169 replies to this topic

[Ratpoison]

SplashDown, on 09 December 2015 - 03:16 AM, said:

I've played MWO since early CB and I've spent money on this game..so i will express my opion anywhere i wish.
MWO has gotten so far off lore that it isnt even MWo anymore..its just robots online.
Why has this happened? the IS cry babies have broken the game with the opion of IS should be equal to clan? and lets all be in the same mechs but with diff skins..how about NO!..Again this isnt MWO anymore its robots online.
..
So kuados IS you've broken the game for any past,present,or future player base, But blame does not lay only with you as PGI would rather butcher the game and nerf it to the ground rather than make a realistic MM..mainly since they dont want to do any real programing just keep you quiet and buy more packs.

Perhaps im a bit spoiled after player EVE online for 14 years with a solid gamer company like CCP..But then again CCP hires real programers capable of meeting any challenge

To top it all off PGI wayyyy over charges for everything and i mean EVERYTHING....the amount of money they ask for mech packs,colors,camo..ect.ect. you could spend that money on a real subscription game and play for 5 years with access to EVERYTHING!

So i for one will make dam sure that all potential new players know the truth about this game..before coming here.
But to be truthfull some-1 out there has already beaten me to it..and this game does not get good reviews from any of the gamer sites i belong to.including steam.

Now i know alot of the MWO fanboi's want the game to be a hit since they've alrdy invested time and money into game as i have...but the truth is this isnt MWO anymore so why would any-1 play it when they can play MW-3 and have more fun doing it?

Do i still play MWO? yes i do and why not? i spent my hard earned money on it and i play once or twice a month these days..sometimes more...when i need somehting diff or need a break from playing a real game with real pvp,,tactics and game mechanics

P.S some players may say why do something to hurt the game or its community? My reply is what community? this forum?
MWO is NOT an MMO its a 24 man instance...MWO does not meet the requirements to be classes as an MMO....sorry

When it isn't PGI's fault, it's the IS' or Clanner's fault. This community is top shelf hilarious.

[Dino Might]

strikebrch, on 08 December 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

Funny how people that hate a game keeps playing it for 3 FULL YEARS XD XD

Gaming Sadomasocism reaching critical levels or in simple words: MANCHILD

I've already stated that im done giving money to this game after 3 years buying packs just because it hasn't taken the path i was expecting. That doesn't mean i don't like to play it or any other crap that this dumbasses are throwing now because of a steam launch.

Censored , banned.......**** just move on. This is the reason why i don't make a single game my whole world like some salty people out there. I play planetside 2 , warframe , armored warfare , MW4mercs , Homeworld 2 remastered , shadow run returns , Assasins Creed Syndicate , Guild wars 2 , skyrim , Elite Dangerous (oh boy , guys i really recomend that one ).....and is just about what i want to play at the moment without the "tryhard i wanna be esport champion on mechs" impulse that drives players mad.

Only 2 times has PGI let me down in this 3 full years , the rest have been good times and years to come too.

I wanted a hardcore simulator ? YES
I wanted a deep battletech experience ? YES
It happened ? NO
.....mehh i still like the game even if its not the dream experience i was expecting , so good luck PGI because theres still a lot of time to keep adding features. Really looking forward to PVE in 2016.

psssst, if you want hardcore sim, get a joystick and throttle and come play Digital Combat Simulator (flight sim) with a few of us. It is a seriously good time, and all private lobbies where the host makes up the missions. Also, in about a year (estimate) they will have the F-14 A/B out, which is (definitely coincidence only) about the time when my wife will consider leaving me.

[TWIAFU]

DarthRevis, on 08 December 2015 - 04:15 PM, said:

But it was PGI who thought it was a good idea to pair up with said publisher, who will stay unnamed, so we cant say it was all the other guys fault.

SOMEONE at PGI thought this was gonna be a good idea...maybe that person has been canned already but you cant say PGI is Blameless for the issue that went down during this time. But i also dont think ever little thing was the publishers fault either.

Sometimes, in business, you have to make a deal with the devil.

