1443 replies to this topic

[Thuzel]

MustrumRidcully, on 09 July 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

They did backtrack Repair & Rearm, though. What lead to that? Maybe we need to give them more credit? I don't know. ECM is the terrible counter-example. And it's not like they ever listened (or "reacted to") to the concerns about convergence or the heat system that started early in Closed Beta. What was so special about R&R that they decided to kill that, but are unwilling to change the implementation of, say ECM? Did it hur the bottom line (did the game even have a bottom line back then?)

Yeah, I've had the same thoughts.

The only explanation I've found is that ECM is someone's "pet", and that someone is probably high up the chain. I've seen that happen from time to time at various places. Someone in power decides they want a specific feature or behavior and then the rest of the project has no choice but to follow along, and those that don't are made irrelevant.

Edited by Thuzel, 10 July 2013 - 07:03 AM.

[Chrithu]

There's not really a versus here. MWO by design (at least as far as I understand everything said by the devs) isn't particularly meant for those that seek long term motivation and a game that keeps them playing several hours a day for months or maybe years.

MWO is targeted at people that seek some fun for a few hours a week and maybe some more on the weekends and that's it.

Star Citizen on the other hand is envisioned by the devs to be some kind of parallel universe that you can lose yourself in with it's own stories and conflicts driven by what players do. This is a concept that is new to many gamers, but that has worked before. I am part of a group of priviledged people that were playing a MMO gem called Neocron in it's first year that showed what awesome dynamics and stories can emerge from a game that is mostly player driven as far as story and economy go. I've never played it myself but from stories told by others I gathered that similar is experienced in EVE Online. So while combat surely is the most prominent and important core mechanic of Star Citizen the interesting and memorable stuff will surely happen at a meta level.

In conclusion I will surely be playing both. I see no reason to choose really. What's making me think hard is the choice wether to start TES:O or not. Because I surely do not have the time to play two full fledged MMOs (SC and TES:O) and thus far I favor Star Citizen (hence I pledged about 60 total thus far).

Edited by Jason Parker, 10 July 2013 - 07:13 AM.

[Chavette]

Adridos, on 10 July 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:

Tools get better and more expensive, too.

I have given you figures of games from relative antiquity. Want to see the figures for a decent game today? Let's just say CryEngine 3 license itself eats up 30% of all the title's revenue alone. Oh... a few steps closer to the average indie title budget without doing anything and promising one of the most daring games yet.

A custom game engine probably eats up more than that, and a few years too.

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

If you guys don't think that when Alpha/Beta SC comes out that there weren't be hordes - hordes - of complaint threads, you're crazy and/or blinded by {Noble MechWarrior} fascination; and this is coming from a Wing Commander nut and fellow buy-in.

Of course there will be complaints and problems, they have that everywhere. The difference will be how they address it.

You can see how things get addressed here, with weapon damage changes needing months to come out(single number in an XML sheet) and creative director updates disappearing altogether.

Edited by Chavette, 10 July 2013 - 07:48 AM.

[BlackWidow]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 09 July 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

I am gonna LOL so hard if star citizen gets cancelled.

OMG...can you even imagine? I mean, if MW:O doesn't make it past next year, I will at feel that I did get my money's worth with the founders package. But, if SC got cancelled for whatever reason....wow. 15 Million dollars up in smoke.

[BlackWidow]

ARCTIC F0X, on 09 July 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

I find it funny all the post saying SC is doing it right. Really a game that from what i understand doesnt even have a Alpha out yet is doing it right. Ive been gaming since the late 80s and every game i have seen that has way to much hype never lives up to it. Good luck to all the people dumping money in a game that u cant even play yet i hope it does live up to everything they say lol

Well, the EXACT same thing was said for MWO. And yet I took the risk, bought founders (and recently PP) and even if MW:Online became MW:Offline tomorrow, I would have gotten my monies worth. But, it's not just empty promises that SC is offering. No more than MWO did. They are developing a MUCH richer gaming experience in general. I think MWO will reach it's goals. I think SC will ALSO reach it's goals. It's just that SC's goals are MUCH MUCH higher.

