90 replies to this topic

[Big Tin Man]

FTP Pain? At least there are a LOT of trial mechs right now, and the game doesn't make you pay $0.01 to try a lot of mechs. Once upon a time, there were only four of them. Did you go through your cadet bonus driving a trial Dragon, because it was the best option of the 4? I did. That is FTP pain.

Mechbays can be earned for free via CW and weekend events, heroes are not PTW. Only colors, camos, and cockpit swag are behind a paywall, and they're only cosmetic. The rest can be ground out in time. The question is, what is your goal for playing mechwarrior? Are you happy running the same couple mechs? Do you enjoy the grind to try to obtain every variant for free? AFAIK, the only people really complaining about the grind are the FTP only clanners

[Wrathful Scythe]

Beeing a whale kinda defeats the purpose of me posting here but to hell with it. There are definitely a lot of f2p games which have a broken p2w system from the core and are designed that way. Just look at steam and you find a whole lot of shovelware to generate bucks. MWO isn't layed out to be fully p2w. Had some people starting from scratch and I guided them to buy useful stuff. Some hours passed and they got pretty decent machines. The MPL Thunderbolt isnt that expensive and still strong as f*ck.

MWO has a pretty decent system where you are not forced to pay money to be effective. You "just" need to spend some (or a whole lot more) time. Aiming for one of the current metamechs (Crow, Timber, Thunderbolt) should cost you some hours but then you've got one of the best mechs for the pug queue. Then comes the grind to level up 2 more of the same chassis to the most of it but you have your mech, which still does its job even without those elite skills. The problem here is that every player gets thrown in the same bucket. That newly bought Timberwolf will still be destroyed by my fully fitted DWolf with modules and everything.

Some might say that the Hero's are OP but that isn't really true. Maybe the Huginn needs reduced dps but nerfing lights shouldn't be the priority now. They sometimes offer unique builds, which often come with a drawback.

Some could argue that PGI's tendency to release overpowered mechs at release, then follow it up with a nerf, which comes right on time for the c-bill release, is a ploy but hey; thats only an assumption.

[Moldur]

I've played probably near a dozen f2p games (by play, I mean dumped at least a few hundred hours.) Mechwarrior is by far the most expensive free to play game I've ever played.

• Mechs are ridiculously expensive for an unlimited, 'common' item. Mechs shouldn't be over $7. Especially when $80 mech packs are $5 across the board per chassis for preorder with 4th variant.
  
• The exchange rate between real money to MC is pretty bad in comparison with other games. (also, wtf is with those numbers? 1,250 for $6.95? 25,000 for $99.95? Was it that hard to make an exchange rate that wouldn't **** our eyes?)
  
• The exchange rate between MC to C-bills is atrocious when looking at mech price (again refer to 1st point.)
  
• There is no way to make an argument to support buying cosmetic upgrades when they're more expensive than mechbays, which actually do something.
  
• The disgusting Mech Mastery system is essentially behind a paywall since the only way to have more than 3 mechbays is to get destroyed in trial mechs repeatedly in CW. That's not grindy, that's "Hey, it's technically possible for free, so don't give us no flak ya hear?"
  
• You literally cannot freely have more than 3 mechs unless you play Russ' awful brainchild known as CW or play for years.
  
• You have to play that grotesque abomination known as CW that laughs in the face of the sunk-cost fallacy to have more than 3 mechbays
  
• Paywall, 3 mechbays.
  
• Seriously, only 3 mechbays.

MWO is practically a subscription based game until you have enough mechbays, but it says it's a free to play. Why would I, a regular gamer who doesn't give a **** about battletech, want to grind in the least fun way imaginable, ever, in order to get onesie-twosie mechbays for a game that hasn't even proven it's fun at all yet?

At least there's no pay 2 win, which usually starts to happen a year or so after a free game comes out. The power creep increases as new weapons come out, prem weapons, abilities, etc.

[Aim64C]

Paigan, on 16 July 2015 - 02:33 AM, said:

About the video:

His bottom line is:
1.) The "average player" has to accept that content cannot be free but must be payed for.
My answer: They don't, so here we are. It's not that the BAD BAD companies force that strategy. They REACT, even are FORCED to react to the immature behavior of the average player.

