109 replies to this topic

[Skyraxx]

http://www.pcgamer.c...0-still-coming/

[MechWarrior071507]

Russ. Dont worry. Just keep doing what you're doing. Ignore the angry forum trolls who have gone to such great lengths as biasing online news articles to say you're making wrong moves. They're all on islands and it doesn't matter what they say, at the end of the day what matters is how many continue to play.

The 5% that are so vocal will not harm our game. Keep doing what you're doing. There's these 13 rules

http://www.forbes.co...ngs-they-avoid/

almost all of these rules relate to the unwarranted hate the nerd fanbase is giving you, and how to respond to it. You're pretty much doing as you should, basically telling them to f*** off, and continue building this successful game the way you think it should be. I applaud your tenacity and steadfastness in the face of so much adversity. Opinions don't mean anything, results are what matters.

Ignore all the opinions posted everywhere, they can't change the success of MWO.

[scgt1]

Jesus Christ did you wipe your mouth off and brush your teeth?

There are many facts all over the forum as to why players aren't happy. I think you've been under a rock for the past two years son.

Edited by scgt1, 18 December 2013 - 11:02 AM.

[PharmEcis]

I think you need to brush up on your sarcasm scgt1.

[scgt1]

PharmEcis, on 18 December 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

I think you need to brush up on your sarcasm scgt1.

It wasn't sarcasm. Hence why the comment sounded serious.

[PharmEcis]

You aren't understanding Khorek's sarcasm. You have no sarcasm in your original reply.

[Rizzwind]

Ha ha haaaaaaaaha haaa ha ah haahahaha. Opps think I peed. It only goes down hill when one of the big 3 start to think your game is slipping.

[Lokust Davion]

Khorek, on 17 December 2013 - 08:31 AM, said:

Russ. Dont worry. Just keep doing what you're doing. Ignore the angry forum trolls who have gone to such great lengths as biasing online news articles to say you're making wrong moves. They're all on islands and it doesn't matter what they say, at the end of the day what matters is how many continue to play.

The 5% that are so vocal will not harm our game. Keep doing what you're doing. There's these 13 rules

http://www.forbes.co...ngs-they-avoid/

almost all of these rules relate to the unwarranted hate the nerd fanbase is giving you, and how to respond to it. You're pretty much doing as you should, basically telling them to f*** off, and continue building this successful game the way you think it should be. I applaud your tenacity and steadfastness in the face of so much adversity. Opinions don't mean anything, results are what matters.

Ignore all the opinions posted everywhere, they can't change the success of MWO.

is this sarcasm?

@khorek: can you clarify if this is indeed sarcasm?

Edited by Lokust Davion, 18 December 2013 - 04:10 PM.

[Mechteric]

I don't see what they're doing as any worse than Star Citizen, which isn't even playable yet. That said, I'm not putting money down on any clan pack until UI 2.0 releases, and hopefully other necessary overdue balance changes (my most recent complaint is that SRMs are so terrible they are limiting medium mechs' usefulness! My poor griffin and wolvie's have to use Streaks, blegh)

[Riptor]

CapperDeluxe, on 18 December 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

I don't see what they're doing as any worse than Star Citizen, which isn't even playable yet. That said, I'm not putting money down on any clan pack until UI 2.0 releases, and hopefully other necessary overdue balance changes (my most recent complaint is that SRMs are so terrible they are limiting medium mechs' usefulness! My poor griffin and wolvie's have to use Streaks, blegh)

Star citizen isnt a f2p mmo thought. Its both a traditional single player game with the options to log into a persistant universe mmo-esque and also allows you to host private server wich are fully modable.. just like freelancer back in the day.

Wich means all the ships n stuff you get for further crowdfunding the game? You can get them all for "free" in the game once the title is launched one way or another. You dont even have to opt in the persistant universe.. just create one yourselfe by hosting a private server.

The money that people spend now on Star citizen is infact called crowdfunding and the stuff you get is considered a "thank you" from the Devs... but at the same time not seen by the Devs as a product they sold. Thats very important.

While at the same time PGI Devs dont get tired on telling us how they delivered everything the founders packages entailed to the letter, without mentioning how many people did not bought the founders packages for those benefits but to help make the game that was laid out infront of them... wich in hindsight turned out to be nothing but false promises and "their position at the time". It seems they didnt really realise what they did when they called these packages "founders"

They should have called them "early starters" or something like that and made it clear from the very beginning that this had nothing to do with funding the project.

But they tricked people into actually believing that they would help out the game greatly by buying these packages. Wich again turned out to be false since theres indication that the money rather went to MW tactics and that other game wich isnt even published by IGP anymore.

Also i have yet to see the Star citizen devs actually lying to their backers. Something i cant say about MWO. Due to its nature as a single player game with added persistant universe what you really should compare star citizen to is not MWO but actually games like the neverwinter nights series wich had a similiar concept (allbeit no company hosted persistant universe)

Both single player titles that gave their players the options to host private servers. Or heck.. Freelancer is the best comparison. MWO in comparison has very little to do with Star citizens model.. it is not an offline title with optional multyplayer, you cannot host private servers and never will be able to and its "founders" program was just a wrongly worded early starters package that aparantly had as much to do with crowdfunding the project as putin has with democracy.