Only downside to SC is no stompy robots.

Xeno Phalcon, on 09 July 2013 - 03:28 PM, said:

Each game has its own merits, I don't really see the issue picking one over the other CAUSE IMA GREEDY ******* and will play any and all F2P games as my bandwidth allows.


Who earns more of my actual money, its up to the developers of each game however, MWO has improved a TON but in the same stride terrible choices have been made that have made me a bit hesitant (and by a bit I mean very) to spend anything more until im sure the game is going in a direction i'll enjoy. Star Citazen will probably be fun, iv always liked space sims quite a bit (WingCommander and Colony Wars were a blast back in the day) but there are only so many hours I can spend doing loop de loops in space shooting at other ships before i'll need a break from that too.

I recently started playin planetside 2 as well now that iv a machine that can run it (more or less, kinda looks like Doom with my graphic settings) and the combined arms feel and massive battles it offers have been a blast (Punctuated by moments of mind numbing rage at SOE for having horrible hit detection and needing a better anti-cheat function) though I dont imagine myself giving them money, upwards to $10 for a single gun i'll only be able to use one a single character is pretty much crap on par with MC prices on standard mechs here.

Great post, thanks!

[BlackWidow]

CancR, on 09 July 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

Seeing as PGI was just copying HI Rez in that they had a Moba in the works and just need to push a POS game they can make near millions on to support their #Moba #Esport, MWO is going to be like tribes where its dead except 40 people who desperately support it.

Tribes is an excellent example of peoples fears about the hype over SC. (and to a lesser degree MWO)

Tribes (1) is one of my top 10 PC games of all time. So is Wing Commander. Mechwarrior 2 series is still #1 and always will be.

But, Tribes has tried and failed 3 times, including the the F2P online, to recapture that and never has. Is Star Citizen trying to recapture Wing Commander? Well, Squadron 42 should do just that, but the MMO part? Only time will tell.

GroovYChickeN, on 09 July 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Star Citizen is a brand new IP made by a company with no publisher. This means they can do whatever, whenever as long as they have the money.

MWO is a licensed IP from a TT game not owned by either PGI or IGP. Owners of the IP get a say in what happens in anything that using their IP. Also PGI has a publisher and a number of silent backers that are helping fund MWO, because they are helping PGI make this game they get a say in what happens. This mean that PGI is limited to what they can and cannot do with their game.

I do wish that this game was handled the way SC is being handled but I know exactly why it is not and it is not because the Dev's don't care. It's because they don't have control. They just do what they are told.

That being said. I can't wait for Start Citizen. I hope it is going to be amazing.

That is the downside of Battletech/Mechwarrior being and IP we love. We would never be as happy with non-licensed version. Heavy Gear anyone? Good, but meh...

[BlackWidow]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

I still can't believe that a couple of flashy videos and a bit of developer communication that people are banking on Star Citizen as a 'no fail guarantee'. Ever hear of Age of Conan? Hell, how about Star Wars: The Old Republic? Think that did well? I'm pretty sure that the much-abused but most beloved IP in the world, a vaporized several hundred million dollars, and the reputation of of one of the most creative developers (BioWare), would like to talk to you, then.

The consistent, "this sucks, but the next game on the horizon will be awesome!" approach is unfathomable, but very much in tune with the lack of patience that people display these days. Star Citizen will have the exact same problems - perhaps even more - you will see. I'm a Wing Commander nut myself, but Christ Roberts hasn't done anything in over a decade, and right now the only intergalactic thing he's churning out is 'hype'-erdrive.

I understand what you are saying. But, no one is suggesting ANY type of guarantee of success. It's simply that what their *PLANS* are for SC are much more of what we ALL wanted for Mechwarrior and won't appear to ever get. Yes, there are licensing issue. And maybe.....just maybe...MW:O will prove to be successful enough that PGI or someone else may get the extended license to do a FULL BLOWN MMO like Star Citizen WITH the Front Loaded SINGLE PLAYER game (ala Squadron 42) that we all scream for.

