275 replies to this topic

[Riin Suul]

people demanding to play a game before they prepurchase it is absurd.

think about the BF3, CODwhateverthehellthenumberisnow, skyrim, deus ex human revolution, etc preorders.
we didnt get to play them first, and we didnt EXPECT to.

preordering games is an act of trust in the devs. if you don't trust them, don't get it.

[CW Roy]

Maybe when the Devs launch the open beta for founders' purchasers, they should give everyone else a 1 or 2 day trial and an extended 1 or 2 days to purchase the founder's package.

They said they'd have their 'final hardware' (servers) by then, I think.. It'd be a good way to test the load and make more money.

A constraint could be to not offer the legendary at that point.

Edited by cw roy, 21 June 2012 - 10:22 AM.

[Deracial]

I am really enjoying the exceedingly eloquent arguments put forth by people who demand to play a game before they buy a FOUNDERS PACK.

Founder (As defined By Dictionary.com) - A person who ESTABLISHES an institution, company, society etc.

Founders are involved BEFORE the item, or thing they found actually exists. Therefore, if you would like to wait for the game to come out before paying, you are welcome to, but by definition will NOT be a FOUNDER.

If this is not enough information for you to understand why you should not be allowed to buy a FOUNDERS PACK after the open beta, then I will refer you back to the definition of FOUNDER which you obviously did not read.

[Tano]

Deracial, on 21 June 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

I am really enjoying the exceedingly eloquent arguments put forth by people who demand to play a game before they buy a FOUNDERS PACK.

Founder (As defined By Dictionary.com) - A person who ESTABLISHES an institution, company, society etc.

Founders are involved BEFORE the item, or thing they found actually exists. Therefore, if you would like to wait for the game to come out before paying, you are welcome to, but by definition will NOT be a FOUNDER.

If this is not enough information for you to understand why you should not be allowed to buy a FOUNDERS PACK after the open beta, then I will refer you back to the definition of FOUNDER which you obviously did not read.

Normally, quoting a dictionary fails, but this is excellent.

[Ssturmm]

personally ive spent $1000s on pay2play games that i enjoyed and $100s on free2plays that were alot of fun and had good things in there cash shops. I dont mind supporting the development of games that are enjoyable and this game will be fun for me and i may even spend more on it later. for me the reason i spent the money before its released is im hoping that by recouping some of there money they wont be in such a hurry to release the game early and have it full of game play issues that make it no fun fast. support there work and give them a chance otherwise you get another AoC they were so worried about makeing money they released a good game way to early and made it a bad game that failed.

[Loki Farseer]

nightmare, on 20 June 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

It's quite logical for anyone who hasn't seen an actual product, or sample it for that matter, to be a bit aprehensive about shelling out big-time dough. I would be one of those skeptics. On the other hand, however, the reviews have been well received and the demos look fantastic. So I have to remain optimistic.

Face it people: these guys know better than try to pull off what would be one of the biggest scams (aside from that Facebook fiasco) to come along in a while without knowing Law Enforcement would come down hard on them--not to mention the class action suites that would follow.

Buy or don't buy the Founders Pack. Nobody is forcing you one way or the other. Those of us in the forums need to lay off the skeptics and let them rant. After all, isn't that what forums are for?

Mmmmmm Facebook IPO is good... maybe D3 and their current... Boondoogle... Just sayin. The only thing I have learned in my years on this ball o' dirt is never underestimate human stupidity (and greed)... especially in MMO Games.

TBH I've shelled out alot of money for alot of Pre-Orders and I'm going to sit and wait a bit. Hopefully some loudmouth that knows what an IP Proxy is from Closed Beta will mmm "Spread the Word"...

-Disclaimer : I do not endorse anyone breaking your NDA for the Closed Beta ... but I wouldn't be sad if someone did

Additional Thoughts : Yes I understand I'll never get into Closed Beta with the above statement but guess what... I wasn't going to anyway (and neither are you).

Moving On...

Edited by Loki Farseer, 21 June 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[Serjth]

Free-to-Play game for 30-60-120$?! Good joke!

[BlindProphet]

GHQCommander, on 20 June 2012 - 09:58 AM, said:

I was going to spend $120, then I read more posts asking to actually see what they are going to get for it. Even a single player game gets a small demo for half the price.

So I'm joining that argument.

Give it a couple of months and there will be players in this forum complaining about how they wish they never spent $120. There always is in every game, every kind of argument and complaint. So many users in this forum have spent the $120, they behave as if its nothing, but just wait and see. Some of them will have some complaint to make one day and their tune will change about their payment. Granted not all and most will be happy, like I probably will be.

