96 replies to this topic

[jss78]

AnimeFreak40K, on 03 January 2016 - 05:34 PM, said:

To be quite clear, I am NOT defending PGI, their actions, decisions or the direction they are taking the game. What I am saying is that if PGI is unsuccessful with MWO, it is very possible that it will be 10+ years before there is another MechWarrior game because no other company would want to take the chance of touching the franchise.
This self-defeating fandom

While some may have various misgivings about MWO development directions, isn't it at this point established that PGI was in fact "successful" with MWO, from a business standpoint?

They're already several years into working on MWO, and have been continuously hiring new people over the last year. That's hardly the hallmark of a failing business. Instead, I'd assume they are making a profit. All this puts them way ahead of most new business ventures.

Not saying they shouldn't aim higher and fix outstanding issues. With the Steam release, improving NPE, and CW3 and PvE coming, there's a definite potential for MWO to become much bigger than it is now, if PGI works hard and works smart.

Edited by jss78, 04 January 2016 - 02:51 AM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Satan n stuff, on 04 January 2016 - 02:19 AM, said:

We never had true dubs.

Was pretty sure we had them right off, or they had them during "internal" testing and it was changed very quickly for fear of the 5 second jenner.


Then again, that was years ago, so kinda hard to remember at times.

[Satan n stuff]

Flash Frame, on 04 January 2016 - 02:58 AM, said:

Was pretty sure we had them right off, or they had them during "internal" testing and it was changed very quickly for fear of the 5 second jenner.


Then again, that was years ago, so kinda hard to remember at times.

We didn't even get double heat sinks until November '12, long after Paul introduced heat retention ( weapons generate more heat each time they are fired ) because he didn't want a Jenner to fire *gasp* 4 medium lasers without even risking shutting down. Double heat sinks were equal to 2.0SHS in the engine and 1.4SHS external when they were introduced.

[The Basilisk]

MadcatX says:

> - Version purists: As far as core tabletop games go, Btech is the only one I've ever encountered that's drastically changed it's
> ruleset and mechanics over the years. The first iteration was FASA's hex-based terrain and detailed record sheet for each
> mech you own. When the franchise went to Wizkids, they produced some Classic Battletech material however they really
> pushed their new btech rulest that used their Clix system and created MW: Dark Age as the lore of their system. Had to look
> up Alpha Strike since I really didn't know much about it, but apparently the franchise then got in the hands of Catalyst Game
> Labs and from a gameplay video I just watched, can't say I know the ruleset well other then they rolled a couple dice and used > a tape measure very often.

You did not do your homework right.
If you insist on commenting on Battletechs whereabouts as...."Franchise" (already wrong )....you realy should do a better research.
Battletech was originaly owned by FASA and was sold to Wizkids then its diverse media rights lizensed seperately to different holders.
FASAs Battletech was hexbased tactic and later strategy game with continuous developing side and additional rules but its core rules never changed.
When FASA went bankrupt it was sold to Wizkids who made an effin bloodsucking, moneygrab, tabeltop game with rules largely stolen or addapted from WH40k.
Most real Battletech fans stoped playing or just keeped the classic Battletech. Wizkids parody did not go well, most just shunned it.
Since 2008 Catalyst Labs ( former FANPRO LLC the european distributer of BT from FASA ) holds the rights of CBT parallel to WizKids for its MW: Dark Age.
Holder of the rights for the MW computer game series is still Microsoft who lizensed to different other firms.
Just read the wikipedia article on BT.

> - Tournament games: Now that I think of it, btech is the TT game I've played where I've witnessed the most drama, usually
> tourny FFA games for quite a few different reasons. I've never played or watched a whole lot of 40K games so I'm not sure
> how they compare in that regards though.

Mayby those Measureband warriors have explicit bad habits.
Again MW: Darkage has little to do with CBT nowadays.
The CBT Games ( even on campaign level with beautyfully build large turney 3D Hex Maps ) where pretty fascinating and well organized ( granted it was an european turnament in Germany )

> Heck, even with MW:O you've got a divide on the fanbase between an online-only btech game instead of, well, MechWarrior 5.

