223 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

CyclonerM, on 08 October 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Is that a Marauder?! It looks like more a Supernova..

I know. Actually I thought it looked more like a Mad Dog.


As opposed to a Marauder


But then again there's a lot of weird ones here..




Actually modify the head cannon and some aspects of the forearms... and I'd like to see the last one here. But definitely need a HUGE change to that cockpit design and narrow the vents.

I much prefer the sealed cockpit, no transparent steal design.

Edited by Koniving, 08 October 2013 - 10:52 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Koniving, on 08 October 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Looking back at this... I know why I don't like that Marauder design which is odd because I like the legs and I like the minor details.

It's because the Marauder is a short mech with a long profile... this is a taller mech with an average profile.

I'd also say the footpads are too small, the torso looks misshapen without the side pods and over canopy weapon of choice and the forearms aren't massive enough for a mech that houses over 1/10 th it's mass in each arm.

[White Bear 84]

PGI giving chance for people that are unhappy to get out - after that its locked doors so dont cry if you end up locked in, chance offered.

Good on PGI for yet more good communication.

[Sharp Spikes]

Wintersdark, on 06 October 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

[snip]
There's always a segment of the community that seems set on proving somehow that MWO is dying, and trying to identify ways to prove that.

My opinion on this is simple, and related to the above.

There is no point in pursuing that line of reasoning at all. There's only a couple outcomes that are possible, if you think it through:

1) These folks are actually right. MWO is failing, PGI is struggling to get $ to pay the bills. If this is the case, broadcasting that just hastens the inevitable and gets things shut down faster. Nobody wants that.
[snip]

Just wanted to note, that it's not exaclty nobody. I won't mind if PGI will go down in flames, so that more competent developer can obtain rights on MW IP. Because, IMO, PGI has shown that they haven't got what it takes to develop anything more complex than "Bass Pro Shops: The Strike"

[Alaskan Nobody]

Sharp Spikes, on 08 October 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Just wanted to note, that it's not exaclty nobody. I won't mind if PGI will go down in flames, so that more competent developer can obtain rights on MW IP. Because, IMO, PGI has shown that they haven't got what it takes to develop anything more complex than "Bass Pro Shops: The Strike"

And if this game goes down in flames, how many people are going to be willing to touch what has already been labeled as a toxic IP?

This game goes down in flames at best we are not going to see another Mechwarrior game till Micro$oft gives up the license... and they area company known for loving giving up IP's.

[Sharp Spikes]

Shar Wolf, on 08 October 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

And if this game goes down in flames, how many people are going to be willing to touch what has already been labeled as a toxic IP?

This game goes down in flames at best we are not going to see another Mechwarrior game till Micro$oft gives up the license... and they area company known for loving giving up IP's.

If this game goes down in flames we can possibly see renewal of development of MW:LL. That would be great.

[PoLaR]

Koniving, on 08 October 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

I love the SNES MW reference

[Alaskan Nobody]

Sharp Spikes, on 08 October 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

If this game goes down in flames we can possibly see renewal of development of MW:LL. That would be great.

Unlikely as the people who were working on that have either started working for PGI or were working for other companies, and thus have little say over what games they produce.

[Wintersdark]

Sharp Spikes, on 08 October 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Just wanted to note, that it's not exaclty nobody. I won't mind if PGI will go down in flames, so that more competent developer can obtain rights on MW IP. Because, IMO, PGI has shown that they haven't got what it takes to develop anything more complex than "Bass Pro Shops: The Strike"

You haven't really thought this through, have you? There's a reason there hasn't been a Battletech/Mechwarrior game in many, many years. The IP is viewed as garaunteed to fail.

If MWO fails, after a massive crowdfunding start? It won't get picked up again. Not for at least a decade.

If you want to see another, better Battletech game than MWO, your best odds of that happening are through MWO being successful and profitable.

You don't see many games based off failed games, you see new games in a genre when the initial game is actually successful.

[Sharp Spikes]

Shar Wolf, on 08 October 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

And if this game goes down in flames, how many people are going to be willing to touch what has already been labeled as a toxic IP?

By that logic Warhammer is a "toxic IP" too and no one will touch it anymore. Do you believe in that yourself?

Wintersdark, on 08 October 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

You haven't really thought this through, have you?

Oh, but I did.

Quote

There's a reason there hasn't been a Battletech/Mechwarrior game in many, many years. The IP is viewed as guaranteed to fail.

I could not care less how it is viewed by commercial devs/publishers. MW community did well without them.

Quote

If MWO fails, after a massive crowdfunding start?

