203 replies to this topic

[BLOOD WOLF]

Amsro, on 30 March 2014 - 09:33 AM, said:

Not any response, just opinionated uncited posts. You want us to not make up things and listen to PGI podcast but then you ignore the facts they state in the video.

ggclose

I didn't ignore any facts. Which facts are you referring to. I will be more than happy to refute anything, and soundly to.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 09:39 AM.

[Amsro]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 09:33 AM, said:

Ignore what facts did i not adress

I'm not here to sway your decision, I can tell that has already been made.

But what is it that you are white knighting for?

No Founders
No Phoenix
Not likely a Clan Pack
Do you have any heroes?

How invested into this game are you truly?

Why is it you've sent me a PM to converse about it there and then continue posturing on this front as well.

I, at this point, am waiting/viewing from the sidelines to see how PGI's "vision" comes to fruition over the next 2 months.

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

I didn't ignore any facts. Which facts are you referring to. I will be more than happy to refute anything, and soundly to.

You must understand that at this exact juncture in 2013 the people who you so devoutly are arguing with are the VERY SAME people that were White Knights in your position.

Stick around for another couple months I will likely see you singing a different tune as well.

Edited by Amsro, 30 March 2014 - 09:41 AM.

[Amsro]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

I will be more than happy to refute anything, and soundly to.

How about we reverse the roles here, and I'll make it easy, I won't even refute/argue any of your points, this will even be my LAST post in this thread.

If you can, please, make your argument for the Launch Module. I really want to be looking forward to this games future. Show me why I should be excited.

The stage is yours. Try to be thorough and touch as many of the topics as possible. No rush.

Edited by Amsro, 30 March 2014 - 10:02 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Amsro, on 30 March 2014 - 10:00 AM, said:

How about we reverse the roles here, and I'll make it easy, I won't even refute/argue any of your points, this will even be my LAST post in this thread.

If you can, please, make your argument for the Launch Module. I really want to be looking forward to this games future. Show me why I should be excited.

The stage is yours. Try to be thorough and touch as many of the topics as possible. No rush.

The only thing i can say in regards to that is, it isn't what sandpit was making it out to be. Private matches were just a ways to allow players the freedoms of forming a group however large against another Premium user. Without the restrictions of the rules of public 3/3/3/3. The Fact that you cannot earn rewards isn't even an issue, nor does it detract from competitive play. The same issue he brought was on twitter and russ said he had false assumptions. He's keeps stating how he wont be able to play with friends which i don't even know what that comes from.

Which is what i see here a lot is false assumptions. Some people opinions are bolstered because the feeling is shared regardless if their sound. That's why i prefer to have my arguments on TS. On the forums Quotes, even tho they are direct sources are always taken out of context to because of irrationality or refusal to acknowledge another s views because the contradict and disprove your own.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 11:02 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

http://mwomercs.com/...3-feb-27-2014/- Read private matches, its all their, based on that, i don't see where Sandpits concerns lay. I assume we all have reading comprehension skills? i know its a lot of text. As for not being able to earn anything, That is irrelevant. Private matches were meant to allow players to play without the restrictions of pug play launch implementation.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 10:56 AM.

[Amsro]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

The only thing i can say in regards to that is, it isn't what sandpit was making it out to be.

When I said my previous post was my last I guess I lied, this is not showing anything about how PGI's launch module is going to make the game better.

That is what I'm looking for from you at this point.

Explain how anything this link included is going to make the game better and more suited to community warefare.

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...3-feb-27-2014/- Read private matches, its all their, based on that.

I wasn't asking for you to discredit me or Sandpit or anyone else. Instead simply make your case, explain the white light at the end of the tunnel. I sincerely want to understand your optimism so I can employ some for myself.

[Cimarb]

Russ is not saying it wrong, Pieper, just means something slightly different than you think. A "pub" is someone that drops in a PUBlic match, as opposed to a private match.

[Roadbeer]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...3-feb-27-2014/- Read private matches, its all their, based on that, i don't see where Sandpits concerns lay. I assume we all have reading comprehension skills? i know its a lot of text. As for not being able to earn anything, That is irrelevant. Private matches were meant to allow players to play without the restrictions of pug play launch implementation.

So, since Sandpit's and my concerns about this are similar, let me ask you this.

Ok, fine, I now get to play with the 7 of my friends who are online, we're all in a group and ready to launch.

Who do we launch against?

[Lukoi Banacek]

Rebas Kradd, on 29 March 2014 - 02:16 PM, said:

You're standing on two technicalities here. One is beta. .....

It's not a technicality. It's a fact. Whether it's degrees of beta or an open product for sale, taking the tag off is a method of managing expectations. They chose (forced or not by IGP) to remove the tag, thus they set a certain level of expectation. I think you need to reread what I wrote earlier to determine what exactly you are arguing with me about.