And I am sure the deal looked great on paper, otherwise it would not have been taken. What happens on paper, or is supposed to happen, is very different then what happens in the board room all the way down to the coders and the janitor.

Who else did they have to choose from?

[Raggedyman]

SplashDown, on 09 December 2015 - 03:16 AM, said:

MWO is NOT an MMO its a 24 man instance...MWO does not meet the requirements to be classed as an MMO....

It's an MMO

It's Massive (couple thousand players in the same environment)
It's Multiplayer (24 a drop, and interacting in the game)
It's Online (you needs the internet to play it)

You can argue if its an MMORPG or an MMOBA or an MMOCCG or an MMOFPS, if its good or if its bad, it its worth the money or a con job, you can compare say its not like MMO X or missing things from MMO Y, you can dress it and label it however you want.

But you can't say it's not an MMO when it fundamentally, obviously, indisputably is.
Even if your core reason for claiming it isn't is that you don't like it

/2p storm so I can go and water my hobbyhorse.

Edited by Raggedyman, 09 December 2015 - 04:51 AM.

[SplashDown]

Raggedyman, on 09 December 2015 - 04:50 AM, said:

It's an MMO

It's Massive (couple thousand players in the same environment)
It's Multiplayer (24 a drop, and interacting in the game)
It's Online (you needs the internet to play it)

You can argue if its an MMORPG or an MMOBA or an MMOCCG or an MMOFPS, if its good or if its bad, it its worth the money or a con job, you can compare say its not like MMO X or missing things from MMO Y, you can dress it and label it however you want.

But you can't say it's not an MMO when it fundamentally, obviously, indisputably is.
Even if your core reason for claiming it isn't is that you don't like it

/2p storm so I can go and water my hobbyhorse.

YES i can say it...look it up..WOT went threw this same problem..without a community chat box (minimum) it is not considerd an MMO..you can live in fantasy land all you like..but it is what it is...WOT wasnt going to implement a community chat box either..but they wanted to be classed as an MMO so they did

[Raggedyman]

SplashDown, on 09 December 2015 - 05:27 AM, said:

YES i can say it...look it up..WOT went threw this same problem..without a community chat box (minimum) it is not considerd an MMO..you can live in fantasy land all you like..but it is what it is...WOT wasnt going to implement a community chat box either..but they wanted to be classed as an MMO so they did

I did

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is a video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance (or world).
https://en.wikipedia...yer_online_game

An MMO, or massively multiplayer online game, is a game that thousands of participants can play simultaneously over the internet.
http://lexicon.ft.co...tiplayer-online

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) refers to videogames that allow a large number of players to participate simultaneously over an internet connection.
https://www.techoped...nline-game-mmog

massively multiplayer online game: any online video game in which a player interacts with a large number of other players
http://dictionary.re.../browse/mmo?s=t

No one has "must have a community chat box or its not an MMO" listed
It basically all boils down to this

To be classed as a Massively Multiplayer Online game you must be

1 - Massive
2 - Multiplayer
3 - Online

Now, please explain to me how MWO isn't:


1 - Massive
2 - Multiplayer
3 - Online

Go on, I'm sure you can do it without pulling some random other requirement out of your backpack

Edited by Raggedyman, 09 December 2015 - 06:07 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Duke Nedo, on 09 December 2015 - 12:03 AM, said:

TBH, naivety lost long ago.

Yeah, expecting honestly from the developers of a game...

Thats like if you got sold a DBZ game but you got hello kitty instead and when they got angry you called them naive for believing the advertising

Or when ppl pointed out this was false advertising



But other ppl pointed out it was fan made and somehow that made it better roflmao

[Raggedyman]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 December 2015 - 05:38 AM, said:

Yeah, expecting honestly from the developers of a game...

Thats like if you got sold a DBZ game but you got hello kitty instead and when they got angry you called them naive for believing the advertising

Not really.
If someone says "I'm going to make you a ham sandwich", and then some ham between some bread then it's still a ham sandwich irrespective of what else there is or isn't in there.

