!

[Belorion]

Some of you negative people attack pgi with such gusto, that one has to wonder if you are getting paid by one of the other mech games out there. Most people that don't like a product simply stop using/playing it.

Its like you come up with things to complain about. Post something negative about pgi is a forum that it doesn't apply to, then complain when it gets moved...

If you don't like the game move on. Otherwise if you turn your sour attitude around you might find you like the game more than you admit.

[MonkeyCheese]

Belorion, on 09 September 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

Some of you negative people attack pgi with such gusto, that one has to wonder if you are getting paid by one of the other mech games out there. Most people that don't like a product simply stop using/playing it.

I assume you mean we are hawken Fan . Boys (Seriously stop auto replacing that word)

Hawken and games like that are nothing at all like mechwarrior and most people love this game for the fact that it isnt just another cod/bf shooter, well at least thats the way things began.

I for one have no interest in any of that hawken/cod stuff and have never owned or intend to play them, I only got into the halo franchise thanks to the scifi

Belorion, on 09 September 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

Its like you come up with things to complain about. Post something negative about pgi is a forum that it doesn't apply to, then complain when it gets moved...

But all the bad PR inducing threads in the higher trafficked forums are always getting moved. AKA the great fourm reshuffle and death of the real General Discussion forum a while back.

Belorion, on 09 September 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

If you don't like the game move on. Otherwise if you turn your sour attitude around you might find you like the game more than you admit.

We only complain as we love mechwarrior as I have said before if people hate the game they just quit and move on and dont look back, while other people just hate the current state of the game and the direction it is going in but are still in love or at least in love with the way it use to be.

Edited by MonkeyCheese, 09 September 2013 - 05:37 AM.

[Swords to Plowshares]

I'm enjoying my time with the game. I don't feel ripped off (although I can sympathize with Founders who paid for a sales pitch different than what we've got). I do try to get my friends to play. Successful only once so far. I still love my 3PPC stock-style AWS-8Q even though it's taken a beating (that I don't think it needed). And I spent money on Pretty Baby months ago just before an SRM nerf, although thankfully that nerf is over. I've been reluctant to spend additional money because I know I've really, really got to love a chassis through good times and bad equally in order for it to be worth the dough.

Edited by John Neil, 09 September 2013 - 05:44 AM.

[Deathlike]

I've pretty much disagreed with almost everything that is in the poll, except with the PGI decisions question.

I know exactly why PGI is making such a decision... it's called a money grab. The Reinforcements package for PP is exactly that. Whether or not it was intentional (the timing is suspicious in the first place), PP's structure might be lucrative for PGI, but the bottom of the barrel spending (the $20+$40 base packages) are woeful. I will have fun crushing Locusts.

It is understandable that PGI wants to make a profit as a business, but to do it for the detriment of the overall product... well, that's up to them.

[NoiseCrime]

Shazarad, on 09 September 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

Looking at the numbers in the poll, it is not all surprising and to be expected. Similarly minded people will vote in a similar fashion due to the ideological demographic here. I'm not quite sure what the OP intends to achieve with this poll, but he/she knew beforehand of the forum populace and their attitude towards the questions posed here.

While I would agree such a poll is likely to be skewed, it does have some value when you examine the results for specific questions within the group that has answered.

For example only 5 of the 101 voters admit to not spending any money on the game, that means 95% of respondents are paying customers and so their opinions should not necessarily be easily dismissed.

Interestingly, ignoring undecided, its 50/50 on those who agree/disagree that the money they have spent has been worthwhile (36% each) which is more balanced than I would expect for a poll that would think would attract mainly detractors. In addition its also quite balanced for those who are willing to ignore current issues. However 62% no longer want to spend any more money on the game, indicating that either the decisions being made or perhaps lack of variety/longevity in the game are putting off players who up till now felt the money they had spent had been worthwhile. That alone should be a cause of concern.

There are other interesting aspects from within the results, which I don't believe should be easily dismissed purely as coming from a small segment of detractors.

Edited by NoiseCrime, 09 September 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[M4jk]

I have to work a bit more today so just in peanut:
Willing to spent more money?
- not at the moment, I want to see CW, UI2.0, CW, CW, .... CW and more features (see below).
- just to put there one very important argument - I've spent almost 180 bucks on Star Citizen in last three weeks!

