116 replies to this topic

[Appogee]

Smoked, on 30 April 2016 - 05:22 AM, said:

While I want to support PGI in its quest for improvement,

But PGI is clearly not questing for improvement. That is actually the problem.

Their quest appears to have been to wrap a minimally viable product in bandaids for as long as they can keep punters buying Mech skins.

BTW, thank you for being the only person I know who has spent more on MWO than I have

Edited by Appogee, 01 May 2016 - 01:50 PM.

[Appogee]

W T F.

I bought $1500 of Mechs ... but now PGI wants me to spend MC for the 'privilege' of saving more than two drop decks...?

Monetising long-overdue core game functionality is NOT ON, PGI.

Edited by Appogee, 01 May 2016 - 01:50 PM.

[Bud Crue]

Appogee, on 01 May 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

W T F.

I bought $1500 of Mechs ... but now PGI wants me to spend MC for the 'privilege' of save more than two drop decks...?

Monetising long-overdue core game functionality is NOT ON, PGI.

Testify.

Alas, since PGI knows best it is not for us to question or complain. Be grateful that they decided to finally introduce this absurdly obvious functionality which actually supports the sole way in which they fund their game (moar mechs!). It is pure coincidence that it is being introduced now after countless complaints and entreaties by the community for it. It is part of their master plan no doubt.

On a serious note: I'm happy it is finally being introduced. It sucks that they are going to make us pay for more than a couple of decks, but I will take what I can get.

Edited by Bud Crue, 01 May 2016 - 05:58 AM.

[Smoked]

^ Well I guess that's the PGI free to play model. Any intuitive game feature will now cost you $10, such as having multiple drop decks from the hundreds of mech bays that you own with the hundreds of mechs that you have bought with cash. But now they want you to buy drop decks for a portion of the game that they are trying to promote because the population is so low. I wonder if they ever write any of their ideas on paper and just read it aloud just to see if it makes sense. Perhaps the logic in Canada is different than the US so I'm blinded by what I may consider universally accepted common sense and reasonable logic to be a local bias on my part.

Some of the things Russ says makes my head explode such as his infamous statement about how PGI is selling mechs one chassis at a time to save the players money. His initial reasoning for the Marauder made sense that PGI is afraid of Harmony Gold therefore they will start releasing mechs one at a time to see if they get sued. However after seeing how much more profit they can rake in with less work overall, they just kept that price plan and extended it to all future releases.

I definitely understand that PGI is a business and that I have the option to purchase anything they have available. However many founders such as myself that have been spending about a $500 to $1,000 a year on this game are going to stop funding a product that does so many things to money grab constantly instead of just finishing the game like they should. As expected, most Steam players have left after 3 months. Many have bought nothing. Most of the recruited twitch streamers that got a lot of rewards for adding MWO to their game rotation have stopped broadcasting MWO completely.

PGI just needs to sit down and analyze why their game isn't good enough to keep non Battle Tech fans interested for very long. There are many glaring unfinished holes in this game and maybe they just need to acknowledge the weaknesses and spend time on fixing it instead of working on October's new mech chassis release that you can buy in May. Maybe next Town Hall meeting, instead of pitching another mech chassis, they can talk about the Steam experiment and some real metrics (not PGI made up or modified numbers) and lessons learned so that the primary stakeholders, the people that buy their products and provide the funds to keep the game going, are kept in the loop.

[L1f3H4ck]

Did I hear that correctly? Energy Draw? I have a bad feeling about this. Like they're not about to fix the heatscale, but throw another system on top of it.

[Emilio Lizardo]

"It is what it is."

That's avoiding responsibility.

YOU ARE IN CHARGE. IT IS WHAT YOU MAKE IT.

Take responsibility. Man up.

Overwhelmed? Lost? Get help, hire consultants, surge on temporary talent hires and make the changes the game needs.

What are your goals? Guide the game into the grave or realize its potential?

[Smoked]

Frechdachs, on 01 May 2016 - 10:24 AM, said:

Did I hear that correctly? Energy Draw? I have a bad feeling about this. Like they're not about to fix the heatscale, but throw another system on top of it.

Well that's just par for the course. There was an existing system called Battle Value used to balance the number of mechs, based on their weapons, mechs, tech, etc., on each side. Instead PGI developed the quirk system to "balance" the mechs so that they become "equal." If they follow the World of Tanks model, they tiered their tanks into 10 different tiers realizing that there were signficant differences in performance in the various tanks. However PGI just added quirks to equal all these mechs out for "balance." Then they implemented a PSR system to balance the teams for player skills, splitting the small player pool up even more. So many variables, so many items that require tweaking, revisiting, and liabilities against new mechs that come to meet this "balance" system so that it has to be constantly re-evaluated. But PGI isn't the model of efficacy nor efficiency.

