148 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

Perilthecat, on 30 June 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

I know. You're preaching to the choir, but since I don't have experience with this setup I didn't feel confident making a comment on the cooling efficiency of the build. And thus not able to confirm or challenge the validity of the "no cooling issues" claim.

To say nothing of the actual damage capability of the build. As you said it probably looks very impressive, but how does a bystander gauge the destructive capability? Could be any number of factors. Lots of guns doesn't necessarily equal performance.

Quiaff? ;P

yeah, my response was directed more at Mr. Ward.

It was one of my first Direwolf builds, but honestly I wasnt terribly impressed by it in practice. I mean, on paper its devastating but in order to run it you need to give up very important parts. You either need to sacrifice lateral arm movement or the +10% twist speed torso.

But yeah, for cooling, you don't need additional she and will not overheat unless you really lay into the double taps and trigger ghost heat.

If you didn't take any other weapons, you could pack in a couple she and largely ignore Ghost Heat too, but it would still be a heavily flawed build.

[Perilthecat]

Actually, I just had a thought.

Why SHOULDN'T there be a paywall on some sought-after content? Why are all players entitled to equal access to the full range of 'mechs? F2P players serve a valuable role in keeping the game going, but ultimately they are there to expand the player base and attract more paying customers. It's a for-profit business, as many have pointed out. It doesn't matter how many F2Players there are if money isn't coming in.

The F2P experience in MWO is far from crippled, and is quite enjoyable judging from the amount of players doing F2P. So could someone explain to me why the only content that is allowed to exist behind a paywall is either cosmetic or sub-par? Would a valid business practice not include putting a paywall on content that people would actually want? Is it everyone's best idea about how PGI runs their business? No, it doesn't appear that it is. But they seem to be doing as well as they want to be as they aren't changing up their business model much.

Just thinking.

[Roland]

Perilthecat, on 30 June 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

Actually, I just had a thought.

Why SHOULDN'T there be a paywall on some sought-after content? Why are all players entitled to equal access to the full range of 'mechs? F2P players serve a valuable role in keeping the game going, but ultimately they are there to expand the player base and attract more paying customers. It's a for-profit business, as many have pointed out. It doesn't matter how many F2Players there are if money isn't coming in.

Because free players provide content. Without them, the overall game would die. And if they feel like they are being put at a disadvantage against players who pay money, then they won't necessarilly stick around.

It's easy to create a monetization scheme which still rakes in tons of money, while never selling power. Many games have successfully done just that.

[1453 R]

Perilthecat, on 30 June 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

Actually, I just had a thought.

Why SHOULDN'T there be a paywall on some sought-after content? Why are all players entitled to equal access to the full range of 'mechs? F2P players serve a valuable role in keeping the game going, but ultimately they are there to expand the player base and attract more paying customers. It's a for-profit business, as many have pointed out. It doesn't matter how many F2Players there are if money isn't coming in.

The F2P experience in MWO is far from crippled, and is quite enjoyable judging from the amount of players doing F2P. So could someone explain to me why the only content that is allowed to exist behind a paywall is either cosmetic or sub-par? Would a valid business practice not include putting a paywall on content that people would actually want? Is it everyone's best idea about how PGI runs their business? No, it doesn't appear that it is. But they seem to be doing as well as they want to be as they aren't changing up their business model much.

Just thinking.

The usual thing is to do as Piranha’s already done and offer dual payment methods for any in-game content – a paid-for method, a’la MC, which allows the player to just get whatever they like, and a ‘free’ method using a second currency generated in-game, a’la C-bills, which is free but is also a delayed-gratification thing. The method considered most ethical for a F2P game is to ensure that everything is fairly available to everyone, but that the time required to earn a thing with the free in-game currency is sufficient that some players will opt to bypass the time sink with their wallets.

Games like this actually have a lot of calculation going on as to the average earning rates for players and tune their economies (or at least their payouts, as MWO doesn’t really have an economy) pretty tightly in order to provide just enough pressure to encourage sales without making the grind seem ridiculous/impossible. Of course, cosmetics like cockpit items and paint schemes are traditionally free game for paywall considerations – some F2P games are generous with their cosmetics and keep only a handful of the Shiniest Shinies behind payments (see Path of Exile), while others are…less so. Nevertheless, nobody worth paying attention to complains about a company charging for shinies.

