28 replies to this topic

[Nick86]

So we have a situation where you can now see your mechs in their individual Camo on the Faction screen for example, but not in game on CW and also you can't lock preferences for sorting the Mech Select screen.

So, eventually players will bring this up and PGI may be forced to come back to it in order to polish the game before Steam release (I think anyone in their right mind would not allow the game to be available on such a platform before the real polishing is done for obvious reasons).

So.. begs the question, WHY IS IT ALWAYS (ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS!!!) a half-done job with PGI?

Half an hour to use the game, then sit around a table with a bunch of people after a change such as the new mech select/camo screens would surely have thrown this stuff up if people were switched on. As someone helping to fund the game, it really f*cks me off to see all the WASTE in the system. As a player, it's frustrating as hell.

Not in the best of moods when writing this (Not doing the f*cking Oceanic challenge as I always get the Disco's on my side and the Ping is cr@p) so maybe I'm not putting it as politely as I should, but seriously, PGI, please knock it off with the incompetence; there must be a better way to avoid the blatant schoolboy errors that the players notice within 1hr of a patch coming out.

Also, I'm an experienced player trying to grind some mechs at the moment, especially given the double XP event (thankyou for that), but Jezuz... pitting your untweaked Jager against good players in Uber-Mechs with Mods is awful. It's a TRULY AWFUL experience.
... And I am experienced. This needs to be sorted before we look to raid the pond for new players. I have no idea why NPE/Grinding hasn't been a priority already given it's a CORE part of the game.

What are you guys doing? What's the reasoning behind this? How can we not get through to you...? The whole Skill Tree/Grinding/XP mechanics needed an overhaul in 2014..

God.. you make playing this game hard. This is why I haven't bought two mech packs from you now. That's $200 from one player in a couple of months... WASTED.

Please think about this.
(I'm trying to be nice... even if it doesn't come across that way.)

Dear other users, feel free to add..
Thankyou.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

I'd probably put these sort of visual changes on the test server to get player feed back as "we don't like it" is a lot less problematic on the test server than in the general game.

(Also, urbanmech is best mech so you should expect to die to them regardless)

[Zordicron]

I will say the non locked sorting stuff really, really annoys me. In particular, the way it goes back to putting trial mechs back in the selection until I filter them out, every single time.

I own like 170 mechs or some ****, I do not need a trial mech.

The other thing that irks me about it is there are no drop menus per chassis. By weight class we get nice little minimize menu bars, but not chassis.

Also, where does it show what modules I have on the mech in the select screen? Or cockpit items? OR, what menu will show me where said items are equipped?

I am the player that needs to actually sort the mechs, but the system is designed for a player with like 15 mechs. I like the new pictures. I prefer the old menu system for the select mech screen. The big improvment I see in this one is it "autosaves" your mech you click, so less button pushing there. In the end, I think if/when they actually complete the work on the current one it will be a solid UI. Until then we will see rant threads on a weekly basis, or more often even.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 09 August 2015 - 07:53 PM, said:

I'd probably put these sort of visual changes on the test server to get player feed back as "we don't like it" is a lot less problematic on the test server than in the general game.

(Also, urbanmech is best mech so you should expect to die to them regardless)

They actually use the test server now?

[Bishop Steiner]

Eldagore, on 09 August 2015 - 08:00 PM, said:

I will say the non locked sorting stuff really, really annoys me. In particular, the way it goes back to putting trial mechs back in the selection until I filter them out, every single time.

I own like 170 mechs or some ****, I do not need a trial mech.

The other thing that irks me about it is there are no drop menus per chassis. By weight class we get nice little minimize menu bars, but not chassis.

Also, where does it show what modules I have on the mech in the select screen? Or cockpit items? OR, what menu will show me where said items are equipped?

I am the player that needs to actually sort the mechs, but the system is designed for a player with like 15 mechs. I like the new pictures. I prefer the old menu system for the select mech screen. The big improvment I see in this one is it "autosaves" your mech you click, so less button pushing there. In the end, I think if/when they actually complete the work on the current one it will be a solid UI. Until then we will see rant threads on a weekly basis, or more often even.

persistent preferences will be part of the 8-18 patch.

Would you rather they release nothing until it's 100%? Or release the features as they get them ready? Personally, I'd rather see stuff get released as they get it ready, and not artificially held back to satisfy some people who will probably just complain no matter what, anyhow.

[Troutmonkey]

Nick86, on 09 August 2015 - 07:37 PM, said:

So we have a situation where you can now see your mechs in their individual Camo on the Faction screen for example, but not in game on CW and also you can't lock preferences for sorting the Mech Select screen.

