413 replies to this topic

[Kyrie]

Love that post Koniving. One of my pet dreams at present is to due MWO's shooter-FPS mechanics with a BT'fied implementation of Heroes and Generals RTS:

- Commanders determining offensive and defensive resources located at every point on the map
Managing supplies, parts, etc
- Replace "assault team" from H&G with "Lance" for concept, organized into companies of either mercs or military units;
- Hex-Map based planet RTS system (from the MPBT 3025 document)
- Personal mechs owned for QP integrated into FP via a series of progression-achhievements (aka rank grind), not instantly available
-Development of military RPG elements to denote all aspects of FP progression (as per MPBT 3025)

[Bishop Steiner]

The Zohan, on 06 August 2016 - 01:42 PM, said:

Tbh I dont really think these two games cannibalize each other. They are just to different.

pretty simple actually.....

This game will keep the twitchy, CoD, FPS players. No doubt. But the rest, those who like RTS, Turn Based, or just actually liek the actual IP? Even if they split time evenly between BOTH games? That still them playing half as much as before. And when you play a game half as much? You are far less inclined to buy everything that comes down the pipeline, especially if you are spending money elsewhere. (No microtransaction, but there will probably be DLC, even if it's just sequel games)

Time spent playing other games is a net loss for MWO and PGi, period.

LordKnightFandragon, on 06 August 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Im not saying it cant happen, I just really hope its about that rare, 1 Manfred Von Richthofen killed by a lucky bullet in the thousands of pilots throughout WWI.

Nothing will be more annoying then that for sure....And ofc it will be your best pilot in your best mech, cuz thats just how Murphy Law works....

well, actually the casualty rates of pilots in WWI was tremendous. And a lot of them were ACEs. A lot more never lived to be aces. They don't say War is Hell because it ends like a John Wayne movie with the heroes just getting a superficial bullet wound to look even more heroic.

[Xenon Codex]

My opinion only, standard disclaimers apply...

I have a hard time just wanting to play MWO. The needless wait screens really turn me off. It usually starts off with me browsing the forums and reading some interesting tactic or mech loadout that gets me to fire up the game for a few rounds.

I also really like turn-based games, and have backed HBS's game. The preview looks great, and I'm looking forward to the release.

However, I actually expect my MWO involvement to INCREASE once HBS's game is released. They are very different games, and I expect after playing a few rounds of Battletech I'll be motivated to fire up MWO for some hands-on a$$-whupping. Turn-based is great and all, but it can be frustrating due to RNG. And nothing is better than a FPS to vent some frustration! I don't know how much I'll "buy" into MWO in the future, but I definitely see myself playing it more often.

PS: I really love the sharing of the mech models between the games...it makes the IP much more continuous for those of us not very familiar with previous BT content. From just a few years playing MWO I felt very connected with the gameplay shown in HBS's video (except those JJ, why can't my SHD jump like that???).

[JC Daxion]

The Zohan, on 06 August 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

Maybe
I was more thinking along the lines of turn based vs real time (with everything the respective modes offer), 3rd person/free cam vs real time shooter, (almost) full customization vs (almost 3025 stock config.) etc

They cater a different stroke of ppl in my opinion, the only common denominator is the BT universe. I personally will play both. And I do think it´d be wise for both devs to be close and work with each other (like they do, apparently) and maximize i.e. customer reach.

yea i completely agree here.. defiantly room for both.. Though i am one of those gamers that love all kinds of games, Adventure, strat, 4X, RTS, RPG, Deep games that take 100's of hours, and often short games that i can finish in a night. (i acutally really have started to enjoy short games, because really, how many games can you have that you need to sink 500 hours into.. Something unique, i can play in a night, and enjoy and not look back is always wonderful. Serena is one that leaps to mind, a quick hour long game that was a lot of fun about a cabin in the woods. (was an adventure game tech demo for an up coming game called asylumn) btw, if it interests you, and you wanna play, it is free, but no save, so make sure you have an hour or so to complete.

But yea.... Just like back in the late 90's/2k's we had MC and MW, so happy i have both options again.

Matt2496, on 06 August 2016 - 07:32 AM, said:

Well, if the ice cream tastes bad (Shoddy development, poor gameplay, etc), then yeah, I'll take extra sushi.

