38 replies to this topic

[DEMAX51]

http://www.awesomeou...arrior-scorned/

[NoSkillRush]

DEMAX51, on 18 December 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

http://www.awesomeou...arrior-scorned/

Great Read!

[Legend_]

I like this article, it sums up a lot of things that fall into line with my own thoughts and opinions.

[BlackIronTarkus]

Its basically a simple description of everything that happened lately. Nothing new, not even an opinion. Meh!

[Heffay]

DEMAX51, on 18 December 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

http://www.awesomeou...arrior-scorned/

You wrote this article, right?

[Buso Senshi Zelazny]

Heffay, on 18 December 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

You wrote this article, right?

Thats what it looks like

[DEMAX51]

Heffay, on 18 December 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

You wrote this article, right?

Yes, I did.

Edited by DEMAX51, 18 December 2013 - 12:18 PM.

[Sandpit]

Good article, a bit too opinionated as opposed to journalistic but I assume it's an editorial piece so that's ok. I agree with most but not all of it.

[Heffay]

DEMAX51, on 18 December 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

Yes, I did.

Just wanted to make sure.

What is your opinion of PGI securing the license through 2018, and potentially through 2020?

[DEMAX51]

Heffay, on 18 December 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

Just wanted to make sure.

What is your opinion of PGI securing the license through 2018, and potentially through 2020?

If it gives them the security they need to justify increasing their non-artist development budget, I'm all for it.

Sandpit, on 18 December 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

Good article, a bit too opinionated as opposed to journalistic but I assume it's an editorial piece so that's ok. I agree with most but not all of it.

My editors encourage us to editorialize a bit in news articles. Honestly, I'd prefer to be a bit more objective with news pieces.

I'm all for differences of opinion, though. What are your thoughts on the matter, Sandpit?

Edited by DEMAX51, 18 December 2013 - 12:42 PM.

[Heffay]

Did you attempt to contact PGI or IGP to get their input for your article?

[DEMAX51]

Heffay, on 18 December 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

Did you attempt to contact PGI or IGP to get their input for your article?

I haven't yet, but I do plan on reaching out to them to see if they'd like to discuss the game and the recent events.

[Heffay]

DEMAX51, on 18 December 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

I haven't yet, but I do plan on reaching out to them to see if they'd like to discuss the game and the recent events.

That would be great. I doubt they'll reply, but you never know if they'll toss you a scoop!

[DEMAX51]

Heffay, on 18 December 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

That would be great. I doubt they'll reply, but you never know if they'll toss you a scoop!

Here's hoping

I did reach out to Paul informally awhile back after he initiated a PM with me regarding an Ask the Devs question I submitted, but I never received a reply.

[Sandpit]

DEMAX51, on 18 December 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

If it gives them the security they need to justify increasing their non-artist development budget, I'm all for it.


My editors encourage us to editorialize a bit in news articles. Honestly, I'd prefer to be a bit more objective with news pieces.

I'm all for differences of opinion, though. What are your thoughts on the matter, Sandpit?

Personally I think the whole "$500 gold mech" thing is blown way out of proportion. They're out there for purchase for those with that kind of disposable income and the "Ooooooo pretty, I want it because it's special!" crowd. There's nothing wrong with that at all. I think the clan packs themselves are very reasonably priced. It comes out to $10/mech which is a very good deal when compared to the costs of any other mech in the game when purchased with $$ as opposed to c-bills.

If you look past the flame trolls I think you see a much deeper problem with the game and company at this point. i've said several times that perception is reality. Many players now perceive PGI as a money grabbing, deceitful company that has used underhanded and misleading business practices to obtain sales. I have actually been pretty content and happy with the game and still am for the most part. What has soured my view lately was the fact that Russ all but stated PGi was pretty much in a holding pattern on committing resources to development due to be unsure of the licensing agreement with Microsoft. That means that they have been withholding pouring the resources obtained from the sale of items and packages (which were originally touted as being available since open beta because the resources obtained from these items would help increase productivity of core game features such as CW that many are hinging their opinion of the game on).

