1443 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

At one point MWO was just promises, and now SC is just promises.

True. But look at the games PGI made before MWO. And look at the games Chris Roberts made before SC. I think Wing Commander affords Chris Roberts at least a small degree more credibility than PGI's terrible console games and their diehard mod/standalone game LOL. I mean comon Wing Commander is one of the most celebrated space sim games of all time, second only to TIE Fighter, IMO.

Quote

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.

If I only have $40 to spend on games, im going to give it to the game I think will give me a more entertaining return on my investment. So yes it absolutely is because SC has something MWO doesnt... and that thing is Hope. There is no hope for MWO. This game is on the decline and everyone knows it.

Edited by Khobai, 09 July 2013 - 07:29 PM.

[xengk]

Im going to wait and see on SC.
I got burn out by Black Prophecy and Star Conflict, so Im not ready for another space sim shooter.

[Thuzel]

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 07:13 PM, said:

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....

Lol, it's all good.

The difference here is the consistency of behavior. SC has been operating in a consistently positive way for a while now, and that is a hallmark of a well run project. It's not a guarantee of success by any means, but it is a good sign.

The only consistencies on PGI's side are negative behaviors. E.g. lack of communication, lack of qa, etc... Hell, they haven't even kept a consistent forum structure for more than a few months, and that takes actual work to change around.

-- edit --

That is a sexy sexy beast, btw

Edited by Thuzel, 09 July 2013 - 07:32 PM.

[Archon Adam Steiner]

I'm fine with that, and I'm fine with dissent (and actually think it's healthy). This game has things that need addressing; all games do.

What I have issue with is people creating non-constructive posts (like this one) which aren't genuinely offering help, suggestions, or useful feedback, but rather a "Billy has a shinier bike than you do, yours is ugly" kind of dialogue.

Do people like Star Citizen? Great. I do too. Their forums are over that way. This is MWO. Most of us would like to see it succeed. Given that this is the gameplay balance section for MWO, discussing exactly that is far more useful to the game and the community than drawing specious comparisons between this game and one that doesn't really even exist yet.

I do appreciate the chat, by the way.

Edited by Arrachtas, 09 July 2013 - 07:25 PM.

[Lonestar1771]

Belorion, on 09 July 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

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.

We can compare the two teams communication with their fan base. Both are in critical times of development yet one team still takes the time to explain features, goals, etc on a daily basis, and the other team can't even keep up with the monthly development updates. One developer has had TWO 24 hour livestreams and runs a weekly web show. One developer can't even announce a surprise reveal on twitter without delay, and the reveal was a false alarm at that, considering it had more or less already been revealed weeks prior.

[Thuzel]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

I'm fine with that, and I'm fine with dissent (and actually think it's healthy). This game has things that need addressing; all games do.

What I have issue with is people creating non-constructive posts (like this one) which aren't genuinely offering help, suggestions, or useful feedback, but rather a "Billy has a shinier bike than you do, yours is ugly" kind of dialogue.

Do people like Star Citizen? Great. I do too. Their forums are over that way. This is MWO. Most of us would like to see it succeed. Given that this is the gameplay balance section for MWO, discussing exactly that is far more useful to the game and the community than drawing specious comparisons between this game and one that doesn't really even exist yet.

I do appreciate the chat, by the way.

I don't know about anyone else, but the main reason I usually respond to this type of thread is the hope that PGI will see it and take something away from it.

In this case, I'm hoping that they look at the SC project and try to learn why so many people prefer that to what they are doing now. Maybe they can learn something.

[Lonestar1771]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

I'm fine with that, and I'm fine with dissent (and actually think it's healthy). This game has things that need addressing; all games do.

What I have issue with is people creating non-constructive posts (like this one) which aren't genuinely offering help, suggestions, or useful feedback, but rather a "Billy has a shinier bike than you do, yours is ugly" kind of dialogue.

Do people like Star Citizen? Great. I do too. Their forums are over that way. This is MWO. Most of us would like to see it succeed. Given that this is the gameplay balance section for MWO, discussing exactly that is far more useful to the game and the community than drawing specious comparisons between this game and one that doesn't really even exist yet.

I do appreciate the chat, by the way.

In all honesty I would love to see MWO get turned around as I've been a fan of BT and MW for a long time. I'm not a fan of the development team by anymeans, but do I wish ill things upon them? No (well most of the time, I'm only human lol). I have no idea what would prove to me that things are changing for the better, but I do feel that I would know it when I see it and thus far I have yet to see it.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Thuzel, on 09 July 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

Lol, it's all good.

The difference here is the consistency of behavior. SC has been operating in a consistently positive way for a while now, and that is a hallmark of a well run project. It's not a guarantee of success by any means, but it is a good sign.

The only consistencies on PGI's side are negative behaviors. E.g. lack of communication, lack of qa, etc... Hell, they haven't even kept a consistent forum structure for more than a few months, and that takes actual work to change around.

