716 replies to this topic

[Smedlee]

Is there a released estimate on when there will be a game available for public sale?

[Threat Doc]

Nightshade24, I thought I put together massive walls-o-text. I'm sorry I just can't take the time to read that, but today is a very busy day for me... maybe sometime in the future. Very nice effort, though.

spectralthundr, on 01 October 2015 - 01:36 AM, said:

Actually no publisher wanted to bite on MW5 because MS owns the electronic IP.

Nope, not anymore. The entirety of the IP rests back in Jordan Weisman's hands, IIRC. I do agree with you, however, that if he did a MechWarrior, or an MMO like I'd like to see, he would have either of those funded immediately, if not sooner.

Smedlee, on 01 October 2015 - 08:45 AM, said:

Is there a released estimate on when there will be a game available for public sale?

I'm seeing two dates for the goodies to go out... May 2017 and June 2016... if they're to stick with the cycle they've set up, then I think the June 2016 is, most likely, a typo, and it's supposed to be 2017. I would hope for the best to be May 2017.

[martian]

Smedlee, on 01 October 2015 - 08:45 AM, said:

Is there a released estimate on when there will be a game available for public sale?

They have said repatedly that the game is planned to be published in the first quartal of 2017. The web page says May 2017 too.

[Trystan Thorne]

June 2016 might be the datedate for some physical goodies maybe.

But May 2017 is the earliest date we can expect this game. A hugely successful Kickstarter has the downside that the more stretch goals are reached the longer the development can take.

[Jack Gallows]

Kay Wolf, on 01 October 2015 - 09:32 AM, said:

Nightshade24, I thought I put together massive walls-o-text. I'm sorry I just can't take the time to read that, but today is a very busy day for me... maybe sometime in the future. Very nice effort, though.

I'll end up having one for later, but at work and can't type well on the phone

Kay Wolf, on 01 October 2015 - 09:32 AM, said:

Nope, not anymore. The entirety of the IP rests back in Jordan Weisman's hands, IIRC. I do agree with you, however, that if he did a MechWarrior, or an MMO like I'd like to see, he would have either of those funded immediately, if not sooner.

Microsoft still owns the right to digital Mechwarrior. It's one of the reasons that Mechwarrior 5 didn't happen and we ended up with MW:O. Least that's how it appears, seeing as Microsoft also had to give the ok for PGI to keep doing MW:O.

Edited by Jack Gallows, 01 October 2015 - 04:50 PM.

[Creovex]

martian, on 25 September 2015 - 09:38 PM, said:

I guess I will wait for more details before I make a pledge to that HBS' project.

I remember what PGI promised when they were raising money and what the today's state of MWO is.

BIG DIFFERENCE: They have some serious badass game managers with lots of success and experience (Mr. MechCommander himself is in on this, and he made the best games I have ever played...outside of MW2:Mercs)

I will forgo the Maurader and IIC to fund this project.

Edited by Creovex, 01 October 2015 - 10:26 AM.

[NocturnalBeast]

Kay Wolf, on 01 October 2015 - 09:32 AM, said:

Nightshade24, I thought I put together massive walls-o-text. I'm sorry I just can't take the time to read that, but today is a very busy day for me... maybe sometime in the future. Very nice effort, though.

Nope, not anymore. The entirety of the IP rests back in Jordan Weisman's hands, IIRC. I do agree with you, however, that if he did a MechWarrior, or an MMO like I'd like to see, he would have either of those funded immediately, if not sooner.

I'm seeing two dates for the goodies to go out... May 2017 and June 2016... if they're to stick with the cycle they've set up, then I think the June 2016 is, most likely, a typo, and it's supposed to be 2017. I would hope for the best to be May 2017.

My Kickstarter confirmation email said that the physical items are expected to ship June 2016, but the game is expected to be completed in May of 2017.

[anonymous161]

It still astounds me how much money people are willing to throw at a game not even promised to be a good product with the way taxes keep getting higher, cost of living keeps going up, putting your kids through college will be extremely difficulty in 20 years, but damn another turn based mech game?! Sign me the **** up! Here take all my money I dont care I just live in my moms basement anyways hahahahaha!!!

Kind of a long time to wait for some turn based game that will be funded by fans and because we all should know by now how that tends to turn out...

Edited by Darth Bane001, 01 October 2015 - 11:02 AM.

[NocturnalBeast]

There is even an article on iO9 about Battle Tech! http://io9.com/a-new...-yes-1733956310

[Wildstreak]

Trystan Thorne, on 01 October 2015 - 09:44 AM, said:

June 2016 might be the datedate for some physical goodies maybe.