All I can say is whomever gets that luxury better damn well hire Flying Debris to continue doing the mechs.

Peace out.

[BlackWidow]

Kaspirikay, on 09 July 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

Haha, all you founders are making the same mistake. Putting money into something you're not sure of, again.

I never had and never will claim my Founders money was a mistake. It's the best gaming money spent in the last few years. I have had a blast with MW:O and have got my worth.

What I don't want to see is it lose steam and become some sad version of Call of Duty online with robots. I want MORE.

That was the whole point of my post. I want PGI to take notice of Cloud Imperium's numbers and understand that if they give us what we want we will hand over money without even giving a second thought. I am looking forward to SC. I think it will be fun.

But what I WANT is Squadon 42 Single player game and a Star Citizen MMO/RPG but set in the Battletech Universe. Give me that....and I will PROMISE you I will spend the next 10 years playing it and spend THOUSANDS of dollars over the course of those years.

Peace out.

[BlackWidow]

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

2. Why won't he "fark it up"? Wing Commander Prophecy was terrible.

CR had already left and formed Digital Anvil by then. WC:Prophecy was not his.

[KuruptU4Fun]

MischiefSC, on 09 July 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Here's the difference. SC doesn't do early releases or anything 'extra' for cash only. Cash buys you in game currency. That's it.

Umm no, and let me show you how...

MischiefSC, on 09 July 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

MWO, conversely, makes money by selling things you can't get any other way. If you want them you pay extra. The Phoenix Package for example. Want the Battlemaster? Wait an extra 4 months or buy the Locust, Shadowhawk and Thunderbolt too.

Go to the RSI store your initial package is purchased here: https://robertsspace...pledge/packages
In game add-ons like skins are found here: https://robertsspace.../pledge/add-ons
Physical add-ons: https://robertsspace.../pledge/add-ons

And you can buy additional ships with your initial package. So whatever you were trying to get by with just got mis-proven...

MischiefSC, on 09 July 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Also it has single player, supports modding, etc. You buy the game and you own it. Do with it what you will.

The single player game is "SQUADRON 42" which is a military campaign only. You don't get to fly around in your cargo ship making money off of nodes, or catching that bounty you've wanted for months...

Since "modding" really hasn't been explained I'm not going to try and argue that point. But I doubt the "Do with it what you will" isn't going to be as open and inviting as you think it will be.

MischiefSC, on 09 July 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

By the way I do not expect them to change that model - cash buys you in game currency on the persistent universe. There will almost certainly be larger DLC available down the road for people who never even get on the PU. The difference is that you get the game and you play it how you want.

There's that word expect again, and how it leads to disappointment and frustration. As well as of course there's a difference, basically MW:O is a FPS, SC is a MMO Space-Sim.

MischiefSC, on 09 July 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

The difference though is method of salesmanship. Both are getting money, the difference is how you get people to give it to you. One shows you a product and sells it based on features, advantages and the benefits. The other says that you've got to pay for certain stuff or either wait, or possibly go without. Given that the new content for sale literally is the only new or changing experience the game has to offer it's a bit of a hostage approach to sales.

It's the approach. Which is why SC is probably going to raise $15 million in donations by the time it goes to alpha. Worth considering.

From your post count I'm going to assume you've been around since the early days of closed beta, maybe even beforehand. If not, PGI was trying to sell you packages exactly like SC is doing, the only difference is that the top tier of MW:O Founders was $120. The top tier of SC is at $10,000...

[BlackWidow]

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.

So much ^^this!

[BlackWidow]

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.

Contrary statement there, my friend. That is EXACTLY what you can do based on your logic. MW was 100% promises and has lived up to about 20% of them.

SC is "promises" but bear in mind the promises (eg. game features) they are making are ones we have been asking for from PGI for a MW universe and they have NEVER been promised or even really discussed to any great length.

Peace out.

[BlackWidow]

Thuzel, on 09 July 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

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.