Currently there’s a rather fierce debate in the forums over whether or not the timed-exclusive deal with the Clans is too harsh an imposition on the player base. This game is expensive as sin for a F2P, and then you add the Clan package prices on top of it…well.

I have no issue with people debating, hotly or otherwise, whether or not the timed exclusive thing is a good idea. However, any of the usual ‘Balance’ or ‘OP’ or other such excuse-issues people throw up there to cover their bitterness/jealousy/irritation?

THOSE, MY GOOD MAN, WILL GET AN ATTN.

[Perilthecat]

Roland, on 30 June 2014 - 05:50 PM, said:

Because free players provide content. Without them, the overall game would die. And if they feel like they are being put at a disadvantage against players who pay money, then they won't necessarilly stick around.

It's easy to create a monetization scheme which still rakes in tons of money, while never selling power. Many games have successfully done just that.

Why do you think PGI has taken this particular route?

Edit:
Are there any case studies of games that have gone this route before and failed specifically for the reasons you pointed out?

Edited by Perilthecat, 30 June 2014 - 06:04 PM.

[Roland]

Perilthecat, on 30 June 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:

Why do you think PGI has taken this particular route?

It's a very common misconception among corporate accountants who don't really understand the F2P monetization scheme, to think that the best way to earn money is to make the "best stuff" cost money, because hey, people always want to buy the best stuff, so if you make the best stuff cost money then you'll get the money!

They fail to realize that such schemes make players often feel like they are being preyed upon and exploited, because it's kind of transparent when such moves are made. This can make players feel like the developer sees them as a resource to be exploited, and this can drive players away. While you'll get some people who buy content, the loss of free players will erode the community such that in the long-run you'll generally earn LESS money.

Whereas, if you make a game where everyone can get to anything for free (albeit, with a significant amount of grind) then you end up getting a game with a more symbiotic relationship between the developer and the audience. The developer can be focused entirely on trying to make the game cool and fun to play, while the gamer just plays the game. Folks who have less time to play can purchase convenience and avoid grind.. and many people, because the game is something they love, will purchase cosmetic stuff because when people love things they like to make them look cool.

The F2P model isn't really that easy for traditional corporate accoutants to understand, because digital content like this isn't really the same as normal commodities. Dealing with it kind of requires that you abandon some of your traditional concepts of how goods and services are sold and how you earn money from them.

In this case though, by expanding access to the goods, you create a larger overall market because the mere existence of those players who are earning them using only in-game currency are themselves making the game more appealing to those players who WILL pay you money.

[Perilthecat]

Roland, on 30 June 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:

It's a very common misconception among corporate accountants who don't really understand the F2P monetization scheme, to think that the best way to earn money is to make the "best stuff" cost money, because hey, people always want to buy the best stuff, so if you make the best stuff cost money then you'll get the money!

They fail to realize that such schemes make players often feel like they are being preyed upon and exploited, because it's kind of transparent when such moves are made. This can make players feel like the developer sees them as a resource to be exploited, and this can drive players away. While you'll get some people who buy content, the loss of free players will erode the community such that in the long-run you'll generally earn LESS money.

Whereas, if you make a game where everyone can get to anything for free (albeit, with a significant amount of grind) then you end up getting a game with a more symbiotic relationship between the developer and the audience. The developer can be focused entirely on trying to make the game cool and fun to play, while the gamer just plays the game. Folks who have less time to play can purchase convenience and avoid grind.. and many people, because the game is something they love, will purchase cosmetic stuff because when people love things they like to make them look cool.

The F2P model isn't really that easy for traditional corporate accoutants to understand, because digital content like this isn't really the same as normal commodities. Dealing with it kind of requires that you abandon some of your traditional concepts of how goods and services are sold and how you earn money from them.

In this case though, by expanding access to the goods, you create a larger overall market because the mere existence of those players who are earning them using only in-game currency are themselves making the game more appealing to those players who WILL pay you money.

So if the game goes belly-up we will know who to blame: hypothetical corporate accountants.


And what of the other strong content that is not behind a (temporary) wall? Cataphracts and the rest? Can powerful content not exist on both sides of the wall, if only for a time?

[Perilthecat]

Question: has anyone here worked for a game developer or publisher on a F2P title? If so, would you be able to weigh in on the validity of the various claims being made from both sides of this debate?

[Allen Ward]

Perilthecat, on 30 June 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

What maps did you run into this on? I'm going to build it out and test it on Testing Grounds to see if it works as you described.

