188 replies to this topic

[IraqiWalker]

Noth, on 07 August 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:

Sandpit (you too axeface). Look at what the game is now. We drop in and kill other mechs/capture a point. The CW will not change that. The CW will basically be what the Clan Wars are in WoT and that doesn't change the fact that it is still a deathmatch game. CW here will be ignored by the majority of players or simply play second fiddle to the actual game. It is not going to change the game like people want. The advertising also doesn't change what the game actually is.

I have also actually agree we need more maps. People acting like it is a wrong bad, mistake to focus on monetizing aspect like all f2p games is what I don't agree with. Maps will come, they should come faster, and there are 2 maps in the pipeline. Yet it is still "Waah! they aren't here now!"

It's like people say they want more maps and PGI says, ok, we are working on two more (even with an approximate date for one of them), but people still claim they don't work on maps at all. They move to improving something and the people instead of going good, and being at least somewhat happy about it, simply cry more, because it is not immediate.

People will ALWAYS complain.

As for maps, I would rather they made more maps, but hey, at the same time, I have an understanding of the position they are in, and the fact that they are understaffed. They need to be at least 3 times their size to properly handle MW:O. The mere fact that we have this game as it is now, despite plenty of Paul's decisions, is astounding to me.

Aresye, on 07 August 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

What I don't understand (like many others) is the whole, "It takes an absurd amount of time and upwards of $250,000 to make a map."

I think a 12y/o script kiddy on 4chan can over-exaggerate about how complicated DDoS is better than PGI can explain how complicated map making is.

That's why Cry Engine has it's own tools to create maps. It's there for a reason! It's why completely free mods for games can have DOZENS of amazing maps designed by an extremely small group of people for NO COST. If it cost modders $250,000, or even $250,000 in overall "work time," then no mods would exist. Only companies would have the monetary support and manpower to create maps, and we all know that isn't the case.

I believe that lie just as much as I believe the whole, "We didn't send a C&D against MWLL." Like a group of modders who worked hard for 4-5 years and had exceptional communication to the community just decided, "Nope, we're done," on a single night, abandoning the project that was ~ 80% complete and halting all production then and there.

Axeface, on 07 August 2014 - 05:03 PM, said:

It's complete bull. You can license cryengine now for 10 dollars a month. And... if you are paying a MAPPER 250 grand a year, holy cow they better be AMAZING. It's all bull.

1-It's not one mapper, that's the cost for the entire staff working on it. Plus all of the dev staff, and the concept artists, and so on and so forth. (Edit: I'm also not sure about this whole 250K thing)

2- Unlike script kiddies, these maps go through a proper development phase which is slow to begin with, and even slower with PGI since they are small.

3- In addition, the maps for MW:O have to balanced, while most community developed maps aren't so focused on balance.




EDIT: I will say this. What we really need is massive maps, possibly if they scaled down the mech sizes we could have the same effect with not so huge maps.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 07 August 2014 - 05:13 PM.

[Axeface]

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

2- Unlike script kiddies, these maps go through a proper development phase which is slow to begin with, and even slower with PGI since they are small.

3- In addition, the maps for MW:O have to balanced, while most community developed maps aren't so focused on balance.

These are jokes right? Do you play this game?
You think the maps are balanced or have passed any quality control that is worth mentioning.

In all honesty, I am logging off now. I am coming to a realisation about this game that I have been avoiding, because the combat is well done and leveling mechs is addictive.

Edited by Axeface, 07 August 2014 - 05:16 PM.

[Sandpit]

Noth, on 07 August 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:

It's like people say they want more maps and PGI says, ok, we are working on two more (even with an approximate date for one of them), but people still claim they don't work on maps at all. They move to improving something and the people instead of going good, and being at least somewhat happy about it, simply cry more, because it is not immediate.

That's misrepresenting things a bit and taking a few thigns out of context

the next map was a MINIMUM of 60 days out. That was about 2 weeks ago so there's still another 6 weeks or so MINIMUM.

then there was the 6 months prior to that (2 weeks ago) where they DIDN'T work on ANYTHING (much less maps) except 10 clan mechs. Again, THAT should make you wonder at the very least. 6 months to produce 10 mechs? This is about resource allotment and development cycle.

