287 replies to this topic

[Thomas Covenant]

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

If it hurts you so much and you hate it with such fiery passion, if you think PGI are a bunch of untrustworthy liars, THEN LEAVE. GO AWAY, NOONE WANTS TO HEAR YOU ***** AND MOAN ABOUT IT. If you truly have the power to decide which games you want to play or don't want to play, then EXERCISE THAT POWER AND STOP MAKING EVERYONE ELSE MISERABLE WITH YOUR MAKE BELIEF PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE FORUM RAGE WHICH SERVES ONLY TO RUIN YOUR DAY AND EVERYONE ELSE'S DAY AND HAS ABSOLUTELY NO POTENTIAL GAIN FOR ANY PARTY INVOLVED.

You may be right. Though I don't go out of my way to imitate a flaccid *****, and it's ok to stand up for what you believe in, if it's something you care about/enjoy and so forth.

[SirLANsalot]

This is such an old argument.


The people who didn't want 3Pv were the people who got ******** over it back in the MW4 days. Back then computers and game engines couldn't handle the complex programming needed to flesh out a good spotting system. Today we can, and do, the only adjustment to have done is you cannot psychically see a mech in 3PV unless your cockpit can see it. However that is only a minor adjustment anyways and one that can come at a later date after CW has been established.


Anyways you can run and spot better in 1PV. How? Easy, its called UAV drone and being in a fast light mech.

[Dr Herbert West]

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

If it hurts you so much and you hate it with such fiery passion, if you think PGI are a bunch of untrustworthy liars, THEN LEAVE. GO AWAY,

Hrrm. No.

I love the franchise, and currently, PGIGP is the franchise holder, so I will voice my concerns. Honestly, I post because I'd like to help the game, and I still have some (irrational) hope that someone at PGIGP will change course and make MWO a better game.

Quote

NOONE WANTS TO HEAR YOU ***** AND MOAN ABOUT IT. If you truly have the power to decide which games you want to play or don't want to play, then EXERCISE THAT POWER AND STOP MAKING EVERYONE ELSE MISERABLE WITH YOUR MAKE BELIEF PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE FORUM RAGE WHICH SERVES ONLY TO RUIN YOUR DAY AND EVERYONE ELSE'S DAY AND HAS ABSOLUTELY NO POTENTIAL GAIN FOR ANY PARTY INVOLVED.

Forum rage, you say?

Heffay, on 30 October 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

30%? Where are you pulling that number out of?

Look at the poll results

pbiggz, on 30 October 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

Also even if that was an accurate number, its 30% of a small percentage of players, not 30% of your overall playerbase...
I think someone here is less than practiced in his discrete math.

Its 30% of the most fanatical, active part of the player base. Before you say that population on the forums is not an accurate representation of the player base at large, two preemptive counterpoints:
-Where is the proof of this assumption, and why is it reasonable?
-PGI (and every other game developer ever) implicity admits that the forum population is representitive of the player population at large by having a feedback forum

The relevent mathematical field here is population statistics, and someone here is less than practiced in it.

Please ask me about my education in population statistics!

SirLANsalot, on 31 October 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

This is such an old argument.


The people who didn't want 3Pv were the people who got ******** over it back in the MW4 days. Back then computers and game engines couldn't handle the complex programming needed to flesh out a good spotting system. Today we can, and do, the only adjustment to have done is you cannot psychically see a mech in 3PV unless your cockpit can see it. However that is only a minor adjustment anyways and one that can come at a later date after CW has been established.


Anyways you can run and spot better in 1PV. How? Easy, its called UAV drone and being in a fast light mech.

The thing in bold would be a perfect change and would address my, and I suspect everyone else's, concerns. I would have no problem playing in such an environment.

[Heffay]

Dr Herbert West, on 31 October 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

Look at the poll results



Its 30% of the most fanatical, active part of the player base. Before you say that population on the forums is not an accurate representation of the player base at large, two preemptive counterpoints:
-Where is the proof of this assumption, and why is it reasonable?
-PGI (and every other game developer ever) implicity admits that the forum population is representitive of the player population at large by having a feedback forum

This poll is statistically meaningless. It's a self selected sample of the 5-10% of the people who even bother using the forums. That number by the way has been confirmed not just by PGI and the volunteer moderators here, but is consistent with what many other game forums have posted as well. The forums are a tiny fraction of the playerbase. And a self selected portion of that is completely meaningless.

