174 replies to this topic

[Turist0AT]

Minimal viable product

Russ said it himself.

[Joseph Mallan]

Turist0AT, on 25 August 2014 - 11:22 AM, said:

Minimal viable product

Russ said it himself.

Yes, He has a way of saying bad things with a acceptable spin.
Minimal Viable Product=Demo!

He needs some help from my employer when it comes to glorifying mediocrity.

When I was highred I was informed My job title was, "Prototype Materials Expediter".
My reply was, " You mean Shipping Clerk?"

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 25 August 2014 - 11:29 AM.

[Sarlic]

Joseph Mallan, on 25 August 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Yes, He has a way of saying bad things with a acceptable spin.
Minimal Viable Product=Demo!

He needs some help from my employer when it comes to glorifying mediocrity.

When I was highred I was informed My job title was, "Prototype Materials Expediter".
My reply was, " You mean Shipping Clerk?"

It's still a minimal viable product. Although i understood what Russ was trying to say.

Do you mind i laughed? With your photo (face) in another thread and the 'shipping clerk' made me laugh. Felt i could watch that conversation.

Hopefully you dont beat me up!

Edited by Sarlic, 25 August 2014 - 11:32 AM.

[Turist0AT]

Sarlic, on 25 August 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

Hopefully you dont beat me up!

Oh he will. Trust me, i know...

[Kyrie]

I have been advocating caution on hoping for too much out of CW, precisely because PGI has never really stated clearly what CW is going to really be. Not only that, but it has been delayed for so long that its become an institutional joke for us Founders.

The first moment I was completely sure that we would not be getting a BT-based strategic sim for CW was first when I saw Byran's infamous "reveal" of CW at the Launch Party event. The next moment was when I saw the rather generic unit creation model that could have been copied from any simplistic RPG guild system.

I am a firm believer that a proper implementation of CW would add considerable longevity to the game. The issue is not the maps, a limited number of maps is not necessarily an obstacle to a good CW system. CW is supposed to provide a context and meaning to the endless death-matches; you are not just grinding for content, you are living out the wars of the InnerSphere with your friends. It is this social element that will make the game a true success.

MWO's design has, for the longest time, completely ignored the main advantage of having thousands of players -- your players generate content for you for free, creating interest and driving others to keep playing the game. Consider the lack of simple chat channels to communicate, the lack of a lobby system -- there is practically no social contact whatsoever in MWO. The design has, up until now, focused exclusively on creating a casual FPS shooter while completely ignoring social interaction.

CW is, perhaps, what will bring about a sense of community in MWO. Players banding together through alignment with a House, fighting what most of us would consider dreary and well-worn maps for a "greater goal". For their lance-mates, unit-members and House (if so inclined). CW is what could create a bridge between the pure casual FPS shooter and a deeper role-playing game where people are not just hopping into a mech for a quick battle, but are engaging in a serious campaign to conquer and defend. This brings about a link between the FPS and role-playing.

Role-playing has a bad rap in the FPS world, as it is associated with "RPG". However, ignoring what makes RPGs a successful product is an ill-advised path to take. The key to success for RPGs lies in creating game mechanics that allow your users to create content. People begin to live out their dreams through their characters, and in doing so keep everyone else interested in the game. I had hoped for the longest time that MWO would evolve from being a shooter into being a military RPG based on the BattleTech universe... it is these elements that would in my mind comprise a successful implementation of CW.

I have a feeling that this is not the path that PGI has taken on CW, but we will see.

[Cest7]

Minimal Viable President
Minimal Viable Developers
Minimal Viable Company?

[Lonestar1771]

PGIGP and MWO in a nutshell.

Edited by Lonestar1771, 25 August 2014 - 02:17 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

I see somebody finally fixed the grammar error in the thread title.

[MonkeyCheese]

MonkeyCheese, on 15 August 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

Was going to read this thread until I seen the "your naive" in the title...

yay you finally un engrished the name!!!

[Sarlic]

Lyoto Machida, on 25 August 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:

I see somebody finally fixed the grammar error in the thread title.

Took a while.