Again only partialy right.
MWO exists only due to the founding of said fanbase ( the founders you still see frequently their tags )
The main point of critique by this fanbase is that PGI showed and advetised something completely different than what they delivered.
And what they delivered after YEARS of delay was not even close to what they promised in their second, third and so on takes on what they said they wanted to do.
What finaly until today established was their infamous policy of "minimum viable product^TM" ( No invention it was called like that by PGI itself )

So the diversion in community of MWO is largely between those who initially invested and made the game possible and felt cheated over and over again and those joining up later who felt a game done by such a smal and understandably limited ( hardware, software and know how ) company like PGI is expected to be in a state of constant alpha. ( Still am barely able to call the momentary state of the game a beta or even release state )
And now we get an influx of steamers ( Steam wich is to be frank the bottom sediment of the barrel of casualness ) which find nothing wrong with MWO.
An other issue is the fact many MW computer game fans can still remember the gameplay of MW3 and four and feel MWO to be a harsh setback except graphics.

[VinJade]

I tend to not care about steam users because I very much doubt they that they would know a Jade Falcon from the WiE or for that matter Inner sphere from Clanners.

They only started playing what for a fraction of the time than most players before steam?

Sure PGI has problem but to say 'der go find different company be better!'

But at least the game is being created by 'actual' BTers.

as for mech assault.. lava guns ect? many BTers do not recognize that game as remotely any thing to BT or a true MW game.
MA was an abomination made directly for players who don't care about anything other then just another generic mecha shooter if that.

as to those that put money into the game such as the founders to began with along with those that have bought mech packs I can understand your frustrations from other games I had played in the past but I think PGI even with their (massive) flaws they just need to get more people to help them or at the very least talk to outsiders such as Smith & tinker to help fix problems they are having.

or there are others that crated upgrades for games like MW 4 (mektek I think it was)on their own. they done stuff like that for free and show their love for MW line.

Edited by VinJade, 04 January 2016 - 04:32 AM.

[Bobzilla]

The rage does have an effect, otherwise every white knight post wouldn't have this somewhere in it:

"they have made changes and are more open..."

The 'changes' where a direct result of 'salty vets'. I.e. bad press

[carnivorouswinds]

Steam has around 150k installs, with only around 35% of players actually getting an achievement for winning a game. Concurrent players have halved since Steam release (from ~4k to ~2k or less), despite some players converting to Steam (so actual Steam player retention is much, much lower than it seems).

The game reeks of cash shop free2play from an average player's standpoint. Seeing the 'mechs you're getting wrecked with only available exclusively for cash (even if limited to months or whatever) reinforces this stereotype. Also doing simple math and realizing you'll pay $15-30 dollars per 'mech or $55 for a single a la carte, just to grind in an arena shooter skinned as Battletech is not very appealing. PGI's dev cycle is too long and misguided ("Hire more guys to make mech packs!" Screw upgrading the engine or hiring actual map/game designers) to have any significant impact on the fact that it has been circling the drain for a while now.

MWO being the only option does not make it a good one.

[VinJade]

though what I have seen and have been told about steam users are mostly whiners and if they don't get their way or like how things go they whine and cry over it even if they had never played the game before.

That and steam users are some of the most foul mouthed people I have ever heard.

I was watching a game that my friend was playing once(metal air ships in the sky where you have to parts to play on the ship) and I heard things that would get anyone band, the use of the N word, F word(not talking about the four letter one), and so on.

so forgive me for not taking anything steamers have to say as anything more than that. .

Edited by VinJade, 04 January 2016 - 05:14 AM.

[Jenovah]

LordBraxton, on 03 January 2016 - 06:32 PM, said:

MWO will never 'take off,' it's far too late for that. While I am a serious 'bittervet,' because I HATE where this game has gone since the golden glory days of Beta, Im glad that PGI managed to make money selling their mechs, and am sad that the game will never have huge appeal.




Acting like MWO could become considerably more popular in the future is ridiculous though... I've never seen or heard of a game 'taking off' 3+ years after its release.