PLEASE, YES AND MORE.

Personally I want to thank all of you for participating in this chat. Some people are a bit jaded on both sides and both have good cause. But, so far in nine pages there has been no name calling or insults.

I think, within personal preferences, we ALL want MORE depth to MW:O. I also think we have been down this SC hype road before many times, including with MW:O and so see peoples excitement with a jaded eye. Nothing wrong with that.

I was merely hoping to catch PGI's attention with this and emphasize what we all want, will stay for and spend gob tons of money on.

To sum up:

Would like single player game, ala Squadron 42. Basically a Mechwarrior 5 single player or co-op game who's end game is MW:O

More transparency and communication. We understand you are all busy, but stop dancing around key issues. Like exactly WHY is there no heat damage table. Basically, why are you suddenly afraid to share your thought processes with the gamers? Open and honest. Yeah, you occasionally may get bit and have to back pedal now and then, but the love, trust and devotion you will get in return cannot be measured.

Oh, yeah. It can be. With me playing...and paying for...your game for then next ten years.

Think about it.

Farix, on 09 July 2013 - 07:38 PM, said:

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.

Whoa whoa whoa.....where did this come from? I don't think anyone has suggested anything even close to this.

Cappy, on 09 July 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

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

Was so looking forward to this game, until I saw the CLOWN MECHS.

No thanks.

[BlackWidow]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 07:40 PM, said:

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?

Except for the fact that we have told them specifically.

We said...

GIVE US SINGLE PLAYER STORY
FIX ALPHA PINPOINT STRIKE CAPABILITY
GIVE US MORE GAME MODES
GIVE US DIRECT X 11 (serious....I want my SLI to be useful)
FIX MATCHMAKING
ETC.

KuruptU4Fun, on 09 July 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:

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...

Exactly as long as it took the ink to dry on the EA buyout of them.

[BlackWidow]

Arrachtas, on 09 July 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

That's exactly it.

I'm all for being excited at the idea of Star Citizen, but the wanton and baseless hype that people are chewing up like candy is amusing, given how many times this plot line has played out before; "Game X isn't living up to expectations, but here comes Game Y! It has this! It has that! It will give me a massage while cooing into my ear like a love bird!".

Next thing you know, all those fancy videos turn out to be buggy graphics when put into actual motion, the gameplay isn't what it's supposed to be, the content is more shallow than one was led to believe, and even if the game is pretty decent, the failure to meet wildly heightened expectations leads people to start rambling out the usual "this sucks", "this is taking too long", "where is feature X", and then another game dies.

People have no patience any longer - not genuine patience. We're in a pretty stable Beta, here, with good ideas and a solid community, but people want to point at the twinkle-in-daddy's-eye down the street, convinced he'll be the new bad-*** on the block. This has happened dozens of times before, and it will happen again.

Again, I don't think this is what is happening. At least not with the OP. Who is me.

First off, just because something is "hype" does not make it wanton and baseless. I had (still have?) same hope for MW:O and love the hype. Problem is....no more hype these days. Project Phoenix, yes. And I LOVE me some classic mechs, but they could trash the lot of em if I could get a SINGLE PLAYER campaign in here. And player driven economy. And the ability to play cool features OUTSIDE of my mech.

Basically the things SC is planning on implementing. You can call it hype. You can say it's just talk. But, it's in the ACTUAL GAME PLAN. PGI has never had those designs for MW:O.

MischiefSC, on 09 July 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

Know what's funny? I'm a huge BT fan - yet I've dropped an order of magnitude more money on SC than I have MWO and SC isn't even in alpha yet. For all the reasons listed. The MWO business model is based on trying to force people to pay for things they don't want but have to in order to get what they do. SC, conversely, just offers the best possible product and charges a fair price for it.

MWO has the only BT option. They'd have my money regardless. The business model though motivates me to resist any sort of purchase - it's not voluntary it's obligatory. I pay bills because I have to but spend money on games because I want to. If it's a bill or an obligation I am inherently going to look for better deals. It prevents loyalty instead of engendering it.