I too think I will love the game, but it is not the point. My own customers for my own software get a refund if they are not happy and they pay about $140. They also get endless videos, tutorials, endless page of documentation, they get to speak to myself directly, they get access to beta, trials etc

I won't get a refund for my $120 on this if it launches, no rights. Only with software can they get away with that, despite this being a service that can be stopped from their end. Many developers ethics are poor especially in MMO game development. So I realised I don't want to encourage this behaviour in software development when the software is provided via a controlled web service, not a stand alone product for Windows. They are hiding behind the old software no return excuse, desptie it not applying in the slightest because this is a service.

They could issue even 1 hour of beta access and I want that first. That is my change of position since a couple of days ago.

When I have no trial for my software, customers don't want to pay $20 never mind $120. Let me see the game please, thanks.

GHQCommander, on 21 June 2012 - 07:25 AM, said:

I meant reviews once beta is public. If it is that is. If they don't make beta public during founders sales. They are up to something and it could be the pure knowledge that many will not pay for what is coming. I myself think the game looks amazing, lots of fun, but it is not the point. I don't want to encourage developers to hold back their beta access like all the current founders buyers just did.

Everyone who bought founders encouraged beta to be held back prior and during the first sale of the game. What a weakness that is.

I seek none bias facts for my decision process also and anyone who bought the founders pack straight away can't give me such answers. Most will give one sided arguments and it is often to justify their purchase in their own minds too. So I need beta access or more dev communication.

All of which could, possibly come, over the next couple of weeks. Who knows right?

GHQCommander, on 21 June 2012 - 07:31 AM, said:

Faith is another word for gamble.

Most don't question why public beta is not offered during the sale, no one finds that suspicious at all? lol

Many think they need to help them pay bills...



I would love to know how many of you have giving $120 to charity for a poor family and helped pay their bills? That would be the selfless act you sound like your trying to suggest you performed.

It's less to do with helping the game no matter how much you tell it. It is everything to do with hoping you continue to get what you want for a long time, a good game. It is a selfish decision not selfish. That is how the human mind works. We tell ourselfs dribble to make ourselfs feel better.

I'll make my decision on facts not some notion of doing something good for someone who gets paid more than me whatever happens. Well for now

I know you probably won't listen to anything I say but I'd still like to correct a few things you've stated...

1) Even single player games get a demo

This is true in some cases. Most don't get demos. Some only get demos long after their original release. But the vast majority of games will only ever give you gameplay videos and trailers.

2) If they don't make the beta open before the founders sale ends they're up to something...

While this is a possibility it is far more likely the game is not in a state that is ready for full public consumption. Opening the beta when the game is not near the finished state and much balancing and tweaking still needs to be done can do far more harm than good. Now one can make the argument that if its in that state then the founders sale shouldn't go on until closer to release. However thats not the argument you state. You specifically say that the devs are up to something and make the implication that its something dirty and unethical.

3) Everyone who bought a founders pack encouraged the beta to be held back

While that is one way of looking at it, its not entirely accurate. The beta hasn't been held back. CB1 is currently well underway. Aside from that, this was the plan before anyone decided to buy a founders pack. Would they have changed the order of things depending on the purchase of founders packs? Likely no, due to their stated reasons for the timetable laid out. CB2 begins as they switch over to the production hardware, and they ramp users up to ensure stability, influx of founders, then once the servers are stable and they're satisfied, open beta.

While buying the founders pack can be seen from a narrow point of view as supporting holding back the open beta, at the same time, not supporting it wouldn't have brought the open beta to us any sooner. From another point of view people are supporting a game, and company they believe in. From another they are supporting the direction of the game. From another people are wallet warriors. There are a great number of different ways to look at it and no one view is entirely correct.

4) Its selfless to give money to a poor family, but not selfless to support something you believe in.

This is as hypocritical as you can get.

Supporting a family you believe in is "selfless" because they have nothing and you're getting nothing in return, is I believe your argument. However thats not true. Many people donate to such things, and such causes because it makes them feel better about themselves. Makes them feel superior in that they gave up something to help someone who didn't have something. As you said its how the human brain works.

5) You seek non biased facts, and people who purchased a founders pack can't give you to them.

Incorrect. You don't seek non biased facts if you're only looking from facts from one group of people. And people who bought founders packs are capable of giving you facts that are not biased. Will they give them to you in a non biased manner? Who knows, but just having the founders pack does not disqualify them from being able to state facts in a non biased manner.

For example:
Fact: Founders packs are entirely optional.
Fact: You do not need to purchase one.
Fact: PGI thanks you if you do, and if you do not they still hope to see you playing and enjoying their game.

Three facts that are not biased.

[BigMo5]

Most pre-orders allow for you to put a little down and pay the rest at launch, usually after some demo was released. I don't trust Game PRODUCERS and marketing folks as far as i can throw them. Let me drop a few bucks to hold my spot, that way i can play the game and either say yeap here is my 120, or no its just not what i expected and i'm out nothing.