Still enjoying the game?
- considering my playing time during last month - seems not so much as before, I feel lack of features (CW, CW, CW, more game modes, lobby, ...) and getting more and more annoyed by the old not flexible UI
- for my personal life it is an advantage

Will I stop playing MWO (in terms of next few months)?
- I hope not, but It will need some BUFFs to keep my attention - CW, CW, CW, UI 2.0, more weapons (Clan tech?), Lobby, new game modes ...

Thank you in advance for not screwing it up PGI/IGP!!! I MEAN IT, do not do that to me (us) !!!

[Mawai]

Renthrak, on 08 September 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

So. MWO has lost half of the original Founders, and the current player count is too weak to be publicly shared. Aside from UI 2.0, nothing will change in the game at 'Launch', but it will be on-time.

This seems like a useful time to measure the mood of the community. Or at least that portion of the community that is sufficiently committed to the game that they take the time to visit these forums.

There are no 'right' answers. The questions are entirely subjective, and are intended only to gauge feelings. Votes are public, so everyone will be able to see how Founders and non-Founders respond.

I like the idea of the poll and you have done a good job of keeping it generally neutral in tone which is great

However, I really disagree with your follow up comment:

"So. MWO has lost half of the original Founders, and the current player count is too weak to be publicly shared."

1) I have no idea how many of the original founders MWO may or may not have been lost. I do know that I have played off and on since I started in closed beta ... so I am not sure how it can be decided that a player is "lost". In fact, I suspect that anyone who has paid money toward this game will check back in future to see if they like the changes and evolution since they are already "invested" in the outcome. The ones who are unlikely to return are those who try it and decide they just don't like stompy mech games.

2) MANY MMOs do not post player counts. Some consider it competitive information. If another company opens a game they can gauge its impact on competitors if they can monitor player counts. This will also give information on which time zones might dominate the player numbers and a variety of other possible pieces of information about the player base that could be used by other online gaming companies when designing marketing programs that might appeal to the same demographic. In addition, posting player counts can result in all sorts of histrionics from the "fan" base. "The game is dying", "The game won't last", "Look, only X number logged in on the long weekend" ... lots of incorrect conclusions could be drawn by folks trying to read too much into the numbers. Personally, I have no problem with PGI keeping the concurrent connection numbers, total account data, retention and other numbers private. They are not unique in this and it generally does not have anything to do with "player count is too weak to be publicly shared".

Edited by Mawai, 09 September 2013 - 07:32 AM.

[Gallowglas]

I'm guessing that 50% of the people who played World of Warcraft, Skyrim, etc. at the start aren't playing it now either. Does that make those terrible games? I definitely agree that the devs have made a few bone-headed decisions and the lack of real, tangible progress on CW, new game modes, etc. is troubling at best. There are also some fundamental balance flaws. That said, I get irritated at people citing anecdotal and flawed evidence that the game is failing. You don't know anything about the health of the game and there's nothing you can do to determine who plays and who doesn't, so why waste time wallowing in the angst of those topics? That time is better spent focusing on what you don't like and how you'd change it.

And, yes, I do think polls like this to show PGI how the community feels are also constructive in a way. Skewed perhaps, but still productive, so my problem isn't with the poll itself.

[Ridersofdoom]

the trust of our community has been hit, in the future this will be taken into account by any other company that wants to invest in this franchise, is sad but perhaps we are seeing the last mechwarrior of our generation.

[Sidekick]

I think the poll is great. The statistic shows a quite balanced result, it tends to be a bit negative but:
- players enjoy it
- there is still faith in progress
- players see MWO faithful to the source material

The problem is: the damage is done and no band-aid is in sight.

[Renthrak]

Mawai, on 09 September 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

1) I have no idea how many of the original founders MWO may or may not have been lost. I do know that I have played off and on since I started in closed beta ... so I am not sure how it can be decided that a player is "lost". In fact, I suspect that anyone who has paid money toward this game will check back in future to see if they like the changes and evolution since they are already "invested" in the outcome. The ones who are unlikely to return are those who try it and decide they just don't like stompy mech games.

Gallowglas, on 09 September 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

You don't know anything about the health of the game and there's nothing you can do to determine who plays and who doesn't, so why waste time wallowing in the angst of those topics? That time is better spent focusing on what you don't like and how you'd change it.

I avoid anecdotal evidence as much as possible. I was merely restating information posted by Bryan Ekman (I'm sure I spelled that wrong) on Reddit. According to that, approximately 50% of the original Founders log in at least once per month, which should include a decent portion of those that are inactive and checking back occasionally. It is also stated that the player numbers for MWO are not being shared until they are less ambiguous.

