398 replies to this topic

[Literally]

Helmer, on 26 October 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

http://www.pcgamer.c...-online-review/


Verdict : Slightly overpriced

I feel like we're not focusing on the important part here.
The game is overpriced. It's free. It costs time to play.
I.E., It's not worth playing.

[Sandpit]

Literally, on 28 October 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

I feel like we're not focusing on the important part here.
The game is overpriced. It's free. It costs time to play.
I.E., It's not worth playing.

you forgot p2w lol

[Demogarose]

i read the review in its entirety, and IMO they hit the nail on the head

they pointed out pretty much all the things wrong with MWO, but also all the things that make it awesome

[MustrumRidcully]

Alistair Winter, on 28 October 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

In regards to the high score and MWO being ranked one of the top 25 FPS games of all time, I will ask one question. And bear in mind that I'm a quite vocal critic of PGI, as referenced in my signature.

If this game isn't a top 25 FPS game, then why didn't I play all those other top 25 games several hours a week for a year, like I've done with MWO? The only previous FPS I've played as much (probably more) is Counter Strike Source. And I will grant you that Counter Strike was, and still is, a better game. But even for me, it's a bit too minimalistic.

Are you actually big on shooters?

I am not. Mechwarrior 3 I played a lot, however. And of course, this is one of the few games I actually paid more (much more) than 30-40 € on.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 28 October 2013 - 11:11 PM.

[Schrottfrosch]

I think prices are fair - just look at world of tanks - Löwe premium tank cost 51.95 $ - ok there is a garage slot inclusive...

[Vassago Rain]

Schrottfrosch, on 29 October 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

I think prices are fair - just look at world of tanks - Löwe premium tank cost 51.95 $ - ok there is a garage slot inclusive...

Those aren't fair prices.

[Johnny Z]

KovarD, on 28 October 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

If I would to choose a Mechwarrior franchise game to be on a "Best Shooters of All Time" list, definitelly wouldn't be MWO. Mechwarrior 2 for sure.

I didnt play Mechwarrior 2 until well after it was out of date, but that was a great game for its day I am sure. I have put this link up a few times to show what could be done in 1996, http://www.youtube.c...e&v=li2g-mIkX4M.

Sure hope Mechwarrior online, going into 2014 can add to what they are offering.

I am a fan and happy with the game play, but like the review said its really hurtin in almost every other way.

[KinLuu]

Vassago Rain, on 29 October 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Those aren't fair prices.

That depends on your definiton of "fair price".

Is 1000$ for a Idris corvette in Star Citizen a fair price? I guess so, as they sold out in minutes, the last time they went up for purchase.

Prices are not fair or unfair. Prices have no moral value. These games prices seem to be correctly placed - as the goods PGI is offering, obviously do sell.

[Tombstoner]

Helmer, on 26 October 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

http://www.pcgamer.c...-online-review/


Verdict : Slightly overpriced, but a more than worthy successor to one of PC gaming’s greatest franchises that nails the important part: combat.

Except that they dont know enough about how the game works and called it "balanced".....
Not mentioning all of any drama spikes like ghost heat or 3PV.
This review over looks the bad and hypes what little good is left.
This is a major propaganda boom for PGI and IGP but its based on half truths.
Time to sucker some more drones.

Edited by Tombstoner, 29 October 2013 - 06:17 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

KinLuu, on 29 October 2013 - 03:24 AM, said:

That depends on your definiton of "fair price".

Is 1000$ for a Idris corvette in Star Citizen a fair price? I guess so, as they sold out in minutes, the last time they went up for purchase.

Prices are not fair or unfair. Prices have no moral value. These games prices seem to be correctly placed - as the goods PGI is offering, obviously do sell.

That's not a fair price, either, which is why only about 200 people own them.

[Skunk Wolf]

xhrit, on 27 October 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

I would say Mechwarrior 2 and the online component, Netmech, were one one the top 25 greatest games of all time.

MWO is just like Netmech, except with better graphics and more features.

Ergo.

I recall destructible features in Mechwarror 2.

Maybe arm movement is missing from it.

More weapons in MW2.

We are missing a view mode from that also.

Remember popping the reactor in multiplayer? Good times.

[Heffay]

Vassago Rain, on 29 October 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

That's not a fair price, either, which is why only about 200 people own them.

What's "fair" then? Who gets to decide that?

[Calamus]

Quite the review with kid gloves.

[Roland]

LakeDaemon, on 28 October 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Just curious. What were you hoping to see with MWO that didnt happen?

ANY of the community warfare stuff, which was promised to us years ago, and which still doesn't exist in anything beyond the most vague vaporware form?

Mechwarrior 4 didn't include that, but it at least let us have our own servers, and thus allowed us to implement that element on our own, which we did.

However, beyond that, the biggest and most crippling disappointment is the fact that you can't play with more than 4 people, unless you have EXACTLY some other number of people... before, it was 8, which was hard enough to get together... And now it's 12, which is even more ridiculous... So you have 4 players on, and then a fifth comes on, and he can't play with you until you get another 7 folks together. It's nonsense.

And it was promised to us back when they first implemented the 8 man queue that it was a temporary measure that would be dealt with... and then they never did. And tons of units lost tons of players as a direct result of this move on PGI's part, and they still refuse to deal with it.

PGI is actively preventing people from playing their game, and it's absurd.

I've given PGI more money than I've given most developers, and even with that in mind I am brutally disappointed with their total refusal to deal with this issue which is directly preventing us from attracting players who were previously extremely interested in the mechwarrior franchise.

