1251 replies to this topic

[Toydolls]

wow after seeing the tour teams lol it should be nicknamed Tour of The White Knights

[Toydolls]

Riptor, on 26 September 2013 - 04:08 AM, said:

Im using words like that out of context because a) they sound funny

b ) the usual plethora of internet name calling is in desperate need for some variety

and c) to see how long it takes till someone notices them.

So i guess.. congrats for noticing?



Hrm.. cant agree with that... MWO is many things but not a 0

You know what a 0 is thought?



Sometimes im surprised by the balls some developers have when it comes to release complete ***** for games and expect to get paid for it.



To wich i would retord: "No sh*t sherlock! They are the only ones on the market!" XD

No offense meant but it isnt hard to be "best" at something if youre the only one around who does it.. in this case a mech simulation.

it's not even a sim lets get real here go play a sim plane game and then come back here and say it's a sim this game is a slower call of duty with mechwarrior skins now

[Riptor]

Toydolls, on 26 September 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

it's not even a sim lets get real here go play a sim plane game and then come back here and say it's a sim this game is a slower call of duty with mechwarrior skins now

Well thats not really fair since we dont have real life mechs to compare to.

The game is trying to simulate victional vehicles. We have no idea how real mechs with tech that is impossible to achieve today would actually handle in the field.

I think its as close as you can get to a simulation without making it complicated and disrupting the game flow.

[Jestun]

It's not simulating random mechs how they might be in the future.

It's simulating an established IP which is a specific brand of sci-fi that was dated decades ago.

On top of which the IP includes the concept of LosTech which is technology lost to the ages.


All in all it's not as simple as just thinking "would a mech have this in the future?".

Edited by Jestun, 26 September 2013 - 10:53 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

RedThirteen, on 26 September 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Where?

google is your friend

Besides, if this is game is so bad..should be easy to move all the unhappy people back to mech4.

[Nekki Basara]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

google is your friend

Besides, if this is game is so bad..should be easy to move all the unhappy people back to mech4.

Totally should be, what with the servers being, you know, gone and all.

[Corvus Antaka]

Jack Gallows, on 26 September 2013 - 03:40 AM, said:

Personally, I'd rather see the Mechwarrior IP in someone elses hands as I don't feel confidant or believe that PGI will deliver on a worth-while project. Though, if you're curious I guess you could keep assuming anyone on the forums giving their opinions on a low scoring game still plays it and thereby invalidates their reviews/opinions. Sweeping generalizations, huzzah!

Well, PGI made the game in only 2 years on a shoestring budget of 5 million.

Seems to me you think that for that money and timeline someone else will do better - so rating the game a 3 means that somewhere in about 2-3 years time this game will fail. (assuming you are correct) for those 3 years, you will never drop a mech game again, because a 3 game sucks.

Then, lets give it 5 years at least, maybe 10 for someone else to "Try again"

Now you are looking at about a 10 year timeline to see a new mechgame if this one fails tomorrow.

Seems counterproductive to me. This game is far from a 3. in terms of F2P, value, and pure mech blasting fun, gameplay/graphics has us about a 7-8 right now. Nevermind the future content coming. Now, we could say that lack of CW etc pushes overall rating to about a 6 - because there is little replay value once you get all the mechs/become a stable veteran pilot with little future "progress" but battle after battle and cbill income.

So I can see the 5 ratings. Maybe even a 4. but 3 or less just indicates to me that you find this game has failed in every way. Convergence, heatscale, 0 fun in battles, etc etc.

Good luck hoping for someone to save this IP and for PGI to fail.

I'd rather try and help PGI grow & build a better product and promote this game so it improves into the future than wait 10 more years for another company to try and hope they do a better job. To much time, too many assumptions.

Is everything the way I want it? no. Am I dissappointed? slightly.

but core gameplay is imho already fun, close matches are intense beyond any other FPS I've ever played. The core is strong, and to abandon PGI now with 0 prospects beyond watching them fail and hoping for a miracle seems very foolish to me.

Nekki Basara, on 26 September 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

Totally should be, what with the servers being, you know, gone and all.

nothing stopping you from making new ones.

[Jack Gallows]

Nekki Basara, on 26 September 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

Totally should be, what with the servers being, you know, gone and all.

There are alternatives such as Game Ranger, etc.

[Sandpit]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

Well, PGI made the game in only 2 years on a shoestring budget of 5 million.