2.) He would be willing to pay mighty 10 bucks for a sophisticated high-tech state-of-the-art multi-MILLION-dollar-game.
My answer: which extremely ironically can only work if there is the MASSIVE advertising that he condemns.

In short: naive idiot

Speaking of Naive idiots...

You should actually familiarize yourself with the marketing strategies he is talking about:

http://www.techtimes...ar-fire-age.htm

" The report about the young teenage boy who spent a whopping $46,000 on in-game purchases was seen on the Belgian news site Nieuwsblad. According to the report, the boy is said to have bought the game's gold using his grandfather's credit card. His mother says that he did know that he was spending real money.

The game that the boy was playing is known as the "Game of War: Fire Age," an online strategy game. In the game, the player can buy packs of 20,000 gold for $100. "

http://www.macworld....n-commerci.html

"Of course, you'll have plenty of opportunities to invest real cash: Game of War may be the most aggressively monetized free-to-play game I've ever played. Each session begins with a full-screen splash ad that tempts you to buy into some limited-time promotional bundle: $5 or $20 gets you a stack of gold and a slew of other resources and items that you can use to speed up timers or enhance your alliance. In one recurring case, the "X" to close the ad was obscured by its graphical design. I don't believe it was a coincidence.
...
While writing this up, I noticed one of my advanced alliance mates saying he had 38 days left on his current research timer. More than a month to wait for something to activate, because there's no such thing as instant gratification in free-to-play games—not without immense cost, at least. He seemed to be taking it in stride, however. "I have nothing but time," he said. You've also got so many more options beyond this bland freemium grind. Explore them, please. "

Some of my friends from work got into Game of War, and we all tried to form an alliance and do some stuff. Months for something to complete is roughly mid-way through, and it's a multiplicative curve. Worse - the $5 buy-in goes away, at least for a time. Most of the 'sale' packages start at about $5 and then automatically jump up in cost after you purchase them (with the reward multiplied - IE - if the cost goes up 4X, the number of items received goes up 4X). This continues up to $100.



This is not at all rare.

Final Fantasy: Record Keeper, for example, has a much less aggressive pricing model, but it still has some relatively expensive buy-ins:

http://www.macworld....at-results.html

"Where money can come into play is with the Rare Relic Draws, which let you spend big to try and unlock top-rated, memorable gear from the various games. You’ll occasionally earn mythril rocks to use as currency, and those can be used to tap into a Rare Relic Draw. However, it accumulates so slowly that it’s much more tempting to pour in some cash for gems and buy a bunch of draws at once.
...
In fact, DeNA and Square Enix will happily sell you 11 draws for the price of 10—but it costs almost $30 to buy enough gems to jump on that supposed bargain. Likewise, a single draw purchased with gems will set you back $3, and there’s no guarantee of what kind of gear you’ll win. "

This "Casino" model of gaming has actually been fairly successful - although the $30 buy-in is considerably steep for what amounts to a fairly shallow 'game' meant mostly as a sort of collectors' case. This is especially true when you figure what it costs to actually complete said collection can easily run into the hundreds of dollars, even with Mythril awarded.

Of course, like I said, it's a fairly shallow game that is there mostly to give you the warm fuzzies because Tifa and Rydia just blew up a screen full of 2d sprites.

Which is what MechWarrior: Online is. It's here to give us the warm fuzzies because we're stomping around in a Timberwolf, or whatever, making pew-pew noises at each other. MWO is meant for depraved fans of the series willing to pay for senility.

Quote

On the thread:

MWO is completely free to play.
You can get EVERYTHING you need to be competitive eventually without ever paying a single buck.
No mech, weapon, equipment is locked behind a pay wall. You can get plenty of MechBays from CW and events. More than evough to have a respectable collection of Mechs.
You can even be competetive RIGHT NOW as many many good mechs are already purely C-Bill-available and the new ones are not "better" per definition, only "different", suiting another role, another play style.

That's actually MWO's greatest "hidden problem."

It's what the industry calls a "Small and poorly monetized player base."

What many companies do (including PGI) is separate their currencies into 'privileged' currency reserved to paying customers and then into 'free currency' that is rewarded for playing the game. In many cases, certain items are restricted to this privileged currency.