PGI is terrible at managing expectations and over promising at this point. Simple as that. The F2P model in your argument is an excuse to prematurely publish an unfinished product and then you complain that customers "should know better?" That's horrible marketing, horrible customer service and horrible in terms of product/service development. Companies FAIL because of this logic here, of blaming the customer. I'd rather PGI did not fail but they are on that glidepath.

Rebas Kradd, on 29 March 2014 - 02:16 PM, said:

Second. We may be paying customers at this moment, but you were investors at the time PGI was making their promises.

Rebas, this is completely untrue. Are you relatively new to MWO? I'm not going to go back and demonstrate every single time PGI has promised something AFTER the Founders investment period until now, but you really are fabricating here. It's factually untrue.

PGI routinely said something and "changed their mind." And I'm not just talking about timelines or predictions. I'm talking about how the game is marketed, how the Devs attempt to portray it etc. They over promise routinely on what they are going to provide and while they no longer tell you a date (so that can at least reduce the backlash over that) they imply or promote concepts that do not come to fruition.

FFS they selling Clanpacks with almost zero explanation of how they will operate within the game. There's simply no excuse for that kind of behavior. It alienates customers and they will continue to badmouth the company, making it harder and harder for them to survive.

If they cannot attract new paying customers, how will they generate the funds to continue? More ill-defined, ill-thought out options (see Clanpacks) that come across as money grabs which further piss off customers and drive more away? It's a simple death spiral to do that.

People don't come at these opinions just from a mob mentality Rebas. There are plenty of objective, interested parties here that actually base their comments on more than rants and hyperbole, so don't discount peoples' opinions on the state of the game as mere uninformed rants, if you're not seeing all of the same things they are.

[Igorius]

Roadbeer, on 30 March 2014 - 01:19 PM, said:

So, since Sandpit's and my concerns about this are similar, let me ask you this.

Ok, fine, I now get to play with the 7 of my friends who are online, we're all in a group and ready to launch.

Who do we launch against?

My nonexistent group of friends?

Okay, joking aside, you've got a good point. A really good point. The core of the game's players have been effectively gutted at this point. Call it whatever you want, it's the truth. Sure, there's still people playing the game, and still some of the founders and phoenixes rumbling around, but that initial core that existed when the game was at its peak has long since been reduced to a fraction of itself.

I don't know how you go about getting that back. More so than that, it really is starting to appear that there's been a decision to not even make the attempt. It's a Pugger's game now, instead of being the quirky marriage of group and individual play that used to make it so interesting/frustrating.

Well, whatever works for them, I suppose.

[Randalf Yorgen]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

The only thing i can say in regards to that is, it isn't what sandpit was making it out to be. Private matches were just a ways to allow players the freedoms of forming a group however large against another Premium user. Without the restrictions of the rules of public 3/3/3/3. The Fact that you cannot earn rewards isn't even an issue, nor does it detract from competitive play. The same issue he brought was on twitter and russ said he had false assumptions. He's keeps stating how he wont be able to play with friends which i don't even know what that comes from.

Which is what i see here a lot is false assumptions. Some people opinions are bolstered because the feeling is shared regardless if their sound. That's why i prefer to have my arguments on TS. On the forums Quotes, even tho they are direct sources are always taken out of context to because of irrationality or refusal to acknowledge another s views because the contradict and disprove your own.

I was just wondering, if I have to use premium time and then spend MC/C-Bills for this module, and then if I want to use Consumables, How is what I highlighted NOT an issue?

They want us to pay, and spend and use our own resources but not give us any rewards. The money spent on the consumables isn't being replaced, in part or in full so it's right out of our pocket and that's on top of us having to pay out of pocket to even privilege, or maybe the ability, of dropping in a larger group. The way this plays out this is PGI saying you can group all you want, just give us a little extra money but we also are going to force you to either buy MC to replace your consumables or we are going to force you to drop with the soloists in teams of 4 or less. Unarguably it's the biggest Frack-You PGI has ever given to its team players.

The Solo players or PUBS should be scared shipless over this. even if PGIs metrics are only slightly off the casual larger team players will stop playing this game. When they leave, their friends who have been dropping solo but choose to group with them a couple of times a week will also leave. Even if PGIs numbers are close, 1/4 of what's left of the already shrunken player base (look at how well the match maker isn't working for the evidence to support this) is going to walk away and not come back. You will be left with the hard core 12 manners, and the soloist pub player who doesn't give a damn about grouping with anyone from the get go and how only plays the game for free. The player base will be tiny and spread all around the world, the people who spend money will have moved on and there will be the epeen leets of both the 12 man and the solo ques left, nothing of the casual drop with a bunch of my friends team player will ever be seen or heard from again. This game cannot survive on its present path, there is a cliff before it but the drivers at PGI are happy as clams to drive it right over the edge.

Now put your tinfoil hats on.......

The rocky horror picture show was an insurance scam that backfired, the producers lost everything because of the lie. Is that a useless piece of information or is it?