But May 2017 is the earliest date we can expect this game. A hugely successful Kickstarter has the downside that the more stretch goals are reached the longer the development can take.

Not really, they can put out part of the game with the rest added in later.
Example, I paid for a Shadow Era Kickstarter that made stretch goals, not only have all not been implemented, even non-stretch goals like the new campaign for heroes are not present.

[Jack Gallows]

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

HBS stated themselves earlier that if it was a FPS game they would struggle a lot with melee and such, it is much more easier in a RTS or TTS game. You can't really say anyone would do it better in the FPS field. Mechwarrior 1, 2, 3, 4, Mechwarrior living legends, etc all never had melee, besides Mechwarrior 4: Mercs with Mektek mods at best. Which had the Battlearmour claw which in terms of 'animation' and in technicallities in play was a "Gauss rifle" that had like 5 meter range with high damage. It isn't satisfactory at all for Mechwarrior Online and neither was it that much of a satisfaction in MW4, it mainly gained it's coolness to the stretch that Mekpak 3.1 put to the game however Mekpak 4 which never was released had much more interesting features such as directional jumpjets, more armour types, Multiplayer redo, better aimming with arms and stuff, etc. if MP4 came out there was a posibility that MW: LL would not be around, at least as soon as it came out as with the high graphic mods and new features for MW:4M MP4 it was going to be quite a blast.

Other games have done it, is my point. It's doable and I also didn't say that it was going to be super easy for anyone or that it's not easier to do in a different format. And I'd debate that Living Legends wouldn't have happened, but that's mostly just because they added a lot that MW4 didn't have like combined arms/etc.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Anyway, PGI is doing good for there pace, they are doing better then Star Citizen, Star Conflict, War Thunder, World of Tanks, etc. Taking PGI's origins with MW: O into account it does show quite well...

Let's see.....

PGI launched MW:O's site in October 2011 (or there abouts,) and the game came out (pretty much in a late alpha/early beta state) in a very bare bones setting about a year later. Took 2 years for community warfare, which was supposed to be out a year before (and had repeatedly said to have been worked on and then we kept finding out that was NOT the case, was a 5 year old's powerpoint presentation a year after it was supposed to be in.) So...4 years and it's still an arena shooter at it's core that moves at a snails pace. Mimimum Viable Product.

Star Citizen started funding in October 2012, Arena Commander (early beta/dogfighting) came out just a bit over a year later. A year later and we see a working FPS module (unreleased yet, to be fair,) and a scope larger than anything MW:O aspires to. It's estimated full release will be in 2017. So PGI is at 4 years overall where Star Citizen will be at 5 and be multitudes in size larger and more functional. Maybe not a fair comparison in some aspects, since one is F2P and the other is NOT.

War Thunder got started after World of Tanks and is already a better overall game with much higher fidelity. Constant updates and one of the better pay models I've seen for a F2P game (one or two hiccups but it's well priced overall.) It also came out in 2013, meaning it's been around for 2 years and is well beyond what MW:O offers in terms of content and variety.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Both mechwarrior games; check, Both FPS's, check, MW: O using inspiration from MW4's unique hardpoint system, check, map designs inspired from MW2 maps? (Frozen city specifically, Terra therma specifically, Alpine peaks specifically, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there a map in MW2 literally called frozen city or was that Mw3?), check. both use 6 buttons for 6 weapon groups? check, both have many of the same controls? check... PGI still lacks crouch, spot lights, etc for a 3051 game, but I think it makes up for it for the ability for easier chain fire, change weapon groups bid game, EXTREMELY better arm movement, turn ECM modes, turn AMS on and off, etc...

It's missing a campaign experience, it has horrible tournaments that do more to fracture players than it does to bring them together. Most of those other benefits are tech upgrades and less influences from Mechwarrior itself. The older games were more sim than FPS like this one is.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

The only major part that isn't an improvement that differs MW: O and the other MW games is the fact the other games had a way better trailer... MW2 mercs, 31st centuary, ghost bear legacy, intros, outros, trailers, etc were all amazing, MW4 vengence trailer was great, MW4 vengence and mercs intro was great but MW4 Mercs trailer is probably a disapointing on par with MW: O's... for those who haven't seen it.


I have seen fan movies using MW4 mercs better then this trailer =l

There's been some pretty amazing trailers. The Mechcommander intro and the original Mechwarrior 2 Mercs one might be my favorites.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

And you vastly underestimate the Mechwarrior crowd.

