50 replies to this topic

[Roadbeer]

Tezcatli, on 22 April 2014 - 12:35 PM, said:

That's the Free to play model a lot of the times. It's not their only revenue. But I imagine it is the primary one. And it wouldn't be if people weren't buying them.

Be that as it may, since you posted that, I've come up with about a dozen ways to monetize Group Play, that would actually get people to WANT to spend money (rather than HAVE to in the Premium Private Match system).

If they're interested, they can contact me, because I know they rarely read the forums of their own volition.

[GreyGriffin]

I would love new maps, but... HPG is just so bad...

[Nathan Foxbane]

Bishop Steiner, on 22 April 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

This? I would rather them front load the modeling fixes for a month or two than worry about "new" content. Heck give us some cosmetic options to make money with in the interim. Ain't that what you got Hayden for?

FTFY.

[DONTOR]

I play for the mechs, but new maps would be nice. I could care less about community warfare.

[Trauglodyte]

How about a swamp? Limited land area with water that slows movement.

[DONTOR]

GreyGriffin, on 22 April 2014 - 01:18 PM, said:

I would love new maps, but... HPG is just so bad...

Wait... Whats bad about it? I play conquest mostly, and it seems fine to me. Is it bad on skirmish or assult?

[GreyGriffin]

HPG is bad because...

• The map's texture and color is so homogenous they needed to add giant color coded stripes to the wall.
  
• The lunar landscape areas are completely wasted
  
• Narrowly channeled spawn exits are in sniping range of each other.
  
• Lack of elevation and cover on the outer perimeter makes the hill unassailable against three Blackjacks who are at least halfwits, or 2 that are three-quarterwits.
  
• Those annoying pillars that seem explicitly designed to catch lasers from Atlas arm hardpoints while providing no appreciable cover.
  
• Huge giant coliseum walls and vast circular arena make it seem like a thinly veiled Solaris arena rather than a Comstar facility.

That's kind of off the cuff, I haven't really done a deep analysis, but... it looks boring, plays boring, and has some glitchy areas that make me grit my teeth. Overall, not good.

[OneEyed Jack]

Roadbeer, on 22 April 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

Long story short... I'm bored. 5 months without a new map, and nothing new in sight.

And you'd be bored with a new map, too. What's your point?

You act as if new maps actually change anything, but new mechs with small differences are just the same old thing. Guess what, new maps are just the same old thing with obstacles shifted around a bit and maybe a different ambient heat. Whoop-de-doo. And within a week it would just be another map for you to ***** about.

[Roadbeer]

OneEyed Jack, on 22 April 2014 - 02:28 PM, said:

And you'd be bored with a new map, too. What's your point?...
And within a week it would just be another map for you to ***** about.

Alpha - 2012: 8 maps (4 with 4 derivative variations)
2013: 6 Maps
2014: 0 Maps

But in that time we've had 29 new chassis.
If all it takes is a new avatar to keep you entertained, then I suggest you refrain from posting and just bang a couple rocks together.

[Hellen Wheels]

A new map will not save this cluster fail.

It's dead, Jim.

RIP.

[Joseph Mallan]

RG Notch, on 22 April 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

I thought they hired him to spread propaganda on the forums.

He did that for free! It just wasn't Prop they wanted LOL

[Lukoi Banacek]

Roadbeer, on 22 April 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Alpha - 2012: 8 maps (4 with 4 derivative variations)
2013: 6 Maps
2014: 0 Maps

But in that time we've had 29 new chassis.
If all it takes is a new avatar to keep you entertained, then I suggest you refrain from posting and just bang a couple rocks together.

Actually I'm pretty sure he was pointing out that both new maps and new avatars provide about the same level of new, exciting and in-depth play we're all craving (aka none really). Not that new mechs were better than new maps. But I could be mistaken.

[Nemesis Duck]

One of the newer screenshots of the Timberwolf looks like an alpine map but with trees and rocks, maybe we're getting upgrades like destructible objects?

[OneEyed Jack]

Roadbeer, on 22 April 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Alpha - 2012: 8 maps (4 with 4 derivative variations)
2013: 6 Maps
2014: 0 Maps

But in that time we've had 29 new chassis.
If all it takes is a new avatar to keep you entertained, then I suggest you refrain from posting and just bang a couple rocks together.

If all it takes is new scenery to keep you entertained and the mechs don't matter, I hear there's a new map available. It's called Outside.