Heh,, maybe bad example,, should of said pizza.. There is no bad pizza.,. only pizza that is better than others.. But to me this is far from frozen pizza

Marauder3D, on 06 August 2016 - 10:52 AM, said:

My Davion themed merc lance:

PHX-1D Phoenix Hawk

WHM-6D Warhammer for full Armor goodness

MAD-3D because hey, it's me baby!

ENF-4R for AC 10 love

240 tons of faction specific goodness!!!!!

Heh.. one of the things i am looking forward too.. Fielding my own group that listens!

Bishop Steiner, on 06 August 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:

pretty simple actually.....

This game will keep the twitchy, CoD, FPS players. No doubt. But the rest, those who like RTS, Turn Based, or just actually liek the actual IP? Even if they split time evenly between BOTH games? That still them playing half as much as before. And when you play a game half as much? You are far less inclined to buy everything that comes down the pipeline, especially if you are spending money elsewhere. (No microtransaction, but there will probably be DLC, even if it's just sequel games)

Time spent playing other games is a net loss for MWO and PGi, period.

Totally disagree, One of the worst things for a game is people doing nothing but complaining about a game they don't like in hopes of something better coming along.. Starwars galaxies vrs SWTOR is the most perfect example.. Some people were so angry about the direction SWG took, and spent years doing nothing but bash the game, despite the game having a very loyal following. (the proof is SWG EMU) In the end SWG got canceled and the savior SWTOR launched, and it was not what people wanted, though i find the game fun, it is no SWG, but to me there was room for both.

It would of been far better had SWTOR launched, and SWG stuck around IMO, and those people that didn't like SWG had another option, and could of left it alone, and perhaps people would of found the nitch game and enjoyed it.

As the other peson said.. both games can grow, and it is lots easier to grow a game with out bitter people around complaining about it all the time. I STILL to this day see people ***** about SWG, a game that many never played past 2005, and had no idea what it actually became. For many people the game was far above what the original beta SWG was, even EMU at this point IMO does not come close in so many aspects, but still a fun game.. we will see how it continues though, as the community is strong, for an entirely volunteer devs.

If this new BT game takes those that don't like it, and gives them something they love, and this game is allowed to grow.. it will be far better off in the end. I personally hope that game is the answer for all those, but often people are disappointed by what they think they want.. I hope that is not the case.

Edited by JC Daxion, 06 August 2016 - 03:50 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 August 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:

well, actually the casualty rates of pilots in WWI was tremendous. And a lot of them were ACEs. A lot more never lived to be aces. They don't say War is Hell because it ends like a John Wayne movie with the heroes just getting a superficial bullet wound to look even more heroic.

True dat.

At the end of the day, I hope maybe they keep the Perma dead thing, but have an option to turn it off. While, yes, it is good for immersion and realism, its annoying to do all that hard work, raise a pilot up just to have them die off. Work your mechs up, earn it, dump all that into it just to have it gone. Ofc, the mech you should be able to just re-salvage unless the reactor went critical. Its doubly annoying when its to a gimmicky feeling mechanic like random headshots. I know they exist and were a part of BT, it just feels bad when playing with it.

As for preventing meta whoring mechs, if they add infantry, tanks, planes and the whole gambit, people will quickly find out that 6 PPC Stalkers simply dont work. When there is 3 platoons of infantry advancing on you and your lance is a 6 PPC Stalker, a Dual Guass Metaphract, a LPL boat and a LRM boat, you will quickly find out how useless those builds are. When the mission designs are diversified enough to more or less force a more balanced build and lance makeup, then meta goes to hell and a hand basket.

I know in like MEchcommander and MC2, I would run only big heavy hitting guns. I used to get my *** kicked in that game to.....I then started using mixed MEdium, long and short range builds, the game is actually pretty easy now, barring me being a tard and dorking up the tactical side of it.

Done right, Meta wont exist because you will have to carry a little bit of everything so that you are more prepared for different situations. There really is nothing like having a city battle, that turns into open field and your lance is equipped with machineguns, SRMs and medium lasers, but now the battlefield is more for LPL/PPC and Guass. Suddenly your **** up a creek without a paddle and sorely out of your element.

