63 replies to this topic

[Kunae]

Something else to think about: http://www.ign.com/g.../xbox-360-19496

Cancelled for XBox-360, but had been originally planned for it.

[627]

How much do they need to dumb down the game to be successful on an Xbox?

They didn't make any other tutorial besides movement, yet. even if they have all the tools, should not be a big deal to let people shoot some dead mechs and explain weapons and heat. But after that first tut there was nothing, not even a voice who tells you what to do, you need to read like in a 90's game.

And this game, with it's overall complexity, hidden ghost mechanics, no explanations whatsoever and without any type of meta game, this game should launch on an xbox? for all those 13 year old gamers who can't walk in a straight line without an achievement and XP awards?
Sorry but this whould be more hilarious than that fail "launch" day...

[-Natural Selection-]

Heffay, on 11 November 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

I think the number of people they'd pick up if they added the Xbox One to the game would dwarf the loss of any PC players who didn't want to play with the console kids. The console market is rather deep.

I remember when cross platform testing was all the talk in the early CoD modders community. There was an interview that was streamed with a guy from their company talking about how horrible it went for the console players. Only thing I ever heard about it since then was some sites posting this (and this wasn't the same guy):
http://kotaku.com/55...360-online-play

Edited by Dozier, 13 November 2013 - 12:53 AM.

[Heffay]

Dozier, on 13 November 2013 - 12:53 AM, said:

I remember when cross platform testing was all the talk in the early CoD modders community. There was an interview that was streamed with a guy from their company talking about how horrible it went for the console players. Only thing I ever heard about it since then was some sites posting this (and this wasn't the same guy):
http://kotaku.com/55...360-online-play

Yup, and I've mentioned that several times that there would need to be a separate queue for the two platforms. While I would love to destroy some console kids all day long, it would be a rather negative experience for them. So either MWO will have a separate port & queue for the Xbox One (and maybe have some features disabled to make it fit on a controller), or the rumors of a console port are just that: Rumors.

[Deathlike]

Heffay, on 13 November 2013 - 04:23 AM, said:

Yup, and I've mentioned that several times that there would need to be a separate queue for the two platforms. While I would love to destroy some console kids all day long, it would be a rather negative experience for them. So either MWO will have a separate port & queue for the Xbox One (and maybe have some features disabled to make it fit on a controller), or the rumors of a console port are just that: Rumors.

I'm starting to think these are not rumors.

When you're a developer, you must always explore your options to make money (3PV, consumables, etc.) The thing of the matter is that if you've actually bothered to read the comments of Bryan's (and Russ's) twitter feed, you would catch onto the idea that they have been looking/considering the option for that. This may not necessarily be an IGP/PGI specific thing, but it doesn't hurt to explore that path.

PGI's track record has included porting to other systems, so IMO their track record suggests that they may attempt something along those lines, assuming they have the time to do that... which at this moment they do not (with UI 2.0 being at the horizon, with some part of CW following that). Once such a hurdle is cleared (at least UI 2.0, since that is the most important thing that holds it all back), then it isn't actually out of the realm to "grab" the extra 10% or whatever magical "silent majority" says that they should even bother collecting.

In sum, UI 2.0 controls a lot of PGI's destiny, and any console porting reference is an actual likely reality that they will explore if they believe they can collect on that slice of the pie. I would not simply write it off... PGI's track record suggests it so it makes sense to prepare for the inevitability of it IMO. Past history tends to dictate future performance. This is no different.

[Kunae]

Deathlike, on 13 November 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

In sum, UI 2.0 controls a lot of PGI's destiny, and any console porting reference is an actual likely reality that they will explore if they believe they can collect on that slice of the pie. I would not simply write it off... PGI's track record suggests it so it makes sense to prepare for the inevitability of it IMO. Past history tends to dictate future performance. This is no different.

Explore? No, it's been their plan for a very long time.

3pv
Arm-lock
Throttle-decay
This latest keybinding fiasco
The design of "UI 2.0" being very consolish.
DX 11

All of these point to a designed approach to integrate consoles.

[RG Notch]

UI 2.0 is due out 3 weeks after launch according to the announcement at the Launch Party. I mean they didn't just say that to sell more Project Phoenix packs .......

[Deathlike]

RG Notch, on 13 November 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:

UI 2.0 is due out 3 weeks after launch according to the announcement at the Launch Party. I mean they didn't just say that to sell more Project Phoenix packs and .......

Fixed that for you.

[NRP]

Can you guys just stop with all the console port talk already? It was nothing more than tinfoil hat speculation as to why UI 2.0 isn't ready yet.

[New Day]

NRP, on 13 November 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

Can you guys just stop with all the console port talk already? It was nothing more than tinfoil hat speculation as to why UI 2.0 isn't ready yet.

Did you even read Deathlike's post?

