188 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Fade Akira, on 08 June 2016 - 03:42 PM, said:

PGI have done a great job with MWO ...

What? Where are the original four pillars again?

[GenghisJr]

I wouldnt even know about MWO if it werent for Blizzard, I was watching Husky call SC games and i clicked on a link for one of Cattra's vids, that was in 2013 and here I am now.
Not interested in Overwatch, at least I had heard of it, I like MWO for the simulator style combat, customization & team play.

[Sable]

This whole comparison is moot anyway. How long has PGI been developing the game? How long does Blizzard take to develop a game? If you didn't know Blizzard was working on the MMO Titan for 7 freakin years and ultimately the project failed and then some of it's design and concepts morphed into Overwatch.which took another 2 years to develop. Just look how long it took them between starcraft brood war and starcraft 2. I don't think you quite get the trend in online games these days. Play it as it's developed and be a part of the process, OR wait 5-10 years for a nicely polished game.

And again why does everyone glorify overwatch, it's just another Team fortress/titanfall/halo/modern warfare rehash. People will get bored with it in a few months.

Edited by Sable, 08 June 2016 - 09:06 PM.

[Raggedyman]

RedDragon, on 08 June 2016 - 07:08 AM, said:

So basically new IP with no fans on an oversaturated market
vs
Established IP with many hardcore fans who you could sell a lump of coal if it was titled Battletech (no offense meant, I'm one of them, we're just that loyal) without any real competitor on the market right now
?

Also: PGI has had 5 years now and a steady cashflow. Even if it was a one man company, the game should by all rights be better and more complete than it is now.
Yes, they are a kinda small studio (but really not that small by market standards). But even a small studio should be able to accomplish something beside pumping out purchasable mechs for 4 years after the basic game was done.

My gosh, your right.
This is why Napalm Death are playing Wembley every other week and One Direction are squatting in obscurity.

I also happily agree that Blizzard has no fan base to work from and that targeting an FPS at people that don't normally play FPS's means they were gunning for a fully filled up market.

65 Employees is also pretty much indistinguishable from the several thousand that work at Blizzard, because once you get over 5 numbers stop happening unless you want to be picky. This is also why MWO is still exactly the same game that it was at launch, if you ignore everything that's been added since launch because we came here to play a mech game and adding different game modes or weapons or maps or campaign modes or anything mech game related just doesn't count!

((Hint, the above may have contained sarcasm))

[RedDragon]

Raggedyman, on 08 June 2016 - 09:50 PM, said:

My gosh, your right.
This is why Napalm Death are playing Wembley every other week and One Direction are squatting in obscurity.

I also happily agree that Blizzard has no fan base to work from and that targeting an FPS at people that don't normally play FPS's means they were gunning for a fully filled up market.

65 Employees is also pretty much indistinguishable from the several thousand that work at Blizzard, because once you get over 5 numbers stop happening unless you want to be picky. This is also why MWO is still exactly the same game that it was at launch, if you ignore everything that's been added since launch because we came here to play a mech game and adding different game modes or weapons or maps or campaign modes or anything mech game related just doesn't count!

((Hint, the above may have contained sarcasm))

Blizzard may have a fan base, the game does not. Naturally a game from Blizzard will be a hit no matter what, but to belittle MW just because the IP is 30 years old doesn't make any sense. There are a lot of loyal fans for a MW game as a basis, and if done right (if e.g. Blizzard would do it) the game could get as many new fans as any other new game out there.

So, I am interested. What exactly did change in MWO since 2013? There are no new weapons (except Clan stuff, which mostly are the same weapons with new graphics and some tweaks to an XML file). There is a handfull new (badly designed) maps, but not nearly enough for 5 years of development. I hope you were joking about "different game modes and campaign modes". The only thing they changed in the last 5 years was a new capture mechanic for the same basic game mode that was already there. The only new thing is CW, and here the changes are some destroyable buildings and a star map that a fan mod team could program you in one week.
5 years and there is no meaningful end game content, no AI units, no game mode that differs from team death match with an optional capture goal, no leagues, no economy, no information warfare. Hell, there are not even decals (despite being worked on for years if we are to believ the devs), no hangar you could explore - not even basic things as water slowing down a mech.

