543 replies to this topic

[Trystan Thorne]

I spent more money MWO than I spend on some other games.
I had great fun with MWO (currently taking a break) and do not regret the money I invested.

But a lot of the fun and enjoyment came from the fact that this is a BattleTech/MechWarrior universe game. A universe I deeply enjoy. So it was easier for me to forgive the shortcomings in regards to the game (obviously, there are good things about MWO too) as part of me was happy to simply be able to play a modern MW game.

However, Transverse isn't anything I feel nostalgic about. So why should I invest any money there when PGI didn't even manage to deliver the promises they made for MWO yet.
To be honest, I'm surprised that PGI even thinks that Transverse is going to work well at the current stage. With all the negative press in the recent month about delayed features and ridiclously pricey Clan packages PGI's reputation isn't really that good out there right now. As long as they don't regain the trust of the majority of people out there (ust splip isn't enough), many will stay away from Transverse.
And to make matters worse, Frontier with Elite Dangerous showed how a funded game of similar fundamount is properly handeld.
Sorry PGI, I will come back to MWO when CW is out, but I have no trust at all in you right now to invest any more money, be it Transverse or MWO.
I will reconsider should I feel that MWO is back on track.

Sorry, went a bit into a rant and offtopic there. Anyway I'm hoping that this will be a fresh start, but I'm not very confident yet.

Edited by Trystan Thorne, 10 September 2014 - 08:17 PM.

[MischiefSC]

I like the post about CW but....

As I said in the CW thread -

I call. Cards on the table. Talking about CW isn't really relevant. Show me screen caps, cell phone pics of screens, show me pictures. I don't care if it changes later - just pictures. Show me what's actually there, give me something to see and value. Otherwise this isn't a lot different from the slide show given a year and a half ago at 'launch'.

Pics or it didn't happen.

[Theodore42]

EDIT:
I missed this:

http://mwomercs.com/...arfare-phase-2/

It is probably the post MischiefSC referred to. This is actually what I ask for in this post, so gg. I'll leave my original post though. It is still relevant but maybe comes off as a little melodramatic Still a fun read I hope.

--

MischiefSC, on 10 September 2014 - 08:21 PM, said:

Pics or it didn't happen.

I agree. I will love and play and drop money on MWO since I think the clans dropped great and I enjoy the game play.

But the most definitive thing I've head about CW is that it will be "hardcore." Excellent, I'm sure I'll love it. But that is hardly specific. The Troll Alarms and Hater Sirens better be going off like crazy at PGI HQ. People are going to start getting ideas about what CW is, and when it is released, they will be disappointed. And PISSED.

I have all the confidence in PGI to implement an awesome CW experience. I look forward to it. But I KNOW it isn't going to be what 90% of players are expecting. CW is the most hyped aspect to mwo, and I get the impression that it has been on the back-burner for a long time. Something that has been hyped longer than it has been worked on is going to disappoint. It just is.

I fear PGI will say nothing until release, and only when it drops on Dec 21st (or whenever) will people get an idea of what CW is all about. And I've gotten the impression that it will only be a "first step" implementation.

This is a recipe for haters and flamers like we have never seen before.

So PGI: If you were to communicate but ONE thing to the community for the rest of the year, it needs to be at least a few SPECIFIC descriptions of CW. Piss people off. Plan on it. It will be better than dropping a first step implementation on a community anticipating a polished, mind blowing, immersive universe.

Edited by Theodore42, 11 September 2014 - 12:24 AM.

[POWR]

Trystan Thorne, on 10 September 2014 - 08:08 PM, said:

I spent more money MWO than I spend on some other games.
I had great fun with MWO (currently taking a break) and do not regret the money I invested.

But a lot of the fun and enjoyment came from the fact that this is a BattleTech/MechWarrior universe game. A universe I deeply enjoy. So it was easier for me to forgive the shortcomings in regards to the game (obviously, there are good things about MWO too) as part of me was happy to simply be able to play a modern MW game.

However, Transverse isn't anything I feel nostalgic about. So why should I invest any money there when PGI didn't even manage to deliver the promises they made for MWO yet.
To be honest, I'm surprised that PGI even thinks that Transverse is going to work well at the current stage. With all the negative press in the recent month about delayed features and ridiclously pricey Clan packages PGI's reputation isn't really that good out there right now. As long as they don't regain the trust of the majority of people out there (ust splip isn't enough), many will stay away from Transverse.
And to make matters worse, Frontier with Elite Dangerous showed how a funded game of similar fundamount is properly handeld.
Sorry PGI, I will come back to MWO when CW is out, but I have no trust at all in you right now to invest any more money, be it Transverse or MWO.
I will reconsider should I feel that MWO is back on track.

