Jump to content

Just Realized How Incomplete The Website Is


57 replies to this topic

#41 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 31 March 2015 - 04:02 AM

View PostDino Might, on 30 March 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

My recommendation is to work up something on your own. Build a draft product that they could, in a day, polish and post as a main part of their website.

Three years ago, I would have agreed with you. But I've witnessed first-hand the amount of effort and work that players have put into making suggestions for PGI, and I have never seen any of it actually used. Map ideas, game mode ideas, game mechanic ideas... the forum archives are filled with so much work done by the players to help PGI, which PGI has ignored. Maybe because they prefer to do things their own way, maybe because of legal reasons. Who knows.

At any rate, I have stopped trying to do stuff for PGI at my own initiative. Right now, they need to make the first move if they want to mobilize the players again. I don't think it's too late though.

View PostDar1ng One, on 28 March 2015 - 11:43 PM, said:

Hi AW, good forum topic. Here is some skimmed source material from my battle tech source books. Hope this helps you M8.

Hey, thanks a lot for the effort! But really, my questions were just rhetorical ones, to illustrate that some vital aspects and core concepts in Battletech are missing entirely from the website, which makes it harder for new fans to really be engaged and captured by the game. So it's not about me personally, it's about the new player experience. :)

#42 Peter Wolf 359

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,111 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 01 April 2015 - 06:14 AM

View PostAlistair Winter, on 31 March 2015 - 04:02 AM, said:

Hey, thanks a lot for the effort! But really, my questions were just rhetorical ones, to illustrate that some vital aspects and core concepts in Battletech are missing entirely from the website, which makes it harder for new fans to really be engaged and captured by the game. So it's not about me personally, it's about the new player experience. :)


I fully agree. When I try to recruit new players from my pool of nephews and nieces I now say it's like Game of Thrones (5 houses with a threat from the north) crossed with Pacific Rim, but cooler robots. Seems to grab some attention from the mobile Clash generation.

Edited by Dar1ng One, 01 April 2015 - 06:15 AM.


#43 0rionsbane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 122 posts

Posted 01 April 2015 - 10:48 AM

View PostMajor Tryhard, on 08 March 2015 - 02:01 AM, said:

They don't care to provide all these things because this game is not aimed at random people. This is a game for the middle-aged BT junkie who has the books, the old games, the mech wallpapers, can name the 3rd cousin of Hans Davion from his mother's side and tell you exactly how many manufacturers of the AC20 exist in the inner sphere and on which planets they are based.
PGI get a lot of criticism from those passionate people but at the same time they get an easy ride because of players' addiction to the Battletech universe. They ***** and moan (well, half of them do) but at the end of the day they keep playing and buying the nostalgiamechs.
If they dared present a random robot game missing all those features and not explaining anything to the new player, then they would have been ridiculed and closed up shop long ago. Right now they have the players doing their job for them, providing a proper mechlab, supporting the newbies on this forum or reddit or youtube, providing mech guides etc etc.
Don't expect things to change any time soon, they have found their small niche and the veterans are keeping the lights on. That seems to be enough for PGI.

except the game is balanced around attracting new players with higher heat scales and rebalanced mechs/weapons. So in other words they are failing on both sides attracting new players keeping old junkies and making the game competitive and immersive well forget that one its not even close yet.

#44 Havyek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts
  • LocationBarrie, ON

Posted 01 April 2015 - 07:35 PM

Honestly, I wouldn't hold my breath too long for a lot of this. Most of the MWO information comes from Twitter instead of the website that holds its name.

#45 Peter Wolf 359

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,111 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 02 April 2015 - 07:45 AM

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

#46 Peter Wolf 359

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,111 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 02 April 2015 - 07:55 AM

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

#47 Peter Wolf 359

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,111 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 02 April 2015 - 07:59 AM

Posted Image

#48 VoodooLou Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 586 posts
  • LocationMember #2618

Posted 03 April 2015 - 05:11 PM

While I like what youve added Daring, you shouldnt have needed too. All of the Lore info you provided is the Bailiwick of the Dev's. Unless of course you got paid a stipend to scan in TRO pages.

