

Venting: The Game Is Turning In A Casual Game.
#61
Posted 26 July 2014 - 08:17 AM
Depth comes from the tactics used to fight.
Of all you do every game is run to center, then yeah, it might be pretty shallow. But that's the player's fault.
#62
Posted 26 July 2014 - 08:34 AM
Tactics and Teamwork outperform just about everything else consistently. The difference between a pilot that knows his mech's capabilities and when to commit, retreat or wait for reinforcements is the difference between a pilot that gets 5 dmg and one who does 500+ dmg. Not to mention the fact PGI has not exactly made the game approachable from the get go. 3PV and a simple tutorial only get you so far and I have had several gamers just go WTF is this and quit after their first 15 mins. These are people who play other shooters like TF2 and Halo regularly and well.
The game certainly lacks CW and collisions. No denying that and until CW this game is really just hovering above the abyss. IF they pull it off and it's a huge IF then I expect to be playing this game for a long time. If they don't I will be sad to see Mechwarrior forever disappear into the mists of time, because it will not be back if this doesn't pan out.
#63
Posted 26 July 2014 - 08:37 AM
Jetfire, on 26 July 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:
The level of skill required isn't what makes a game casual or not. Compare LoL to EVE, player skill makes a huge difference in the former and almost none in the latter (once you've mastered the art of the spreadsheet) but no-one says EVE is a casual game.
#64
Posted 26 July 2014 - 08:51 AM
Davers, on 25 July 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:
I have to agree that the F2P is nice, but honestly the frequency of the 50% off sales pretty clearly indicates they know that realistically their pricing is at least 100% higher than the market demand will realistically bear. I get the feeling they use it to straight up control cash flow, which given their player base size may not be the worst idea. However it would be nice to see pricing more reasonable for the content. Mech pricing I think is best addressed with their Master packs and Starter packs, but paint and camo could stand a permanent 50% cut and they would probably make more money on impulse buying. That or add combo packs for those too.
I want them to make money and I have no problem with paying what they ask, but I also know I have more disposable income by far than I did at 18 and those are the new players they should be looking to attract. $60 should get you a lot more content in this game than it does. I would love to see a $60 pack that lets you pick 4 chassis's (light, med, heavy, assault), 3 variants each (champ, hero and reg), mech bays, 6 months premium along with the basic and camo paints. Purchasable only once per account. I think this would provide enough value to turn many free customers into paying customers.
Edited by Jetfire, 26 July 2014 - 08:52 AM.
#65
Posted 26 July 2014 - 08:56 AM
Heeden, on 26 July 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:
The level of skill required isn't what makes a game casual or not. Compare LoL to EVE, player skill makes a huge difference in the former and almost none in the latter (once you've mastered the art of the spreadsheet) but no-one says EVE is a casual game.
What is a casual game if the relevance of skill is not the differentiator? Simple time commitment to engage in the activity?
#66
Posted 26 July 2014 - 09:10 AM
Jetfire, on 26 July 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:
What is a casual game if the relevance of skill is not the differentiator? Simple time commitment to engage in the activity?
It's more the level of organisation needed. Casual players can just log in whenever they like and play for as long as they feel whilst getting some progression. Non-casual (formal?) players will have set times when they arrange to be on, usually to team up with a set group of players to progress through bigger challenges. It's possible for a casual player to put in lots and lots of hours in the game but never play it anything other than casually.
You could say there's also involvement outside of the actual game, if you're playing something totally casually you won't be visiting web-sites to discover the "best" builds or for other strategy tips.
#67
Posted 26 July 2014 - 09:50 AM
Jetfire, on 26 July 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:
I have to agree that the F2P is nice, but honestly the frequency of the 50% off sales pretty clearly indicates they know that realistically their pricing is at least 100% higher than the market demand will realistically bear.
I am guessing you made a slight mathematical error because 100% less expensive is free.
I have difficulty believing that a Legendary founder who has also purchased a Gold Clan pack is suggesting everything should be free.