In other market segments where they have to be competitive and put out quality products without excuses, "it is what it is" won't work. PGI would've been long out of business in another market segment. Imagine if Ford, who infamously made the Pinto, would've answered, "it is what it is." They delivered on many of the requirements of the Pinto, which was to provide an affordable, economical vehicle, that was cheap to design and produce and required very little maintenance. However they knowingly allowed a vehicle an obvious flaw to be released to the public but took ownership when it became a big issue for the public.

PGI, the non-Battletech players have spoken through the Steam release. While we, the long time supporters tried to tweak those Steam numbers to help you out, there aren't many players that are still playing from the Steam release. There will not be a new infusion of players unless the world thinks that a 3 to 4 year old game with a low population is worth trying out, all of a sudden.

We realize that the time is ticking for MWO. There will not be an incredible influx of new players. PGI just needs to try to hold on to the players and patrons they have. If they just followed some of the other games that were successful with their community channels (where it allowed players to chat with people that were not on your friend's list in a lobby), implemented 4v4, 8v8 for CW earlier, had immersive PVE missions where it counted toward the planet ownership/defense, implemented MC rewards earlier for CW like people have been saying for the past 2 years or so, etc. With a lobby, a lot of the wayward new (Steam) players that wanted to try out the game without searching the internet and forums for quick advice, would've found some answers quickly. They could've asked a lot of build questions, etc. without having to search youtube, twitch and the forums.

PGI forgot that today's generation wants to jump into a game and start playing and have fun right away. They don't want to spend hours learning about a game to do okay at it. They want to find instant mentors and teachers and start interacting with a community of fellow gamers that love the game. Instead they relied on Twitch for popular World of Tanks streamers and similar Twitch personalities to try to sell their audience on MWO. Many of these guys did it for a few days or weeks but many got tired of the game because it becomes very repetitive. If you are not a true fan of the BattleTech universe, you will find that many mechs are very similar to the average player. There aren't many achievements to get that will help you. You will not find unique salvage out on the field.

You can pat yourselves on the back every time a patch comes out, but for the average player, very little has changed since closed beta when it was 8 vs 8 to now when it's 12 vs 12 in quick play in three years. Many successful games have been developed and released during that time frame. Not sure why I'm wasting yet more time on this post because "it is what it is."

[Dan Nashe]

I always find I disagree with most posters, so I assume everyone feels the same about mine.

I regret that the only two options on the table were xlan v IS and 10 factions. Lore supports 4-5 easily. Maybe as a test? Crusader (falcon, jag), Warden (wolf, g bear), liao/marik/kurita, davion/steiner.

As a compromise, FRR can continue to exist. FRR can't fight other houses, any IS can help FRR. FRR can defend against any clan attack. A planet captured by FRR goes to original IS owner, if an IS house captures an FRR planet it goes to FRR. The unit that tags can get the rewards still. I mean 30 mc is like 100,000 cbills, even the smallest house can burn that. If the lack of IS v IS in 3050 for FRR players makes the faction a minor house thatvs fine :-).

Rotate attack lanes between factions. Bend lore a bit obviously (wolf helping gbear directly obviously a little odd. But at least they share goals.

Each faction should have one IS and one Clan attack lane.

A units tags only count on the 6 most valuable planets they have majority tags on, so if KCOM has 9/10 tags on 10 planets, and SomeGuys have the remaining 1/10, some guys get crsdit for the 4 least valuable. So one dominant unit won't eat all mc.

/shrug. But sure my idea is no more popular than others, I never claim to be right, just like to be considered!

[R79TCom1 Night Lanner]

All I can say is can we get the new 'Mech's name pronounced correctly. Gyrfalcon is pronounced "jur-fawl-kuh n," "jur-fal-kuh n," or "jur-faw-kuh n"

Not "y-ear," not "j-eye-r," and not "j-ear."

So it is "Night-Jur."

Edited by R79TCom1 Night Lanner, 03 May 2016 - 01:02 PM.

[Sereglach]

Frechdachs, on 01 May 2016 - 10:24 AM, said:

Did I hear that correctly? Energy Draw? I have a bad feeling about this. Like they're not about to fix the heatscale, but throw another system on top of it.