Sorry, went a bit into a rant and offtopic there. Anyway I'm hoping that this will be a fresh start, but I'm not very confident yet.

Not defending anything, just wanted to point out that Elite was already in development when they launched the kickstarter and that the company behind it had secured a large amount of funding, as well as already having a history of titles generating money to spend on developing Elite. These "high profile" kickstarter-style titles generally do it for publicity than money.

[Xtrekker]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 September 2014 - 03:40 AM, said:

Flamers are a space filling fluff weapon, it is not meant to be worth taking, you take it when you got nothing else you WANT to take. I have played Giant Stompy Robots for 30 years without using a Flamer. The game would not die if they NEVER got fixed. Trust me on that.

Shame you never ran a 17 flamer Strider in MW3 then. Two alphas (big woosh, not the constant flame we have here) would pop any mech even if they were standing in water. First would shut them down, second would go critical. It would shut you down for a few seconds so you had to be sneaky about it. Was so much fun and a humiliating death for the other guy.

[Elizander]

Just got my full clan package even after all the fire and brimstone hurled around from here to Reddit. Always wanted to get it before but didn't have the funds back then. Still can't afford a gold mech, sorry! 3rd world problems!

Now while I will admit that the trailer for Transverse could use a lot of work (the fights with the ships felt too static and the background felt quite 'dead' like it was a Jpeg and not a real 3D background. Some effects to enhance the motions might have helped. The 'rush' and 'impact' feeling wasn't there when I watched the trailer due to how it was made but I do like the cyborg girl in the web site (the one on the right).

I'm curious how it will turn out and I might support it a little, but I'm mostly a Mechwarrior Fan (though I do like Sci-fi stuff). Hey, at least it looks way better than Mechwarrior Tactics, right?

[POWR]

LordNIcon, on 11 September 2014 - 01:37 AM, said:

@OP - Compliments for your time that is a nice Post to read. - and - @Community nice to read answers

---- Now to my 10cent's about MW:O

Allot is going on... German Sites report undermining of Clients Money... We see that the Game is in one way ignored or maybe old issues fixed!

New Content is nice but not as nessecery --- i think a solid base were hit dmg and collision works like a charm is better then flashy new mechs or maps!

I too invested allot but i did this knowingly and willingly - With the mndset it motivates the devs. to create a sollid base for MW:O!

I was wrong and the trust is gone... With more news spreaddig that PGI kicked out its Publisher IGP without informing the Community!

Thank you for your time @all

LordNIcon from Blue-Vengeance

Well, the posts on what the money is for is all speculation. But it's the speculation you want to hear, so you take it as fact. That's stupid, but you do what you want.

That PGI got rid of the publisher is a good thing. Not being public about business dealings is how things are generally done.

You should be more happy, you know. Don't believe in conspiracy so much.

[SaltBeef]

Optimistic that is will be the kick! PGI needed to make the BT Universe bigger and better than it ever was.

[Chrithu]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

And yes, I would feel somewhat different. And I bought the maximum Founders pack. And the money from that, was used long ago, to repay their startup loan from IGP, and add content. 5 Million is a drop in the bucket though, in game development (kind of insane, actually).

What I find laughable, is the number of people who act as if the Phoenix and Invasion packs were some kind of Founders pack, with all funds designated some sort of holy corban, only to be used at the Altar of MWO. And by that logic, every paint, cockpit bauble, etc, would be, too.

None of that was ever the case, or implied in the purchases of those packages. Yet here we are, people complaining, because a company uses assets from one product to help another product.

To my knowledge (correct me if I am wrong) not even the founders pack was ever officially advertised as anything else but a pre-order with beta access included. Read no one employed at PGI or IGP ever said the founders pack was made to support the development of the game. Although of course a lot of that money naturally went towards the development of MWO as it was PGI's only project at the time for all we know. What IGP as a partner did with their share of the income is their business alone. But I figure they also paid the customer support, marketing and QA staff for MWO first and then used the excess for things like kicking off MWT.

I've said this often times and i will say it again: Crowdfunding a new game and pre-ordering a game already in beta under full production are NOT the same thing. And the term "Founders pack" is nothing but word from marketing in order to get a share of the crowd funding phenomenon. People should be aware of that. The decisive differences are that a crowd funded project simply would not be made without the money from the pledgers whereas a game selling founders packs usually already is so far in progress that it will be finished regardless whether founders packs are bought or not and usually a game selling founders packs already has publisher and investors involved that will get a share of the revenue from the founder pack sales, whereas a crowd funded game usually either does the campaign to convince publishers/investors to partner up or to be able to independently develop the game.

That is not to say that money from founders/preorders doesn't support development of the game bought, but it is nowhere near as much an automatism as with crowd funded projects. And surely there is no entitlement whatsoever for the customers to have their feedback heard or to demand the money only being used to get the game they pre-ordered made.