Please don't take this as a personal attack, but I want to touch on two things here--


Point 1-
The trend of the "bittervets" the "founders" and "CBT's" to feel disenfranchised from the game by PGI I do understand to a point. However, as someone who missed CBT with MWO but has been a A/B tester in other games that were very successful I think you have to realise that it was a very small pool of opinions and ideas put into place to prepare for broader release to others who will have, at some point, input into the direction of the game. If for no other reason than continued profit to the business, PGI has to consider the desires of others. I see way to often in too many games where "originals" and "founders" or "testers" feel their input is more valuable than others or even that they think the game should not have changed direction since then. It's Going To Happen. Nearly every single time. It's not a maturity issue either, so being "young" for a CBT guy doesnt play into my perspective. I've seen more mature CBT people in this and other games act like infants because they think they have more say in a business' direction than they do. At one time, as a young (experience wise) tester I was the same way.

The endstate is the testers and founders did a wonderful service to establish a pretty damn good game that thousands enjoy playing. Well done, to all of you.

The experienced tester/maturity part comes in when you realise that the game you tested will continue to evolve and change until it plays out, and the profit margin for that business is no longer manageable. So for those who do, dont marginalize other peoples input.



Point 2-

One game which I tested, which didnt take off for 2-3 years, then lasted for 13 years; for anyone familiar with WWII combat sims you might have played it, although it did finally get unplugged in around 2010 I think. It started on MS online community (at which point I was too young to test for at 14, back when geocities chat was big, lol) however, was turned over 2 or 3 times by companies, in which I did test for version 2 and 3.

[MadcatX]

The Basilisk, on 04 January 2016 - 03:43 AM, said:

MadcatX says:

> - Version purists: As far as core tabletop games go, Btech is the only one I've ever encountered that's drastically changed it's
> ruleset and mechanics over the years. The first iteration was FASA's hex-based terrain and detailed record sheet for each
> mech you own. When the franchise went to Wizkids, they produced some Classic Battletech material however they really
> pushed their new btech rulest that used their Clix system and created MW: Dark Age as the lore of their system. Had to look
> up Alpha Strike since I really didn't know much about it, but apparently the franchise then got in the hands of Catalyst Game
> Labs and from a gameplay video I just watched, can't say I know the ruleset well other then they rolled a couple dice and used > a tape measure very often.

You did not do your homework right.
If you insist on commenting on Battletechs whereabouts as...."Franchise" (already wrong )....you realy should do a better research.

Perhaps my observations about the only thing I researched, Alpha Strike, was flawed. The rest wasn't research at all, it was me living and experiencing battletech on tabletop, CCG, PC/SNES, RPG (that wasn't my cup of tea), the TV show with the state of the art enhanced imaging. I didn't mention FASA because I figure that was common knowledge. I never said the core rules changed under FASA at all, it definitely expanded through supplements. I did say that battletech did change hands between FASA to Wizkids, whom did make a new btech TT game using the clix system. I did say that it did then change hands to Catalyst Labs who came out with Alpha Strike, which again uses a different ruleset.

The point of my post wasn't to give an entire rundown of the history of battletech, I'd have to go farther back and explain how the unseen are ripoffs from the Macross anime and what transpired to make them become the unseen for a very long time. but wanted to point out and perhaps it was my fault for not clarifying that the point I was getting at is that different rulesets will always create a certain amount of controversy, debate and hostility in a dedicated fanbase that has a preference to one ruleset. CBT is indeed the most played game of the various iterations of the tabletop game but, from what I've observed, a lot of btech players have disdain to some extent to the clix ruleset that people do play because "It's not real battletech, it's a cash grab, Warhammer 40K game with a Btech overcoat" is what I hear the most often. And the generation that knows and only played the Wizkidz Dark Ages btech because that is an actual demographic since it obviously made enough money to go as long as it did, might not be happy that the CBT purists consider the clix version an inferior product and by proxy it's players.

