No Guts, No Galaxy Podcast: Goes live!
#441
Posted 26 December 2011 - 06:26 AM
Anyways I hope you continue to enjoy listening!
#442
Posted 26 December 2011 - 11:00 AM
#443
Posted 26 December 2011 - 02:20 PM
So we at NGNG would like to apologize for the delay, we only hope you understand that sometimes things are out of our hands. On another note we hope everyone enjoyed their Christmas days with friends and family.
Be safe, be smart on New Years and if you'd like to take pictures of the celebration please do not hold back on sharing them!
#444
Posted 26 December 2011 - 02:43 PM
On another note, will you guys be recording another cast this week and then loading them up on the web page at a later date? or taking a break like the rest of us trolls until after the new year?
#445
Posted 26 December 2011 - 03:24 PM
Cyote13, on 26 December 2011 - 02:43 PM, said:
On another note, will you guys be recording another cast this week and then loading them up on the web page at a later date? or taking a break like the rest of us trolls until after the new year?
This one I cannot speak upon for personally I am free to do the cast, its just depends if the others are available as well, mainly PK. We might have to put a hold on it until after the new year so I hope no BIG information is released!
#446
Posted 26 December 2011 - 05:01 PM
Ill put up the pitchforks, and put out the torches till the wed. after the first. After that well .....
#447
Posted 28 December 2011 - 11:24 AM
#448
Posted 28 December 2011 - 10:08 PM
Edited by Cattra Kell, 29 December 2011 - 11:40 AM.
#449
Posted 29 December 2011 - 10:52 AM
So yeah, wow, the Catapult is pure sex on two legs and it looks like S3dition did get the spotting for the mechs leg in that one picture!! As for the Podcast, I will be able to get the #8 up tomorrow, again apologize but real life kicked in this holiday season.
I'll need to listen to the Podcast they revealed and see what all it talks about. I'll be meeting with the crew and going forth! Looking forward to this New Years!!
#450
Posted 29 December 2011 - 01:09 PM
"Something else we massively underestimated was people’s desire to win! When we were working on the design it was our belief that as long as people were progressing in some way, they would be happy and that winning wasn’t the only way to progress however the most common reason given for people giving up their subscriptions was that they didn’t feel they were progressing in the game, as they weren’t winning every match or in the top 100 of the gameworld. With the model in place, someone had to be taking that bottom spot, and not surprisingly, no one wanted to be that person. Or the 900 above that."
How will MWO reward losers to stay ingame and fight even if they find themselve on the bottom of the food chain losing (to) much?
Its known that Players only feel comfortable with at least 2/3 win ratio!
Only the hardcore BT/MW crowd wont pay the games bills or secure future development.
Personally i want MWO succeed and become more over time than a combat only game.
Maybe you can ask/talk about it on one of the next Podcasts?
TY
Edited by Thorqemada, 29 December 2011 - 01:09 PM.
#451
Posted 30 December 2011 - 02:23 PM
Thorqemada, on 29 December 2011 - 01:09 PM, said:
"Something else we massively underestimated was people’s desire to win! When we were working on the design it was our belief that as long as people were progressing in some way, they would be happy and that winning wasn’t the only way to progress however the most common reason given for people giving up their subscriptions was that they didn’t feel they were progressing in the game, as they weren’t winning every match or in the top 100 of the gameworld. With the model in place, someone had to be taking that bottom spot, and not surprisingly, no one wanted to be that person. Or the 900 above that."
How will MWO reward losers to stay ingame and fight even if they find themselve on the bottom of the food chain losing (to) much?
Its known that Players only feel comfortable with at least 2/3 win ratio!
Only the hardcore BT/MW crowd wont pay the games bills or secure future development.
Personally i want MWO succeed and become more over time than a combat only game.
Maybe you can ask/talk about it on one of the next Podcasts?
TY
Very good topic, we will add this to our notes!
#452
Posted 30 December 2011 - 05:34 PM
Edited by Andrew Harvey, 30 December 2011 - 05:46 PM.
#453
Posted 30 December 2011 - 06:33 PM
#454
Posted 31 December 2011 - 12:40 AM
Distribution Platform
I'd prefer STEAM as it reduces the number of Icons I have on my desktop, no discs to lose or get destroyed. The only issue I have with steam is that it makes it way to easy to spend my money in their store. It really uses such minimal resources (less than 150 MB).
Number of players per map
I really hope servers aren't hard set as 12 v 12, but rather 24 'Mechs total per match (balancing based on BV rather than tonnage or number of 'Mechs), but I don't know how PGI is balancing the game yet.
Voice Chat
Hopefully they do have an integrated voice chat that is worth a damn.
Maps
Yeah, I read it as four types of maps, and not just four maps total. I don't know about the maps being randomly generated (not sure if that's what you guys meant), but a decent variety of map types within each category and you don't know exactly which sub-map, of each archetype, you are dropping in that would be cool.