So again, we have 6+ months spent developing 10 mechs. Keep in mind this isn't the first 10 mechs ever created. They SHOULD have mech development down to a science at this point. Then the weapons, the only thing "new" about the weapons are burst fire mechanics, ranges, colors, and min range on LRMs. This is not something that had to be created from scratch. They were simply adjustments to existing weapons.
In nearly 2 1/2 years they've developed 100 mechs. SO now you expect me, as a reasonable adult, that it takes 6 months for the ENTIRE company to produce 10 mechs....? That's the issue. This poor resource management and terrible production cycle permeates every facet of the game.

THAT'S what makes many complain. PGI isn't dealing with the typical 20 and under gamer crowd with this IP. Most of the founders are pushing 40+, have had decades of experience in gaming, developing, etc. So they KNOW what a decent delay is, how long something like a map SHOULD take, etc. It's not nearly as easy to excuse PGi's shortcomings in these areas.

It's not really about the number of maps or even content, it's more about PGI really expecting us to believe that a multi-million dollar professional game development company cant' produce more than 3 maps per year or that it takes 6 months for the entire company to produce 10 mechs. THAT'S really what's at the core of this and the frustration.

Then you add in the history of poor communication, positions at times, islands, "true" support, mocking customers, etc. and it just compounds that problem. That's what I mean by taking some of this out of context.

[Kyle Wright]

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

People will ALWAYS complain.

As for maps, I would rather they made more maps, but hey, at the same time, I have an understanding of the position they are in, and the fact that they are understaffed. They need to be at least 3 times their size to properly handle MW:O. The mere fact that we have this game as it is now, despite plenty of Paul's decisions, is astounding to me.




1-It's not one mapper, that's the cost for the entire staff working on it. Plus all of the dev staff, and the concept artists, and so on and so forth. (Edit: I'm also not sure about this whole 250K thing)

2- Unlike script kiddies, these maps go through a proper development phase which is slow to begin with, and even slower with PGI since they are small.

3- In addition, the maps for MW:O have to balanced, while most community developed maps aren't so focused on balance.




EDIT: I will say this. What we really need is massive maps, possibly if they scaled down the mech sizes we could have the same effect with not so huge maps.

Ive been told by someone that in the past, that PGI purposely designed maps to have limited options for engagements. If you look at the MW:LL maps they have wide variety of approach options. Also go back to page 5 where 1 OF THE GUYS THAT DESIGNED 2 MAPS FOR MW:LL MADE 1 ON HIS OWN ON HIS FREE TIME. Looks balanced to me, though im sure it has a couple issues.

[Noth]

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

That's misrepresenting things a bit and taking a few thigns out of context

the next map was a MINIMUM of 60 days out. That was about 2 weeks ago so there's still another 6 weeks or so MINIMUM.

then there was the 6 months prior to that (2 weeks ago) where they DIDN'T work on ANYTHING (much less maps) except 10 clan mechs. Again, THAT should make you wonder at the very least. 6 months to produce 10 mechs? This is about resource allotment and development cycle.

So again, we have 6+ months spent developing 10 mechs. Keep in mind this isn't the first 10 mechs ever created. They SHOULD have mech development down to a science at this point. Then the weapons, the only thing "new" about the weapons are burst fire mechanics, ranges, colors, and min range on LRMs. This is not something that had to be created from scratch. They were simply adjustments to existing weapons.
In nearly 2 1/2 years they've developed 100 mechs. SO now you expect me, as a reasonable adult, that it takes 6 months for the ENTIRE company to produce 10 mechs....? That's the issue. This poor resource management and terrible production cycle permeates every facet of the game.

THAT'S what makes many complain. PGI isn't dealing with the typical 20 and under gamer crowd with this IP. Most of the founders are pushing 40+, have had decades of experience in gaming, developing, etc. So they KNOW what a decent delay is, how long something like a map SHOULD take, etc. It's not nearly as easy to excuse PGi's shortcomings in these areas.

