543 replies to this topic

[Dolph Hoskins]

retracted

refraining from going off topic.

Edited by The Ripper13, 09 September 2014 - 09:39 AM.

[Grugore]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

There is much discussion, with the announcement of the New Game, Niko's Community Post, the recent spate of communication by Russ, etc. Some are angry. Some are happy, a lot are justifiably confused, and or, concerned. I'm probably a little bit of all the above.

While reading some comments and replies by other long term community forum members and contributors, it got me really thinking. Especially about focus on cleaning up the toxicity on the Forums. Some find it offensive. Some "silly". Others a great thing. But the more I think it through, I can't say I find the intent to be silliness. Or wrong. All I have to do is think of the number of innocuous threads (even things like Art posts) derailed and led into unsubstantiated, circular arguments to the point the thread was effectively derailed.

Simple truth is, there was a subset of people who posted for no reason other than to undermine the Devs, and this Community. One could argue that some have justified reasons, others have this fever dream that they can get PGI stripped of the License, and some other studio will ride in and save MechWarrior (despite no one touching it with a 10 ft pole for a decade), do these "contributions", in the future in any way benefit the Community?

In the real world, there are repercussions to undermining the order of a community. Fact is, on a Online Forum, there is ZERO "right" to free speech. These can at times, be amongst the most toxic forums. Individuals do not always provide constructive criticism, but look to tear the community down, be it because the game didn't unfold the way they thought it should, or because they think they are being a BD(i)H, or because certain individuals and groups simply like to watch things burn.

That is known as being a cancer. Cancer left alone, festers, and eventually kills a community and a game as surely as anything. To prevent that from happening to our community we need to try to support the efforts of Niko and the Mods, not fight them. If we try to minimize the unfounded negativity, and focus on constructive input, of both the good and the bad (as we perceive it), the general attitudes of the Forums, the Game and Community can change very rapidly, to a positive and welcoming experience for players, new and old. MWO has a good community, for the most part. With a few angry bad apples. But by and large, even those critical of the direction, or some decisions, are mostly positive contributions to the health of the Community.

Now.

That doesn't let PGI off the hook. In my mind, it now put the burden even more squarely on them. PGI has one less excuse for issues, for not communicating with us. The millstone of certain people rampantly attacking their every word, should be reduced or removed. So now they need to step up in a big way. Communicate. Deliver. LISTEN. And when things go sideways, as will ALWAYS happen, communicate some more. The same standards we the community are held to, the Mods, volunteer or otherwise, and Devs, need to be held to, ALSO.

Our role?

CONSTRUCTIVE Criticism. When and where there are legit issues, that can realistically expect to be balanced, fixed, etc? We need to, in concise and civil manners, bring it to PGI's attention. I have actually found considerable success just tagging Russ on Twitter, and instead of being confrontational, saying "hey, discovered this issue", or "hey, had this idea". Doesn't mean everything is handled the way I want, and doesn't mean I like having to go to twitter to get it done. Perhaps now though, Russ can actually get a word in edgewise on PGI's own forums, he might use it more regularly.

There are certainly things to complain about. Some of the Clan Balance ideas were just poorly handled. Invisible walls on 2 year old mps, etc. Yet I get the feeling that half the people doing the complaining, have never bothered to submit detailed support tickets about these things, either. And other things, we just have to accept are NOT going to change, like the Heat System. Sized Hardpoints, etc. Would they make it better? Almost certainly. And nearly 3 yrs down the rabbit hole, such a core tear down is almost certainly NOT going to happen. So stop cluttering every post opining about these things, and then decrying PGI as idiots. It just makes getting the things we can realistically expect to see fixed, harder to dig out and find.

And if that is not acceptable to folk? There's the door. Get off PGI's Boat. Go, live long, prosper. FInd a game that DOES make you happy, and go enjoy the rainbows and sunshine there. (Though I have a feeling many of the usual suspects, will be just as miserable and complaining on other forums too, as some folks are only happy when they are making things miserable for everyone, themselves included). But there is no reason to be HERE, making themselves, and everyone else miserable, and stirring up trouble.

So me? Yeah, there are issues. And I plan to keep calling PGI out when I see them. But it is past high time this town had a Sheriff, and the riff-raff got the heck out of Dodge.


As for the continued life cycle and viability of this game? Can't say my name is Nostradamus. But it would be silly for them, at this point to abandon it, now that the "hard part" is mostly over (finally, and yes, well behind schedule). PGI is a Dev Studio on the other hand, not a Mechwarrior Studio. If you expected them to spend every cent, every waking moment, from now til eternity on MWO, then you really need a reality check. They need to develop games to grow and have a chance at being stable and healthy, as a business. But as CW get's implemented, the actual staff demand for MWO will go down, freeing up programmers for other games, which are known as Revenue Streams, which keep the lights on, and all the titles running.

