1443 replies to this topic

[Ralgas]

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 06:05 PM, said:

Jasen, first I was joking, you would have known that if you've actually seen the movie. Second, he stopped making video games because he was bored and couldn't do anymore with the technology. So he went and produced the movie, it tanked and so did other projects of his like the Thomas Jane version of THE PUNISHER.

His last game didn't tank (Freelancer), it simply was released well after it was supposed to (much like Duke Nukem Forever) it was rated pretty well once released.

He actually walked away from freelancer, and it was finished without him. They refer to Starlancer, which did tank. That said it never really got much promotion, either

[Jonnara]

Jasen, on 09 July 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

Wow man, amazing conviction you have.

You didn't learn the first time?

Mate, founders programs and crowd funding is for showing support development for a game, you go into it knowing the fact things can go pear shape.

What companies make as an on going revenue model is what MWO is going to missing out from me this point on. Hope that makes you understand more about why people support these things, its not always about what you get in return.

Edited by Jonnara, 09 July 2013 - 06:19 PM.

[Lonestar1771]

I find it extremely hypocritical that some founders are like: "All SC is now is just a bunch of promises! At least we can play MWO! I'll laugh when SC fails!"

As I recall, MWO started off the same way, but I guess MWO and PGI get a pass since it is Mechwarrior after all.


EDIT: because not all founders like to ride sinking ships to the bottom.

Edited by Lonestar1771, 09 July 2013 - 06:35 PM.

[Ralgas]

Jonnara, on 09 July 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

Its not the developers holding the game technology back, its been the 3rd generation consoles. As every publisher that wants to make the games on the console first and than port to PC.

Chris Roberts showed the specs of one of the development PCs in his office and its running SLI 680s with an I7. was in the office walk-though of the new LA studio.

^this, microsoft won't back anything thats not mobile or for an xbox 1st, sony's the same with the ps (planetside being an exception due to it's established ip and highly popular genre) . EA wont look at anything they cant milk every 3 months with dlc.

Add that to ongoing financial issues after the gfc and it's a bad bad time to be trying to fund an entertainment project without an excessively proven track record or (in the case of star citizen) a fanbase willing to throw in mountains of cash.

Given the regard Mektek has with MW:LL i was very surprised Heavy Gear Assault fell over as badly as it did. They are still pushing but they have buckly's of picking up a big publisher short of Mircosoft taking it back in and making it an xbox one title, which will no doubt kill the "e-sport" focus they are currently trying to promote

Edited by Ralgas, 09 July 2013 - 06:25 PM.

[Donnie Silveray]

Jonnara, on 09 July 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

But as it stands now I will not spend any more money on MWO than what i already have - Legendary Founder and Overlord.

Once I get Overlord chances are I won't be spending any more money either. Question is will you still PLAY MWO?

I've trained as a game dev and right now unless the folk at PGI are SERIOUSLY mismanaged, abused, and suffering from poor leadership, their presentation currently with MWO isn't an indication of development problems. In fact I've faced this very issue once before on a project where we reached a sort of focal point in development where all our time and effort was spent putting everything together. It's a sizable and lengthy task, one that requires a lot of things be in place without breaking. At this point, just two months from release, I can see PGI is currently in this dev limbo period where they are putting all their energy into several key features.

This is generally why I have some faith in PGI as they are in a rather rough moment in development. I'll allow you to stuff those words up my mouth if they fail to deliver, but right now I'm hoping that this is the case and that they're more focused on getting things in place over possibly messing with what they have by adding balancing features.

[Lonestar1771]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

1. He hasn't done anything relevant in over a decade. More than ten years. If a movie star hasn't put out a great movie in over ten years (and isn't dead), are they still great? Could they still even act?

Define relevant? Justin Bieber is "relevant" but is he honestly a talent? **** NO! He is just some overproduced piece of **** ******bag. Just because someone isn't actively promoting themselves does not mean they are ignorant of technology changes and new methods. Retired athletes don't forget how to play the game and talent never goes away. We don't know what CR was doing during his hiatus but I would bet my life savings that he didn't have his head in the sand ignoring the industry he has spent most of his life working in. Hell for all we know he was probably doing research for SC and figuring out what can and can't be done.

