12 replies to this topic

[NoClass]

There is a sizeable community of dissatisfied patrons and players of MWO. This dissatisfication ranges from gameplay right down to the ethics and business model of the developer. This community is very invested, emotionally, in the survival of MWO because its survival is intrinsically linked with the survival of the franchise.

By my own observation there are enough players who are as intelligent as they are passionate. Many of their proposals go un attended because they are not in line with the goals of PGI resulting in an increasingly toxic and deconstructive environment.

For most people, the attitude towards the state of affairs is thus: It's just a game.

For others, a bad investment.

My tip for those in the latter camp is to come together and form a development team with the intention of creating the mech warrior game they want to play.

I understand this is a radical proposition. The challenge is great and the obstacles are vast. Yet, what has the alternative accomplished? Months have been by the dissatisfied community spreading their individual neurosis on message boards and voicechat applications. What do you really have to show for it? Balance mechanics you disagree with? Business models you view as being exploitation?

I would wager that there are a significant amount of talented people out there who could actually accomplish a competing game who choose instead to direct their time and energy into protest.

"but vigilance, what you suggest is impossible because of x,y and z"

No it is not impossible, it just requires hard work. You know, actually doing something. Accomplishing something in the real world actually requires more than faintly organized protests. I understand that method is preferable because it doesn't actually require any goal setting or personal sacrifice.

"Vigilance, why don't you put your money where your mouth is!"

Because it is just a fun game to me. The survival of the franchise is entirely inconsequential to my life.

"if you don't care then why make this post"

1. I would like to participate in this game without the barrage of hostility.
2. The potential for the creation of a better MW game is well worth a short post.

Edited by VigilanceHawkwind, 16 September 2013 - 08:37 AM.

[Andrew Porter]

Yeah! Wouldn't it be great if some enthusiastic fans could make their own MW/BT game that was something more than a IP-abusing cash-cow MOBA. They could call it... ohhh, I dunno... MechWarrior Living Legends maybe. Oh, wait...

[NoClass]

And the writhing sarcasm is exactly the thing this franchise doesn't need. Considering the conditition of these forums is largely a devolved echo chamber of neurosis, I wouldnt be half surprised to see potential competitors to the MWO brand shy away from the thing because of the behavior of their potential customers as witnessed in this community.

PGI is not a non-profit and MWO is not a mod.

If the franchise is really that big of a deal for you, get off your butt and get your hand dirty.

Edited by VigilanceHawkwind, 16 September 2013 - 12:10 PM.

[Lostdragon]

I would imagine PGI/IGP has exclusive licensing for Mechwarrior. If you tried to make a competing for profit game you would probably be shut down by a team of lawyers before you could even get started.

[NoClass]

I was under the impression from reading another source that Microsoft owned the rights

[Mawai]

First - your idea fails due to intellectual property ownership and exploitation rights in the video game industry for the MechWarrior franchise. (Which random individuals interested in creating a game do not own).

Second, as mentioned above, MechWarrior:Living Legends was exactly such a franchise. Built as a mod on an existing 3D engine. I never played it but elements of it apparently compared favourably to MWO though I heard it had balance issues among other concerns. After a "discussion" at a gaming convention between PGI representatives and the MW:LL developers. They decided that it would be in the "best" interests of the overall MW franchise to stop working on MW:LL and leave the field open for MWO.

So ... your post misses the mark on several levels.

[Lostdragon]

VigilanceHawkwind, on 16 September 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

I was under the impression from reading another source that Microsoft owned the rights

Microsoft owns the rights but PGI/IGp has a license to use those rights to make MWO and MWT. I don't know the details of their agreements with Microsoft but often times such licenses grant the developer exclusive rights to the IP so the dev does not have to worry about the exact situation you are advocating.

[NoClass]

Lostdragon, on 16 September 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:

Microsoft owns the rights but PGI/IGp has a license to use those rights to make MWO and MWT. I don't know the details of their agreements with Microsoft but often times such licenses grant the developer exclusive rights to the IP so the dev does not have to worry about the exact situation you are advocating.

Thank you for the calm response.

This may very well be the case. I have to ask whether or not anyone had tried to procure a license for themselves. The greater point is a shift in attitude. The polar opposite to stomping your foot like a petulant child in protest is creating something functional. Granted it may be impossible, a point ill have to sort of concede on, but you can't tell me the only method of problem solving available to dissatisfied adults is the conduct of this forum?

HomelessBill did what I would consider a constructive action with his proposed convergence solution. Not that I agree with it, but that's not the point. On the contrary, the savemwo protest was not constructive in the slightest. Sure it appears like it, however the reality is that their demands are ultimately an insult to the devs intelligences. Mob rules, so to speak.

To draw a parallel: It is a very rare occurance that those who cry the loudest about the government are running or have ever attempted to run for office. Banding together and making a bunch of noises is the wrong way to deal with this situation.

