#auniversetoexplore
#101
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:27 PM
Can we get some assurances that you guys at least expanded the MWO team a little with the money you made off Clans?
#102
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:27 PM
Yet, you have enough resources to start a project that is "the biggest undertaking ever by Piranha Games"?
How about you do 10 vs 12, stop half way developing this game and do what the community asks of you. As a game developer, this is completely baffling.
Also, website registration shows that website was registered June 10th.
How long has that project been siphoning resources from this one?
Edited by Gyrok, 05 September 2014 - 09:47 PM.
#104
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:36 PM
#105
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:38 PM
#106
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:38 PM
PGI is trying to make a game that doesn't have a beloved, pre-existing IP to rely on for players? And it's just going to be another drop-in-the-bucket space sim in a market flooded with them?
Well. Good luck with that. Not even going to touch the unfortunate implications this has for MWO, that seems pretty well covered by previous posters.
Edited by Elkfire, 05 September 2014 - 09:45 PM.
#107
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:39 PM
#108
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:39 PM
still, good luck with the game pgi.
#109
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:42 PM
I thought one of the problems we had with features for MWO was the bottleneck of having enough coders and engineers to do work for it.
And so you hire a team to code and work on a completely different game.
I get that you're a business and want to make money, but there's a lot to be said for having a fully flushed out project as an example to investors.
Unless this new game is based on a known IP, you won't have a built in audience and it will be playing into a flooded market. Please invest these new resources into coding for this (MWO) product.
/concerned Gut
p.s. Please remove about 80% of the grind on leveling mechs, also make each mech around $5, and fix the dang net code.
Edit: A point brought up further along: If someone is investing in a new product that doesn't touch the resources of this product, it still doesn't mean that you shouldn't have convinced them to expand this property instead. I reiterate the product point: make a solid product first, don't just present a dollar sign.
Edited by Gut, 05 September 2014 - 10:13 PM.
#110
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:42 PM
Mal, on 05 September 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:
Yes its true that Devs work on multiple games, in this case, PGI has to actually be working on one to be working an another.
White Panther, on 05 September 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:
Just give it up already Bryan, you're done. There is no way people are going to trust you guys the same way again.
Yes I've considered this as well. Its just kinda sad.
Sandpit, on 05 September 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:
Sorry not buying it. PGI is a small unknown in the industry that's produced ONE title with a HORRIBLE development cycle. This isn't a major company with dozens of AAA titles under their belt. Their one and only title is lucky to hit 6 on metacritic. Yet I'm expected tp believe that IGP (who apparently can't even keep MWT going) gave them capitol to start another IP? Or even that some other publisher decided PGI was a top notch company with a great track record and picked them to develop a new game?
I don't buy it at this point. Times like these I miss roadbeer
What happened to Roadbeer?
Redshift2k5, on 05 September 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:
Meh, PGI was never involved in Tactics. Barking up the wrong tree.
True, but a large amount of the founders package money went to support MWTactics.
#111
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:47 PM
ICEFANG13, on 05 September 2014 - 09:42 PM, said:
Check the reddit page:
http://www.reddit.co..._game/?sort=new
#113
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:50 PM
Heffay, on 05 September 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:
Ugh... no. Horrible idea. Why do people keep promoting this??
Because it is better than nerf bat whack-a-mole, and is something THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL wants...outside of a few sniveling noses crying "esport" that is complete BS, MWO will never be an esport.
Redshift2k5, on 05 September 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:
IGP invested money and was due their share, which they spent on another project. That's what publishers do.
Except the SAME developer is who is developing that one...
#114
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:57 PM
#115
Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:59 PM
Carrie Harder, on 05 September 2014 - 09:47 PM, said:
Yeah I just noticed that, I don't much care for Reddit or Twitter, but this game has its info all over the place, so I've gotten more used to it.
So uh banning Roadbeer and Sandpit, um. They make the forums more interesting and better, maybe not a good move, but then again, most of the moves are pretty poor here. Didn't he get a little award too for being an outstanding poster? I dunno he is a pretty cool guy, both of them are actually.
#116
Posted 05 September 2014 - 10:01 PM
#117
Posted 05 September 2014 - 10:05 PM
Rebas Kradd, on 05 September 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:
See, that's just it...you shouldn't have to. This is a terrible PR model for PGI. Upset everyone first, then do damage control.
Hasn't that been PGI's PR model all along? Has PGI ever had an announcement that didn't end up with a huge forum backlash?
Looking at the site, I have to wonder: Can PGI make an 'epic' game? All I have seen so far is 'minimally viable' and rather unambitious.
#119
Posted 05 September 2014 - 10:08 PM
ICEFANG13, on 05 September 2014 - 09:42 PM, said:
I hate seeing this rumour spread around as gospel. I've never seen anything to indicate that it happened, except for a bunch of rabid fanatics insisting that it must be so. If you or anyone else got some evidence that money PGI got for MWO was spend on MWT (developed by three different developers, none of whom were PGI), let's see it.
Yep, I agree that this is a terrible time for PGI to announce a new game, especially without providing any details other than "we're spending time making a new game". Not because I think there's anything wrong with them doing it, but because the public response is going to be, well, pretty much the vitriol that has been the last 6 pages. The money invested to start this new game almost certainly came from a publisher or other third-party investor, not the community - a solely crowdfunded game gets you something on the scale of Shadowrun Returns, not MWO. As much as we might want it to be, that money (and the time and employees it buys) can't simply be diverted to another project - for exactly the same reason we don't want the money we spend on MWO spent on AUTE, the investors who started this project aren't going to want it spent on MWO.
That appearance, though, is what I'm concerned about. Maybe let AUTE brew quietly in the background for a bit longer, finish up community warfare, and then announce that there's a new game that's been under development once we've got our cookies. Don't tease us with it, either. The MWO community, at least, has had enough vague hints of forthcoming content.
#120
Posted 05 September 2014 - 10:10 PM
3 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users