98 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 June 2016 - 01:50 PM, said:

meh

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 27 June 2016 - 02:28 PM.

[Novakaine]

Malleus011, on 27 June 2016 - 02:11 PM, said:

Sadly, I think MWO should charge hard for eSports and Solaris VII dueling arena.

At least a fragment of the competitive crowd is still here and still playing, and those who have left likely lack the bitterness of burned founders. If they quit, it was likely out of boredom, not disappointment.

They've squandered the goodwill of the Battletech fanbase, most of whom have left. If they turned hard towards lore, community warfare, and strategy, some would return, but most of them are gone and never coming back. That's the direction I'd rather they took, but at this point, that's probably a losing direction. They lost their window to be the next big Battletech/Mechwarrior franchise game.

They might still be able to salvage an action shooter, but that's it.

Yes they squandered it, but I still maintain things say like Aerotech could reinvigorate the game.
The fanbase and their pocketbook.
Like Bishop said PGI may not want to be known as a Battletech developer, but they own it now.
PGI just needs to known they own it.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Novakaine, on 27 June 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

Yes they squandered it, but I still maintain things say like Aerotech could reinvigorate the game.

More like make it worse, at least if we are talking about combined arms. Who needs light mechs when you have aerospace fighters.

Combined arms has more potential to make this game worse than it does better imo.

An aerospace companion game would be pointless to me, considering I don't really trust PGI to make it good.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

I don't know about direction.

But I do wonder if they might not be better off getting things right the 1st time so they don't have to go back and redo things over and over.

Example of this -- the GUI interface. It wasn't done correctly the first time & they've had to go back and redo it 2 or 3 times.

The heat system. They didn't get it right the first time. They had to redo it with ghost heat, then they'll redo it again with ghost heat 2.0.

The hardpoints system. Didn't get it right the first time. Its being redone as we speak.

Mech scaling. Didn't get it right the first time. Had to go back and to redo it. Won't be surprised if it needs to be redone again in the future.

Jump jets. Were redone at least once.

Mech quirks. Needed to go back and adjust them multiple times.

Weapons balance. Weapon values edited and changed multiple times.

If there is one area that is slowing down progress it could be constantly having to go back and fix things that weren't built correctly the first time around.

Then again, it could simply be standard procedure. Pixar studios has had to go back and rewrite the entire script for some of their movies. It could all be part of the standard devleopment process that people aren't aware of as they don't normally get to see what happens behind the scenes.

I have to imagine its difficult to move forward with Solaris, PvE or anything else if makeovers are constantly being re-done on existing features.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 27 June 2016 - 02:53 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 27 June 2016 - 02:47 PM, said:

More like make it worse, at least if we are talking about combined arms. Who needs light mechs when you have aerospace fighters.

Combined arms has more potential to make this game worse than it does better imo.

An aerospace companion game would be pointless to me, considering I don't really trust PGI to make it good.

That's true, but somewhat a side point. There are also plenty who simply don't have interest in WC type games. That said it would have been a better direction and attempted use of resources than the direction chosen which only further undermined people's confidence in PGIs ability to deliver. At least an Aerotech game would have made some degree of sense, even if only to capitalize on the Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous hooplah of the time as a way to expand the Mechwarrior IP.

But after almost 2 years of fervent discontent, to pretty blindly throw out "We're making a wingcommander rip off...in fact we even bought the rights to the IP (supposedly) but didn't make it WC out of respect to Chris Roberts (piss on Chris Roberts) after all the nonsense of 2013, before they even had remotely started (for a short while anyhow) repairing their image with their jilted customer base?

That's business blindness to the worst degree.

[Bishop Steiner]

I Zeratul I, on 27 June 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

I don't know about direction.

But I do wonder if they might not be better off getting things right the 1st time so they don't have to go back and redo things over and over.

Example of this -- the GUI interface. It wasn't done correctly the first time & they've had to go back and redo it 2 or 3 times.

The heat system. They didn't get it right the first time. They had to redo it with ghost heat, then they'll redo it again with ghost heat 2.0.

