125 replies to this topic

[uebersoldat]

CW shouldn't be the 'final' anything here. This IP deserves a lot more than that, especially because with the current amount of maps CW is not going to be very believable.

Let the community create maps, and an economy. Outsource seasoned professionals if you have to. Planetary conquest needs TONS of maps to begin to be believable in this universe.

While I'm at it, we can't even break trees yet. The engine can do it, so why not? Also, why can't I 'chute out of my mech and run around on foot? vehicles? aero?

CW cannot be the 'final' anything because CW is not very impressive sounding at this point

[MischiefSC]

Look, one of the biggest guns to the head of MW:O and player dissatisfaction is existing lore and nearly 50 years of boardgame, RPG and a slew of good and bad computer game mechanics. A new IP is the best possible idea to go with in this situation; it's tabula rasa.

I'm satisfied with the answers. If CW comes and I see good things for MW:O coming from the spit with IGP then if it seems like my sort of game I'd put money into the new project. Hell, I'll put more money into MW:O.

That's more than promises or timelines or setting expectations of what might come though. I'm hopeful and happy for all the news that's comes out these last few days but I don't feel it's unfair to say we, as consumers, have extended a lot of financial and emotional credit to PGI based on prior promises that didn't get kept. The last several months have been a running start in the right direction so I'm willing to be hopeful and give both MW:O and the new project my full attention and in turn continue to put past issues behind me but before I go all in on anything I need to see CW on my screen, I need maps and long promised content for MW:O. I need a new game with functioning tech demos and some well defined 'we will deliver X by Y or else Z' sort of contingencies on any sort of founders program for the new game. Nothing wacky or unreasonable but we're still a bit away from trading $ for promises again.

Moving that way though. Absolutely moving that way. You've got my attention and it seems a lot of others. Please take advantage of that opportunity. We want an excuse to believe in you and trust you with our money to give us the content we want. There's always going to be people eager to burn bridges just to stay warm but the rest of us still play MW:O for a reason.

So... you've got my attention and I like what I'm seeing so far. Show me pretty things.

[Aym]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 08 September 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

Hey there MechWarriors!

Here are the top FAQ questions and Answers from the teaser of #AUniverseToExplore

Please tell us what you think!

You mention CW is the last feature, but what about all the revisions and improvements to our UI?

[Sarlic]

I would like to have seen more detailed answers.

Could PGI please make a new roadmap for the end of the year? Since you have bought the rights off the Publisher. I am interested. Also please let the Community gets involved with making content.

Edited by Sarlic, 08 September 2014 - 08:40 PM.

[Illegal Username]

Sarlic, on 08 September 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

I would like to have seen more detailed answers.

Could PGI please make a new roadmap for the end of the year? Since you have bought the rights off the Publisher. I am interested. Also please let the Community gets involved with making content.

CW is always 90 days away

[Star Colonel Silver Surat]

Well I don't think they're misguided enough to think they can float their own game without a well known license to back them up. They must realize that pretty much the only reason most of us are their customers is because of the Battletech license, not necessarily the quality of their game (though it does have tremendous potential, and can sometimes be a lot of fun!).

Therefore, I figure this new game is something that's being forced on PGI due to some circumstance we're not privy to. Perhaps a requirement to have multiple new projects in the works to continue to receive Canadian government subsidies. I wonder if they're planning to use this game as sort of a test bed/breeder project that, while it is almost doomed from the start due to how competitive the space combat genre now is, will serve as a testing ground for concepts and gameplay they can later incorporate into a proper Aerospace TM game set in the Battletech universe.

PGI owns the Battletech license at the moment, and it is by far their best asset. They must realize they need to make use of it as much as possible, across multiple games if necessary, to stay afloat.

Edited by Star Colonel Silver Surat, 08 September 2014 - 09:50 PM.

[Johnny Z]

So when is there more details about this new game coming out?

[Darth Futuza]

Eh not sure if I should put this here, but in case you missed the stream: http://www.twitch.tv...gtv/b/566663831

(Starts about 5 minutes in).