So yes, for 5 years of development they have basically to show nothing, and that's no real hyperbole. Everything they added since Closed Beta (apart from new mechs) could have been done by a hobby mod team in under a year. Just look at MW:LL. They did basically the same as PGI (and in many ways a lot better), on the same engine, without having consultants from Crytek, and all in their free time with a team of like 20 guys.

There is just no excuse for this game to be in the state it is in now, with only a fracture of the design pillars in place that were promised 2011/12. We threw so much money at them, and everything we got over the last 5 years was purchasable content and half finished features that most people never even wanted (3PV, consumables).

And even IF PGI pushes out new content, even someone without any idea about porgramming can see that they have either no clue what they are doing or rush content out without any quality control (or most likely both). Or how do you rate that the lead designer has to freaking MOR THAN HALF the damage of Long Toms after a day because it broke the whole game? We are not talking about a point more or less here and there, but a reduction from 700 to 300 points of damage, and no one in the Dev team has noticed that beforehand. And this is just one of the most recent blunders from PGI, not to talk about 3PV which was totally broken at introduction, or, god beware, ECM, which now, after 2 years or so is finally in some sort of balanced place (and still sucks as a game mechanic).

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

I'm surprised at people saying overwatch is a good game.

It seems to me the quality of blizzard's games have been steadily declining.

Is there any real progress or advancement in overwatch from old fps shooters like golden eye 007 for N64?

[Juodas Varnas]

I Zeratul I, on 09 June 2016 - 02:01 AM, said:

I'm surprised at people saying overwatch is a good game.

It seems to me the quality of blizzard's games have been steadily declining.

Is there any real progress or advancement in overwatch from old fps shooters like golden eye 007 for N64?

Uhh, you're implying like it's even possible to improve upon perfection that is Golden Eye.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

snip

It's just how f2p games in ongoing development look like. Once the game is out and there are fires to put down, exploits to remove, various compatibility issues to solve, balance problems to smoothen, servers to keep operational, bugs to remove, cryouts from the community to respond to somehow, etc. etc. the development starts getting really slow. Whine all you want, literally every f2p title has THE SAME problems. At least every single one I played so far or have any contact with.

Did PGI could do things better? Surely, even a lot better. Yet somehow, nobody does it much better than PGI. I'm no fan of Battletech or Mechwarrior, I just stumbled at this game by accident. Played WoT in the past, but left because of bad design decisions, lack of actual development, attempts to simplify the gameplay to cather to complete casuals and incompetence of the devs. Played WT, but left because of bad design decisions, lack of actual development, grind and hidden p2w elements. Played a niche thing called APB Reloaded, but left over too twitchy gameplay, lack of actual development, grind and certain p2w elements. Went here and despite that there still are signs of bad design decision, slow actual development (4vs4 I like) and dev incompetence here and there, it's significantly less bad overall than anything competition has to offer.

There is quite a number of things I'm not happy about in this game. Not being a BT or Mechwarrior veteran, If there was a better game competing with it in the vehicle-based team pvp MMO I would probably leave MWO in an instant. But there isn't. Play any 'competitor' title in this niche for as long as you played MWO, I'll bet you'll be at least as dissapointed in that other game.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 09 June 2016 - 02:32 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Also: Show me a game that gets MORE complex after release.

Developers always end up simplifying the game to attract a broader player base. Always.

Sadly

[Kaeb Odellas]

KHETTI, on 08 June 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

And Titanfall 2 will have the same hype too and most likely will be garbage like the first title.

The first Titanfall was fine. It would have had more legs if it had more content and variety.

I Zeratul I, on 09 June 2016 - 02:01 AM, said:

I'm surprised at people saying overwatch is a good game.

It seems to me the quality of blizzard's games have been steadily declining.

Is there any real progress or advancement in overwatch from old fps shooters like golden eye 007 for N64?

Are you trolling, or merely ignorant? The only thing GoldenEye did was make a 3D FPS work on a console. That is it. Even then it did not compare to shooters on PC at the time. Quake was released a year before for gods' sakes.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 09 June 2016 - 03:16 AM.

[Raggedyman]

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

Blizzard may have a fan base, the game does not.

They have a couple million players. They spent months selling the game at those players, and the game press spent years hyping up the game because it was going to be the next Blizzard product.
It could have been a reskin of Farmville and it would have had a million sales on the first day.
To say otherwise is to fundamentally misunderstand how games marketing works.

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

but to belittle MW just because the IP is 30 years old doesn't make any sense.

