76 replies to this topic

[Haxburch]

Alistair Winter, on 18 August 2014 - 03:26 AM, said:

Let me just debunk a few myths in this thread:

• "Other games have destructible terrain". False. Destructible terrain is impossible with today's technology, otherwise we would have it in this game. We used to have 1 destructible tree, but it had to be removed because it crashed the servers.
  
• "It's fairly easy to make maps. Many amateurs have made great maps on their spare time, as a hobby." False. Maps are extremely complex and mysterious. It costs $250,000 to make a map, and it will be full of bugs, broken geometry and places where you will get stuck.
  
• "Many fans would be happy with simple maps with nothing but hills and trees." False. MWO fans would rather wait 1 year for every new map, as long as they have the same quality as recent maps, such as HPG Manifold and Terra Therma, with volcano platforms and underground generators.
  
• "Cryengine was made for games with beautiful, lush forests and jungles". False. Cryengine can only be used to make maps with snow, sand, rock and mud. Any trees will be brown, half-dead, acid-burned husks, with pine needles. Green leaves are impossible.
  
• "Cryengine supports maps with random and changing daylight settings, different weather conditions, etc." False. It only supports daylight and some kind impossible dusk seen in River City Night, where everything is dark up close, but relatively bright far away, to the point where it's easier to spot enemies if they're hiding further away. Random weather conditions for every match is also impossible.

I hope this clears things up.</p>

LOL !

[Theodore42]

Cryengine isn't the best engine for mwo but it is what we're stuck with. I don't think the maps they are coming up with are crappy. Anyone with enough time can make the most beautiful, detailed map anyone has ever seen. Now get it to run of the average pc: that's what you're gonna spend all your time on.

A much better engine would be the top of my list for MWO2. Cryengine is for FPS games and seems limited for something like MWO. Maybe an engine from a flight simulator or something like that would be more appropriate. I would rather have fewer maps as big as Chenarus (from arma2 and DayZ) than a bunch of little maps a mile or two across. But that is a dream within a dream.

[Ryoken]

Hm did I just see the exact same Jungle Tree with Lianes in the Warthunder and in the first MW:LL video?
Seems both are strongly using the engines standard assets. Maybe PGI could get some more maps out fast if they would do to.

Still those videos show what is possible in building maps, and I hope some day we will get there with MWO to.

And when it comes to Warthunder and World of tanks, those games are only fun if you like to play in a wet dream of soviet propaganda.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

As often as WoT and WT get compared to MWO, Warthunder has attention to detail going for it and WoT has map quantity going for it. Other than that, those games are garbage regarding balance that they make MWO look fair and balanced.

[Turist0AT]

Lord Scarlett Johan of Yazoo, on 18 August 2014 - 04:30 AM, said:

As often as WoT and WT get compared to MWO, Warthunder has attention to detail going for it and WoT has map quantity going for it. Other than that, those games are garbage regarding balance that they make MWO look fair and balanced.

WT is a simulator. balance can go f it self.

[Khobai]

Quote

Release actual Solaris content as an MC subscription,

No. Segregating the player base based on who pays and who doesnt is exactly what they SHOULDNT do.

[Jonny Taco]

Kyle Wright, on 17 August 2014 - 04:35 PM, said:

The guy who did 2 maps on MW: LL did it on his own for fun. Gaijiin who does War Thunder I believe is the same size of PGI.

While gaigin may be extremely biased... Example being that they add the m71 m-185 of which only 1 prototype with that engine was ever built yet they will not introduce 44-1 fuel for p-51 and p-47 which is the fuel the 8th air force used from 44-45.... Now ignoring my specific gripes with the selection of aircraft and performance levels, Gaigin is certainly an industry leader when it comes to tech. Compare introducing an airplane with a new fm to that of a mech.... Yeah, it's not even remotely close... Now compare the relatively comparable team sizes and the manner in which they monetize... In terms of quality of developer, gaigin makes pgi look like an incompetent child.

[Turist0AT]

lartfor, on 18 August 2014 - 05:28 AM, said:

In terms of quality of developer, gaigin makes pgi look like an incompetent child.

Hah! Gold.

[CDLord HHGD]

cdlord, on 18 August 2014 - 04:19 AM, said:

For PGI and concerning maps, the devil is in the details. I'm very much a PGI white knight but they do need to take note and figure out how to put maps on an assembly line. $250k per map is not sustainable and there's something very wrong with the process.

Also, why the repeat thread??

