203 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Lukoi, on 28 March 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

I do not know how to build or produce a car but if it performs very differently than promoted, a good word of mouth bashing should be expected. If it completely fails to perform or is unsafe, a company should conduct a voluntary recall or expect litigation for their failings. My lack of knowledge on how its produced or the timeline of production is not relevent.

I respect your right to withhold your money. But the situation is comparable to Ford announcing that they're going to create an awesome new vehicle that you can drive within three months of the very first sketch, even as they're building the rest of the vehicle around the framework over the next four years. Some people get all excited and buy the framework. A lot of other people just hold their money until the finished product arrives; they know that the usual development process dictates that not all the original vision will last until launch.

Your knowledge of the timeline is VERY relevant, because it informs how you invest. Now...I admit that it's very easy for me to dismiss the anger of those paying customers whose expectations weren't met, because I didn't invest any money until just this month. So perhaps I could be standing in your shoes more firmly than I am. I know I sound like quite the Monday Morning QB. But since there are people on this forum (not you) determined to actively interfere with people's enjoyment of the game and trash PGI's reputation, I think these points are relevant. Investment should be balanced with being informed.

I'm not insulting anyone; I'm saying a lot of unrealistic expectations have been flying around. In three years, if it lasts that long, I think a lot more of the original vision for this game will be present. I certainly hope so.

[WM Jeri]

Rebas Kradd, on 28 March 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

I respect your right to withhold your money. But the situation is comparable to Ford announcing that they're going to create an awesome new vehicle that you can drive within three months of the very first sketch, even as they're building the rest of the vehicle around the framework over the next four years. Some people get all excited and buy the framework. A lot of other people just hold their money until the finished product arrives; they know that the usual development process dictates that not all the original vision will last until launch.

Your knowledge of the timeline is VERY relevant, because it informs how you invest. Now...I admit that it's very easy for me to dismiss the anger of those paying customers whose expectations weren't met, because I didn't invest any money until just this month. So perhaps I could be standing in your shoes more firmly than I am. I know I sound like quite the Monday Morning QB. But since there are people on this forum (not you) determined to actively interfere with people's enjoyment of the game and trash PGI's reputation, I think these points are relevant. Investment should be balanced with being informed.

I'm not insulting anyone; I'm saying a lot of unrealistic expectations have been flying around. In three years, if it lasts that long, I think a lot more of the original vision for this game will be present. I certainly hope so.

I think its important to not lose sight of who set many of those expectations...PGI is not blameless in this area. Albeit some players are over the top in their critique, but the ownership of controlling the message is truly PGI's and honestly they have not had the best track record for being open and forthright about the design cycle and timeline and their messaging and marketing have decidedly been lacking.

Those are things they can control and if they would seize the initiative on the information cycle and early on been more honest about where things stood such as the license negotiations I think the uproar would have been a lot less. Sometimes you do reap what you sow.

Edited by WM Jeri, 29 March 2014 - 10:23 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

WM Jeri, on 29 March 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

I think its important to not lose sight of who set many of those expectations...PGI is not blameless in this area. Albeit some players are over the top in their critique, but the ownership of controlling the message is truly PGI's and honestly they have not had the best track record for being open and forthright about the design cycle and timeline and their messaging and marketing have decidedly been lacking.

Those are things they can control and if they would seize the initiative on the information cycle and early on been more honest about where things stood such as the license negotiations I think the uproar would have been a lot less. Sometimes you do reap what you sow.

I do agree with much of this. In my eyes, PGI's biggest shortcoming has been transparency. They have nobody in the building with any real PR skill. To their credit, they have tried to establish more dialogue in the last three months and I do appreciate that, but we're still so in the dark in regards to the real "story" of 2013.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Rebas Kradd, on 28 March 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

I respect your right to withhold your money. But the situation is comparable to Ford announcing that they're going to create an awesome new vehicle that you can drive within three months of the very first sketch, even as they're building the rest of the vehicle around the framework over the next four years. Some people get all excited and buy the framework. A lot of other people just hold their money until the finished product arrives; they know that the usual development process dictates that not all the original vision will last until launch.