Loyalty Points
I really like how LPs are used/earned differently based on role, and unit type (Lone Wolf, Faction, Merc) and that decay only effects further advancement of rank and perks. I'm curious as to if Loyalty Points (LPs) are replacing C-bills, and if they are does that mean that every LP I use causes a hit against gaining ranks, or are ranks based on total LPs earned sans decay? Also will Mercs pay more generally for 'Mechs or will the merc units LP with a given faction determine the cost for a specific 'Mech?
I read the planetary holdings as separate from contract agreements, but the way the question was answered confuses the two issues. I am a little less sure if the two are actually separate from one another, and if that is the case I think that doesn't make quite as much sense to me.
Various XP types
I like the concept of 'Mech XP in that you gain better proficiency with a specific 'Mech, and hope that it is also a general 'Mech role, but maybe the latter is covered by pilot XP which would also make sense.
Custom skins and Logos
I read the custom created skins and logos as separate from the provided in-game tools for creating Merc' skins (an integrated at launch skin creator) and a number of integrated logos available at launch. I.E. at launch there will be a series of tools to create skins and logos for a unit, but completely unique logos and skins won't be an option until later when they can figure out the legal issues involved with allowing user created content within that category.
Mercs, contracts, planetary control
On the faction contract vs planetary control seems to me to fall within the various sub sets of planets (core, border, periphary) and their answer just seems to reaffirm that stance. Core worlds only change hands based on major timeline events, factions fight for border worlds (which they may higher mercs to assist with), and periphery worlds will be controlled by merc corps. All of them are separate sub sets of planets with their own rules. Factions cannot lose core worlds, factions fight for border world control (and may use mercs to capture/defend) and merc corps vie for control of periphery planets (non faction contract).
Melee
The certain game type/map/planet type that "demands" melee combat I read as a post launch thing that will introduce melee combat. AKA they are working on melee combat, but don't expect it to be ready until after the launch date and have a few close quarters types maps that will demand the use of melee to achieve victory just because it will be too close quarter to use weapons effectively.
Permanent destruction
My only issue with the permanent destruction is it may be a real turn off to a huge portion of the player base and could effect the profitability of the franchise, but I agree there should be some cost associated with getting your teeth kicked in. It just shouldn't be so severe that more casual players will be turned off and therefore reducing player base. From a business perspective that would be detirmental. I'm all for the hardcore perma-destruction, but that should really be reserved for a hardcore game mode.
Loadout
I hope they stick the customization to still fall within canon variants, or at least limit personal customs to some extent. I think something between MW4 and full strip down a la MW3 is used. Full customization as in MW2/3 is too easily abused, but MW4 is way too limiting.
Half An Axe
Personally I'm afraid of the Urbie. It honestly is a devastating ambush 'Mech for it's size. It can punch a hole in many Heavy 'Mechs armors. Even if it dies shortly there after the hole is still there and all his lance mates can exploit that new found weakness.
Practice
I really hope they do have training matches that exist outside of regular combat. No consequences, but no XP, or LP. Travel time may not fit in an instanced PvP game in my opinion.
Travel Time
I really hope they don't implement some kind of real time travel time as it won't work too well in an instanced PvP focused F2P game in my opinion. I think you are right that travel time is a concern, and yes immersion could be a factor if you are always instantly wherever you are fighting, but from a business perspective it could be detrimental.
Melee
Seems to me they covered this in one of the QnA2 questions. We will see this post launch and I'd assume that includes weapon based melee combat for 'Mechs that implement them. I'd also love to see me being able to beat an Atlas down with it's own arm that I shot off.
Lone Wolf
PGI has suggested that Lone Wolfs may be able to act as bounty hunters in an interview. How do you guys feel about this, and how should it, bounty hunting, be implemented?
Catapult Announcement
This suggests that fire support is a archetype of Mechwarrior. I know the Dragon announcement suggested that indirect fire is a possibility, but how do you guys think this should work? Should indirect fire be purely based on scouting, or be able to be used more like artillery where you don't need a target, but can just blanket fire an area to coral or just strike fear into your opponents? What is your opinion on Flyingdebris' redesign? Personally I think Isaac has really made it look a machine of war, as much as I love the old design I think his redesign makes it look more viable.
New Question
Do you guys think that PGI should be considering adding a SP campaign to MWO post launch or should they be considering creating a new game with an SP focus after MWO succeeds?
General boot kissing
Love the addition of great music to the Podcasts. Keep it up guys you all get better with every podcast.
Edited by Halfinax, 31 December 2011 - 12:42 AM.
#455
Posted 31 December 2011 - 06:51 AM
Sorry my questions are rather lame, I will try to come up with better ones.
#456
Posted 31 December 2011 - 11:11 AM
Barantor, on 31 December 2011 - 06:51 AM, said:
Sorry my questions are rather lame, I will try to come up with better ones.
Never lame bud! Keep them rolling!
#457
Posted 31 December 2011 - 11:45 AM
#458
Posted 31 December 2011 - 11:58 AM
Also, on the topic of girly mechs and ponies, I've been fielding a pink Warhammer in TT since before that.
#459
Posted 31 December 2011 - 11:58 AM
#460
Posted 31 December 2011 - 12:40 PM
Steam also is a good advertisement and you can't deny that a lot of folks that game know what steam is.
15 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 15 guests, 0 anonymous users