53 replies to this topic

[Aim64C]

I will do my best to present this as clearly and concisely as possible - and I'm sure I'm not the only one to have done this - I'm just going to connect a few of the dots. (Credit to where I found these links at the end)

Russ and Brian, in 2001, bought out share-holder Jason Holtslander for PGI, and re-invested in a new label: Jarhead Games.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Piranha_Games

We can see how that worked out:



While revenues from those games are not readily available - one must immediately question: "How does an official developer with hired staff remain in business through games that... well... sucked?"

The answer, I believe, is two-part. For starters - these games appeared on WalMart shelves for $10. People spend more on a night to drink beer with their buddies - so discretion is thrown to the wind: "Be a sniper? Cool! ... Well... it was just ten bucks, what was I expecting?"

Though it would seem even WalMart wouldn't touch their labels after a few years. Someone in their marketing and sales department probably found GameSpot and other review sites and decided not to purchase half a million copies of a game that would likely rate a 2.0/10 and encounter a customer base that would start to think twice about $10 'military sims.'

http://www.giantbomb...-inc/3010-1656/

Here is Part 2:

http://www.clickonli...-montreal/4663/

http://win.virtuvent...ExecSummary.pdf

So, basically: "Hey... Canada needs more software development. Make a game here, get $8M or some cut of it."

This was not the first time, either:

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ats-up-1.877686

Canada's districts have long been subsidizing software development in an attempt to 'stimulate' the economy. My time in the military has made me exceptionally suspicious of anyone receiving government funding (including fellow military members) - because it tends to be money poorly spent. I've seen the ways of defense contractors, and even when you know what they are doing and can prove it - no one cares because it's billed to accounts well above your control and it's not a problem politicians can campaign on (so representatives are ineffective).

But I digress...

Smith&Tinker - let them not be forgotten: http://en.wikipedia....mith_%26_Tinker

Looking at the individuals in that company line-up - it's a completely different picture from Russ and Brian.

MechWarrior (the original series), ShadowRun, Crimson Skies - these guys had credit to their name.

S&T managed to secure the license agreement alongside PGI for many of FASA's old titles.

Smith&Tinker disappeared - http://www.citysearc...tinker_inc.html

Though they were rather interestingly invested: http://gamasutra.com...iOS_Rebirth.php

In hindsight, they probably should have stuck to their guns:



I would like to point out that the postmortem analysis of S&T was published July 4, 2011.

In October of that same year: http://massively.joy...line-announced/

Exactly where MechWarrior work fell between Smith&Tinker and PGI is not clear. But what is clear, is after Smith&Tinker folded, PGI almost immediately announced a plan to launch a Free To Play game while petitioning for government grants.

The game was marketed under a highly successful closed beta access ticket to the tune of $5M - http://www.gamasutra...ew/news/180401/

That discussion is interesting because it gives numbers and percentage break-downs for each buy-in tier (good for estimating retail of yet-to-be released Phoenix and Clan package numbers).

Either way - it paints a rather interesting picture, given Russ and Brian's track record of quality game releases.

I would wager that MWO was an alpha stage concept back when S&T folded. It had undergone a game engine shift from the trailer's Unreal engine to the CryEngine (or, perhaps the port was made just after the announcement due to licensing issues with Unreal?), but the game was still mostly a testbed for rigging animations, textures, weapon effects and function, etc. It was meant for bigger purposes - a true MechWarrior release... but what it was would suffice.

The government grant for development was just extra cash in-hand - the rudimentary stage of the game was fine if they were selling access to an open beta. Sure - they still had to fulfill the requirements of that grant (such as actually 'launching') - but it all represented an opportunity to turn a profit on (what was most likely) S&T's work on MechWarrior for minimal development costs. I'm sure they were invested in the art, or something (would seem likely from the ability of PGI to turn out graphical content as compared to coding and feature content).

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.

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.

It was, in all likelihood, the success of Founders, Phoenix, and the relative MC sales that convinced PGI to re-negotiate the license. 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."