Alpine

wolf74, on 30 June 2014 - 03:02 PM, said:

Let us take a Look at the list of weapons you have there and when they came in to Play for the I.S.
3058 ER M.lasers (Free Worlds League 1st)
3058 ER S. lasers (Free Worlds League 1st)
3057 Ultra 2 (Free Worlds League 1st)
3057 Ultra 10 (Free Worlds League 1st)
3060 Ultra 20 (Lyran Alliance 1st)
3058 LBX 2 (Federated Suns 1st)
3058 LBX 5 (Federated Suns 1st)
3058 LBX 20 (Federated Suns 1st)
3058 Streak 4 (Draconis Combine 1st)
3058 Streak 6 (Draconis Combine 1st)

By 1st I mean that is the House that Got the Weapon in use, the Other House would slow get access to them from the above dates.

So we have to wait a few years now before the very first of these will come out for IS?

[Allen Ward]

IraqiWalker, on 30 June 2014 - 03:22 PM, said:

I still play mostly IS mechs, and I still hold the argument that the biggest problem most people are running into is their lack of flexibility and adaptation to new variables. It's not that the equipment is OP (it's not), so much as people don't like changing their Modus Operandi and adapting to the new battlefield. Take that argument as you will.


I personally think that the UACs should have scaling jam rates (UAC20 with 18% jam rate for example)

As for those weapons. Pretty much almost all of them are 3058 or 3057. None of them are here yet.


Have you tried this setup?

No I'm not trying to do a "I can teach you how to pilot your mech better than you do" thing here. Just asking if you tried it.

Not yet, actually I only bought the Misery last weekend. I am well aware of this very fine setup and I will test it. But, as far as it comes to the current situation with clan assault mechs dominating the field over long distance, I stayed away from all the classical close quarter elephant hunter builds. I ran my Atlac DDC with Ac20, 3SRM6 and 2 Med VERY efficiently for almost 18 months, now, with the clans, you can throw this away. All the good old pointblank brawl tactics are gone. You get PPCed to bits while closing in.

I know using the XL on the Misery is madness, but using slow mechs is even worse. Clan mechs are fast AND have lots of firepower. Who cares that they are paper thin? If they see u first and fire away, it's game over. I stopped counting how many times my Atlasses got cored from the very first volley of PPC/laser strikes. You can't duck away, ECM doesn't help much as every second clan mech carries TAG (I would too, if I had almost energy slots). It's hard times.

I switched to the XL Misery with 3 LPL and 2 ERLL and enough DH to fire them in an acceptable way. I destroyed some Timbers with it, although in a fresh duel I die first. My tactic is to stay low until alle Clan mechs receoved some bruises from laser fire/missiles, then I move in (along with others, otherwise I become sole target and die instantly) and knock out the cheeky Timber who thinks I am easy prey. It works sometimes. If I manage to take ozt the side torso with an Alpha, bingo. Often I end up shutting down staring down the badly wounded Timber, not good.

And on many games, while fighting that Timber, I get flanked by a Stormcrow an Ultra AC20 = dead. Funny, that this exact situation repeats so often, the team setups are pretty boring currently.

Thanks for the smurfy link, I will keep it and test if this build works for me.

Sorry for the typos, I have to somehow switch off that darn Touchpad on my Dell notebook.

Edited by Allen Ward, 01 July 2014 - 05:18 AM.

[Allen Ward]

Wintersdark, on 30 June 2014 - 04:59 PM, said:

yeah, my response was directed more at Mr. Ward.

It was one of my first Direwolf builds, but honestly I wasnt terribly impressed by it in practice. I mean, on paper its devastating but in order to run it you need to give up very important parts. You either need to sacrifice lateral arm movement or the +10% twist speed torso.

But yeah, for cooling, you don't need additional she and will not overheat unless you really lay into the double taps and trigger ghost heat.

If you didn't take any other weapons, you could pack in a couple she and largely ignore Ghost Heat too, but it would still be a heavily flawed build.

I agree, I saw the 4 UAC10 killer machine under perfect conditions for him. Cover, no backstabbers, no lights attacking him, enemy already in bad shape and in disorder. I think, if he enters battle early or get's surrounded, he will find himself in a dire situation, lol.

[Allen Ward]

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3cfb775c7a24914
My Laser Misery

[EmperorZombie]

It weird seeing the lack of business sense here.

caveat: this is from the perspective of a US business practice:

All PGI did with the clans is reward early adopters. Not hard to figure out. Not exactly evil. I will be doing it for my business: you join me early when things are difficult, i reward you with status and discounts. Nothing new here.

