53 replies to this topic

[Mycrus]

CYBRN4CR, on 31 December 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

Not entirely Heffay. I can at least see the graph communicates a gap between an EVP and an MVP and extrapolate that if consumers expect an MVP to be an EVP (or takes a long time getting to an EVP) they are going to be sorely disappointed.

because "quality" is also a function of timeliness...

yes this is a good stompy robot arena game... but we were sold on... design pillars and community warfare...

as time goes by... "quality" drops... even if at the core this is a good stompy robot game... why?

customers expect certain milestones to have already been met after a set amount of time...

we have a glacial pace of feature development... coupled with finding out that the license was only recently extended (and the disparity between mech/map content resources versus feature/daily ops resources) will lead any normal and rational thinking human being to have some doubts why it took so long to have [insert here] feature released...

PGI is to blame for how the community is reacting... an already poisoned community gets hold of developer histories / 7G entertainment prospectus... what do you expect the community to do? understand?

lulz... i don't believe that PGI/IGP/7G is publicly traded (i aint tryhard enough to dig into it)... a publicly listed company would already be reeling from all the bad press... http://www.computera...lefield-4-bugs/

btw, just in case it ain't clear enough from those that don't undertand the murky corporate soup... MWO was launched because failure to do so would violate loan/investor convenants... those agreements just says we need a launched game by X date... it didn't say though what "state" the launched game should be...

Heffay, on 31 December 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

Can you show the data that the graph is based on? And the methodology that was used to derive it? That would be super, thanks!

the file is placed together with MWO's active player count... just search the bottom left drawer...

[Jun Watarase]

Mystere, on 31 December 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

I think the following quotes from the OP sealed the fate of this thread:

• With the launch of Open Beta and the beginning of the 1:1 time-frame... there was absolutely no intention to carry the game through.
  
• It was the perfect 'out' to their little scheme. "Oops - License is up, boys - and, well, Microsoft just isn't being very agreeable - you all know how they can be."
  
• The game was never supposed to succeed.
  
• MechWarrior: Online was a cash-grab. Plain and simple.

Of course I am only guessing in here. But, any moderator serious about his job will see these as red flags.

Uh....im not seeing how those are red flags. Those are the OP's opinions.

If the OP had posted the exact reverse, the thread would never have been moved.

The only way those could be red flags is if the forum banned all negative opinions about PGI while allowing positive opinions.

[Heffay]

Jun Watarase, on 31 December 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

Uh....im not seeing how those are red flags. Those are the OP's opinions.

If the OP had posted the exact reverse, the thread would never have been moved.

The only way those could be red flags is if the forum banned all negative opinions about PGI while allowing positive opinions.

One of the metrics used to determine whether a thread should be jettisoned is whether you need to wear a tinfoil hat for it to make sense.

[Aim64C]

Egomane, on 31 December 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

See? That's exactly what I mean.

No, that's not what you mean. What's sad is that you're self-deluded into believing your own misdirection.

Quote

You are unsatisfied with decisions that were made, that much I can understand, but making personal attack because of that, lettin your own view getting clouded by your anger, that's what I don't get.

I come from a security background. I was charged with doing everything I could to prevent people from becoming victims to predators. This goes beyond: "unsatisfied with decisions." This goes to direct and intentional exploitation of people. It is wrong. And you are just as wrong and backwards for defending it (even if it is because you are deluded).

Quote

You call for a more open communication. So when Russ posted why the decision for 3rd person view was made, was that open enough for you? No... It was called another lie! Russ got insulted over it. His son got insulted over it! So a developer makes a post, stating that it is breaking his heart, that his own son can not play the game he is currently developing and all he gets for it are insults. How would you react in such a case?

I will not try to answer for the behavior of other people. If you want to get on to the point of 3rd person view - it was quite clearly stated that third person would never be implemented (which was not even in this post, by the way - I consider it a non-issue in the long run). Then that players would never be forced into the same queues as third person players.

Then the "explanation" for why it was changed was: "Because that was our position at the time."

Which is basically saying: "We are never going to hold ourselves accountable for any of our statements, promises, etc."

Quote

The decision making process was made clear, but instead of accepting it, as the business decision that it is, the angered masses insult and threaten and call for boycotts. How did Russ, or his son, deserve such a treatment?

Please point to where I mentioned third person view.

Quote

Here is a simple fact for you... Intended goals and content for software are changed eveywhere on a daily basis. That's not lying! That's business as usuall. Everywhere and every day and we as the customers can voice our dislike about it. We do not own te product and we are not even entitled to get the things we envisioned the product would look like in a given timeframe or in its finished state. It is PGIs game, not ours. We may use it and if we like it, we can have extra content in exchange for our money. This doesn't change the fact, that it is not our game. If we don't like the changes, we can only go away, if our dislikes are not considered. Insults and defamation are unacceptable ways to voice our anger.

You're on an island, there, Ego.

The fact of the matter is that there are very serious red flags that should be raised about the history and current business decisions of a company that is marketing hopes and dreams.