I played STO and have a great time, i have actually spent some cash on it. WHY? because it was so damn fun...WOT which looks like has had their business model copied, was not what I expected from all the "ARCADE SHOOTER" Hype.

Only time will tell.

[Iulianus]

The founders pack just reinforces my suspicion that MWO will turn into a P2Win, giving an unfair advantage (money and XP bonus) to people who pay.

[CW Roy]

Serjth, on 21 June 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

Free-to-Play game for 30-60-120$?! Good joke!

What's the joke? It came with some neat stuff and anyone really caring about MechWarrior/BattleTech won't view MWO as "hurr durr it's just a F2P." The quality of MWO will be greater than that of any previous MechWarrior video game, so again, tell me why $30-$60 (normal retail values for many games) is so funny?

What's funny is how cheap some people are.

[Creed Buhallin]

Koenig, on 20 June 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

Again, the problem is the "get it before its too late" gimmick. I have no problem waiting for the full release and also completely willing to spend the full $120. What the people in this thread are talking about is how it's strange that is not an option. When you factor in how much PG pushes the NDA, you would have to be a fool not to have asked the same question.

Exactly this. I'm generally a believer in selfish motivation, especially where companies are concerned. If PGI believed that they would make more money by letting people see the game before purchasing, then they'd have done that. If they believed they'd sell more founder's packs by keeping the NDA in place and information locked down, relying on nostalgia and hope, then they'd do that.

That tells me everything I need to know about making my decision.

For those comparing this to Kickstarter: This is not a Kickstarter. Kickstarter looks for community funding to replace a lack of venture capital. PGI has one of the larger well-known IPs in gaming. By all accounts they've been working on it for multiple years. They've done nothing to come out and say "This is where things stand, we need help to finish this."

What they have done is carefully timed their initial sale to coincide with the period of enforced ignorance on their playerbase. They are, in essence, relying on that ignorance as part of their marketing scheme. Mark Jacobs, for all his many faults, put forth an interesting theory a while back that said that you can tell how confident a company is in their product by when they drop their NDA. Currently, MWO's plan is not to drop the NDA until AFTER you can't buy it any more.

I can understand and appreciate those who are willing to drop that much money - or any money, honestly - on hopes and wishes for a good game. But can you really sit there and say you don't understand the concerns of those not buying it?

[CW Roy]

Creed Buhallin, on 21 June 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:

Exactly this. I'm generally a believer in selfish motivation, especially where companies are concerned. If PGI believed that they would make more money by letting people see the game before purchasing, then they'd have done that. If they believed they'd sell more founder's packs by keeping the NDA in place and information locked down, relying on nostalgia and hope, then they'd do that.

That tells me everything I need to know about making my decision.

For those comparing this to Kickstarter: This is not a Kickstarter. Kickstarter looks for community funding to replace a lack of venture capital. PGI has one of the larger well-known IPs in gaming. By all accounts they've been working on it for multiple years. They've done nothing to come out and say "This is where things stand, we need help to finish this."

What they have done is carefully timed their initial sale to coincide with the period of enforced ignorance on their playerbase. They are, in essence, relying on that ignorance as part of their marketing scheme. Mark Jacobs, for all his many faults, put forth an interesting theory a while back that said that you can tell how confident a company is in their product by when they drop their NDA. Currently, MWO's plan is not to drop the NDA until AFTER you can't buy it any more.

I can understand and appreciate those who are willing to drop that much money - or any money, honestly - on hopes and wishes for a good game. But can you really sit there and say you don't understand the concerns of those not buying it?

Pure speculation.

Edited by cw roy, 21 June 2012 - 10:32 AM.

[Lyteros]

Somehow I think many people talk across purposes.

I understand both sides, even If I see myself rather as sceptic.

One side wants to support the DEVs and the game, but many of those say its for a better game and "the best game of the battletech franchise ever" - then the sceptics say "you dont know that, we have not enough information to make an educated decision".
These are two sides of the same coin, just does one side look optimistic on it, with faith and hopes and the other one wants to go the safe way and demands facts before taking action.

Actually I want to quote something, that I personally found very true when I heard it: "truth is a three edged sword". (kudos who knows who it's from). There is your truth, my truth and the real truth. The real truth in this case is what the developers had in mind by doing the founders thing... and it is something we will most likely never really know. As long as we do not know, there can only be assumptions why they do what they do. It is futile to discuss so please let the devs intentions out, it only makes people mad... And I think we all can agree to say the CEO here is someone with 20+ years experience, who did a lot of good stuff we all (well the vet's...) enjoyed and we can be sure he has no malicious intent upon us

For me personal, my trust has so very often been screwed by the gaming industry (yeah, as whole. On many different levels, by many different publishers, even some I held in highest regard...) that it became a personal principle NEVER to pay before I have enough information available to know what I get. If that means I dont have the option to become founder, since it is not going to be available when I finally can try this game, so be it.