If someone says "I'm going to make you a cheese sandwich" and there is bread but no cheese then it's not a cheese sandwich. So be as annoyed as you want. Just don't assume it'll have pickle and moan if it doesn't.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 December 2015 - 05:38 AM, said:

But other ppl pointed out it was fan made and somehow that made it better roflmao

That is possibly the most wonderful and saddening thing I've seen. Thanks for the share
The Atlas eyes are brilliant.

Edited by Raggedyman, 09 December 2015 - 07:10 AM.

[Duke Nedo]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 09 December 2015 - 05:38 AM, said:

Yeah, expecting honestly from the developers of a game...

Thats like if you got sold a DBZ game but you got hello kitty instead and when they got angry you called them naive for believing the advertising

Or when ppl pointed out this was false advertising

But other ppl pointed out it was fan made and somehow that made it better roflmao

Either it's illegal, and then you can sue them, or it isn't and then you just misplaced your trust.

If you just didn't get what you had hoped to get when you handed them your money, then you made a bad call. If you were conned and PGI broke their legal commitment, then you are a victim.

Which is it?

[KuroNyra]

Duke Nedo, on 09 December 2015 - 06:14 AM, said:

Either it's illegal, and then you can sue them, or it isn't and then you just misplaced your trust.

If you just didn't get what you had hoped to get when you handed them your money, then you made a bad call. If you were conned and PGI broke their legal commitment, then you are a victim.

Which is it?

The latter without doubt.

Jumpjets? You have it.
Big mech squeletton? You have it too.
The only two things that aren't there anymore are the Glowing eyes who were present during a moment and the old U.I.
So basicly they never lied, it's just an old video .


And about the trailer itself, well, it's a trailer. Not a gameplay video. Your going to tell me trailers ALWAYS tell the truth for about EVERY VIDEO GAME AND MOVIE?

[TLBFestus]

Sandpit, on 08 December 2015 - 04:07 PM, said:

I think he's referring to the clinging to the past and doing nothing but repeating the same thing for 3 years

The thing is, I've been around on this planet for long enough, longer than many of you, to have come to the understanding that just because something is old, in the past, doesn't mean it's to be forgotten or isn't significant.

That OLD phrase about "those who don't learn for the past are doomed to repeat it" is actually true. In this case it can cut both ways.

PGI has improved since they unshackled themselves from IGP and I remember thinking that finally they can do it their way, and we'd see big improvements, and we have. Not as many as I'd like to have seen in the time that has past. There are areas that they have simply dropped the ball again, and they've shown a tendency to simply screw up what appears to be "no brainer" decisions.

We never know if they are going to get it right the first time (history says "No") or if they are going to fix it soon, or ignore if for years. In that lies the frustration, the not knowing, the abundant lack of communication about things like that. I think that that itself leads to a lot of the angst around here.

Admittedly that can backfire on PGI too, cus it has in the past, and with their past track record they are gun shy. "Done in 90 days" is iconic for these guys because they earned it. The first time they admitted to saying that for the longest time while they were in fact not doing anything about CW.

At the time it was a BIG DEAL. It didn't stress the line of trust between the developer and community, it BROKE it. Sure, eventually they shook off IGP and dumped the blame at their deceased feet, but for many players it was a big breach of trust that many can't get past and some will not forgive.

I'm like that in real life. If someone deliberately lies to me about a big deal, they don't get a second chance. I'm talking about big stuff, most other times I'll give it the "3 strikes" policy and wait for a pattern to develop, but sometimes once is all it takes. I've only done that about 3 times in my 50+ years, but it's been the right thing to do every time.

In some peoples mind it is that big a betrayal (especially internets wise cus we all know that everyone's a tough guy here) and they aren't satisfied with dumping them, they want to even the score. I get it. I don't necessarily see it here, but I get it.

Now, if you think of that, then using the "3 strikes", PGI has screwed up multiple times, and frequently enough that they never establish enough momentum to heal those old wounds they caused. After awhile, some walk away, some attack.

In a nutshell, or to use the internet way TL:DR, the past does count. If you don't examine the past, learn from it, you are going to either screw up or get screwed. So saying, "It's in the past, it doesn't matter" is just plain wrong.