And no, it's not the most fanatical, active part of the playerbase. Nor should you assume that it is the biggest spending portion of the playerbase. You're drawing conclusions based on how you wish the world was, not how it actually is. You believe that because you feel this way, any reasonable person would feel the same. However, you're not reasonable. You're just a tiny fraction of a small group of the vocal minority, and statistically insignificant.

You don't feel that way, of course, but the absolute worst thing you can do is start to believe your own propaganda.

Catering to the 1PV crowd would split the queues and cause far more damage to the game than giving them what they want. You can't give everyone everything they ask for. That's not game design. That's anarchy.

Edited by Heffay, 31 October 2013 - 08:44 AM.

[Dr Herbert West]

Heffay, on 31 October 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

This poll is statistically meaningless. It's a self selected sample of the 5-10% of the people who even bother using the forums. That number by the way has been confirmed not just by PGI and the volunteer moderators here, but is consistent with what many other game forums have posted as well. The forums are a tiny fraction of the playerbase. And a self selected portion of that is completely meaningless.

You don't understand polls and sample sizes.

That PGI "confirms" this erroneous statement means that they are lying or that they also don't understand polls and sample sizes. In fact, how could they confirm this without knowing what every one of their players opinions was ... its impossible.

The fact that the sample includes individuals who are self selected does not imply that they do not represent a cross section of the population at large.

Quote

And no, it's not the most fanatical, active part of the playerbase. Nor should you assume that it is the biggest spending portion of the playerbase. You're drawing conclusions based on how you wish the world was, not how it actually is. You believe that because you feel this way, any reasonable person would feel the same. However, you're not reasonable. You're just a tiny fraction of a small group of the vocal minority, and statistically insignificant.

By definition, those who take the time to argue/comment on the game on forums are the most active and fanatical part of the playerbase. This isn't debateable.

As for drawing conclusions based on how I wish the world was ... project much?

Quote

You don't feel that way, of course, but the absolute worst thing you can do is start to believe your own propaganda.

Again, projection.

I at least have some data points (this poll, the prior >90% opposed to 3PV polls). Where are your data points? For that matter, where are PGI's?

Quote

Catering to the 1PV crowd would split the queues and cause far more damage to the game than giving them what they want. You can't give everyone everything they ask for. That's not game design. That's anarchy.

First of all, in addition to not knowing how polls and sample sizes work, you also don't know what anarchy means.

Second, if catering to the 1PV crowd splits the queues and causes damage, then catering to the 3PV crowd has caused even more, as the 1PV crowd outnumbered the 3PV crowd by 9:1.

Finally, if splitting the queues would have caused so much damage that it couldn't be done, this is only evidence that PGIGP's prior design descisions (CW/UI 2.0/New Gamemode delay, Ghost Heat, etc) had already irreperably decimated the game's population. If this is the case, then I admit that removing 3PV wouldn't do any good, because the game would already be dead.

[Heffay]

You're wrong pretty much across the board. You weren't even right for the wrong reasons at any point of your post, which is really incredible.

Hey, if we're going to talk prior polls, then 93% of the most fanatical, active playerbase is fine with 1PV being in 12 mans only. Because that was the latest poll held on the topic.

Edited by Heffay, 31 October 2013 - 10:53 AM.

[Thomas Covenant]

Dr Herbert West, on 31 October 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

Stuff

Pretty much.

Look, I actually think this is a fairly new discussion. I am not making an anti 3rd perspective thread/rant/rage/ect. ect., and have no such delusions or interests.

I am regarding something that her to forth I thought was a sure thing: 1st person matches, and not just for 12 man players.

Heffay, on 31 October 2013 - 10:52 AM, said:

Hey, if we're going to talk prior polls, then 93% of the most fanatical, active playerbase is fine with 1PV being in 12 mans only. Because that was the latest poll held on the topic.

The title for that poll was:
"Should 12 v 12 pre-made group matches be limited to 1PV (First Person) view mode only?"

Is it surprising they said yes?

[Roland]

Heffay, you basically just said, "Nuh uh!"

You are incorrect in your perception of how statistics work.