I do think that IGP/PGI would probably be making more money if average MC price for everything was 30-50% lower
#68
Posted 26 July 2014 - 09:54 AM
Edited by lsp, 26 July 2014 - 09:57 AM.
#69
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:09 AM
Step 1) Play a match (up to 15 minutes)
Step 2) Repeat if not bored already.
#70
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:41 AM
Elite dangerous managed 40.000 planets in one year and is almost out of beta.
Edited by Henri Schoots, 26 July 2014 - 10:41 AM.
#71
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:46 AM
Sarlic, on 25 July 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:
Community? Great.
Game... it's not what I saw when I played closed beta. It's not the ambitions originally presented. The direction went from a "Thinking person's shooter" to a "click and kill" casual game for burning free time in frustration.
Now if you want my vision on what this game could have been based purely on things stated by the Developers since 2012?
Signature. "What 3/3/3/3" cost us. Not so much just what 4x3 cost us but what ~that~ game is... based purely on everything ever said by Russ, Bryan, etc.
Compare it to what we have now and may soon have. It makes my eyes water with sadness.
#72
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:51 AM
Rogue Jedi, on 26 July 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:
I have difficulty believing that a Legendary founder who has also purchased a Gold Clan pack is suggesting everything should be free.
I do think that IGP/PGI would probably be making more money if average MC price for everything was 30-50% lower
Actually if something costs $10 and it is priced 100% higher than the going rate... that means the going rate is $5 as 100% increase from $5 is $10.
Probably not the clearest semantics possible, but it does not mean prices should be reduced by 100% or that they need a 100% discount, simply that they are double what they should be at least.
Edited by Jetfire, 26 July 2014 - 11:00 AM.
#73
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:56 AM
Heeden, on 26 July 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:
It's more the level of organisation needed. Casual players can just log in whenever they like and play for as long as they feel whilst getting some progression. Non-casual (formal?) players will have set times when they arrange to be on, usually to team up with a set group of players to progress through bigger challenges. It's possible for a casual player to put in lots and lots of hours in the game but never play it anything other than casually.
You could say there's also involvement outside of the actual game, if you're playing something totally casually you won't be visiting web-sites to discover the "best" builds or for other strategy tips.
Ok but I think that is probably not good enough for a universal definition of "casual". A game can have a casual commitment requirement and a hardcore difficulty level with a medium grind and no effect of skill on performance. A game is not inherently better because the commitment level required is high. I mean if this game required the commitment level of 40 man wow raids back in the day I would not be here. I am an adult with a job and a commute and chores and commitments. This is a game for me that I enjoy, but it cannot be a lifestyle choice like Wow used to be and Eve was for some friends.
#74
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:57 AM
The main problem is the competitive side doesn't have much going for it save for running meta builds and stomping casuals. Yes there are leagues, but league matches are usually what...like 1 or 2 matches a weekend?
You can't really have a single elimination game that focuses heavily on teamwork and positioning and call it casual. In fact, casual gamers are usually at a disadvantage because the #1 way to ensure success is to be on comms together to work towards a common goal.
A free-for-all respawn mode would be a truly casual game type.
A multi-round match (ex: winner is best of 3 rounds) would go a long way towards catering to both competitive and casual gamers, and has been used to great success in most non-respawn games. And it wouldn't be very hard to implement.
I personally find the most frustrating part of this game to be the fact that it takes a long time to search for and find a match. It isn't fun spending 5-10min waiting to drop only to get stomped in 3min and then have to wait another 5-10min for another game. If games had multiple rounds, each game would feel like the wait was worth it, even for stomps, because you're actually spending more time playing the actual game than watching the spinning search wheel.
#75
Posted 26 July 2014 - 11:05 AM
Aresye, on 26 July 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:
The main problem is the competitive side doesn't have much going for it save for running meta builds and stomping casuals. Yes there are leagues, but league matches are usually what...like 1 or 2 matches a weekend?
You can't really have a single elimination game that focuses heavily on teamwork and positioning and call it casual. In fact, casual gamers are usually at a disadvantage because the #1 way to ensure success is to be on comms together to work towards a common goal.