Why would you launch an online game that, knowingly, you cannot continue beyond ten years? Why would you launch a game with a time schedule you -know- you cannot keep? Or promise features you -know- you do not have anywhere close to ready?

Simple: The game was never supposed to succeed; Russ and Brian have been making that work for years. The upcoming features never existed, and it is highly questionable as to whether or not they will exist in the future.

MechWarrior: Online was a cash-grab. Plain and simple. Though the IP re-negotiation seems to have changed the flavor of the cash-grab ($240 mech packages - lol) - it still paints a very bleak picture for the future of MWO.

So... how close am I Russ, Brian? I really am curious. Perhaps I am just way off-base, here... but you have to admit that you've given me (us) plenty of ammunition to this conclusion. Not that I really expect an answer (and even then, it would have to be an outright confession or one hell of a well constructed lie to make me believe much of it) - or for my little bit of rambling to actually make it to your eyes.

But, such is my arrogance.

Speaking of arrogance - I should probably give a bit of credit where it's due, now, shouldn't I?

www.forgotten8th.net/topic/really-bad-russ-bullock-bryan-ekman-gamez-ex7

http://mwomercs.com/...head-games-inc/

http://mwomercs.com/...-funded-honest/

As for why this is in upcoming features?

Well - those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it. It would be wise to view the list of promised upcoming features through the lens of history.

[Sephlock]

I came in here expecting something related to Halo.

.

[Thorn Hallis]

For whatever reason my playlist switched to Black Sabbaths "Paranoid" when I entered this topic.

[Egomane]

Oh, look! It's another one of those.

[Tekadept]

Egomane, on 31 December 2013 - 01:15 AM, said:

Oh, look! It's another one of those.

Does the fact there is so many ever make you wonder late at night?

[Egomane]

Tekadept, on 31 December 2013 - 01:21 AM, said:

Does the fact there is so many ever make you wonder late at night?

Nope!
Some people always try to do something negative, even if they do know better.
People hold grudges. Sometimes to their last breath.

How this world might look like, if people learned to let go of their hatred and simply moved on with something else? This is the thing I wonder about.

The past is the past.
Some few people learn from it and improve themself from it.
The others will hold it against you for eternity. Even if they were never involved in the things that happened in the past. Those are the ones who truly repeat past errors.

It doesn't keep me up at night. I already lost hope for the most part of mankind to ever improve itself.

[Alexandrix]

Egomane, on 31 December 2013 - 01:39 AM, said:

Nope!
Some people always try to do something negative, even if they do know better.
People hold grudges. Sometimes to their last breath.

How this world might look like, if people learned to let go of their hatred and simply moved on with something else? This is the thing I wonder about.

The past is the past.
Some few people learn from it and improve themself from it.
The others will hold it against you for eternity. Even if they were never involved in the things that happened in the past. Those are the ones who truly repeat past errors.

It doesn't keep me up at night. I already lost hope for the most part of mankind to ever improve itself.

Who'd have thought people would be upset after being repeatedly and blantantly lied to!
What is this world coming to!? Craziness!

Edited by Alexandrix, 31 December 2013 - 01:47 AM.

[Egomane]

Alexandrix, on 31 December 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:

Who'd have thought people would be upset after being repeatedly and blantantly lied to!
What is this world coming to!? Craziness!

Being upset and trying to harm others (in a business way, mental or physical) are totally different kind of shoes.

If you are upset, you declare what you are upset about. If you can change it with that, perfect, if not it's better to move on. Of course you still try debate what you are upset about.

If you start to try to harm others, is were I draw a line. If you punch them, insult them or if you try to find a something in their past to hold against them, so that others don't believe in them, don't give them a chance, its all the same.

PGI didn't lie about their past, as it has so often been declared in the last days. Everyone interested in it can find it with just a few clicks in the internet. It simply didn't matter. PGI is PGI for several years now. Far longer then they are working on MWO. They did work for other gaming companies to keep them above water. Nothing of that is secret.