Edited by Lonestar1771, 09 July 2013 - 06:35 PM.

[Jonnara]

Donnie Silveray, on 09 July 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

Once I get Overlord chances are I won't be spending any more money either. Question is will you still PLAY MWO?

Yep will still be playing it as some thing I can jump in and have a few rounds and relax, It will be casual.

[Thuzel]

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

Everything thing that has been talked about over there is again only TALK. Nothing has been proven in a playable game yet.

Very true. And they may fail for a lot of reasons.

I didn't give them a lot of money because of what they've said. I gave them a lot of money because of how they've said it.

They have communicated at every turn and shared most of what's going on behind the scenes. They've been reasonable, and above all, consistent.

I may have thrown my money away there just as I've probably thrown away my money here, but I have good reason to think they will succeed.

[Hexenhammer]

The biggest obstacle MWO has to overcome is BattleTech and MechWarrior.

Star Citizen is an "original idea" in the fact there are not 20 years of pre-existing material getting in its way. New spaceship in Star Citizen? Awesome! everything in that game is new. Original Mech in MWO? Endless cries about why they wasted time on a new mech when they should do the UrbanMech or should have fixed weapon balance or, or, or.

Edited by Hexenhammer, 09 July 2013 - 06:47 PM.

[Belorion]

Do I want SC to fail? No, I would quite like to play it once it comes out. There is no back story for me to be attached to however. There isn't enough there for me to be an early adopter. I don't think I will have missed out on anything. If the ships now are superior in some way, then it is p2w and I wont be playing.

The thing I think is funny. People saying how PGI is simply grabbing money, and not producing. Yet we get a patch twice a month with new content/bug fixes/features. To claim you aren't going to support a game you are actively playing because of xyz so instead you will go buy stuff at SC is the part I think is hypocritical. They are comparing an active game to one that at this point is 100% promises.

[Lonestar1771]

Hexenhammer, on 09 July 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

The biggest obstacle MWO has to overcome is BattleTech and MechWarrior.

Star Citizen is an "original idea" in the fact there are not 20 years getting in its way. New spaceship in Star Citizen? Awesome! everything in that game is new. Original Mech in MWO? Endless cries about why they wasted time on a new mech when they should do the UrbanMech or should have fixed weapon balance.

New IPs are harder to sell than tried and true nostalgic IPs such as BT or MW. New IPs receive less friction once they actually do sell, but old IPs pretty much have blueprints laid out for them.

[Lonestar1771]

Belorion, on 09 July 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

To claim you aren't going to support a game you are actively playing because of xyz so instead you will go buy stuff at SC is the part I think is hypocritical. They are comparing an active game to one that at this point is 100% promises.

Wasn't MWO once upon a time "100% promises"? Is it not telling of the state of MWO if people would rather jump ship (HA!) to a game that at this point in time is "100% promises"?

[Archon Adam Steiner]

Lonestar1771, on 09 July 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

Define relevant? Justin Bieber is "relevant" but is he honestly a talent? **** NO! He is just some overproduced piece of **** ******bag. Just because someone isn't actively promoting themselves does not mean they are ignorant of technology changes and new methods. Retired athletes don't forget how to play the game and talent never goes away. We don't know what CR was doing during his hiatus but I would bet my life savings that he didn't have his head in the sand ignoring the industry he has spent most of his life working in. Hell for all we know he was probably doing research for SC and figuring out what can and can't be done.

From your paragraph (and your signature), it's pretty obvious where your distaste for PGI lies, and the concurrent desire (need?) to get invested in some other game so that you can forget your time here. It's not the best way to get over a bad break-up, but it's very human. PGI did something to hurt you (the game wasn't what you wanted, fixes didn't come fast enough, whatever it may be), and now you want everyone to know that this game is crap, and will simultaneously defend the game you've now chosen to supplant it. It practically mirrors how people deal with break-ups! Very human, and I do understand.