[Sandpit]

Roland, on 29 October 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

ANY of the community warfare stuff, which was promised to us years ago, and which still doesn't exist in anything beyond the most vague vaporware form?

Mechwarrior 4 didn't include that, but it at least let us have our own servers, and thus allowed us to implement that element on our own, which we did.

However, beyond that, the biggest and most crippling disappointment is the fact that you can't play with more than 4 people, unless you have EXACTLY some other number of people... before, it was 8, which was hard enough to get together... And now it's 12, which is even more ridiculous... So you have 4 players on, and then a fifth comes on, and he can't play with you until you get another 7 folks together. It's nonsense.

And it was promised to us back when they first implemented the 8 man queue that it was a temporary measure that would be dealt with... and then they never did. And tons of units lost tons of players as a direct result of this move on PGI's part, and they still refuse to deal with it.

PGI is actively preventing people from playing their game, and it's absurd.

I've given PGI more money than I've given most developers, and even with that in mind I am brutally disappointed with their total refusal to deal with this issue which is directly preventing us from attracting players who were previously extremely interested in the mechwarrior franchise.

It SEEMS like they are actively preventing league play and unit cohesion. I don't know if it is intended or not but that's how it seems. They may be roadblocking it to ensure that CW isn't an "option" as if players were allowed to form their own leagues en masse it might render CW inconsequential. Then add in all the UI problems and such and throw in a few cups of "we really don't kow how to handle PR very well" and that brings us to where we are at now. Just my thoughts on that particular subject. I can tell you this much, the first break in PGI trust and PR mismanagement that I can recall is when they simply deleted the Centurions from hangar bays and they introduced the wang as a hero mech. This has just been a history of poor PR and communication

[Sadist Cain]

Heffay, on 28 October 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

Bioshock is an MMO? That's news to everyone...

MWO is an MMO?

[Roland]

Sandpit, on 29 October 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

It SEEMS like they are actively preventing league play and unit cohesion. I don't know if it is intended or not but that's how it seems. They may be roadblocking it to ensure that CW isn't an "option" as if players were allowed to form their own leagues en masse it might render CW inconsequential. Then add in all the UI problems and such and throw in a few cups of "we really don't kow how to handle PR very well" and that brings us to where we are at now. Just my thoughts on that particular subject. I can tell you this much, the first break in PGI trust and PR mismanagement that I can recall is when they simply deleted the Centurions from hangar bays and they introduced the wang as a hero mech. This has just been a history of poor PR and communication

Honestly, I'm not even talking just about the inability to replicate any of the league play that we had in the old MW4 planetary leagues (which would be great).

The fact that we can play with 1-4 people.. and then if more folks show up, they are just screwed and can't play with us, is totally absurd. It's driving people away from the game.

And it's been in place for months now, and tons of units have hemorrhaged players as a result. And we keep telling PGI about this, and they simply do not care at all. They don't even respond or acknowledge that this is even an issue for us.

Since Phoenix came out, some folks started returning to the game.. and then we immediately had the same issue we had previously. 4 folks will be on, and then some 5th guy shows up... and, inevitably, someone will just leave to make a spot for that new player.

So then, instead of having 5 people playing, and then 6, and then 7, etc.... you have 4, and that's it.

And then we are left with all of these reasons for not implementing a better matchmaking system, or better grouping queues.. That we can't do that, because the player base is too small.

THE PLAYER BASE IS SMALL BECAUSE THE CURRENT SYSTEM DRIVES PLAYERS AWAY.

And no, I don't want to just pugstomp. Hell, I'd play in the 12 man queue undermanned with pugs filling the slots if we were able.. I'd gladdly give pugs a solo queue. I just want to be able to play with my freaking friends without jumping through hoops. Why the hell can't we do that?

[xhrit]

Skunk Wolf, on 29 October 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

I recall destructible features in Mechwarror 2.

Maybe arm movement is missing from it.

More weapons in MW2.

We are missing a view mode from that also.

Number of weapons are restricted by the lore. When the clans are released MWO will have the same number of weapons as MW2.

Same thing with the view modes that we are missing. "Image Enhancement" is clan tech. Even in mechwarrior 2, Inner Sphere mechs could not use it.

Technically MWO already has destructable terrain, but it is not enabled on everything.



Sure, I'd like more destructable features. I'd like to see cars explode and flip like in the Avengers. ^^

[Deathlike]

Roland, on 29 October 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

THE PLAYER BASE IS SMALL BECAUSE THE CURRENT SYSTEM DRIVES PLAYERS AWAY.

QFT

Quote

And no, I don't want to just pugstomp. Hell, I'd play in the 12 man queue undermanned with pugs filling the slots if we were able.. I'd gladdly give pugs a solo queue. I just want to be able to play with my freaking friends without jumping through hoops. Why the hell can't we do that?

Reasons.

There's nothing that kills teams than not being able to play with people you want to play with. It doesn't matter if it's an elite group, or just a bunch of friends that want to have a good time regardless of the result.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 October 2013 - 08:57 AM.

[Silent]

xhrit, on 29 October 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

Technically MWO already has destructable terrain, but it is not enabled on everything.

Destructible light poles.

That's the only thing that can be destroyed in the game right now. Lets not get our hopes up and start calling it destructible terrain, like we're ever going to see trees burning or buildings crumbling.

Edited by Silent, 29 October 2013 - 10:23 AM.