Not really. The Mech games have been, overall, really great. MW:O just doesn't have that longevity and that's mostly due to PGI's mishandlings. People will still play MW:O but I'd expect a pretty fair chunck of the player base leave for just Battletech depending on how it pans out (Co-op would probably draw an even BIGGER crowd.) PGI's obviously hoping for some brand visiblity to draw people in....but I think I'd rather pay 35 bucks (at a minimum anyway,) for a complete game instead of a single hero mech. Value is important to their lifespans and appeal, as well.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Keep in mind not all old BT guys hate the clans, there are TT guys who thought the clan invasion of 3050 was the best thing in the franchise and I do not blame them because I feel 3050 is the most important or famous part of the whole battletech franchise to begin with. I should also mention MW2 is set in the decade of the initial invasion as well as MW3 playing a pivitol point with the clan smoke jaguars annihilation post invasion as well as Mechwarrior 4 set in the Fed Com Civil war which had clan influences (specifically wolf) and clan tech is becoming more of a norm across the battlefield... heh... every time I think of the 3060's state of clan tech availability in the IS I always remembers Duncan Fishers rants about that...
Also the fact the Mad Cat/ Timberwolf was the icon of battletech since... 1995 was it? 1998? Good bye Warhammer boxart, Battlemaster icon, and Marauders battlefield apperance, and Hello Timberwolf-everything. Timberwolf box art/ TRO art, Timberwolf icon, Timberwolf this and that...

The Clans as an idea weren't bad (as was the original idea of the Jihad before FASA went under, WAY DIFFERENT), but their handling really just made the game this huge arms race and cut the playtime down drastically (on an average anway...those big regiment vs galaxy/etc matches still take a good while ) I enjoyed the books of the era about as much as I did the earlier ones (the Clans themselves are interesting in how they interact with the lore,) but overall I feel the style of 3025 era fits Battletech better...and that's just personal opinion. Also...Warhammer went away because of a lawsuit, not because the Twolf was more of an icon (though it's gotten there.) My Battletech box has a Whammy on it, thanks.

Also, nevermind that we haven't gotten a story/game that was pre-Clan in FOREVER and it's about damn time.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

having a modern Battletech game without a timberwolf is blasphemy- to those who grew up with battletech franchise knowing this as the icon of the franchise, the show-mech, the cover-mech, the icon representative of the 3050's, etc...
I personally am not much of a timberwolf fan, but personally I can never imagine the battlemaster being the icon... by that I mean visually, I know it used to be, but I can't picture it without google.

All the long term Battletech fans have had to do without their icons ever since the Harmony Gold lawsuits. Most would consider that losing them is a way worse thing then if we had lost the Timberwolf.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

That out of the way, Many people picture 3050 as the hotspot of battletech, and the majority of new and old people alike, FPS, TTS, TT, or RTS, all think the jihad, 3070's, is where the franchise takes a big dip... personally I wish there was 1 mechwarrior game set in that era and shed more light. where all the mk II, III, IV's, etc of mechs are around. It's kinda cool seeing an Atlas III bash the face in of a Timberwolf IV the same way how 40 years back the Atlas bashed the face in of a timberwolf or how 70 years back from then the Atlas II bashed the face in on the Marauder....

Actually, the original idea for the Jihad was a good bit different. It was still going to happen but was going to have a bit of a better lead up, though similar in origin (better explanation for such a large amount of 'mechs/etc, however.) One of the better
things at least to me was how they would have used the Clans near the end. Word of Blake held Terra and Clan Ghost Bear somehow found out that the Wobbies might have given aslyum or had active members of Minnesota Tribe/Clan Wolverine. Lots of war/etc ended with a blockade of Terra with Clan Ghost Bear warships involved as they had the most intact warships at the time and had been fighting ferociously against the Blakists but wouldn't step foot on Terra due to the truce. The Dark Age might have still happened but the structure of the lore would probably have been a lot different and better put together...but I attribute the drop in quality to FASA going under and Wizkids/etc trying a bit too hard to bring it back and jumping the timeline.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Kinda intersting you and I... I'm also a ghost bear fan but also a fan of house davion... however FRR is quickly rising in my appreciation and that's why I am sad FRR is not in BT...

