173 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Alastair, I agree that our wallets are our ballots; I just have to take issue with the things you find a priority.

Game modes, game modes, game modes. The one unheralded reason people leave this game is boredom. There's nothing to do. The game modes are simplistic, the maps too few (though they've stepped that up), and once you've played one team deathmatch you've played them all. It is the biggest poison to this game's retention levels. CW didn't help the game because it was CW; it helped because it was a new game mode, Attack and Defend. It's what got people checking back in. I can almost guarantee that the return would have been rougher for the population levels had CW been played out on River City.

And with PGI continuing to adhere to the meticulous design process that's native to the software industry, we're getting one game mode per year. It's just not enough. Players need variety and depth to their combat, somewhere to go once their current mode gets boring, and we need somewhere to put larger maps. Turkey shoot, escort, territory control, Solaris, single-player/co-op missions...these are must haves, they made all the previous MW titles worth playing, we're not getting any until 2016 based on what we heard in the last Townhall, and the 4vs4 scouting missions in CW...new maps? Team deathmatch again? We don't have solid information.

Give people fun, varied, and interesting game modes, and watch every other issue dwindle into a manageable nuisance.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 17 April 2015 - 05:48 PM.

[Deathlike]

Alistair Winter, on 17 April 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

I believe I'm in a different situation than most people, because I'm fairly confident that I've spent more money than 90% of the people playing this game. So I don't really feel any pangs of guilt regardless of what I choose.

Some people may find that they money they've invested in MWO is rather insignificant compared to the thousands of hours of entertainment they've gotten back, in which case I can hardly blame them for wanting to pay PGI back and keep supporting the game. Indeed, I have often chastized other players who take some perverse pride in having played thousands of hours, while only spending a little money, or no money at all.

I don't think chastising players really helps in the cause. People will put in the money that they feel they need to... for whatever the reason. It's their decision, and if they don't feel the game is worth putting in a dime for... well PGI probably didn't do a good enough job to convince them... or that they are satisfied with their experience "as is".

Although, it is amusing sometimes to poke a little fun @ the gold mech owners.

Quote

Every man has to make his choice, both based on whether they think the product is worth the price and based on whether they feel like they've given a fair amount back, compared to the entertainment they have received.

Sure, but at this point... the merits don't always need to be debated... but a reminder is necessary instead of just throwing money and hoping things resolves themselves... as people seem to think sometimes that will somehow get the game that they have been asking for..

[Bill Lumbar]

This really is very simple and has been brought up so many times before in many threads.

Plan A:

#1. Increase ALL players earnings CB's/XP/GXP by 50% across the board, including CW matches (keep current LP rewards or even add some to them)

#2. Drop all MC prices purchased with cash and MC prices on mech's by 50%

#3. Drop all mech packs by for sale by 50%

#4. Keep PT the same amount in MC, but make it only tick down when logged into game.

#5. Drop color prices by 75% and they unlock across all mechs owned. Drop Camo prices by 50% and make them unlock across all chassis owned.

This adds the word "Value" into PGI's pay model, and players can start to feel like they really progress at more then a snails pace in this game as we do now, IMO. I don't know about you, but it would make me want to play more, and it would make me want to purchase more then I already have the last two years. Mech bay sales would be up, because if players want more then 4 mechs at a time, they will need more of them because of increased earnings.


If this concept is to much for PGI to wrap their heads around, Here is another option...

Plan B:

#1. Increase ALL players earnings CB's/XP/GXP by 30% across the board, including CW matches (keep current LP rewards or even add some to them)

#2. Drop all MC prices purchased with cash and MC prices on mech's by 50%

#3. Drop all mech packs by for sale by 50%

#4. Keep PT the same amount in MC, but make it only tick down when logged into game.

#5. Drop color prices by 75% and they unlock across all mechs owned. Drop Camo prices by 50% and make them unlock across all chassis owned.

#6. Remove the "Pawnshop" style sell back method in the lab, and give us back 75-80% of the value we paid for anything with C-bills for, weapon modules, mechs, upgrades, etc. etc.


These are all very easy things that could be done by PGI, and in the long run with all things considered with where this game is at, development wise... it would not hurt PGI to do this. This would make things about this game that many are not happy with not so bad until PGI can fix or add them. Breathing room....for them, and much love will be given back from us players, incoming and Veterans alike. It will also keep players interested, after all, the only real depth we have now is the next mech coming out for sale, or so it would seem.