That's the part of this that you miss, horribly. Where is my Faction Point boost on my Phoenix mechs? ... Where are my faction points, period?

Quote

But I guess you don't care about all that as well!?

I care about defined concepts of right and wrong, Ego.

The moment it becomes 'wrong' and 'hatreful' to bring up facts about a developer's history and speculate upon decision making and motivations is the moment you've lost all integrity.

Now, I'm not going to pretend as though I've never crossed any lines, myself - I have joked quite unprofessionally regarding Russ and Paul - and it was not the 'bigger man' thing to do.

However, what you have shown is blind hatred.

Where did anyone, prior to this post, mention Third Person view?

Where did I suggest PGI hid their past?

No one did. Yet you carry the fight that was not raised.

You're wrong, Ego. Plain and simple. No minced words about it. Are there people who are critical of PGI, even hateful, and wrong? Yes.

PGI is wrong. Plain and simple. While I do not doubt there are people who are more than happy with the game (though I may question their value as sentient creatures) - it is their money to part with. There are many, however, who see the big hope and dream, who see the 'small developer versus the world' romanticism, and part with considerable chunks of money, wanting to feel as though they are going to be a part of something big.

You can attempt to say that is an attempt to damage PGI - and, I suppose since I see PGI as something close to a con operation, that's not too far off the mark. Predators require victims, and warning victims away from predators is a good way to thin the predatory population.

If I'm supposed to care about whether or not Paul or Russ cry themselves to sleep at night, or not - I really don't understand the bias. I cry myself to sleep at night or receive hateful posts - no one gives a damned. The CEO of a company makes poor decisions and receives heat from the community of gamers... it's suddenly our problem.

Russ and Paul are big boys. It's time for them to grow up and handle their own affairs. If those affairs are preying upon uninformed and/or hopeful gamers (attached to an IP that has had all other outlets shut down by PGI...) - then why, exactly, should I feel sorry for him? Because it wasn't his choice to make definitive statements and then try to sell the antithesis of those statements like a used car salesman?

You act like I'm unfamiliar with development, or as if I'm unfamiliar with management. I've managed equipment with individual components valued more than all of PGI. Software development is easy compared to managing maintenance - where the stuff you fix spontaneously and unpredictably breaks of its own accord (or enemy accord...). I've worked and managed environments where the work flow and the work requirements are almost entirely unpredictable. An airman drops a tool and now you have to go through two hours of disassembling and reassembling with a five man team just to get the damned thing. A plane comes back missing a whole vertical stabilizer, a pilot forgets to flip a switch and you spend six hours hunting a phantom problem caused by operator error.

Unless you've never heard of flow charts, naming conventions, and organizational standards - software development (and a management thereof) is comparably simple and low-stress. You plan contingencies for delays and have your standards in place to improve debugging and troubleshooting of errors. Things get complicated when you don't set those standards and have two different programmers on two different pages and having to call objects and variables built/declared by the other.

This stuff isn't rocket science, and it doesn't work for me to try and argue: "Software changes all the time. PGI was just making decisions."

Just making decisions to invalidate their previous statements (which gives them poor marks in integrity), to completely omit features of the game (with a full time staff supposedly working on implementing said features over the last two years... except... the claims that they were, apparently, outright lies... when Russ came out later and said that no one had been working on those features because of licensing concerns).

That sounds like these:

http://www.scambuste...mbusters45.html

The "Quantum-energy-zero-point doomaflitchit" is always just around the corner. The factory is sabotaged and burns down (likely those oil companies). Just a few more dollars. Just a few more months. You can help change the world.

It's infinitely better executed than WarZ or FighterOps, though. Those developers forgot the "viable" as a part of the "minimum viable" strategy.

But, keep believing. Hope and Change, buddy. Hope and Change.

[Heffay]

CYBRN4CR, on 31 December 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:

All I was trying to get at was that the graph communicates data at face value, and that data can be interpreted and thus have meaning. Whether the graph is scientifically valid or not (or even forged) is a different question altogether.

There is no data in the graph. It is an abstraction of someone's opinion of a gross assumption of a very complicated subject.

It has zero meaning in the real world.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

I come from a security background.

Woah, watch out Egomane. He pulled out his mall cop credentials on you!

[Aim64C]

Heffay, on 31 December 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

Woah, watch out Egomane. He pulled out his mall cop credentials on you!

Since you bring it up - I am part of what used to be called Maritime Expeditionary Security. We went into foreign countries and set up security for ships worth more than your whole blood line.

While not as glamorous as the Marines - it's still sufficiently more impressive than being a mall cop (though some malls, these days, are quite the hazardous environment).

Though I find it interesting - your crowd likes to accuse me (and those similarly critical of PGI) of being hateful... and, yet... it would seem that there is plenty of hatred to go around.

[Jun Watarase]

Heffay, on 31 December 2013 - 02:17 PM, said:

One of the metrics used to determine whether a thread should be jettisoned is whether you need to wear a tinfoil hat for it to make sense.