You have 3 seperate versions using the same IP. Heck, if you want to see how different rulesets can impact a playerbase, research "D&D edition wars",

As for MW:O / Mechwarrior 5, I'm not referring to the MW:O fanbase exclusively. I'm referring to the fanbase who know btech only through video games, played in open beta, said it was, and I'm quoting this because I hear it all the time from my TT CBT group: "MW:O is not Battletech. It's World of Tanks with another paint job. The mechs look different but beyond that have no identity to them, they are simply all walking hardpoints at varying heights. Completely lacking in any form of lore or logistics, it's essentially those few Solaris arena missions from Mech 2: Mercs". Their words, not mine. And I really can't say they're wrong other than the walking hardpoints and lacking identity parts because of perks but then again the perks were implemented as a tool for balance primarily, reinforcing the role that mech/variant typlcally is used for comes second. I actually usually end up saying "soon" heh.

And as mentioned earlier, you have folks that dislike other folks that play clan, etc. Not sure if we're self-defeating per say, but like most fanbases, we have a community spanning several generations over various platforms, have been introduced to battletech through different means thus have our preferences regarding btech TT and PC games.

Full Disclosure: I am very biased regarding this topic because I am absolutely sick and tired of being told from CBT players that anything that isn't CBT for TT is worthless and if I played and had fun with MechAssault I'm a horrible person, or at least have bad taste and question how I can enjoy MW:O since it is so different and in their POV extemely lacking compared to the older mainstream mechwarrior games.

[VinJade]

Madcatx
only thing I say about MW:O and BT is that it isn't battletech for many reasons, they use the name of the game itself along side their MW:O and their weapon systems are nothing like BT TT game (and yes I know, no need to tell me again why that is.) also with the very lack of any lore what so ever it is in the end just another generic shooter game.

I have also never viewed clicky teck as Battletech as many other BTers as the game was so broken it makes the current problems with MW:O seem like nothing.

good example of that is crunches preventing mechs from moving when they should be stepped on and so on.

Also one must remember the creators of MW:O have said it is their own timeline so they can more or less do whatever the hell they want and be damned with everything else.

thus MW:O isn't Battletech in any way shape or form.

[Scar Glamour]

Self-deteating fandom? What?

It's just whiners covering up their whining with good intentions and aggravated by PGI's not exactly top notch PR. They couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions even if there were any.

[VinJade]

@ winter burn
they are just steamers, whom most are just foul mouthed whiners who most likely played the game for thirty seconds and then rage quit and then whine about it.

[Cappy]

Dakota1000, on 03 January 2016 - 05:53 PM, said:

I remember seeing your posts on the Steam forums. I must say honestly that I usually only give them a skim since they always tend to be pretty massive posts in a forum which generally acts concisely, but I do agree with what you are saying there.

Many of the more vocal players of this game, such as those on the forums that are you referencing really say this game is much worse than it really is, they don't give it a chance either from some very old action of PGI's, being mad over the state of MW:LL, or for the hope that if PGI dies out that someone else will take it up and make it better.

As far as I see it, PGI dropping MWO leads us to an unknown as to what will happen to the series, if the next will be better or worse or even exist, and leaves us with the known that another thing won't be around for at the very least years while development happens, if it happens. What I know as far as PGI continuing to make money is that they will be able to expand the game and add more and more features to improve the game, and add many of the things people could wish for while keeping the game's general format. If PGI makes the series popular enough more developers might want to start working with it, as we've seen already with that new turn based Battletech game coming out.

Yeah but that wasn't because Mechwarrior/BT all of a sudden exploded in popularity, it's because Jordan Weissman owns HBS and has a long history with BT/MW. Not trying to be a naysayer, I'd like nothing more than for MW/BT to become the next big sci-fi series but the truth is MWO has done very little to raise the franchises' profile... And a pessimist might say they've done more to hurt it than anything.

Look, the game, for what it is, is fine. There's nothing wrong with what's already here, the primary issue is that it's just not enough to propel the project beyond being an arena shooter and the steps being taken towards expanding MWO as a game are... Well... small even for baby steps. I've been here since closed beta. I've watched every rise and fall of the community, I've seen every controversial change come and (sometimes) go. But for all that they have changed the game is still fundamentally the same game it was at closed beta. It's shallow. It's repetitive. It's content bare. It's design is constantly hampered by the F2P model... Which is honestly the biggest roadblock to making this game more.