What others, especially PGI, fail to do is generate a fluid economy within the game. MWO's economy is very stagnant. Purchasing within either sets of currency is purely based upon possession as opposed to usage. I'm not even paying the game's internal currency while playing the game - It is simply a means to a possessive end.

Compare this to games like Command & Conquer: Renegade. The entire game broke down to an economic war. Each team has a base with buildings that must be protected as their function is tied to receiving money, the cost of vehicles and characters, the ability to produce vehicles and characters, or automated defenses. The refinery produces a fixed rate of income for the team. Doing damage to the enemy team generates credits for the player generating damage. Repairing damage to allies and the team's buildings also generates income (though less than what was awarded for doing the damage in the first place).

If you spend 500 credits on a vehicle, and it gets destroyed - you are out 500 credits. While there are free characters that can fulfill most of the basic tasks for defending and attacking - there are 'advanced' characters that cost credits to play as. If you spend 1000 credits on a character that then gets sniped in the head - you're out 1000 credits.

The game's currency is spent playing the game (though the economy was all internal to the game - there was nothing to be purchased from your wallet) and is always in motion. Hoarding currency really doesn't help your team as it's credits that are not being put into play against the enemy team. Of course, spending credits stupidly or using the assets you've spent poorly damages your individual (and by extension, your team) ability to field characters and vehicles best suited for the task at hand.

There is far too little money being spent in the playing of MWO - be it 'internal' or 'privileged' currency - there's no real movement within the economy of MWO.

Which means that PGI's business model is built upon the desire of the community to purchase 'mechs and collector's items. While they are focused upon trying to sell 'mechs for $80 - they really should be trying to figure out how to make it worth a $10 purchase once every month - or every week.

This is partially why I am lumping you in the 'naive idiot' category, as this is how the marketing models differ between Free to Play and "standard" video games. Standard video games release, get a year or two of support (perhaps a couple of expansions that extend the support), and then they are largely abandoned by their developers.

Free to Play is different in that the sale is not made upon the opportunity to partake in the experience of the game, but is developed from a market built within the game. That market can be many different things, but it often acts over time.

When someone says: "Spend $10 on a free to play game" - it doesn't mean that they are going to spend $10 to get everything they ever wanted in it - but that $10 every once in a while is enough to remain relevant within the game's environment.

MWO actually has the problem of "there's no reason to spend money."

The reason I bought the Overlord Phoenix package? I wanted to be a part of MechWarrior's return after a very long delay. I wanted to show that there was a community that was willing to spend money. Plus, it was a package of 'mechs I was not all that familiar with from a MechWarrior standpoint.

Care to guess why I didn't spend money on 'mechs I was familiar with and wanted?

See - PGI/IGP recognized this when they launched the Clan invasion waves. The $500 gold 'mechs? Those were an attempt to appeal to "Whales." Let's say I have $10K and I want to spend it on MWO ... how do I go about it? Other than buying a lifetime supply of MC that I can pretty much spend from without thinking clear through the Word of Blake Jihad, I'm pretty much limited to the content releases from PGI.

There's no way to really spend money on the game, itself. And that's a problem in a free to play market.

Quote

This makes any and all whining about having to pay in MWO the same naive idiocy that is displayed in the video.

The problem is what you're getting for that money.

There's a reason I haven't spent $30 on trying to get Rydia's badass whip in Record Keeper. I'd spend $5 on an 11-item draw, but $30 is just ridiculous for what you get. Maybe people living in areas with stupidly obscene cost of living see it as agreeable, but I'm from the midwest where we can live pretty comfortably off of $25K per year if we're not stupid with our money.

Likewise, my purchase of an $80 package was done under the pretense that it was a sort of 'support' type of thing. I accepted what I thought to be a higher-than-market-value price because I was voicing my support and looking at it as a sort of investment in development infrastructure.

Truthfully, what we get out of the current packages is what I'd value at around $20. I'm sure PGI begs to differ, but that's also part of the failing of their model. Content is expensive to develop. Without monetizing the gameplay and without having a popular game that can retain the player base, content releases will always be presented to a limited marketable audience.

You can see, here:

http://www.gdcvault....e-Wrong-Way-Age

That this is a topic of correspondence courses within the video game industry.

Quote

In the end, every whining is just a coverup for "I want ingenious engineering work and I want it FOR FREE or MAYBE for the price of an average McDonalds visit".