[Cavendish]

Aym, on 08 September 2014 - 08:33 PM, said:

You mention CW is the last feature, but what about all the revisions and improvements to our UI?

He stated that CW is the last remaining MAIN feature of the ORIGINAL VISION to be delivered, not that its over and done with once they put CW in place, there is quite a difference.

[Bazlborn2]

Simple question, which I hope gets a simple answer. How many people make up the "core development team" before P2 came into existence, and how many will make it up after P2 came into existence?

[Brut4ce]

Cavendish, on 08 September 2014 - 11:56 PM, said:

He stated that CW is the last remaining MAIN feature of the ORIGINAL VISION to be delivered, not that its over and done with once they put CW in place, there is quite a difference.

Aye that is true. From what was quoted in the recent "Townhall Meeting", with CW by the end of 2014, possibly 2 queues will come into play, the "casual" mixed queue as is now and the "Hardcore" queue with planetary conquest, mech limitations etc. etc. (remember like 1PV "hardcore" and 3PV "casual" modes), and after that possibly a single player mode and more...and mechs...Wave 2 Clan mechs! Woohoo! Where are them mechs??? Gotta get them ALL!......or not......

[PhoenixFire55]

Quote

Was MWO Founder’s money used to pay for development of P2?

No!!! Absolutely not! Every last cent PGI received from the Founder’s program and each consecutive program (Phoenix and Clans) went right back into development of MWO.

Lies.

Quote

Would you ever divert resources from one project to another?

We will always do whatever is best for the success of our company, which means we will do whatever it takes to build games that are engaging and entertaining for you to play.

Totally explains why you ignore feedback from your playerbase for 2 years and even support takes weeks to resolve tickets.

[Tristan Winter]

Someone has been practicing their doublespeak.

Now I just need to practice my doublethink, so I won't get in trouble with the mods.

[Asmosis]

MischiefSC, on 08 September 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:

Look, one of the biggest guns to the head of MW:O and player dissatisfaction is existing lore and nearly 50 years of boardgame, RPG and a slew of good and bad computer game mechanics. A new IP is the best possible idea to go with in this situation; it's tabula rasa.

I'm satisfied with the answers. If CW comes and I see good things for MW:O coming from the spit with IGP then if it seems like my sort of game I'd put money into the new project. Hell, I'll put more money into MW:O.

That's more than promises or timelines or setting expectations of what might come though. I'm hopeful and happy for all the news that's comes out these last few days but I don't feel it's unfair to say we, as consumers, have extended a lot of financial and emotional credit to PGI based on prior promises that didn't get kept. The last several months have been a running start in the right direction so I'm willing to be hopeful and give both MW:O and the new project my full attention and in turn continue to put past issues behind me but before I go all in on anything I need to see CW on my screen, I need maps and long promised content for MW:O. I need a new game with functioning tech demos and some well defined 'we will deliver X by Y or else Z' sort of contingencies on any sort of founders program for the new game. Nothing wacky or unreasonable but we're still a bit away from trading $ for promises again.

Moving that way though. Absolutely moving that way. You've got my attention and it seems a lot of others. Please take advantage of that opportunity. We want an excuse to believe in you and trust you with our money to give us the content we want. There's always going to be people eager to burn bridges just to stay warm but the rest of us still play MW:O for a reason.

So... you've got my attention and I like what I'm seeing so far. Show me pretty things.

agreed, aside from everything else battletech would make for quite a boring space game given its limited scope off planet.

So long as they get it out the door before start citizen, they'll probably be fine.

As for the comments about CW, yes that's the last major announced feature. Because everything else people are bringing up like collision, UI, masc, maps etc are minor features. Once all the big stuff is in place they can do all the fine tuning. Once that's tuned and MWO is in a healthy state, they can look at expanding on the timeline like their original goals.

If it stays healthy, they might even make some new MechWarrior content along the lines of what MW4 did, I'm pretty sure all those weapons aren't canon.