This isn't entirely true. They raised $5 million through founders but this was not their only form of funding nor does it take into account all of the money made since founders, since you know, the MC store was implemented shortly thereafter

[Xakthos]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

Seems counterproductive to me. This game is far from a 3. in terms of F2P, value, and pure mech blasting fun, gameplay/graphics has us about a 7-8 right now. Nevermind the future content coming. Now, we could say that lack of CW etc pushes overall rating to about a 6 - because there is little replay value once you get all the mechs/become a stable veteran pilot with little future "progress" but battle after battle and cbill income.

So I can see the 5 ratings. Maybe even a 4. but 3 or less just indicates to me that you find this game has failed in every way. Convergence, heatscale, 0 fun in battles, etc etc.

In fairness it's a decent robot shoot em up. It isn't a Battletech or Mechwarrior game to me however. They've gone too far into creating their own mechanics for me to view it as what I originally signed up to play. I'd give it a 4 in the sense that logging in to shoot up some large robots once an evening every quarter or so is about all the draw it has now. Unfortunately even the battles aren't that much fun anymore; the multitude of broken mechanics that have no logical information on the interface make it unappealing.

I swing by the forums once a month at most now just to see if by any chance they decided to actually make the game what they originally advertised. Eventually I'll stop doing even that and only thing that'll be left is my handle in the credits.

I still even have most of the MC I got from the Legendary Founder. It hasn't even drawn me into spending what I already received. In my mind that is a pretty epic level of failure.

[Dr B00t]

Destined, on 25 September 2013 - 09:18 PM, said:

Well aren't you sassy.

ok...hehe ill give you a like for that

[Dr B00t]

Riptor, on 26 September 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

Well thats not really fair since we dont have real life mechs to compare to.

The game is trying to simulate victional vehicles. We have no idea how real mechs with tech that is impossible to achieve today would actually handle in the field.

I think its as close as you can get to a simulation without making it complicated and disrupting the game flow.

you are really straining the limits of magical logic with that argument...

[SteelPaladin]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

I'd rather try and help PGI grow & build a better product and promote this game so it improves into the future than wait 10 more years for another company to try and hope they do a better job. To much time, too many assumptions.

You can't change behavior by rewarding the current behavior. Supporting a company and their product provides positive reinforcement for their current strategy and direction. In your case, you're more or less okay w/their current strategy and direction, so by all means. For those who aren't, however, continuing to support and promote the product is counterproductive. Companies (hell, people) don't change unless there is incentive to, and there is no incentive if people will reward their behavior either way.

I'm not going to run out and try and torch PGI simply because I have neither the time nor energy for all that (if folks do have that level of free time, that's their prerogative). There's no reason for me to be in any way active in trying to help them either, though. I drop so little anymore that, for me, there is functionally almost no difference between this game existing and not being played and the game not existing and waiting for the next try.

[Nekki Basara]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

nothing stopping you from making new ones.

I haven't really tried since the last Mercs release sort seems to refuse to even try connect externally for me. I *could* go try again, but TBH MW3 was more fun multi-player anyway what with the less effective jumpjets.

[Alois Hammer]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 September 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

I'd rather try and help PGI grow & build a better product and promote this game so it improves into the future than wait 10 more years for another company to try and hope they do a better job.

Then give them feedback on what is and isn't working, let them take that information and apply it, and see how that works out.

Oh wait...I think we already know how that plays out, somehow...

[Badconduct]

Shumabot, on 17 September 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

This game is a 5-6 at best. It's featureless, ugly, performs terribly, has no working social components, it's gameplay is stilted and incredibly unbalanced, it's full of badly designed overly complex and fully hidden systems that will never be explained to new players, etc. That said, it's not a virus, and it doesn't have the number of crash bugs as your average 3/10 movie tie in game.

The fact that so few people are giving it the yellow scores it deserves speaks to just how few people outside of the founders community have played this game, and it shows explicitly that the founders are fighting over the IP, not this game.

It shows how few people play it and review it because it's a sh*tt game.

[Badconduct]

I stopped playing 2 - 3 months ago. I forget what patch came out, it was boring.

