543 replies to this topic

[Nichiren]

There's a lot of good points made by a lot of people in this thread. A lot of folks here are hurt by perceived or real slights made by the company. The company has stated they have made mistakes and haven't lived up to the expectations they set for themselves or for its player base. There's a lot of reasons for it. Some easier to swallow for folks than others.

Yes, it is worth looking at things such as the release of mechs for cash and the lack of tweaks to some maps that could use them. Some of that could be due to the manpower at PGI, their priorities being different than what people would like. It's my understanding(and I could be wrong) that during the stream last night, Russ stated how they really only had one artist working on the map side of things. I'm not certain if that artist shares duties with modeling mechs or texturing them.

Regardless, I don't know if anyone can say with absolute certainty that the delivery of all the mechs is motivated solely by monetary gains. They want to get CW out and to do that, they need to get the clan mechs out. The MC/c-bill argument is solely a time management and money issue on the players with the exception of some hero mechs.

Do you have the expendable cash? If yes, do you want the new mech early? Beautiful. That's a choice beholden only to you.

Missing features, slow development cycle, etc. All valid points that Russ acknowledged. We can all hold PGI accountable for making promises they couldn't deliver. It seems PGI is doing the same, at least now. I find it hard to believe that the men(and potential women) of the company are any happier about it than we are as players. They play the game too, despite what people may feel in regards to the balancing issues.

I think one of the important things that people have to do now is take a slow step back and try to look at the bigger picture. Realize that no matter how big a fan of the Battletech universe you may be, now matter how the tabletop was balanced, how the books were written. Things are going to be different. There's no two ways about it.

This is not a singleplayer game. MWO is always going to be an evolving landscape for as long as it's up and running. Metas will and are going to continue to change as min/maxers find and exploit the absolute best possible combinations to most easily and efficiently stomp their enemies. By the same token, you'll always have other folks who are get their enjoyment from running less-seen builds, or playing 'weaker' mechs to either challenge themselves or simply because they enjoy them for one reason or another. Nothing PGI can do is going to make everyone happy. People will be unhappy with an RNG set in their weapon accuracy. People will be unhappy with instant, 100% accurate pinpoint.

Ultimately, PGI will balance for what they feel is the healthy majority of the game. Be it 'casuals' or 'hardcores'. Can there be a happy medium? Maybe. But it's not going to be easy to find, if ever, and even if there comes a day where there is a modicum of it, you'll still have the vocal minority of both sides expressing their displeasure.

Ask yourself if you're comfortable supporting a game that's vision of MWO may not be as absolute as your own. If not. Ask yourself if you're willing to compromise that golden path, or at least pave the road a little wider to give more folks room to walk. If the answer is still no. Then you might need to come to terms with the fact that MWO will never fulfill the vision you want it to, and it's time to enjoy something else rather than stay in a miserable relationship.

Keep in mind that devs are not robots. They're human beings and deserve every right to be treated as such. Humans make mistakes, some worse than others. PGI is still learning, still growing, despite people insisting they're not. No, it's not perfect. Yes, there are still aspects of the game that are missing or a mess.

I think, more than anything, that we need a clear and concise picture of what PGI envisions MWO becoming. But, let's not burn them at the stake. Get the information, weigh it against your own views of what you want the game to become and if they are so terribly disjointed that you want to start throwing rocks, just..stop playing and stop paying. First and foremost, consumers speak with their wallets. I'd love to have a clear and mutual dialogue with the guys at PGI, but it's hard to blame their reluctance given the complete lack of give and take demonstrated by some of the forum members.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

Since the project was apparently pitches at Q4 last year, or Q1 this year, I would dare say, that "waiting til Q1" of next year would have cost them the gig. Since They hired new staff specifically for that (and one must assume with funding provided for that project, listening to russ describe int last night), in the end, it really has no impact on MWO, except a possible second revenue stream to keep PGI solvent, and thus MWO running.

Perhaps, but I have a hard time believing things are going to remain or even that they are as rosy as Russ describes. He is asking for a reboot on our memory of things prior to this year, but until I see some evidence that things are actually improving beyond hitting a couple deadlines for a change I will remain at best cautiously optimistic.

