203 replies to this topic

[Kyrie]

I tend to my spend my yearly entertainment budget in a few big purchases. I spent most of my 2014 entertainment budget on an indy game called "NovusAeterno", gave them $500 in their Kickstarter project at the end of '13. Had PGI delivered on a meaningful system (akin to MPBT by Kesmai back in the early nineties), I would have gladly spent that all on PGI.

Seeing the new Dev Vlog and reading this summary of Russ' interview reassures me that dropping PGI from my entertainment budget was a great idea.

I still feel sad though -- I so wanted to give them all of my money.

[Sandpit]

Kyrie, on 23 March 2014 - 02:07 PM, said:

I tend to my spend my yearly entertainment budget in a few big purchases. I spent most of my 2014 entertainment budget on an indy game called "NovusAeterno", gave them $500 in their Kickstarter project at the end of '13. Had PGI delivered on a meaningful system (akin to MPBT by Kesmai back in the early nineties), I would have gladly spent that all on PGI.

Seeing the new Dev Vlog and reading this summary of Russ' interview reassures me that dropping PGI from my entertainment budget was a great idea.

I still feel sad though -- I so wanted to give them all of my money.

you're not the only one

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Sandpit, on 23 March 2014 - 02:26 PM, said:

you're not the only one

See Sig.

[AdamBaines]

Again thanks Peiper for the transcription! I may not agree with some of your angles and feelings on your comments and footnotes, but I can see you love this game just as much as the rest of us. And for that you have my thanks.

[Randalf Yorgen]

it was a good write up but he did paraphrase a few areas. For the most information if you can, give the playback a listen. It's not just the words but it's also the tones used with the words that are telling the tail. What I get from the tones Russ uses is that he's tired, insulted and hurt that we don't absolutely LOVE his vision of the game and now he is getting a little payback. If you listen to the first half, you can start at the 34 min mark and just let it run for about 5 min you will notice that HOW he is saying things makes him sound very high on himself.

[Sandpit]

Randalf Yorgen, on 24 March 2014 - 08:06 AM, said:

it was a good write up but he did paraphrase a few areas. For the most information if you can, give the playback a listen. It's not just the words but it's also the tones used with the words that are telling the tail. What I get from the tones Russ uses is that he's tired, insulted and hurt that we don't absolutely LOVE his vision of the game and now he is getting a little payback. If you listen to the first half, you can start at the 34 min mark and just let it run for about 5 min you will notice that HOW he is saying things makes him sound very high on himself.

It became very clear when it was consistently "their vision" of the game. That says a lot to me

[Knussman]

This is literally my second post of on these forms and I am not sure if I will bother again. The question weather or not to push CW back or not. Honestly I have noticed I don't have much of a drive to play this game anymore. There is no point in grinding out just to get more mechs just so I can grind to get another. Adding CW as soon as possible would give a drive to play. The achievements are nice but not nearly enough to get me to play. I am happy to pay for things that I want in this game. But right now I have no motivation to play the game so I am not going to pay for the game.

Currently I have higher hopes for Star Citizen then I do for this.

Please understand I WANT this game to give me a reason to play. I am however board of it now. Also when i do get on now i am only on for about 1 or 2 matches. Back when i first started i would play for hours at a time. And I would team up with friends however now i just drop solo because there is little point.

PGI, Russ, to whomever it may concern. This is a shout to you, I guess you can do what ever you please, but I can honestly say I can only team death-match so many times. It has come to the point were I will stop. And you will of lost at least this paying customer.

[Sandpit]

^ This

[RG Notch]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

It became very clear when it was consistently "their vision" of the game. That says a lot to me

So you're saying it wasn't clear before? LOL, I guess some of us are more perceptive than others.

[Sandpit]

RG Notch, on 24 March 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

So you're saying it wasn't clear before? LOL, I guess some of us are more perceptive than others.

Not really, it's become abundantly clear though that they have a very specific vision for MWO and it doesn't appear to coincide with what I feel they originally planned or what I thought they were going to do. It's cool, like I've said many time, it's a free game so I can continue playing but money goes elsewhere at this point

[Thunder Lips Express]

StandingCow, on 21 March 2014 - 12:46 AM, said:

That you very much for doing the summary.. I cannot bring myself to listen to these guys anymore.

agreed, i used to enjoy them, but up until around last summer i can't put them on anymore, bad blood

[Deathlike]

Knussman, on 24 March 2014 - 08:38 AM, said:

PGI, Russ, to whomever it may concern. This is a shout to you, I guess you can do what ever you please, but I can honestly say I can only team death-match so many times. It has come to the point were I will stop. And you will of lost at least this paying customer.

Just so you know, if you get a cap win (max resources in Conquest), you get a crappier payout (equal to "losing the match in Conquest - you get instead of getting resources*50, it's resources*12.5). It seems like you will get "full rewards" if you kill out the other team in Conquest... which I guess is "working as intended".