Well, technically being a Ghost Bear fan means you'll eventually get FRR stuff anyway so best of both worlds? LOL. There's a lot of people's favored factions not in games, though, just like this game doesn't have periphery states or the St. Ives Compact. Neither of those are in the Battletech game, either, periphery because the scope is more focused and St. Ives and FRR because they haven't been founded yet.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

CW is still in the works, the same way BT is in the works, play BT now, try to see how well that new campaign they are now working on is going... well that isn't the most fair comparison but it's an example

No, it really isn't. BT has been in pre-production for 3 months, not 3+ years like MW:O has been. It took just over a year for Shadowrun to go from concept/kickstarter to release. It also got an expansion AND a sequel since then. PGI is slow and doesn't deliver on what they say they're going to, or takes so damn long it's about the same.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

St Ives compact is nearly virtualy only an importance in terms of story, from memory it has little to no impact on say the battlefield and they disapear again back into Liao in a few years. Clan Wolfs in Exile I can definitly imagine coming into the game as they had a strong push in the story and lore as well as the battlefield. However this all depends on the community of MW: O... technically PGI wants CW to be an alt history so to say, where the player controls what happens... so unless the playerbase wants more factions there will not be more, if they want less then that may happen. we may not have a clan wolf in exile or many all of clan wolf will be in exile depending on what the players want... beats me.

It's of a moral importance, as well as a thelogical/political one that has real life mirrors that made it compelling, but having sub factions within others would have still been possible. Would work with Clan Wolf in Exile as well, and would add a dimension to CW that would make things a bit more interesting, imo.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

technically not, MW: LL is still alive, you can still play it. But guess what? most people decided they want to play MW: O more and thus the population of MW: LL nearly went extinct, people still play it. But many more preffer MW: O. if people really liked MW: LL more then MW: O, then they would play MW: LL. if so many people play MW: LL, then things would be different and they could possibly get rights to continue development on a successful title such as that.

All development was forced to a halt. Living Legends is dead compared to a game with an active developer, and it's still fairly better than MW:O and was done in people's spare time for a long while. People only play MW:O compared to it because getting into it is easier and has an official backing. Living Legends helped keep Mechwarrior alive on the computer in addition to MW4 leagues, and LL added a ton of stuff that is pretty damn well done.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

F2P doesn't mean payways. There isn't much in MW: O to begin with, you can pay 0 dollars and have a good time in MW: O, and buying a packs value is more then just mechs mate, it's a pre order, it's support, it's all the bonuses and premium time and stuff. Fun fact, you need to pay a lot more to get early access to BT as well...

F2P is designed to make you want to spend money or goad you into it, at least for most companies and PGI is no different (LOL GOLD MECHS). Mechbays costing only real money? That's crap. The conversion rate on GXP is so high that it's a crime unless it's on sale...and then it's still high compared to competitors. I understand they have to make money...but push too much and you scare away more money then you're going to make. Besides the new player experience is crap, or has been, because that C-bill boost gets you MAYBE a lower tier 'mech and then you have to grind your eyeballs out either outfit that OR buy another 'mech...which again would be stock.

And instead of paying 20-35 bucks...I'd just go get another COMPLETE game or get premium time in another game that does it better. (War Thunder's premium account has some really amazing value for it's price which is also really low comparitively.) I don't know, maybe it's hard to understand the value of money whilst on an ISLAND.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Not really. As mentioned above, the games can't replace each other. MW: O has quite a lot of advantages over BT that it will not be replaced by a game. I can still see a majority of MW: O population not even touching BT ever in there time. It's really hard to pilot a mech that you are not even piloting. [that is a sarcastic quote saying how BT is not made for someone who actually wants to feel like the mechwarrior and to be in the cockpit where the shacking of the cockpit as it's turns, jumps, buck,s and gets hit affects you and how your gunnery skills is what matters and not what the dice says so. if you take that literally then shame on you. if this meaning I say over and over again doesn't get across then Shame on me for trying 50 times I guess.

I'd argue that the lion's share of players have played table top over the amount that haven't, and those that haven't probably still either enjoy or play some form of tactical based game like the new Battletech. While it may not dominate over more sim/FPS/etc style games, they'll still probably try it and many might enjoy it more. As for the bigger percent, you're going to find a lot of people preferring BT over MW:O because it'll be more of what really makes Battletech/Mechwarrior than what MW:O offers even if it isn't a FPS/Sim.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

You are saying that games in development or already made before SC is already being made purely to compete and not to be it's own game? You do know how narrow minded that sounds right? Also Star Citizen has issues competeting at the momment because just like how people chanted back in 2012 that MW: O is the best game ever and that around when SC game, people chanted SC is best game ever and MW: O/ PGI is ****.