[Stoned Prophet]

Alistair Winter, on 17 April 2015 - 03:33 PM, said:

Apparently, Resistance pack 2 is on its way and will be available for sale May 1st. I guess PGI will follow its winning recipe of 4 mechs + 1 loyalty mech, available for 20 / 40 / 60 / 80 dollars. (Edited)

I'm not going to ask anyone to buy or tell anyone not to buy, but I would just like to point out that this is the best possible time to vote with your wallet. If you want to send a message to PGI, I think this is the best time. Because this is the moment when a lot of people make the decision whether or not to buy, and this is the moment when PGI is paying close attention.

If you buy, I think this is the best time to tweet PGI and tell them that you're buying their product, and why. And if you don't buy, I think this is the best time to tweet PGI and tell them why you're not buying.

The reason I bring this up, is because there's some discontent on the forum. Granted, there's always some discontent and the actual source of discontent varies a little bit over time, but it seems to me that more and more people are starting to become aware of the decline in graphics and sound. I'm talking about...

• Low quality mech textures (e.g. camo patterns)
  
• Ugly damage textures
  
• Removing inverse kinematics (mechs matching the angle of their feet with the terrain)
  
• Less dramatic visual effects for death (e.g. less glowing metal, less visible ammo explosions)
  
• No working cockpit screens (Never saw them. Removed in CB, I'm told)
  
• Missiles with spiralling flight paths
  
• The changes from dynamic geometry. The CPLT used to look like this. Now it looks like this. And don't get me started on the CTF or CN9 or Jagermech. Just check out this thread.
  
• The changes to sound effects, many of which were quite unpopular. Especially the ballistics sounds, but many people feel that old PPC and SRM/LRM sounds were also better.
  
• Atlas glowing eyes.

And that's just graphics and sound. I'm not talking about any of the other stuff that people miss from CB. But I'm sure you know the stuff that would go on that list too. Personally, I would like to see PGI fix some old nagging issues before we march on to CW phase 3 and 4. You may agree with those issues, or you may be more concerned about other things entirely.



I'm not starting this thread just as a random weekly rant (although that would be pretty cool). As someone who has spent hundreds of dollars on MWO, I encourage everyone to keep buying stuff if you're happy with the product and/or want to show your appreciation of what PGI is doing with MWO. I'm not going to talk anyone out of buying Resistance Pack 2. And as someone who got into the game relatively early, it's not a big deal for me personally if I'm skipping a mech pack or two, but I understand that the early grab deals are great value for money for new players. So I'm not here to talk anyone out of anything.

I am starting this thread because there's a lot of people expressing discontent about certain elements in MWO that are actually declining (especially graphics and sound) instead of progressing, and that's something PGI doesn't seem to take seriously. So if you are truly concerned about those issues, I encourage you to use this special moment in time to vote with your wallet. Don't just write some sarcastic posts about it on the forum. Walk the walk.

And if you really want to send a message, maybe start some kind of viral Twitter hashtag. Like #atlasglowingeyes or #theybrokemywang.

TL;DR: The moment PGI comes out with a new mech pack, it's kind of a big deal. It's a good time to either show your support or to send a message about stuff you're not happy with.

Check out this thread for tips on how to get Russ' attention on Twitter.

Meh. Im happy. Ill buy max pack again, as always. And as they fix these things, ill enjoy them too. (I really didnt bother reading. Textures, this, that, the other thing thats not really that important. I feel ya. I just dont care.)

Now, reading this, you make think "FOOL! Thats what they want you to do! How can you possibly be happy with the game!?!?!!?
You know what makes me happy? Mechs and Maps. Guess what weve been getting?
You (whomever) may disagree, but Im pretty sure the number of people like me is greater than the number of people like you. My evidence (if you can call it that. more like a conclusion based on anecdotes) PGI keeps doing the same thing, and I assure you, as a business owner myself, if they werent making enough money off the model, theyd change it

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

I've dropped $950 on this game since my Founder's pack in November of 2012. I've been well entertained for that $950 considering I've put anywhere between 10 to 20 hours a week playing.

However.

The sharp decline in quality of content, lack of content, and poorly made design decisions have inevitably shut my wallet.

[Alistair Winter]

Bill Lumbar, on 17 April 2015 - 05:56 PM, said:

This really is very simple and has been brought up so many times before in many threads.