So, mechs will end up being more like the stock Marauder. 2 PPC, 1 AC5 for punch and distance, 2 ML for closer in and vehicles andstuff. Its more then overkill to use 2 PPCs on a single infantry man...machineguns and flamers might even have a use.....3 platoons of infantry ambush your big bad *** 6 PPC Stalker as it's sniping in a forest....suddenly those 6 PPCs are useless.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 06 August 2016 - 04:37 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

LordKnightFandragon, on 06 August 2016 - 04:31 PM, said:

True dat.

At the end of the day, I hope maybe they keep the Perma dead thing, but have an option to turn it off. While, yes, it is good for immersion and realism, its annoying to do all that hard work, raise a pilot up just to have them die off. Work your mechs up, earn it, dump all that into it just to have it gone. Ofc, the mech you should be able to just re-salvage unless the reactor went critical. Its doubly annoying when its to a gimmicky feeling mechanic like random headshots. I know they exist and were a part of BT, it just feels bad when playing with it.

As for preventing meta whoring mechs, if they add infantry, tanks, planes and the whole gambit, people will quickly find out that 6 PPC Stalkers simply dont work. When there is 3 platoons of infantry advancing on you and your lance is a 6 PPC Stalker, a Dual Guass Metaphract, a LPL boat and a LRM boat, you will quickly find out how useless those builds are. When the mission designs are diversified enough to more or less force a more balanced build and lance makeup, then meta goes to hell and a hand basket.

I know in like MEchcommander and MC2, I would run only big heavy hitting guns. I used to get my *** kicked in that game to.....I then started using mixed MEdium, long and short range builds, the game is actually pretty easy now, barring me being a tard and dorking up the tactical side of it.

Done right, Meta wont exist because you will have to carry a little bit of everything so that you are more prepared for different situations. There really is nothing like having a city battle, that turns into open field and your lance is equipped with machineguns, SRMs and medium lasers, but now the battlefield is more for LPL/PPC and Guass. Suddenly your **** up a creek without a paddle and sorely out of your element.

So, mechs will end up being more like the stock Marauder. 2 PPC, 1 AC5 for punch and distance, 2 ML for closer in and vehicles andstuff. Its more then overkill to use 2 PPCs on a single infantry man...machineguns and flamers might even have a use.....3 platoons of infantry ambush your big bad *** 6 PPC Stalker as it's sniping in a forest....suddenly those 6 PPCs are useless.

well, I don't think we'll be seeing gauss any time soon.... or LPL... since neither were around in the IS in 3025.......

And I mean.... would perma dead be better or less gimmicky if it was here in MWO and one was manually aiming for your cockpit? (most headshots on not afk/shutdown targets even here are as much luck as design)

I mean... it happens. A bridge fell on captain Kirk. *shrugs*

And honestly, at least in PvP being able to "turn off" Perma Death? So one guy plays for keeps and the other for funsies....

IDK. I mean I hate it when I lose a warrior in Btech, but it happens. It also forces tactical thoughts. Crap, my mechs head is stripped.... do I stay in battle and risk a stray SRM splatting my pilot..or withdraw? Sounds like the very definition of "immersion" to me.

[Fiona Marshe]

Koniving, on 04 August 2016 - 04:46 AM, said:

That's a really good comparison and in fact that appears to be how the chosen movement mechanics (move and shoot per mech) works.

God damn it. I just booted up some Front Mission.

MaxTech RPG method. Makes for a much faster gameplay (my prefeered method for large matches). F2f games move at 3-4 times faster than phased play.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 August 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

well, I don't think we'll be seeing gauss any time soon.... or LPL... since neither were around in the IS in 3025.......

And I mean.... would perma dead be better or less gimmicky if it was here in MWO and one was manually aiming for your cockpit? (most headshots on not afk/shutdown targets even here are as much luck as design)

I mean... it happens. A bridge fell on captain Kirk. *shrugs*

And honestly, at least in PvP being able to "turn off" Perma Death? So one guy plays for keeps and the other for funsies....

IDK. I mean I hate it when I lose a warrior in Btech, but it happens. It also forces tactical thoughts. Crap, my mechs head is stripped.... do I stay in battle and risk a stray SRM splatting my pilot..or withdraw? Sounds like the very definition of "immersion" to me.