So if you are secretly hoping this new game fails, or that PGI loses the MWO franchise, you are really sabotaging yourself. BEcause if this new venture fails, MWO will almost certainly go dark. And since no one BUT Smith and Tinker/PGI were willing to actually pay for the license in the last decade of MWO, don't expect some major "good" studio to run in, scoop it up, and save the day. PGI fails, MechWarrior is probably dead, for a very very long time, if not permanently.

I am all for discussion here, for disagreement. But to hope and expect, as Niko apparently does, that it be productive, constructive, intelligent and CIVIL, is not in unreasonable.

I hope the Devs and Mods weigh in on this also, and speak their peace, correct misassumptions of mine, etc. THAT is part of healthy dialogue.





oh..TL;DR? Too bad. I'm not looking to give sound bites and CliffsNotes. Read and contribute, or do not.





Cheers, fellow mechwarriors. Let's see how CW unfolds, and I hope to see ALL of you, dirtside.



(this started as a reply, in a different thread, so you will likely see an edited version, elsewhere in the forums)

With the news on this post, looks like a new beginning, to me.
http://mwomercs.com/...s-igp-feedback/

I'm reminded of what happened during, or shortly after closed beta. The devs wanted to add third person view to the game. The Mechwarrior Community was overwhelmingly against it. The devs decided to do it anyway. That proved, to me, that they don't listen to the players. You know, the ones who are paying their salary.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

Well, we will continue to disagree on aiming. I will say, find me the tank that has perfectly stable aiming, or any combat vehicle, at flank speed over rough terrain (and humanoid locomotion naturally sways more than wheeled/tracked (though also absorbs impact better), and I will conceded.

You want perfect aim? You stop, or go very slow for the second you line up. You don't blast 20,000 lbs of thrust out your butt and launch like a titan rocket (ok...well, like really shaky hoversled now), or sprint across broken terrain, and have millimetric precision, a kilometer out. So yeah, sorry if I feel it takes more skill to deal with things like that, and succeed, than pick a pixel.

As for why more people don't do it, it's a matter of reflexes. Some have it, some don't. But super reflexes should only take one so far, and not, IMO (note I say, IMO) negate "reality factors". Also things like the sputtering reticle under high heat load in early CB IMO (again) added a heck of a lot of immersion to the game, and helped make people more circumspect about their heat management.


As for stubborn people debating....here? In an online Stompy Robot Forum?!?!?! Never happen!


No, you just need to fall back to the definition still used by almost anyone who actually knows what they are talking about.

Show me a Battlemech in real life using a gyroscope feeding it the humans centre of balance.

Show me the 360 hud, that has a crosshair projected onto it from inside the cockpit.

Conversion, so that torso mounted weapons don't fire bending inwards to the reticule would be sensible.

CoF not really, not in 1050 years forward, plus movement penalties.....these just promote static camping based play in the most defendable position on the map.

Like i say if aiming is so easy i presume all your weapon stats are 90%+ Bishop? and mechs fall before you with missing CT's in 2-4 shots.

Edited by DV McKenna, 09 September 2014 - 09:44 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Thirdstar, on 09 September 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Now that's the Bishop Steiner I know and love.

And there's the Thirdstar I still ignore.

[Roland]

I think that you're both arguing past each other, in that I think the solution is to make the convergence system more complex, without simply injecting randomization into the game.

Frankly, just having the arms and torso separate led to some convergence disparity, and adding in arm lock was one of the worst possible changes they ever made.

[CeeKay Boques]

I'm not sure if they're done, but I'm getting off here. Man. 4 years of white knighting, 6 months of Gray Knighting, and you make a new IP, while pushing back something you promised years ago.


I... I hope you fail.

[Bishop Steiner]

Grugore, on 09 September 2014 - 09:09 AM, said:

I'm reminded of what happened during, or shortly after closed beta. The devs wanted to add third person view to the game. The Mechwarrior Community was overwhelmingly against it. The devs decided to do it anyway. That proved, to me, that they don't listen to the players. You know, the ones who are paying their salary.

Yep. Kind of missed the point. We don't know how much of which features and stuff was IG, or PGI. And if PGI has any professionalism, we will never know all the details.

Now, it's solely in PGI's court, succeed or fail.