Persistent sorting coming next patch.
CW Mech Select coming in a future patch.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

2 OP, That's why it's been about 10 months since I dropped the game. I want to get back when playing it is actually worth the time and effort spent on the UI before you get to battle at least. Not to mention hit reg, ping and other issues in battle.
And as for UI, I've never seen worse in any game.

I wish it at least looked good. Looked better in Closed Beta *facepalm*

Bishop Steiner, on 09 August 2015 - 08:50 PM, said:

Would you rather they release nothing until it's 100%? Or release the features as they get them ready? Personally, I'd rather see stuff get released as they get it ready, and not artificially held back to satisfy some people who will probably just complain no matter what, anyhow.

That doesn't change the fact they release terrible stuff like their totally user-hostile UI, and leave it be like forever, even though everyone complained and provided them with all kinds of feedback since day one.
As OP says, one hour is enough to understand that stuff is unusable.

Releasing half-baked content makes these particular devs think they did a good job already - if it's in the game it's done.

Edited by GM Patience, 10 August 2015 - 02:37 PM.

[MechaBattler]

They said when they released the patch that it wasn't saving preferences. But it would in the next patch

[Nick86]

MechaBattler, on 09 August 2015 - 09:25 PM, said:

They said when they released the patch that it wasn't saving preferences. But it would in the next patch

Okay, fair enough, I get that point..
But regardless of the example, we all know that most of this stuff is half baked and things that should be BLATANT PRIORITIES aren't fixed. (New player exp, ECM... economy - some of the anomalies that occur with earnings are ridiculous; we've all seen it.)

Meanwhile... 'BUY SOME MECHS!' - 'HERE'S AN EVENT TO LURE YOU INTO PLAYING!!'

Edited by Nick86, 09 August 2015 - 09:51 PM.

[Kiiyor]

Making the sorting persistent will be part of the next patch, I believe.

I mean, it's nice to get on a high horse about these things, but I would vastly prefer a mostly functional system over delays of weeks to release something you would consider perfect. From the initial patch notes, it seemed like the functionality was intended to be included, but was either left out at the last minute or wasn't finished.

I'm more than happy with what we have.

If you're looking to start a thread with the intent of bashing PGI, you'll probably be better served throwing it into r/mwo, as that sort of thing doesn't hold as much water as it used to around here. There's nostalgia to be had in said vilifying, but recent performance from the DEV team has gone a long way towards soothing past ill will in all but the most bitter of bittervets, at least in my twisted and gnarled circle of friends at any rate.

[Otto Cannon]

Nick86, on 09 August 2015 - 07:37 PM, said:

pitting your untweaked Jager against good players in Uber-Mechs with Mods is awful. It's a TRULY AWFUL experience.
...

That's the idea. If it wasn't awful you wouldn't be tempted to do it with your mastered favourite instead and pay to convert the xp. Apparently that's vastly more important than new players staying long enough to buy anything.

[ChewBaka]

I agree that PGI really needs to get their matchmaking sorted, and only pit tweaked mechs against each other instead of tossing players with sub-optimal mechs into the fray just to get slaughtered.

However, I do believe they are moving in that direction with the implementation of Battle Values. Just have to keep your fingers crossed and hope that works out properly.

However, this is also partially self-inflicted. Whatever gave you the idea to drive a Jager, which is known to be a mech that is only good in the hands of an experienced pilot? Also, AC5s aren't particularly hot so an expensive DHS upgrade isn't necessarily needed if you don't mount lasers too. You just need the cheaper Endo. You can't even afford to tweak the mech just a little? C'mon...

[Paigan]

Nick86, on 09 August 2015 - 07:37 PM, said:

[...]
So.. begs the question, WHY IS IT ALWAYS (ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS!!!) a half-done job with PGI?
[...]

I agree in principle about the problematic half-assed-ness.
However your sentence is fundamentally wrong.

The problem here is not the reality, but the selective perception:

If they do a good job, it is perceived as "normal" and quickly forgotten.
If they do a half-assed job, everyone is screaming about and remembers it forever (at least sub-consciously).
So only the half-assed-ness gets remembers and appears to be 100%.

It's the same with the weather-forcast: if it's correct, no one bats an eye. If it's wrong, everyone says "they are ALWAYS wrong".

It might even be that PGI do an 80% excellent job and 20% half-assed-ness (which is still worth mentioning, of course).

If you want to call yourself a grown-up, you have to consider and understand that.
... and edit your childish post asap.

Edited by Paigan, 10 August 2015 - 12:30 AM.