Your knowledge of the timeline is VERY relevant, because it informs how you invest. Now...I admit that it's very easy for me to dismiss the anger of those paying customers whose expectations weren't met, because I didn't invest any money until just this month. So perhaps I could be standing in your shoes more firmly than I am. I know I sound like quite the Monday Morning QB. But since there are people on this forum (not you) determined to actively interfere with people's enjoyment of the game and trash PGI's reputation, I think these points are relevant. Investment should be balanced with being informed.

I'm not insulting anyone; I'm saying a lot of unrealistic expectations have been flying around. In three years, if it lasts that long, I think a lot more of the original vision for this game will be present. I certainly hope so.

3 months? Try a couple of years.

The game is no longer beta.

The flaw in your Ford comparison is this. Ford does not overpromise to produce a vehicle 3-months after showing a prototype at a trade show. They manage expectations much more clearly than PGI has done. I don't need to know how long a car takes to develop, proof, retooling of the assembly line etc to produce. I just know they announced the 2015 Mustang in late 2011, showed concepts by 2012, a "production" model in 2013 and it'll be on showroom floors by a fairly predictable date (Spring/Summer 2014). That's completely counter to how PGI has promoted their product and then performed since the beginning.

Obviously I'm still a fan of the franchise and the product to a degree, but let's not view things with rose colored glasses. The marketing/production/service intersection PGI has demonstrated thus far has been bad, continues to be less than anywhere near optimal and if you want the game to last they need to improve it or the game will die.

I want them to fix what they keep ******* up behavior wise, so I can play a polished game for years. Not drive away people with continued mismanaged expectation. Blaming the CUSTOMER for misunderstanding or not knowing enough about your product or service is a major misstep. Successful businesses do not do that for long, or they do not remain successful.

ps. it is a mis-characterization to call this investment. It is purchasing a service now. We are long past Founder's investments. We are customers, not investors.

Edited by Lukoi, 29 March 2014 - 11:07 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Lukoi, on 29 March 2014 - 11:05 AM, said:

ps. it is a mis-characterization to call this investment. It is purchasing a service now. We are long past Founder's investments. We are customers, not investors.

You're standing on two technicalities here. One is beta. The prototype that Ford showed was on the verge of running into unforeseen and formidable design challenges. They may have removed the beta tag, and we could argue over whether they should have done so (is it financially wise for them to leave the beta tag on for five years? Did IGP force their hand?) But we have to balance that with the reality that beta doesn't mean much anymore, because F2P means we get to at least drive the car for grocery trips while it's still being built around us. The beta removal doesn't magically allow the devs to turn a three-year-old game into a six-year-old game in one patch. We are where we are. The game is exactly where most video games would be after three years...and what's more, it's not only playable, but enjoyable to where people's departure fanfare usually involves the phrase "be back in six months" rather than "I'm never playing this game again."

Second. We may be paying customers at this moment, but you were investors at the time PGI was making their promises. That is what people are basing their demands on - "I invested, and now I want either my product or my money." Sorry, investments don't work like that. What you put money towards was an uncertainty, based on numerous factors uncontrollable by us or even sometimes by PGI (the economy, for example), and therefore it was a gamble. PGI slammed headfirst into a bunch of technical challenges and the gamble has stuttered. (That's another thing - had things gone more smoothly, the game might well have had

What I'm saying is that PGI had a part and we have a part. PGI's part was to offer realistic expectations, and while they really didn't, there are also classic design struggles that need to be factored in. And the community had their part, that of being educated about the likelihoods when they invested. If you're disappointed, fine, but I'm asking for perspective, not rose-colored glasses. You're being somewhat measured, Lukoi. I feel like I can talk to you. Those who troll the boards, brag about how closed their wallets are, wring their hands about how let down they feel, or go completely off the deep end and start making unfounded accusations of malfeasance against the company, are way out of line with what's happened.

And FWIW, PGI has learned their lessons about expectations. They don't predict anything anymore. No ETAs on anything, "subject to change" disclaimers on everything. They're totally silent on everything to the point of bringing their PR to a virtual halt, and honestly, THAT is killing them as well.

[Amsro]

Sandpit, on 21 March 2014 - 01:17 PM, said:

I have been a professional wrestler for over 10 years.

Sandpit Wrestler

[Amsro]

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

PGI's part was to offer realistic expectations

But they did offer realistic expectations, the fault lies directly in all the choices they have made since. Great games can be made just as quick/quicker with a smaller team with better results.