[Satan n stuff]

Anjian, on 18 August 2014 - 01:37 AM, said:

I always wonder like wow, what if you do Mechwarrior using this game engine. Gaijin actually licenses the game engine should any desire.

Aren't those the same fools who made that xblades thing a couple of years ago? They make good games now?

Edited by Satan n stuff, 18 August 2014 - 05:52 AM.

[Andross Deverow]

Alistair Winter, on 18 August 2014 - 03:26 AM, said:

Let me just debunk a few myths in this thread:

• "Other games have destructible terrain". False. Destructible terrain is impossible with today's technology, otherwise we would have it in this game. We used to have 1 destructible tree, but it had to be removed because it crashed the servers.
  
• "It's fairly easy to make maps. Many amateurs have made great maps on their spare time, as a hobby." False. Maps are extremely complex and mysterious. It costs $250,000 to make a map, and it will be full of bugs, broken geometry and places where you will get stuck.
  
• "Many fans would be happy with simple maps with nothing but hills and trees." False. MWO fans would rather wait 1 year for every new map, as long as they have the same quality as recent maps, such as HPG Manifold and Terra Therma, with volcano platforms and underground generators.
  
• "Cryengine was made for games with beautiful, lush forests and jungles". False. Cryengine can only be used to make maps with snow, sand, rock and mud. Any trees will be brown, half-dead, acid-burned husks, with pine needles. Green leaves are impossible.
  
• "Cryengine supports maps with random and changing daylight settings, different weather conditions, etc." False. It only supports daylight and some kind impossible dusk seen in River City Night, where everything is dark up close, but relatively bright far away, to the point where it's easier to spot enemies if they're hiding further away. Random weather conditions for every match is also impossible.

I hope this clears things up.

Oooooooook....

* Your first point - What color is the sky in your world?
* Your second point - Refer to my question regarding your first point.
* Let me say that you are horribly mistaken on your third point. Noone other than yourself feels that 1 map/year is acceptable. In all actuality it is a joke that PGI has so little content for this game after a couple years.
* Your fourth point - Refer to my question regarding your first point.
* Your fifth point - Refer to my question regarding your first point.

Regards

[3rdworld]

Does anyone actually believe PGI has a map department at this point?

[Satan n stuff]

Andross Deverow, on 18 August 2014 - 05:59 AM, said:

Oooooooook....

* Your first point - What color is the sky in your world?
* Your second point - Refer to my question regarding your first point.
* Let me say that you are horribly mistaken on your third point. Noone other than yourself feels that 1 map/year is acceptable. In all actuality it is a joke that PGI has so little content for this game after a couple years.
* Your fourth point - Refer to my question regarding your first point.
* Your fifth point - Refer to my question regarding your first point.

Regards

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, Andross.

[Andross Deverow]

Satan n stuff, on 18 August 2014 - 06:05 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, Andross.

LIES!!! ZOMG!!!

LOL!

[Angel of Annihilation]

Well I think the issue isn't that they can't make maps, but rather they don't want to make maps.

There was a PGI post where they came right out and said that maps take up resources and since maps provide very little financial return (as opposed to hero mechs, clan mechs and swag) that maps were considered a very low priority.

So if and only if they can figure out a way to get away with charging for access to new map, then we will get new maps.

Pretty sad really.

I remember a computer company I worked for. At the time is was bigger than Dell and its stock split like two to three times in less than 2 years because it was doing so well. Then new management came in and basically looked at the financials and realized that they only made about a 10% profit on selling a computer but made anywhere from 25%-200% profit on selling printers, scanners, cables and software. They then made it mandatory for its sales reps to sell 5 addons for each computer in order to keep our jobs so inevitably the sales reps stop focusing on selling computers and focused on selling everything else.

Here is the problem, they forgot that Software, Printers, Scanners and cables were useless without the computer and that people were coming to the store to buy a computer not the other stuff so the company closed its retail operation about 6 months after the change.

PGI is doing the same thing. The are forgetting that Hero mechs, Clan packs and swag are useless without a good game to back it up. If they don't get it though their head soon that the Game needs to come first, they are going to end up just like that multibillion dollar computer company I worked for that lost 75% of its market share in 6 months.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 18 August 2014 - 06:39 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

PGI sucks. Nuff said.

[Roland]

Viktor Drake, on 18 August 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

There was a PGI post where they came right out and said that maps take up resources and since maps provide very little financial return (as opposed to hero mechs, clan mechs and swag) that maps were considered a very low priority.