A free-for-all respawn mode would be a truly casual game type.
A multi-round match (ex: winner is best of 3 rounds) would go a long way towards catering to both competitive and casual gamers, and has been used to great success in most non-respawn games. And it wouldn't be very hard to implement.
I personally find the most frustrating part of this game to be the fact that it takes a long time to search for and find a match. It isn't fun spending 5-10min waiting to drop only to get stomped in 3min and then have to wait another 5-10min for another game. If games had multiple rounds, each game would feel like the wait was worth it, even for stomps, because you're actually spending more time playing the actual game than watching the spinning search wheel.
What definition makes it casual?
Also 5-10 min wait? When are you playing? I have never waited more than maybe 3 minutes. I wait way more playing games like Dota 2... which is one of the reason I rarely play it. I could see the server's might be a bit sparse when it isn't daylight in NA though.
#76
Posted 26 July 2014 - 11:24 AM
Aresye, on 26 July 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:
Unequivocally false.
Universal participation =/= casual; it makes it a game. A "casual" game would allow a new player to pick up a Trial Mech and be as efficient as a person who has the same Mech elited with a custom loadout and has taken the time to master (muscle memory) piloting that Mech. This game has a steep learning curve and to dismiss that by labeling this game as "casual" is asinine.
There is also a huge distinction between "casual" gamers and a "casual" game. You're equating one with the other. Just because this game, like every game, has casual gamers doesn't make it "casual". Your entire argument is one giant contradiction. You call this game "casual" yet say:
Aresye, on 26 July 2014 - 10:57 AM, said:
Since that is the only game-type this game has, how can MW:O, by definition, be "casual"?
Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 26 July 2014 - 11:26 AM.
#77
Posted 26 July 2014 - 10:46 PM
Wolfways, on 26 July 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:
Step 1) Play a match (up to 15 minutes)
Step 2) Repeat if not bored already.
It feels more like a filmsy shooter. It's not dynamic enough to be a Battletech game. Its feels repetitive.
Nothing wrong with a MMO but not when it enlists enduring problems and has no depth.
A little bit off-topic
It would have been changed if they did go singleplayer as their first intention was. The Batman series gave me a huge blast for example. What a great serie. Or the Witcher series. Unfortunatly they scrapped this and turned it in a online game. Which is not bad with a decent paymodel which they dont have. But that's my opinion. I think this game would do much better if it was a dynamic singleplayer game with loads of packages to explore. For example Frozen city but then 10 times bigger with missions and side mission. Add some worthy DLC per year and the cash will be flowing.
Edited by Sarlic, 26 July 2014 - 11:33 PM.
#78
Posted 27 July 2014 - 03:17 AM
El Bandito, on 25 July 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:
However, the game is undeniably moving towards more and more dakka heavy route thanks to PGI making XL mechs too good--XL mechs are practically the only competitive way to play.
The Raven Alliance as well, but I think he meant at 3049, not decades later.
http://www.sarna.net.../Raven_Alliance
So you have yet to experience running along in a 55 ton mech at over 90kph with max armor and being destroyed from over 800m away with a single 50 point hit to a side torso fired from a mech you couldn't see.
Or rounding a bend in a match that looks clear of enemies and BLAM! 40 point pinpoint hit strips 100% of the armor off your side torso leaving you exposed to a kill shot by a stiff breeze.
Or...poptart tears a hole in your mech leaving you all but crippled before your own weapons are in range (yeah right brawling lol)
Or jumpjet "fix" making your light mech a death trap when coupled with fall damage "fix" ...
#79
Posted 27 July 2014 - 03:26 AM
Lykaon, on 27 July 2014 - 03:17 AM, said:
I experienced it maybe 1 in a 100 deaths. Small enough that I am never worried about it. Cause I hug cover like a tick hugging flesh.
Edited by El Bandito, 27 July 2014 - 03:29 AM.
#80
Posted 27 July 2014 - 03:38 AM
clan mechs -side torso durability - thats a bit of a buff, no?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users