[Daekar]

Roadbeer, on 22 April 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

ENOUGH ALREADY!

So far, I've only seen that there will be 2 new maps in the foreseeable future. So for all of 2014, we only know about 2 maps in the pipe, but I can tell you that there are going to be 8 new mechs and probably more if they keep with their statement that new IS mechs will be released along side the Clan ones.

I get it, everyone has their favorites that they want to see in the game, but can we take a break from a new mech chassis every month or two? Especially when so much else is suffering.

I understand you have to make money, and it seems that your only consistent way to do that is the Hero of the new chassis coming out and Mech Packs, but...Take a step back, Why would I want to buy (insert Hero/Mech Pack here) when the game is basically the same whether I'm piloting that, or my good ol' CAT C-1(f)?

I don't care if they're even derivative maps (Crimson night, Canyon snow, Terra Therma Day) whatever, I'm starved for a variety of terrain.

I also understand that you have to keep your mech modelers working, cool, make some additional Heroes for the chassis you already have. I'm not happy with the Jester and would love another CAT hero more than a new humanoid chassis that looks and operates the same as any number of other chassis, except this one is 5 tons more(less). Or, I don't know, go back and fix the numerous problems with the existing Mechs.

Long story short... I'm bored. 5 months without a new map, and nothing new in sight.

I'm glad someone else feels like the mech modellers are the only ones working. How long did it take to design and build UI2.0? And when they released it, it wasn't done! Still isn't done! Factional Warfare has been in the design stages since Closed Beta, and not hide nor hair have been seen of it. Yes, we've got the Clans coming, yay... but that's the mech modellers again. What exactly does everybody else at PGI do all day? I've been playing and paying for two years and it's still only half a game, guys, that's not OK. Clean up the mess that is first-gen mechs, for the sake of Kerensky's saggy left uh.. actuator.. finish UI2.0, and roll out FW asap.

OneEyed Jack, on 22 April 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

If all it takes is new scenery to keep you entertained and the mechs don't matter, I hear there's a new map available. It's called Outside.

I heard the quality is terrible if you live in the city.

Plus, PGI doesn't get to charge money for that.

[OneEyed Jack]

Daekar, on 22 April 2014 - 03:16 PM, said:

Plus, PGI doesn't get to charge money for that.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Daekar, on 22 April 2014 - 03:16 PM, said:

I heard the quality is terrible if you live in the city.

Have you been to Forest Colony lately?

[Dymlos2003]

Typical whining...

Pretty sure they are working on attack/defend maps for CW cause, you know, they need those.

[Daekar]

OneEyed Jack, on 22 April 2014 - 03:24 PM, said:

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Have you been to Forest Colony lately?

Well it's certainly not bad they can't charge for it, but that fact renders it pretty irrelevant.
Besides, I'd rather spend a week camping in the misty solitude of Forest Colony, fly fishing, exploring, taking photos, and climbing the rock formations than I would spend the same amount of time in Philadelphia, New York, DC, Annapolis, Richmond, Baltimore, Raleigh, Charlotte, Charleston, Tallahassee, or any of the other cities I've been in.

As long as I got to visit on Very High settings I think it would be nice.

[Jin Ma]

GreyGriffin, on 22 April 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:

HPG is bad because...

• The map's texture and color is so homogenous they needed to add giant color coded stripes to the wall.
  
• The lunar landscape areas are completely wasted
  
• Narrowly channeled spawn exits are in sniping range of each other.
  
• Lack of elevation and cover on the outer perimeter makes the hill unassailable against three Blackjacks who are at least halfwits, or 2 that are three-quarterwits.
  
• Those annoying pillars that seem explicitly designed to catch lasers from Atlas arm hardpoints while providing no appreciable cover.
  
• Huge giant coliseum walls and vast circular arena make it seem like a thinly veiled Solaris arena rather than a Comstar facility.

That's kind of off the cuff, I haven't really done a deep analysis, but... it looks boring, plays boring, and has some glitchy areas that make me grit my teeth. Overall, not good.

i just hate that it looks like borg cube/cybertron and like nothing out of the battletech universe. and forget the whole theme of realism they've been building

[GreyGriffin]

Daekar, on 22 April 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

As long as I got to visit on Very High settings I think it would be nice.

It was very pretty until the tragic tanker beaching.

What the hell was an ocean liner doing in a tiny bay that's not even 2 jenners deep?