Jump to content

#auniversetoexplore - Part Deux


215 replies to this topic

#201 verybad

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,229 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 11:13 AM

How has the development of Mechwarrior Online brought about this decision to make a new game?

how has MWO's decisions affected the new games decisions regarding playstyle, operation, etc?

Why was Aerotech (the space combat aspect of Battletech) not used as a basis for the new game?

#202 jozkhan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 384 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 11:16 AM

Can you see how players of MWO might feel doubecrossed over this?

After all you are cloning a business model that has been used with MWO (Founders packs and all) and using the proceeds from the success of your exploitation of the Battletech License and the established customer base of the Battletech Franchise.

With this in mind have you discussed this at all with Microsoft? They who hold the Battletech license and enabled you to make yourselves so successful with MWO. Is it not entirely likely that their own legal people may well also feel doublecrossed by this move. After all you are effectively cutting their share out of the deal and taking it for yourselves with this new venture.

You are leaving MWO behind and starting up NWO (say for example) that tastes the same but none of that pesky money to Microsoft.

This new project of yours will be successful at the cost of MWO, that's where the money is for you guys. We get that - Why pay a cut to someone else? While I'm sure we can all see the appeal $$$ for you, it does seem to appear a little too obvious what you are doing from the customer perspective and probably also from the license holders too.

Edited by jozkhan, 07 September 2014 - 11:19 AM.


#203 Igor Kozyrev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • WC 2017 Silver Champ
  • WC 2017 Silver Champ
  • 1,881 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationRussia, Siberia

Posted 07 September 2014 - 11:45 AM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 06 September 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

  • How does your new game impact the production of MWO?
  • Are you sharing resources (money, team members) between MWO and the new project?


Give me the answers on these two questions and I'll be satisfied.

#204 Flashripper

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts
  • LocationStrana Mechty

Posted 07 September 2014 - 11:57 AM

View PostVagGR, on 06 September 2014 - 07:05 AM, said:

i only have one question...

-Will you be honest with us on this subject?

If we ask you "does this impact MWO development" you will say "No". if we ask you "are you sharing resources?" you will say "No". Im pretty sure you will say what we want to hear but will it be the truth? Its hard for us to believe you since we have supported the development of MWO and that develpment is lagging behind for 2 years now and here you are starting a brand new project.

So will you be honest with us? your community, your customers, your primary source of income?


Years pass, still the same question.

#205 Scratx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 3,283 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 12:22 PM

An interesting technical question, if it hasn't been asked yet...

Q: Is MWO's current network infrastructure (the backend, that is) going to be used for the new game?

Q: If yes, will improvements on that from either project filter to the other?

#206 Harmin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts
  • LocationSussex, UK

Posted 07 September 2014 - 01:20 PM

Will the new space game take part in the Battltech Universe?

If it does, will there be synergies with current MWO units?

If it does not, why not? The franchise has a space combat element to and exploring / trading could probably be attached to it easily!

#207 Saber Avalon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 362 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 07 September 2014 - 03:26 PM

View PostNikolai Lubkiewicz, on 06 September 2014 - 02:11 PM, said:



I appreciate the apprehension. Bryan will have much juicier stuff to share early next week.
Otherwise, with regards to communications. I've already put together and effected a stronger social media policy for PGI which codifies the expectations for a healthier community. Everyone has been on-board with the new set of rules and even helped me find the holes in it's wording and logic in the initial drafts. The overarching goal of this all is to have a have a forward-facing policy which not only we, but you too can hold us to. One which embraces the philosophies of honesty, timeliness and effective knowledge management.


I'm curious what this set of rules was, because it seems to be "post new information, don't care where, just as long as it's posted." Then we have to scour twitter, reddit, and NGNG for information that should be all posted on this site. After going through the clan launch and me having been the one to collect all the clan data in a central point.... it was exhausting. Something players shouldn't have to do. It should all be on this site. Heck, there are people in my clan who don't even check this site for patch notes anymore, they go to reddit because they feel it has more information. Even then, during the clan release, I and many others asked you and the PGI staff for info, some were answered, some were not. I hounded you for a single clarification answer on something that was already stated and never did get the clarification from you, even though you said you'd send off an email about it. I had to find out for myself on the test server. I'm sorry, but that's a massive failure in community management.

Can we expect to see the same with this new IP?

View PostNikolai Lubkiewicz, on 06 September 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:


There may come a time when MWO can be called "feature complete", I think we can safely say we're not even close to that point yet. In the weeks to come, We're going to see a handful of individuals move on from MWO to take senior roles in the new project; Don't panic! We're also going to see (and are already) seeing many new fresh-faces on staff. If it helps the mental imagery, [size=4]Bryan was rummaging around the office with a measuring tape the other day trying to figure out how we're going to fit all the extra workstations needed. We're going to get to benefit from the added wisdom and experience of these new team-members too. :)


This is exactly what some of us are concerned about, reallocating and removal of resources from MWO for the new game. You just told us not to panic about the very thing we are concerned about! Your word choice is especially terrible "move on from MWO". The only time I've used the words "move on" is after the death of a family member or friend or after a break up with a girl friend..... not comforting in the least.