[Thomas Covenant]

Heffay, on 31 October 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Catering to the 1PV crowd would split the queues and cause far more damage to the game than giving them what they want. You can't give everyone everything they ask for. That's not game design. That's anarchy.

lol

[Sean von Steinike]

I am more ticked off at the betrayal, wasted time and resources, and the preventable outrage the issue caused.

[Thomas Covenant]

Sean von Steinike, on 31 October 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

I am more ticked off at the betrayal, wasted time and resources, and the preventable outrage the issue caused.

I am not really impressed with anyone. The actual "pro 1PV" voice was pretty small, is what I am saying.
"I don't want A!" and "I really am in favor and want B" ARE actually separate messages, and the pro 1PV voice, in support of HOW EVER pgi could deliver it, was fairly silent, in comparison at least, and it's what I seek to change, though I do have the caveat I don't want it to rest on the laurels of an exclusive 12 man mode.

[Heffay]

Thomas Covenant, on 31 October 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

I am not really impressed with anyone. The actual "pro 1PV" voice was pretty small, is what I am saying. "I don't want A!" and "I really am in favor and want B" ARE actually separate messages, and the pro 1PV voice, in support of HOW EVER pgi could deliver it, was fairly silent, in comparison at least, and it's what I seek to change, though I do have the caveat I don't want it to rest on the laurels of an exclusive 12 man mode.

You're trying to drum up more support for the 1PV queue crowd with this survey?

There were several rather vocal groups (#savemwo, United and Drop) which mustered pretty much every available asset that was actually interested in that. It was about 1000 people total, or less than 1% of the player base. Less than 1% (significantly less) of the people playing the game cared enough to sign their name to try to change the whole 3PV direction. And that was during the peak of the "issue". And of course a significant number of those people ended up buying Project Phoenix packages anyway.

In other words: Nobody cares about 3PV.

[Aeolus Drift]

Heffay, on 31 October 2013 - 10:52 AM, said:

You're wrong pretty much across the board. You weren't even right for the wrong reasons at any point of your post, which is really incredible. Hey, if we're going to talk prior polls, then 93% of the most fanatical, active playerbase is fine with 1PV being in 12 mans only. Because that was the latest poll held on the topic.

Saying somebody is wrong is not proof that they are wrong, just as saying god exists is not proof of the almighty's existence. Also I find it strange that you would criticize somebody for making up a statistical analysis of a forum poll, when you stated that the playerbase has continued to grow because PGI have said so on twitter. On the other hand, just because Bryan also said that fifty percent of the founder's still play at least once a month on either NGNG or reddit does not exactly make his statement hard statistical data either. The problem is we are left interpreting #'s and player samples without having any ******* clue to how large a demographic we are dealing with relative to the size of the population. This is further complicated by our lack of knowledge of the number of inactive accounts, alt. accounts,and consistently active player base relative to the total number of accounts actually registered to play MWO. And if we are going to dismiss the forums for any form of statistical accuracy, then what do we have to rely on to make conclusions on the game's demographic other than our own anecdotal knowledge.

[Heffay]

Interceptor12, on 31 October 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

Saying somebody is wrong is not proof that they are wrong, just as saying god exists is not proof of the almighty's existence. Also I find it strange that you would criticize somebody for making up a statistical analysis of a forum poll, when you stated that the playerbase has continued to grow because PGI have said so on twitter. On the other hand, just because Bryan also said that fifty percent of the founder's still play at least once a month on either NGNG or reddit does not exactly make his statement hard statistical data either. The problem is we are left interpreting #'s and player samples without having any ******* clue to how large a demographic we are dealing with relative to the size of the population. This is further complicated by our lack of knowledge of the number of inactive accounts, alt. accounts,and consistently active player base relative to the total number of accounts actually registered to play MWO. And if we are going to dismiss the forums for any form of statistical accuracy, then what do we have to rely on to make conclusions on the game's demographic other than our own anecdotal knowledge.

It's pretty amazing that people say MWO is dying or that 3PV hurt the game given all that, right? Things like "PGI is abandoning their playerbase", or "People who vote on this poll topic are the most dedicated fans".

Yet you choose to ignore all that and call out my post instead. Interesting.

[Thomas Covenant]

Well Heffay, this is the best way I know how.