The delays were of unexpected lengths and continue to be pushed back nonchalantly.

Pick A or B and we'll START working on it. LOLWUT?.! There is no other way to look at it other then poor management. Simple.

Edited by Amsro, 29 March 2014 - 05:47 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Amsro, on 29 March 2014 - 05:47 PM, said:

But they did offer realistic expectations, the fault lies directly in all the choices they have made since. Great games can be made just as quick/quicker with a smaller team with better results.

The delays were of unexpected lengths and continue to be pushed back nonchalantly.

Pick A or B and we'll START working on it. LOLWUT?.! There is no other way to look at it other then poor management. Simple.

you are probably the smartest person who ever lived, and i mean that.

They didn't ask people to pick A or B, great reading comprehension skills on these forums.

People cry and complain when they missed deadlines and then they set the schedule and nailed the dates but the quality was buggy people still complained. They are asking would we want it released and then finished, or worked and finished first then release. Either way its going to be finished.

if you going of forum post rather than what was actually said then listen to it rather then misinterpreting someones post

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

I will reiterate. Or you can watch the podcast and hear it for yourself.

You guys(taggers/some) have been riding their asses about missed deadlines. Its obvious they are trying to appease you guys which i cant understand why. So they want to ask whether or not they should push the content on the deadline given on the state of the IS post and get it to use on time(yes, we polish later, play now). Or they could polish it a bit and make it functional rather than working on it as its released.

Now i think we can all agree we would rather just have the features and they can fix them and debug while we get to play. Its a obvious question that takes a simple answer, instead i see a lot of people talking out their a**.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

That's at the core of a lot of what I've said. This IP doesn't have what I'd consider a "huge" following anymore but it does have a very loyal and passionate fanbase. Those are the ones that drop hundreds and thousands of dollars on the IP. They're the ones that buy things like the gold mechs. The average casual player who has no idea what Btech is outside of what they've learned from MWO isn't going to drop $500 on a gold mech typically speaking.

Now had PGI come clean about a few things, been more upfront with where they were at (if you honestly believe that they mysteriously learned that they couldn't get CW out until later this year after 2 years of delays and suddenly it magical having a "real" release date AFTER renewing the IP from MS... well let's just remember what they say about being born every second) and had made a call and offered some extra perks for different things and pledge packages, etc. there would have been plenty of hardcore fans that would have dropped money into this to help fund a bigger dev team and such.

By being less then upfront (since I know what the word "lying" would do) they created a very hostile environment with a lot of their customers. They created that mess themselves. Then they wonder why customers are refusing to hand over money, preorder stuff, accuse them of lying, leaving the game, etc.

Group limits are my main issue. There is absolutely no way to convince me that for over a year now they've flat out said group limits were temporary. Every single dollar I've given them past founders was based in part on that very premise. Whether it was intentional or not is irrelevant. They took money from customers under what some will consider false pretenses. You CAN NOT take money from paying customers while saying one thing and then doing another and not expect them to be unhappy at best and toxic at worst. I have ZERO sympathy for PGI at this point. Either do what you say you're going to do or don't let paying customers think you're doing one thing for a year or more then suddenly without any warning "change your position". Regardless of how and why that change occurred and whether you think it was intentional or not, it's a piss poor way to do business, period.

DUUUUUDE!, a lot of words but you didn't really make a point.

I think your upset at group limits, i don't know why your upset. with less words more elaboration, i will say private matches solves your concern about group size?

[Thunder Lips Express]

Sandpit, on 24 March 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

"temporary" group limits
"CW" it's in quotes because it's no longer community warfare, it's faction warfare according to the latest Vlog
the consistent "our position at the time" changes over the past 2 years
Take your pick

i wonder if pgi takes notice that some of their most ardent supporters are losing faith and becoming disgruntled?

[Stunner]

But private matches does not earn Cbills, xp or faction.

from what I'm reading from the interview it appears the only way we'll see true Clan VS IS matches is to do private matches which means community warefare will be private matches which means you can't earn xp and cbills during community warfare.

I guess you are suppossed to grind up your mech in pug drops and then go to private matches for community warefare endgame.