What is funny is that you miss the completely accurate comparison to fast food.

Free to play models aren't about 'buying a game.'

Free to play models are about selling a consumable. That consumable may be time (in the form of skipping a 'grind'), it may be 'power' (in the form of influencing game play), or any number of different things.

Free to play business models are virtually identical to marketing anything that is consumed as a part of life (or, in this case, as a part of playing the game).

It is not the same as purchasing an object considered to be an asset, and thinking of it this way is wrong.

Quote

If I were part of a F2P company, I would rage-explode on a regular basis about that hypocracy and insulting demanding from "average players".

Frankly, it is this way of thinking that has most damaged the free to play business model. Share holders who don't understand what they are invested in want to go about pretending to know what is best for it.

Why do you suppose Google provides so many things free of charge to end-users?

Why do you suppose Amazon allows me to download programs they created for no cost upon my phone?

Why, then, would a game developer allow me to download their game for free?

Amazon is a market. Google is a market. The more people interface with their market, the more exposure their items get and the more market activity they see.

That is exactly what the free to play model is. It is a market - or a 'market portal' if we want to get fancy. The reason the game is provided for free is because there is something to sell within it. You are selling people time, possessions, and effect within an environment you created in order to give the market meaning.

If you create a game environment consisting of a desert, and then place sand within your market place - what do you think the market value is going to be? Supply and demand.

If you create a desert and then charge people traveling through it $40 for a bottle of water - how many people are going to find it worthwhile to venture into your desert to buy water?

The closest thing I can compare a Free to Play game to in a current existing model is a Carnival or Fair built upon free admission. The reason people will pay $5 for a slice of pizza is because they don't want to spend the time to go some place else and miss the tractor pull (or whatever other attraction(s) they are there for). The attractions give the vendors purpose. Without the attractions, there's no reason for anyone to be there for the vendors - without the vendors, there is limited ability to monetize the fair.

Edit:

Any time I paste something from an external source... this forum breaks itself over it.... edited to remove excessive nonsense tags.

Edited by Aim64C, 16 July 2015 - 12:07 PM.

[Mystere]

Corduroy Rab, on 16 July 2015 - 11:27 AM, said:

Mostly Extra Credits is James Portnow who is a games designer who writes the scripts and Daniel Floyd who is an animator and provides the narration.

As for your belief, doesn't matter to me. I would say that since they both work in the game industry their opinion is worth considering at the least.

What I want to know is in what capacity they are involved in the industry. Have they been involved in developing any games I play? Anyone can claim to be a games "designer" or "developer" these days, just like many claim they're "journalists".

[Felio]

I love this YouTube channel, but I would say they left something out.

He says what makes what I am going to call "predatory F2P" unsustainable is that the free or almost-free players leave the game and need to be replaced to serve as PvP content for those who spend a lot.

That may be true for some games, but I would add that eventually, even the "whales" get tired of the greed and leave in resentment. And eventually they are going to stop throwing money at game after game, because they will realize that:

1) A good game isn't going to remain good for long as the developers tighten the squeeze.
2) Even for a game they enjoy, they are eventually going to get tired of paying and start to feel like it's been a waste, so why do it again with the next game?

And when that happens, the main revenue stream (the whales; that 10% of the players) is going to dry up. The bubble pops.

[Aim64C]

Johnny Z, on 16 July 2015 - 10:33 AM, said:

Give it a rest on the, "this game is to tough for F2P".

I was free to play for a very long time in this game and the thought never crossed my mind even once. Now I am not F2P and its no big deal except I am in a better looking mech then the F2P'ers, and this makes a ton of sense.

Anyway, all kidding aside, although I dont want to see cheap tactics in Mechwarrior Online, and there are none since nothing in game is off limits, I do want to see the game succeed so lets stop the calls for bankruptcy for this game. Thanks.

If a player wants 4 top quality mechs with all the best stuff buy a pack, if not play the game some and get one mech at a time fairly easily even.

If I want to drop into a map full of people to slaughter: https://www.renegade-x.com/

That game has Team Death Match covered.

When I feel like stomping around in a battletech robot, I might boot up MWO every now and then while imagining what it would be like if it were an actual game.

