10 replies to this topic

[Berkut]

So Ive only been playing for a month or so, played a little in beta a long time ago.

I like the game a lot, but talking about what I like is kind of boring, so I want to talk about some stuff I do not like, and am wondering why it is the way it is.

The user interface in some cases is just bizarrely difficult, and I do not understand why.

A couple examples:

1. Why can't I get to the mech skill tree straight from the mech selection screen? Further, why can't I just have the mech skill selection pane only show me mechs I actually own, or maybe even mechs that I actually have skill points on? The entire thing where you have to select SKILL tab, then hunt through this long list of mechs, the vast majority of which you cannot possibly care about, is just plain bad design. And *obviously* bad design.

2. If something is possible, make it easy. If you don't want people doing it, don't let them do it at all. If it is possible to buy one copy of a mech module, and then move it to each mech, then let me do that easily. In fact, if it is possible to just buy one copy of the module, then don't ever even make me actually move it - just let me buy on meta copy and then put as many copies on as many mechs as I want. Since I *can* do that with a bunch of mouse clicks, just let me do without all the mouse clicks.

I get that maybe the inconvenience is high enough that it probably drives some people to just buy more, but that is basically forcing people to spend C-Bills to save themselves mouse clicks. That is terrible UI/X design.

Suggestion: Researching the relevant module unlocks the ability to buy a blueprint for that module, say for 5M C-Bills (for something like Radar Deprivation). Then, for each mech you want to actually place it on, you have to buy a actual module, but make it cheap, say 250k. Similar net effect, but saves me from clicking all over the place.

Or maybe there is actually good reasons for all these, which in my newbness I simply don't understand?

[Davers]

Making players buy stuff for convenience's sake is a staple of F2P design.

[SuomiWarder]

There are no good reasons for why PGI does a lot of the design the way they do. Another module option to keep us from searching through mechs is if we own one and equip it on a new mech, it automatically unequips from the mech it was previously on.

But I suppose they want us to have something extra to spend C-bills on.

[TyphonCh]

Mastering mechs and min/maxing modules is expected to be 'end game' content.
They had to make it difficult. It's like a really ****** boss fight that you have to keep doing again and again

[zagibu]

Over the years you come to realize that there is not always a reason behind things that PGI does. Sometimes they just couldn't think of a better way of doing it, or were incapable of doing it that way.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Without an actual repair/rearm mechanic, the economy hinges on you buying these things.

It's a c-bill sink, essentially. They don't want to make it easy on you. One of the tennants of F2P game design is "Time or Money." Basically either take the time to do stuff the hard way, or spend money to do things the easy way.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

SuomiWarder, on 02 April 2016 - 12:30 AM, said:

But I suppose they want us to have something extra to spend C-bills on.

Which is a bit silly IMO since if people have more cbills they'll buy more mechs which means they need more mechbays which makes PGI more money.

[GreenHell]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 02 April 2016 - 06:06 AM, said:

Which is a bit silly IMO since if people have more cbills they'll buy more mechs which means they need more mechbays which makes PGI more money.

This guy makes a lot of sense. PGI didn't think that through very hard did they?

Either way, back to OP. I think some UI changes are coming in like... June? At the very least they mentioned that the chat / friend / unit UI will merge onto the front screen (instead of being behind its own button), so there's some improvements to look forward to in future. At PGI's speed though, so give it like... 2 or 3 months.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

GreenHell, on 02 April 2016 - 06:14 AM, said:

This guy makes a lot of sense. PGI didn't think that through very hard did they?

I think PGI is trying to sell more mechs for MC but... outside of exclusive windows and hero mechs I don't think that's ever been a huge source of profits.

[Berkut]

Davers, on 01 April 2016 - 09:07 PM, said:

Making players buy stuff for convenience's sake is a staple of F2P design.

That is not even remotely true. I've played many F2P games, and none of them are as annoying as MWO in things like this.

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 02 April 2016 - 04:23 AM, said:

Without an actual repair/rearm mechanic, the economy hinges on you buying these things.

It's a c-bill sink, essentially. They don't want to make it easy on you. One of the tennants of F2P game design is "Time or Money." Basically either take the time to do stuff the hard way, or spend money to do things the easy way.

I don't mind C-Bill sinks at all - I get the economics of F2P, and am happy to give them my money.

But they should be trying to offer me something real for my money. Better consumables, premium mechs, whatever.

Not "I am going to make the UI suck so it is painful so you give me money to make it not suck so much".

That is a badly designed F2P game.

[Berkut]

People should NOT be tolerant of the "The UI sucks so you spend money to make it not suck" argument.

F2P works when the added content that people pay for gives them something real in return - not something that is just a slight lessening of the pain of poor design.

What is more, it harms the company as well. Good design will open up new and otherwise not accessible avenues for legitimate revenue. ****** design just closes those doors, and of course pisses off customers who go and play better designed F2P games.