Well, I think there are a lot of good and simple recipes for improving the game. But I'm not one of the people who is very optimistic about my ability to influence PGI's decisions. After thousands of posts and God knows how many hours spent on this forum, I wouldn't be surprised to find that the result of all my involvement in discussion, all my creative ideas and suggestions, all my constructive criticism... was zero. I think I would be more surprised to find out that I actually had an impact on the game.

Hence my decision to stop attempting to communicate with PGI through the forums . It doesn't seem to be working at all. And I'm not going to attempt any kind of Twitter dialogue either.

Deathlike, on 17 April 2015 - 05:53 PM, said:

I don't think chastising players really helps in the cause. People will put in the money that they feel they need to... for whatever the reason. It's their decision, and if they don't feel the game is worth putting in a dime for... well PGI probably didn't do a good enough job to convince them... or that they are satisfied with their experience "as is".

Although, it is amusing sometimes to poke a little fun @ the gold mech owners.

You may be right. But ultimately, I think the P2W model has something in common with the "name your price" model that a lot of artists are using, including game developers. Like when Radiohead released In Rainbows and just let everyone pay whatever they wanted for the album. In principle, no one was obliged to pay anything. But morally, I take issue with people who have the ability to pay, who derive a lot of pleasure from a product, and decide not to give anything back.

Of course, even if you were to grant that such behaviour is wrong (which you may still disagree with), that doesn't necessarily mean that it's constructive to chastize those people. But I figure it's worth a shot, when the opportunity presents itself

Deathlike, on 17 April 2015 - 05:53 PM, said:

Sure, but at this point... the merits don't always need to be debated... but a reminder is necessary instead of just throwing money and hoping things resolves themselves... as people seem to think sometimes that will somehow get the game that they have been asking for..

Agreed.

Rebas Kradd, on 17 April 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

Alastair, I agree that our wallets are our ballots; I just have to take issue with the things you find a priority.
Give people fun, varied, and interesting game modes, and watch every other issue dwindle into a manageable nuisance.

Oh, I'm not going to argue against that. Like I said in the OP, people may disagree about what's most important. I merely picked the issue of graphics and sound because it's been something of a hot topic lately and a lot of people have been vocal about their discontent. So my question is "Well, what are you going to do about it?". The forum circlejerks are fun, but I'm not sure they actually accomplish anything.

I've written much and often about MWO's gamemodes and how I'd like PGI to imitate other popular game modes instead of trying (and IMHO, failing) to come up with entirely new ones. On a positive note, Russ says a 4th game mode is planned for public queue. On a negative note, it doesn't sound like we're going to see it in 2015. Maybe the game will be 4 years old by the time we see that 4th game mode.

For me personally, the stuff I want most from MWO is apparently planned anyway. I've always said that I'd pay for PVE and Solaris, and Russ is saying that it's coming in the future. When it's here, I'll probably pay for it.

[Deathlike]

Alistair Winter, on 17 April 2015 - 06:26 PM, said:

You may be right. But ultimately, I think the P2W model has something in common with the "name your price" model that a lot of artists are using, including game developers. Like when Radiohead released In Rainbows and just let everyone pay whatever they wanted for the album. In principle, no one was obliged to pay anything. But morally, I take issue with people who have the ability to pay, who derive a lot of pleasure from a product, and decide not to give anything back.

Of course, even if you were to grant that such behaviour is wrong (which you may still disagree with), that doesn't necessarily mean that it's constructive to chastize those people. But I figure it's worth a shot, when the opportunity presents itself

I think it has more to do with the "entrance fee" or the "first buy-in to MWO" is the hardest sell IMO. Besides if you spend just $7 or even $15 and spend it w/o knowing whether something is worth it... tends to cause repercussions down the line. A "newbie friendly" option where you'd get like 30 days premium with a dozen mechbays and some decent C-bill gaining mechs (at least 4 in total) for $20 should be on the table... otherwise people get the wrong impression and become "one and done" with the game. It's all a real problem with the NPE.

Quote

I've written much and often about MWO's gamemodes and how I'd like PGI to imitate other popular game modes instead of trying (and IMHO, failing) to come up with entirely new ones. On a positive note, Russ says a 4th game mode is planned for public queue. On a negative note, it doesn't sound like we're going to see it in 2015. Maybe the game will be 4 years old by the time we see that 4th game mode.

For me personally, the stuff I want most from MWO is apparently planned anyway. I've always said that I'd pay for PVE and Solaris, and Russ is saying that it's coming in the future. When it's here, I'll probably pay for it.

