1251 replies to this topic

[Ngamok]

Sybreed, on 17 September 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

we tried to help the dog get better. The thing is, the veterinary is actually a stressed out intern, and we're all people with pretty good knowledge of dog's anatomy (BT experts, gaming veterans). Yet, to every suggestion we give to the vet intern, he says: "NO, you're no vet and I know better, deal with what I'm gonna do with your dog and hope he'll get better, it cost 600$ btw".

You take the dog to a different vet like you take your money to a different game.

Sybreed, on 17 September 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

Case in point, I ordered a Tissot watch last week that cost me around 500$. A little cap was missing on the chrono reset and I sent it back and asked for a refund. When you pay hundreds of dollars for a product, you expect to have something decent in return.

That's how it goes.

You asked for a refund instead of a replacement with the cap there? Interesting, guess you really didn't want that watch.

[Sybreed]

Ngamok, on 17 September 2013 - 09:45 PM, said:

You take the dog to a different vet like you take your money to a different game.



You asked for a refund instead of a replacement with the cap there? Interesting, guess you really didn't want that watch.

well, the watch was ordered from amazon and they had no replacement. Tissot told me to get the watch to a service center in Toronto which I had no idea where it was, and I already had all the necessary stuff to get my refund from Amazon. I already had a faulty watch from amazon before (and that was the last time I ordered watches from them) and I decided to get it back to them and get a refund... simpler, less time consuming. I got another watch from a standard retailer instead.

edit: and I really wanted that watch, it was pretty damn good looking.

Edited by Sybreed, 17 September 2013 - 09:50 PM.

[Corvus Antaka]

Vanguard319, on 17 September 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

on a scale of 1 to 10, that is average, It doesn't change the fact that most of the people posting are not giving honest reviews. Most of what I've read amounts to "PGI lied, therefore the game is automatically failed". There is no commentary on what they did right, or what needs improvement, only that they suck. That's not a review, that's petty nerd rage.

It is all petty nerd rage.

Realistically this mech-game is the best of the franchise. Anyone claiming otherwise is free to return to mech3/mech4 or even MW:LL - in theory if there are truly so many disgruntled players they could easily go play something "better".

Therefore the reality is that what we are seeing is ultra nerd rage that is completely uncontrolled. Outside of their desire to destroy this game with bad reviews they have no goals or direction beyond that, they either think it will hurt the game and therefore don't care, or they are too dumb to understand that.

Fortunately stuff like Miley Cyrus twerking and the horrid bad press that generated ended up benefitting her. I expect to see the same thing in MWO. Generally the players on teamspeak that play, the overall population, care 0 for these forums or reviews, and while the early rage exists, over the long term just like Diablo 3 metacritic will clean up the trolling as necessary.

Diablo 3 is STILL going, and everyone constantly screams about what a failure that game is/was. Heck, I only logged maybe 80 hours of D3 and got bored, and yet it is still ticking.

What some of the trolls trying to kill this game have not considered is that the core base still behind this game can keep our "0" going for another 10 years. So, they won't kill it and get their balony "remake" by X dev house, they'll still just be losers screaming into the wind, and we will be here, enjoying ui 2.0 and CW and all the goodies coming. Then the trolls will no doubt return, spend even less money, and cry about how the game is still P2W, or whatever else they want to cry about that day.

[Ngamok]

DocBach, on 17 September 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

Gave it 6/10 with honest feedback.

Same. Lets be honest. The people who are giving it a 0 are doing it to spite the developers.

[WaKK0]

Well, I'll be putting in my vote of 3 for great graphics and total disregard of Table Top rules that have been well established for decades. They keep trying to balance the game by adding in mechanics that are broken instead of doing what they said they would from the start, following the TT rules.

Edited by WaKK0, 17 September 2013 - 09:55 PM.

[Krivvan]

WaKK0, on 17 September 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

They keep trying to balance the game by adding in mechanics that are broken instead of doing what they said they would from the start, following the TT rules.

To be fair, they only said that they'd start with TT rules and go from there. The majority (and vocal minority) opinion right now is to jettison the TT rules.

[Ngamok]

Jman5, on 17 September 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Just to give you guys some perspective:

http://www.metacriti.../world-of-tanks

And:

http://www.metacriti...odern-warfare-3

Battlefield 3 people down voted it hard.

[Wired]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 17 September 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

I am quite happy. My opinion is mine. Wait. I know, why dont you tell folks what to vote in the next election to? B/c you opinion is the only right one. I mean that is how you sound right now


Look peeps. You need folks other than just the usual ranting crowd on here to vote. Personally I dont know why they bother. I would support just shutting the forums down.

Ironically, with your constant arguing at people who HAVE voted opposite of your opinion to come off as telling people how to vote.

[Lindonius]

MischiefSC, on 17 September 2013 - 08:05 PM, said:

I can't stress enough how important this is and why it pains me so much. I deal with this sort of stuff for a living - helping a business improve their rankings in JD Powers, that sort of thing.