So you believe its a conspiracy theory that german film makers such as uwe boll were intentionally making minimally viable movies to secure government funding?

I will just wait for you to google this to see the many news articles that used to talk about this...

Many players find it really disturbing that all their founders and phoenix package money would have simply evaporated into smoke if PGI had not successfully convinced microsoft to extend the licence, since that would have forced PGI to shut MWO down, without anyone seeing community warfare or lag compensation added to the game. This isnt a conspiracy theory, because russ admitted this himself on the forums.

Just imagine plonking down the deposit on a car only to be told you will never ever get the car because the company lost the rights to make the car....and your money is gone too.

Actually, just imagine russ bullock signing up to work at PGI only to be told 2 years later that he would never ever receive a pay check for any of the work he did because HR cant pay him....

In regards to positions changing, sure it happens all the time in business. Its really common for games to initially decide "lets do this" only to change their minds later.

The problem here is that PGI received money on the basis of claims which they later revoked.

Lets say EA decides to make a new battlefield game and they sell pre-orders based on a series of claims (that it would have X amount of maps, certain types of guns, a certain gameplay mode, etc).

Later on in development they decide to alter game design drastically and the new battlefield game no longer has those features which were promised. Would you be entitled to refunds? Yes, and i dont think i need to explain why, legally and morally.

If PGI had never received money for any of the claims they made, nobody would have cared really. It would be like duke nuken forever NOT getting released....people would have simply shrugged and moved on. A couple of die hard fans would complain, but well, nobody actually lost money on it, so no big deal.

To put it into perspective lets say you put money down on a new house. You are told it will have X rooms, be constructed of Y material and with Z fittings. The house is done, you go to inspect it, and its very different from what you were told. The developer tells you they made changes to it without informing you or asking for your consent, because, well, positions change.

How many people here can honestly say they would be fine with it?

I can just picture russ bullock and other PGI executives screaming "I will sue! I WILL SUE!".

Oh, even better. Imagine if the mall decides to kick PGI out of their office space with no warning, because you know, positions change, and who cares about the rental money that PGI has been paying them right?

Edited by Jun Watarase, 31 December 2013 - 07:53 PM.

[Mycrus]

hey heffay, use dem college brain to read up on this... i googled up this for yeh! all from the HBR, you can ask them about their methodologies... lulz...

http://blogs.hbr.org...eh-minimal-via/

http://blogs.hbr.org...nimum-win-over/
http://blogs.hbr.org...um-viable-prod/

now tell me that your good genes and college type brain can't understand what PGI is doing wrong...

[Aim64C]

Jun Watarase, on 31 December 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

So you believe its a conspiracy theory that german film makers such as uwe boll were intentionally making minimally viable movies to secure government funding?

This is not, in the slightest, an unexpected response.

I discuss politics, a lot. I told people that millions would lose their health insurance. I was told I was a conspiracy theorist and that I needed to go find my tin-foil hat.

This was years ago.

I told people that the numbers losing their health insurance would climb over a hundred million. I was called a liar and told that I was simply misconstruing the facts.

Leaked documents show that market analysts informed the administration that the Affordable Healthcare Act would require that over 100 million insurance policies be discontinued. This was before the "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

This is nothing new. For starters - there is no end to the doom-sayers who spout nonsense. There's always someone predicting today to be the end of the world, the end of the dollar, whatever. It makes it easy, culturally, to dismiss these people. After all - society runs on faith - the faith that their money can buy the things they require, the faith that the majority of people around them mean no harm, etc.

Buying into 'doomsaying' and 'conspiracy theories' is often very difficult for people to do without completely throwing away their ability to function in a faith-based system. Even now - I watch as new market bubbles form around the U.S. economy. The housing market is taking off again - acting as a sink for inflationary spending and fractional reserve banking. That will start to spill back over into automobiles - though 2015 will see the federal government having to bail out "Obamacare" to the tune of billions. That's going to result in a single-payer system if that economic shock from that doesn't trigger another run on the banks and completely collapse our treasury bonds.

Of course - I'm speaking pure lunacy to most, and they'll laugh at me.

Then it will happen and they will blame insurance companies and the banks rather than Congress and the Federal Reserve. Russia is poised to become the new America (probably will end up having a sort of demi-revolution against the power-blocks run by the former KGB - but otherwise...) - America is poised to become the new USSR.

My father said as much when I was a kid. I thought he had a point - but never thought it would actually go that far.

Now, I seriously weigh my options in moving to some of the former Soviet republics. Americans have a lot to offer those countries in terms of both industrial expertise and cultural perspective. As much as 'racism' is brought up in America - most Americans have never really experienced it outside of government programs designed to trap people onto government subsidies. In a lot of those places - 'democracy' is closer to: "Now you get to PICK your tyrant, and hope he is friendly to your ethnic group).

Honestly, I couldn't tell you the difference between a Czech, Croat, Serb, and Bosnian. A lot of people died over that distinction and how many letters are in the alphabet.

