141 replies to this topic

[Kirkland Langue]

I'm probably one of the most critical of PGI. I could, and have, written pages of complaints about choices that PGI has made over the years. I could, and have, written many paragraphs about the problems specific to CW.

But, CW is pretty good. PGI needs to spend a LOT of time over the next year improving upon what was delivered ... heck, at the rate that PGI has historically fixed blatant issues, they probably have 5 years worth of work ahead of them just getting MWO to the place it probably already should be at.

But, CW is pretty good. It was a well needed shot in the arm - and while PGI might have missed the vein, and the shot hurts like hell, it was still much needed.

[CDLord HHGD]

Arkmaus, on 17 December 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

I saw "Destructoid" and chalked it up as garbage.

See all the time I saved.

I will know better in the future.

[Deathlike]

TBH, I agree with the author. I will disagree how he went about conveying his opinion on the matter. Some of us still remembers the kinds of blunders PGI has had. That is obviously coloring what he's saying, and I don't entirely blame him for feeling that way. With that said, "90 days" was a real tagline for those of us not believing that CW would arrive on time. Watching that said AGAIN on the launch day video serves as an actual reminder to those of us skeptical of PGI's intentions.

For now, I guess PGI is doing better than before... at least OK. However, I'm not blind to how much work has to be done on PGI's end to address many issues that have plagued this game that still have to be addressed. While I have no real expectations of the ETA, as long as PGI is demonstrating that they are addressing things (like, are they ever going to fix the "Ammo Explosion" message for the Gauss Rifle...?), then people will continue to support them within reason.

It doesn't mean I can entirely forgive what they have done before. It is still PGI's job to improve and not go back to their old ways. Otherwise, the sentiment does not go away... with its previously well founded reasons.

[EvangelionUnit]

the truth hurts

[wanderer]

Quote

(like, are they ever going to fix the "Ammo Explosion" message for the Gauss Rifle...?)

Actually,that's precisely how it's treated as in tabletop in the rules, up to and including being able to gib a 'Mech beyond repair if the Gauss exploding finishes off the CT internals.

[Deathlike]

wanderer, on 17 December 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:

Actually,that's precisely how it's treated as in tabletop in the rules, up to and including being able to gib a 'Mech beyond repair if the Gauss exploding finishes off the CT internals.

I know that, but this is for the new player that doesn't realize the Gauss Rifle exploded, causing their death. You and I may know the rules and what happened, but the average new player doesn't and keeps posting bug reports on this.

Edited by Deathlike, 17 December 2014 - 02:19 PM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Deathlike, on 17 December 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

TBH, I agree with the author. I will disagree how he went about conveying his opinion on the matter.

You mean the part where he sneakily offered the impression that PGI has been working on nothing at all of value over the last two years? And the part where he conveniently leaves out the fact that PGI is a skeleton-crew developer with forty people on staff and a ton of inexperience? And the fact that PGI will continue to develop it?

The article omits enough facts, perspective, and backstory to be considered a piece of open calumny. The guy obviously just wants PGI to look bad and has tailored his story accordingly.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 17 December 2014 - 02:23 PM.

[TripleEhBeef]

The author of the article isn't exactly wrong, PGI has missed a lot of deadlines, dropped A LOT of balls, and at the very least could have added some more functionality to CW before beta release. I know they wanted to put it in player hands and get some much needed feedback over the course of the holidays, but even some basic features, such as tutorial tips explaining the mode and contracts, and a global/faction chat interface could have helped the presentation much more.

HOWEVER, the way the article was written was much less a "First Look at Community Warfare" and much more "Metacritic User Review From A Guy Who Drank Way Too Much Red Bull".

Fine, you can pick a bone with PGI and with the game, but at least make your point without sounding whiny. I saw plenty of unflattering reviews of Takedown Red Sabre by reviewers who were old school tac-shooter fans, but not all of them were kicking their heels in the articles (some did though).

Tossing out a snarky comment at the core playerbase seemed uncalled for too.

[elismallz]

Khaze, on 17 December 2014 - 01:19 PM, said:

The article is a blog entry, not a piece of journalism.

That said, there is still a grain of truth in there and undoubtedly a lot of feelings have been hurt over the years. What is there to say? Mechwarrior fans are passionate people.

I like the game and I play it whenever I have the time, that's enough for me. It might not be if I had thrown more money at it than I have, but there you go...

I can't say for sure, but I doubt any of their contributors go to conventions and say "I'm a contributor" or "I'm a blogger". I'm fairly confident they go in saying something along the lines "I'm So and So with Destructoid". This, at least to me, would imply that they should be held to certain journalistic standards.

Even if the above is complete hogwash, the article is on the main games page and has the tag "News" and "Media", no mention of "Blog" (Destructoid has a blog section). If they want the "it's a blog" pass, it should be labeled as a blog or as opinion.

Anyway, good chat all.

[beerandasmoke]

Live in the past or move on towards the future. Guess the author chooses to live in the past and hold on to all the anger that goes with it. The game is doing fine and the devs and Russ are doing a good job. Good job PGI and I will continue to invest in this game as long as you keep up the good work.

[TripleEhBeef]

elismallz, on 17 December 2014 - 02:23 PM, said:

Even if the above is complete hogwash, the article is on the main games page and has the tag "News" and "Media", no mention of "Blog" (Destructoid has a blog section). If they want the "it's a blog" pass, it should be labeled as a blog or as opinion.

So... Is it a blog, or a beta?

[wanderer]

Quote

Live in the past or move on towards the future. Guess the author chooses to live in the past and hold on to all the anger that goes with it. The game is doing fine and the devs and Russ are doing a good job. Good job PGI and I will continue to invest in this game as long as you keep up the good work.