We're likely to get a new mode in Dec 2015, in honor of the "one a year" new game mode record they are setting. I mean... let's keep setting the bar low right?

[Bishop Steiner]

Certainly, there are things that need fixed. Some long standing. What's funny to me is that people phrase and say things like the Devs don't want to fix a lot of things.

Yet some things, like the lowered graphics was done because there was 100x more forum QQ during CB by people whose rigs could not run the game, or at very poor FPS. There are myriad things that combine to cause that, but it's the root part of why things got toned down. (12 v 12 sure didn't help, either, yet half the people asking for 8v8 back? Are the same people that pushed for 12 v 12 in Beta. Chew on that).

Some things do boggle my mind, like the scaling issues they have. But all I can do is keep rattling Russ's cage about it, and eventually, hope for progress. And hope that progress doesn't come with unintended and unexpected consequences. But I pushed Russ hard enough, and guess what? He discovered the Grasshopper WAS going to be in the game as Huge, and not only worked to address that, but finally, in the same manner improved the Gargoyle and Victor. Change happens. Just not always overnight, or in the priority you or I might wish.


Regardless, by purchasing the pack will depend entirely on 2 things. Do I have the money, and do I want the mechs? I didn't buy Clan Wave III, because TBH, 90% of the mechs in Wave I and II, bore me to tears. I just find that outside my Summoner (which is still woefully unimpressive, but I love it anyhow, like an ugly child) I don't get any fun out of driving them. So for the first Pack ever, I abstained. (there are also a couple Heroes that never tickled me, like the Golden Boy).

Resistance II? Will depend entirely on what is in it, including, as a vain and fickle person, how they look.

But Russ finally gave me my Urbanmech, so it would be rather churlish for me to not give them the chance. As for this post, well, I did make a tongue in cheek, though also semi serious post like this myself way back in Wave III, so I can't really begrudge you the right to speak up.
http://mwomercs.com/...k-for-wave-iii/

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 April 2015 - 06:41 PM.

[Anjian]

I am not buying it this time, and in fact I also cancelled my Clan wave 3 Gladiator pack until PGI does something to improve their connectivity, improve their polling rate (at least return it as it was prior to July 2014) and their weak servers, the latter especially instead of spending the money on failed ventures like Transverse. The rubberbanding, the warping, the poor hit registration, these are serious show stoppers for me. I don't encounter similar problems in other games.

[Sigilum Sanctum]

I can probably attribute my relatively positive attitude to PGI to that fact I haven't been "burned" just yet (although the Jager geometry and oversized Grasshopper still annoy the **** out of me).

Although I do recognize some of the issues that really should be attended too, I'm still enjoying the game, extensively. I'm probably going to buy the reinforcement pack, depending if I like the mechs or not.

[Armorine]

I'll help. Already getting the pack. Done

[Impyrium]

Alistair Winter, on 17 April 2015 - 03:33 PM, said:

• Low quality mech textures (e.g. camo patterns)
  
• Ugly damage textures
  
• Removing inverse kinematics (mechs matching the angle of their feet with the terrain)
  
• Less dramatic visual effects for death (e.g. less glowing metal, less visible ammo explosions)
  
• No working cockpit screens (Never saw them. Removed in CB, I'm told)
  
• Missiles with spiralling flight paths
  
• The changes from dynamic geometry. The CPLT used to look like this. Now it looks like this. And don't get me started on the CTF or CN9 or Jagermech. Just check out this thread.
  
• The changes to sound effects, many of which were quite unpopular. Especially the ballistics sounds, but many people feel that old PPC and SRM/LRM sounds were also better.
  
• Atlas glowing eyes.

While everyone's going to do their own thing with their own money, I too really want to see those points among others addressed. I mean, to each their own, but I disagree the focus of a game should permanently, always, be primarily focused on game balance. Bugs, gamebreaking oversights, sure. But polish and quality are equally important in making a game enjoyable (and attractive to new players).

Personally I don't like the mentality where the only thing that matters is whether someone's Timber Wolf is matched perfectly with its IS counterpart and all that, but that's for the same reason I think competitive play can be a little silly at times. Just me.

Certainly my wallet has never been wide open nor at all recently, yet if PGI showed they were taking that stuff seriously rather than just pushing it aside, I'd be far more inclined to put money into 'Mech packs.

Also, fun fact. The Raven's cockpit does not animate 'bobbing' when moving backwards. So many little things. PGI plz.