I'm not belittling it. An IP still being around after 30 years is a massive accomplisment and shows it's strength.
It's just that it is a niche product and with its complicated mechanics it is going contra to the market.

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

There are a lot of loyal fans for a MW game as a basis, and if done right (if e.g. Blizzard would do it) the game could get as many new fans as any other new game out there.

There really aren't, at least not when compared to Blizzard products.
They have millions of people try their products each year

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

So, I am interested. What exactly did change in MWO since 2013?

Okay, I accept it
Yes, Nothing has changed or been added to MWO, if you ignore all the things that have been changed or added.
And Blizzard have ditched nothing that they promised, if you ignore all the things they ditched
And they have patched nothing, if you ignore all the things they have patched

MechWarrior would indeed be a much bigger game if one of the worlds largest games companies, with over a thousand staff and millions in their marketing budget, was making it.

Well done champ, you have proven your point

your crown is in the mail.

[Meathook]

Sable, on 08 June 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

And again why does everyone glorify overwatch, it's just another Team fortress/titanfall/halo/modern warfare rehash. People will get bored with it in a few months.

Just shows you have no idea at all. Team Fortress has a playerbase MWO could only wish for. People will get bored with it in a few months? Just like the new plaxers got with MWO after a few DAYS? How many active players does MWO have at peak hours? ~2000. Huge.

Don't get me wrong, we like this game and still play it, but don't try to fool yourself and talk yourself into believing MWO is "good" or "special" and way better than other games. MWO actually has very stale gameplay and little to no variation, just look at the maps and modes. Let's be honest here, we are only here because of "Battletech", not because we are enjoying a top class FPS here.

[Johnny Z]

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

Blizzard may have a fan base, the game does not. Naturally a game from Blizzard will be a hit no matter what, but to belittle MW just because the IP is 30 years old doesn't make any sense. There are a lot of loyal fans for a MW game as a basis, and if done right (if e.g. Blizzard would do it) the game could get as many new fans as any other new game out there.

So, I am interested. What exactly did change in MWO since 2013? There are no new weapons (except Clan stuff, which mostly are the same weapons with new graphics and some tweaks to an XML file). There is a handfull new (badly designed) maps, but not nearly enough for 5 years of development. I hope you were joking about "different game modes and campaign modes". The only thing they changed in the last 5 years was a new capture mechanic for the same basic game mode that was already there. The only new thing is CW, and here the changes are some destroyable buildings and a star map that a fan mod team could program you in one week.
5 years and there is no meaningful end game content, no AI units, no game mode that differs from team death match with an optional capture goal, no leagues, no economy, no information warfare. Hell, there are not even decals (despite being worked on for years if we are to believ the devs), no hangar you could explore - not even basic things as water slowing down a mech.

So yes, for 5 years of development they have basically to show nothing, and that's no real hyperbole. Everything they added since Closed Beta (apart from new mechs) could have been done by a hobby mod team in under a year. Just look at MW:LL. They did basically the same as PGI (and in many ways a lot better), on the same engine, without having consultants from Crytek, and all in their free time with a team of like 20 guys.

There is just no excuse for this game to be in the state it is in now, with only a fracture of the design pillars in place that were promised 2011/12. We threw so much money at them, and everything we got over the last 5 years was purchasable content and half finished features that most people never even wanted (3PV, consumables).

And even IF PGI pushes out new content, even someone without any idea about porgramming can see that they have either no clue what they are doing or rush content out without any quality control (or most likely both). Or how do you rate that the lead designer has to freaking MOR THAN HALF the damage of Long Toms after a day because it broke the whole game? We are not talking about a point more or less here and there, but a reduction from 700 to 300 points of damage, and no one in the Dev team has noticed that beforehand. And this is just one of the most recent blunders from PGI, not to talk about 3PV which was totally broken at introduction, or, god beware, ECM, which now, after 2 years or so is finally in some sort of balanced place (and still sucks as a game mechanic).

Belittle Battletech because its 30 years old? That may its strongest point considering the strongest title for movies or games and toys and comics etc by light years ever is Star Wars and that's got to be nearly 40 years...

By the way according to Game Spot there is 5 game studios working on Star Wars games at this moment and there is a new Star Wars movie coming out every year, yes every year, for the foreseeable future.