The game is recovering from long lapses in development. They're fixing them but introducing new "Oh, come ON!" flaws when adding new content.

Do we need to mention the last Clan 'Mech that was taking hits to it's CT like a shot trap, funneling hits through the back armor? PGI produces, but some of what results has disappointing results. At this point, CW should have spent some time on the Test server before being even considered a beta- but getting it out with warts and all satisfies the letter of promises made, if not the spirit.

[Moomtazz]

I've spent about $500 on MWO so I feel ok in calling myself a supporter of the game. I didn't see anything terrible about the article. I thought it was pretty accurate.

3 years in....basically useless in game chat, no in game support system, unwelcoming new user experience, plus some other things that are lacking in a 2014 title.

[Deathlike]

Rebas Kradd, on 17 December 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

You mean the part where he sneakily offered the impression that PGI has been working on nothing at all of value over the last two years? And the part where he conveniently leaves out the fact that PGI is a skeleton-crew developer with forty people on staff and a ton of inexperience? And the fact that PGI will continue to develop it?

To some degree, a lot of things are not "finished".

Adding DX11 "support" is only basic... it "functions" but does nothing else. It's not even optimized and I believe we still have the gamma issue that still has that feature disabled for DX9 (DX9's gamma is not broken, but they haven't fixed DX11 so both modes have it disabled).

UI 2.0 is a far cry from being "sufficient". It has nothing that resembles smurfy.. and still doesn't have an active crit+heatsink count. Heck, moving modules is a complete PITA (and not just finding engines).

I would like to point out.. you say that they are "inexperienced" which may be accurate for some of the crew. However, even PGI at various times have said they have had over a decades worth of experience for being in the industry. Therefore, there is still some onus on PGI (regardless of IGP's involvement) to have some clue on what they are doing if they have been here that long.

Quote

The article omits enough facts, perspective, and backstory to be considered a piece of open calumny. The guy obviously just wants PGI to look bad and has tailored his story accordingly.

It wouldn't really call it a journalistic piece, but more of an opinion blog post. It's not "inaccurate" for the expectations of a player that probably wanted "more" from PGI.

I mean, PGI hasn't really given reason to tell you "why" one should join a specific faction... and discuss its brief history (and only that can be barely found on this website).

Like, I think Invasion mode is nice, but it's "limited" in a sense that it could be more interesting for what it is. Perhaps the newer maps could demonstrate more variety than what there is right now (kill the gun is kinda straightforward as is). Still, I think more hardcore MW/TT fans prefer more modes like a defend the VIP-type of mode...

I would like to point out that PGI is "on track" with my "1 game mode a year" thing that PGI does. Last year was Skirmish. The year before that was Conquest. That is a really slow track of progression for just one mode IMO.

[Screech]

Why would gaming journalism be any different then the rest. It is the narrative that matters, nothing else.

At least they didn't claim they were ***** while playing. We got off easy.

[Rebas Kradd]

Deathlike, on 17 December 2014 - 02:44 PM, said:

To some degree, a lot of things are not "finished".

Adding DX11 "support" is only basic... it "functions" but does nothing else. It's not even optimized and I believe we still have the gamma issue that still has that feature disabled for DX9 (DX9's gamma is not broken, but they haven't fixed DX11 so both modes have it disabled).

UI 2.0 is a far cry from being "sufficient". It has nothing that resembles smurfy.. and still doesn't have an active crit+heatsink count. Heck, moving modules is a complete PITA (and not just finding engines).

All true, but it's not the whole story. In fact, it's so far from being the whole story that it can be safely considered unrepresentative of the game's history.

Any layman who stumbles across the article will get the impression that PGI has been doing nothing for three years. Whether the author intended that impression is questionable, and irrelevant.

[Kraven Kor]

Screech, on 17 December 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Why would gaming journalism be any different then the rest. It is the narrative that matters, nothing else.

At least they didn't claim they were ***** while playing. We got off easy.

And we should be decrying that until it changes. Politely.

[Angel of Annihilation]

While I generally have fun playing MWO, I can't help but agree with most of what was said in the article. Honestly I was expecting a hell of alot more from CW. Part of the reason I thought they kept delaying and delaying was because they were legitimately working on this amazing new game addition that was just going to knock our socks off complete with dozens of maps and a real, living battlefield type of feeling. However what we got here really seems like something that any competent developer could have put out in two month, especially consider the core game has already been in place for a long, long time. Honestly what we have, isn't 2-3 years worth of effort guys, not by a long shot and your fooling yourself if you believe PGI actually put a major effort into this.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 17 December 2014 - 04:33 PM.

[Dragomir Zelenka]

Viktor Drake, on 17 December 2014 - 04:33 PM, said:

While I generally have fun playing MWO, I can't help but agree with most of what was said in the article. Honestly I was expecting a hell of alot more from CW. Part of the reason I thought they kept delaying and delaying was because they were legitimately working on this amazing new game addition that was just going to knock our socks off complete with dozens of maps and a real, living battlefield type of feeling. However what we got here really seems like something that any competent developer could have put out in two month, especially consider the core game has already been in place for a long, long time. Honestly what we have, isn't 2-3 years worth of effort guys, not by a long shot and your fooling yourself if you believe PGI actually put a major effort into this.

While I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a two month job for development, I largely agree with you. CW as it stands feels like a bare minimum effort, and is distinctly underwhelming for me. While I didn't expect dozens of maps, I did expect an addition that didn't feel like a kit-bashed mod.

[Piney II]

What a butt hurt, whiney piece of pseudo "journalism" this piece is.