Everyone trying to tell the past, current and potential players that they intentionally hid their past is ignoring, that it is completly normal for a gaming studio to rename themself several times over their lifetime. Almost all the big ones in the businees have done it at least once during their time. Telling that PGI can't do better because of what they did in the past, is ignoring the fact, that those titles were for the budget market. Low development cost and low income but enough to keep the company alive. Just like the renaming, almost every current big gaming developer has done so in the past.

So these posts are trying to bath PGI in a negative light for something that is every day business everywhere. They are trying to deny PGI the chance to improve, like the other developers did, in driving their customers away.

To me, this is beyond upset and completly unacceptable behavior.

[Alexandrix]

Egomane, on 31 December 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

*stuff*

I really don't care about any of that honestly.Simple fact of the matter is,PGI as PGI developing MWO lied about working on core features of the game that they sold founder's packages on.PGI itself is doing a perfectly fine job of bathing itself in a negative light,they've had chance after chance to improve and have ignored those opportunities in favor of cash grabbing.But,by all means,feel free to continue to shovel cash in their direction because you think "they'll do better next time".No,they won't.Not so long as people continue to support the "do as little actual work as possible,rake in loads of cash from suckers" path they are on.

What really burns my chestnuts is that russ even has the gall to come out and cite some of the worst game decisions I've ever seen as great successes! It's like he's either completely disconnected from what's going on,or it's just that hard to see what's going on down here from atop the piles of cash they've squeezed out of people.
If they'd just come down off the high horse,swallow their pride,and speak to the community plainly,openly,and honestly about everything...that would go a real long toward repairing bridges.Just a "hey guys,we know we really **** the bed on some stuff...this is what happened and why we did that....but we see where we screwed up and are really going to try hard to fix things." but no....it's just more "Everything is awesome! ignore that elephant in the room over there! give us more money!"

Edited by Alexandrix, 31 December 2013 - 03:13 AM.

[Egomane]

Alexandrix, on 31 December 2013 - 02:57 AM, said:

I really don't care about any of that honestly.

See? That's exactly what I mean.

When I read your post, I see someone who wants to hurt, not help.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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

[Mystere]

Sephlock, on 31 December 2013 - 12:12 AM, said:

I came in here expecting something related to Halo..

And I was expecting something about South Africa, what with Nelson Mandela's passing and the legacy he left. I am so sorely disappointed.

[Jun Watarase]

Egomane, on 31 December 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

Being upset and trying to harm others (in a business way, mental or physical) are totally different kind of shoes.

If you are upset, you declare what you are upset about. If you can change it with that, perfect, if not it's better to move on. Of course you still try debate what you are upset about.

If you start to try to harm others, is were I draw a line. If you punch them, insult them or if you try to find a something in their past to hold against them, so that others don't believe in them, don't give them a chance, its all the same.

PGI didn't lie about their past, as it has so often been declared in the last days. Everyone interested in it can find it with just a few clicks in the internet. It simply didn't matter. PGI is PGI for several years now. Far longer then they are working on MWO. They did work for other gaming companies to keep them above water. Nothing of that is secret.

Everyone trying to tell the past, current and potential players that they intentionally hid their past is ignoring, that it is completly normal for a gaming studio to rename themself several times over their lifetime. Almost all the big ones in the businees have done it at least once during their time. Telling that PGI can't do better because of what they did in the past, is ignoring the fact, that those titles were for the budget market. Low development cost and low income but enough to keep the company alive. Just like the renaming, almost every current big gaming developer has done so in the past.

So these posts are trying to bath PGI in a negative light for something that is every day business everywhere. They are trying to deny PGI the chance to improve, like the other developers did, in driving their customers away.

To me, this is beyond upset and completly unacceptable behavior.

Im confused, you have repeatedly insisted that there is nothing wrong about what PGI did or their history.

So why are you hiding this thread? Its nothing more than a retelling of PGI's history which you insist is not shady at all. If PGI is proud of their history they wouldnt be hiding this thread, they would be in here, in this thread, saying "yes this is exactly what we did and we are proud of it". I dont see that happening though, i just see people shoving this thread into a sub forum specifically made to have threads quietly dissapear.