It will indicate that developers were incompetent and couldn't deliver what they promised. And that's the way it is.

Quote

It won't get picked up again. Not for at least a decade.

Do you think that, for example, no one will touch Star Wars ever because BIOWARE itself failed at it?

Besides, BT/MW community will not see MW IP as "toxic" only because someone failed to grab planned amount of cash from its fans. The community will still love it and use it to create something good.

Quote

If you want to see another, better Battletech game than MWO, your best odds of that happening are through MWO being successful and profitable.

You try to portray the matter as if MWO is doing very well, and only critically-minded people are a threat to its existence. This is not the case. MWO is borderline viable product with horrifying amount of shortcomings, big and small, and with current speed of development\content creation it will fail by itself without any external help. The question is only how soon it will happen.

Quote

You don't see many games based off failed games, you see new games in a genre when the initial game is actually successful.

While I'd prefer continued development of MW:LL to any commercial game based on MW IP, I have nothing against MWO being successful game. I just don't see how it can become one without increase of development speed AND quality -> change of developer.

To sum it up, there are two possibilities:

If PGI will continue to develop MWO and there will be no major personnel changes at PGI then MWO will fail. After that community will be able to pick up development of MW:LL and/or MW4 and, IMO, that will be good.

If IGP will realize that PGI just doesn't cut it and either force major personnel changes at PGI or hire another development company, then MWO has a chance to succeed. That's fine with me.

I just wish that any one of these two possibilities became reality sooner.

[MechFrog1]

If it's MWO or nothing, that's all the more reason to be very vocal about what needs to be fixed. The game is already gimped by some bad reviews due to ignoring the plethora of suggestions. Why double-down on the bad by continuing to pretend that the game doesn't have major issues that need to be addressed immediately?

So far, shouting down people with legitimate criticisms has yielded a game with horrible reviews and a less than stellar launch with almost no fanfare. Perhaps it's time to hang up the white hat and stop defending the game right or wrong because it's clearly not helping.

In so far as constructive criticism, I will repeat what I stated months ago as priorities:

1. King of the Hill Deathmatch
2. Lobbies (If it's going to take you a year to finish CW, let your players create content for you)
3. Removal of Ghost Heat since it failed at its purpose and unnecessarily limits your content.
4. All available resources on UI2.0 (Without proper documentation and a usable interface, your new players WILL quit. There are literally hundreds of other games out there trying to get the attention of players. Most of which will tell you if firing more than 2 of a certain type of weapon will gimp you.)

Educational research shows that more than 4-5 goals actually yield less success, so while there are many other things that could improve the game, these are the most important to pumping some electricity into this thing.

Edited by mint frog, 09 October 2013 - 10:00 PM.

[HugoStiglitz]

Sharp Spikes, on 08 October 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

If this game goes down in flames we can possibly see renewal of development of MW:LL. That would be great.

This is really to all of your statements, but this one in particular gets me. MW:LL's staff went off to do other things, there will be no more development of that and even if there is someone else will have to pick it up. That someone will have to do alot of work for no pay, since they won't own the license. This brings it back to the fact that if the first commercial MW game in a long time fails, no business in their right mind would pick it up. That just doesn't make any business sense at all.

You use the example of Warhammer and Starwars as "toxic" IPs but the difference between them and MW is that both have had successful games in the past 10 years, MW has not. One game going south doesn't make an IP toxic, by that logic Halo is a toxic IP after Halo Wars, and Resident Evil would be a toxic IP after it's recent slip ups. It's a long wait followed by one failed game. Do you think there is going to be another Aliens game or a new Duke Nukem any time soon? If MWO goes then nobody picks it up and you are counting on someone having a lot of spare time on their hands to develop a new game while working for free.

And you talk about the game having short comings. Give an example aside from the obvious CW please? I could argue that this game is no much different from CS:GO, TF2 or LoL with replayability and late game content even without CW. They have laid out their work flow pipeline in the latest Creative Dev Update and by the end of the month it looks like we might get a good little bit of the stuff we've been shown with more to follow suit. The speed of their updates has not changed, we are still getting a new update once every two weeks, and even with only a new mech once a month that is better than the development of DotA2 with their grand total of nothing but cosmetics since launch, and it's considered successful.

Edited by HugoStiglitz, 09 October 2013 - 11:30 PM.

[Sharp Spikes]

HugoStiglitz, on 09 October 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

This is really to all of your statements, but this one in particular gets me. MW:LL's staff went off to do other things, there will be no more development of that and even if there is someone else will have to pick it up. That someone will have to do alot of work for no pay, since they won't own the license. This brings it back to the fact that if the first commercial MW game in a long time fails, no business in their right mind would pick it up. That just doesn't make any business sense at all.