[Torgun]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 09:05 AM, said:

OK, so old and ignorant. Something to be proud of? (Which is not something I want to accuse you. But refusing facts and arguing against them, is silly)


Or we can acknowledge a different viewpoint, and move forward. The point having been, from the get go that Russ said it could be up til Dec 21. Really our differing opinions on "Fall" are rather irrelevant to that, you know?

Yeah not knowing when fall techically ends is the height of ignorance indeed! But even then, it's better than being gullible though, generally speaking of course! So CW before the 22nd of Dec then, they better be able to keep this since PGI has full control now and really no one else to blame.

[Bishop Steiner]

DV McKenna, on 09 September 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

Show me a Battlemech in real life using a gyroscope feeding it the humans centre of balance.

Show me the 360 hud, that has a crosshair projected onto it from inside the cockpit.

Conversion, so that torso mounted weapons don't fire bending inwards to the reticule would be sensible.

CoF not really, not in 1050 years forward, plus movement penalties.....these just promote static camping based play in the most defendable position on the map.

Like i say if aiming is so easy i presume all your weapon stats are 90%+ Bishop? and mechs fall before you with missing CT's in 2-4 shots.

Nope. Because as I said, I don't have the REFLEXES (mostly due to essentially playing with one functional arm, tyvm). Love how defensive you get over this lol.

[Almond Brown]

Viktor Drake, on 08 September 2014 - 04:55 PM, said:

stuff

I know for myself, I would love to come on the forums and say, "Thanks PGI, I really like the overall improvement in JJ capabilities" or "Thanks PGI, your changes to the heat system really make playing the game more enjoyable". Those type of responses mean I am having fun and maybe more importantly, spending all my time and money on MWO. That is the game I want to play.

It is also incumbent on the players, as a whole, to show some ability to understand that PGI cannot make MWO the way "you" want it for "everyone" who plays it.

It seems as if some would rather bash the game, that they are not even playing (posted on here to state as much) because it is not "Their" vision of what this new MW game should be.

If that is the basis for ones argument, frustrations and or vitriol viewpoint then PGI, this Forum and the Community as a whole was doomed before the first Beta invite was sent out.

You know the old expression. "If you want it done right! Then you have to do it yourself!" FOr myself, I will have to use PGI's vision as I sure as hell can't do it myself, right or otherwise. But I do recognize this and don't whine and QQ about those things that could be "better" over and over ad nausea. It just doesn't help.

Time to put away the torches and pitchforks as there is plenty of blame on both sides. Besides the tide is coming in this "Island" shrinks a lot when it does.

[Bishop Steiner]

Torgun, on 09 September 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Yeah not knowing when fall techically ends is the height of ignorance indeed! But even then, it's better than being gullible though, generally speaking of course! So CW before the 22nd of Dec then, they better be able to keep this since PGI has full control now and really no one else to blame.

Really the whole point, that was trying to be made, TBH.

No more strawman, no more outside interference. It's PGI making an investment (something that seems silly to do if they were just planning to let it fail) and taking the full accountability, win or lose.

This is the first actual "clear picture" we will have of what is, and what is not PGI. Let's see where it goes.

Roland, on 09 September 2014 - 09:45 AM, said:

I think that you're both arguing past each other, in that I think the solution is to make the convergence system more complex, without simply injecting randomization into the game.

Frankly, just having the arms and torso separate led to some convergence disparity, and adding in arm lock was one of the worst possible changes they ever made.

So true.

Though I must note.....whether intentional or bugged....me and some CGBI guys have been noting some CB like convergence issues with PPCs and Gauss in the arms crossing paths and such on snapshots.

Am guessing it's a bug, but boy howdy would I love to have it back.

[Duke Hector]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

Yep. Kind of missed the point. We don't know how much of which features and stuff was IG, or PGI. And if PGI has any professionalism, we will never know all the details.

Now, it's solely in PGI's court, succeed or fail.

^exactly this

after listening to Russ last night about how CW was in some part delayed from clans due to IGP, i would not be surprised if coolent flush, and 3rd person would also be a part of that.

BUT at the end of the day i DID appreciate the level on honesty that Russ had last night and what ever happened behind closed doors should stay behind closed doors

end of story

Edited by Dan the Ice Man, 09 September 2014 - 09:53 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

Nope. Because as I said, I don't have the REFLEXES (mostly due to essentially playing with one functional arm, tyvm). Love how defensive you get over this lol.

I don't know about your one functioning arm so lets ignore that and look at it generally, according to you aiming is so easy that everyone should do it and do it exceptionally, yet we know this is not the case.

