27 replies to this topic

[Zolaz]

Why do kills matter in Conquest? Why does a win pay the same as a loss? I could go on and on but it just makes me shake my head in disgust.

MWO is more like a cash grab plain and simple.

[Rhaythe]

The business model for Mechwarrior Online is probably geared to be profitable while retaining a relatively low risk of failure. PGI's track record of games is rather spotty (http://en.wikipedia....Games_developed). The Mechwarrior IPO waned in recent years insofar as the PC gaming industry. Just look at the gap between Mechwarrior 4 and MWO. I suppose you could count the X-Box game, but there were really very few true Mechwarrior IPOs available.

This game seems to be a low-risk, pay-as-you-go business model. So long as the game funds itself, development should continue.

Doesn't necessarily make it a cash-grab, though.

[Fut]

There's many reasons as to why this isn't a "Thinking Man's Shooter", but the main culprit has got to be the lack of Repair/Re-arm. People don't have to think about anything, they just charge into battle and spam their alphas until either their opponent is destroyed or they are.
Bring back R&R, and you'll start to see a lot smarter game play.

As for the rewards and such, they all seem like after thoughts to me.
Like you pointed out, none of them really make much sense.

[DEMAX51]

Rhaythe, on 07 January 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

The business model for Mechwarrior Online is probably geared to be profitable while retaining a relatively low risk of failure. PGI's track record of games is rather spotty (http://en.wikipedia....Games_developed). The Mechwarrior IPO waned in recent years insofar as the PC gaming industry. Just look at the gap between Mechwarrior 4 and MWO. I suppose you could count the X-Box game, but there were really very few true Mechwarrior IPOs available.

This game seems to be a low-risk, pay-as-you-go business model. So long as the game funds itself, development should continue.

Doesn't necessarily make it a cash-grab, though.

IP, not IPO

IP = Intellectual Property
IPO = Initial Public Offering, like when a privately owned company first sells shares of their company on the stock market.

[Rhaythe]

DEMAX51, on 07 January 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

IP, not IPO

IP = Intellectual Property
IPO = Initial Public Offering, like when a privately owned company first sells shares of their company on the stock market.

You are correct. My mistake.

[Mechteric]

They just don't have the rewards tuned in properly yet



that has nothing to do with being a cash grab or pay 2 win, that's just the grind

[MadcatX]

Fut, on 07 January 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

There's many reasons as to why this isn't a "Thinking Man's Shooter", but the main culprit has got to be the lack of Repair/Re-arm. People don't have to think about anything, they just charge into battle and spam their alphas until either their opponent is destroyed or they are.
Bring back R&R, and you'll start to see a lot smarter game play.

Why do people keep thinking that!? The first time around, good people still played good, idiots still played like idiots.

[Rhaythe]

MadcatX, on 07 January 2014 - 10:38 AM, said:

Why do people keep thinking that!? The first time around, good people still played good, idiots still played like idiots.

His point was that it brought some level of risk into the equation, and in that regard, he's correct. The way the game is balanced, there is little risk to a player charging theta with guns a-blazin', since he is not paying for the consequences of his actions.

The counter-argument to that should be that the return of R&R would only increase poptarting and other low-risk, high-alpha tactics.

[Mr Andersson]

Rhaythe, on 07 January 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

The business model for Mechwarrior Online is probably geared to be profitable while retaining a relatively low risk of failure. PGI's track record of games is rather spotty (http://en.wikipedia....Games_developed). The Mechwarrior IPO waned in recent years insofar as the PC gaming industry. Just look at the gap between Mechwarrior 4 and MWO. I suppose you could count the X-Box game, but there were really very few true Mechwarrior IPOs available.

This game seems to be a low-risk, pay-as-you-go business model. So long as the game funds itself, development should continue.

Doesn't necessarily make it a cash-grab, though.

That's a very plausible analysis. It would explain why development moves slower than an urbanmech.

[Voidsinger]

I suggest if you want to look at Russ Bullock and Bryan Eckman's previous efforts, look up Jarhead Games.

This game is becoming less thinking and more console with each passing month.

[Deathlike]

Voidsinger, on 07 January 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

I suggest if you want to look at Russ Bullock and Bryan Eckman's previous efforts, look up Jarhead Games.

This game is becoming less thinking and more console with each passing month.

If UI 2.0 doesn't produce an indirect console port in the future, then... all we're getting is Store 2.0 anyways.