The idea of limited government and that democracy doesn't mean the voted official can do whatever the hell he pleases is a bit hard to find in those regions - but it's what made America possible to begin with (and even then - we had our bumps and bruises along the way).

America is heading down that path. Treat people like animals - and they will eventually become animals. Tell people they have no ability because they are black, and eventually they will believe it. Racism gives politicians power - after all, the school history books teach you that the civil rights movement was centered around government action (it was actually prompted by the migration of black laborers from the south into the union-dominated North who didn't much appreciate having their contracts under-bid - that was the whole impetus behind 'prevailing wage' laws that essentially required governments to pay union wages), that the Civil War was over slavery, that the New Deal saved a distraught economy....

It's an indoctrination. The interesting thing is how it all came to be - because it wasn't a grand conspiracy, but a 'conspiracy' of the human mind. Our parents and grandparents were taught the history of child labor laws not to illustrate how government 'came to the rescue' - but to illustrate how it was important that people be able to enter, under his/her own competency, into employment contracts. The laws were a result of the people recognizing that need and moving to correct it, not a result of elected officials and presidents educating the people.

But that's not what we focused on. Over time, due to the ever-increasing amount of history and the separation of "history" from "government" classes - much of the context was lost from those lessons. Over time, it became: "These are problems the government solved." Which later became "This is what would happen if we didn't have government."

It's become a readily accepted belief [of fact] that without government, we'd all be slaves to some corporate empire.

One would have to question which came first... Government or Society. Since society clearly cannot be had by government... then government must have been around to form society... but how does government exist without society?

Unfortunately - we have reached a point where, for most, they will not realize they can live without government until they are forced to do so by the frivolous behavior of existing governments.

Should be an entertaining sequence of events.

Either that, or this just marks my descent into senility at the age of 25.

However this works out, I should be one hell of an entertaining senior citizen, at this rate.

Quote

Oh, even better. Imagine if the mall decides to kick PGI out of their office space with no warning, because you know, positions change, and who cares about the rental money that PGI has been paying them right?

I'm kind of curious what kind of software development goes on within a mall.

Now - it's not at all unusual for malls to host legitimate businesses (after all - it's a pretty damned good deal for all involved - headquarter in a mall for easy access to grocery shopping and a wide range of walking-distance lunch-breaks... and host a business that will provide stable customer bases for some of your other shops).

On the other hand - it's also quite popular for medicare fraud (and others) to set up in a mall. It's a legitimate appearing business front (often with real customers and a minimally functional facade) that doesn't immediately trigger alarms. Anyone who actually places the business under observation will notice that the customers never match up with the company's revenue (or what they bill medicare) and that phantom employees exist on the pay roll who never show up to work.

Going with the whole 'minimally viable' theme....

It would be interesting to see what kind of activity actually goes on at their headquarters.

And... you know... I actually hope to be surprised by the findings of such a venture. Expected results are boring and, like I said, only inflate my ego. One's health and the frequency with which he is correct eventually becomes an inversely proportional relationship.

[Rift Hawk]

Funny how the first person to argue is a moderator.

Not like that really has anything to do with it I guess.....

I also find it funny this ended up in the jettisoned communication so quickly.

[Rebas Kradd]

Aim64C, it's a lot easier to reject a conspiracy theory when there are simpler explanations. That's the case here. Your track record on the ACA doesn't magically make you right on this, so nobody really cares about your invocation of it. And I'm a Republican.

After speaking with a friend within the software industry today and describing PGI's 2013 to them, he decided that what he was hearing was, while unfortunate, still very typical and common for the industry. Missed deadlines? They're always arbitrary to programmers, and always overly optimistic. Questionable QA? Programming is a trial-and-error thing for those who do it. Flawed code and lacking documentation? Programmers are notorious for being cowboys. They code first and ask questions later. Bad feedback loop of dropping morale/community communication due to getting behind and thus criticized? Very common in ANY workplace. (Think about this: is not Microsoft itself notorious for some of the very same issues that PGI is accused of?)

This isn't an apology for PGI's failures thus far, but it's a corrective to the thinking that PGI is either a bottom-of-the-barrel developer or a pack of mustache-twirling villains. Even with all the problems, they sound like just another software company. They'd probably look ten times better if only Garth were doing his job. The gold standard in the industry is of course Blizzard, with its tight coding practices and crackerjack QA, but I'm sure every Hollywood studio would like their own Christopher Nolan too.

You, on the other hand, are starting to sound like you really don't have the industry experience to interpret what you're seeing. The UI technical updates we were given made it clear that it was much more than just the "web browser" like you claimed. And your running off on conspiracy theories isn't helping.

[Mystere]

Jun Watarase, on 31 December 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

Uh....im not seeing how those are red flags. Those are the OP's opinions.

If the OP had posted the exact reverse, the thread would never have been moved.

The only way those could be red flags is if the forum banned all negative opinions about PGI while allowing positive opinions.