GREAT POST.

[BlackWidow]

hammerreborn, on 09 July 2013 - 09:43 PM, said:

You honestly think he's going to turn down 15-16 million from investors? And who you honestly think Chris Roberts is going to listen to? You, with your 150 dollar purchase or the dude who handed him 15 million?

Actually, in fact, yes.
He has already *REFUSED* capital funding from two sources and hopes to tell them all "thanks, but now thanks"
He is already rich. He doesn't need money, personally.

He just needs enough to make the game and keep it going. If he can do that by crowd funding and game subscriptions, he would PREFER that so he doesn't have to worry about investors interference.

He has stated specifically that.

[BlackWidow]

Jason Parker, on 10 July 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

There's not really a versus here. MWO by design (at least as far as I understand everything said by the devs) isn't particularly meant for those that seek long term motivation and a game that keeps them playing several hours a day for months or maybe years.

MWO is targeted at people that seek some fun for a few hours a week and maybe some more on the weekends and that's it.

Star Citizen on the other hand is envisioned by the devs to be some kind of parallel universe that you can lose yourself in with it's own stories and conflicts driven by what players do. This is a concept that is new to many gamers, but that has worked before. I am part of a group of priviledged people that were playing a MMO gem called Neocron in it's first year that showed what awesome dynamics and stories can emerge from a game that is mostly player driven as far as story and economy go. I've never played it myself but from stories told by others I gathered that similar is experienced in EVE Online. So while combat surely is the most prominent and important core mechanic of Star Citizen the interesting and memorable stuff will surely happen at a meta level.

In conclusion I will surely be playing both. I see no reason to choose really. What's making me think hard is the choice wether to start TES:O or not. Because I surely do not have the time to play two full fledged MMOs (SC and TES:O) and thus far I favor Star Citizen (hence I pledged about 60 total thus far).

Wow. What a great post and a slightly fresh perspective on the goals of the games. Thanks, and I agree.

Unfortunately, I want the WHOLE ALL OF WAX IMMERSION for Mechwarrior. But, as you, I will play both.

Farix, on 10 July 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

Blue Hymn, you have to realize hat the whole point of the OP's post was to slam PGI and MWO. So nothing good was ever going to come out of this topic. The irony that they are buying into the highly idealized promises of Star Citizen while at the same time excoriating PGI for not living up to some if its highly idealized promises is completely lost on them. Star Citizen may actually be in a worse position that MWO because the expectations for that game are so much higher than they were for MWO.

You sir, are SO WRONG it hurts. That was NOT my intent. I LOVE Battletech and have been enjoying MW:O immensely. I just want more than a FPS with a ladder system. I want for MW what SC is offering for their universe.

[deforce]

lets put it this way..... PGI says it costs them $250,000 to create every single map, with broken terrain and tons of places to get stuck on.

I still have no freaking clue how they can say it costs that much. If they released a public map editor this game would have so many community created maps, made in a week by a single {Noble MechWarrior}.

[Adridos]

deforce, on 10 July 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

lets put it this way..... PGI says it costs them $250,000 to create every single map, with broken terrain and tons of places to get stuck on.

I still have no freaking clue how they can say it costs that much. If they released a public map editor this game would have so many community created maps, made in a week by a single {Noble MechWarrior}.

That quarter was spent on the map longest in devlopment, Tourmaline. However, the real price is still quite in the "Da faq" territory for those who have no idea what it actually takes to create a map in a video game: http://www.penny-arc...am-creates-worl

Besides, map editor for this game was public since the day it was announced. That is 1 year, 8 months, and 20 days without anyone doing a single complete map... and we've also had a massive initiative to promote such a thing on this very forum.

[Hexenhammer]

Lonestar1771, on 09 July 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

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.

Valid point. But star citizen has "wing commander" backing it up so we have a clear idea on what to expect. It's sort of a double edge sword.

Note- sort of a convoluted point but I hope people get the idea.

Edited by Hexenhammer, 10 July 2013 - 11:37 AM.