Transverse was a direct desire to cash in on the new space sim wave and it failed misrably. Bad timing, lack of trust in developer (PGI,) and knowing that funds from their already perpetually delayed game was going to go to it while asking for MORE MONEY was a concotion for failure out of the gate. Star Citizen's taking a while to develop but honestly....not much more than your average high dollar triple A game, people were just aware of it long before most companies let the cat out of the bag.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

why CW is going so rusty and slowly. Because the innitial testing was pushed away in favour of doing it right at the time instead...

Oh man, I know I'm an MW:O cynic but this is too much. CW came out when it did not because it was the right time, it's because any more pitchforks from angry players and there'd have been an exodus larger than the one Kerensky made. It's also because they're a slightly small studio that bit off way more than it could chew or had the expertise to pull off in the time they said. Not dissing on the hard working people there, but the management and some others don't handle things well.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

still would have thought that making a BT space game would have been wildly succesful... I mean imagine a game that centred the player as an aerospace dog fighter, an admiral at the helm of a Federated suns warship, or a tank commander in a tank or armoured car.
Hell even an infantry game of battletech would be fun. I do not even care how simular it is to Battlefield, Call of duty, or more simulator like games like Verdun, If it uses heavy inspiration from BT and it's rules. That would at least change half the game, what changes a quarter of it would be the theme, story, timeline, and the rest is up to the developers... would be interesting to see that game still as combined arms (ai) where you can't really camp as those aerospace fighters or mechs would make quick snack of you... wouldn't be to simular to titanfall due to the lack of agility and the huge difference in mech control..

Don't know if they've really got the rights to those types of games, outside of the 'mechs cockpit of control. I mean, eventually, a large scale project like how robust Star Citizen might be (and I'm still hopeful it will,) would be pretty sick. I think Mechwarrior/Battletech has to be in the news/etc for a while more while it's active to draw that kind of interest/money though.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure they got sued, they lost a lot of money, especially considering making those adds to begin with costed a lot of money which should have made them get money and attention to begin with but due to having to kill MW5 as well as lost money due to the trials and lawsuit it just was a bigger sinkhole of cash. Stupid HG... I love that PGI still decided to make another mechwarrior game... the whole BT franchise is always on the fringe of extinction due to legal problems, lawsuits, and economical problems...

Actually, it was primarily because Microsoft told them that they couldn't release the game on PS3, and then PGI couldn't get a publisher to back them for a long time leaving the game unmade. Once IGP saddled up, focus had to change due to the restriction Microsoft gave them and then MW:O came out of it. It almost didn't. Harmony Gold probably had a bit to do with it as well in maybe scaring off some publishers but a cease and desist doesn't lead to a lawsuit if you chill your **** and don't push the issue.

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Didn't say that, I said it was a catalyst, it cleared the path, not created it. It also aided the path a lot as it allowed BT guys get good art assets that also make an art continuity in BT never seen before.

We would have had a Mechwarrior game anyway, Wiesman would have found a publisher or another company other than PGI if he hadn't chosen them to give the license to (from Smith and Tinker, from Microsoft.) As for the art, Alex Iglesias that does the mech concept art for MW:O has been a part of Catalyst's team of artists from before MW:O was a thing and he continues to contribute to the table top products. It's neat that both use the same art but it isn't a necessity as the concepts we've seen from Harebrained Schemes look amazing even if they weren't using Alex's 'mechs (the tone and other aspects like the tanks and people/battlefields.)

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Which doesn't surprised me seeing your whole comment chain. That could be bias to the conversation I would guess. Seeing the majority of your comments and rather over exageration on parts I stated, emphisis on certain points. or commenting on thigns I haven't said. At least this helps me think that I am not lossing it

More like micsommunication in some aspects and just disagreements in others. I'm pretty anti-PGI but sometimes mistaking people's intents or words at least in some contexts happens in text based conversation, it's just natural

Nightshade24, on 01 October 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Thus MW: O has done amazing work so far. The fact you see more then 1 mech under 80 tons per game is already amazing. Tell me that 10 years ago and I would have perscribed you some medication to get off those drugs. I do hope to a degree some of this form of ballancing will be done in the single player as well as BT taking some inspiration from using lights- considering it's more of a TTS
Also I do not consider this an arena game?... I mean until Solaris VII is added It's not in my eyes....

This game really is just an arena shooter with long queue times. Boating didn't go away no matter how hard PGI tries. Also, it's not like drop weights and other factors like player leagues didn't make lighter 'mechs of different configurations useful in Mechwarrior 4 and other iterations...just that the single player and FFA matches ended up as the arms race. This game is basically team Solaris in all but name with a light mape that doesn't mean anything in it.