You use the example of Warhammer and Starwars as "toxic" IPs but the difference between them and MW is that both have had successful games in the past 10 years, MW has not. One game going south doesn't make an IP toxic, by that logic Halo is a toxic IP after Halo Wars, and Resident Evil would be a toxic IP after it's recent slip ups. It's a long wait followed by one failed game. Do you think there is going to be another Aliens game or a new Duke Nukem any time soon? If MWO goes then nobody picks it up and you are counting on someone having a lot of spare time on their hands to develop a new game while working for free.

Yes, I am. I am even willing to participate.

And you talk about the game having short comings. Give an example aside from the obvious CW please? I could argue that this game is no much different from CS:GO, TF2 or LoL with replayability and late game content even without CW. They have laid out their work flow pipeline in the latest Creative Dev Update and by the end of the month it looks like we might get a good little bit of the stuff we've been shown with more to follow suit. The speed of their updates has not changed, we are still getting a new update once every two weeks, and even with only a new mech once a month that is better than the development of DotA2 with their grand total of nothing but cosmetics since launch, and it's considered successful.

An example of critical flaw in MWO? Oh, well...
What about hit detection? You know, I'm kinda tired of having 50% chance of my SRM hits being not registered. I'm f--n tired that I have to fire lasers ahead or behind or above but NOT at the enemy mech to score at least SOME damage. I absolutely am not enthusiastic about having to fire 3 AC40 alphas (yes, that's still possible) at a Spider to have some chance to kill it, etc. etc.
And besides hit detection we have significant problems with mech scales, hitboxes, weapon balance, movement... That'd be a LONG list if I'll go into the details. I don't even mention clans or community warfare here, now we have two deathmatch modes: Dumb & Dumber, and even these aren't working properly. Is it too much to ask for properly working TDM in a RELEASED game that was in development for two+ years?

[Tyrnea Smurf]

Heffay, on 05 October 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

So I think we can safely say less than 300 people. Probably significantly less than 1% if I had to guess. And even then, a big chunk of those refunds came for reasons other than dissatisfaction with the game, and were reasons like "Wife saw credit card statement. Money needed for divorce lawyer."

Oh please if someone's calling the divorce lawyer over $80 to a $110 dollar purchase there's far more wrong in that relationship than buying high cost pixels shaped like big stompy robots in a video game.

Now if said someone went and saw that purchase on the credit card statement and then perhaps demanded a $250 bracelet to make up for it..... Now that's a horse of another color...

And then lets suppose once she got the bracelet she began wondering aloud how strange it is that some people have golden things on their wrists while others have to sit and wait for the pixels to be delivered, and how buying expensive pixels can have a karmic effect on the state of a relationship.....

[HugoStiglitz]

Sharp Spikes, on 10 October 2013 - 12:06 AM, said:

An example of critical flaw in MWO? Oh, well...
What about hit detection? You know, I'm kinda tired of having 50% chance of my SRM hits being not registered. I'm f--n tired that I have to fire lasers ahead or behind or above but NOT at the enemy mech to score at least SOME damage. I absolutely am not enthusiastic about having to fire 3 AC40 alphas (yes, that's still possible) at a Spider to have some chance to kill it, etc. etc.
And besides hit detection we have significant problems with mech scales, hitboxes, weapon balance, movement... That'd be a LONG list if I'll go into the details. I don't even mention clans or community warfare here, now we have two deathmatch modes: Dumb & Dumber, and even these aren't working properly. Is it too much to ask for properly working TDM in a RELEASED game that was in development for two+ years?

I have not had a problem at all with hit detection since they added host state rewind. Maybe that just has to do with the fact that I am playing in NA and your profile says you are in Russia, that would make it more of a server regional issue, not a development issue. Some mech scales are bad (Awesome and Quickdraw) but most are fine IMO. Balance is not far off, sure some weapons are underpowered, but what online game doesn't have it's minor balance issues. I'm not even sure what you mean by movement. Is it unresponsive? If so that is again a ping issue, not a development issue. They are developing more game modes if you bothered to read the Creative Dev Update. Last but not least CW is coming, just have some patience for ***** sake.

[Jack Gallows]

HugoStiglitz, on 10 October 2013 - 12:35 AM, said:

Last but not least CW is coming, just have some patience for ***** sake.

We've been waiting over a year for CW.

My patience was already gone before they said that CW was basically another 6 months to a year away given how slow PGI works.