How will you react if/when Star Citizen disappoints you the same way? That's what I find curious; that the next game on the horizon is bound to be better than whatever one is already playing, and if it has faults, they won't be nearly as bad. It's an odd predilection that people have. There will always, always be people in ever game - regardless of how good or bad it is - that will loudly trumpet how much it 'sucks' and how much 'that game' is so much better. It's tiresome, but I suppose I should get used to it.

[Thuzel]

Belorion, on 09 July 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Do I want SC to fail? No, I would quite like to play it once it comes out. There is no back story for me to be attached to however. There isn't enough there for me to be an early adopter. I don't think I will have missed out on anything. If the ships now are superior in some way, then it is p2w and I wont be playing.

The thing I think is funny. People saying how PGI is simply grabbing money, and not producing. Yet we get a patch twice a month with new content/bug fixes/features. To claim you aren't going to support a game you are actively playing because of xyz so instead you will go buy stuff at SC is the part I think is hypocritical. They are comparing an active game to one that at this point is 100% promises.

They don't communicate.
They don't meet their own deadlines.
Extremely simple and obvious issues go unaddressed for months and months. (backspace repeat in chat, I'm looking at you, just one of dozens of examples I could cite)
When people call them on their bs, they don't own up to it. Instead, they delete posts and "reorganize" things.
They've completely and utterly failed to perform any significant qa testing, and when that's been pointed out they ignore it and repeat the same mistakes time after time. They've finally said they're releasing test servers, but those have missed the deadline as well.


Point is, they have produced some things, true enough. But the manner in which they've done so has been has been very lackluster at best.

SC may eventually start following that trend, but so far they've shown no sign of doing so.

[Lonestar1771]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

From your paragraph (and your signature), it's pretty obvious where your distaste for PGI lies, and the concurrent desire (need?) to get invested in some other game so that you can forget your time here. It's not the best way to get over a bad break-up, but it's very human. PGI did something to hurt you (the game wasn't what you wanted, fixes didn't come fast enough, whatever it may be), and now you want everyone to know that this game is crap, and will simultaneously defend the game you've now chosen to supplant it. It practically mirrors how people deal with break-ups! Very human, and I do understand.

How will you react if/when Star Citizen disappoints you the same way? That's what I find curious; that the next game on the horizon is bound to be better than whatever one is already playing, and if it has faults, they won't be nearly as bad. It's an odd predilection that people have. There will always, always be people in ever game - regardless of how good or bad it is - that will loudly trumpet how much it 'sucks' and how much 'that game' is so much better. It's tiresome, but I suppose I should get used to it.

I'm not so naive to think that SC will be without it's blemishes and some features may have to be left out, but at this point in time CIG has done nothing to dissuade me from trusting them. I trusted PGI in the beginning (note the founders tag), but due to their design choices and lack of communication and willingness to listen, among other reasons, I've come to distrust and question anything and everything they do, and they have done nothing to dissuade me from my distrust of them.

Why shouldn't I trumpet my cause? This is a forum after all?

[Khobai]

I too am banking my hopes on SC to revitalize the sim game genre. I have come to the conclusion that MWO will never be the game I want it to be. Worst of all, due to recent balance changes, MWO is actually way less fun now than it was last October. I don't even want to play it anymore.

1) MWO has failed to provide players with a fun and engaging gamemode (assault/conquest SUCK).
2) MWO has failed to provide any kind of immersion in the battletech universe (no vehicles, no clan update, no community warfare, etc...).
3) Game balance is a complete and utter mess, PGI continually refuses to listen to their player base on core issues like ECM and PPC balance.
4) There is nothing I want to spend money on in this game. Everything falls into one of two categories: being atrociously overcosted or a complete waste of money.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2013 - 07:18 PM.

[Belorion]

Lonestar1771, on 09 July 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

Wasn't MWO once upon a time "100% promises"? Is it not telling of the state of MWO if people would rather jump ship (HA!) to a game that at this point in time is "100% promises"?

Exactly my point. At one point MWO was just promises, and now SC is just promises. Now with MWO we have a game, you can't compare the now MWO game to the SC still promises. "MWO has poor balance, I am giving all my money to SC" just doesn't make sense because SC doesn't have balance at all. Until SC comes out this kind of comparison is meaningless. If you want to support SC by all means go do so, but don't pretend its because it has something that MWO doesn't.