For me there are too many questions about this project, and on what happens if it struggles. Will Russ and the others panic and cut it off like so much dead weight, or will they try desperately to keep it afloat by diverting resources both liquid and physical from other places to keep their new pet project going? Until MWO was able to get all four of its legs under it they should have been more cautious about rocking the boat with unknown variables from a new project.

[Deathlike]

Bishop, let me be clear about this entire issue...

I don't have a problem giving PGI a second chance or a "fresh start", but let's be honest... I have effectively given them multiple second chances they don't fail to disappoint. At this stage of the game, it's put up or shut up. The problem is that to some degree, they haven't put the effort into some of it. Even Russ wrote in that Clan vs IS balance thing... they "hope" that would be the "last balance" change needed... when anyone with a clue knows.. it's not even close to being done at all (Flamers being #1 on that list as it were).

We can go chapter and verse WHAT THEY DID THIS YEAR, and it's not all perfect.

UI 2.0 is still the most frustrating UI experience ever, despite improvements to it. I swear to get what amounts to a "basic feature" that players need and want, it has to be a hostage negotiation to get it put in. For instance, why isn't it possible to get a HS count, like we did in UI 1.5? How about a "free critspace" count that we haven't seen since UI 1.5? How about showing the ammo loadout as part of the UI w/o having to goto the mech details section? That doesn't even begin to express how we're not going to get anything resembling smurfy's until realistically next year. These things add up and don't play well with everyone. Just because the people can at least "tolerate it", when we reference stuff that was AVAILABLE in the previous UI and NOT in the CURRENT UI, there's something wrong with this "upgrade".

"CW Phase 1" is only what people have asked for since the beginning. I don't grasp or understand how it took literally a year after launch to complete something as basic as this... and IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE STRICTLY FROM THE FORUMS. Putting it in game obviously is easier as people don't often want/need to goto the forums, but this kind of design could have been dealt forum-wise long before (it's been done in leagues, so it isn't actually implausible to do it otherwise). It's hard to say this is a great plus, when certainly didn't have to be held back by UI 2.0.

The most recent post about Clan vs IS balance is appalling. To say that they don't want to tweak any more stuff (outside of what they intend to tweak in the near future) is insulting. Those feedback threads about any PTS/balance changes have been nothing short of meaningless in the grand scheme of things... choosing "the easy route" of doing things instead of small progressive tweaks that in time would have been more acceptable. Clamoring for balance w/o actually asking the right questions or drawing the proper conclusions based on what was changed is mindblowing at times. There is no logic or reason... occasionally half-reasoning w/o actually being thorough and critical to the points made. There is no warm and fuzzy feeling when I make very critical statements about balance (or another else for that matter), and proceed to see minimal change/impact. That is when I cannot seriously take PGI at its word.

Of course, all of the opinions are subjective, but considering what matters most is that the people decide what is working/good and what is terrible/bad/needs fixing. To strictly believe everything is good is bad. To strictly believe everything is bad is still bad. However, the fact that feedback isn't really being listened to, is probably more disconcerting than anything above all else. So even while you got Paul to comment on this thread, it doesn't change the fact that so many things that are supposed to fall on his shoulders, and gets plenty of feedback on stuff... nothing really changes from what he has put down. So, it's hard to give people free passes until they themselves prove to everyone that they can be trusted. Trust is earned, not given for free. The skepticism for what PGI is doing is well deserved. It is up to PGI to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Every single time I see the talk, there's no meaningful progress... no walk. We can always "loosely claim" that PGI did X or Y, but did they do a quality job of X or Y? That isn't up for another person to tell me... I can see with my own eyes if it was a good job or not. I can still safely say, MWO needs a boatload of work before I will give it a fair shake. That is still up to PGI to accomplish, not my "basic" expectations that keeps getting lowered each and every patch day. I cannot say there is "quality" when the bar gets lowered so often.

TL;DR - It is up to PGI to mean what they say and say what they mean AND DO A QUALITY JOB. Failure to do so will only prove the past is more indicative of the future. They can have their second chance, but the proof is in the players stick around to find out if they are true to their word. If there's no meaningful CW before the end of this year, there is no future for PGI.