Edited by AUSwarrior24, 17 April 2015 - 07:23 PM.

[Chuanhao]

I think we all intrinsically vote with our wallet. What u are attempting though is sharing with us how u weigh your investment in the game and what u feel is bang for the buck. And thanks for sharing your perspective.

On the whole, I feel that people will pay for the features that they want. My own priorities, being a weekend warrior, and having a terrible lag being in Asia-Pacific, graphic quality is of the least importance. What I will spend on however are mechs. My own valuation system goes by "how much is my Time worth" if I like a mech, and it takes too long to get it by cbills, I would get it alacarte if necessary. Hence, my priorities are more mechs and more non CW maps. I would pay for a mech (not forced mech packs) if I like it. Otherwise I wont. I cant crowd fund more maps, so I try at the forums.

Final note. The black knight would not earn a cent from me, even if it has ECM.

[DaZur]

Alistair Winter, on 17 April 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

Thanks for your response. I'm not quite sure if I understand or agree with the term "holding a business hostage". If I bought the iPhone 2, 3, 4 and 5, but refuse to buy iPhone 6 because I feel like Apple should do something more to earn my payment, am I holding them hostage? You may feel that the comparison is ridiculous because Apple is infinitely bigger than PGI, but PGI has maintained a staff of 50+ employees for years now. To their credit, they are a remarkably big and stable gaming company. It's impressive that they have accomplished so much, and that they indeed managed to split with IGP instead of being absorbed entirely by bigger companies.

I don't feel like I'm holding them hostage, really. I feel they're pretty robust. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

It's more like purchasing the iPhone 6, using it for two years, coming to the conclusion that all the while Apple could have actually made larger strides in the improvement between 5 and 6 and decided to stand in the foyer of the local Apple store and politely issue a recommendation to all patrons to not invest any more money in Apple until they square themselves away, make some more palpable changes in the design, functionality and performance of the iPhone.

Mind you I'm extremely impressed with the tone and civility of your terms... But at the end of the day even with the well heeled nature of the proposition, it's still a leveraging maneuver using the withholding of monetary support.

Edited by DaZur, 17 April 2015 - 08:03 PM.

[JediPanther]

The game is boring and rewards minimal. As one who doesn't like or find cw, conquest or assult modes fun; having the same few maps is quite dull. Even with founder or hero mechs that I have cbill rewards are low even in those rare 300+ damage games. Like others I would buy and use premium time a lot more if it had an on/off option at my command instead of runing 24/7. The few times I've used it were as auto actitaved event prizes.

The two things that do keep me interested in the game are the mech lab and the gaming unit I play with. Toying with builds that are just really bad or weird is fun. I won't buy mc "just to support pgi." I have a small fixed income so you have to have something interesting or uniqe for me to spend my money. I donated to the sarah charity when that was big and got the jenner s for it. I bought the urbie standard because it sounded like a good just-for-fun mech.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Alistair Winter, on 17 April 2015 - 03:58 PM, said:

Well, I'd have a hard time with that choice. Because I'd feel a bit like I was being milked beyond the point of decency.

But I would be more comfortable if PGI had public stretchgoals for each mech pack, showing their motivation to fix issues that are important to the fans. Like "If 10,000 people buy this mech pack, we can add ambient sounds and a soundtrack, or bring back cockpit monitors for people with Very High graphics setting." or "If 15,000 people buy this mech pack, we can revisit the dynamic geometry for these four mechs, or finish our work on destructible trees and traffic lights."

Give the players some realistic options within a certain budget, let the players vote, and then leave it to the players to reach those stretch goals.

Even this may make a lot of players uncomfortable, because they feel it's unreasonable that they bought a Founder mech pack and then the product they were happy with in CB gradually got worse. So they're not happy that they have to "buy back" the Atlas' glowing eyes, in a sense.

It's all academic anyway, since I think it's going to take a long time before PGI actually takes the issue of graphics and sound seriously. Hence my decision not to buy, even though I really want the rumoured Wolfhound and Mauler, ever since I saw the Battletech cartoon as a kid.

I'd rather pay another $120 and get it all fixed up rather than not spend $120 and watch it never get fixed.

[STEF_]

I managed to pilot the mechs I was interest in.
You know, as an old timer fan of BT and of mw since mw2, I'm happy piloting mechs from 2750 to 3050 TROs.