[Chemie]

Ui2.0 is not ready yet because they are incompetent. Name a game developer who does not have a functioning UI within the cryengine? Why is it only PGI needed more than 1 year to develop this? Why is it that they were fairly certain in June that it would be ready at launch but later changed it to 3 weeks after launch and now we are two months after launch and are shown a alpha...and that alpha would have to have been in that state back in June for them to say launch was possible....meaning they actually never had any UI2 written when they predicted its release. Try 2014. Oh, and every feature is dependent on UI2 because their one monkey can only do one thing at a time.

[aniviron]

Bhael Fire, on 11 November 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

From technical development standpoint, yes, getting the Clan mechs in is easier than CW because it doesn't require a lot of backend support; the functionality is there already. CW on the other hand requires support from their software engineers as well as Crytek's...which takes more time because of all the unseen variables involved.

Of course, it took six months to change the PPC's heat, a single value in an xml file. If we extrapolate that every single piece of clan equipment is going to need at least two new values in an xml file (heat and damage, we can ignore things like impulse right now) then the clans should be here by 2246 at the earliest.

[RG Notch]

NRP, on 13 November 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

Can you guys just stop with all the console port talk already? It was nothing more than tinfoil hat speculation as to why UI 2.0 isn't ready yet.

Isn't that better speculation than that PGI is incompetent, lazy or trying to milk people in a cash grab? It would seem one of those is the culprit.

[NRP]

Well, until there's an official announcement of a console version, it's nothing more than "grasping at straws" speculation. Personally, I don't think a console port is likely given the money transaction model in MWO. Consoles are a "walled garden" ecosystem and the platform owners would not only want their cut of each transaction, but would undoubtedly insist on directing how things are done (and are not done). Perhaps if MWO had a big publisher like EA or Activision, but my guess is they'll make more money (and have more freedom) by remaining PC only. Hell, I wish they'd port it to Xbox, at least then everyone would have voice comms. But I don't think it's going to happen any time soon.

The reality is this: UI 2.0 will be ready when PGI feels it's ready. This is a common mindset among PC devs (see id's classic "when it's done" mantra). No need for tinfoil hat theories.

[aniviron]

The real issue that people are missing with the console port theory is that Sony and MS charge five or six figure sums every time a developer patches the game; given MWO's patching model and the fact that it would die within a few months if the patches stopped, I find a console deal to be unlikely at the given time.

Please also note that this is how it worked on the PS3/360; I don't know if xbone and ps4 are different, but I have no reason to assume that MS and Sony have abandoned a lucrative stream of free cash.

[Heffay]

aniviron, on 13 November 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

Please also note that this is how it worked on the PS3/360; I don't know if xbone and ps4 are different, but I have no reason to assume that MS and Sony have abandoned a lucrative stream of free cash.

I think MS is trying to be a lot more friendly to independent game developers with the Xbox One. Might be trying to siphon off some of the business Steam gets. At least, I seem to recall hearing something like that. They might forego the patching/dev revenue in exchange for a cut of the microtransactions.

Still, rumor is rumor....

[Sabazial]

Ok, even if they added a finished UI 2.0 and the clan omnimechs in the next few days, it's going to be pointless because we'd only be able to fit them with the same weapons we've been using for the last 2 years anyway.

You expect them to release a whole batch of new clan tech? ER medium lasers, Heavy gauss rifles, Ultra AC20, Streak SRM 6? There's no way we're ever going to see this kind of tech in MWO, so other than the cool factor and those on nostalgia trips piloting their favourite chassis, the clan mechs aren't really going to be that impressive considering they already stated they will be heavily nerfed to keep the playing field even.

[Chemie]

2 game modes, same weapons, and the fact that UI2 is useless in terms of game play were the reasons I did not buy Phoenix.

[Haakon Magnusson]

Kunae, on 13 November 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Explore? No, it's been their plan for a very long time.

3pv
Arm-lock
Throttle-decay
This latest keybinding fiasco
The design of "UI 2.0" being very consolish.
DX 11

All of these point to a designed approach to integrate consoles.

I sort of am tending to dismiss console port deeply in tinfoil region of thinking, but the look and feel of UI2 definitely smells of "made-for-controller".
I mean if you were aiming for pc audience, why would you even think of leaving paperdoll out?

Hopefully their energy is concentrated on finalizing long-waited parts of this game instead of getting a quick console port out (Then again, they could outsource this and run it side by side, if you are not risking base development. Unfortunately they'd be in separate q's... I for one would welcome our 3pv walking targ.. players) because in current state it needs more depth for player retention.

... although you could add some sort of enhanced auto-aim for 3pv to even the footing... and actually give them all Clan mechs. SHiiiiit, no wonder they ain't talking how they are going to implement Clans.
*puts on tinfoilhat*

[tayhimself]

Chemie, on 14 November 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

2 game modes, same weapons, and the fact that UI2 is useless in terms of game play were the reasons I did not buy Phoenix.

Yup, I would add fear of terribad hit boxes to that list.

For UI2, I don't know how they can give a 3 week estimate at launch and be 4x off already. If I took 5x as long to do my software development work as my estimates I would be out of a job pretty quickly.