Envisage, on 08 December 2015 - 03:32 PM, said:

TLBFaust. You're toxic.

Seriously? I've been called much worse than that. You can do much better.

I prefer "Spoon", cus they stir things up.

Oh....hold it....I just recognized the name of the guy. He's got a nut on for me because I've been critical of his budding youtube career about MWO and CS:GO gods. He doesn't like honest and accurate criticism.

Edited by TLBFestus, 09 December 2015 - 10:18 AM.

[Sandpit]

SplashDown, on 09 December 2015 - 05:27 AM, said:

YES i can say it...look it up..WOT went threw this same problem..without a community chat box (minimum) it is not considerd an MMO..you can live in fantasy land all you like..but it is what it is...WOT wasnt going to implement a community chat box either..but they wanted to be classed as an MMO so they did

lol so you don't consider it an MMO
the vast majority do. Why the hell does it even matter?

Ok, it's not an MMO
Happy?
Can we talk about something pertinent instead?

[Rampancy]

Lightfoot, on 09 December 2015 - 02:22 AM, said:

No it's not. MWO is alot more shiny, but has a long way to go to become the tactics enabled sim that MW4 was. I played MechWarrior 4 and 3 PvP league play where dropweight balance and map selection was bid on and those games were all tactically rich. Take the wrong weapon for the map and you lose. Gauss Rifles balanced off against both LRMs and LB-20X, and with no Gauss charge-up, and when used correctly each would be the key to winning the match. MWO is just laser-vomit right now. It used to be of the caliber of gameplay that MW4 and MW3 was, but that all got nerfed into laser-vomit.

Yeah, no. You either large laser boated or PPC/Gauss boated, or you got crushed by equally-skilled players that did. There were a few maps that favored in-fighting more, but that's a matter of map design, not of relative weapon power. Laservomit meta gets crushed by ballistic/SRM brawlers in MWO, too.

MW4: Mercs was community modded (with weapon properties drastically changed-- 3/4 weight LRMs, lighter/rangier autocannons, heavily boosted IS damage and/or ROF compared to lighter clan counterparts) to bring more weapon parity, but they broke a lot of BT weapon relationships to do it.

[Praehotec8]

TLBFestus, on 09 December 2015 - 09:49 AM, said:

The thing is, I've been around on this planet for long enough, longer than many of you, to have come to the understanding that just because something is old, in the past, doesn't mean it's to be forgotten or isn't significant.

That OLD phrase about "those who don't learn for the past are doomed to repeat it" is actually true. In this case it can cut both ways.

PGI has improved since they unshackled themselves from IGP and I remember thinking that finally they can do it their way, and we'd see big improvements, and we have. Not as many as I'd like to have seen in the time that has past. There are areas that they have simply dropped the ball again, and they've shown a tendency to simply screw up what appears to be "no brainer" decisions.

We never know if they are going to get it right the first time (history says "No") or if they are going to fix it soon, or ignore if for years. In that lies the frustration, the not knowing, the abundant lack of communication about things like that. I think that that itself leads to a lot of the angst around here.

Admittedly that can backfire on PGI too, cus it has in the past, and with their past track record they are gun shy. "Done in 90 days" is iconic for these guys because they earned it. The first time they admitted to saying that for the longest time while they were in fact not doing anything about CW.

At the time it was a BIG DEAL. It didn't stress the line of trust between the developer and community, it BROKE it. Sure, eventually they shook off IGP and dumped the blame at their deceased feet, but for many players it was a big breach of trust that many can't get past and some will not forgive.

I'm like that in real life. If someone deliberately lies to me about a big deal, they don't get a second chance. I'm talking about big stuff, most other times I'll give it the "3 strikes" policy and wait for a pattern to develop, but sometimes once is all it takes. I've only done that about 3 times in my 50+ years, but it's been the right thing to do every time.

In some peoples mind it is that big a betrayal (especially internets wise cus we all know that everyone's a tough guy here) and they aren't satisfied with dumping them, they want to even the score. I get it. I don't necessarily see it here, but I get it.