Well Chris Roberts has some advantages in that field. First being experience with creating games. Experience with high end marketing being another. Finally being successful in both of those areas for the most part.

PGI being a small dev, their best QA is actually us. And if these forums are much of an example, we are more interested in how we can mop people up off the floor and upset when others do it to us.

Star Citizen will use us as QA too. But compared to the 5mil PGI gathered to the (sofar) 14 mil Roberts has, who's more likely to succeed in the long run?

Lonestar1771, on 09 July 2013 - 07:27 PM, said:

We can compare the two teams communication with their fan base. Both are in critical times of development yet one team still takes the time to explain features, goals, etc on a daily basis, and the other team can't even keep up with the monthly development updates. One developer has had TWO 24 hour livestreams and runs a weekly web show. One developer can't even announce a surprise reveal on twitter without delay, and the reveal was a false alarm at that, considering it had more or less already been revealed weeks prior.

They are giving daily updates on something they haven't even got a gameplay demo of Lonestar, I can talk all day about what I've eaten/drunk and how much of it. Until I take a crap you can't tell if my guts are good at doing what they're supposed to are they?

Ok, that was a bit overboard on the descriptive comparison, but at least it's effective...

[Farix]

If you honestly believe in the vision that is Star Citizen, then fund it. But if you are funding Star Citizen as a way to slam PGI and MWO, you're being stupid.

[Cappy]

here's another game for people to waste money on before it comes out... But at least this one is in beta.
https://mwtactics.com/

you're welcome

Edited by Cappy, 09 July 2013 - 07:40 PM.

[Archon Adam Steiner]

That's like a girl/guy going to their significant other and saying, "You need to change!", but not telling them what, how, or why they need said change. How is that productive? How does that help them grow/develop as a company? It doesn't. Pointing an admiring finger at some other company and saying "do it like that!" provides no justification. Personally (and I'm sure I'm not alone), 24-hour feeds and some flashy videos do not impress me. They aren't real game play, they don't address 'the nitty gritty'. They are marketing pitches, designed to drum up financial support - don't kid yourself on that one. MWO's trailer a couple of years back came out for the exact same reasons.

Star Citizen is going to have the exact same problems as MWO because *EVERY* game has these problems; hell, look at World of Warcraft, the most profitable and prolific MMO there is, and it has *miles* of complaints about it, despite being (like it or not) one of the best online games in the world, ever, period. Star Citizen was an expensive buy-in for a lot of people - more so than even the top Founders package, here, and because of the higher 'buy in' rate when compared to MWO, expectations will be even higher as well. I am indeed curious to see what the whining will be like on their forums, and what game that disenfranchised early-adopters of Star Citizen will, in turn, look to joining.

Edited by Arrachtas, 09 July 2013 - 07:43 PM.

[Thuzel]

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 07:33 PM, said:

Well Chris Roberts has some advantages in that field. First being experience with creating games. Experience with high end marketing being another. Finally being successful in both of those areas for the most part.

PGI being a small dev, their best QA is actually us. And if these forums are much of an example, we are more interested in how we can mop people up off the floor and upset when others do it to us.

Star Citizen will use us as QA too. But compared to the 5mil PGI gathered to the (sofar) 14 mil Roberts has, who's more likely to succeed in the long run?

Excellent points.

All I would add is that, given the comparable fan bases for the two projects, would a reasonable person think that Chris Roberts' name by itself explains the huge monetary gap between the two? More likely than not, a large part of the difference is due to the way SC is treating its community compared to the way PGI treats its own. And if that's the case, why wouldn't PGI try to emulate some of that behavior in order to provide a better service?
But that's just my own thoughts on the matter.

[Archon Adam Steiner]

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Star Citizen will use us as QA too. But compared to the 5mil PGI gathered to the (sofar) 14 mil Roberts has, who's more likely to succeed in the long run?

Star Wars: The Old Republic had:

1. It's freakin' Star Wars
2. BioWare, god of RPG makers
3. Anywhere from two hundred to three hundred million dollars (Roberts would pee himself with that much cash).

What happened?

It tanked.

People need to stop looking at how much money a game has as if it is an indicator of how successful it will be.

[Belorion]

Khobai, on 09 July 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

True. But look at the games PGI made before MWO. And look at the games Chris Roberts made before SC. I think Wing Commander affords Chris Roberts at least a small degree more credibility than PGI's terrible console games and their diehard mod/standalone game LOL. I mean comon Wing Commander is one of the most celebrated space sim games of all time, second only to TIE Fighter, IMO.

If I only have $40 to spend on games, im going to give it to the game I think will give me a more entertaining return on my investment. So yes it absolutely is because SC has something MWO doesnt... and that thing is Hope. There is no hope for MWO. This game is on the decline and everyone knows it.

SC will have all the same complaints as MWO, it just isn't to that point yet. As for putting money where you fun is, if you are putting 40$ into MWO you have something now to play. Not true for SC, so...