As far as P2W, well im not a comp player, but the tournaments and comp players will find the 'op meta' builds first by nature of skill. Weather PGI works with them or just guesses, or uses research to plan and guess which combos of components make a mech 'op' before release, i dont know. Some Heros look like happy accidents, others just cool skins with no particular advantage(which would be charging people for customizable content-which compared to some other games could be an untapped source of income for PGI).

As far as F2P and CROWDSOURCING, this is a new phenomenon in the market and many economists dont even know what to make of it. If a videogame goes this route and does well, its because of the community, not money. If PGI started this game to make a profit, then expect them to try to make money and USE for-profit business practices.

Just ask of yourself, if you want PGI to do if for free, would you volunteer-for free- to do the same amount of work at your job? For free???? Time is money, which i didnt understand in my youth. It is so easy to ask for free stuff, but free means you dont value it, right?

I have some experience in the nonprofit world and its funny how the mantra of 'the market solves everything' gets outdone by a nonprofit in several cases.
But PGI is a for profit business im guessing so dont expect them to use nonprofit/crowd-sourcing tactics. If you want that kind of game, look at stuff like Kickstarter and support a project you think will be good.

I bought the kitfox package. I didnt know what to expect. So i went with the MINIMUM BUY-IN. For $30 i got to be a cool person with a new shiny- which with the peeps i roll with was/is fun so far- and was worth it. Does it make me leet competitive? Hell to the NO! Just, LOOK at my KDR...much sad.
You are paying for an experience. I cant buy the skills needed to be comp. Nor do i have the time to build said skills.
I essentially bought a fun time.

The people who bought the clan super package and are disappointed, whelp, dems da risks of being an early adopter.

Those who didnt buy a cheap kitfox and are crying about it, whelp, sometimes it pays to be an early adopter.

Those who cry, 'i dont have money', go make some. I started my business when i was unemployed and the Ohio dept of jobs and family services was sending me weekly letters of how the state unemployment fund would become insolvent(no more unemployment for me even though my taxes paid into it for over 4 years while working at one place...THAT is BROKEN, folks!)
If you TRULY value that shiny mech, you WILL go find money for it. At the end of the day, the crackhead get his crack, no?

Those who cry clans are OP? Well, lore-wise clans are supposed to be. Thats the main crux of that part f the Btech story.
How it plays out in a F2P game made by a company trying to turn a profit?

I dont think its been long enough for the comp players to determine a new meta, should there be one. PGI will likely swing the balancing/nerf bat a little. Many will be upset regardless of the outcome.

As a consumer, all i want is CW implemented and maybe a sensible tweak to the jumpsnipe/FLD/convergence meta. I fthis doesnt happen within a year, me and my friends may leave and ill go back to PSO2...if Sega didnt IP ban ALL non-japanese.(thats something to complain about)

As a player, to the other players, in the underhive grumble of pugs, just enjoy the game. Seriously, not to sound like your mom(or mine) there are better things to do with your time. Pushups, learn a new language. Learn how to 'tak to girls'. Make your RL community better, etc.

The only complaining i feel is justified is serious balance issues and PGI not keeping promises(because thats just bad business)

Just my opinion. Feel fee to dismantle

[1453 R]

The problem, Allen, is that you're trying to fight the Clans on their strong ground. XL-equipped overgunned monstrosities are where we shine - we do it better than the Inner Sphere does. The Inner Sphere's advantage lies, generally, in the shorter face-time requirements of its weapons, as well as its lower heat generation per weapon. The Misery is one of the best 'Mechs in the game for taking advantage of that shorter face-time, but only if you center it on that cannon slot. Right now you're chin-deep in Ghost Heat, which means you likely have more face-time requirement than most Clan 'Mechs if you want to fire all those large lasers sequentially and avoid kicking your own behindus.

The reason the Misery does well is because the Stalker's side-torso hitboxes catch everything; most Misery pilots I've seen sacrifice the right side as a shield for the left. It's a 'Mech that rewards good twisting very well, but doesn't really perform until you get that twisting down. The elephant hunter builds still work just fine against the Clans, you just have to be patient and hope your team doesn't fold before your turn comes up. Which, frankly, goes for short-range big-punch Clan builds to, so...yeah.

Brawling in general is a dicey choice these days, man. Has nothing to do with the Clans thing.