[Bishop Steiner]

WarHippy, on 09 September 2014 - 10:37 AM, said:

Perhaps, but I have a hard time believing things are going to remain or even that they are as rosy as Russ describes. He is asking for a reboot on our memory of things prior to this year, but until I see some evidence that things are actually improving beyond hitting a couple deadlines for a change I will remain at best cautiously optimistic.

For me there are too many questions about this project, and on what happens if it struggles. Will Russ and the others panic and cut it off like so much dead weight, or will they try desperately to keep it afloat by diverting resources both liquid and physical from other places to keep their new pet project going? Until MWO was able to get all four of its legs under it they should have been more cautious about rocking the boat with unknown variables from a new project.

Yup.

But here is a what if. And mind you, just postulation. But still a what if to ponder.

IF... a lot of the issues was the oversight and demands of a bean counting publisher
and
IF .. PGI used the Clan Pack sales and the patronage/funding of A Universe to Explore to build their buy-out nest egg, to free themselves of IGP goals which were obviously no inline with PGIs, and to allow them the freedom to focus on their vision of MWO.....

would it not make sense, and be worth it?


I cannot prove that is so, but even at the end of last year and earlier this year, Paul had made several...open....comments to leave one wondering about the relationship with IGP. Even at the launch event, talking to him, I got the distinct impression he did NOT feel the game was ready for launch. And on an NGNG interview pre Clan Launch, he intimated things were pushed ahead of what he thought they should be.

So I freely admit, I do not know the inner workings of what happened. But to me, from what I have garnered on the outside looking in, a lot of their moves in the past year have been aimed at taking the power back, as it were.

But in truth, I am more concerned with what they do with it NOW, then what may have happened in the past, which no one outside IGP/PGI actually knows.

But the simple fact they pursued and obtained full rights to the IP back, to me sounds like a definite commitment to MWOs future.

[Nichiren]

Deathlike, on 09 September 2014 - 10:42 AM, said:

Even Russ wrote in that Clan vs IS balance thing... they "hope" that would be the "last balance" change needed... when anyone with a clue knows.. it's not even close to being done at all (Flamers being #1 on that list as it were).

To be fair, he stated last night on the stream that he hoped it would be the last nerf to clan lasers. I do well and truly hope that flamers will get some love sooner rather than later, but no one really knows where(or if) that's on the list of priorities.

[KingCobra]

Nichiren said (There's a lot of good points made by a lot of people in this thread. A lot of folks here are hurt by perceived or real slights made by the company. The company has stated they have made mistakes and haven't lived up to the expectations they set for themselves or for its player base. There's a lot of reasons for it. Some easier to swallow for folks than others.

Yes, it is worth looking at things such as the release of mechs for cash and the lack of tweaks to some maps that could use them. Some of that could be due to the manpower at PGI, their priorities being different than what people would like. It's my understanding(and I could be wrong) that during the stream last night, Russ stated how they really only had one artist working on the map side of things. I'm not certain if that artist shares duties with modeling mechs or texturing them.

Regardless, I don't know if anyone can say with absolute certainty that the delivery of all the mechs is motivated solely by monetary gains. They want to get CW out and to do that, they need to get the clan mechs out. The MC/c-bill argument is solely a time management and money issue on the players with the exception of some hero mechs.

Do you have the expendable cash? If yes, do you want the new mech early? Beautiful. That's a choice beholden only to you.

Missing features, slow development cycle, etc. All valid points that Russ acknowledged. We can all hold PGI accountable for making promises they couldn't deliver. It seems PGI is doing the same, at least now. I find it hard to believe that the men(and potential women) of the company are any happier about it than we are as players. They play the game too, despite what people may feel in regards to the balancing issues.

I think one of the important things that people have to do now is take a slow step back and try to look at the bigger picture. Realize that no matter how big a fan of the Battletech universe you may be, now matter how the tabletop was balanced, how the books were written. Things are going to be different. There's no two ways about it.