[Heffay]

Riptor, on 19 December 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Also i have yet to see the Star citizen devs actually lying to their backers.

They said the dogfighting module was going to be released in December no matter what. According to the yardstick you measure PGI by, that was a lie.

I guess it was their position at the time...

[Riptor]

Unlike PGI thought they came out and admitted that they will be pushing back the module and named reasons. Not only that but they will (or have allready depending when you read this) put up a live stream showing the module as it is now and aparantly will explain why they pushed it back.

That my friend is how you communicate a setback in a project.

PGI on the other hand posts on the forums "its 90 days"... has an interview with pcgamer and says "in two months" and then goes around and says "6 months after launch we will have CW and 4 weeks after launch we will have UI 2.0"

Also once again Star citizen is not a F2P mmo. It is suposed to be first a single player game and then a persistant universe. For one, complete games have a much higher dev time then arena shooters/mobas because you cant just make a map and deathmatch system and call it a day.

Second i cant really hold it against them when they say "yeah we have the module and we could release it... but its not really that good and could generate even more bad press then the hangar module did.. so we would rather push it back and give you something more polished"

And then they go on livestream and actually show you that what they say is true instead of going silent for months after the deadline has passed.

Remember when PGI told us that sepereate ques for 1st and 3rd person view dont exist? AFTER the patch they introduced 3rd person.

Had they come out 2 weeks prior and told us in a livestream and showed us why this was suposedly a bad idea then the fallout would have been much less severe. But instead they kept silent till the patch was allready delivered and only AFTER sh|t hit hyperdrive did they come out and gave a half hearted explanation that was barely readable.

So yeah... i am not pissed at reasonable and explained setbacks. What i can absolutely not tolerate thought is that at the beginning of the year you tell your community that the most anticipated feature is gonna be delivered 90 days after open beta launch when you KNOW that not a single line of code NOR THE BASICCONCEPT of said feature have even been outlined.

Star citizen has the module ready.. allbeit its crappy and thats why they dont release it. And its their FIRST pushback

MWOs Devs went and lied straight to our faces SEVERAL TIMES even thought there is no way they wouldnt have known that these Dates are impossible to keep given the circumstances.

Pushbacks happen but that is no reason to lie to your customers.

Edited by Riptor, 19 December 2013 - 07:59 AM.

[Sandpit]

Riptor, on 19 December 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

Unlike PGI thought they came out and admitted that they will be pushing back the module and named reasons. Not only that but they will (or have allready depending when you read this) put up a live stream showing the module as it is now and aparantly will explain why they pushed it back.

That my friend is how you communicate a setback in a project.

PGI on the other hand posts on the forums "its 90 days"... has an interview with pcgamer and says "in two months" and then goes around and says "6 months after launch we will have CW and 4 weeks after launch we will have UI 2.0"

Also once again Star citizen is not a F2P mmo. It is suposed to be first a single player game and then a persistant universe. For one, complete games have a much higher dev time then arena shooters/mobas because you cant just make a map and deathmatch system and call it a day.

Second i cant really hold it against them when they say "yeah we have the module and we could release it... but its not really that good and could generate even more bad press then the hangar module did.. so we would rather push it back and give you something more polished"

And then they go on livestream and actually show you that what they say is true instead of going silent for months after the deadline has passed.

Remember when PGI told us that sepereate ques for 1st and 3rd person view dont exist? AFTER the patch they introduced 3rd person.

Had they come out 2 weeks prior and told us in a livestream and showed us why this was suposedly a bad idea then the fallout would have been much less severe. But instead they kept silent till the patch was allready delivered and only AFTER sh|t hit hyperdrive did they come out and gave a half hearted explanation that was barely readable.

So yeah... i am not pissed at reasonable and explained setbacks. What i can absolutely not tolerate thought is that at the beginning of the year you tell your community that the most anticipated feature is gonna be delivered 90 days after open beta launch when you KNOW that not a single line of code NOR THE BASICCONCEPT of said feature have even been outlined.

Star citizen has the module ready.. allbeit its crappy and thats why they dont release it. And its their FIRST pushback

MWOs Devs went and lied straight to our faces SEVERAL TIMES even thought there is no way they wouldnt have known that these Dates are impossible to keep given the circumstances.

Pushbacks happen but that is no reason to lie to your customers.

This

Communication would had alleviated a lot of the hate. It's not a matter of whether a customer's perception is right or wrong. That customer's perception is right in their opinion and that's all that matters. It will dictate how they spend their money. Leaving a customer in the dark to wonder and seethe is bad business period

[scgt1]

Remember the customer is always right!

[Bilbo]

Riptor, on 19 December 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

Unlike PGI thought they came out and admitted that they will be pushing back the module and named reasons. Not only that but they will (or have allready depending when you read this) put up a live stream showing the module as it is now and aparantly will explain why they pushed it back.

That my friend is how you communicate a setback in a project.