Darth Bane001, on 01 October 2015 - 10:59 AM, said:

It still astounds me how much money people are willing to throw at a game not even promised to be a good product with the way taxes keep getting higher, cost of living keeps going up, putting your kids through college will be extremely difficulty in 20 years, but damn another turn based mech game?! Sign me the **** up! Here take all my money I dont care I just live in my moms basement anyways hahahahaha!!!

Kind of a long time to wait for some turn based game that will be funded by fans and because we all should know by now how that tends to turn out...

Lotta sweeping generalizations here. Lotta people who play these games aren't on the struggle bus as much as you'd think and at least in Battletech's case the company making it has a proven track record of producing what they say they're going to.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for being more on topic, almost to the 1,350,000 stretch goal of voice acting! Need some George Ledoux (Duncan Fisher from MW4,) and as Jordan Weisman mentioned, the voice actress for Dagger from Mechcommander 2 works at Harebrained!

Let's get it happening, need more immersion! (And money, and...mechs, and....more mechs!)

Edited by Jack Gallows, 01 October 2015 - 04:56 PM.

[NocturnalBeast]

Jack Gallows, on 01 October 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

***Snip!***

Wall of text summarized "I hate PGI because MWO is not where I believe it should be at this point and I only play it because BattleTech is not out yet."

I too am waiting for BattleTech with bated breath, but I still enjoy MWO and will still play it when BattleTech comes out because they are different genres of games.

I am also tiring of people who do not remember much of the pre-Clan days and don't understand the allure of the 3025 era and keep pestering HBS about the Timber Wolf and other Clan era or later mechs, though.

Edited by Ed Steele, 01 October 2015 - 05:39 PM.

[Jack Gallows]

Ed Steele, on 01 October 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

***Snip!***

Wall of text summarized "I hate PGI because MWO is not where I believe it should be at this point and I only play it because BattleTech is not out yet."

I too am waiting for BattleTech with bated breath, but I still enjoy MWO and will still play it when BattleTech comes out because they are different genres of games.

I am also tiring of people who do not remember much of the pre-Clan days and don't understand the allure of the 3025 era and keep pestering HBS about the Timber Wolf and other Clan era or later mechs, though.

I don't play MW:O, I hang out on the MW:O forums for discussions/etc.

As for the pre-Clan stuff, I can understand that people ask after things they like especially if the Clans are where their hearts are. I do hope that Battletech is amazingly successful and that a sequel will include some Clans for those that want them!

[spectralthundr]

Kay Wolf, on 01 October 2015 - 09:32 AM, said:

Nightshade24, I thought I put together massive walls-o-text. I'm sorry I just can't take the time to read that, but today is a very busy day for me... maybe sometime in the future. Very nice effort, though.

Nope, not anymore. The entirety of the IP rests back in Jordan Weisman's hands, IIRC. I do agree with you, however, that if he did a MechWarrior, or an MMO like I'd like to see, he would have either of those funded immediately, if not sooner.

I'm seeing two dates for the goodies to go out... May 2017 and June 2016... if they're to stick with the cycle they've set up, then I think the June 2016 is, most likely, a typo, and it's supposed to be 2017. I would hope for the best to be May 2017.

I was under the impression MS still owns all the electronic rights to the FASA properties and Jordan managed to secure the license for shadowrun because MS wasn't going to do crap all with it anyway, in a licensing fee sort of way. Has this changed? If so even more hope for a proper MW5 being made down the road.

[Nightshade24]

Jack Gallows, on 01 October 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

-snip-

This is getting longer and longer and now we are getting into a table tenis match on some points where no progress is really made- partly because you are very anti PGI and keep thinking your negatives out weigh the positiveness or different motives or reasons. (and the fact I can do the same thing with SC, WT, etc but that is more of putting fuel on other fires...)
So instead I will skip most of the Table tenis matches and condense this response because I am running out of 10 cent coins and now moving on to the goldies' (1 and 2 dollar coins)