This game is boring. I can install and play Mechwarrior 4 multiplayer for free, and everything is unlocked.
Grinding to just to buy a 'Mech for a game of Team Deathmatch is stupid.
Pay-to-win Consumables are stupid.
The engine they used is for 3D shooters, not SIMs. It's poorly optimized, runs horribly. DX11 is in Beta, and the game is "released". This engine is not optimized for sim play. It feels like a really slow 3D shooter with bad controls. Trees don't fall over, buildings don't break apart. My Mech doesn't feel heavy, I don't eject from the cockpit. This game is not immersive. I don't "feel" like I'm in a 'Mech, I feel like I'm playing a reskinned version of Crysis, that ultimately costs more money and provides no substance.

There is no community Warfare.
Every new 'Mech is basically a re-skin of another Mech, give or take 5 tons. They change the weapon layouts, but the weapons are so poorly balanced you just pick one that fits as many PPC's as you can hold.

Why can't we walk around a Lobby in my pilot outfit and talk to other players between matches?
Why is there no "team missions" where I kill some AI and gain experience and items?

There's nothing new or creative with this game.

Why is there nothing but "click to spawn" "Team death match"
There's no substance to this game. It's just a pay-to-win version of Mechwarrior 4's multiplayer feature, but with less game modes and no options without spending 10 hours straight playing it.

Assuming this game survives, they may add some of these features in future patches. But by then, the hard-core community will be so OP'd, it won't even be worth spawning anymore.

I can see why new players don't like this game, because not only do they not understand the game mechanics, but by the time they figure them out and get one decent 'Mech, they realize the game isn't going to get better and stop wasting their time playing it. You can argue with me, but that just goes to show why these forums are dying. The Mechwarrior community is horribly abusive with outsiders, they don't like any criticisms that fall outside of the BT Universe and they always chirp the loudest to make sure the game devs follows their demands instead of what SELLS.

Released, pffft...

I have played this game since closed beta. See my founders tag? Nope. I am not a fool. I don't pay for promises.

This game has a bad review because it's a bad game. Making up excuses for people who post their opinions and making 61 pages of debate about it isn't going to fix anything, it just further shows how bad the community is. I love Mechwarrior, I've played all of them.

I have even finished the SNES and PS1 verions of MW and MW2. I have probably put more hours into MW4 and MW4: Mercs then most other games. I very much understand the game Mechanics. But this just isn't a good version of Mechwarrior, no matter how much I try to like it. This game is a trap to capture as much money from MW fans as possible for as little money as possible before losing control of the IP. If you see it as some love for MW released for your pleasure, than you are horribly confused.

This game was designed around marketing strategies to maximize profit. Pure, Simple, Obvious.

Edited by Badconduct, 26 September 2013 - 05:26 PM.

[Gaden Phoenix]

Why it is getting the reviews it is getting?

Very simple there are just too many unhappy with the current gameplay people ...

I fall under the unhappy with current directions crowd. I dislike what MWO has become and the lack of any meaning progress in the last 6 months, As well as all those broken promises or unfulfilled promises. . PGI's concept of time is really fluidic and the word soon has taken on new means for me.

I just do not have the time or motivation to go post a review.

Edited by Gaden Phoenix, 26 September 2013 - 04:30 PM.

[Dr B00t]

someone should update the mechwarrior online wiki page to flesh out the "reception" section

http://en.wikipedia....hWarrior_Online

no vandalism please...just state the facts...they speak volumes on their own

i would suggest "tepid" "underwhelming" and "shallow"

[Badconduct]

Gaden Phoenix, on 26 September 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Why it is getting the reviews it is getting?

Very simple there are just too many unhappy with the current gameplay people ...

I fall under the unhappy with current directions crowd. I dislike what MWO has become and the lack of any meaning progress in the last 6 months, As well as all those broken promises or unfulfilled promises. . PGI's concept of time is really fluidic and the word soon has taken on new means for me.

I just do not have the time or motivation to go post a review.

IMHO, this was the game direction in closed beta, and from what I've seen, it's the direction they always planned to go in. There's no room for growth.

Remember Duke Nukem Forever? What about the half of AMRA III that was never released?

The new gaming trend; make a ton of promises and ask for everyone's money before developing something.
Build a half-*** attempt then release it and keep all the collected money.

Star citizen is going to be a huge example of this, just watch.


It's like prepaying your annual salary before you start your new job.

Alpha, Beta, Pre-purchase... even Indie.
These terms are the next online scam, for "I am an African prince... " or "I need a loan, I'm stuck in Scotland and you are the only person I could reach..."

Indie developers are telling you what you want to hear, knowing it's not possible to develop a product that involving, and asking for your money up front. It's a scam.

Edited by Badconduct, 26 September 2013 - 06:28 PM.