There are opinions, and there are accusations of misdeed and malice. The list I provided are of the latter kind.

Edited by Mystere, 01 January 2014 - 02:14 AM.

[Heffay]

Mycrus, on 31 December 2013 - 08:44 PM, said:

hey heffay, use dem college brain to read up on this... i googled up this for yeh! all from the HBR, you can ask them about their methodologies... lulz...

http://blogs.hbr.org...eh-minimal-via/

http://blogs.hbr.org...nimum-win-over/
http://blogs.hbr.org...um-viable-prod/

now tell me that your good genes and college type brain can't understand what PGI is doing wrong...

So those opinion pieces off of someone's blogs with misspellings in them show that MVP products can survive, if they have a decent product. Just like MWO. The gameplay is fantastic, the game is downright beautiful, and progress is being made.

You're suffering from confirmation bias. You're reading an article and attempting to shoehorn it into your preconceived notions as opposed to critically analyzing the situation to see what applies and what doesn't. MVP products can succeed; even the AoEO postmortem clearly stated that. And MWO is doing a ton of things right according to that.

Meanwhile, back in tinfoil hat land...

[Egomane]

Rebas Kradd, on 31 December 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:

Egomane, I mostly agree, but you have to admit it's not going to be a satisfying answer. "Business as usual" is not a popular line these days.

No, it's not a satisfying answer, but it is the truth.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

No, that's not what you mean. What's sad is that you're self-deluded into believing your own misdirection.

Someone has a different point of view from yours, so he is delusional? Is that really what you just said?

I know about the flaws of MWO and PGI, but I still don't see how that justifies insults, threats and defamation. I enjoy the game, the way it is. If I no longer enjoy it, I'll leave. If it is because of a developer decision I'll have to accept that, but I'll not campaign,the way some users do, against PGI to try to hurt their business.

I didn't get my promised lollypop, so I knock the other guy down and kick him while he's there. That is the mentality behind such actions and I can not stand for them. No decent being should defend something like that.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

If you want to get on to the point of 3rd person view

I don't! I used that as an example of how open communication has been valued by the angry mob in the past. If you look closely, I did not, for a single word, go into the details of 3PV and only adressed how Russ and his family has been attacked over it.

How about you actually answer what I wrote?

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

The moment it becomes 'wrong' and 'hatreful' to bring up facts about a developer's history and speculate upon decision making and motivations is the moment you've lost all integrity.

You used the past of some people and used it in a way to try to discredit them. The past has nothing to do with current development of MWO, except that it's the same people involved.

You are trying to hurt them and their business. Ignoring the fact, that PGIs past is just like the one of every other gaming company in this world. And you make accusations of motive like these on top of that:

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

there was absolutely no intention to carry the game through.

No clans. (work on those likely began after the early numbers of Phoenix forced a reconsideration of letting the IP license expire)

License expiring in less than 2 years.

Absolutely zero support or motion toward faction/community warfare.

You do not critizise... you accuse! Without evidence, only your own personal vison of how things must have played out. Making the intent of your thread pretty much clear.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

However, what you have shown is blind hatred.

What?
Oh... yes! I hate false accusations and insults and such. I pretty much made that clear many, many times now. If you feel that this hate is hitting you, that might tell you something about yourself and the posts you make.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

PGI is wrong. Plain and simple.

In your opinion!
Opinion does not equal fact!
It's a simple truth, but still hard to grasp for so many in this world.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

You can attempt to say that is an attempt to damage PGI - and, I suppose since I see PGI as something close to a con operation, that's not too far off the mark. Predators require victims, and warning victims away from predators is a good way to thin the predatory population.

Finally admitting that you actually do want to harm the business of PGI. We are getting somewhere.

Aim64C, on 31 December 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

If I'm supposed to care about whether or not Paul or Russ cry themselves to sleep at night, or not - I really don't understand the bias. I cry myself to sleep at night or receive hateful posts - no one gives a damned. The CEO of a company makes poor decisions and receives heat from the community of gamers... it's suddenly our problem.

If you cause it, or are a part of it, then yes, it is your problem.
Do you know there are laws against cyberbullying in nearly every nation today?
Throwing insults at people, starting campaigns to hurt their business and such, do actually fall under these laws. If you believe it is harmless and only a internet thing, you are decieving yourself. Just because these guys run a business, doesn't make them (or their families) a valid target for personal attacks.

Your attempt to intentionaly discredit them, is walking on thin ice on your part. It's an internet thing or they need to man up are not valid excuses! Your insistence of the right to insult or discredit, just shows how ignorant you are about others and how self centered you are. You do not want to protect others. That is a lie you made up for yourself (yes, I can play that card as well), to justify your own actions before your own conscience.

[Tekadept]

Heffay, on 01 January 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

Just like MWO. The gameplay is fantastic, the game is downright beautiful, and progress is being made.

Have you played any other games other then MWO lately and if so what? just curious.

[Heffay]

Tekadept, on 01 January 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

Have you played any other games other then MWO lately and if so what? just curious.