[Mazikar]

I hate to say it but I have still been hoping for my money spent to buy content in the game. I fear though that it has bought their indifference, and complacency. Why should they work for content when we buy mechs.... and even $500 for one with gold paint (still have never seen one in game but I know they are out there).

This game will die off slowly at this rate... quickly if someone does one better. I might be wrong, they might come out with a magical patch but I stopped holding my breath a while ago.

[Sarlic]

Lotharian, on 25 August 2014 - 09:01 PM, said:

I hate to say it but I have still been hoping for my money spent to buy content in the game. I fear though that it has bought their indifference, and complacency. Why should they work for content when we buy mechs.... and even $500 for one with gold paint (still have never seen one in game but I know they are out there).

This game will die off slowly at this rate... quickly if someone does one better. I might be wrong, they might come out with a magical patch but I stopped holding my breath a while ago.

Many people did believe or was hoping PGI to improve. The Overlord / Phoenix packs should have been those eye openers already.

[Odins Fist]

Turist0AT, on 25 August 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:

Its not the same with every game out there. War thunder implemented ground forces and is looking at implementing war ships. Thats a hella of a lot more than what PGI can come up with.

Odins Fist, on 25 August 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

The "CORE" gameplay will remain the same, and we will have some other different options while looking at a map..

Roger that.

Yeah, it's still going to be big stompy Robots...

[Sandpit]

Sarlic, on 15 August 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

length

can someone give me a TL;DR version? I'll read it thoroughly when I get home from work but that'll be a bit.

[Sandpit]

Just going off of the thread title:

No, CW is not going to change the game. That's a silly notion. Game play isn't going to change with the implementation of a campaign. It's not going to physically change how you play the game or how the game plays in general.

So no, CW isn't going to "change the game" in the respect.

However,

It DOES change the mentality behind the game. It changes HOW you play the game. Losses = consequences. Wins = more than just cbills to buy the next mech. Players will be more concerned with losing. Right now there is absolutely NO consequence to losing other than slightly lower (not even the case in many matches I earn just as much for a loss as I do for a win because even though my team might lose, I still did well as an individual) cbill and exp earnings.

It changes the psychology of the game. You'll still be stomping away in the same mechs with the same core mechanics. Nothing will physically change in the game. It also changes the goal of the game. Right now the only goal in the game is to buy the next mech or stockpile GXP and Cbills. That's it. With the implementation of a campaign that changes the dynamics of the game and end goals. You're naive if you think that doesn't change the game.

[Johnny Z]

I see the same players saying that it wont change anything. As if saying it over and over will make it true.

This makes no sense at all, even in the least.

Would the total war series of games be good without the many factions? etc, and the answer is no, most movies and games would be nothing. This is where mechwarrior and tons of other games are at.

Why the game industry is offering nothing but BLUE VRS RED TDM lately i have no idea, but this game has said it will add factions and something more than red vrs blue tdm. I think thats why many have kept playing.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Kyrie, on 25 August 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

People begin to live out their dreams through their characters, and in doing so keep everyone else interested in the game. I had hoped for the longest time that MWO would evolve from being a shooter into being a military RPG based on the BattleTech universe... it is these elements that would in my mind comprise a successful implementation of CW.

I have to agree, this is what I was hoping for and expecting MWO to be. A MMO by definition is suppose to be "Massively Multplayer" which means large amounts of people simultaneously existing in a persistent world. A 12 vs 12 match lasting 15 mins isn't large amounts of people or a persistent world so honestly we don't have a MMO.

In any case, what usually draws me to an MMO is the immersion. They are an outlet allowing me to imagine myself as the character and get a feel of what it would be like to be that person. Even a game like MWO needs this immersion and the design should be to make you feel like you exist in the Battletech universe and are actually a pilot of this gigantic, humanoid war machine.

MWO however sorely lacks anything that draws you in and makes you feel a part of the world and honest that is what is needed out of CW. They don't seem to understand this though and continue down the WoTs model which massively holds this game back. If they ever do realize that Mechwarrior and Battletech have a rich RPG background that many players are craving and add these aspects to the game, then they will actually have a hit with MWO.