Edited by VigilanceHawkwind, 16 September 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[Lostdragon]

VigilanceHawkwind, on 16 September 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

Thank you for the calm response.

This may very well be the case. I have to ask whether or not anyone had tried to procure a license for themselves. The greater point is a shift in attitude. The polar opposite to stomping your foot like a petulant child in protest is creating something functional. Granted it may be impossible, a point ill have to sort of concede on, but you can't tell me the only method of problem solving available to dissatisfied adults is the conduct of this forum?

HomelessBill did what I would consider a constructive action with his proposed convergence solution. Not that I agree with it, but that's not the point. On the contrary, the savemwo protest was not constructive in the slightest. Sure it appears like it, however the reality is that their demands are ultimately an insult to the devs intelligences. Mob rules, so to speak.

Well I would argue that some of the things PGI employees have said insult the intelligence of the community. PGI chose to have a Founder's program and open beta with a cash shop to finance development of the game. People supported the game financially based on the vision and core pillars of the game PGI originally outlined. The game they are releasing tomorrow is a far cry from that original vision. It does not include key aspects like Community Warfare and role warfare and it does include two things that were originally promised not to be in the game: coolant flush and 3PV.

Based on the state of the game and the many communications failures from PGI I would say PGI has made their bed and now they have to sleep in it. They have thrown gas on the fire started by some of these issues so you would think they would be doing everything they could to appease their base but they seem hell bent on attracting a different crowd that may or may not exist.

I desperately want MWO to succeed as the game they originally pitched: deep, meaningful, and steeped in great mech combat. Hopefully that will still happen but I think we are a long way from that game.

[Andrew Porter]

OP, I appreciate your sentiment and I'm sorry I was rude; it is just that your suggestion that we collectively build a replacement game is, quite frankly, a bit silly. Technical and legal niceties aside, it is not really how things works. If you bought (or rented) an item, (e.g. a car or a toaster) and it was not up to the standard you had been lead to expect, would you make your own replacement? Of course not.

[IC Rafe]

VigilanceHawkwind, on 16 September 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

Thank you for the calm response.

This may very well be the case. I have to ask whether or not anyone had tried to procure a license for themselves. The greater point is a shift in attitude. The polar opposite to stomping your foot like a petulant child in protest is creating something functional. Granted it may be impossible, a point ill have to sort of concede on, but you can't tell me the only method of problem solving available to dissatisfied adults is the conduct of this forum?

HomelessBill did what I would consider a constructive action with his proposed convergence solution. Not that I agree with it, but that's not the point. On the contrary, the savemwo protest was not constructive in the slightest. Sure it appears like it, however the reality is that their demands are ultimately an insult to the devs intelligences. Mob rules, so to speak.

To draw a parallel: It is a very rare occurance that those who cry the loudest about the government are running or have ever attempted to run for office. Banding together and making a bunch of noises is the wrong way to deal with this situation.

Getting a licence involves a lot of money and convincing. Even PGI doesn't have a full licence (they can't use certain mechs for example, because parts of the IP is held elsewhere (dont remember exactely by which company). Creating another Mechwarrior game as such, wont work (due to lawyers etc).

This is basically the last chance in a long while to get something good out of mechwarrior, but the developers (or the ones financing them) dont keep their community (the founder parts) and promises in mind. This leads to the current behaviour on the forums (of which i'm guilty too a bit). It hurts to see a good basis for a game (i might not be a founder, and joined late in the beta period, but kept an eye on this game from the start) seemingly ruined and promises broken.

[Vexidious]

Mawai, on 16 September 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

They decided that it would be in the "best" interests of the overall MW franchise to stop working on MW:LL and leave the field open for MWO.

More accurately, it would be in best interests of people not wanting to be sued into oblivion to stop work on a game for which they don't have a right to use the IP.

[RG Notch]

VigilanceHawkwind, on 16 September 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

And the writhing sarcasm is exactly the thing this franchise doesn't need. Considering the conditition of these forums is largely a devolved echo chamber of neurosis, I wouldnt be half surprised to see potential competitors to the MWO brand shy away from the thing because of the behavior of their potential customers as witnessed in this community.

PGI is not a non-profit and MWO is not a mod.

If the franchise is really that big of a deal for you, get off your butt and get your hand dirty.

If one wanted to make their own MW/BT game they would have to drive this one under since PGI has the exclusive license, so maybe the people who want to make a new game are trying to kill this game so they can get their hands dirty, or do you not know how IP licensing works? So the first step would be to kill this game off if that was their goal. Now some people might want this game to succeed and think PGI needs a kick in the *** to get on the right track. Of course if the message is not received well then the bonus would be the game going under so some one else can get the license. Basically a no lose situation if one isn't happy with the game, it's direction or developers.