Neither of those things is an indication that the game is failing. What they do tell us, however, is that we are far from a solid success.

As far as the '50% in a FTP" goes, that number isn't 'free' players. It's people who essentially pledged money to the development of the game in exchange for in-game goodies. A FTP retaining 50% of everyone who played would be miraculous, but it worries me that people who paid for this game's progress are leaving.

With regard to the poll, I think PGI would be well-served to send out something like this to all registered users to see more directly how the players feel. The forum is not the majority of the community, but I would go so far as to say the people most dedicated to the game likely frequent the forums. If a person doesn't care enough about a game to tell you how they feel, they probably aren't going to be a reliable source of revenue.

As far as complaining goes, I certainly can't speak for everyone. In my case, I provide suggestions and criticism because I want to play MWO. I want to enjoy MWO. I want to be someone who is buying more 'Mech bays in 2015 because I want the shiny new 'Mechs. I'm here because I care, and I want MWO to be better.

[DONTOR]

So far I have liked all the recent weapon balance changes. SRMs needed more damage they got it. Streaks sucked they got buffed. UAC 5 jammed to much (jams to little now, but only by 5%), machine guns do something now. There was a problem with 2ppc gauss builds, everything from a dragon to an atlas was using it. It is fixed now, maybe over fixed but fixed none the less. Im content with PGIs balancing skills.

[Gallowglas]

Renthrak, on 09 September 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

According to that, approximately 50% of the original Founders log in at least once per month, which should include a decent portion of those that are inactive and checking back occasionally.

I'm dubious about what that 50% "should" include. I don't even know that 50% retention over a year after release for a game buy-in is a bad thing. I don't know that it's good either. Do you? I just don't think any of us have a context upon which to speculate with any accuracy. Like I've said, how many folks who bought the collector's editions of Skyrim are still playing and at what rates? Skyrim is considered wildly successful and still probably has a huge player base, but I have a feeling that a huge percentage of the folks who bought in at the start have put in their time and have moved on to other things. Yes, I know the importance of such things is more pronounced in a multiplayer game, but what about games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, etc?

And, again, I'm not bashing the poll or defending PGI. I just strongly question some of the base assumptions made about how the game is supposedly losing players at an alarming rate. It's difficult to have an objective discussion when hyperbole and wildly flawed assumptions being thrown around.

Edited by Gallowglas, 09 September 2013 - 02:19 PM.

[Renthrak]

Gallowglas, on 09 September 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

I just strongly question some of the base assumptions made about how the game is supposedly losing players at an alarming rate. It's difficult to have an objective discussion when hyperbole and wildly flawed assumptions being thrown around.

Actually, I believe MWO is gaining players. The point that I am getting at with that argument is that a number of the recent changes seem to have been intended to make MWO appeal to more 'casual' (for lack of a better term) players. Now, attracting less dedicated players is certainly necessary to keep the game going, however making the game less palatable for the hardcore fans in the process doesn't seem to be a wise trade-off.

Rather than 'new player retention', I would like to see statistics about 'paying customer retention'. Are all these new players actually spending money, and do they stick around after paying (which would indicate that they may pay more in the future)? That would be a bit more telling of a statistic, but I doubt that we will have access to that data for industry competition reasons.

So, given that it is unlikely that we will ever have solid data to use as a basis for debate, we might as well talk now. The discussion itself, I think, is necessary. Thus, there is no sense in refraining from debating the future of the game with 'incomplete' data, given that we will likely never have 'complete' data.

Also, this thread does NOT belong in the Jettisoned Communications forum, which is explicitly for "[color=#959595]discussion of any subject not directly related to MWO.".[/color]

[Miekael]

Of course it belongs here, it shows negativity and dissatisfaction with their product, so they got to bury it deep.

[Renthrak]

Waiting for a moderator to move this to the correct forum.

[Kaijin]

Egomane, on 09 September 2013 - 04:49 AM, said:

How is that thread gameplay balance?

Moved!

That's right. Move the poll to Jettisoned Communication so nobody but those who have been getting shafted by PIG for a year or more will even know where to find it. Community Warfare at it's finest.

Edit: It appears Egomane moved it to Metagame, and then an IGP staff moderator ditched it here. The Community Warfare charge stands, though an apology was offered to and accepted by Egomane.

Edited by Kaijin, 12 September 2013 - 04:17 AM.