YEah, but we wont get to "withdraw" it will be esc, fail the mission and restart. I mean, it would be good if they did a Planetside 2 style open ended coop campaign type deal, but I dont think that is ultimately going to happen.

Ofc, in Mechcommander I can typically go an entire campaign with maybe 1 or 2 guys ejecting on later missions.

[ice trey]

It's Single Player
It's Battletech
There will be a story
There's a good reason I put a months' salary into the Kickstarter.

When it comes out, I'll be ok if MWO dies. I hope it adapts and notices that there are a community of Mechwarrior fans who prefer single player - you know, considering that literally every single Mechwarrior title to this point has been a single player game first and foremost.

CW was supposed to be the compromise to keep us caring. It isn't, and isn't showing signs of changing for the better.

[martian]

LordKnightFandragon, on 06 August 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Im not saying it cant happen, I just really hope its about that rare, 1 Manfred Von Richthofen killed by a lucky bullet in the thousands of pilots throughout WWI.

Nothing will be more annoying then that for sure....And ofc it will be your best pilot in your best mech, cuz thats just how Murphy Law works....

Keep in mind that there are not too many headcapping weapons in the Succession Wars era. No idiotic FedCom Gauss Boat spam, no Clan ER PPCs.

Just short-ranged AC-20 and some rare Binary Laser Cannons (if they even include them in the game). That's all.

Of course, it can happen that somebody crits your cockpit with AC-10 or PPC, or that every single small enemy weapon hits your cockpit - but that would be a bad luck, not game design.

LordKnightFandragon, on 06 August 2016 - 04:31 PM, said:

Ofc, the mech you should be able to just re-salvage unless the reactor went critical.

And do you have Heavy BattleMech Recovery Vehicle in your garage?

Edited by martian, 06 August 2016 - 11:40 PM.

[Rakshasa]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 August 2016 - 08:01 AM, said:

4) Even lightly armored Mechs will have viability, like the Jagermech, because of range and spotting. A Jager could conceivably stand off at AC2 long range, and as long as it has LoS rain in fire support still. Add in concealment, and these mechs get to actually be viable with their stock flavor.

Now now, let's not get hysterical. A stock JM6, viable? The only person who thought that was the engineer who designed the thing, and he was so drunk he thought spending 12 tons of payload space on a pair of long range machine guns was a great idea

I can just hear that first briefing now.

"So...is it tough?"
"No."
"Can it evade?"
"No."
"Can it do damage?"
"Eh...kind of? No, not really."
"...so what's the point of this thing?"
*engineer plays tape of dakka noises* :D

[Harper Steel]

after seeing that demo I understand PGIs current attitude and actions,,, they see how cool and how enthused those developers are and they look around their own offices and the motivation to even try to compete with what Hairbrained is doing,, is gone..

I am sure that the fact the MechWarrior community Successfully raised $2,785,537 with 41,733 backers into the new game made the PGI developers a bit jealous..
I mean its normal human behavior for them to also be slightly angry.
Look at it from their point of view, here this new company that doesn't even have a demo, just an Idea is able to raise almost 3 million dollars. while PGI who has bee carrying the MechWarrior torch for 4 years is barley able to sell a mech pack..
so their attitude now is evident in their lack of anything except ways to make money....

[jss78]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 August 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

well, I don't think we'll be seeing gauss any time soon.... or LPL... since neither were around in the IS in 3025.......

And I mean.... would perma dead be better or less gimmicky if it was here in MWO and one was manually aiming for your cockpit? (most headshots on not afk/shutdown targets even here are as much luck as design)

I mean... it happens. A bridge fell on captain Kirk. *shrugs*

And honestly, at least in PvP being able to "turn off" Perma Death? So one guy plays for keeps and the other for funsies....

IDK. I mean I hate it when I lose a warrior in Btech, but it happens. It also forces tactical thoughts. Crap, my mechs head is stripped.... do I stay in battle and risk a stray SRM splatting my pilot..or withdraw? Sounds like the very definition of "immersion" to me.