[Hastur Azargo]

HugoStiglitz, on 10 October 2013 - 12:35 AM, said:

Last but not least CW is coming, just have some patience for ***** sake.

I second this. Seriously, guys, how many games do you know that pack as much as what you expect from MWO + CW? Because what you're asking for (and what PGI will deliver, given time) is a Battletech MMO, while MWO was probably conceived as a MOBA/shooter.

Now if you'd expect it to come up to DotA/LoL/War Thunder level in terms of CW, it would probably be a few relatively short steps from our random-queue only reality to the final product. What do we really lack? Custom Lobbies, Rankings, Dropship Mode to mirror War Thunder's Arcade Battles, plus maybe faction exp with unlocks, which is already coming. Now that probably wouldn't take long, but you expect turf wars, player-owned planets and planetary assaults. How many games have such a huge scope? EVE, of course, which is 10 years old, Planetside, to a lesser extent, and it's being developed by huge SOE, Star Citizen, which will allegedly have a greatly interactive universe, but it remains to be seen if their speed of development will be satisfying for their players. How many more?

The fact that less than 2 years after closed beta PGI gave us "CoD with mechs" is already a lot, and if CW turns out to be a full galactic map with factions and dropships and capturable territory, then this game will be almost unprecedented, second only to EVE, since it will be reaching EVE scale, with a fully fledged ground combat. Sure, EVE has Dust 514, but it's been released 10 years after EVE, and you're asking for full CW now.

Seriously, if PGI dares go that far, there's no point of stop for them. They can go on and on and on, adding Mech Commander mode to issue mechs orders via drag-select from a bird's eye view, then they can add aerospace mode a-la War Tunder, to fight in orbit as well as over battlefields, and then they can go ship-to-ship, and make MWO the ultimate Battletech experience.

All given time.

If you're unhappy with the game now, you can always go spend some time in War Thunder or LoL or whatever and come back later. The game is a bit coarse now, but it's very playable, and as time goes by we'll be seeing more and more improvements to it, and although I do think that the tiny PGI is overwhelmed by this project, hence the slow pace compared to their initial projections, but I certainly don't want it to "go down in flames" so that somebody new comes and starts from scratch, since there is no guarantee that the new game we get from a new developer in several years will be at least as good as MWO.

Be patient.

[Sharp Spikes]

HugoStiglitz, on 10 October 2013 - 12:35 AM, said:

I have not had a problem at all with hit detection since they added host state rewind. Maybe that just has to do with the fact that I am playing in NA and your profile says you are in Russia, that would make it more of a server regional issue, not a development issue.

ORLY?
If you don't have issues with hit detection you are extremely lucky person. Because I saw people from NA and Canada complaining about hitreg too. Just look at patch feedback subforum, there are several threads about bad hit detection for every patch since May. Look here and here for example.

And yes, in April-May (before patch that introduced HSR for SRMs) HSR worked fine with lasers and ballistics for me. Now it doesn't and my ping didn't change since then. So it worked, was broken and isn't fixed for almost half a year.

Quote

Some mech scales are bad (Awesome and Quickdraw) but most are fine IMO. Balance is not far off, sure some weapons are underpowered, but what online game doesn't have it's minor balance issues.

We have almost all medium mechs being too large for their weight and that makes medium mechs mostly useless against skilled players. On the other hand we have the Stalker that is a bit smaller than the Catapult... In your opinion it's OK, in mine - it is not.

Quote

I'm not even sure what you mean by movement. Is it unresponsive? If so that is again a ping issue, not a development issue.

By "problems with movement" I mean 15m tall mech frequently getting stuck on 2m high obstacles yet capable of moving knee-deep in water without any loss of speed.

Quote

They are developing more game modes if you bothered to read the Creative Dev Update. Last but not least CW is coming, just have some patience for ***** sake.

I care neither about new game modes nor about CW until they fix problems with game modes we already have. I'd rather have CW and new game modes postponed even further but get fixes to existing problems ASAP.

[Cimarb]

Sharp Spikes, on 10 October 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

ORLY?

I quoted the important part. If you don't like it so much, go find something else to do. Honestly, I am glad you are enthusiastic about the IP, but your.... outpouring....of negativity is horrible. Take a break, go find another hobby for a bit, and check back in a year or so and see if it is more to your liking.

[GRIMM11]

Azargo, on 10 October 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

The fact that less than 2 years after closed beta PGI gave us "CoD with mechs" is already a lot,

A lot that nobody wanted. I dont want COD style mechwarrior. I WANT MECHWARRIOR! I tiny percentage wanted 3rd person view, did we get a new game mode? no we got 3pv.