[Kyrie]

Viktor Drake, on 26 August 2014 - 09:58 AM, said:

I have to agree, this is what I was hoping for and expecting MWO to be. A MMO by definition is suppose to be "Massively Multplayer" which means large amounts of people simultaneously existing in a persistent world. A 12 vs 12 match lasting 15 mins isn't large amounts of people or a persistent world so honestly we don't have a MMO.

In any case, what usually draws me to an MMO is the immersion. They are an outlet allowing me to imagine myself as the character and get a feel of what it would be like to be that person. Even a game like MWO needs this immersion and the design should be to make you feel like you exist in the Battletech universe and are actually a pilot of this gigantic, humanoid war machine.

MWO however sorely lacks anything that draws you in and makes you feel a part of the world and honest that is what is needed out of CW. They don't seem to understand this though and continue down the WoTs model which massively holds this game back. If they ever do realize that Mechwarrior and Battletech have a rich RPG background that many players are craving and add these aspects to the game, then they will actually have a hit with MWO.

Absolutely! I agree completely. I am still surprised we do not even have chat channels in the game (unlike World of Tanks).

[SixstringSamurai]

I think it's awesome that you've taken the time and effort to word this very carefully and professionally. Ultimately, I pray someday someone will actually listen, however this isn't the first or last posting of it's kind. PGI just does not care about the player base in the way it needs to, they don't play the game we play, so we will probably remain some sort of erroneous data as far as they are concerned for some time.

Recently they started taking feedback from some of the competitive player base, which is kind of awesome. At the same time it's also not the best thing for everyone who plays this game. I love stomping the crap out of people in premades and I had an itch one day to see the other end of that experience. It was an absolute terrible and frustrating experience. I imagine that's what is the day one / match one experience for a lot of people. It seems they are focused more on the higher end of the player spectrum then the lower and have basically set the game up in a way that totally favors established, well trained units while neglecting the emerging player base. This needs to stop. As a solo player I should only interact with solo players or at most groups of 2-3. The other thing this game needs is balance from both ends of the player base, maybe even different rules or handicaps for better players vs weaker less skilled players.

As far as CW goes, well having worked on Proxis, seen RHOD, active in MRBC, witnessed the play of countless other leagues like the Marik League and probably some others out there (sorry if I'm not mentioning you), it becomes immediately apparent that Clan Wars while sounding super cool, in not necessary. The community has created far more interesting and in depth unit vs unit concepts and games to play. The lobby system is all this really needed. Instead I would rather of seen resources spent to improve the core game such as some sort of team planning or guidance in regards to tactical play and god forbid, Maps that actually work right, or even VOIP built into the game. I laugh every time I see the game hint = "Working as a team greatly increases your chance for success" (or whatever it actually says...that's the gist), simply because nothing in this game promotes that. Hell even most of the events in this game are solo based events!

Edited by SixStringSamurai, 26 August 2014 - 10:41 AM.

[Sarlic]

Sandpit, on 26 August 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

Just going off of the thread title:

No, CW is not going to change the game. That's a silly notion. Game play isn't going to change with the implementation of a campaign. It's not going to physically change how you play the game or how the game plays in general.

So no, CW isn't going to "change the game" in the respect.

However,

It DOES change the mentality behind the game. It changes HOW you play the game. Losses = consequences. Wins = more than just cbills to buy the next mech. Players will be more concerned with losing. Right now there is absolutely NO consequence to losing other than slightly lower (not even the case in many matches I earn just as much for a loss as I do for a win because even though my team might lose, I still did well as an individual) cbill and exp earnings.

It changes the psychology of the game. You'll still be stomping away in the same mechs with the same core mechanics. Nothing will physically change in the game. It also changes the goal of the game. Right now the only goal in the game is to buy the next mech or stockpile GXP and Cbills. That's it. With the implementation of a campaign that changes the dynamics of the game and end goals. You're naive if you think that doesn't change the game.

With the arrival of the invasion people also needed to change their mindset. As you can see it worked out: Clan Warrior online. With CW not so much. I bet it will be the same dull matches as before with the difference there's a map now. No joy. With critical basic features missing its still a no go on teamwork. There will be hardly goals when we dont have any clear specific roles to take. Same dull matches over again and then i did not have mentioned the overall balance

Edited by Sarlic, 26 August 2014 - 11:20 AM.