Now you throw in the fact that there is no way Russ and the rest of PGI had any misconceptions about how far off implementing these types of features (Again CW being one of the biggest) were to be implemented all the while standing on stage during the official launch and claiming said features were "right around the corner" and "90 days after launch". This one I cannot simply dismiss as incompetence. This was deliberate and deceitful. The company had no intentions of releasing these features within that time frame.

The poor communication from PGI to its customers is another major sticking point. I'm not one who expects daily or even weekly detailed updates on statuses but I do expect a bit of communication and information on items that a company expects me to pay for. I still don't know exactly how the loyalty point bonuses I paid for months ago will work. I also don't know hardpoints, tech specifications, or any stats on a package PGI is asking me to spend $240 on (assuming I buy the top package which is the one I want to purchase).

As it stands now it's not the price point that is preventing me from dropping $240 on the clan package. It's the fact that after 2 years I haven't seen enough progression or completion of key features I feel are important to warrant and justify any more money. Top this off with the fact that I have sincere doubts about the legitimacy of any deadlines or priorities that PGI sets at the moment and I have no faith that the money I hand them will be used to actually complete features I feel should have been implemented long before now

[Josef Koba]

Good write up. I appreciate you sharing it with us.

[Gremlich Johns]

Sandpit, on 18 December 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

Personally I think the whole "$500 gold mech" thing is blown way out of proportion...........

I agree with the totality of your wall of text point of view. It's not about the money, it's about the other issues.

[Sandpit]

Gremlich Johns, on 18 December 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

I agree with the totality of your wall of text point of view. It's not about the money, it's about the other issues.

lol sorry for length, I just wanted to make sure I gave my thorough opinion on it. I don't disagree with the article, I just think a small handful and select "entitled" players are focusing on the price and many are trying to make it into a price thing because it's an easy scapegoat to get more people to jump on their bandwagon and just to see if they can get PGI to lower them. I'm sure there's a few who sincerely and legitimately do feel the prices are too high but not most complaining about it.

I also wanted to be clear to any of the dev team that might actually read this, that many are not buying because of the poor progression rate and seeming deceitful nature of communication in regards to deadlines, CW, etc.

[AC]

Good write up indeed.


My issue with the whole thing isn't so much the prices or gold mechs or any of that. It is simply the timing. We JUST finished with a pack and then a booster pack on that pack, and then they throw this at us which is even more expensive. It smacks of "cash grab", even if that wasn't the intent. This pack should have been presented in June after some of the other features had been released and people had a chance to restock their wallets and get some faith back in PGI. (Someone needs to fire the marketing team.)

[MustrumRidcully]

Sandpit, on 18 December 2013 - 05:53 PM, said:

lol sorry for length, I just wanted to make sure I gave my thorough opinion on it. I don't disagree with the article, I just think a small handful and select "entitled" players are focusing on the price and many are trying to make it into a price thing because it's an easy scapegoat to get more people to jump on their bandwagon and just to see if they can get PGI to lower them. I'm sure there's a few who sincerely and legitimately do feel the prices are too high but not most complaining about it.

I also wanted to be clear to any of the dev team that might actually read this, that many are not buying because of the poor progression rate and seeming deceitful nature of communication in regards to deadlines, CW, etc.

I have to agree, the price is mostly irrelevant. The prices are consistent with what else they offer, the lock-in might be a bit ... dubious. But in the end, if that is w hat the market will pay and it seems to high to me, maybe I am not part of the market and that's it.

The reason why I am questioning it and have doubts spending any amount of money on their game right now is that they failed to prove that they can achieve their goals and timelines. We have clear evidence that they miss their deadlines and stuff they said would be done isn't done.

Since the usual comparison these days is always Star Citizen...
Star Citzen hasn't delivered a game yet, but they delivered on a few promises (Hangar Module, whether you deem it useful or not, I don't), and the rest that was promised is still far out. We don't know if they'll manage in the end. But we still have a reason to believe they might, because they didn't fail any objectives.

I would actually be willing to argue that the Dogfight modus delay is finally some counter-evidence and give reason to doubt, but that is a new development. You can't blame people for spending their Founder's money on MW:O or their kickstarter funding on Star Citizen because at that point, we all knew it was on faith but had no concrete reason for doubt.