Edited by 1453 R, 01 July 2014 - 07:37 AM.

[DaZur]

I can't roll my eyes far enough back in my head to grasp the ability of this community to demand unmitigated swings of the nerf bat without allowing the front loaded metadata that is typical with the injection of anything new into the play mechanics...

​Sometimes it's the equivalent of a rain-drop forbearing a torrential downpour...

How bout we let the meta settle before we turn everything into pillows and fluffy-bunny slippers?

Edited by DaZur, 01 July 2014 - 07:56 AM.

[Tovan Cassidine]

Allen Ward, on 30 June 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

I have watched Dire Wolf with 4 Ultra Ac10s several times, bringing some 600 shots of ammo. He NEVER jammed, and had Zero cooling issues. He was slow as hell, but whatever popped up before him went down after 2 dakka dakka salvos. My Misery (XL 310 because I have to bring some weapons after all to compete) dies within 2 seconds versus a single Clan Ultra Ac20 hitting my side torso.

I've seen those, too. They were pretty impressive. Then, I got behind them in my Dragon and blew big holes into them until they stopped being impressive. Tactics, son. Use better tactics. Use the terrain to your advantage. Learn where to place your shots and practice to do it accurately. Stay mobile. Don't run straight at them guns blazing. Don't stop in front of the gigantic, heavily-armed robotic fighting machine. Manage your heat better. Twist that torso. Design a better fit for your 'mech, perhaps one that does not put your engine into the side torsos; that triples your vulnerability. Maybe try some different 'mechs until you find one that really suits your play style.

My buddy, who also runs a Misery, has zero problem dropping Clan 'mechs. My buddy in his Spider has no problem dropping Clan 'mechs. I have no problems dropping them with my Dragon. Do we always win? No, of course not. Neither do the dirty Clanners. That's why it's a "game" instead of a "movie."

In short, stop crying that someone has a better toy than you and demanding that someone take theirs away. Learn to use yours better.

Edited by Tovan Cassidine, 01 July 2014 - 08:02 AM.

[Kitane]

Tovan Cassidine, on 01 July 2014 - 08:00 AM, said:

I've seen those, too. They were pretty impressive. Then, I got behind them in my Dragon and blew big holes into them until they stopped being impressive. Tactics, son. Use better tactics. Use the terrain to your advantage. Learn where to place your shots and practice to do it accurately. Stay mobile. Don't run straight at them guns blazing. Don't stop in front of the gigantic, heavily-armed robotic fighting machine. Manage your heat better. Twist that torso. Design a better fit for your 'mech, perhaps one that does not put your engine into the side torsos; that triples your vulnerability. Maybe try some different 'mechs until you find one that really suits your play style.

My buddy, who also runs a Misery, has zero problem dropping Clan 'mechs. My buddy in his Spider has no problem dropping Clan 'mechs. I have no problems dropping them with my Dragon. Do we always win? No, of course not. Neither do the dirty Clanners. That's why it's a "game" instead of a "movie."

In short, stop crying that someone has a better toy than you and demanding that someone take theirs away. Learn to use yours better.

The "play smarter" answer is great on individual level, but you can't argue that IS is fine because they can outsmart their Clan opponents. IS doesn't have monopoly on strategy and tactics (though the lore would disagree...)

IS meta builds are fine. The rest is outclassed more noticeably than before.

[Tovan Cassidine]

Roland, on 30 June 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:

Whereas, if you make a game where everyone can get to anything for free (albeit, with a significant amount of grind) then you end up getting a game with a more symbiotic relationship between the developer and the audience. The developer can be focused entirely on trying to make the game cool and fun to play, while the gamer just plays the game. Folks who have less time to play can purchase convenience and avoid grind.. and many people, because the game is something they love, will purchase cosmetic stuff because when people love things they like to make them look cool.

And who pays to keep the lights on and the servers serving? If PGI offers up everything for free so that players get to use only the in-game currency for all the shinies, how does PGI (a for-profit business) make money to pay for all the things necessary to stay in business? Developers are not volunteers working in their spare time from mom's basement. Servers don't just magically appear in data centers. Bandwidth cannot be cobbled together using spare parts and chewing gum. Advertising isn't free. Artists aren't free. Everything associated with offering up a "free-to-play" game costs real money. Literally everything. If players are only using in-game currency earned through spending hours playing, how does PGI pay for all of that? The nebulous concept of "developers" gets used far too often in discussing game companies and their offerings. Developers write the code. For all their supposed altruism, they still want to get paid. They are not usually the ones calling the shots in the business. Imagine if you were asked to produce a product without compensation. Would you? I would not. Neither would the "developers."