Now, if you think of that, then using the "3 strikes", PGI has screwed up multiple times, and frequently enough that they never establish enough momentum to heal those old wounds they caused. After awhile, some walk away, some attack.

In a nutshell, or to use the internet way TL:DR, the past does count. If you don't examine the past, learn from it, you are going to either screw up or get screwed. So saying, "It's in the past, it doesn't matter" is just plain wrong.





Seriously? I've been called much worse than that. You can do much better.

I prefer "Spoon", cus they stir things up.

Oh....hold it....I just recognized the name of the guy. He's got a nut on for me because I've been critical of his budding youtube career about MWO and CS:GO gods. He doesn't like honest and accurate criticism.

Out of pure curiosity, just what, exactly has PGI done truly wrong? Not trying to be a troll, but I truly do not see what they have really lied about, for the most part. The ONLY one I can think of that was truly deceptive was the implementation of 3pv, but (as we all know now) aside from the questionable act of implementing it against their promise, it has largely been a non-issue.

Everything else has been delivered or is being delivered, in some form. VOIP? check. CW? check. Some form of role warfare? Check. New player experience/tutorials? Check. What else was in the, "N.O.P.E." banner?

Is everything as good as one might want, or done exactly as each individual wants? No, but nothing is ever perfect, and I think PGI has been fairly sincere about their desire to deliver a good game, I just think they are small and were relatively inexperienced at making such a complex game. Overall, I do not have the impression that their management is sitting around thinking up ways to screw the player base and make false promises. They ARE trying to make a game that is within the bounds of their capabilities, and remains profitable.

Things have taken time, but overall, the game is not in a bad spot. It is not the game some people wanted, which is too bad, but at some point one either needs to accept what is, or just move on. Case-in-point, I am a big fan of the Thief series, and I found the 2014 reboot to be utter mediocrity, far divorced from the spirit and polish of the originals. I posted my thoughts about it and left. I do not continue to post on the EIDOS forums about it, or claim the developers lied to me. It is what it is, and some people do like that game.

[Revis Volek]

TWIAFU, on 09 December 2015 - 04:22 AM, said:

Sometimes, in business, you have to make a deal with the devil.

And I am sure the deal looked great on paper, otherwise it would not have been taken. What happens on paper, or is supposed to happen, is very different then what happens in the board room all the way down to the coders and the janitor.

Who else did they have to choose from?

Im guessing you have no idea how many PUBLISHERS there are out there for video games...its a lot.

Also you dont NEED a publisher, do it on your own like they are now. Im not saying it didnt look like a great idea to start, but honestly IGP has never had a good track record and now they are bankrupt and gone. They have made 3 games in their lifetime and two never even released.

But why i am even talking about this i have no idea....been long gone.

[nehebkau]

@ OP

I saw the Steam reviews and the purposeful attempts to mislead people and hurt PGI is really scary. Some of these people are on the verge of being "restraining order" scary.

What makes it worse is that I went to other review sites, like metacritic, and the amount of obvious attempts to drown the game with bad reviews is astounding.

Why are so many people so badly butthurt? They are acting like the were in a romantic relationship the the game and got jilted for an Italian plumber and his dinosaur.

I get it when you get angry because PGI makes a change to something you like *ahem* my Huginn -- which i spent real money for. But I would hope that people would recognize that the greater good of the game requires imbalances to be corrected.

Edited by nehebkau, 09 December 2015 - 12:57 PM.