It would be like if i wrote an article saying "{Godwin's Law} killed X amount of people", published it in a newspaper, and then my editor had it quietly removed and said that i was out to hurt the {Godwin's Law} party.

[Mystere]

Jun Watarase, on 31 December 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

Im confused, you have repeatedly insisted that there is nothing wrong about what PGI did or their history.

So why are you hiding this thread? Its nothing more than a retelling of PGI's history which you insist is not shady at all. If PGI is proud of their history they wouldnt be hiding this thread, they would be in here, in this thread, saying "yes this is exactly what we did and we are proud of it". I dont see that happening though, i just see people shoving this thread into a sub forum specifically made to have threads quietly dissapear.

It would be like if i wrote an article saying "{Godwin's Law} killed X amount of people", published it in a newspaper, and then my editor had it quietly removed and said that i was out to hurt the {Godwin's Law} party.

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.

Edited by Mystere, 31 December 2013 - 10:30 AM.

[Mycrus]

Jun Watarase, on 31 December 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

So why are you hiding this thread?

because funny enough k-town is now the repository of truth (and reconciliation)...

Mystere, on 31 December 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

And I was expecting something about South Africa, what with Nelson Mandela's passing and the legacy he left. I am so sorely disappointed.

now you are just asking for the interpreter meme...



maybe he knows how to make a AAA stompy robot title too...

Edited by Mycrus, 31 December 2013 - 11:15 AM.

[Heffay]

If PGI releases CW, that pretty much makes this whole thread moot.

[Rebas Kradd]

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

Intended goals and content for software are changed eveywhere on a daily basis. That's not lying; That's business as usual. Everywhere and every day and we as the customers can voice our dislike about it. We do not own the 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.

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. It's the blanket excuse for everything from decline of artistic integrity, to insurance not benefiting people anymore, to rigging of political campaigns, to pharmas being rigged for profit instead of research. And I do believe it's OUR game. We're paying for its direct development, not the recoup of its costs afterwards like the previous model.

I absolutely agree that insults and defamation are wrong. But I also have room for the outrage on the forums. We invested our money in promises that haven't been met. "Buyer beware" and all that, I suppose...

[Mycrus]

Heffay, on 31 December 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

If PGI releases CW, that pretty much makes this whole thread moot.

[Heffay]

That graph is completely meaningless.

[Mycrus]

Heffay, on 31 December 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

That graph is completely meaningless.

it should make sense.. i mean mommy and daddy gave you good genes and insisted on college right?!

anyway... just to cater to the target audience (you)...

MVP - ex. developer launches F2P game without complete "core" features... promises to have incomplete features by X date..

• Result = expect "quite small" attention, customers, and evangelism (aka word of mouth sales)...

EVP - ex. developer launches F2P game with complete "core features...

• Result = expect "decent" attention, customers, and evangelism...

but in PGI's case... they latch on to niche IP with a small but bankable customer base... releases a product that has "potential" ("relatively" good stompy robot combat action) and promises core [insert here] features some time soon (90days, upon 90days, upon 90days)... well you know the rest...

• Result = "Harmful" attention, customers, and evangelism...

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

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.

"You isolate your core customer base at your own risk" -- Age of Empires dev dude that has seen it all... find your own GDC link...

i respect PGI's decision... i have to make a personal decision also to

a.) tell the truth about MWO to anybody who asks me... which is "it's a good arena fighting combat game but nothing more than that... don't spend a cent as it gets old really quick..."

b.) spend my entertainment dollars elsewhere... like i told old heffy... i don't need to "play" MWO... there are other fun things to do... heck even trolling is getting old and un-fun too... i can get perma-banned on the forumz today and won't think anything of it... that is how burned out i fell about MWO now... i haven't even touched my sabre mechs yet....

meanwhile, i even placed another $5 into the train wreck that is "war of the roses"... the devs released a decent balance patch... but it is another story of too little too late... player base has moved on... only about 30 people still play in my timezone... this is how MWO will be if the devs go along their merry path...

[Heffay]

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.

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!