...unless they do "Star League Cache" type missions. In the Death from Above tabletop campaign they run on Twitch, one of the players's now rolling with a thus-recovered LPL in her Griffin. They've already used DFA to showcase the turn order, so maybe other elements will drift from there as well...

That might be fun, as long as the lostech remains rare and hen's teeth, and not every 'mech is loaded to the brim with it by endgame.

Edited by jss78, 07 August 2016 - 02:30 AM.

[Satan n stuff]

Rakshasa, on 06 August 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

Now now, let's not get hysterical. A stock JM6, viable? The only person who thought that was the engineer who designed the thing, and he was so drunk he thought spending 12 tons of payload space on a pair of long range machine guns was a great idea

I can just hear that first briefing now.

"So...is it tough?"
"No."
"Can it evade?"
"No."
"Can it do damage?"
"Eh...kind of? No, not really."
"...so what's the point of this thing?"
*engineer plays tape of dakka noises*

The Jagermech is the kind of design that needs C3 to really work, it doesn't hit hard but with a C3 network and a good spotter it could hit consistently.
Opening fire for 2x5 and 2x2 damage with a ~30% hit chance is laughable, with a ~90% hit chance on the other hand...
You'd need overwhelming firepower or your own C3 network to be able to beat that.
Unfortunately the only variant with any kind of C3 module is a Jihad era design.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 07 August 2016 - 03:03 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

JC Daxion, on 06 August 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

yea i completely agree here.. defiantly room for both.. Though i am one of those gamers that love all kinds of games, Adventure, strat, 4X, RTS, RPG, Deep games that take 100's of hours, and often short games that i can finish in a night. (i acutally really have started to enjoy short games, because really, how many games can you have that you need to sink 500 hours into.. Something unique, i can play in a night, and enjoy and not look back is always wonderful. Serena is one that leaps to mind, a quick hour long game that was a lot of fun about a cabin in the woods. (was an adventure game tech demo for an up coming game called asylumn) btw, if it interests you, and you wanna play, it is free, but no save, so make sure you have an hour or so to complete.

But yea.... Just like back in the late 90's/2k's we had MC and MW, so happy i have both options again.




Heh,, maybe bad example,, should of said pizza.. There is no bad pizza.,. only pizza that is better than others.. But to me this is far from frozen pizza






Heh.. one of the things i am looking forward too.. Fielding my own group that listens!






Totally disagree, One of the worst things for a game is people doing nothing but complaining about a game they don't like in hopes of something better coming along.. Starwars galaxies vrs SWTOR is the most perfect example.. Some people were so angry about the direction SWG took, and spent years doing nothing but bash the game, despite the game having a very loyal following. (the proof is SWG EMU) In the end SWG got canceled and the savior SWTOR launched, and it was not what people wanted, though i find the game fun, it is no SWG, but to me there was room for both.

It would of been far better had SWTOR launched, and SWG stuck around IMO, and those people that didn't like SWG had another option, and could of left it alone, and perhaps people would of found the nitch game and enjoyed it.

As the other peson said.. both games can grow, and it is lots easier to grow a game with out bitter people around complaining about it all the time. I STILL to this day see people ***** about SWG, a game that many never played past 2005, and had no idea what it actually became. For many people the game was far above what the original beta SWG was, even EMU at this point IMO does not come close in so many aspects, but still a fun game.. we will see how it continues though, as the community is strong, for an entirely volunteer devs.

If this new BT game takes those that don't like it, and gives them something they love, and this game is allowed to grow.. it will be far better off in the end. I personally hope that game is the answer for all those, but often people are disappointed by what they think they want.. I hope that is not the case.

I like this post, but two things, Sony closed down SWG early, because they sulked over losing the licence, it was a game I wanted to like, but at the end it was a sand box where nothing happened, I was in a 'clan' and nothing happened unless you were into star wars, painting and decorating online..we once camped some critter for four hours, because he dropped something that looked like an over head light for the guild leaders house.

The title as a growing concern was dead, for all but a select few, who wanted to play build a house, if that is what people find fun in there is nothing wrong with it, but it's not what Star wars is about. its like all games old that go to the great game god in the sky, there will always be a hard core of players that can make a game work if it's open source because they care more about it still being, than a practical down side of it having less than 200 people logging on at any one point.