It's not really about the number of maps or even content, it's more about PGI really expecting us to believe that a multi-million dollar professional game development company cant' produce more than 3 maps per year or that it takes 6 months for the entire company to produce 10 mechs. THAT'S really what's at the core of this and the frustration.

Then you add in the history of poor communication, positions at times, islands, "true" support, mocking customers, etc. and it just compounds that problem. That's what I mean by taking some of this out of context.

Yes we know their past, everyone gets stuck on it and that is the issue. They only see the past and ignore any good or change in the direction to fix issues of the past. It doesn't make up for the past, but it shows improvement. Improvement apparently is not good enough for people stuck looking at the past. They need it now and without now, PGI isn't trying to change or improve anything at all.

People are upset at the past and keep looking there instead of looking forward. Then in the past where they did something, like the fact that in the span of a year we got 6 maps which is, not good, not bad, but decent (as most games don't put out that many maps in a year), is ignored. Yes they took a break for the clans and that was a misstep, but to keep saying that they don't make maps or don't care about maps like a lot of people seem to assume off those quotes is just wrong.

[IraqiWalker]

Axeface, on 07 August 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:

These are jokes right? Do you play this game?
You think the maps are balanced or have passed any quality control that is worth mentioning.

In all honesty, I am logging off now. I am coming to a realisation about this game that I have been avoiding, because the combat is well done and leveling mechs is addictive.

Not really jokes.

The maps go through quality control, and multiple phases of approval. I never said that it's well done, just that it goes through them.

However, as far as balance goes, except for a couple of maps, they are actually well balanced (turret placement on Crimson city, and spawn location on Caustic and Terra Therma both need some redoing).

[Aresye]

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

1-It's not one mapper, that's the cost for the entire staff working on it. Plus all of the dev staff, and the concept artists, and so on and so forth. (Edit: I'm also not sure about this whole 250K thing)

I know map creation isn't some super complicated endeavor that takes over half a year to develop.

Let's assume it takes the same amount of time to fully model and rig a character for 3d animation (a much more complicated task) as it does to create a map:
- For a lone 3D artist working 8hrs a day, this should take about 2-3 weeks. Maybe a month tops.
- 21 x 8 = 168hrs work.
- Let's assume testing and quality control are implemented over the last 1-2 weeks to make it a full month.
- 30 x 8 = 240hrs work.
- $250,000 / 240 = $1042/hr
- According to the Game Career Guides Survey for 3D Artists in 2013, the average salary is ~ $50,000.
- So for a normal 8hr day (40hr work week), the going rate would be $47/hr

- It would take 22 workers working 8hrs a day for a month straight on a single map to rack up $250,000.
- But wait, with more workers, it isn't a full month anymore is it?
- That's right, so if it takes 1 person 30 days, it should take 22 people...32hrs.
- New hourly rate for each map worker: $355/hr

No matter how you do the math and adjust for higher paid employees, it doesn't add up. Maps don't take a single person a full month to create. A small team of less than 5 people should be able to do it in less than a week.

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

2- Unlike script kiddies, these maps go through a proper development phase which is slow to begin with, and even slower with PGI since they are small.

- Map hitbox problems.
- Braindead spawnpoint locations.
- Falling through map.
- Terrain glitches.

Obviously there is nothing proper about this, "proper development phase," you allude to.

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

3- In addition, the maps for MW:O have to balanced, while most community developed maps aren't so focused on balance.

Alpine Peaks is here to disagree with you.

[Sandpit]

Noth, on 07 August 2014 - 05:29 PM, said:

Yes we know their past, everyone gets stuck on it and that is the issue. They only see the past and ignore any good or change in the direction to fix issues of the past..

That's misrepresenting things a bit as well

I personally just thanked Russ for actually giving us some info regarding CW and events in August. I've also congratulated and praised PGI every single time they do something "good" or make a "breakthrough" in development. I jumped for joy when UI2.0 was released.

Maps aren't a past issue. They're a current issue. It's not like they just announced that now they're increasing map production so that has nothing to do with the past.

I used their history to reply to your assertion that this is just some players being upset solely about map production. It goes way beyond that. It also doesn't reside solely with "past history". It has to do with resources and, again, how a company expects its customers to accept that a single map should take $250,000 and 4 months to create.