I consider Battletech to be Star Wars only competitor as a matter of fact as well as the Mass Effect Universe. Maybe Titanfall 2 will be in the running. Other than that unless I missed something there isn't any other competition, definitely none coming from the motion picture side of things. Enlighten me if I missed something, which is entirely possible if anyone wants.

None of the competition compares with MechWarrior and Battletech factions. Only Star Trek at the moment and that has issues in the awsome department.

Final Fantasy has issues with being all over the place over the years with its story is its weakness. Robotech and Star Wars only have 2 factions. The others have similar weaknesses.

Also don't bring any of the Super Hero franchise into this, they make all these fictions I just mentioned look like fact based documentaries. Not to mention they can barely manage to flip half successful movies with tons of hype let alone anything else.

Edited by Johnny Z, 09 June 2016 - 05:55 AM.

[Thorn Hallis]

Juodas Varnas, on 09 June 2016 - 02:10 AM, said:

Uhh, you're implying like it's even possible to improve upon perfection that is Golden Eye.

It is...Perfect Dark (on N64).

RedDragon, on 09 June 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

Just look at MW:LL. They did basically the same as PGI (and in many ways a lot better), on the same engine, without having consultants from Crytek, and all in their free time with a team of like 20 guys.

MWLL uses Cry Engine 2, while MWO uses Cry Engine 3. And weren't two of the devs employed at Crytek?

Edited by Thorn Hallis, 09 June 2016 - 05:36 AM.

[Rhaythe]

Juodas Varnas, on 09 June 2016 - 02:10 AM, said:

Uhh, you're implying like it's even possible to improve upon perfection that is Golden Eye.

Well....

[meteorol]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 June 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

If you loved Diablo2 as much as I did (I played it almost every other day for almost 14 years) then I bet you'd love Path of Exile.

Dunno, D2 is easily my most played game ever (started with day 1 vanilla release, last thing i did was several finished selffound HC runs early 2014) but PoE wasn't able to attract me more than a few hours.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Hit the Deck, on 08 June 2016 - 10:58 AM, said:

Wat no. I decided to not play SC2 because they turned the story into a romance rivaling Twilight.


Well, we still need to thank PGI for at least making a BT game. Was there any developer/publisher remotely interested in the IP at all?

to be honest there still isn't, the thing is you need publishers that are passionate about the BT universe. Say what you want but PGI at least fit that bill. I think Russ initially came in here with an idea and the drive; However their studio didn't have the experience but learned over the years.

[Johnny Z]

Meathook, on 09 June 2016 - 05:06 AM, said:

Just shows you have no idea at all. Team Fortress has a playerbase MWO could only wish for. People will get bored with it in a few months? Just like the new plaxers got with MWO after a few DAYS? How many active players does MWO have at peak hours? ~2000. Huge.

Don't get me wrong, we like this game and still play it, but don't try to fool yourself and talk yourself into believing MWO is "good" or "special" and way better than other games. MWO actually has very stale gameplay and little to no variation, just look at the maps and modes. Let's be honest here, we are only here because of "Battletech", not because we are enjoying a top class FPS here.

I cant stand team Fortress 2. It was ahead of the pack by being an interesting team based game that was free to play with no competition backed by Steam. Its not that good and is living off past successes.

Your also wrong about every single other word in your reply. If the game play in MechWarrior was stale or like anything else you said I would agree with you. Its being held back by pro trolls in game and maybe on the forums to, and no advertising. A distant third is slow process of making the game feature complete and not a lot of prototypes.

Last of all if your suggesting that Overwatch is half the game MechWarrior Online is then I laugh loud and long. HA HA HA If a fairly minimal amount of time doesn't prove me right then obviously I'm wrong. If anyone is playing Overwatch in 6 months I will admit I'm wrong. Make that 2 months.

Edited by Johnny Z, 09 June 2016 - 05:41 AM.

[The Basilisk]

GRiPSViGiL, on 08 June 2016 - 06:36 AM, said:

Ironic considering MWO is a FPS.

No....it isn't...or better it should not be...(ok PGI droped development of some of the sim elements)
It's more a tac sim.

But hey...there may be the problem right. Customer focus and identification.
MWO has to become even less childish twitch shooter and more Mechsim.

Edited by The Basilisk, 09 June 2016 - 05:44 AM.

[Juodas Varnas]

Rhaythe, on 09 June 2016 - 05:13 AM, said:

Well....