You mean like what they did to Flamers, instead of actually fixing them? Yeah . . . that's about what I'm expecting, here. My expectations are not high at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given Russ's attitude from this town hall, and the numerous statements he made, I'm not spending any money on MWO for the forseeable future. Not even if they properly fixed Flamers (as promised in December of 2013) would I spend money on this game right now. These statements alone (let alone all the other atrocities and bad omens) pretty well seal that deal:

Russ Bullock - "If you want to play this game solo, unfortunately this isn't the game for you."

Russ Bullock - "It is what it is."

Those statements, and their surrounding context, made me see red. Any and all faith I had that PGI was going to do anything right with the IP pretty much died right then and there. Solo players are the majority of any game's player base, period. Without them any game will die; and PGI/Russ has apparently decided they don't give a red rat's behind about any of the solo players.

Where does PGI think it's going to get the money needed to do things like support their "World Series"? The competitors or big organizations? Not hardly, there's not enough of them. There's a reason they made the "Tournament Supporter Pack" and are marketing it to all the little guys to help support and fund the tournament. What a pile of hypocritical BS from PGI. I'm utterly disgusted and appalled.

At this point I think all I can hope for is that the IP isn't considered too toxic for anyone else to ever work with once PGI fails; and I think they're going to fail hard by the time their "World Series Final" hits.

[NocturnalBeast]

Sereglach, on 03 May 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

You mean like what they did to Flamers, instead of actually fixing them? Yeah . . . that's about what I'm expecting, here. My expectations are not high at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given Russ's attitude from this town hall, and the numerous statements he made, I'm not spending any money on MWO for the forseeable future. Not even if they properly fixed Flamers (as promised in December of 2013) would I spend money on this game right now. These statements alone (let alone all the other atrocities and bad omens) pretty well seal that deal:

Russ Bullock - "If you want to play this game solo, unfortunately this isn't the game for you."

Russ Bullock - "It is what it is."

Those statements, and their surrounding context, made me see red. Any and all faith I had that PGI was going to do anything right with the IP pretty much died right then and there. Solo players are the majority of any game's player base, period. Without them any game will die; and PGI/Russ has apparently decided they don't give a red rat's behind about any of the solo players.

Where does PGI think it's going to get the money needed to do things like support their "World Series"? The competitors or big organizations? Not hardly, there's not enough of them. There's a reason they made the "Tournament Supporter Pack" and are marketing it to all the little guys to help support and fund the tournament. What a pile of hypocritical BS from PGI. I'm utterly disgusted and appalled.

At this point I think all I can hope for is that the IP isn't considered too toxic for anyone else to ever work with once PGI fails; and I think they're going to fail hard by the time their "World Series Final" hits.

I have been playing MWO since June of 2012 and I lost track of how many times I have heard that PGI / MWO is about to "fail". Even though charging is to save more than two dropdecks is a very bad decision, I doubt that it will be the nail in the coffin for MWO.

shopsmart, on 28 April 2016 - 04:50 PM, said:

Only issue and question I got. What is going to be done to curb laser vomit.

Cooldown increase?

Duration increase?

Seems like it might actually work...

Pillow fight Online!

[Sereglach]

Ed Steele, on 03 May 2016 - 05:28 PM, said:

I have been playing MWO since June of 2012 and I lost track of how many times I have heard that PGI / MWO is about to "fail". Even though charging is to save more than two dropdecks is a very bad decision, I doubt that it will be the nail in the coffin for MWO.

You missed a pretty major point. Russ blatantly came out and said that he doesn't think MWO is a game for people who want to play as solo players (in-context as non-unit players who are queuing up and dropping into matches not in a member of any group). THAT, combined with his lack of regard and negative attitude for the new player experience, is the kind of attitude that will be the death knell of MWO.

It is also reflected in the stats of how quickly MWO is losing Steam players. Since the December steam launch MWO has already lost 40% of its average player count. This "amazing CW event" has only brought back .5% of those players. About 700k installed MWO through Steam and only about 412k are considered "players" (as noted on Steam and the various Steam tracking apps . . . a 40% loss since release) and just "players" . . . not even active players (only about 5% have logged in the past two weeks, which is considered "active players"). Russ made a big deal about MWO being nearly in the "Steam Top 40" during December/January timeframe (going so far as to say with the non-Steam crowd MWO should be in the top 10) and yet now he's trying to downplay the fact that MWO is barely registering in the top 100.