[Amsro]

Cimarb, on 30 March 2014 - 01:18 PM, said:

Russ is not saying it wrong, Pieper, just means something slightly different than you think. A "pub" is someone that drops in a PUBlic match, as opposed to a private match.

Yes, but I can be in a 4-man and still be a "Pub"lic player, whereas a Pug refers to being solo, just jump in. (I'm sure you know that) An obvious difference of meaning to be sure.

[Kyrie]

I have found myself unwilling to start the launcher and patch the game for a long time now. However, I find myself oddly compelled to read the forum for signs of hope, for a tiny tidbit to give me cause to hope that PGI is grasping why I haven't loaded the launcher in months despite being a Founder and Overlord. It took me a long time to lift my blinders, but I have come to fully understand that MW:O is very much a game driven by standard MBA-speak corporate decision making processes.

I have come to fully understand that PGI, for whatever reason, will always seek to lower the minimum in minimum-viable-product.

I have come to fully understand that PGI and IGP do not quite grasp the particular psychology of the hardcore fan of the franchise, and have no particular interest in directing development to what I consider the key feature, real House to House warfare. The very slim hope I had a few years ago for an MPBT reboot, or even a rough analogue of same, is quite thoroughly dead; turned to bitter tears long since wiped away.

Hardcore gamers, the whales that most F2P games attempt to fleece, are fickle. As one of the 50% of the Founders that no longer plays MWO, I can only say why I in particular have stopped playing: I have no confidence that PGI wishes to cater to my particular market-segment. They really do not want my money; they want a mass-market product.

The games that have kept my attention for a long period of time have all had a few things in common:

• Immersion and rich forms of player interaction
  
• More than one level of play - i.e., shooters that have an overall strategy meta-game; never plain shooters.
  
• If grind is present, the grind is meaningful in terms of player interaction (i.e., contributing to your faction and so on). Grinding to unlock content has never held my attention.
  
• Significant player interaction (bringing the multi-player into the multi-player game).

PGI has charted a course that in broad terms fails to address any of my concerns. I do not really blame them, I must in all honesty blame myself for projecting my MPBT biases unto the IGP corporate landscape. This is fundamentally incompatible.

The philosophy that seems to have been espoused to date has been, to my mind, systematic efforts to make quarterly revenue calls. What I would have preferred, as a "whale", is a design and development philosophy focused on delivering a truly awesome game; a game that would allow us hardcore types the chance to relive and role-play the rich world of the Inner Sphere. I would gladly have put all of my disposable entertainment budget into this game instead of scattering it to the four winds...

I will likely continue to haunt the forums to see what exactly PGI does to implement "faction warfare". I am almost certain it will not be what I was hoping for. But the slim hope keeps me checking in.

[Cimarb]

Amsro, on 03 April 2014 - 05:47 PM, said:

Yes, but I can be in a 4-man and still be a "Pub"lic player, whereas a Pug refers to being solo, just jump in. (I'm sure you know that) An obvious difference of meaning to be sure.

Technically, a PUG (it should be all caps, though the U is sometimes lowercase) is a Pick Up Group. A member of that illustrious PUG would be a PUG'ger, but us lazy gamers have shortened it like we do everything and then just made it a label for people. It doesn't necessarily mean no one knows each other, though, because anything short of a 12-man team is actually a PUG, since there are people in the group you didn't invite directly. So, a 4-man premade group can be part of a 12-man PUG, just like it can be Pub players. You could also have a Private match with PUGs, but that would require a lobby or at least one new player that you hadn't played with before.

[Roadbeer]

Semantics...

[Amsro]

Roadbeer, on 03 April 2014 - 08:02 PM, said:

Semantics...

[Jess Hazen]

[color=#959595]32:45 Russ brings up a question for them to ask Paul: will there be a toggle in the premium windows to allow or disallow clan tech?[/color]
[color=#959595]ut oh sounds like more monetization...inc...[/color]

[AlmightyAeng]

Jess Hazen, on 03 April 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:

[color=#959595]32:45 Russ brings up a question for them to ask Paul: will there be a toggle in the premium windows to allow or disallow clan tech?[/color]
[color=#959595]ut oh sounds like more monetization...inc...[/color]

Guessing he was talking about the premium private matches, with are already monetized...and adding that option in.

[Cimarb]

Ghost Badger, on 04 April 2014 - 06:23 AM, said:

Guessing he was talking about the premium private matches, with are already monetized...and adding that option in.

Yeah, listen to it in context - they were just asking him what options where available to limit matches by.

[AlmightyAeng]

Cimarb, on 04 April 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

Yeah, listen to it in context - they were just asking him what options where available to limit matches by.

While I'm not happy with the disappearing promise of an open queue...I can't gripe about MORE options being added for people interested in League play. Don't know that this particular change benefits ME much...but I'm sure some people out there will appreciate it.