The hardpoints system. Didn't get it right the first time. Its being redone as we speak.

Mech scaling. Didn't get it right the first time. Had to go back and to redo it. Won't be surprised if it needs to be redone again in the future.

Jump jets. Were redone at least once.

Mech quirks. Needed to go back and adjust them multiple times.

Weapons balance. Weapon values edited and changed multiple times.

If there is one area that is slowing down progress it could be constantly having to go back and fix things that weren't built correctly the first time around.

Then again, it could simply be standard procedure. Pixar studios has had to go back and rewrite the entire script for some of their movies. It could all be part of the standard devleopment process that people aren't aware of as they don't normally get to see what happens behind the scenes.

I have to imagine its difficult to move forward with Solaris, PvE or anything else if makeovers are constantly being re-done on existing features.

Always better to do it right the first time. The only vague and weak defense I can even muster for PGI....is in most of those cases those were the first time they ever attempted any of the above... which is a heck of a lot harder to get right the very fist time, than when you have experience at making something, and still get things wrong when you introduce them.

IMO the more off putting part of all those failures was more the rather blithe "we know what we're doing^tm" demeanor and attitude they pushed when they obviously didn't. It's pretty funny how overall accepting this playerbase (mostly) has been when PGI just admitted they were in over their heads on something. Which in reality has been nearly every step of the way, besides Alex's artwork.

[DaZur]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 June 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

IMO the more off-putting part of all those failures was more the rather blithe "we know what we're doing^tm" demeanor and attitude they pushed when they obviously didn't. It's pretty funny how overall accepting this player base (mostly) has been when PGI just admitted they were in over their heads on something. Which in reality has been nearly every step of the way, besides Alex's artwork.

Once you commit to self-promotion it's hard to redact... I don't care who you are. It's further exacerbated when you continue to defend ones own hubris by being even more arrogant and narrow-minded.

[Xyroc]

I know I'd like (and most others ) to see some large scale battles for Faction Warfare. Tanks, infantry, etc assaulting a base that isnt just two gates behind some mt. walls.

[Davers]

Just my 2 cents :

Changing stance from "CW is a pillar of the game" to "exports is a pillar of the game" has been pretty shifty bait and switch.

Having a esport mode that is fundamentally different than casual play mode shows incredibly poor planning. If the game is best played, and presumably more balanced, at 8v8 with locked weight class balancing, why isn't that the standard game mode?

As has been mentioned previously, PGI hasn't really planned things since day one, and it keeps coming back to bite them.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 June 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

Always better to do it right the first time. The only vague and weak defense I can even muster for PGI....is in most of those cases those were the first time they ever attempted any of the above... which is a heck of a lot harder to get right the very fist time, than when you have experience at making something, and still get things wrong when you introduce them.

IMO the more off putting part of all those failures was more the rather blithe "we know what we're doing^tm" demeanor and attitude they pushed when they obviously didn't. It's pretty funny how overall accepting this playerbase (mostly) has been when PGI just admitted they were in over their heads on something. Which in reality has been nearly every step of the way, besides Alex's artwork.

I'm clueless, bro. I'm sure a lot of people myself included have thought they could do better than PGI at times. But none of us ever got around to putting that assumption to the test because its too much work lol. On that basis, I have to give PGI credit. Who knows what really happens behind the scenes. There could be a valid explanation for everything. I don't care if they're arrogant or make mistakes. I just hope they find some way of fixing things and possibly not making the same mistakes over and over.

Davers, on 27 June 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

If the game is best played, and presumably more balanced, at 8v8 with locked weight class balancing, why isn't that the standard game mode?

The explanation for going with cry engine was that there weren't many games being developed for that platform. MWO could gain more exposure since they were one of the few using that technology.

12 vs 12 over 8 vs 8 might also been done for marketing reasons If your game supports 12 vs 12 that could give it a marketing advantage over games that support fewer max players.

[adamts01]

Novakaine, on 27 June 2016 - 12:07 PM, said:

If PGI was smart crowd funding a PVE environment would work.
Human's have short memories even most of us salty vets.