I can't believe we are going to have clan mechs fighting alongside IS mechs. PGI said the timeline was 3050. Not 3060 and later.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Ecliptor, on 30 March 2014 - 07:31 AM, said:

i wonder if pgi takes notice that some of their most ardent supporters are losing faith and becoming disgruntled?

that wasn't a good quote to use their buddy.

Faction warfare and community warfare are intertwined- the naming makes no difference, its the dedicated inverse that's gonna make it what it should be.

Their goes that word "our" are you founders all linked I heard a great referenced to Ad Hominem earlier and it appears to me that that all your basis for arguments are strengthened by circumstantial Ad Hominem rather than rationality. oh internet what happened to reasoning? the many holes in arguments and constant in-elaborate statements. everybody just half-a**ing everything.

Sandpit is going on about group limits without cause. Complaining about not being able to earn anything, if its league run matches, aren't you their for the competition? why would you need to earn Xp or C-bills "The only way to run a player league is private matches. Private matches = no rewards." who cares, Just little complaints to no end.

Stunner, on 30 March 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

But private matches does not earn Cbills, xp or faction.

from what I'm reading from the interview it appears the only way we'll see true Clan VS IS matches is to do private matches which means community warefare will be private matches which means you can't earn xp and cbills during community warfare.

I guess you are suppossed to grind up your mech in pug drops and then go to private matches for community warefare endgame.


I can't believe we are going to have clan mechs fighting alongside IS mechs. PGI said the timeline was 3050. Not 3060 and later.

Sucks but they cannot have all clan vs IS in public play, The players already said no to that, it would make it unfair.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 07:50 AM.

[Thunder Lips Express]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

that wasn't a good quote to use their buddy.

Faction warefare and community warefare are intertwined- the naming makes no differnce, its the dedicated unverse thats gonna make it what it should be/

Their goes that word "our" are you founders all linked I heard a great referenced to Ad Hominem earlier and it appears to me that that all your basis for arguments are strengthened by circumstantial Ad Hominem rather than rationality. oh internet what happened to reasoning? the many holes in arguments and constant in-elaborative statements. everybody just half-a**ing everything. Sandpit is going on about group limits without cause.



Sucks but they cannot have all clan vs IS in public play, The players already said no to that, it would make it unfair.

it wasn't the quote i was referencing, it was meant for sandpit in general. him and roadbeer in my eyes were big supporters, and now they are not, a position which mirrors my own to a lesser extent since i don't post very often.
what ever happens when the "white knights" turn?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Just don't understand sandpit's deposition. First he going on about not being able to play with friends because of group sizes limit to four but that's what private matches are for, with PM you will be able to have any group size,and set the parameters.

[Amsro]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

you are probably the smartest person who ever lived, and i mean that.

Heh, sarcasm or otherwise this is false, of that I can guarantee!

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

They didn't ask people to pick A or B, great reading comprehension skills on these forums.

I'm not sure how you interperet Pauls words ANY other way then pick which one you want to have
"soon" and the other will get pushed back to? who knows when?

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

People cry and complain when they missed deadlines and then they set the schedule and nailed the dates but the quality was buggy people still complained. They are asking would we want it released and then finished, or worked and finished first then release. Either way its going to be finished.

You are assuming they are working on it already. Knocking a tree over isn't collision and community warfare is going to be a clan joke.

Finished or otherwise if you can't see the horror of balancing they are trying to employ then my words will have little to no effect regardless of how long you quote me.

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

if you going of forum post rather than what was actually said then listen to it rather then misinterpreting someones post

I'm not sure what you are referencing here, but I ONLY use information DIRECTLY from the "podcast". In fact I find it is YOU who spouts random facts with NO reference.

You are just Anti-Bash PGI Protesting, while not using the information given to you by PGI.

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

that wasn't a good quote to use their buddy.

Sometimes the best ideas come from within

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Faction warfare and community warfare are intertwined- the naming makes no difference, its the dedicated inverse that's gonna make it what it should be.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here? The dedicated inverse?

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Their goes that word "our" are you founders all linked I heard a great referenced to Ad Hominem earlier and it appears to me that that all your basis for arguments are strengthened by circumstantial Ad Hominem rather than rationality. oh internet what happened to reasoning? the many holes in arguments and constant in-elaborate statements. everybody just half-a**ing everything.

Not refering to founders, that boat has sailed long ago, those founders that felt completely lied to are NO LONGER here. Roughly 50% of original founders have moved on.