Love and hate represent an emotional investment. A bit of effort, not even that much but just a bit, can move that in either direction. An angry customer you can turn into a loyal customer. Apathy is a lot harder to deal with. PGI had and to some degree still has the opportunity to have a large, passionate, loyal and engaged fan base. It's not about catering to the whiners. Just saying that implies a complete lack of understanding about customer service and even some basics of human interpersonal interaction. It's about empathizing, acknowledging and using some basic communication skills. Most of the particularly angry people can be flipped into positive consumers without changing a thing in the game, just some decent communication skills and engagement.

The core issue that upsets some people here is that PGI just won't. They'd rather see the game get tanked reviews that open a dialog. Literally. I'll save everyone the armchair psychology on how this engenders a judgemental response (a desire to see socially negative behaviors punished) but realize that even more so than the introduction of ECM, coolant flush, ghost heat, gauss fire delay and 3PV, even more than what at this point is years long delay Community Warfare, Clans, all the broken promises.... even more than that is how the communication has been handled.

Right now PGI has made it pretty clear that they'd rather burn it all down and close their doors than admit any mistakes or problems or attempt to communicate with the community. They do, however, consistently and without fail push for us to give them money every 7days like clockwork. Whatever does or doesn't get pushed back in game development, design, whatever time they don't have to write a forum post, they absolutely DO consistently push out MC-only content (new camo, hero/champion mechs, MC only release of mechs, Phoenix, etc).

That the response to this surprises anyone I admit confuses me.

[Grisolm Redd]

Miekael, on 17 September 2013 - 09:36 PM, said:

I find the reviews ranging from 4-7 tend to be the most honest, and genuine. All the rest are people taking sides according to the "line in the sand."

I read "line in the sand" and thought of islands. Lonely developer islands. Sandy, lonely developer islands.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Sybreed, on 17 September 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Guys, I just realized this:

Number of meta critic reviews for MWO: 401
For War Thunder: 63
For WoT: 411 (since its release in 2011)
For Hawken: 70

Take it for what you want... MWO's community is quite possibly the most passionnate community there is. PGI should learn something from this...

They won't.

Sybreed, on 17 September 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Oh? For me it's Thomas, Alex and Math Craig. The other dev, David Bradley I think? Seems alright too.

All good guys. There are some geniunly good people at PGI, sadly not all of them.

Edited by mwhighlander, 17 September 2013 - 10:32 PM.

[Mystere]

Sybreed, on 17 September 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

well, the watch was ordered from amazon and they had no replacement. Tissot told me to get the watch to a service center in Toronto which I had no idea where it was, and I already had all the necessary stuff to get my refund from Amazon. I already had a faulty watch from amazon before (and that was the last time I ordered watches from them) and I decided to get it back to them and get a refund... simpler, less time consuming. I got another watch from a standard retailer instead.

edit: and I really wanted that watch, it was pretty damn good looking.

As I always tell people, never ever buy expensive stuff from Amazon. I get my watches -- and my chocolates for that matter -- straight from the manufacturers in Switzerland.

[Deathlike]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 17 September 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

Diablo 3 is STILL going, and everyone constantly screams about what a failure that game is/was. Heck, I only logged maybe 80 hours of D3 and got bored, and yet it is still ticking.

It is actually possible that there's enough "good will" from Diablo and Diablo 2 will hold them over for a bit. If you treat Diablo 3 like the PS3 (in being initially expensive an underwhelming), it only takes a second failure before people give up on that cause.

Unlike Diablo 3, PGI/MWO doesn't have much of a previous reputation to use as a "good will mark" like Sony and Blizzard had.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 17 September 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

Realistically this mech-game is the best of the franchise. Anyone claiming otherwise is free to return to mech3/mech4 or even MW:LL - in theory if there are truly so many disgruntled players they could easily go play something "better".

Find me a version of MW3 that will run reliably on a modern system, and I'll start throwing hundred dollar bills at you. MWO is fun for awhile, but the only reason I've played it as much as I have is that there's no alternative. I won't claim that everyone else feels the same way, but there is probably a reason that the Mechwarrior games have been among the most requested on GOG.com for at least the past several weeks. Once I can pay $50 to unlock every mech AND get an awesome single player campaign, then MWO might be as good as MW3.

edit: nothing against the actual engineers - I'm sure they're doing their best to make a great game - but they really need to put some new people in charge of product decisions and PR.

Edited by Fitzbattleaxe, 17 September 2013 - 11:11 PM.

[Zakie Chan]

Mwo isn't terrible. However it is far off the mark from the game I bought into as a founder. I enjoy the IP and thus will not completely forsake Mwo. That said, I did pledge 80 $ on overlord only later to retract it over the latest 'never a 3rd person, maybe a 3rd person, you can choose if dont want to be a part of 3rd person, to here take this third person you'll learn something.'

The core of the game is good. Game modes are terribly linear and need more thought and passion from developers. Mission based gameplay is the meat and potatoes of mechwarrior. Get players engaged and to have an overarching meta game like CW is icing on the cake. Sure roflstomping mechs in TDM is fun, but you can only be fully engaged in it for so long.