I'm currently playing AC4. Fantastic game, and loving it!

[Mycrus]

Tekadept, on 01 January 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

Have you played any other games other then MWO lately and if so what? just curious.

Heffay, on 01 January 2014 - 05:36 AM, said:

nope he is too busy thanking mom and dad about genez, college, and ish... lulz...

Heffay, on 01 January 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

Egomane, on 01 January 2014 - 05:05 AM, said:

Someone has a different point of view from yours, so he is delusional? Is that really what you just said?

i'm pretty sure that is what heffy the golden mech said...

[Mycrus]

Heffay, on 01 January 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

So those opinion pieces off of someone's blogs with misspellings in them show that MVP products can survive, if they have a decent product. Just like MWO. The gameplay is fantastic, the game is downright beautiful, and progress is being made.

You're suffering from confirmation bias. You're reading an article and attempting to shoehorn it into your preconceived notions as opposed to critically analyzing the situation to see what applies and what doesn't. MVP products can succeed; even the AoEO postmortem clearly stated that. And MWO is doing a ton of things right according to that.

nope, heffy the golden mech... you are suffering from white knightis...

it is even clouding your wonderful college brain and genez..

btw, did you tell mommy and daddy that you bought a golden mech? what did they say?


so the harvard business review is just some "blog" now... Lulz... really... i must cancel my subscription to the Economist... because for you it is just some "Tabloid".... you made my day heffy the golden mech...

Edited by Mycrus, 01 January 2014 - 08:53 AM.

[Aim64C]

Egomane, on 01 January 2014 - 05:05 AM, said:

Someone has a different point of view from yours, so he is delusional? Is that really what you just said?

You are delusional in that you think you have a coherent grasp of my statements. You keep rambling on about things that have no application to me or to what I've said. It's kind of entertaining, really.

Quote

I know about the flaws of MWO and PGI, but I still don't see how that justifies insults, threats and defamation. I enjoy the game, the way it is. If I no longer enjoy it, I'll leave. If it is because of a developer decision I'll have to accept that, but I'll not campaign,the way some users do, against PGI to try to hurt their business.

I didn't get my promised lollypop, so I knock the other guy down and kick him while he's there. That is the mentality behind such actions and I can not stand for them. No decent being should defend something like that.

Must be a cultural difference.

You see, in America, when someone comes to ask for investments in his/her business model for various engineering marvels that will 'revolutionize the industry' or 'put oil companies out of business' - it's perfectly fair to show up and analyze what's being offered.

When the "self-sustaining energy producing circuit" is shown to have a battery or AC hook-up - it's generally considered polite to inform people that their money is, most probably, not going toward the development of a zero point energy module (or whatever).

Necessarily, that is going to 'hurt' the 'business' of these 'people' who do this. And many will actually try to threaten legal action along the lines of slander and defamation.

Quote

I don't! I used that as an example of how open communication has been valued by the angry mob in the past. If you look closely, I did not, for a single word, go into the details of 3PV and only adressed how Russ and his family has been attacked over it.

How about you actually answer what I wrote?

The problem is that the "third person view" was not "open communication." It was an official address. There is a difference - and I know your head is currently about to explode, but I'll explain the difference.

An official address is when I stand up in front of my platoon and tell them what's about to happen to them, and a little bit of explanation as to why (if I even know why from when I was standing in front of a different official address).

Open communication is where my junior sailors can find me to ask what is going on, or that I make it a point to go around and see what their concerns are so that I can either address them, myself, or put them on the table to be addressed by my superiors (or in PGI's case, a board of directors/administrators).

Open communication is not a lecture by Paul or Russ. That's an official statement. Open communication would be having them (or other members of the development team) post to the forums somewhat regularly - not in lectures - but in appropriate threads or even just as simple as a new thread that says: "So, I've read some of the suggestions and complaints on gameplay balance, and there are a few things we are kicking around."

Yes - it requires a little more finesse, because you can't go around like I would and endorse/criticize various ideas.

This is part of the problem with their use of twitter. A lot of that traffic needs to be re-directed to the forums. Their twitter posts should amount to: "Hey, gave some more input on some stuff regarding MWO - here is the link to the forum post/page."

And, yes, it requires work. That is why a number of projects hire and/or designate a community manager/representative who sits in on board meetings and/or talks with/interviews staff for the purpose of keeping people informed on who is doing what, where things are going, etc.

Other projects have their upper-echelons do that as part of their job, depending upon what their work load is and the size of the project/community.

Quote

You used the past of some people and used it in a way to try to discredit them. The past has nothing to do with current development of MWO, except that it's the same people involved.

LOL

That's rich. So it would stand to reason that the past of people (who are not me) criticizing PGI has nothing to do with my current thread.

Yet, that is precisely the reasoning you use in half of your argument against me.

I believe, if you read my post, you will see that I have already illustrated that the development pattern of MWO follows the development pattern of their previous titles.

"We are working on community warfare. Next two or three updates for sure."