[WarHippy]

Raggedyman, on 09 December 2015 - 05:37 AM, said:

I did

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is a video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance (or world).
https://en.wikipedia...yer_online_game

An MMO, or massively multiplayer online game, is a game that thousands of participants can play simultaneously over the internet.
http://lexicon.ft.co...tiplayer-online

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) refers to videogames that allow a large number of players to participate simultaneously over an internet connection.
https://www.techoped...nline-game-mmog

massively multiplayer online game: any online video game in which a player interacts with a large number of other players
http://dictionary.re.../browse/mmo?s=t

No one has "must have a community chat box or its not an MMO" listed
It basically all boils down to this

To be classed as a Massively Multiplayer Online game you must be

1 - Massive
2 - Multiplayer
3 - Online

Now, please explain to me how MWO isn't:


1 - Massive
2 - Multiplayer
3 - Online

Go on, I'm sure you can do it without pulling some random other requirement out of your backpack

Not that it really matters if it is or isn't an MMO, but MWO really isn't. CW is about as close as MWO gets to the "massive" part of MMO, and even then very few actually play it regularly. People playing in hundreds of separate instances of the same game does not make it a MMO. Every game ever played online would be an MMO by that really broad definition.

[DarthHias]

Lightfoot, on 09 December 2015 - 02:22 AM, said:

No it's not. MWO is alot more shiny, but has a long way to go to become the tactics enabled sim that MW4 was. I played MechWarrior 4 and 3 PvP league play where dropweight balance and map selection was bid on and those games were all tactically rich. Take the wrong weapon for the map and you lose. Gauss Rifles balanced off against both LRMs and LB-20X, and with no Gauss charge-up, and when used correctly each would be the key to winning the match. MWO is just laser-vomit right now. It used to be of the caliber of gameplay that MW4 and MW3 was, but that all got nerfed into laser-vomit.

I went over to Steam and posted a nice review of MWO which is none the less a great game and one that is easy to compete in. It can be better, but that's irrelevant to a new player. New player's just want to know how to proceed and will they have fun, and they will find MWO fun and easy to level in. I mean what other PvP game puts you in the best gear after only a few weeks to months? None that I know of. Sure you won't have all the mechs at first, but you will have a mech that is as good as any in short order. And you could always buy a Mech-pak. Speaking of which, why are you not offering any Mech-paks on Steam, PGI?

I have to disagree, sorry. Maybe in your 3v3 league play all was shiny, but in normal multiplayer (and yes I was in a small clan with regular matches against others and training among ourselves) it was Pin point front loaded. Boating ERlarges if you couldn´t aim or boating Gauss/CLERPPC.
For the cold moon map everyone would change into incredibly heat inefficient mechs with loads of ERlarges and reflective armor.

[lshtaria]

I'm no longer a fan of this game, Russ and Paul have done a damn good job of that. Refunded my unseen pre-purchases and just stopped playing, simple as that. Had no need to make salty comments on this forum of Steam's so I just did what any unhappy player should do and that's walk away.

That's not to say this game isn't without its merits and if I was to write a Steam review then I would be fair and honest about the good and bad things this game offers. There will also be many potential players out there who will enjoy this game along with Russ and Paul's... "vision" of it. Is it really my "duty" to drive as many of these players away just out of spite to PGI simply because they haven't made the game I want?

I guess that's the difference between an older 35 year old gamer and the younger "CoD Generation" of gamers. I fear for the future of society, I really do.

Edited by Kyocera, 09 December 2015 - 01:25 PM.

[SplashDown]

Raggedyman, on 09 December 2015 - 05:37 AM, said:

I did

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is a video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance (or world).
https://en.wikipedia...yer_online_game

An MMO, or massively multiplayer online game, is a game that thousands of participants can play simultaneously over the internet.
http://lexicon.ft.co...tiplayer-online

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) refers to videogames that allow a large number of players to participate simultaneously over an internet connection.
https://www.techoped...nline-game-mmog

massively multiplayer online game: any online video game in which a player interacts with a large number of other players
http://dictionary.re.../browse/mmo?s=t

No one has "must have a community chat box or its not an MMO" listed
It basically all boils down to this

To be classed as a Massively Multiplayer Online game you must be

1 - Massive
2 - Multiplayer
3 - Online

Now, please explain to me how MWO isn't:


1 - Massive
2 - Multiplayer
3 - Online

Go on, I'm sure you can do it without pulling some random other requirement out of your backpack

All youve done is prove me right...this game DOES NOT hold 1k players on the same map so its not an MMO

http://mwomercs.com/...-mmo-or-a-moba/