[Rebas Kradd]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

It became very clear when it was consistently "their vision" of the game. That says a lot to me

I think "their vision" is better phrased as "their capability".

Everything we're seeing now, all the changes of mind and vision about-faces, I suspect are really just symptoms of their limited ability. They're a small and inexperienced developer and simply can't accomplish a lot of things until they grow and mature later down the road. It's a far sight better than being lazy or deceitful, but at the same time, it may still end up biting them.

[Sandpit]

Rebas Kradd, on 24 March 2014 - 11:59 AM, said:

I think "their vision" is better phrased as "their capability".

Everything we're seeing now, all the changes of mind and vision about-faces, I suspect are really just symptoms of their limited ability. They're a small and inexperienced developer and simply can't accomplish a lot of things until they grow and mature later down the road. It's a far sight better than being lazy or deceitful, but at the same time, it may still end up biting them.

If they said "Hey, this is what we had originally planned but we just aren't capable of doing it right now" I'd agree with you, but they have SPECIFICALLY stated that they just changed their minds. HUGE difference. I even took the stance you're taking now in the past. No more. I'm no longer excusing complete 180s on fundamental game design that I spent money on.

[Rebas Kradd]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 12:01 PM, said:

If they said "Hey, this is what we had originally planned but we just aren't capable of doing it right now" I'd agree with you, but they have SPECIFICALLY stated that they just changed their minds. HUGE difference.

They changed their minds BECAUSE they realized they lacked the ability, is also a possibility.

It's not like they're ever going to admit to the shackles of being a small developer. It'd hurt consumer confidence (even more so than it's already been hurt). Practically everything can be laid at the feet of that without straining credibility nearly as much as all the other theories.

It's also both fair and damning to say that they changed their minds because further data and experience exposed their previous promises as untenable. Fair because it doesn't require us to theorize mustache-twirling villains or bumbling morons; damning because it's a subset of "small and inexperienced developer" and is still not going to help salvage confidence in the product.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 24 March 2014 - 12:21 PM.

[Sandpit]

Rebas Kradd, on 24 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

They changed their minds BECAUSE they realized they lacked the ability, is also a possibility.

It's not like they're ever going to admit to the shackles of being a small developer. It'd hurt consumer confidence (even more so than it's already been hurt). Practically everything can be laid at the feet of that without straining credibility nearly as much as all the other theories.

It's also both fair and damning to say that they changed their minds because further data and experience exposed their previous promises as untenable. Fair because it doesn't require us to theorize mustache-twirling villains or bumbling morons; damning because it's a subset of "small and inexperienced developer" and is still not going to help salvage confidence in the product.

I disagree

Leaving customers thinking you blatantly lied, misled, deceived, and took money from them under false pretenses is FAR worse than "Hey, we're small, we can't do this, maybe later we'll look back into it but it is what it is"

[Rebas Kradd]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

I disagree

Leaving customers thinking you blatantly lied, misled, deceived, and took money from them under false pretenses is FAR worse than "Hey, we're small, we can't do this, maybe later we'll look back into it but it is what it is"

Unfortunately, this very thing tends to be a corporate reality.

Wanna know why they lied about CW being 90 days out?

Because their only alternative was to go "Ummm, yeah, we've coded ourselves into a corner with bad hitreg and the UI and a bunch of other stuff, and we also just don't have the development pace we thought we'd have. So...yeah, CW is going to be another two years out while we fix this stuff."

Yeah, right. The customers would leave in droves and the game would go broke.

I don't like it any more than you do, but I understand why it happened. Their early missteps left them in an uncomfortable spot.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 24 March 2014 - 12:27 PM.

[Sandpit]

Rebas Kradd, on 24 March 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

Unfortunately, this very thing tends to be a corporate reality.

Wanna know why they lied about CW being 90 days out?

Because their only alternative was to go "Ummm, yeah, we've coded ourselves into a corner with bad hitreg and the UI and a bunch of other stuff, and we also just don't have the development pace we thought we'd have. So...yeah, CW is going to be another two years out while we fix this stuff."

Yeah, right. The customers would leave in droves and the game would go broke.

I don't like it any more than you do, but I understand why it happened. Their early missteps left them in an uncomfortable spot.

Now customers are leaving because PGI "lied" to them. At least with them admitting that I'd still be willing to give them money. Now? Not a single penny. That money that went to a Masakari pack? It's already being spent on other games for other companies.

[Rebas Kradd]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

At least with them admitting that I'd still be willing to give them money.

That's naive. Maybe it's true for you and me, but from most people, transparency would coax nothing but outrage.

[Sandpit]

Rebas Kradd, on 24 March 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

That's naive. Maybe it's true for you and me, but from most people, transparency would coax nothing but outrage.

It's a moot point anyhow, we'll never know