"Yeah... we weren't really working on community warfare because we weren't sure if Microsoft would re-issue the license."

Quote

You are trying to hurt them and their business. Ignoring the fact, that PGIs past is just like the one of every other gaming company in this world. And you make accusations of motive like these on top of that:

Your allegiances are showing, Ego. The more you talk, the less deluded you appear and the more corrupt you smell.

You could argue that I'm trying to hurt PGI and their business - because their business is, historically and currently, marketing sub-par products under misleading and deceitful advertising.

You want to talk history - let's talk history of all of PGI's directly produced games:

http://www.ign.com/a...a-review?page=2

One of their first. Unfortunately, one of their best.

http://www.metacriti...-nascar-edition

http://www.ign.com/a...rcover-review-4

http://www.ign.com/a...review-2?page=2

http://www.ign.com/a...e-hunt-review-2

http://www.ign.com/a...ground-review-2

Brian and Russ's own track record with Jarhead is abysmal. PGI seems to have a poor eye in choosing development partners - or it is exceptionally effective at communicating its lack of capability.

The problem is that we are seeing the same trends in MWO as we are seeing in these other games. There is no clear effort on the part of PGI to reverse the trend. Minimal, lackluster development for below average prices... except that MWO is above-average pricing.

Quote

You do not critizise... you accuse! Without evidence, only your own personal vison of how things must have played out. Making the intent of your thread pretty much clear.

They need to hire a new public defender. This one is broken.

Quote

What?
Oh... yes! I hate false accusations and insults and such. I pretty much made that clear many, many times now. If you feel that this hate is hitting you, that might tell you something about yourself and the posts you make.

You misunderstand. I hate myself. It's a liberating philosophy to take. And your sentiments and observations are quaint - there are much deeper and more personable reasons to hate me. It's a shame that killing myself would put an end to my suffering - something I do not deserve. And if I should go to hell for it - it is my ultimate destination, anyway. No need to bypass this sentence for another.

The problem is that you have no argument, ego. Nothing to the points that have been made. You're angry that people insult PGI - and here is an argument that clearly illustrates the heads of PGI marketing lackluster games with no intention of making them good or improving their production quality.

Then, being caught in a blatant lie regarding community warfare - namely, that it 'was under development' when there were Phoenix mech packages to be sold and that 'all is good - we have the license extended, now' when asking for $200 packages of clan mechs.

Just what the hell do you call that, Ego?

I'm curious.

Quote

Finally admitting that you actually do want to harm the business of PGI. We are getting somewhere.

Well, I suppose under that logic, I'm guilty of desiring to harm the business of PGI. Not only have I declined to purchase their current product - I also attempt to warn people that history would seem to be repeating itself with MWO... except that MWO's very structure allows the same model used by Jarhead games to be used multiple times without re-branding the title.

If anything - complements are in order to PGI. They managed to get me to the tune of around $100 - which is about as much as they would have gotten me for if I'd bought every game produced by Jarhead.

And they didn't have to pay 40% of that for printing and distributing.

That's a personable reason to hate me. I should really go drink a cup of Renalin (concentrated hydrogen peroxide that will turn your skin white) over it - but that would be the easy solution.

Quote

If you cause it, or are a part of it, then yes, it is your problem.
Do you know there are laws against cyberbullying in nearly every nation today?
Throwing insults at people, starting campaigns to hurt their business and such, do actually fall under these laws. If you believe it is harmless and only a internet thing, you are decieving yourself. Just because these guys run a business, doesn't make them (or their families) a valid target for personal attacks.

Where have I attacked their families?

Seriously - don't threaten me with legal action. **** or get off the pot. I'm not going to cow to a threatening circus of trials by circus courts. We are all guilty of breaking some law or another, anymore - you do not have the market cornered on the right to file charges against me or anyone else.

Quote

Your attempt to intentionaly discredit them, is walking on thin ice on your part. It's an internet thing or they need to man up are not valid excuses! Your insistence of the right to insult or discredit, just shows how ignorant you are about others and how self centered you are. You do not want to protect others. That is a lie you made up for yourself (yes, I can play that card as well), to justify your own actions before your own conscience.

And you really don't care about Russ's family.

Your singular focus on the phrase "damage their business" is a legal focus. As is your attempt to try and group me under the people who attack Russ and Paul's family.

If I have insulted anyone - it is Russ and/or Paul, directly. I'll admit to that. Now, if you want to press charges for that, be my guest. It will be entertaining, to say the least.

Otherwise - Drop it.

Edit: End of post got cut off for some reason - perhaps an unintentional 'undo.'

Edited by Aim64C, 01 January 2014 - 01:11 PM.

[Aim64C]

Rebas Kradd, on 01 January 2014 - 12:59 AM, said:

Aim64C, it's a lot easier to reject a conspiracy theory when there are simpler explanations. That's the case here. Your track record on the ACA doesn't magically make you right on this, so nobody really cares about your invocation of it. And I'm a Republican.

My track record of being right, in general, is more than unhealthy for my hubris.

