314 replies to this topic

[Cimarb]

Darth Bane001, on 20 January 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:

I've talked too others who were in on the test. Some things are alright but mostly underwhelming.

Also I'll do whatever I want, I did my part to help fund the game I have every right to participate in the forums even if it is to condemn the lack of progress in the game, I have that right, and you dont have the right to tell me I have to leave. Dont like it then just ignore it simple as that.

Actually, he has just as much right to tell you to leave as you do to say what you just did. In fact, as a person that actually tested the UI, instead of basing things on what "others" have said, he has more right to post in this thread than you do.

Quit trolling - it's childish - go find a game you enjoy and let us enjoy this one.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Its fine, the UI is fine. Don't be that guy. Actually, the great thing about this game is that they can always go back and fix things and are most likely doing so

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 20 January 2014 - 07:24 AM.

[SmurfOff]

BLOOD WOLF, on 20 January 2014 - 07:23 AM, said:

Its fine, the UI is fine. Don't be that guy. Actually, the great thing about this game is that they can always go back and fix things and are most likely doing so

Please show your work in coming to that conclusion. If anything, they have proven the direct opposite of the ability to fix things. The fundamentals in this game have been fubar since closed beta, and all we get are diddly stat changes with every patch, and a promise that UI 2.0 will fix everything. Except, it will be late (by about a year), be broken, and completely miss the mark for a Battletech experience.

The poll shows that UI 2.0 is a step in the wrong direction (majority vote, but not unamous). I've been hearing / reading / seeing people claim that the game is "balanced" but I don't see it. True balance would require a huge re-focus on the fundamentals of the game. Movement / damage / teamwork / criticals...

The only thing the keeps MW:O above water is that there are no other "Battletech" experiences out there. Even comparing the current state of MW:O to the last title, MW:LL, you can see a giant chasm of gameplay that needs to be worked on.

So while UI2.0 looks better, functionally it failed to meet its goals. And I think that the "fixes" to UI 2.0 will be such a boat anchor that we may not see clans until late 2014, possibly 2015.

[Heffay]

SmurfOff, on 20 January 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

So while UI2.0 looks better, functionally it failed to meet its goals. And I think that the "fixes" to UI 2.0 will be such a boat anchor that we may not see clans until late 2014, possibly 2015.

I don't think you understand what the goals of UI 2.0 were.

[MechFrog1]

Heffay, on 20 January 2014 - 08:10 AM, said:

I don't think you understand what the goals of UI 2.0 were.

• Remodel the cash shop in order to shovel out more mechs/paint/premium time
  
• Explain away the lack of progress on core features of the game
  
• Making the modifications of mechs even more time intensive and not offering any of the player suggested ideas like a "strip all" button?
  
• BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP

Did I miss any?

Ed Steele, on 18 January 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

Ho black knight, thou doth protest like a woman afflicted with the monthly curse! Take your whining to forums far from this land, or prepare to meet my mech in the field of battle (if you have not quit yet)!

Please do not encourage players to stop playing. There should be some sort of rule about it...

Edited by mint frog, 20 January 2014 - 09:41 AM.

[Shismar]

Heffay, on 20 January 2014 - 08:10 AM, said:

I don't think you understand what the goals of UI 2.0 were.

Oh, lets see. http://mwomercs.com/...c/117053-ui-20/

Bryan Ekman said:

Three main goals:

• Reduce friction for new players.

Fail. The new UI is at least as cluttered as the old one. If not more.

Bryan Ekman said:

• Communicate information in a clear and simple manner.

Fail. Much too much redundant information such as engine and weapon pictograms and not enough needful information.

Bryan Ekman said:

• Make each screen relevant to the task at hand (contextual).

Fail. There is still no mech centered flow as would be required to keep context. It is still a disjointed jumping around in modules.

Bryan Ekman said:

And one bonus goal:

• Make the Front End a little more sexy.

Check. It certainly looks nice.

Bryan Ekman said:

General Improvements

• Full support for Windowed, Full Screen, and Full Window view modes.
  
• Supports standard game resolutions 1024x768 to 1920x1200.
  
• More dynamic, lots of nice transitions, takes advantage of Scaleform and Flash animations.
  
• Supports element locking, useful for new players and tutorials.
  
• Frames-safe for 4:3 resolutions.
  
• New behind the scene UI architecture reduces bad states, improves stability, and reliability.
  
• Faster.

Check. Mostly, I'd say as I can't double check some items.


To me failing the three main goals is a failure. Especially, the mech lab, the center piece of any mech simulator, turned out almost unusable. I really, really hope they redesign it from scratch. As it is, it makes the new UI a step back. No matter improvements in other areas.

[eldoc]

mint frog, on 20 January 2014 - 09:36 AM, said:

Did I miss any?

Yeah:

- Not putting in some kind of rocket science widget like a slider for armor selection.

[DeathofSelf]

If anyone doesn't understand the goals of UI2.0, it's PGI.

[Aesis]

UI 2.0 is like a shiny toy daddy promised to give for Christmas 2012 and then decided to give a cheap copycat version this year.

[Gorthaur]

CPL Madison, on 19 January 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

honestly it looks s**t thats my opinion

you should stop wasting time on fancy menus and do important things like adding more content to the game

also several years on and the client STILL crashes

several years? it was just barely a year old in october (or during the summer if you count closed beta).

[MechFrog1]

Aesis, on 20 January 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

UI 2.0 is like a shiny toy daddy promised to give for Christmas 2012 and then decided to give a cheap copycat version this year.

We all remember how our eyes lit up on x-mas morning upon hearing the familiar sound of Lego bricks, only to open the box and see they're Tyco instead and just wanting to die.

Gorthaur, on 20 January 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

several years? it was just barely a year old in october (or during the summer if you count closed beta).

You're been a member on this site for 2 years, 2 months, and 20 days

Edited by mint frog, 20 January 2014 - 10:13 AM.

[Jaybee]

Well I think at the end of the day they need to deliver SOMETHING
Long overdue, especially in regards to the chat system.
(We laugh how many clicks it takes to make a group then invite someone lol)

It's a worry when I find smurfy's website FAR more easy to use and get more information than the actual game. E.G. you have the build's rough potential, quick modification to armor and even shows how much ammo you are running...
Other features can always be added later I guess? doesn't have to be a huge this is everything patch?

Also be nice to see more information/lore on each item, e.g. wtf does a case actually do?

Anyway, Feb 4th show time run with that ball and don't drop it PGI

JB

[Heffay]

Jaybee, on 20 January 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

Well I think at the end of the day they need to deliver SOMETHING
Long overdue, especially in regards to the chat system.
(We laugh how many clicks it takes to make a group then invite someone lol)

It's a worry when I find smurfy's website FAR more easy to use and get more information than the actual game. E.G. you have the build's rough potential, quick modification to armor and even shows how much ammo you are running...
Other features can always be added later I guess? doesn't have to be a huge this is everything patch?

The next public test for UI 2.0 will have a Smurfy style ragdoll to show your layout, according to the info released in the dev log. I was surprised that there was going to be another one, but it's nice to know we'll have one more.

[Kraven Kor]

mint frog, on 20 January 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

We all remember how our eyes lit up on x-mas morning upon hearing the familiar sound of Lego bricks, only to open the box and see they're Tyco instead and just wanting to die.

I can do better / worse than that: Tinte.

But, the poll at least has nobody saying it was equal to or worse than the last test, so that's a good thing