Edited by Asmosis, 09 September 2014 - 02:42 AM.

[Cavendish]

PhoenixFire55, on 09 September 2014 - 01:28 AM, said:

Totally explains why you ignore feedback from your playerbase for 2 years and even support takes weeks to resolve tickets.

I honestly dont think its actually ignoring the feedback, more a case of terribad communication.

Lets face it, if they "listened to the feedback" they should;

Boost LRMs
Nerf LRMs
Remove LRMs

Reduce heat on PPCs
Increase heat on PPCs
Increase range on PPCs
Decrease range on PPCs
Remove PPCs
Introduce a charge-up time to PPCs

Remove charge-up time on Gauss, but increase the cooldown
Decrease the cooldown on Gauss but keep the charge-up time
Reduce speed of Gauss
Increase heat of Gauss

Nerf Clan mechs
Improve Clan mechs
Remove Clan mechs
Remove the omni system on Clan mechs

Allow mix-tech
Never allow mix-tech

...and so on. Just read the general disucssion, its full of cross-purpose feedback, most of it "backed by data" yet comming to radically diffrent conclusions. How would you handle that?

What they should have, in my opinion. done is reply to the suggestions backed by a large number of posters in a manner of "Yes guys, this is a good idea, we will bring it up with the staff handling this" (and then actually get back with a reply! This has failed a LOT of times) or say "Well, we understand what you want, however we do not think this is the right solution to the issue we are seeing and it will not be implemented".

[Dark Horse X]

In the finance world, taking resources from one business and paying off the clientele of another business (while still promising returns for their investment in the first business) is just another name for a "Ponzi" scheme. Can you say pyramid? For anyone to think otherwise is the perfect sucker that these cons market to. MWO is drying up, resources are being shifted, and you still don't see it? How'd they put it? PGI will continue to provide content for this offering as long as the player base is willing to support it.

And the statement that CW is the final piece to be added to complete the vision. Anytime you complete anything, it is the end.

[NuclearPanda]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 08 September 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

Why don’t you just finish MWO first?

Community Warfare is the last remaining main feature of the original vision to be delivered. As to CW you have recently seen Unit creation and we are now just a few short months away from delivering this final item. Having said that MWO is never finished. We plan to add content until a) the license expires, players no longer want to support development of new features and content beyond CW.

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not screaming at you guys or attempting to be offensive, but the above isn't correct. Not at all. We're not even close to having the "four pillars" you envisioned and pitched to us. We still have no semblence at all of Role Warfare. In reality we still only have two game modes. We have broken skill trees and useless skills. The UI is still a cluttered mess. DX11 is completely unoptimized. etc, etc, etc. Others can feel free to chime in also with things I'm missing.

There are quite a few "main features" that are missing, nonexistant, or broken currently.

[PhoenixFire55]

Cavendish, on 09 September 2014 - 03:19 AM, said:

I honestly dont think its actually ignoring the feedback, more a case of terribad communication.

Lets face it, if they "listened to the feedback" they should;

...and so on. Just read the general disucssion, its full of cross-purpose feedback, most of it "backed by data" yet comming to radically diffrent conclusions. How would you handle that?

Bad examples. Some matters community never agreed upon, but there were other matters where players totally agreed on a subject, only for PGI to do directly the opposite.

Pushing out open beta too soon?
3rd person view?
etc.

Vast amount of great ideas for the game totally ignored both in CB and afterwards. Why even have the forum if you never read it? Why even bother asking for our feedback if you delete 70 pages of this feedback 2 days after (like it happened just recently after CERLL changes)?

[3rdworld]

This game is lacking in content on a major scale.

But ya, working on 2 projects won't have a negative effect. When I have twice as much to do, I can be twice as efficient!


Niko did you keep a straight face typing that up?

[Enigmos]

Recommend foregoing release of MWO on Steam and instead produce a single-player MechWarrior title to release on Steam that could segue into MWonline to attract new blood.

You would need a great story.