Quote

Oh and I have tested the waters in other F2P games and they are static in their development, so piss off to the complainers in this game. Although again, it has to be mentioned the development of this game is also part of the equation

https://www.pathofexile.com/

If I take a break from this game for any period of time, I end up having a skill tree reset because the game is always developing... sometimes frustratingly so. Just loaded it up and, for some strange reason, some balance change they did ended up making my gear over-leveled for my character, so I'm in a spot of the game where I'm trying to level so I can use my gear (but without my gear...).

It's been under continual development.

Rift has been under considerable development while being free to play.

There are a lot of very active free to play games in terms of development.

Unless you're talking about mobile phone games. Those generally see only a little bit of development here and there. That said, there's usually not much to develop further on many of them. There's only so much development Candy Crush can undergo outside of its social networks of people bugging each other on Facebook.

[mogs01gt]

I've played around 15 different F2P MOBAs and when you compared MWO to them, MWO is ran by insanely greedy developers.

A mech should cost around 5 to 10 bucks MAX!

[InspectorG]

meteorol, on 16 July 2015 - 11:15 AM, said:

They say stuff on the internet and make videos. That alone is enough to assume they are always correct on everything for a lot of people.

60% of the time, they are 100% correct!

Good enough for ole Abe Lincoln.

[Johnny Z]

Big Tin Man, on 16 July 2015 - 11:31 AM, said:

FTP Pain? At least there are a LOT of trial mechs right now, and the game doesn't make you pay $0.01 to try a lot of mechs. Once upon a time, there were only four of them. Did you go through your cadet bonus driving a trial Dragon, because it was the best option of the 4? I did. That is FTP pain.

Mechbays can be earned for free via CW and weekend events, heroes are not PTW. Only colors, camos, and cockpit swag are behind a paywall, and they're only cosmetic. The rest can be ground out in time. The question is, what is your goal for playing mechwarrior? Are you happy running the same couple mechs? Do you enjoy the grind to try to obtain every variant for free? AFAIK, the only people really complaining about the grind are the FTP only clanners

Yep and a fair amount of complaints are because their troll alts are trouble to get up and running.

[Aim64C]

mogs01gt, on 16 July 2015 - 12:49 PM, said:

I've played around 15 different F2P MOBAs and when you compared MWO to them, MWO is ran by insanely greedy developers.

A mech should cost around 5 to 10 bucks MAX!

I wouldn't call them "insanely greedy."

That goes to games like Game of War.

MWO must be understood a couple different ways.

First and foremost, the game we are playing is most likely a salvaged in-house alpha of the MechWarrior Reboot. When Smith&Tinker went under during the development, PGI likely inherited most of the project's assets and licenses. PGI was and is currently led by the same team currently operating under other studios, such as "Rabbit Hole Interactive" which is registered to the same address as PGI.

https://www.reddit.c...hy/who_are_pgi/

Now, if you want a bit of a history lesson, you have to also look to "Jarhead Games" and "Groove Games." They made stuff like this:



And sold it to people. You know - like on that $5 and $10 shelf of stuff at Walmart and Staples?

Granted - they've upped the ante on their artwork since then, but old habits die hard.

So, anyway - they've a lot of experience in this "minimum viable product" thing, and IGP decided to give PGI a shot at doing something with the hole that they were left with after Smith&Tinker was gone.

Battletech is known for its relatively collector-minded fan base. We love our little stompy robot figurines and we like a game that lets us stomp in said stompy robot and make pew-pew noises. It takes a special kind of dedication just to learn the rules to play Battletech (it makes D&D look like a game for knuckle-dragging slobbery mouth-breathers), and we usually like to plan our finances to support our eclectic fetishes of collection.

Thus, the 'minimum viable product' isn't necessarily a game, here. It's a display case or shelf - an means to interact with our collectibles; the battlemechs created and marketed by PGI.

That is what PGI is marketing and selling, here.

Within that concept - I can't argue that their prices are "greedy." I do believe that their prices are far higher than what is necessary (particularly if they had developed a game that would appeal to gamers and 'market itself' - then the costs of producing said artwork can be distributed across a much larger market of consumers), but when you think of them as collectors' items, then their price is roughly in line with that of a collection.

Now - it's dishonest to market this as if it is going to be an online game with communities and social features, but they are not "greedy" so much as they are "parasitic." They've figured out how to game the system and to live an above-average lifestyle while putting forth the minimum necessary effort.