5 million got squandered away by the publisher to fund tactics and whatnot... which is proving to be a colossal waste of funds.... There is a lot of what could have been with this tittle. AAA is a giant what if. The staff is brutally low on man power as well as unexperienced with the new cryengine. In cockpit auxilliary models, model to terrain clipping, fully destructible environments, dx11, etc... have all seen a glimmer of hope in closed beta. Well a year later we stand with very little to show for it.

Closed beta had some issues but as a whole it was a better representation of the gameplay that made MWO head and shoulders above the rest of the battletech spin offs.

There are learning curves, the small dev team really bit off a mouthful try to please the mechwarrior thirst accumulated over the past decade. However, management has taken extremely poor decisions and sold their teams efforts short. Deadlines matter! 6 months ago we were promised the first stages of CW. To this day we are probably 6 months away from getting the UI to support it. Instead of asking users to wait a little longer, short- unrealistic deadlines only cause animosity between the devs and players.

As many users from closed beta declared, Open Beta was launched way to soon. The product offered to the paying customers these past months is shameful to the great vision this title offered fans of the IP. I would argue today should have been the OPEN BETA LAUNCH. Too many bugs were left unchecked and focus seemed to be lost with what was crucial to gamers and their overall experience.

To quote a respected unit member of mine: 'If you dont have the time to do it right, when will you have it later?"

The ideas for Mwo are fantastic, however due to management, financial and development issues, fans were left with the current sour taste. NEGATIVE FEEDBACK IS GOOD! If you can make your gamers so passionate that they cause a rukus like that over 3rd person then you have a powerful product! However, riding the laurels of the IP and taking advantage like what has been done can only end in disappointment for all.

Dear PGI, go back and read the archives of open beta. Re-envision the great plans for Mwo and see how engaged your audience was. Myself and (I assume many others) would prefer a monthly patch schedule if it included more meaningful patches. Get your old bugs ironed out, get new features in and enjoy what thousands are paying you to do!

This launch like open beta was premature, but I wish the devs great success in bringing all the ideas I paid into to the table.


Closed Beta: 8/10 (bugs needed to be sorted but expected for a beta, included regular communication for devs with meaningful updates)
Open Beta: 6.5/10 (Taking consumers money considering the stability of the client and features offered)
Launch: 5.5/10 (Considering product and fully launched ie: On Store Shelves. Issues such as optimization and lack of emphasized features mark an inferior product)

While the meta critic reviews are extremely polar I would not doubt the final score settling in a high 5 to low 6 range.

Edited by Zakie Chan, 17 September 2013 - 11:09 PM.

[Krivvan]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 17 September 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

Find me a version of MW3 that will run reliably on a modern system, and I'll start throwing hundred dollar bills at you. MWO is fun for awhile, but the only reason I've played it as much as I have is that there's no alternative. I won't claim that everyone else feels the same way, but there is probably a reason that the Mechwarrior games have been among the most requested on GOG.com for at least the past several weeks. Once I can pay $50 to unlock every mech AND get an awesome single player campaign, then MWO might be as good as MW3.

The problem with what Vinson said is that MWO really isn't trying to be MW2, MW3, or MW4.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

Krivvan, on 17 September 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

The problem with what Vinson said is that MWO really isn't trying to be MW2, MW3, or MW4.

Yeah, I know. It makes me sad.

[Krivvan]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 17 September 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

Yeah, I know. It makes me sad.

If I remember right, PGI tried to make a proper MW5, but no publisher would pick them up and they had to transition to what we have now.

[Huntrava]

My review:

Pay no attention to the man behind that curtain!

Just as with the Great and Powerful Oz, once you pull back the curtain the magic of Mechwarrior Online is irrevocably gone forever.

September 17--the Mechwarrior Online launch date--signaled the end of the closed beta. This is how the closed beta ends; not with a bang, but a whimper.

The game is built on CryEngine which has a poor track record when it comes to netcode optimization. The result is a jumbled mess of poor hit detection and a decidedly incompetent development team who seem more interested in creating skins and mech ornaments (that cost real money) rather than correcting underlying imbalances and gameplay issues. Unlike other F2P games such as World of Tanks, War Thunder, etc, there is no discernible progression. The game quite literally limits itself to buying mechs and upgrades via C-BILLS that are earned in matches. By that standard, there is more advancement strategy in Battlefield 3.

The initial awe of the game eventually gives way to the grim reality: MWO looks pretty, but the looks are only skin deep. What could have been a rich, fulfilling addition to the Mechwarrior franchise is instead seen as a money-grab by PGI who upsold the game during the closed-beta period. At this point, the minimal differences between the final version and the closed-beta don't justify a years' worth of development and certainly don't deserve your hard earned monies.

These aren't the droids you're looking for.

[New Day]

Ngamok, on 17 September 2013 - 09:45 PM, said:

You take the dog to a different vet like you take your money to a different game.



You asked for a refund instead of a replacement with the cap there? Interesting, guess you really didn't want that watch.

But there isn't an other game. That's why so many people are upset. PGI killed of MWLL and now there is no other option if because they screwed up up.