And look at war thunder: there "CW" equivalent is so far behind that it is barely on the drawing boards. many QnA's brought this topic up and they said they haven't even started doing anything on it. On other news WT can no longer support simulator mode as well and is now an 'event' like thing that's far more limiting. On top of that but a lot of people left war thunder, WT's total 'playerbase' is larger then MW: O's, but the amount of active ones? well ever since Gaijin decided it was a good idea to make people no longer to use 3/4's of the forum any more if they haven't played at all recently, that cut most communications down a lot. I should also state the community there is very toxic- far worse then the MW: O community ever been. I joined this forum in activity back when it was the worst for MW: O but I took it as a breath of fresh air in contrast to the WT forums. I should also mention Gaijins pricing isn't the best one... how many dollars does the Colliope sherman cost or most tier 4 tanks cost? or the terrible state of match maker that they have to change the MM system completely every like 3 months? I think WT went through 8 different cycles now and MW: O only did 1 and I do quite like the PSR system, not leaving people in the dark about what they are and what others are is a good step in the right direction... yea... I've played WT for a long time. there premium model is similar to MW: O's and the reason why the premium time is so cheap in the long term is because not many players stick that long. Most players usually leave after 5 months for good or take a long time to come back into the game... I know a lot of people on WT, most have quit around 770 hours or 1500 hours. May sound like a lot but I know nearly as many people who got double that hours and still playing on MW: O... gods don't tell me how long I have played on MW: O... I think I'll half way there for 5 digits... I'll sush for now as this is becoming more of a WT rant then MW: O related... but WT- in my eyes, isn't fairing better. Still doing better then War Gaming but the retention of players is very poor and the forums are still quite toxic. Hell there are even a few necromancers blasting toxicity at me from posts I made 2 years ago that do not even apply to the current game anymore like back when the German Wellington was pay2win and racking up 500,000 to 1,000,000 SL per game....



Isn't all games purpose is to make money? yes. Yes it is. It isn't a job for no reason. F2P isn't made that you have to pay money after awhile or any time to play it better. MW: O does this well. F2P just makes it easier to spend money because it's much harder to pay for a game that costs money that you have never played (and trust me some games like FTL play and feel a lot different actually playing it compared to watching a you tube video or something). F2P also works well because people who do pay and didn't pay can play together (unless it's a bad Microtransaction model where it separates the two because te F2P guys didn't buy a mech pack or what ever)

Now... I must admit. PGI's older areas in economics like colours, skins, hero mechs, etc... are a bit rusty. This was back when they were very broke and IGP was looming over. the mechpacks values are huge in compared to buying things seperately, the Locust pack from phoenix itself (20 dollars) is worth 160 dollars of content and it's technically worth more for the fact it's early access that gives it more value. This is quite a lot of value that you do not see in most games... however it's slightly contrasts it's own values that are about middle ground for some games (WT used to be cheaper about 2 years ago but not really any more...) I would like to see the formula of hero mechs going from [tons] x 75 to something like [tons] x 50 maybe. so a hero locust pirates bane would cost 1000 mc instead of 1500, an atlas would cost 5000 instead of 7500, etc... it's a big change, 1/3rd of the price changed, but I think it's okay... as well as decreasing costs of colours, patterns, cockpit items, etc by a bit. That way they are more attractive then waiting for a pack that has stuff you like... even with these changes it still puts pack value up very high, but the thing is recent packs get more and more content recently... now it's double the colours, cockpit items a lot more , this and that, 4th variants, etc. I mean it won't resault in saturating value in the packs (because they are only getting more and more higher) and it would encourage people getting more stuff if they wanted to.

Even though PGI is about average, I do believe they can lower some prices and not resort in making them higher like WT to stay afloat as unlike MW: O WT's main income is the premium vehicles and you can buy only so many...It's also flawed because unless you're like me, you do not want the tier 1 to 3 premium vehicles, you want the 4th one so you can grind the whole tree + premium time to get literally the top end jets in 1 week. The fact's that is possible kinda sickens me =l


Golden mechs? look at all the other games around, SC, WoT, they also have there equivilant of golden mechs, I would say WT as welll but for it's early times it wasn't a problem, i really liked WT's early economy until they inflated literally everything and stated releasing vehicles that cost 50+ dollars for a middle tier vehicle BUT the only vehicle at the time to be an MRL... and how much does the T-35 cost being a Tier 1 battlerating 1.3? Do not get me started on some of the british tier 4 premium planes and stuff... well... technically you got the A-26... that any product gaijin promotes with that insta sells often in the hundreds... (and people thought pokemech trainers are to serious... ) okay, I keep talking about war thunder. I'll stop at this point. no more WT.
anyway, golden mechs is just a luxury item and a one off. even though people want Wave II and IS to get golden mechs nad so on and on and on, instead of PGI going for more golden mechs obviously giving them more income they decided against it.