The problem is that this often burns bridges with customers who feel taken advantage of. There's a reason you don't hear about Jarhead and Groove, anymore - people learned to stay the hell away from the bargain software shelf (to be fair, Russ and Bryan weren't the only ones doing this at the time). Online games don't quite market the same way as over the counter games. Half the people who buy a game at the store don't pay attention to the developer or publisher. Online games don't have the privilege of being re-branded so easily.

Which is partially why there is the planned move to Steam, which I anticipate to be marketed as compatible with the "Steam Box" and perhaps they will even make a bid at getting it onto the consoles. They need to break out to bigger pastures where they can do two things - find new suckers transient purchases and ideologically hamstrung hoarders who, by virtue of statistics, take a liking to MWO and absolutely must buy everything that ever comes out for it. People did that with "The War Z," so they'll certainly do it with MWO.

The question is whether or not they will be able to accumulate enough people who satisfy said statistic before they burn out their monetized population.

[Conan Librarian]

I played and still play several F2P titles, spent money only on selected few of them - the ones that I really felt deserved my support and for a little amount of spent money could provide me quality content.

I didn't spend a dime on MWO yet because I'm not feeling I'll get quality content for small amount of money I can spare on games.

This game is aimed at "whales" that can spent xxx or even xxxx $ for half-finished game - and feel happy about it.

At current pricing model the only thing worth buying (IMO) is a couple of mechbays and maybe 1 nice color - only on sale though, full price is too high.

I'd spend money easier if I would get good content for it. Getting single mech for a price of 2 AAA games - too much.

[CtrlAltWheee]

MWO's business model seems poorly optimized.

I'm a whale. $800+ in. I believe in paying for things. Paint colors are expensive and there's inexplicably no bundling. Camo patterns are expensive and there's inexplicably no bundling.

The single use vs permanent camo pricing is bonkers. 75 mc for single use or 750 mc for permanent. I have to change camo 10 times to make it worth buying permanent, so I buy the 75 mc option. Then I never change patterns (give more money) even though I would if the purchases were structured differently.

For a while the competition meta-mechs on the IS side were heroes (ember, misery, dragon slayer). I wish PGI would get away from hero mechs and let me pay them to hero-upgrade standard mechs but Russ gave it a hard "No."

It's not p2w just weirdly bad for PGI. I think they'd make way more money (from me certainly) if they sold the same things differently. And sold more cosmetics at a modest price point for actual micro-transactions. PGI sell me unique geometry!

[CtrlAltWheee]

mogs01gt, on 16 July 2015 - 12:49 PM, said:

I've played around 15 different F2P MOBAs and when you compared MWO to them, MWO is ran by insanely greedy developers.

A mech should cost around 5 to 10 bucks MAX!

I don't think it's greed. They'd make more if they changed their business model. I'd be happy for them to make more money. I think it's just a mistake they don't recognize or don't know how to change without people being mad at them.

[Johnny Z]

CtrlAltWheee, on 16 July 2015 - 04:25 PM, said:

I don't think it's greed. They'd make more if they changed their business model. I'd be happy for them to make more money. I think it's just a mistake they don't recognize or don't know how to change without people being mad at them.

If they were hurting for money the first thing we would see added is the decals. Thats an awsome thing for players and Mechwarrior Onlines bottom line BOTH.

As it is, it looks like decals are done but waiting for other additions to the game before being added.

What else is done and waiting for other additions? What other awsome features will be added? Looks like players have to wait until the Steam launch for alot of info. I cant wait even if it will be a festival of nerdiness.

Edited by Johnny Z, 16 July 2015 - 05:15 PM.

[MechaBattler]

Squirg, on 15 July 2015 - 02:24 PM, said:

Just ask yourself if any other game charged 500$ for a paint job.

There is no FTP game that compares to the greed in MWO's FTP model, and I'm and Steam monster than has played dozens and dozens of FTP games.

MWO's "premium" incentives aren't even that good.

I think All Points Bulletin had like $35 weapons.

Star Trek Online also sells ships. And at least in MWO the mechs don't become completely useless by new content. They are effected by new content, but that's more to do with what is considered the "meta", than them invalidating old content. Which is why they made the choice of not making Clans flat out superior to IS mechs. So that they wouldn't invalidate old content.

