What was the game shown around the 32 minute mark?... you know the one...
3
Angry Joe: Top 10 Controversies Of 2013!
Started by KovarD, Jan 02 2014 03:38 PM
26 replies to this topic
#22
-
-
- Civil Servant
- 1,057 posts
Member
Posted 02 January 2014 - 11:16 PM
this really is a failure on behalf of Angry joe. he just does not understand how the FTP market, or a live product works. and besides he is talking about FTP and the beta state and just used MWO as an example. most of his argument against FTP games goes directly against the whole point of FTP: always changeing and moving forward. if that game wants to succeed, then i needs to keepputting out content, and never be "done".
its just stupid to say that this is not how FTP games should be done (PGIs pricing on packages aside). i mean should ALL of these great FTP games simply not be released or playable simply because they are not "done"? look at almost any of these big FTP games like path of exile, warframe, WOT, WOWP, Warthunder, hawken are not done, but they are playable, and fun. should they NOT be? should they all be with held because they are not "DONE"? dosnt seem right to me. as long as every one involved knows going in what to expect then really what is the problem? this should be a GOOD thing. people get what they want, pay what they want, and the companies get the revenue they need. if you dont want to deal with all the beta BS, dont opt in
i mean hell look at the development of the OperationFlashpoint/ArmA1/2 games. those are boxed games that were released in awful messy buggy and almost unplayable messes, but grew and matured overtime into amazing games because they were in a constant "beta" state (despite never having been called than by the developers). BIS (the devs) had alot of disgruntled and angry customers because of that, but they always pulled through.
think of it this way, what if MWO had no closed or open beta, and instead launched in a "complete" state, with CM and clans and mercs and such in September but with ALL the technical and balance issues that we have had over the course of the games dev cycle all on one package (and ohhh boy have there been a few of those) plus all the bugs and pains that will inevitably be introduced with those new systems. the game would be an utter failure at launch, completely unplayable.
that is why i fully support PGIs "minimum viable product" strategy. first get mechs working. great. now a little balance, stability and optimization. great. now add in some new systems. great. ****, some stuff done broke big time, so we have to fix it. great. now focus on more complex features. great. etc-etc-etc. baby steps, on phase at a time. yes its extremely frustrating that CM and UI2.0 are over a year behind schedule, but trust me its much better this way in the long run.
its just stupid to say that this is not how FTP games should be done (PGIs pricing on packages aside). i mean should ALL of these great FTP games simply not be released or playable simply because they are not "done"? look at almost any of these big FTP games like path of exile, warframe, WOT, WOWP, Warthunder, hawken are not done, but they are playable, and fun. should they NOT be? should they all be with held because they are not "DONE"? dosnt seem right to me. as long as every one involved knows going in what to expect then really what is the problem? this should be a GOOD thing. people get what they want, pay what they want, and the companies get the revenue they need. if you dont want to deal with all the beta BS, dont opt in
i mean hell look at the development of the OperationFlashpoint/ArmA1/2 games. those are boxed games that were released in awful messy buggy and almost unplayable messes, but grew and matured overtime into amazing games because they were in a constant "beta" state (despite never having been called than by the developers). BIS (the devs) had alot of disgruntled and angry customers because of that, but they always pulled through.
think of it this way, what if MWO had no closed or open beta, and instead launched in a "complete" state, with CM and clans and mercs and such in September but with ALL the technical and balance issues that we have had over the course of the games dev cycle all on one package (and ohhh boy have there been a few of those) plus all the bugs and pains that will inevitably be introduced with those new systems. the game would be an utter failure at launch, completely unplayable.
that is why i fully support PGIs "minimum viable product" strategy. first get mechs working. great. now a little balance, stability and optimization. great. now add in some new systems. great. ****, some stuff done broke big time, so we have to fix it. great. now focus on more complex features. great. etc-etc-etc. baby steps, on phase at a time. yes its extremely frustrating that CM and UI2.0 are over a year behind schedule, but trust me its much better this way in the long run.
#23
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 10,635 posts
Member
- LocationHiding in a cake, left in green city called New A... something.
Posted 02 January 2014 - 11:28 PM
He's not the only one poking a bit of personal opinion at PGI. Have you read the Top 10 fan-made Classics on PCGamer?
It includes Mechwarrior: Living Legends, which was really nice on their behalf, and the text beneath it gets to compare it to MW:O, which ends up the way you'd expect it to.
It includes Mechwarrior: Living Legends, which was really nice on their behalf, and the text beneath it gets to compare it to MW:O, which ends up the way you'd expect it to.
#24
-
-
- Overlord
- 254 posts
Member
Posted 02 January 2014 - 11:45 PM
Angry Joe is one of the worst internet reviewers ever.
The whole "angry video game reviewer" shtick was already dated when he first started it, he's painfully unfunny, and his rants and ravings about games are usually unintelligible and off-base.
Although, one of my favorite moments is when he goes to a video game award show and asks foolish questions, chokes under pressure, completely bombing the interview in the process, all while blaming the guy in charge for not being more receptive and nicer to Joe. Even though Joe specifically wanted to bash the guys award show.
He rants about it for a half hour and really he deserved it. Like he expected some star treatment and private interview because he has a corny game review site.
Anyway, did I mention I hate Angry Joe with a passion?
The whole "angry video game reviewer" shtick was already dated when he first started it, he's painfully unfunny, and his rants and ravings about games are usually unintelligible and off-base.
Although, one of my favorite moments is when he goes to a video game award show and asks foolish questions, chokes under pressure, completely bombing the interview in the process, all while blaming the guy in charge for not being more receptive and nicer to Joe. Even though Joe specifically wanted to bash the guys award show.
He rants about it for a half hour and really he deserved it. Like he expected some star treatment and private interview because he has a corny game review site.
Anyway, did I mention I hate Angry Joe with a passion?
#25
Posted 03 January 2014 - 12:13 AM
My only gripe with Joe is his copyright rant about youtube...
Which boils down to "I need mah revenue".. Coz I left my job 4 yearz ago...
I didn't catch his latest videos... His older videos about gamez were spot on... I haven't him call something "good" that wasn't...
Which boils down to "I need mah revenue".. Coz I left my job 4 yearz ago...
I didn't catch his latest videos... His older videos about gamez were spot on... I haven't him call something "good" that wasn't...
#26
-
-
- 8,163 posts
Member
Posted 03 January 2014 - 02:45 AM
While AngryJoe really is holding back in this video, he still is in violation of the rules for language on the MWOmercs forums.
And even though I agree with him on most things, I have to move the thread to someplace, where the language doesn't matter so much.
And even though I agree with him on most things, I have to move the thread to someplace, where the language doesn't matter so much.
#27
-
-
- The Hammer
- 3,711 posts
Liao Mercenary
Posted 06 January 2014 - 09:50 PM
MadcatX, on 02 January 2014 - 07:25 PM, said:
I love Angry Joe and agree with most of what he said with the exception of using the Founders program as an example of an early cash-in. There were plenty of other things MW:o had up for sale during closed/open beta. If he was going for "no cash at beta" angle, not sure why he didn't bring up Star Citizen because it is a great example of a paid preview, with bundle prices far surpassing MW:o's founders.
Other then that, unfortunately for us, it is spot on.
Other then that, unfortunately for us, it is spot on.
That's because SC's official projected Launch date is early 2015 and it is a fully crowd funded game. Until it is pass that dead line.. Nobody can say pretty much squat about it and the fans who funded it.
This other game we know on the other game is only a partially fan funded game, is called Released and has a long bad track record...
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