View PostNikolai Lubkiewicz, on 06 September 2014 - 05:47 PM, said:


At this time, Alex is sticking right where we need him most. Making glorious Mechs.


Finally, some good news!

#208 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 07 September 2014 - 04:21 PM

View PostRedshift2k5, on 06 September 2014 - 03:52 PM, said:

What lessons have you learned from MWO that you feel will make the new project succeed where MWO has faltered? (specifically the major issues of slipped deadlines and announced features not making it into final implementation)

Watch, in-game VOIP and guilds from day one. ;)

#209 chaas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clamps
  • The Clamps
  • 111 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 04:32 PM

The fact that you deleted 12 pages of "expected" responses tells me your PR department lacks someone who knows how to handle a community. When will you be hiring someone who can actually talk to us and not get petulant over things you knew we were going to say in the first place?

#210 BLOOD WOLF

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Jaws
  • The Jaws
  • 6,368 posts
  • Locationnowhere

Posted 07 September 2014 - 04:49 PM

View Postchaas, on 07 September 2014 - 04:32 PM, said:

The fact that you deleted 12 pages of "expected" responses tells me your PR department lacks someone who knows how to handle a community. When will you be hiring someone who can actually talk to us and not get petulant over things you knew we were going to say in the first place?

How about people control themselves in the first place. So even if they have an unruly response they can type it constructively. He had every right and reason to delete.

#211 Cpt Leprechaun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Howl
  • The Howl
  • 110 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 04:58 PM

View PostBLOOD WOLF, on 07 September 2014 - 04:49 PM, said:

How about people control themselves in the first place. So even if they have an unruly response they can type it constructively. He had every right and reason to delete.

how about there not be a problem to get mad about in the first place? who's plate is that on again?

#212 rusticatedcharm

    Member

  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 05:52 PM

Although I have already posted a number of questions in this thread, some new issues have come to light.

Why were members of competitive teams such as HOL and SJR informed of the IGP buyout almost a month before the general public? (This has been confirmed on two twitch streams.)

Does PGI have a policy concerning the interaction of staff members between certain groups of players so as to avoid possible conflicts of interest or competitive advantages that might arise during CW? (If any of you are familiar with EVE, the t20 incident seems something that might happen here.)

If so, what is PGI's policy in terms of favoritism shown by privileged users (employees, community figures, premier competitive players) towards outside organizations such as teams, in game clans or groups of users?

Has PGI considered something like a player-based voted on council, similar to the Council of Interstellar Management in E.V.E., that would help provide user feedback to the developers?

How do you intend do prove that MWO funding is a closed loop and not going into this separate new game?

Edited by rusticatedcharm, 07 September 2014 - 06:04 PM.


#213 H1veM1nd

    Member

  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 06:21 PM

View Postrusticatedcharm, on 07 September 2014 - 05:52 PM, said:

How do you intend do prove that MWO funding is a closed loop and not going into this separate new game?


I feel like this is the most important question.

#214 Bryan Ekman

    Creative Director

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 1,106 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 07 September 2014 - 06:30 PM

Thanks everyone for the questions! I'm working on answering these questions as we speak.

Thread will be locked and cleaned up a bit. Please hold off creating new threads until tomorrow. There will be lots of time to discuss P2 in depth after the QNA tomorrow and announcement on Tuesday!

#215 Russ Bullock

    President

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 909 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 06:37 PM

Evening everyone.

I am coming into this a little late so if I answer anything that has been covered please excuse me but I wanted to start at the very beginning and work through the whole post.

May as well start with this one:

View PostJules Vernes, on 06 September 2014 - 06:57 AM, said:

Soooo...how DOES your new game impact the production of MWO?


This is obviously the number one question.

I absolutely feel I can answer with 100% confidence that the development of a second game will no impact MWO in any way. Now let's remember saying it will not impact MWO development is not the same thing as saying zero resources will be shared or swapped.

For instance it might be the case that were completely finished developing an Installer and build process for MWO just as an example, if the resource who develops those aspects for MWO moves over to develop those items for our second project, it doesn't impact MWO development in any way. There are other examples that would be valid as well, at this point MWO is a mature product and even though we still have lots of work to do, its not the same type of work we have been doing these first three years.

MWO development is dependent only on it's own viability as a product and nothing else. As long as you the customer are supporting its development we will continue to develop it.

Since I will have more opportunities to answer this quesiton I will leave this question with that much information and move on.

#216 Russ Bullock

    President

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 909 posts

Posted 07 September 2014 - 07:42 PM

Okay looks like a great change of plans.

We will get that QnA posted tomorrow and then I look forward seeing you all at the town hall

http://mwomercs.com/...-russ-on-twitch

I will stay as long as needed to address everyones questions about the future of MWO which is looking very bright.

See you tomorrow.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users