[Xetelian]

I think the MASC implementation was really bad. I can use MASC to destroy my legs when standing still, I can also destroy my legs in mid air. It doesn't cool down fast enough and isn't really a benefit for its tonnage.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

I must agree, that sometimes, the bugs appear immediatelly on release. Wondering, if they have some testing team. sometimes seems, not a single men tested the patch, or it was Stevie Wonder.

[Troutmonkey]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 August 2015 - 09:15 PM, said:

welcome to pgi. The only thing thats gotten better is they dont have igp to blame anymore

As someone who's been paying very close attention to bugs and when they are fixed, PGI has improved significantly since parting with IGP. Sure, there's still a lot to be desired, but the backlog of bugs and content built up before is actually moving along at a reasonable pace. If only they'd split earlier.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 August 2015 - 09:15 PM, said:

Thisa is why online gaming in general is dying and needs a industry wide crash

No thanks, I'd prefer to keep my job.

[Nick86]

Xetelian, on 10 August 2015 - 12:29 AM, said:

I think the MASC implementation was really bad. I can use MASC to destroy my legs when standing still, I can also destroy my legs in mid air. It doesn't cool down fast enough and isn't really a benefit for its tonnage.

There you go...

Half-assed. This is what I'm getting at.
Ill thought out, half baked.. F*cking non-sensical stuff. That's what gripes me. I rarely come on to bash PGI and agree they have been much much better lately.. but... Grrr...!!!

I did indicate that I was a little frustrated at the time of writing the OP and therefore may have been more harsh than usual - thus evidenced by the fact that my initial example/post had a lack of research as highlighted by others. But, in essence, we all know what I'm talking about.

[Vahnn]

I can't agree with you on all your points, but one area I feel is always a half-done job is the mechlab UI. I've been playing since 2011 and the interface has been absolute garbage in every iteration. It's better now than it ever has been, true, but there are still at least half a dozen glaring oversights and goofy, fiddly things that should have been addressed and stomped out years ago.

The next UI needs to be publicly tested but a huge variety of players, not just a group of Founders who have been dishing out hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars over the years who love the game to death no matter what. There needs to be new, intermediate, and casual players in addition to the core testing team and whatever long-time fans are currently involved. Getting input from new players especially will help bring attention to a lot of the major UI issues.

Tooltips, consistent (and persistent) filtering options, buttons to quickly remove modules/cockpit items/equipment from a mech without having to click-click-click-click-click and Save every time. I know many people who played MechWarrior or Battletech games back in the day, or are fond of the novels but have never played, who are often quite interested in MWO, but the new player experience is sub-par, to say the least.

I can't help but feel that most of my remaining UI issues are on the verge of being addressed, but it just irks the hell out of me that it's been so, so long and we're still dealing this this sloppy interface.

That said, DAMN I love this game.

[Lily from animove]

you have some points, yet PGI can not make all the things at once. some CW features were delayed for tutorial and stuff, because it is important for the game to o to steam.

since IGP is out much things improved, like map rewrks and such, yet some were still half done. But major direction is better.

Edited by Lily from animove, 10 August 2015 - 03:12 AM.

[Zordicron]

Bishop Steiner, on 09 August 2015 - 08:50 PM, said:

persistent preferences will be part of the 8-18 patch.

Would you rather they release nothing until it's 100%? Or release the features as they get them ready? Personally, I'd rather see stuff get released as they get it ready, and not artificially held back to satisfy some people who will probably just complain no matter what, anyhow.

This is misleading. There is a whole lot between 100% and some of the facepalm oversights we get. I would rather, and hear me out, they waited ONE PATCH and put in such an obvious feature as persistent preferences before we get it.

It's a game, they will need to polish the polished stuff ad infinitum. I am much, much happier with the release rate of newer content and game upgrades this year then in previous times.... BUT, there should be a little more polish, a little more "hey guys we need this feature for sure" kinda deal with some of the things we get, especially with UI.

It is good they set goals and push hard to meet deadlines. It would be better if these deadlines were then met, and put onto public test for 2 weeks so the public can look at it, give feedback, and get rants out of their system. That should be standard procedure, every patch should hit test for 2 weeks prior to live. It would cut down on hotfix, it would let players point out facepalm stuff and if PGI needs more time to fix something or add a feature, they could put, right in the live patch notes, a time goal or patch date goal for the feature or bug to be addressed.

This isn't a black and white issue, it's not all or none. There is room for improvement in the process, and it isn't even really a hard improvment to do, it's just a policy change and a little more communication to go with it.