So PGI has spent $5,000,000 on maps thus far? (i'm not including price tags for the alternate maps) You really expect me to believe that it took $5,000,000 and 3 years to produce 10 maps? Sorry, that's just not acceptable to anyone that knows anything about map making. It's just not. It's not reasonable to most in the community and THAT is what people are currently pissed about. It just becomes exacerbated by all of the other things I mentioned. This isn't a scapegoat for those previous issues, this is a sincere current issue that really needs to be addressed.

I like Bryan, he seems like a pretty cool guy and is one of the on the dev team that has actually tried to be more proactive with the community. This isn't personal though. This is about work.

[anonymous161]

El Bandito, on 06 August 2014 - 11:46 PM, said:

PGI is definitely not hiring the right people.

They aren't hiring, they just butt buddies with each other and if anyone has a problem they can go screw themselves just perm bann them regardless if they spent hundreds to fund their coke needs.

[Johnny Z]

Noth, on 07 August 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:

Sandpit (you too axeface). Look at what the game is now. We drop in and kill other mechs/capture a point. The CW will not change that. The CW will basically be what the Clan Wars are in WoT and that doesn't change the fact that it is still a deathmatch game. CW here will be ignored by the majority of players or simply play second fiddle to the actual game. It is not going to change the game like people want. The advertising also doesn't change what the game actually is.

I have also actually agree we need more maps. People acting like it is a wrong bad, mistake to focus on monetizing aspect like all f2p games is what I don't agree with. Maps will come, they should come faster, and there are 2 maps in the pipeline. Yet it is still "Waah! they aren't here now!"

It's like people say they want more maps and PGI says, ok, we are working on two more (even with an approximate date for one of them), but people still claim they don't work on maps at all. They move to improving something and the people instead of going good, and being at least somewhat happy about it, simply cry more, because it is not immediate.

Im sorry but if they do The star map properly and continue with alot of work with the game, this will be in the realm of the Total War series of video games, with a combat phase and a strategy phase(not the same since it will be mmo). That series would have been nothing without the factions and the strategy map end of story, although the tactical map was extremely well done also.

IF they do the Mech bay and the rest really well on top of this, then we are look at this game being in the realm of Mass Effect series where they have all of these parts of the game and extremely well done. Not exactly the same but the parts are there and who knows what the future brings for Mechwarrior Online.

Anyway I couldnt agree more with the topic title and as it stands at this very moment, it doesnt look great, but again who knows?

[Mister Blastman]

NextGame, on 06 August 2014 - 11:26 PM, said:

I'm surprised that there hasn't been any investigation done around converting some of these maps to MWO

MWO has ****** gameplay compared with MW:LL. MWO had deep, tactical ticket based fluid gameplay that was dynamic and ever changing. Not... deathball here and win. So most of the most brilliant maps aren't really compatible with MWO at all.

[Sug]

Darth Bane001, on 07 August 2014 - 05:39 PM, said:

They aren't hiring, they just butt buddies with each other and if anyone has a problem they can go screw themselves just perm bann them regardless if they spent hundreds to fund their coke needs.

If they were on coke it wouldn't take so long to produce anything.

[Noth]

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 05:37 PM, said:

That's misrepresenting things a bit as well

I personally just thanked Russ for actually giving us some info regarding CW and events in August. I've also congratulated and praised PGI every single time they do something "good" or make a "breakthrough" in development. I jumped for joy when UI2.0 was released.

Yeah, you are not bad in that aspect.

But look at Axeface. They are contemplating something that the community has asked for for almost as long as this game has been around. He sees no good in this and instead reverts to calling it bad because the of PGI's past leading the game to be in place behind where it should probably be. Then the others who read those devs comments and take them as literally meaning they don't care about maps or that they won't make more when if they didn't they would not have churned out 6 maps in one year, nor be working on some new maps even if they are slow.

Not everyone is like that, but often the most vocal are and they are the one's that often stand out.