Every design decision has to fit within the parameters of F2P, which intrinsically pushes Devs to working on the things that turn a profit as opposed to those that don't (i.e. CW). I have no lost "faith"; I understand these things take time, though one might ask how long is long enough, exactly? This game's been out, what? 3 or 4 years now? We're well beyond a regular development cycle at this point for the average game and yet counting the alpha and beta phases... What's really changed beyond balance, systems, mechs and maps? When are they going to make more game? You can't keep eternally polishing what's already there.

TL;DR I have hope, but I do think PGI bit off more than they could chew but are responding admirably given their experience. MWO is a pretty good game, one with obvious untapped potential. I don't think they should feel anything but pride for the game they have accomplished... I just wish they'd add more. Hopefully that wish is answered. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I fully understand why some people have just walked away in disgust. It's unfortunate they are bitter, but there's nothing you can do about that but let them have their say. Telling people their emotional responses are unwarranted usually only results in them doubling down and entrenching their negative view which doesn't do you or them (or the game) any good.

Edited by Cappy, 04 January 2016 - 07:38 AM.

[Ghogiel]

On the flip side riding PGIs nuts and white knighting doesn't do anything good either. So... balance of the force or something.

[Almond Brown]

Mycrus, on 03 January 2016 - 10:36 PM, said:

Player council discussion in 3...2...1
.. oh wait..

Totally PGI's fault too...right? LOL! Maybe the Community can try that one again and this time only let Tier 1 Players in... cause reasons. That would have to be "fair"... cause reasons. LOL!

[Otto Cannon]

There would always be a few malcontents and haters no matter what, the same as any game. This community didn't start off 'toxic' though- at the beginning the players were overwhelmingly positive and quick to offer in-depth constructive advice and feedback. It took a few kicks to the groin by PGI to wipe the smiles off our faces and start people wanting the game to fail.

The 'self-defeating community' is a direct result of self-defeating devs.

[Mcgral18]

Satan n stuff, on 04 January 2016 - 03:26 AM, said:

We didn't even get double heat sinks until November '12, long after Paul introduced heat retention ( weapons generate more heat each time they are fired ) because he didn't want a Jenner to fire *gasp* 4 medium lasers without even risking shutting down. Double heat sinks were equal to 2.0SHS in the engine and 1.4SHS external when they were introduced.

Was it not the other way around upon introduction? Engine untouched, but added were TrueDubs.
Quickly patched due to not Working as Intended™.

Do we still have heat retention on things that aren't the Flamer?
I honestly don't remember it in the first place, aside from the Flamer.

[Aresye]

Flash Frame, on 03 January 2016 - 09:29 PM, said:

When most people talk about the "Golden Age of Beta" we're not even discussing balance. I think everyone will agree Balance is better now than it was then.

No what we're talking about is things like Better Sounds, Better Graphics [paint pealing back to reveal damaged internal structure, instead of simple black charing we have now on damaged areas], Inverse Kinematics, useable jump jets, no consumables, better economy,True dubs, ect.

When I look back on my experience in the navy I think of the beautiful sunsets while cloud-surfing in a helicopter with the doors open. Seeing awesome sights, eating delicious food, and partying hard during port visits. Having 16 player Halo tournaments in my shop during down time. Kickin back, relaxin with a big dip in, talking philosophy and sharing stories...

Oh yeah, it was also f***ing miserable.

Point is, we tend to remember everything that was good, and we forget all the small, bad things. You remember better sounds, but do you remember all the pops, crackles, and dropped sounds? You remember better graphics, but do you remember how horribly low the game's framerate was at?

[Mystere]

VinJade, on 04 January 2016 - 04:22 AM, said:

But at least the game is being created by 'actual' BTers.

I tend to doubt someone is an "actual BTer" when they insist that MWO gameplay involves a clan company made up of 3 Clan lances of 4 mechs each.

Edited by Mystere, 04 January 2016 - 11:26 AM.