This is not a singleplayer game. MWO is always going to be an evolving landscape for as long as it's up and running. Metas will and are going to continue to change as min/maxers find and exploit the absolute best possible combinations to most easily and efficiently stomp their enemies. By the same token, you'll always have other folks who are get their enjoyment from running less-seen builds, or playing 'weaker' mechs to either challenge themselves or simply because they enjoy them for one reason or another. Nothing PGI can do is going to make everyone happy. People will be unhappy with an RNG set in their weapon accuracy. People will be unhappy with instant, 100% accurate pinpoint.

Ultimately, PGI will balance for what they feel is the healthy majority of the game. Be it 'casuals' or 'hardcores'. Can there be a happy medium? Maybe. But it's not going to be easy to find, if ever, and even if there comes a day where there is a modicum of it, you'll still have the vocal minority of both sides expressing their displeasure.

Ask yourself if you're comfortable supporting a game that's vision of MWO may not be as absolute as your own. If not. Ask yourself if you're willing to compromise that golden path, or at least pave the road a little wider to give more folks room to walk. If the answer is still no. Then you might need to come to terms with the fact that MWO will never fulfill the vision you want it to, and it's time to enjoy something else rather than stay in a miserable relationship.

Keep in mind that devs are not robots. They're human beings and deserve every right to be treated as such. Humans make mistakes, some worse than others. PGI is still learning, still growing, despite people insisting they're not. No, it's not perfect. Yes, there are still aspects of the game that are missing or a mess.

I think, more than anything, that we need a clear and concise picture of what PGI envisions MWO becoming. But, let's not burn them at the stake. Get the information, weigh it against your own views of what you want the game to become and if they are so terribly disjointed that you want to start throwing rocks, just..stop playing and stop paying. First and foremost, consumers speak with their wallets. I'd love to have a clear and mutual dialogue with the guys at PGI, but it's hard to blame their reluctance given the complete lack of give and take demonstrated by some of the forum members. )
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is a very good post bro but you forgot few things first PGI had game models of BattleTech and PC MechWarrior games2-4 with all the expansions to use they also had MechCommander and MechAssualt to use as examples of games on top of all that they had 5000-10000 old PC players-fans-tabletop-etc. personnel to help in the development of this online game.All were ignored 99% in development.

As with everything PGI and on these forums we have no idea how long MWO will last in its current state of non completion or even if it is completed with CW will it be enough of a game to keep a good revenue stream going for another 6 years? personally with out a lot of alterations some mentioned by me and thousands of others on these forums it will not survive another 6 years. From the beginning PGI should have let the community help develop a better game overall.

Edited by KingCobra, 09 September 2014 - 10:51 AM.

[Jacmac]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 10:33 AM, said:

But at the end of the day, when outright lies, misrepresentation, and toxic vitriol are drowning out EVERYTHING, then the forums serve no purpose for ANYONE. And the Devs are hard pressed to strain through all the crap to find the 1-2 nuggets of wisdom buried under all the excrement.

Whether PGI succeeds or fails will be based on how they deliver product, not because of how much rage certain forum anarchists can inspire in those too lazy to look up the facts for themselves. I've read the reddits and other cesspools of idiocy. The reek of anger and desperation from certain members is truly sad. But if they insist on being odious, better there, where it doesn't stink up the whole house, then letting people take a crap in your kitchen.

I agree that whether PGI succeeds or fails is has been based on how they did deliver the product. The fact that there was such chaos on the forums speaks volumes to the level of discontent that many players had with the product and how it was released. Obviously you can't make everyone happy, but the liars were not the players upset by the product. Players voice their opposition or their dissatisfactions, and they are more or less expressing an opinion based on how they view the facts (some more politely than others). There may be a number of mongrel players here that are easily swayed by a maniacal diatribe, but I doubt it is a significant number.

[Bishop Steiner]

Roland, on 09 September 2014 - 10:35 AM, said:

NextGame is right, you need to walk the walk if you're gonna talk the talk, Bishop.

Yes, I will simply ignore troll posts from now on. It does give those looking to derail things more recognition and of a soapbox then they deserve.