Everyone misses, everyone hits arms instead of torso's because we are human and the current and previous aiming mechanics are all about the human, something i know Roland will agree with me on, because i know he experienced it ( i don't know about you) but learning to lead targets to hit your desired panel rather than just hit the mech in general is definitely not point and click pixel work.......remember those days of shooting Clan Gauss and Light Gauss at obscene engine busting view distance Roland?
Was that point and click simply point and click?

I don't get defensive per se, i just have a different viewpoint, one that i would say is more rational than yours on this topic, because there is more to it than point and click, these aren't MW4 Lasers.

Edited by DV McKenna, 09 September 2014 - 09:55 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Technoviking, on 09 September 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

I'm not sure if they're done, but I'm getting off here. Man. 4 years of white knighting, 6 months of Gray Knighting, and you make a new IP, while pushing back something you promised years ago.


I... I hope you fail.

Sorry to see you go, and to go so bitter.

PGI is a Game Development Studio. Not a Mechwarrior Studio, bro. To make money, they need to develop games. It sounds like they have had another backer for this for some time, so TBH, I don't see one really relating much to the other, but only time will tell. Hope if things go smoother over the next few months, you return for CW.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Roland, on 09 September 2014 - 09:45 AM, said:

I think that you're both arguing past each other, in that I think the solution is to make the convergence system more complex, without simply injecting randomization into the game.

Frankly, just having the arms and torso separate led to some convergence disparity, and adding in arm lock was one of the worst possible changes they ever made.

Totally agree.

[KingCobra]

Grugore said (I'm reminded of what happened during, or shortly after closed beta. The devs wanted to add third person view to the game. The Mechwarrior Community was overwhelmingly against it. The devs decided to do it anyway. That proved, to me, that they don't listen to the players. You know, the ones who are paying their salary. )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is total bulllshittt first off during closed beta 20%of the players were probably from old PC MechWarrior games that knew 3rd person view was used in battles 90% of the time and FPV was used 10% of the time in leagues and battles. And by the way I piloted FPV and 3rd person view for 20 years in MechWarrior games and it was fun.

Then you had 80% new players in closed beta that never piloted FPV or 3rd person view at all so they had no bias towards one or the other view. Im glad PGI put in 3rd person view and it has been widely excepted by the player base as a whole so I really don't know where your coming from PAL!!!.

Im just disappointed PGI did not make it more like MechWarrior4 was for 3rd person view .

Edited by KingCobra, 09 September 2014 - 09:55 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 09:52 AM, said:

Really the whole point, that was trying to be made, TBH.

No more strawman, no more outside interference. It's PGI making an investment (something that seems silly to do if they were just planning to let it fail) and taking the full accountability, win or lose.

This is the first actual "clear picture" we will have of what is, and what is not PGI. Let's see where it goes.

So true.

Though I must note.....whether intentional or bugged....me and some CGBI guys have been noting some CB like convergence issues with PPCs and Gauss in the arms crossing paths and such on snapshots.

Am guessing it's a bug, but boy howdy would I love to have it back.

I think the break away/buy-out of IGP (the MWT situation was very poorly handled) is the best thing to happen around here for sometime. As stated, it is now all PGI. No more asking a second party. Yeehaaaa!

[Bront]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

Yep. Kind of missed the point. We don't know how much of which features and stuff was IG, or PGI. And if PGI has any professionalism, we will never know all the details.

Now, it's solely in PGI's court, succeed or fail.

Actually, I believe that was revealed to be a management decision to increase game accessibility (IE, likely IGP)?

That said, the 3PV stuff was overblown as a real issue. It's not a huge advantage, and you rarely see it used by top players (which was the fear). That's the big problem though, is folks overreact to news, and things become toxic as folks argue.

[Jody Von Jedi]

Dan the Ice Man, on 09 September 2014 - 09:52 AM, said:

^exactly this

after listening to Russ last night about how CW was in some part delayed from clans due to IGP, i would not be surprised if coolent flush, and 3rd person would also be a part of that.

BUT at the end of the day i DID appreciate the level on honesty that Russ had last night and what ever happened behind closed doors should stay behind closed doors

end of story

I'm pretty sure in one of the NGNG podcasts with Paul, the whole 3PV was forced on them by IGP. He didn't say it outright, but he said the "investor" forced it on them. I can only imagine that was IGP.

[Shismar]

I blame white knights and fanboys for the toxicity of these forums because they turn opposition to every bit of constructive criticism into a jihad. As well as the horrible communication and awfully slow development by PGI.

But hey, at least the last part will come to an end soon. Regrettably not in the way I and many friends of the game and the franchise would like to see.