Boating can never go away, it's part of battletech, just look at the awesome, warhawk, nova, hunchabck 4P, etc. The reason why non boating is not that popular is it requires more skill and it's method of attacking stuff is abuse the enemy weakness instead of play it's strength. (well in terms of a skirmisher, I'm using BT lingo here I hope you can follow ^^)
still works well in MW: O. I do well at it at least...

uh... trying to talk about points in bulk is getting myself lost... I am just going to hit post and pray I didn't do a stupid...




Anyway, next topic... clans producing an arms race? Doesn't that already occur with the standard inner sphere? even the BT guys said it themselves. older mechs = flat out better. ie endo /ferro / DHS / er lasers / streaks / narc/ pulse lasers/ gauss is around for those guys but not the current guys. in a way the inner spheres own internal history is just a mini version of the post clan history. Of course the BV handeling on this is different of course. but in practice it's just another way...



Reason it took so long for CW is because this was PGI's goal and not IGP's goal, IGP didn't want this or that. Before you blame me for using IGP as a scapegoat there is the small tiny winy fact that's it's always PGI who wanted CW, but it's IGP that always brings the hammer down. "We will not add any ai's or dropships to MW: O" and many other comments like this is kinda clear... considering they also said we won't have multi spawns and stuff which is a main part of CW.

[Nightshade24]

Jack Gallows, on 01 October 2015 - 05:54 PM, said:

I don't play MW:O, I hang out on the MW:O forums for discussions/etc.

As for the pre-Clan stuff, I can understand that people ask after things they like especially if the Clans are where their hearts are. I do hope that Battletech is amazingly successful and that a sequel will include some Clans for those that want them!

you do not even play the game yet you judge it critically?

No wonder why it feels like I am talking to a broken record player... not only do you have bias on your side but you also do not really play the game to even support your own claims..

[Threat Doc]

spectralthundr, on 01 October 2015 - 06:06 PM, said:

I was under the impression MS still owns all the electronic rights to the FASA properties and Jordan managed to secure the license for shadowrun because MS wasn't going to do crap all with it anyway, in a licensing fee sort of way. Has this changed? If so even more hope for a proper MW5 being made down the road.

Yeah, Ed Steele and Jack Gallows both corrected me on that. I thought for sure that, at the beginning of this recent summer, Jordan Weisman had announced that all of the BattleTech IP had reverted to him, finally, and there would be no more trouble with getting things done... however, I can't find the article I thought I read, and I've tried multiple search terms.

This tells me that my BattleTech dreams have become more unusual than the fact that I have dreams about BattleTech, hehe.

[Jack Gallows]

Kay Wolf, on 01 October 2015 - 07:31 PM, said:

Yeah, Ed Steele and Jack Gallows both corrected me on that. I thought for sure that, at the beginning of this recent summer, Jordan Weisman had announced that all of the BattleTech IP had reverted to him, finally, and there would be no more trouble with getting things done... however, I can't find the article I thought I read, and I've tried multiple search terms.

This tells me that my BattleTech dreams have become more unusual than the fact that I have dreams about BattleTech, hehe.

Jordan did write something about saying "never sell the rights" after learning that while it might seem like a good idea, you end up in situations like this or even Harmony Gold style where they're just all over the place and it makes it very difficult to get things done.

He got the rights to create a game from Microsoft when he opened and ran Smith and Tinker, which he then used to give to PGI and the rest of that is what we see here. Microsoft still has creative control/etc like we saw with the whole no PS3 thing, but otherwise they probably don't care much long as they make their money.

It'd be so awesome if Weisman actually did own the digital rights again.

[Tylerchu]

Clarifying question...
Is this going to be a digitized version of tabletop? Because I've always been wanting to play TT (but couldn't find anyone else to teach me).

[NocturnalBeast]

Jack Gallows, on 01 October 2015 - 05:54 PM, said:

I don't play MW:O, I hang out on the MW:O forums for discussions/etc.

As for the pre-Clan stuff, I can understand that people ask after things they like especially if the Clans are where their hearts are. I do hope that Battletech is amazingly successful and that a sequel will include some Clans for those that want them!

Although I don't want to see them jump ahead to Clans in Battle Tech, I do like the idea of doing a Clan sequel. I would love to have them make a sequel that focuses on the Clan homeworlds a few decades before the Clan invasion when the clans were fighting each other for the honor of taking part in the in it invasion of the IS. I don't think that any game has been made in the pre-invasion Clan homeworlds.

Edited by Ed Steele, 01 October 2015 - 10:02 PM.