But seriously, my reply to his OP was "snide"?, lol, alright ggclose. (yes the end of that WAS snide, purely for the sake of comparison). I certainly agree my replies after were less than respectful (just responding in kind). Oops.

But if a small handful of comments replying in kind to certain posters in a 250 comment and growing thread is an issue, don't know what to tell you Roland. Here's the thing Roland. Don't want a less than respectful reply? Don't post a less than respectful post. And don't get your panties in a bunch if you do.

Guess as usual, we will have to agree to disagree.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jacmac, on 09 September 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

I agree that whether PGI succeeds or fails is has been based on how they did deliver the product. The fact that there was such chaos on the forums speaks volumes to the level of discontent that many players had with the product and how it was released. Obviously you can't make everyone happy, but the liars were not the players upset by the product. Players voice their opposition or their dissatisfactions, and they are more or less expressing an opinion based on how they view the facts (some more politely than others). There may be a number of mongrel players here that are easily swayed by a maniacal diatribe, but I doubt it is a significant number.

I don't fully disagree with you, but I would make a point. Simple truth? Most people are followers. And inherently, lazy. Most people never bother to fact check for themselves. And online it seems to magnify manyfold. Half the forum rage is people reciting vitriol and half cocked ideas spouted by certain individuals in the Forums who are unhappy for one reason or another, and therefore openly twist or selectively edit what has been said. Some folks who like to think of themselves as Internet Anarchists or Pied Pipers, as it were.

The sheer amount of half truths, twisted facts and outright fabrications that regularly inundated these forums is proof enough of that. To this day we still have people as one of the most obvious examples twisting the whole Founders/MWTactics things into some sinister thing yet with no actual proof at all.

For the average, and new user to the forums to NOT have to sift through that, let alone the devs, for useful information? Priceless, IMO.

[Fut]

Deathlike, on 09 September 2014 - 10:42 AM, said:

It is up to PGI to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Every single time I see the talk, there's no meaningful progress... no walk. We can always "loosely claim" that PGI did X or Y, but did they do a quality job of X or Y?

Have been listening to the Town Hall thing all afternoon at work, one part of it that really stood out was when Russ claimed that 3 of the 4 MWO pillars were in game and working... Talk about loosely claiming things...

[Johnny Z]

Jacmac, on 09 September 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

I agree that whether PGI succeeds or fails is has been based on how they did deliver the product. The fact that there was such chaos on the forums speaks volumes to the level of discontent that many players had with the product and how it was released. Obviously you can't make everyone happy, but the liars were not the players upset by the product. Players voice their opposition or their dissatisfactions, and they are more or less expressing an opinion based on how they view the facts (some more politely than others). There may be a number of mongrel players here that are easily swayed by a maniacal diatribe, but I doubt it is a significant number.

Your right about one thing, talk is cheap(no offense to anyone, but you get what im saying). Your pretty much wrong about everything else.

Doesnt change the fact that faction wars have been said to be done this year... Maybe took to long but lets see how good it is before jumping to conclusions.

Some other features like decals are coming out which is huge especially if they continue to add features. They did say they would begin on entirely new features when factions wars are in and stable. They havnt given any warnings that decals would be completed and in so soon, so who knows what else the have up their sleeve.

The best news I heard was the fact that the star map might not be a boring static front warfare where the borders dont change and instead there will be actual visual and i guess mechanical changes to the star map. When it comes to this I hope they go full out ala the total war series of games where there will be Epic battles for survival of the various factions until either a reset or down time and faction re-emergence.(this would make for an amazing ongoing strategy star map)

Edited by Johnny Z, 09 September 2014 - 11:06 AM.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 September 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

Yup.

But here is a what if. And mind you, just postulation. But still a what if to ponder.

IF... a lot of the issues was the oversight and demands of a bean counting publisher
and
IF .. PGI used the Clan Pack sales and the patronage/funding of A Universe to Explore to build their buy-out nest egg, to free themselves of IGP goals which were obviously no inline with PGIs, and to allow them the freedom to focus on their vision of MWO.....

would it not make sense, and be worth it?