Plus if you play the cash grab card, all SC is right now is a store. If you don't like MWO for being monetized, then you can't say you prefer SC, because all it is right now is monetization.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Thuzel, on 09 July 2013 - 06:36 PM, said:

Very true. And they may fail for a lot of reasons.

I didn't give them a lot of money because of what they've said. I gave them a lot of money because of how they've said it.

They have communicated at every turn and shared most of what's going on behind the scenes. They've been reasonable, and above all, consistent.

I may have thrown my money away there just as I've probably thrown away my money here, but I have good reason to think they will succeed.

Thuzel, on 09 July 2013 - 06:54 PM, said:

They don't communicate.
They don't meet their own deadlines.
Extremely simple and obvious issues go unaddressed for months and months. (backspace repeat in chat, I'm looking at you, just one of dozens of examples I could cite)
When people call them on their bs, they don't own up to it. Instead, they delete posts and "reorganize" things.
They've completely and utterly failed to perform any significant qa testing, and when that's been pointed out they ignore it and repeat the same mistakes time after time. They've finally said they're releasing test servers, but those have missed the deadline as well.


Point is, they have produced some things, true enough. But the manner in which they've done so has been has been very lackluster at best.

SC may eventually start following that trend, but so far they've shown no sign of doing so.

Current behavior that is shown nothing more than interviews and pictures is easy to back up, when they are in the middle of posted development then that's the time to compare your apples to oranges.


As to the first statement I quoted you on, based on that info you're going to fall in love with the first stripper that nibbles on your neck after you give her a $20 for a lapdance....


May I introduce you to your next wife:


Just messing with you dude, I've given them money myself, not a lot, only enough to get the ball rolling....

[Archon Adam Steiner]

Lonestar1771, on 09 July 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

I'm not so naive to think that SC will be without it's blemishes and some features may have to be left out, but at this point in time CIG has done nothing to dissuade me from trusting them. I trusted PGI in the beginning (note the founders tag), but due to their design choices and lack of communication and willingness to listen, among other reasons, I've come to distrust and question anything and everything they do, and they have done nothing to dissuade me from my distrust of them.

Why shouldn't I trumpet my cause? This is a forum after all?

We're mid-Beta, not several months/years into release; even games with much longer (and financially better supported) history still have balance problems; EVE Online, World of Warcraft, you name it - balance is and always will be a problem. Features won't come out on time. Developers will say one thing (or nothing) and then do another because their boss said to, the money ran out, or they had a deadline.

No game meets all expectations, but people are holding SC up like a paragon, and I can only believe it is because they have invested monetarily in something that doesn't really even exist (in a playable sense), and therefore wish to justify their investment.

Last note regarding "lack of communication and willingness to listen":

1. They communicate frequently; ask the devs and updates are frequent, and we get patches every two weeks.
2. Too many people say "they don't listen" when what they really mean is "they don't listen to my ideas and what I want". Not agreeing with what someone (or some people) want is not 'not listening', it is electing to do something else.

If you honestly believe that PGI is just sitting around and doing nothing, you shouldn't even be bothering to be on these forums then, right? After all, what would the point be?

[Lonestar1771]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

We're mid-Beta, not several months/years into release; even games with much longer (and financially better supported) history still have balance problems; EVE Online, World of Warcraft, you name it - balance is and always will be a problem. Features won't come out on time. Developers will say one thing (or nothing) and then do another because their boss said to, the money ran out, or they had a deadline.

No game meets all expectations, but people are holding SC up like a paragon, and I can only believe it is because they have invested monetarily in something that doesn't really even exist (in a playable sense), and therefore wish to justify their investment.

Last note regarding "lack of communication and willingness to listen":

1. They communicate frequently; ask the devs and updates are frequent, and we get patches every two weeks.
2. Too many people say "they don't listen" when what they really mean is "they don't listen to my ideas and what I want". Not agreeing with what someone (or some people) want is not 'not listening', it is electing to do something else.

If you honestly believe that PGI is just sitting around and doing nothing, you shouldn't even be bothering to be on these forums then, right? After all, what would the point be?

Obviously we see/perceive things differently. Agree to disagree.