It's kind of sad that a company could be so shortsighted as to not grasp that more maps would mean more people enjoy playing the game, which would mean they would buy more stuff.

[DustySkunk]

Alistair Winter, on 18 August 2014 - 03:26 AM, said:

Let me just debunk a few myths in this thread:

-Stuff that's partially true

I hope this clears things up.

Crysis, MW:LL and Far Cry would like a word with you...

Alistair, you are right that maps are not easy to make. However I think you need to re-examine some of your statements here. There are games that use the Crytek engines that allow for everything you said was false. Destructible terrain, lush forest, huge (balanced) maps, and day/night cycles all with the same technology. Just because it may be out of the purview (or willingness) of PGI doesn't mean it's impossible.

Also, the you mentioned that the entire MWO community would be satisfied waiting a year(s) for a map. How often do we see threads calling for new maps? How often do we see threads holding up MW:LL as an example of what could be? Making a sweeping generalization about the community's wishes like this (when there is so much evidence to the contrary) is asking to turn this thread into a flame war.

I, for one, tend to agree with the MW:LL group. This was a team of talented modders that accomplished something amazing in their free time while working full time jobs to put food on the table. They weren't even paid, didn't have access to the engine source code and still managed to make an incredible game. I hesitate to even call it a mod because it is so radically different from the game they modded. PGI has access to the source code, is being paid to develop this full time, and have created a product (which although may be updated to today's standards graphically) is missing half the features of MW:LL. If development on MW:LL wasn't forcefully stopped and if it wasn't such a pain in the butt to find a game these days, I might have switched back a long time ago. If there was an exodus back to MW:LL tomorrow, I would play for certain.

However that isn't likely to happen, and I'm now invested in MWO. I want to see it succeed and an exodus back to MW:LL (while it would prove to be immensely satisfying) would only serve to hurt this game and our chances at seeing more games from the Battletech IP in the future.

Listen, I'm all for the positive changes these days PGI has been making. I understand the needs of a F2P business model and am willing to make some concessions for it. Eventually, I may forgive them for the blunders they made with the community about broken promises and moving away from their original design model. But, I'm not willing to call a horse something other than a horse. PGI either can't or won't make map making a priority. They have given up on destructible terrain because it is difficult to sync all of the game objects on 24 clients. MWO has become something other than the Mechwarrior we all know and love. Not necessarily bad, just very different. Maps, immersion, and varied game-play are victims of this transition.

Edited by DustySkunk, 18 August 2014 - 06:52 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Viktor Drake, on 18 August 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

Well I think the issue isn't that they can't make maps, but rather they don't want to make maps.

There was a PGI post where they came right out and said that maps take up resources and since maps provide very little financial return (as opposed to hero mechs, clan mechs and swag) that maps were considered a very low priority.

So if and only if they can figure out a way to get away with charging for access to new map, then we will get new maps.

Pretty sad really.

I remember a computer company I worked for. At the time is was bigger than Dell and its stock split like two to three times in less than 2 years because it was doing so well. Then new management came in and basically looked at the financials and realized that they only made about a 10% profit on selling a computer but made anywhere from 25%-200% profit on selling printers, scanners, cables and software. They then made it mandatory for its sales reps to sell 5 addons for each computer in order to keep our jobs so inevitably the sales reps stop focusing on selling computers and focused on selling everything else.

Here is the problem, they forgot that Software, Printers, Scanners and cables were useless without the computer and that people were coming to the store to buy a computer not the other stuff so the company closed its retail operation about 6 months after the change.

PGI is doing the same thing. The are forgetting that Hero mechs, Clan packs and swag are useless without a good game to back it up. If they don't get it though their head soon that the Game needs to come first, they are going to end up just like that multibillion dollar computer company I worked for that lost 75% of its market share in 6 months.

This.

I hope this isnt the way it is, but the lack of maps, the players stuck in the mechbay and nothing else. The ugly bat taken to Island City. So much focus on none mechwarrior "stuff" in game. Wood speakers, and PLAY NOW buttons. All of this has made me wonder for a while.

Still got my hopes up they are doing the best they can and not throttling this game. Looking forward to coming updates although the guilds being added doesnt affect my game.

Edited by Johnny Z, 18 August 2014 - 01:21 PM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Why not make new maps available only in the Premium Time Private Lobby for x days before releasing for general use? I could deal with that if it meant more maps.