#49 Nothing Whatsoever

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 3,655 posts
  • LocationNowhere

Posted 03 April 2015 - 06:52 PM

I would like to see the in-game tabs reordered a bit like this: Home | Mechlab | Faction (which should probably be renamed) | Codex.

Codex would contain all of the important background info about MWO and Battletech.

Then move Skills over to either the Home tab or Mech Lab.

Crude mock up incoming:

Posted Image

Edited by Praetor Knight, 03 April 2015 - 06:54 PM.


#50 That Dawg

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 1,876 posts

Posted 04 April 2015 - 03:51 AM

Quote

It's kind of silly that we have to go to Smurfy to see the maps, in addition to building mechs.


That has always eluded me.


And...I played for a YEAR before I saw some scaling of mechs against "things" and realized some of these mechs were 3 stories tall?!?!!

Scaling escapes me totally.

Edited by That Dawg, 04 April 2015 - 03:53 AM.


#51 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 04 April 2015 - 08:10 AM

Months ago I asked for one, simple, stupid thing: the ability to sort my mechs in my stat page (the one that lists kills, damage, etc.) in some sane order vs. the random madness that it is currently... it's not alphabetical, by tonnage, or by anything, and it's full of duplicate entries for various mechs...

Somebody from PGI said they'd "look into it" because "it shouldn't be that hard."

And still nothing has been done.

For crying out loud - I know Sharepoint (a common web development tool) that I could add that feature, and I'm not a software engineer, web designer, or anything else! But here we are with a minimally viable website.

#52 Wolf486

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts

Posted 05 April 2015 - 01:59 PM

So let me get this straight, you expect PGI to do more then they already have?

LOL!! ROFLMAO!!! Good one!!

edit.....at least not until you make enough noise to justify making a change and doing something.

Edited by Wolf486, 05 April 2015 - 02:05 PM.


#53 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 05 April 2015 - 04:29 PM

View PostWolf486, on 05 April 2015 - 01:59 PM, said:

So let me get this straight, you expect PGI to do more then they already have?

LOL!! ROFLMAO!!! Good one!!

edit.....at least not until you make enough noise to justify making a change and doing something.


Where's that "Not sure if serious..." GIF...

#54 Reno Blade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 3,362 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 06 April 2015 - 04:22 AM

It seems it's time to ask Tina and the Community for a "Create X" event for all the stuff we have ingame and all the background stuff we could add to the Website (without just copying Sarna.net) !

Lets do this!

#55 Toha Heavy Industries

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 2,341 posts

Posted 06 April 2015 - 04:59 AM

Might have been stated before, but there's no distinction between Battle-'mechs and Omni-'mechs. Or Inner Sphere and Clan.
It isn't even in the Game UI, be it mechlab, skill and even the very dropdeck "edit" page from the CW "faction" page itself.
The only thing what it shows is what mechs you already have and current trail-'mechs. And that's AFTER you picked a Faction.
If you don't know it, you can play "guess what" upon purchasing mechs from the mechlab "purchasable" page.

This is as potato as it can get.

#56 Satan n stuff

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 3,508 posts
  • LocationLooking right at you, lining up my shot.

Posted 15 May 2015 - 02:28 AM

View PostVassago Rain, on 08 March 2015 - 01:01 AM, said:

There used to be a page that talked about the factions.

Dracs were claimed to be AUTOCRAZY, due to a hilarious typo.

They aren't?

Edited by Satan n stuff, 15 May 2015 - 02:29 AM.


#57 sycocys

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,837 posts

Posted 15 May 2015 - 10:49 AM

View PostTeam Chevy86, on 08 March 2015 - 02:05 AM, said:

Yes yes and a thousand times yes. Maybe once they slow down pumping out content (yeah right) they'll remember that they bought an entire franchise and not simply a pile of robots that we can build to shoot at each other. There's a lot more to it than that

Is it even possible for them to move any slower?

#58 GI Journalist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 595 posts

Posted 14 June 2015 - 07:39 PM

Even moving on a one-for-one timeline is ambitious. A lot happens in 3052, and the website could use an updated timeline as we progress.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users