PGI on the other hand posts on the forums "its 90 days"... has an interview with pcgamer and says "in two months" and then goes around and says "6 months after launch we will have CW and 4 weeks after launch we will have UI 2.0"

Also once again Star citizen is not a F2P mmo. It is suposed to be first a single player game and then a persistant universe. For one, complete games have a much higher dev time then arena shooters/mobas because you cant just make a map and deathmatch system and call it a day.

Second i cant really hold it against them when they say "yeah we have the module and we could release it... but its not really that good and could generate even more bad press then the hangar module did.. so we would rather push it back and give you something more polished"

And then they go on livestream and actually show you that what they say is true instead of going silent for months after the deadline has passed.

Remember when PGI told us that sepereate ques for 1st and 3rd person view dont exist? AFTER the patch they introduced 3rd person.

Had they come out 2 weeks prior and told us in a livestream and showed us why this was suposedly a bad idea then the fallout would have been much less severe. But instead they kept silent till the patch was allready delivered and only AFTER sh|t hit hyperdrive did they come out and gave a half hearted explanation that was barely readable.

So yeah... i am not pissed at reasonable and explained setbacks. What i can absolutely not tolerate thought is that at the beginning of the year you tell your community that the most anticipated feature is gonna be delivered 90 days after open beta launch when you KNOW that not a single line of code NOR THE BASICCONCEPT of said feature have even been outlined.

Star citizen has the module ready.. allbeit its crappy and thats why they dont release it. And its their FIRST pushback

MWOs Devs went and lied straight to our faces SEVERAL TIMES even thought there is no way they wouldnt have known that these Dates are impossible to keep given the circumstances.

Pushbacks happen but that is no reason to lie to your customers.

Spin it however you like. They missed their first deadline. I doubt they'll crash and burn, but I feel the same about MWO.

[Heffay]

scgt1, on 19 December 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

Remember the customer is always right!

No, they aren't.

Bilbo, on 19 December 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Spin it however you like. They missed their first deadline. I doubt they'll crash and burn, but I feel the same about MWO.

When they miss it again (i.e. it gets moved to Q2 2014), the goalposts will have moved.

It was their position at the time though. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[Noesis]

Seem like a good article overall with a measured opinion on the current direction and focus to MWO. They only seem to raise an eyebrow about the Gold Mechs which is more than understandable.

PGI is recruiting staff and extending their investment into MWO. Things are being identified for delivery. I still have a lot of hope for the continuation of MWO as a result, hence I will continue to invest in it.

And I'll continue to fund this game despite others wishing to say how things should be when they don't want to spend anything but also have a nerve to tell others how to spend theirs. Or player groups continuing their propaganda campaigns of hate against the developer who also don't want to spend money, but of course "really love this game".

Not that I'll expect any thanks for the Coattail riders in the future, but I'm sure they'll continue to enjoy this game as a result.

[Riptor]

Bilbo, on 19 December 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Spin it however you like. They missed their first deadline. I doubt they'll crash and burn, but I feel the same about MWO.

Yes.. FIRST

Not about 3 to 6 times like PGI did.

Nor did they let decembre come and pass and didnt even mention that they had to push the module back because it wasnt ready for prime time, unlike PGI that anounced a date.. and the date came and went and they didnt lost a single word as to why. Nor did they ever aknowledged this when they came out to anounce the next completly unrealistic deadline.

Furthermore the Star citizen Devs did not lie to their customers. The module is there.. but with how much attention the game has garnered and how much backlash the hangar module has gotten i think its the right decision to polish the thing before releasing it.

Again, I atleast dont take offense to pushback when im explained and shown why it was pushed back. PGI however never had the intention to keep a single deadline from the beginning of open beta to release. Why do i know this? Because during release.. during their little presentation it became painfully obvious that pre production of CW hadnt even begun until that point. So all the dates that where named before launch? Lies. They knew they couldnt keep these dates from the beginning because they had at no point started work on CW

You cant just simply tell me that they didnt knew they wouldnt be able to make the 90 days after open beta deadline when they didnt even had a textfile with the concept done.

Had they played it straight from the beginning there sure would have been disent amongst the user base, but that would have been it. Not the complete rage clusertf... we have now.Thats how games development works.. all games get pushed back one way or another.

But lying to your user base so that they buy the next Mech package? Giving the phoenix mechs loyality point boost when you dont even know what these loyality points do as the very one who created that concept... that just takes the cake.

Edited by Riptor, 19 December 2013 - 09:04 AM.

[Bilbo]

Well, since they have only had the one deadline pass they can't possibly have missed more than that. I've put money into that project as well and I'm not particularly concerned, but I can't see using it as an example of how things should be done at this point.

[Heffay]

Riptor, on 19 December 2013 - 09:01 AM, said:

Furthermore the Star citizen Devs did not lie to their customers.

According to the yardstick you measure PGI by, yes they did.

It was their position at the time. Sound familiar? They changed their mind, which means they lied when they said it would be released in December no matter what. Shall we dig through all the old posts about how saying something that is untrue no matter what the reasons is a lie?

You can't have it both ways. Either they changed their mind (in which case PGI is also absolved of the claims of lying), or they lied (so you can maintain logical consistency).