Yeah a bird in the hand and all that.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Lord British of Ultima Series success buy in option for $11,000 on his new game SHROUDS OF THE AVATAR
Includes All Rewards from DUKE Level!


(Property deeds, houses, and duplicated rewards limited to 1 per pledge)[color=#FDF6C7][/color]


REWARDS:

• Join Richard “Lord British” Garriott in a personal tour of the actual Britannia Manor and its collections (choose 1 of 4 offered dates; travel expense not covered).
  
• Your in-game avatar will receive the honorific title of "Archduke" to be proudly displayed for all to see (title visibility controlled by player).

** Estimated game delivery: Oct 2014 **

A donation of $10,000 to Star Citizen
"Give me the Galaxy"

• Spaceship shaped USB stick of game and all digital elements
  
• CD of game soundtrack
  
• Fold up glossy full color map of the game universe
  
• Set of 5 Ship Blueprints
  
• 10 inch painted model of your in-game ship
  
• Hardback bound 42-page book: 'The Making of Star Citizen' including loads of behind the scenes images and info, prelim concept art, development stories…
  
• Hang for a day with Chris Roberts and key peeps on the dev team!

[color=#D5D4D4]
They will also receive RSI Constellation spaceship with custom skin and an option to name it, 20,000 credits, aTitanium Citizens Card and 1 Million Mile High Club Ownership.[/color]
[color=#D5D4D4]
This pledge grants Commander title and an exclusive access to the Alpha and Beta versions of the game.[/color]

Now tell me who's a little crazier, these two for asking for ten to eleven thousand dollars to invest in their game. Or the people who at most spent $120 before this game came out?

[Lonestar1771]

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

They are giving daily updates on something they haven't even got a gameplay demo of Lonestar, I can talk all day about what I've eaten/drunk and how much of it. Until I take a crap you can't tell if my guts are good at doing what they're supposed to are they?

Ok, that was a bit overboard on the descriptive comparison, but at least it's effective...

They have shown several times ships in game. Is it fully featured gameplay? Not by a long shot, but by that standard neither is MWO. Can i play it? No, but at least they are keeping us in the loop. I don't see how the lack of a playable demo diminishes the fact that they are keeping the community involved on a daily basis. Hell most games in SC's state lose a lot of interest because there is no gameplay. Even MWO went through a long lull.

Edited by Lonestar1771, 09 July 2013 - 07:54 PM.

[Jasen]

Belorion, on 09 July 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Until SC comes out this kind of comparison is meaningless.

Actually its not. Save the courtroom reasonable doubt BS and answer this simple questions:

Do you honestly think Chris Roberts could possibly perform as badly as PGI has to date if he even wanted to?

[Thuzel]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

Star Wars: The Old Republic had:

1. It's freakin' Star Wars
2. BioWare, god of RPG makers
3. Anywhere from two hundred to three hundred million dollars (Roberts would pee himself with that much cash).

What happened?

It tanked.

People need to stop looking at how much money a game has as if it is an indicator of how successful it will be.

Great point!

I actually participated in the TOR beta, and submitted a fair number of suggestions. Then I looked at the forums and saw the same ideas stated over and over and over "the worlds feel sterile", "pathing is too linear", "companion interactions are extremely limited", etc...

All of those ideas were effectively ignored. Then, after it tanked hard (about 3 months in), people started citing all of those as the primary reasons that they stopped playing.

Point is, every business needs to listen very carefully to its customers and interact with them on a frequent basis. Even the ones with 200 million to throw around. If they don't, they risk everything they've worked for. PGI needs to really consider whether they've been doing this, and if not how they can start.

[Farix]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

Star Wars: The Old Republic had:

1. It's freakin' Star Wars
2. BioWare, god of RPG makers
3. Anywhere from two hundred to three hundred million dollars (Roberts would pee himself with that much cash).

What happened?

It tanked.

People need to stop looking at how much money a game has as if it is an indicator of how successful it will be.

And just how many games are considered failures, not because they were bad games, not because they had bad sales, but because they didn't meet the high expectations of the audience? I see this as a real possibility as Chris Roberts' idealism gets mugged by the reality of the market. And Lord help him if he has to make compromises in his vision.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Most people stop playing games (especially nowadays) is because the next AAA title is only 2-3 months away. In WC time it was around a year for the next "big title" to come along and sweep the market. In the space sim genre, Chris had no competition because frankly it's was very niche market at the time.

Second, most games back then didn't have multi player connectivity. And it was even longer before that was really used when broadband was around and widely available. So what your friends are playing effects what you are too, so the longevity of games went from a small trickle to a steady stream. I'm sure that when Blizzard announces World of Starcraft then people will flock from MW:O and SC to flockto their banners saying, they cannot do it wrong...

BTW, arguably Bioware is the king of RPG's yes. But how quick does it take a king to screw up an empire? Ask them that...