The hilarious part about it is that Russ was saying in the January Town Hall that Steam was like "Relaunching the game plus quite a bit more" for the player base . . . Now Russ is saying that "Steam is a minority aspect of population". So which is it? It cannot be both. I think Russ is trying to cover his rear and dodge the rather sincere and concerned question about MWO losing such a large chunk of its Steam population over a rather notable period (one fiscal quarter, to be exact).

[NocturnalBeast]

Sereglach, on 03 May 2016 - 06:48 PM, said:

You missed a pretty major point. Russ blatantly came out and said that he doesn't think MWO is a game for people who want to play as solo players (in-context as non-unit players who are queuing up and dropping into matches not in a member of any group). THAT, combined with his lack of regard and negative attitude for the new player experience, is the kind of attitude that will be the death knell of MWO.

It is also reflected in the stats of how quickly MWO is losing Steam players. Since the December steam launch MWO has already lost 40% of its average player count. This "amazing CW event" has only brought back .5% of those players. About 700k installed MWO through Steam and only about 412k are considered "players" (as noted on Steam and the various Steam tracking apps . . . a 40% loss since release) and just "players" . . . not even active players (only about 5% have logged in the past two weeks, which is considered "active players"). Russ made a big deal about MWO being nearly in the "Steam Top 40" during December/January timeframe (going so far as to say with the non-Steam crowd MWO should be in the top 10) and yet now he's trying to downplay the fact that MWO is barely registering in the top 100.

The hilarious part about it is that Russ was saying in the January Town Hall that Steam was like "Relaunching the game plus quite a bit more" for the player base . . . Now Russ is saying that "Steam is a minority aspect of population". So which is it? It cannot be both. I think Russ is trying to cover his rear and dodge the rather sincere and concerned question about MWO losing such a large chunk of its Steam population over a rather notable period (one fiscal quarter, to be exact).

I think Russ just realized that Steam is not where most of the money comes from and is trying to focus on what the core audience wants once again.

[Sereglach]

Ed Steele, on 05 May 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

I think Russ just realized that Steam is not where most of the money comes from and is trying to focus on what the core audience wants once again.

Given how condescending his attitude was in the Town Hall, I honestly can't say I believe this for a second.

However, even if people playing MWO through Steam still need to come to the MWO website to purchase package pre-orders or buy/redeem gifts (which they do), that still completely dodges the legitimate concerns of people who are monitoring the game's dwindling stats on Steam. If Steam players aren't showing up to play on Steam then they're not going to be showing up to the MWO website to make those purchases. On the other hand, if there was no legitimate reason for concern, then Russ should have been able to handily give a reason why, such as, "Oh, the reason for the dwindling Steam stats is because more people have been downloading the independent launcher and leaving Steam behind." That would be an acceptable answer, but that doesn't appear to be the case, here. Instead, he dodged the concept entirely and was even dismissive of the Steam players by saying that they're "a minority aspect of population".

[Morggo]

My take for the little it's worth... Russ is realizing Steam does what Steam does... cater to the twitch, game of the week, this better be fun and rewarding crowd. So it's either continue turning MWO into another run of the mill CoD, or figure out how to hold onto his market by trying to figure out how to keep MWO unique from the common shooters. IF it's the latter, I'm happy.

(could also be that he simply needed a big influx of cash to get over the next dev phase and Steam gave him a one tme cash card to play...) *shrugs*

[SilentFenris]

Emilio Lizardo, on 01 May 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

"It is what it is."

That's avoiding responsibility.

YOU ARE IN CHARGE. IT IS WHAT YOU MAKE IT.

Take responsibility. Man up.

Overwhelmed? Lost? Get help, hire consultants, surge on temporary talent hires and make the changes the game needs.

What are your goals? Guide the game into the grave or realize its potential?

The consultant idea scares the _____ out of me having played during IGP's handling of MWO.

PGI has done three major things to improve MWO since Beta:
1) sack IGP
2) Community Warfare ( the original release)
3) Faction Play Phase 3.

Yes I genuniely mean that. Was Phase 3 all I wanted? No. But it was an honest attempt to add real content instead of bug fixes, more mechs, more maps, or quirk rebalancing. Solaris will be another good addition (not my cup of tea though) since there are some very vocal players asking for it for years.

Don't get me wrong, mech packs keep the lights on which is a good thing. The Academy is a wonderful idea but how many new players push tutorial before quick play? New and meaningful content is what keeps a game from a slow death.

Edited by GrayFenris, 06 May 2016 - 05:56 AM.

[David Sumner]

Dear PGI. Your Match Score calculation for scout mode is COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS. It's NOT scout mode, it's 4x4 BRAWL. Please get your head out of your fundament.