I think the number of us that would fund another of PGI's projects is pretty small. As I see it, four years later they still haven't delivered on their first promise.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 27 June 2016 - 02:47 PM, said:

More like make it worse, at least if we are talking about combined arms. Who needs light mechs when you have aerospace fighters.

Combined arms has more potential to make this game worse than it does better imo.

An aerospace companion game would be pointless to me, considering I don't really trust PGI to make it good.

PGI can't make a good LRM20, they can't make a combined arms game. As much as I want it, they'd absolutely butcher it. As for obsoleting lights, not necessarily. Much bigger maps, double LRM ranges and speeds, invisible tag, remove the ability for tanks and aircraft to lock targets and that will give lights something to do.

[TheArisen]

Lots of good points being made.

I've messaged Tina with this thread, hopefully it gets through.

[MadcatX]

Davers, on 27 June 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

Having a esport mode that is fundamentally different than casual play mode shows incredibly poor planning. If the game is best played, and presumably more balanced, at 8v8 with locked weight class balancing, why isn't that the standard game mode?

Being a huge fan of 8v8, I always wondered why PGI who stated a while back that they wouldn't go back from 12v12 went with 8v8 for the tourney as well.

[ArmandTulsen]

50 MISSION CAMPAIGN MODE.

$50.

I'LL GIVE AWAY MY MONEY.

/caps

[Weeny Machine]

I think it will go into the direction of "buy one more mechpack"

Which means I gave up the hope that we will get something which gives you a long-term goal as a player like House vs House warfare or IS vs Clans (sorry, not that screwed up CW)

[Haakon Magnusson]

It is not such much the lack of direction, than the lack of vision.

Sure, some people at PGI have these brief glimpses of what the game should be.. but there is no arching vision which would give them the direction to move to.

There is no burning compassion in their eyes like HBS guys, who seem to have an idea where they want to go even though if they might not know exact steps (Well, I'd say they are well on their way now but...) This is what PGI would need.

And frankly, I have so very rare seen any of the "top brass" spouting anything of lore, so is it any wonder that the direction is somewhat bland.
(Again, some people there do get the lore... and if you are making lore based game, that should be the first thing you build from. No wonder Alex renditions of mechs are great, they have a firm founding in lore, pseudo-techical feasibility and will to go beyond the few, sometimes very sad, pictures of original mechs)

[Baulven]

Honestly could we seriously get them to consider a mapmaker? it would free up the art team to focus on mechs, you run a monthly contest with a small prize, and you could look into a variety of other options that would help flesh out the game (i.e. aerotech and air assets, ground assets, etc.) If the game had more things then an extremely simple 12v12 deathmatch game after game it would be more immersive and better overall. The community would probably give you a dozen polished maps in a month without too much hassle. Other than a quick QA check over it would be super simple. Give whoever wins 300 MC so they can buy a mech bay or hoard it like a dragon. Either way it would speed up mech production (and thus sales) it would allow game modes to be focused on and fixed, it would allow new ideas to be tried and it would be a net gain for PGI.

[ArmandTulsen]

Baulven, on 28 June 2016 - 12:44 AM, said:

Honestly could we seriously get them to consider a mapmaker? it would free up the art team to focus on mechs, you run a monthly contest with a small prize, and you could look into a variety of other options that would help flesh out the game (i.e. aerotech and air assets, ground assets, etc.) If the game had more things then an extremely simple 12v12 deathmatch game after game it would be more immersive and better overall. The community would probably give you a dozen polished maps in a month without too much hassle. Other than a quick QA check over it would be super simple. Give whoever wins 300 MC so they can buy a mech bay or hoard it like a dragon. Either way it would speed up mech production (and thus sales) it would allow game modes to be focused on and fixed, it would allow new ideas to be tried and it would be a net gain for PGI.

Seriously, THIS SO MUCH.

It'll save them a lot of time, and all they have to do is tweak maps. CW will be FULL of maps in no time.

[ArmandTulsen]

It should turn left.

TURN LEFT, DAMNIT!