Sadly PGI decided to screw up so many BT rules, but now....
...now the game is in a such idiotic phase, that it will be normal to have matches with 24 ecm mechs.
http://mwomercs.com/...i-like-bt-more/
(of course, there are many other comical situations, but, since evebody knows them... I don't want to make a list. And bugs too.)

and part of the community seems so happy that PGI is changing the game into a any"couterstrike""battlefield with robottos" FSP,too!

So happy and submissive too Check out this thread for tips on how to get Russ' attention on Twitter.

Taking into account this, I think I'll start to spend again from 2018.

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 17 April 2015 - 11:01 PM.

[STEF_]

Rebas Kradd, on 17 April 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

Alastair, I agree that our wallets are our ballots; I just have to take issue with the things you find a priority.

Game modes, game modes, game modes. The one unheralded reason people leave this game is boredom. There's nothing to do. The game modes are simplistic, the maps too few (though they've stepped that up), and once you've played one team deathmatch you've played them all. It is the biggest poison to this game's retention levels. CW didn't help the game because it was CW; it helped because it was a new game mode, Attack and Defend. It's what got people checking back in. I can almost guarantee that the return would have been rougher for the population levels had CW been played out on River City.

And with PGI continuing to adhere to the meticulous design process that's native to the software industry, we're getting one game mode per year. It's just not enough. Players need variety and depth to their combat, somewhere to go once their current mode gets boring, and we need somewhere to put larger maps. Turkey shoot, escort, territory control, Solaris, single-player/co-op missions...these are must haves, they made all the previous MW titles worth playing, we're not getting any until 2016 based on what we heard in the last Townhall, and the 4vs4 scouting missions in CW...new maps? Team deathmatch again? We don't have solid information.

Give people fun, varied, and interesting game modes, and watch every other issue dwindle into a manageable nuisance.

YEP.
I was very happy readind during the past weeks, that we were going to have solaris and 4vs4.
THEN I read halltown, saying 2016????

There really are NO RESON at all, for such a delay.
(if someone says pgi is a little company and they need that time to program those game modes, I think I will die laughing)

[Rick Rawlings]

I have been voting with my wallet for about a year and a half. The game has been stale and unimaginative for a long time. Unfortunately, the free to play format forces PGI to focus on cash generating items rather than core gameplay. Sadly, it remains a really sluggish version of quake. I stumbled on this video one day and realized it represented more fun than I had ever had with MWO
http://m.youtube.com...h?v=Qd4TUlJD2ls
The map is cool, the cat and mouse aspect seems awesome, there's an on-screen map that doesn't cover your entire friggin field of view. I'd much rather have cool gameplay than fancy graphics and right now the game doesn't seem to be going that way...

[Bill Lumbar]

DaZur, on 17 April 2015 - 08:00 PM, said:

It's more like purchasing the iPhone 6, using it for two years, coming to the conclusion that all the while Apple could have actually made larger strides in the improvement between 5 and 6 and decided to stand in the foyer of the local Apple store and politely issue a recommendation to all patrons to not invest any more money in Apple until they square themselves away, make some more palpable changes in the design, functionality and performance of the iPhone.

Mind you I'm extremely impressed with the tone and civility of your terms... But at the end of the day even with the well heeled nature of the proposition, it's still a leveraging maneuver using the withholding of monetary support.

Ummmm Yeah..... I think its everyone's right to spend their hard earned cash how they see fit within their means. That said, funny you should bring up Apple as a example, because they seem to have many things in common with this topic we are talking about and PGI's pay model. I do not believe Alistair and his thread here is like him walking into a Apple store and protesting for others not to spend money on the Iphone 6.5.9 and a half because Apple has brought forth a minimal and over priced product for its customers.

What I do believe is that he is posting on this site, MWO, a public forum regarding his opinion and concerns with the direction of this game and where it seems to be going, or in his opinion, to be clear about it, the LACK of where its going, in his opinion. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think he has suggested or "protested" to anyone here NOT to spend money on this game, or to continue support PGI further with cash, in hopes of further development on this game by PGI. In fact, I think he has stated the opposite of your analogy, no?

Btw, to be clear, even if he is using a " leveraging maneuver using the withholding of monetary support." method as you claim, as customers of any company, isn't that the only real effective way to reach a company that has fallen out of touch with its customers? We as customers have every right to make that choice for our selves, and on a public forum, have every right to be civil and discuss or address our concerns with other customers, no?

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 17 April 2015 - 11:36 PM.