I'm sure there will be future ways to get special mechs, etc. especially for those who don't like the available founder mechs very much.

[Edit] something I want to add:
I myself work as professional softwaretester in a Software company. From my experience I can say: BE HAPPY YOU DONT SEE THE BUGGY EARLY BETA HELL! IT can drive people mad, it will frustrate on many occasions and it can lead to dissatisfaction even by those who just see tiny bits of information about the beta. They will fixate on one or another error and make bad assumptions. That NDA which is in place is better for all of us.
[/Edit]

Edited by Lyteros, 21 June 2012 - 11:16 AM.

[Covet]

Renan Ruivo, on 20 June 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:

Personally, why do i want to try the OB (Or if God allows, the CB) before making a decision? I don't know which founder 'mech to choose would be one. Not knowing if a founder 'mech is even worth is another. But that's just me, whoever wants to buy it at this very moment can very much do so.

Founder's mechs are like premium tanks in WoT (World of Tanks). They are crappier then their same tier counterparts, but after the match is done, you get more credits. In the case of MWO, more C-bills. They are not special OP Mechs. There will be better mechs that people who do not pay for the founder's mechs (premium mechs) will be able to pilot.

The only benefit for premium mechs is just strictly money generation. And it's only 25% more at that. Nothing too crazy. If you are unsure of spending money on a founders' pack. Don't. It's more of a fan based, supporting the devs kind of thing.

MWO isn't the first game to do it.

[BlindProphet]

Covet, on 21 June 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

Founder's mechs are like premium tanks in WoT (World of Tanks). They are crappier then their same tier counterparts, but after the match is done, you get more credits. In the case of MWO, more C-bills. They are not special OP Mechs. There will be better mechs that people who do not pay for the founder's mechs (premium mechs) will be able to pilot.

The only benefit for premium mechs is just strictly money generation. And it's only 25% more at that. Nothing too crazy. If you are unsure of spending money on a founders' pack. Don't. It's more of a fan based, supporting the devs kind of thing.

MWO isn't the first game to do it.

False. They are the same base model as what everyone else can get, save they make more. IE your founder Atlas is the same AS-7D Atlas that that non founders AS-7D. Yours just makes a bit more cash. There is no difference beyond that.

[SideSt3p]

If you don't feel comfortable, don't buy it. If you don't like the idea of it, don't buy it. If you're cheap, don't buy it.

This is a leap of faith for the average consumer, or an experienced buy for those lucky enough to play the Beta.

The point of a Founders Pack is to be an original member/player of a game with a relatively small player base.

[Covet]

Iulianus, on 21 June 2012 - 10:24 AM, said:

The founders pack just reinforces my suspicion that MWO will turn into a P2Win, giving an unfair advantage (money and XP bonus) to people who pay.

How is that an unfair advantage? just play more and pay nothing and you will be in the same variants as them. Dev's need to pay bills, mortgages, food just like everyone else. That can't only sell paint jobs and garage slots. That's just idiotic.

So a premium account levels up 50% faster. Just play one extra game. Free to play doesn't mean you get EVERYTHING for free.
Founder's pack has nothing in it that gives a battlefield advantage to any of it's purchasers. You don't do more damage. You won't be receiving less damage on your mechs. Where is the pay-to-win?

blindprophet, on 21 June 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

False. They are the same base model as what everyone else can get, save they make more. IE your founder Atlas is the same AS-7D Atlas that that non founders AS-7D. Yours just makes a bit more cash. There is no difference beyond that.

If I am mistaken then so be it. But what are variants then?

Edit:
Is the AS-7D Atlas the best atlas you can get?

Edited by Covet, 21 June 2012 - 11:22 AM.

[Major Tom]

Obviously there is some presure to get the game out the door, and pre-purchase is a great way to tap into the MWO fanbase fervor, the timing is a way to add urgency and encourage those still on the fence. But I give PGI (specificly Russ) credit, they have been very forthcoming about what to expect at release (or early access).
No Community Warfare (beign worked on) - lone wolf for everyone.
10 out of 13 released mechs (actually he may have said 40 mechs total including variants and I just assumed 10 x 4)

there are still a few more details I'd like to hear about, but I know there is still plenty of time to decide what package I want before the Founders offer expires.
? number of maps
? types of games
? elite mech availability (other than founder)
? NDA lift (beta feedback)

.

[BlindProphet]

Covet, on 21 June 2012 - 11:21 AM, said:

If I am mistaken then so be it. But what are variants then?

Variants are different set ups of the mech. For example you have the AS7-D is the base variant of the mech in MWO, and is the founders version (stated in the founders Q&A thread). Then you have say the AS7-K which is another variant of the Atlas that has different hardpoint loadouts.

Variants are essentially the same chassis with different configurations.