Since I am not playing a 3PV match anytime soon, or 12 man match for that matter, discussing if my opinion is shared, and what the current developer stance on it is all I got really.

[Heffay]

Fair enough. If you get over your dislike of 3PV, you could get back to playing the game. You'll soon realize that it truly is no big deal. It's not a wall hack, it doesn't affect matches, it just lets you take nice pretty pictures of your mech. ;-)

[Thomas Covenant]

Have a happy Halloween!

[Aeolus Drift]

Heffay, on 31 October 2013 - 01:37 PM, said:

It's pretty amazing that people say MWO is dying or that 3PV hurt the game given all that, right? Things like "PGI is abandoning their playerbase", or "People who vote on this poll topic are the most dedicated fans".

Yet you choose to ignore all that and call out my post instead. Interesting.

To be honest I don't know whether or not MWO is dying or not. On the one hand we apparently lost half our founders in a year which if that is true is hardly supportive of MWO supporitng its core followers. On the other hand if they are picking up new players because of 3rd person and other various reasons, then well maybe the audience (much like their "position at the time") has changed, or perhaps you are correct and the problem has been somewhat . Yes I admit I am quite cynical of the developers, However I don't have any hard statistical data that would let me say with any great certainty that MWO is losing players, or if the growth is stagnating, let alone if it's numbers are actually improving. However, I'm also fairly certain that you are in possession of any data that I couldn't find or haven't found that would change the nature of this argument either, and since PGI is pretty hardlocked on keeping their telemetry to themselves, we are in a bit of a quandary if we are going to be having arguments over demographical statistics, and their statistics. From my perspective, The best you or I can do to substantiate our own hypotheses based on the anecdotal information from the forums and our peers and make the best assessment as to where the game lies right now.
Quite frankly I no longer give a **** if MWO is dying or not, I'm mostly here to partake in the cynical pleasure of watching where the circus train that MWO has become will go to next. Maybe it will do something amazing that my ever growing cynicism would blind me towards otherwise, at which point I will be happy to return having thoroughly pied myself. I just want to make it clear that I don't criticize the game or its defenders because I take any joy out of it. I do it because I am attempting to, point out the flaws in your argument and to understand the faults in mine. Essentially, " I reject your reality, and substitute my own". I'm not as well researched as pht is, nor am I as articulate as Homeless Bill, DocBach, or Andres. But I have a good curiosity and desire to test my knowledge with others. I am willing to concede where my knowledge is limited or impractical (as I did when I mentioned Bryan's statement of half of the founders playing at least monthly) to a discussion, but I do so knowing the rules I'm establishing have to be applied consistently (other wise I would be proposing to use some rather useless tautology).

[Heffay]

Interceptor12, on 31 October 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

To be honest I don't know whether or not MWO is dying or not. On the one hand we apparently lost half our founders in a year which if that is true is hardly supportive of MWO supporitng its core followers.

You make the same mistake you accuse others.

How do you know losing half the founders in a year is a bad metric? If the normal churn for a F2P game is 90% over a year, a 50% churn would be fantastic.

[Deathlike]

SirLANsalot, on 31 October 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Anyways you can run and spot better in 1PV. How? Easy, its called UAV drone and being in a fast light mech.

The UAV serves a completely different purpose and is temporary. You can only have 1 of them on a mech (of course, all 12 mechs on the team could take it, but that isn't the case generally speaking).

Heffay, on 31 October 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

You make the same mistake you accuse others.

How do you know losing half the founders in a year is a bad metric? If the normal churn for a F2P game is 90% over a year, a 50% churn would be fantastic.

It's like saying having lost of half of Microsoft's or Apple's stock value is a good metric. Half of any "large population" is relatively significant in terms of recurring investments. Obviously retention is different in terms of a video game population, but when you have the "optimal" possibility of starting at the "best possible state" by keeping most of the founders relatively happy and trying to keep a healthy portion of them spending... that is when you know you will continue to be successful. Starting @ 50% is a very low bar, and consideration retention rates in conjunction with the game's current New Player Experience (it's not that great, unless you think it's just dandy), you're realistically dying from a slow death. It might not be now, but there's no assurance that this can continue indefinitely at the current pace.

Edited by Deathlike, 31 October 2013 - 08:59 PM.