[Ryolacap]

MWO was build on a 30 year super solid foundation, which PGI went in with jack hammers and screwed up. The foundation is now shoddy so who know when this thing will collapse

[kesuga7]

Rhaythe, on 07 January 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

The business model for Mechwarrior Online is probably geared to be profitable while retaining a relatively low risk of failure. PGI's track record of games is rather spotty (http://en.wikipedia....Games_developed).

Thats a really fishy looking wikipedia page

From what i know piranha developed no games prior to MWO
or at least gave no information out

with Jarhead games having no wikipage

[Bagheera]

Guys, "Thinking Man's ..." was always a typo.

This is the Drinking Man's Shooter. Always has been. Always will be.

[Curccu]

Rhaythe, on 07 January 2014 - 10:46 AM, said:

His point was that it brought some level of risk into the equation, and in that regard, he's correct. The way the game is balanced, there is little risk to a player charging theta with guns a-blazin', since he is not paying for the consequences of his actions.

The counter-argument to that should be that the return of R&R would only increase poptarting and other low-risk, high-alpha tactics.

Risk is still there even without R&R If you go guns blazing and you you don't get many CB/XP and your mech is locked in the game till it ends = lost money.
it would also give CB edge to energy weapons without ammo, my CB grinding mech would be full energy poptarts at that point.
oh yes and this would increase hiding in all game modes. IE. being stick in skirmish mode = hide rest of the game --> save some CB.

[Fabe]

What every one talking about? Just look at some of the threads here,now that we have a deathmtch mode this game has now reached the pinnacle of high level tactical 'thinking mans shooter" game play.

[Thejusttired]

Ryolacap, on 08 January 2014 - 06:41 AM, said:

MWO was build on a 30 year super solid foundation, which PGI went in with jack hammers and screwed up. The foundation is now shoddy so who know when this thing will collapse

Sry man... thats a completely false assumption.

The foundation worked for Dicerolls and turns... and that only smooth when players adepted rules to their preferred playstyle.

What PGI completely fails to do is create a valid "1st Person-mech-sim"- experience using the franchise and it´s lore to it´s strength and unique flavour.

They instead went with a twitchy halfbaked tabletop port that doesn´t live up to the lore but instead let´s us have meaningless arenafights in ratboxes.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Thejusttired, on 15 January 2014 - 12:11 PM, said:

Sry man... thats a completely false assumption.

The foundation worked for Dicerolls and turns... and that only smooth when players adepted rules to their preferred playstyle.

What PGI completely fails to do is create a valid "1st Person-mech-sim"- experience using the franchise and it´s lore to it´s strength and unique flavour.

They instead went with a twitchy halfbaked tabletop port that doesn´t live up to the lore but instead let´s us have meaningless arenafights in ratboxes.

I was completely surprised that they decided to go with basing it on the tabletop. Since when has a simulator ever been based of a table top game. When you put something in 3D combat sim there are too many variables that are different between the two platforms.

[MadcatX]

BLOOD WOLF, on 15 January 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

I was completely surprised that they decided to go with basing it on the tabletop. Since when has a simulator ever been based of a table top game. When you put something in 3D combat sim there are too many variables that are different between the two platforms.

Mainly to get the tabletop/mechwarrior fanbase. As for the variable, there's only 2 huge ones that causes issues:

Pilot Skill (increased accuracy in 3D)
The TT game was very randomized, with the tactics used to raise the odds (Choosing to walk to give a better odds at hitting the enemy or positioning yourself to one side of the enemy that has an armor blowthrough made you roll on a seperate location hit chart that raised the odds of hitting locations on that side). In a PvP environment, randomization through RNG is generally frowned upon with more people favoring a level playing field.

Edited by MadcatX, 15 January 2014 - 05:30 PM.

[Zerberus]

Voidsinger, on 07 January 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

I suggest if you want to look at Russ Bullock and Bryan Eckman's previous efforts, look up Jarhead Games.

This game is becoming less thinking and more console with each passing month.

But for the record, it`s not console players taking it there, it`s the assault blob and twitch kiddies that can`t be bothered with deeper gameplay than "klick, kill, `YAY!! I`m special!´".. they are also what drives the HPPA meta and scream loudest about PPC and AC nerfs and the gauss charge mechanic.

Deathlike, on 07 January 2014 - 06:39 PM, said:

If UI 2.0 doesn't produce an indirect console port in the future, then... all we're getting is Store 2.0 anyways.

Just because people incessantly want to believe that this game is being made for consoles to support their petulant nerdrage does not change reality. Your wishful thinking does not a license grant.

Edited by Zerberus, 16 January 2014 - 09:58 AM.