Which is why I'm closer to a Libertarian while remaining unaffiliated.

You also have to understand that I talk rather openly about what is on my mind. Not all of what I say is intended to sway opinion - it is just a catalog of my thoughts.

Quote

After speaking with a friend within the software industry today and describing PGI's 2013 to them, he decided that what he was hearing was, while unfortunate, still very typical and common for the industry. Missed deadlines? They're always arbitrary to programmers, and always overly optimistic. Questionable QA? Programming is a trial-and-error thing for those who do it. Flawed code and lacking documentation? Programmers are notorious for being cowboys. They code first and ask questions later. Bad feedback loop of dropping morale/community communication due to getting behind and thus criticized? Very common in ANY workplace. (Think about this: is not Microsoft itself notorious for some of the very same issues that PGI is accused of?)

There is a disturbing trend in the video games industry, lately. A lot of products are trying to launch first and patch later - that sort of thing.

The difference between that and PGI is, quite simply, the goal. With the "minimum viable" approach - the goal is not to produce even a consistent/solid gameplay experience. The goal is to create something that people will buy out of curiosity at a minimal cost to the developer. Basically, it's "We're going to sell a square table with as many corners cut as possible before most people say it's a round table. Better yet, we're going to make a round table and cut a few flat sides to it. Less work."

The key red-flag in this issue is the detail regarding community warfare. While, originally, it could be seen as absolutely horrid management where entire central features of the game could go from being "ready to launch in the next three updates" to "not in production - still on the drawing board" in three days. For it to later come out that: "We decided to suspend development of community warfare pending the re-negotiation of the IP license," later... What the unholy ****?

That's above and beyond poor management and bad feedback.

Then we can get into the absolute lack of any kind of development. Compare MWO to Path of Exile - a game developed with a far smaller team than what PGI has at their disposal. The game was literally evolving week-to-week during its open beta phase. While not every month was marked with massive changes/releases - it was clear that they were utilizing their time to develop the game and address issues.

It has become clear that the pace of development on this game between closed beta and now has declined so as to be considered stagnant.

It has reached its "minimum viable" point. Releasing maps for free and mechs to monetize would appear to be the marketing strategy going forward.

Quote

This isn't an apology for PGI's failures thus far, but it's a corrective to the thinking that PGI is either a bottom-of-the-barrel developer or a pack of mustache-twirling villains. Even with all the problems, they sound like just another software company. They'd probably look ten times better if only Garth were doing his job. The gold standard in the industry is of course Blizzard, with its tight coding practices and crackerjack QA, but I'm sure every Hollywood studio would like their own Christopher Nolan too.

PGI is not a great developer - but the events would suggest that amidst their inherent ineptness - there is a deceptive and work-averse mentality.

I'd be surprised if Ego went through the work of filing legal charges (though banning me is a much simpler strategy - he's not exactly going to go hunt down the droves of bloggers and other forums with insulting statements regarding PGI and press charges of cyber bullying against them - that's a lot of work). Yes - that was me being 'childish.' I'm sure the world will be destroyed as a result.

Quote

You, on the other hand, are starting to sound like you really don't have the industry experience to interpret what you're seeing. The UI technical updates we were given made it clear that it was much more than just the "web browser" like you claimed. And your running off on conspiracy theories isn't helping.

*sigh*

The UI for this game boils down to a web-enabled database client. You can see this, yourself, in the logs kept on your computer (OmicronOnline.txt). These are, basically, logs of database queries and modification requests.

The only thing the UI does is provide a visual interface for this data. A "button" on your screen is scripted to request information from the server and display it. You also have client-side scripting that allows you to utilize that data - much like Flash or Java programming (most of which is all executed on the client and does not rely on the server).

The most complicated portion of this particular UI is that they have a 3d scene render in the background. While it appears flashy and complicated - I'll show you, essentially, how complicated of a concept it is: http://irrlicht.sour...example001.html

While it does get a little more complex when you want to add in UI elements: http://irrlicht.sour...example005.html

- It's nothing that would take you more than a year to develop under honest circumstances.

The only halfway-honest interpretation is that they have not developed UI 2.0 because they have absolutely no idea what the UI needs to support. Community Warfare would be rather critical to include into the UI... so would the "Faction Points" ... but those remain very ethereal concepts.

Still, any sensible UI design is modular in both design and in visual organization. That allows for expansion of the UI at a later date and allows for the clear categorization of available user actions and information.

What I see as another 'flag' is that, within days of people requesting the ability to purchase individual mechs and refusing to spend hundreds on a MadCat, there was the option to purchase mechs A La Carte.

No problem adjusting the web-page UI in a timely manner to take money. How long did it take them to make the backspace key function in chat?

I realize that's a low-priority item... but it's not like we had huge updates fixing more critical issues before that was fixed, either.

I realize that, in some ways, this amounts to: "you're complaining about something being fixed?" - but it really seems to set the tone for PGI's priorities... along with lying about community warfare and its state of development.