[Mystere]

Off topic but ...

Aim64C, on 16 July 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

Rift has been under considerable development while being free to play.

How is Rift these days?

I quit playing when the whining of people who realized they were terrible compared to others caused changes that ruined the game for me.

InspectorG, on 16 July 2015 - 02:06 PM, said:

60% of the time, they are 100% correct!

Good enough for ole Abe Lincoln.

Here's the rub. How do you know they're even correct 60% of the time?

Edited by Mystere, 16 July 2015 - 05:53 PM.

[Mystere]

Aim64C, on 16 July 2015 - 03:17 PM, said:

First and foremost, the game we are playing is most likely a salvaged in-house alpha of the MechWarrior Reboot. When Smith&Tinker went under during the development, PGI likely inherited most of the project's assets and licenses.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to ask you to back up what you just said.

[Aim64C]

Mystere, on 16 July 2015 - 05:47 PM, said:

Off topic but ...

How is Rift these days?

I quit playing when the whining of people who realized they were terrible compared to others caused changes that ruined the game for me.

It's been quite a while since I've really played much with it. I played it with a few of my friends before I deployed, and then we never really got back into it after I got back.

Quote

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to ask you to back up what you just said.

That part is largely conjecture. PGI and S&T bounced back and forth in search of investors for a MechWarrior reboot and it is not unreasonable that they would have jointly developed alphas and pre-alphas as proof-of-concept demonstrators. The assets used in creating the advertising video for the UT3 engine were easily twice again the developmental investment of a basic alpha written within either CryEngine or UDK.

I say some of this simply based upon the launcher UI, which had the 'drop deck' originally integrated into it for some seemingly lost purpose, as well as various community-themed features that were simply left as dead legs. It's not entirely clear at what point the game shifted over to an online model. Supposedly, the issue was that Microsoft was only willing to extend the license to a PC/360 exclusive while investors only thought the title would perform as a cross platform to include the PS3 (and possibly a Nintendo release) - and that is when the idea came along for the Online aspect.

It wasn't through IGP, as IGP was created through grants offered by https://en.wikipedia...arit%C3%A9_FTQ. The only reason IGP was invested in by this group was, basically, to serve as a shell front for PGI to market MWO. Basically - to create IGP, PGI had to give these guys something to roll with to justify creating their own publishing arm.

I admit that this is not the only possibility. It just seems to fit with the "missing programmer" line we seem to find so wearily often, where MWO's source code is a sort of Lostech beyond the company's ability to replicate or advance. Simply maintaining it would seem to be a monumental effort.

The team that originally incorporated many of these features into the game we see before us would seem to be a subject of archaeological excavation - a subject of distant history. This is the type of thing that you typically hear about in mergers or acquisitions. A completely separate team inherits the project of an acquired team (few of said team members end up being acquired, usually), and is told to complete a project that made use of paradigms and strategies alien to the operating team.

If you inherit something that kinda-sorta works and you don't have the capability to reverse-engineer it... why break it by doing much more than putting oil in it and keeping the bolts tight?

Even if it were to come to light that what we see, currently, is actually all of PGI's work - then it still represents a seeming exodus of all related talent from the company at a crucial point in the development cycle, which is even more vexing than the subject of an acquisition.

[zolop]

I find Planetside 2 and warframe has better priced items.

In PS2
-At any time I can switch to any infantry loadout package I bought (wheather it be $15-$20+) and play it. I dot have to wait in any que to play my mech and I can virtually test out any of the content in the virtual training area. I try any of the items and find out I did not think it was worth the money,
-MC for mech loadouts can be upwards of $40, a entire game (EG Arma 2, Alien Isolation, Worlds of Magic, etc) and you still have to wait in a que to play those mechs
-Prices though in terms of infantry loadout is the same as a mech ($20 Max) but not so far in as a Atlas Boars head MC Cost.

In Warframe
-At any time I can jump into a mission and use the weapons solo or co-op, no waiting in a que (loading screen is not a que).
-$16 USD for all the basic colors (20+) to use on any weapon or warframe or item
-$20 USD For all the premium colors (30+) to use on any weapon or warframe or item
-Warframes themselves are cheap, function as a much more complex mech, far more dynamics than what MWO should have.