[Tremendous Upside]

Johnny Z, on 07 August 2014 - 05:40 PM, said:

Im sorry but if they do The star map properly and continue with alot of work with the game, this will be in the realm of the Total War series of video games, with a combat phase and a strategy phase(not the same since it will be mmo). That series would have been nothing without the factions and the strategy map end of story, although the tactical map was extremely well done also.

IF they do the Mech bay and the rest really well on top of this, then we are look at this game being in the realm of Mass Effect series where they have all of these parts of the game and extremely well done. Not exactly the same but the parts are there and who knows what the future brings for Mechwarrior Online.

Anyway I couldnt agree more with the topic title and as it stands at this very moment, it doesnt look great, but again who knows?

When I play the Total War series and elect to fight battles out, the battle map looks different just about every time. Here in MWO there are apparently going to be 3 cities in the entire universe. River City, Crimson Strait and Frozen City. They really should've elected to create a few "tournament maps" but built the game around a random map generator. Or much simpler maps that could be easily manipulated into dozens of alternate versions with minimal effort. Nothing in this game breaks the immersion factor more easily.

[Noth]

Johnny Z, on 07 August 2014 - 05:40 PM, said:

Im sorry but if they do The star map properly and continue with alot of work with the game, this will be in the realm of the Total War series of video games, with a combat phase and a strategy phase(not the same since it will be mmo). That series would have been nothing without the factions and the strategy map end of story, although the tactical map was extremely well done also.

For Mercs, you'll have a list of contracts and simply select them and then fight. For faction players, you'll simply pick a place that a battle is occuring and then drop. This is what they have described in the past for CW. Pretty much nothing to do with actual strategy or supplies or troop positioning. If it turns out they actually include that I will be completely surprised as they would actually do something more than what they described.

Edited by Noth, 07 August 2014 - 05:49 PM.

[Ronious]

When the mechs dry up, Map Packs.

[anonymous161]

Sug, on 07 August 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

If they were on coke it wouldn't take so long to produce anything.

Except they constantly missplace the coke so they are in severe withdrawal and cant do anything until they get another mech to have us purchase.

I've pretty much lost all hope and faith that this mechwarrior game is gonna ever be one of the truly good one. I want another single player experience personally, this game is old.

[Livebait]

CW will be a flop. You will have two teams do the same thing on the same tiny boring maps. Map creation is not that hard when the tools are in place and come with the engine. If I had any idea that this game would be in such a sad sorry state as it is now, I would have never funded PGI. Not one cent will go to this joke until REAL progress is being made.

[Johnny Z]

Banky, on 07 August 2014 - 05:46 PM, said:

When I play the Total War series and elect to fight battles out, the battle map looks different just about every time. Here in MWO there are apparently going to be 3 cities in the entire universe. River City, Crimson Strait and Frozen City. They really should've elected to create a few "tournament maps" but built the game around a random map generator. Or much simpler maps that could be easily manipulated into dozens of alternate versions with minimal effort. Nothing in this game breaks the immersion factor more easily.

Dont get me started on the immersion lol. When they screw with that, they are kicking the players right in the balls.

[Axeface]

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:30 PM, said:

2- Unlike script kiddies, these maps go through a proper development phase which is slow to begin with, and even slower with PGI since they are small.

3- In addition, the maps for MW:O have to balanced, while most community developed maps aren't so focused on balance.

______________

Not really jokes.

The maps go through quality control, and multiple phases of approval. I never said that it's well done, just that it goes through them.

No, Iraqiwalker. The intention of your mis-informed post was to imply that mod teams dont have the same quality of quality control that developers do, and that 'script kiddies' (thanks, I've never heard that derogatory term) do everything on the fly without any thought to quality or balance.

I direct your concerns at Alpine Peaks, a HORRIBLY unbalanced map. You cannot deny it.

And.

IraqiWalker said:

As for maps, I would rather they made more maps, but hey, at the same time, I have an understanding of the position they are in, and the fact that they are understaffed

How many clan mechs do you see with names you dont recognise? They sold A LOT.

HIRE MORE PEOPLE.

And, this time... i'm really logging off.

Edited by Axeface, 07 August 2014 - 05:54 PM.