I cannot prove that is so, but even at the end of last year and earlier this year, Paul had made several...open....comments to leave one wondering about the relationship with IGP. Even at the launch event, talking to him, I got the distinct impression he did NOT feel the game was ready for launch. And on an NGNG interview pre Clan Launch, he intimated things were pushed ahead of what he thought they should be.

So I freely admit, I do not know the inner workings of what happened. But to me, from what I have garnered on the outside looking in, a lot of their moves in the past year have been aimed at taking the power back, as it were.

But in truth, I am more concerned with what they do with it NOW, then what may have happened in the past, which no one outside IGP/PGI actually knows.

But the simple fact they pursued and obtained full rights to the IP back, to me sounds like a definite commitment to MWOs future.

Indeed, we will have to wait and see what happens, but I'm not quite ready to forgive and forget just yet. Admittedly I am talking out of my ass when I say this, but I honestly feel that if they haven't made some significant improvements to both the content we have and their overall progress this game is going to be more or less done come March of next year. That is six months to show us that being rid of IGP changes things, that the new project isn't going to be a boat anchor on progress here, and that their passion for MWO is bigger than a minimally viable product. Here's hoping that CW is more epic than epic let down.

[Almond Brown]

Nichiren, on 09 September 2014 - 10:49 AM, said:

To be fair, he stated last night on the stream that he hoped it would be the last nerf to clan lasers. I do well and truly hope that flamers will get some love sooner rather than later, but no one really knows where(or if) that's on the list of priorities.

See the Flamer Thread. Russ responded. A total re-do will be required, as expected, but no resources will be diverted at this time. For me, the Flamer can wait and so can the Small Laser and etc etc.

We got bigger fish, that need turning, in our Frying pan.

[Nichiren]

KingCobra, on 09 September 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

This is a very good post bro but you forgot few things first PGI had game models of BattleTech and PC MechWarrior games2-4 with all the expansions to use they also had MechCommander and MechAssualt to use as examples of games on top of all that they had 5000-10000 old PC players-fans-tabletop-etc. personnel to help in the development of this online game.All were ignored 99% in development.

As with everything PGI and on these forums we have no idea how long MWO will last in its current state of non completion or even if it is completed with CW will it be enough of a game to keep a good revenue stream going for another 6 years? personally with out a lot of alterations some mentioned by me and thousands of others on these forums it will not survive another 6 years. From the beginning PGI should have let the community help develop a better game overall.

I understand that and you can use those assets as building blocks for models of mechs and the like. But it's not simply a matter of copy and pasting the model of a mech from MW4 and sticking it into CryEngine and it just..works. You still need to build the model in the engine, scale it, animate it, create the hitboxes, hardpoints, texture it.

We can argue that hitboxes are still an issue(I spent 20 seconds yesterday about 200meters from a stationary mech trying to put an AC5 through its head hitbox and it passed straight through the model without registering every time). But as far as the models themselves go, the tabletop and previous Battletech games are references to try to emulate, not something you can just put together in five minutes in the engine.

I think the bigger question in relation to that is why are so many resources being dedicated to releasing new mechs when there are so many other issues at play and I think the answer we were essentially given last night was because they want to get CW out to us and getting the clans in was a necessary part of that. I believe it was admitted to during the stream last night that trying to plan things and allocating resources was a nightmare previously and being free from IGP, they're in a much better place. Time will tell on those points.

For allowing the community to help develop the game. That's a hard thing to do. Not everyone in the community wants the same thing. All want a fantastic mechwarrior game that lives up to the franchise we love, but that the sum of the whole has different parts for different people.

I want to believe that PGI has an opportunity now to engage the community like never before. It may be naive to think so, but I'm something of an optimist. Community built maps was a topic that was brought up last night at the town hall in one question and the possibility of something like that down the line would be a fantastic addition to the game. But even that is not without its complications. Hell, I'd love to have community built UI's because I'm all but certain that some of the playerbase is talented enough in that department to give us something beautiful and you can easily argue that the guys are PGI who built UI2.0 did the best they can, but UI isn't their area of expertise. But it's a pipe-dream for me, really. I can't foresee such a thing being possible(and I've not done any digging to in the files to see just how the UI was built, personally).