[Demoncard]

Their first mistake was using cryengine.

[Chrithu]

Demoncard, on 11 September 2014 - 02:30 AM, said:

Their first mistake was using cryengine.

Why? Following the development of Star Citizen it seems to be a quite potent engine for vehicular combat in huge worldspaces. With a lot of cleverly done groundwork already in place. And if you are willing and able to afford a close partnership Crytek also seems to be very helpful in supporting a company with modifying the engine for their particular needs.

So far I played about every major game (FarCry and Crysis series) based on the various iterations of the engine and always found it to be one of the engines that cleverly achieve a nice look without excessively taxing the hardware (MWO sadly being an exception to the line of all the other smoothly running CryEngine games).

[SirLANsalot]

Jason Parker, on 11 September 2014 - 02:43 AM, said:

Why? Following the development of Star Citizen it seems to be a quite potent engine for vehicular combat in huge worldspaces. With a lot of cleverly done groundwork already in place. And if you are willing and able to afford a close partnership Crytek also seems to be very helpful in supporting a company with modifying the engine for their particular needs.

So far I played about every major game (FarCry and Crysis series) based on the various iterations of the engine and always found it to be one of the engines that cleverly achieve a nice look without excessively taxing the hardware (MWO sadly being an exception to the line of all the other smoothly running CryEngine games).

Star Cit has the man power to rework the entire game eng that is Crytek. PGI spent a year or more working out the issues that cryeng had with big stompy robots. Its a very powerful eng, but its not that great for robots. As such it took them a long time to get things rolling, a great many people never understand game development, and how long it takes to do anything. Setting timetables is never a good thing, but coming out and posting a "hay XX bug/issue got in the way" goes a LONG way when missing said "deadline".


There are people out there that hide behind the keyboard and just want to burn everything down. Those people are known, and its been a wonder why they haven't been banned yet. At least now with Unit formations and Phase 2 on its way, we can now actually FIGHT rather then just flame. Putting names to units.....its been needed for a long long long time.

[Chrithu]

SirLANsalot, on 11 September 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

Star Cit has the man power to rework the entire game eng that is Crytek. PGI spent a year or more working out the issues that cryeng had with big stompy robots. Its a very powerful eng, but its not that great for robots. As such it took them a long time to get things rolling, a great many people never understand game development, and how long it takes to do anything. Setting timetables is never a good thing, but coming out and posting a "hay XX bug/issue got in the way" goes a LONG way when missing said "deadline".


There are people out there that hide behind the keyboard and just want to burn everything down. Those people are known, and its been a wonder why they haven't been banned yet. At least now with Unit formations and Phase 2 on its way, we can now actually FIGHT rather then just flame. Putting names to units.....its been needed for a long long long time.

Ok. Now that leaves me wondering what engine would have been a better choice for robots? Especially since Crysis 3 featured a playble 'mechlike vehicle, the "Pinger", so the engine also must have at least basic support for such vehicles as well. To my knowledge it would be hard to find an engine that would not need to be heavily modified in order to get customizable bots with hitzones to work properly in multiplayer with heavily varying latencies. Unless of course you go back and start the work based on the Mechwarrior 4 engine, that may have all the stuff for mechs in place but would need heavy modification in order to achieve state of the art rendering.

[JackPoint]

Cryengine is inferior to every other engine out there, cpu bound over gpu and chosen for cost only.

http://www.gamespot....n/1100-6418427/

Mwo could have been so much more without the cryEngine .

Remember this?.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tombstoner, on 10 September 2014 - 12:07 PM, said:

Artilery can use GPS guided shells. http://en.wikipedia..../M982_Excalibur i Think at this time the g-forces present in the main guns of a US batttle shipshot will break any current microelectronics. limiting its use to smaller shells. even then the accuracy does approach what your looking for but has room to improve.

Which have a accuracy if 5.5m RADIUS. Not at all good enough I'm afraid.

Xtrekker, on 11 September 2014 - 01:08 AM, said:

Shame you never ran a 17 flamer Strider in MW3 then. Two alphas (big woosh, not the constant flame we have here) would pop any mech even if they were standing in water. First would shut them down, second would go critical. It would shut you down for a few seconds so you had to be sneaky about it. Was so much fun and a humiliating death for the other guy.

If you need 17 of a weapon to be effective the weapon sucks.

[IraqiWalker]

Jason Parker, on 11 September 2014 - 04:02 AM, said:

Ok. Now that leaves me wondering what engine would have been a better choice for robots? Especially since Crysis 3 featured a playble 'mechlike vehicle, the "Pinger", so the engine also must have at least basic support for such vehicles as well. To my knowledge it would be hard to find an engine that would not need to be heavily modified in order to get customizable bots with hitzones to work properly in multiplayer with heavily varying latencies. Unless of course you go back and start the work based on the Mechwarrior 4 engine, that may have all the stuff for mechs in place but would need heavy modification in order to achieve state of the art rendering.