The very concept of "free-to-play" seems to be poorly understood. Yes, many games are offered without requiring that you spend a dime on it. One is allowed to play it with no monetary investment. On the other hand, as I mentioned, putting that game out there costs real money. So, companies that do so must have some way of actually turning a profit in order to keep the game in production. This is done by offering items that cost real money. Frankly, I'd much rather pay a subscription to play a game than suffer through micro-transactions and all the whining from freepers demanding that businesses (game companies) cater to them. The "free-to-play" business model has, to me, really brought down the standard of the gaming community, as a whole, and the quality of games with it.

[Tovan Cassidine]

Kitane, on 01 July 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

The "play smarter" answer is great on individual level, but you can't argue that IS is fine because they can outsmart their Clan opponents. IS doesn't have monopoly on strategy and tactics (though the lore would disagree...)

Actually, I can argue that IS pilots who play smarter and work as a team generate more success in matches, even against the dreaded Clanners. In fact, I just did. Our outfit did it all weekend. My skills are not all that great, but I get the job done. Fortunately, this is not a game that caters strongly to being a "lone wolf." This is not Counter Strike. This is a team-based tactical simulation that rewards sound tactics, individual skill, working as a team, knowing the capabilities (and limitations) of your equipment, and maintaining good situational awareness.

[1453 R]

Tovan Cassidine, on 01 July 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

snip for space

F2P as a business model is still quite new; only in the last decade or so has it really gotten any traction. People – and by people I mean CEOs, economists, and other money folks – don’t really understand all the ins and outs of it yet; they’re still experimenting, trying to figure out what works and what doesn’t. Clearly the business model has potential – many argue that it has much greater potential than the traditional subscription model – but we don’t really know how to best run it yet.

Piranha’s opted for a model that runs more like Steam for BattleTech than a typical F2P. The default MC prices are jacked, and while the free currency is certainly an option and you can play just fine on nothing but C-Bills (‘Mech bays notwithstanding, and that’s a thing I’m readily willing to discuss), it doesn’t buy you everything. That said, Piranha also tends to throw out a LOT more sales than other F2P titles I’ve seen/monkeyed with, and those sales tend to be pretty deep, too. 20% off a handful of cosmetics or boosters is fairly typical of sales I’ve seen in other F2P/microtransaction games, while Piranha regularly cuts prices by half during its sales, and rarely goes below 30%. I’m honestly wondering if Roland’s proposed model in which absolutely everything is available for C-bills wouldn’t curtail the frequent sales Piranha currently puts on. They’d have to actually do it to find out, and why should they fiddle with their business model now when it’s currently working? Sure, it may work better than it currently does – or it could work worse.

That’s part of what makes this whole F2P boom so absolutely terrifying for publishers and money-people – they have no idea what The Players Want. They’re trying to satisfy the needs and passions of the Internet, and that is a thing one must undertake with caution most extreme. F2P smash hits are often as much luck as anything else, and the exact same business model that’s a runaway money train for one publisher could turn out to be a complete bust for another, whose player base has different needs, expectations, and desires.

Players have to realize that the Money Folks honestly kinda hate players. We scare them; they have little idea how we’re going to react to any given thing, we’re not as safely predictable as a lot of other markets are, and thusly they consider us a very high-risk venture. This franchise is especially high-risk, as it involves a long-standing, deeply loyal fan base which can be counted on to get one off the ground (as it did; thanks, Founders), but which also has much greater and more fickle expectations than the typical MMO fan base. It’s a whole lot easier to p!ss off BattleTech people than it is Generic Sci-Fi MMO 497 people, who’re willing to let the developer mostly do whatever they feel will make the game better.

It’s why I’m back to having Piranha’s back, now that they’ve demonstrated significant progress in pulling their head out of their [REDACTED]. I love this franchise and I want to see it grow and succeed. I want all the people out there who refused to fund a proper MechWarrior 5 to look at MWO and go “Maaaaan…we totally shoulda picked up that project when Piranha came calling.” I want to prove to the video gaming industry that MechWarrior is still a hot property, and that a developer can count on MechWarrior’s fans to back them up and help them make a really great game.

We’re doing a bang-up job of that now, aren’t we?

[/sarcasm]