Almond Brown, on 09 September 2014 - 11:10 AM, said:

See the Flamer Thread. Russ responded. A total re-do will be required, as expected, but no resources will be diverted at this time. For me, the Flamer can wait and so can the Small Laser and etc etc.

We got bigger fish, that need turning, in our Frying pan.

..I love that you mentioned frying fish and that your name is close enough for me to have misread it as Alton Brown.

[Almond Brown]

One of the big things for myself around here is how much "misinformation" is posted when the truth is s mere 4 posts above, then the poster of said "misinformation" will abuse and accuse anyone who tries and correct the "misinformation" with the truth.

If you don't really know the facts, please don't defend the BS rhetoric cause your buddy told you it was true.

Get self informed on ANY and ALL topics participated in. Knowledge is the best debate tool anywhere. Use it.

[Bishop Steiner]

Almond Brown, on 09 September 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

One of the big things for myself around here is how much "misinformation" is posted when the truth is s mere 4 posts above, then the poster of said "misinformation" will abuse and accuse anyone who tries and correct the "misinformation" with the truth.

If you don't really know the facts, please don't defend the BS rhetoric cause your buddy told you it was true.

Get self informed on ANY and ALL topics participated in. Knowledge is the best debate tool anywhere. Use it.

best bit of advice in quite some time, not just for the Forums, but life.

[Johnny Z]

Well he mentioned something about player building something and i think he was refereing to modeling with textures. I think that would be easier for them to do, would be to hold a contest for the model of a space fortress or some thing they can use on their maps. Maybe ground to space torpedoes or something.

I am sure the top 3 - 5? in such a contest would be well worth their time to go over and clear for use on their in house maps. In game rewards etc.

[KingCobra]

Nichiren said (I want to believe that PGI has an opportunity now to engage the community like never before. It may be naive to think so, but I'm something of an optimist.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bingo you hit the jackpot and my point exactly if PGI goes through and takes common sense solutions to bugs UI problems Social interaction problems or any other thing players are talking about on these forums seriously like making common sense polls it would help them understand what the game needs to make players happy in the first place.

One of those items is Social interaction for players in a live chat platform for 3 years PGI has been asked to build this into there UI system to help promote more sociability and community growth and formation of competitive leagues. Has it been done? no but here is a guy at MWOLOBBY.COM that did a replica of the old MSN gamming zone in less than 6 months by him self.

Smurfys is a good example of a perfect UI mechlab function that MWO lacks? Or why do we not have the option to save and use multiple Mech configurations and load-outs in the UI 2.0 mechlab after 3 years.?

So many unanswered questions with no answers delivered by the devs .Do I believe it was IGP alones fault of course not will I spend more on MWO or a new game? That all depends on delivered playable content as in maps and game modes and a social environment me and friends can have the same type of fun I had in past MechWarrior/BattleTech titles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes JohnnyZ PGI could have had map and mech design contests along with UI designs all along to help them understand what players wanted dude it is not that hardtop make or design things with a little effort on the individuals part most is already built into the Cryeng3 SDK.

P.S you have no idea what a pain in the assets it is to quote and post on these forums because they won't even put the effort into making them WIN8.1 and explorer11 compatible.

Edited by KingCobra, 09 September 2014 - 11:35 AM.

[n r g]

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 honestly was one of the community members that was a bit shocked /worried when I heard about the second game.

To be honest, after listening to the town hall meeting last night, I was actually kind of relived and understood the situation better from PGI's point of view, after hearing Russ Bullock's argument.

To be honest, we as humans and even customers in this case, tend to forget PGI is just human as-well and are prone to mistakes. We tend to focus on the negative and not the positive things they have done for this game and demand things be done in an unrealistic time frame despite most of us having no knowledge whatsoever regarding production/publishing/creation of a online video game.

Just my 2 cents.

[Green Mamba]

El Bandito, on 08 September 2014 - 07:04 PM, said:

3 years or not, I still want ECM rework.

I'll translate .....my LRMS aren't Uber enough