Not sure about which engine is better, but the mech in Crysis was barely the size of a Locust, maybe smaller. Also, it was one mech, while here we have 24 mechs, most of them FAR larger, on maps insanely larger in size to the ones in Crysis. All of this, couple with the Cry engine's drain on CPU over GPU, causes some big problems to happen. The game would have run a LOT faster, and smoother if the mechs were scaled down in size. It would add more work on map design though. Since the devs now have to go in and add pebbles that would look like they are boulders, to help us feel like we're running in big mechs, not tiny bots the size of a person.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jason Parker, on 11 September 2014 - 04:02 AM, said:

Ok. Now that leaves me wondering what engine would have been a better choice for robots? Especially since Crysis 3 featured a playble 'mechlike vehicle, the "Pinger", so the engine also must have at least basic support for such vehicles as well. To my knowledge it would be hard to find an engine that would not need to be heavily modified in order to get customizable bots with hitzones to work properly in multiplayer with heavily varying latencies. Unless of course you go back and start the work based on the Mechwarrior 4 engine, that may have all the stuff for mechs in place but would need heavy modification in order to achieve state of the art rendering.

well, the biggest issue Cryengine has is high speed. Hence the issues with MASC, or getting mech sover 150 kph without mass rubberbanding, and attendant hit reg issues. SC threw a lot of time and money with actual crytechs to get their issues reworked and were still put considerably behind schedule. But because Roberts is better at lying and kissing babies than Russ, its OK for them to miss deadlines.

Probably UE4 would have been a better choice, for the engine, if just performance was the goal. But (and I again, could be wrong) am pretty sure at the time of development, Cryengine was far more affordable and accessible than UE4.

By the time they were done (and really, they still aren't) reworking the code from the ground up, IDK if it was still actually more cost effective than UE, though.

IraqiWalker, on 11 September 2014 - 04:35 AM, said:

Not sure about which engine is better, but the mech in Crysis was barely the size of a Locust, maybe smaller. Also, it was one mech, while here we have 24 mechs, most of them FAR larger, on maps insanely larger in size to the ones in Crysis. All of this, couple with the Cry engine's drain on CPU over GPU, causes some big problems to happen. The game would have run a LOT faster, and smoother if the mechs were scaled down in size. It would add more work on map design though. Since the devs now have to go in and add pebbles that would look like they are boulders, to help us feel like we're running in big mechs, not tiny bots the size of a person.

I was wondering about that, and wondered it it was through scaling that SC finally overcame those same issues? (space maps having less boulders to worry about)

Joseph Mallan, on 11 September 2014 - 04:26 AM, said:

Which have a accuracy if 5.5m RADIUS. Not at all good enough I'm afraid.


If you need 17 of a weapon to be effective the weapon sucks.

And dont forget the "have to shut yourself down".

[IraqiWalker]

Bishop Steiner, on 11 September 2014 - 05:31 AM, said:

I was wondering about that, and wondered it it was through scaling that SC finally overcame those same issues? (space maps having less boulders to worry about)

I was thinking the same thing. I mean, we literally have nothing to let us know that a 20 meter ship is actually 20 meters long, and not 20 meters scaled down to 10 meters.

[Tombstoner]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 September 2014 - 04:26 AM, said:

Which have a accuracy if 5.5m RADIUS. Not at all good enough I'm afraid.

But when using 155mm artilery shells.... essentaly bombs.... a 5.5m "Miss" can still be effective due to the size of the blast radius.

The skud missle used by Iraq on isrial during the first gulf war had a COF of about 2+ kilometers. for a conventioal warhead thats next to usless butt he skud was designed to carry nukes.... thus a nuke hitting 2-3 kilometers away and calling it a miss is just semantics.

[Tombstoner]

SirLANsalot, on 11 September 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

Star Cit has the man power to rework the entire game eng that is Crytek. PGI spent a year or more working out the issues that cryeng had with big stompy robots. Its a very powerful eng, but its not that great for robots. As such it took them a long time to get things rolling, a great many people never understand game development, and how long it takes to do anything. Setting timetables is never a good thing, but coming out and posting a "hay XX bug/issue got in the way" goes a LONG way when missing said "deadline".


There are people out there that hide behind the keyboard and just want to burn everything down. Those people are known, and its been a wonder why they haven't been banned yet. At least now with Unit formations and Phase 2 on its way, we can now actually FIGHT rather then just flame. Putting names to units.....its been needed for a long long long time.

But is a robot that difrent from a person? Yes if PGI game out and said x got in the way of the time line then it would go a long way twords improving peoples opinions.