Instead this is the current run of fallen angels, if you think Sandpit is a crying founder that has always disliked the game you would be mistaken. Roadbeer, nope he would be the first to point out the faults in the negative energy.

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Sandpit is going on about group limits without cause. Complaining about not being able to earn anything, if its league run matches, aren't you their for the competition? why would you need to earn Xp or C-bills "The only way to run a player league is private matches. Private matches = no rewards." who cares, Just little complaints to no end.

I would lean towards a LARGE amount of people care that they need to pay to play the game the way they like to when typically we've ALREADY paid plenty.

Private matches should just be a place to troll around. Practice.

Community Warfare is where you should be playing competitively. That is the entire point of it.

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Sucks but they cannot have all clan vs IS in public play, The players already said no to that, it would make it unfair.

Can you give a citation for this? I've never seen the "players" decide anything significant. Another bold claim.

I appreciate your enthusiasm BloodWolf, but in all fairness the the next 2 months will tell if the game is worth continued playing.

At this point I haven't even been able to muster up the energy to "win" 5 matches to get a free MechBay (great showing from PGI to be sure) but the 12vs12 unbalanced matchmaker trolling sandbox makes that launch button difficult to hit.

[Amsro]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 08:21 AM, said:

Just don't understand sandpit's deposition. First he going on about not being able to play with friends because of group sizes limit to four but that's what private matches are for, with PM you will be able to have any group size,and set the parameters.

This game is 12vs12, let us group up. It's not 4vs4. There is NO logical reason why people should ONLY be able to group with their friends for a meaningless private match. Essentially private matches are Team Training, only problem being there is NO place to bring that team to play.

If it is such an issue then simply add a SOLO ONLY play mode.

Your logic is random and unwarranted, what is it exactly about Public or Private matches that should have ANY effect/limit on how many players you can team up with?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Amsro, on 30 March 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

Heh, sarcasm or otherwise this is false, of that I can guarantee!



I'm not sure how you interperet Pauls words ANY other way then pick which one you want to have
"soon" and the other will get pushed back to? who knows when?



You are assuming they are working on it already. Knocking a tree over isn't collision and community warfare is going to be a clan joke.

Finished or otherwise if you can't see the horror of balancing they are trying to employ then my words will have little to no effect regardless of how long you quote me.



I'm not sure what you are referencing here, but I ONLY use information DIRECTLY from the "podcast". In fact I find it is YOU who spouts random facts with NO reference.

You are just Anti-Bash PGI Protesting, while not using the information given to you by PGI.


Sometimes the best ideas come from within



I'm not sure what you are trying to say here? The dedicated inverse?



Not refering to founders, that boat has sailed long ago, those founders that felt completely lied to are NO LONGER here. Roughly 50% of original founders have moved on.

Instead this is the current run of fallen angels, if you think Sandpit is a crying founder that has always disliked the game you would be mistaken. Roadbeer, nope he would be the first to point out the faults in the negative energy.




I would lean towards a LARGE amount of people care that they need to pay to play the game the way they like to when typically we've ALREADY paid plenty.

Private matches should just be a place to troll around. Practice.

Community Warfare is where you should be playing competitively. That is the entire point of it.



Can you give a citation for this? I've never seen the "players" decide anything significant. Another bold claim.

I appreciate your enthusiasm BloodWolf, but in all fairness the the next 2 months will tell if the game is worth continued playing.

At this point I haven't even been able to muster up the energy to "win" 5 matches to get a free MechBay (great showing from PGI to be sure) but the 12vs12 unbalanced matchmaker trolling sandbox makes that launch button difficult to hit.

If you wish to meet me on NGNG public TS, i better communicate your fault, im on right now or choose a

Im gonna be on TS all day, becuase any response i type is going to be refuted horribly

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 09:35 AM.

[Amsro]

BLOOD WOLF, on 30 March 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

If you wish to meet me on clan wolf TS, i better communicate your fault, im on right now or choose a NGNG teamspeak.

Im gonna be on TS all day, becuase any response i type is going to be refuted horribly

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

Edited by Amsro, 30 March 2014 - 09:33 AM.

[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

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

Ignore what facts did i not adress

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 30 March 2014 - 09:34 AM.