I thought it was a very bad thing that Warhamer online was closed, I still think it has the best PvP campaign created even if the balancing was to hell.

Same will happen here.

People this game relies on to keep going are being more selective in what they buy or spend, if they spend at all.

The Mad II just sends so many signals, whether correct or not, that things are not well in P.G.I land, the 25,000 sales comment about the I.S mad as justification to bring this clan version out, to me cements it, that other mechs are not selling, and this is a desperate attempt to get sales back, based on those of a year ago.

Thing is, the lack of sales are not the mechs they are choosing, but what they are doing to the game, i've odered and cancelled the Viper twice, the Night Gyr, the Huntsman, once, not because of the mech but because of what P.G.I are doing to the game, I'm not getting the Mad II because of what P.G.I continue to do.

I'm on record 18 months ago, saying that P.G.I won't make 2018 or at the best the oceanic, and maybe the european servers will be shut down, I still stand by that, as I firmly believe that when HBS bring out battletech next year, the money will dry up even more, because the only real BT fans that will still spend here in any meaningful way, will be the ones that can't stand turn based games.

Selling the arts licence to HBS might have seemed a good short term solution to cash drying up, but long term its done far more damage to this games survival.

Only chance this game has of making 2018 is to consolidate servers, to cut down out goings, and to have mechs that people love and want to play, that H.B.S don't have access to, and I can't see it being enough.

Of course all speculation, but I think my speculation is the most likely

[C E Dwyer]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 August 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

well, I don't think we'll be seeing gauss any time soon.... or LPL... since neither were around in the IS in 3025.......

And I mean.... would perma dead be better or less gimmicky if it was here in MWO and one was manually aiming for your cockpit? (most headshots on not afk/shutdown targets even here are as much luck as design)

I mean... it happens. A bridge fell on captain Kirk. *shrugs*

And honestly, at least in PvP being able to "turn off" Perma Death? So one guy plays for keeps and the other for funsies....

IDK. I mean I hate it when I lose a warrior in Btech, but it happens. It also forces tactical thoughts. Crap, my mechs head is stripped.... do I stay in battle and risk a stray SRM splatting my pilot..or withdraw? Sounds like the very definition of "immersion" to me.

There has been mentions of them, for the stand alone campaign, but they are going to be extremely, extremely rare, and if you find a gauss rifle, who still makes the ammo, if a Large pulse laser is found, who would repair it when it gets damaged.

Pretty sure they are not going to be a part of the PvP sceen for obvious balance reasons, but on a personal level, I've no plans for PvP with the H.B.S product, as solaris bores me, so I am not to sure of the second part of my statement,as I haven't paid any attention to it, other than to say, I'd be pissed, if PvP balance impacted on the PvE side of the game.

[Cy Mitchell]

I just hope the two games complement each other. I would like to see cross advertising between the two companies along with Catalyst games joining in to revive the BattleTech/Mechwarrior franchise. It would be a win/win/win situation as all three companies could work on their area of the IP, assisting each other where possible and all would profit from the increased exposure.

I believe a turn based campaign game and a real time FPS/Sim can co-exist and thrive.

I know it would rub a lot of old diehard BattleTech vets the wrong way but I would love to see a Star Trek-like total reboot of the BT IP to bring it into the 21st century of gaming and revitalize it. Presently it is based on a 1980s vision. Keep the core idea but bring some of the Tech in line with what has become believable in the last 30 years. Maybe if interest in the IP increases then something like that could happen.

Edited by Rampage, 07 August 2016 - 06:06 AM.

[Kyrie]

PGI raised 5m from a rabid fanbase, they have forgotten us in their esport quest. They should not be surprised that the aame rabid fanbase projectile-vomited cash at what looks like a real BT game.

[LordKnightFandragon]

ice trey, on 06 August 2016 - 10:44 PM, said:

It's Single Player
It's Battletech
There will be a story
There's a good reason I put a months' salary into the Kickstarter.

When it comes out, I'll be ok if MWO dies. I hope it adapts and notices that there are a community of Mechwarrior fans who prefer single player - you know, considering that literally every single Mechwarrior title to this point has been a single player game first and foremost.

CW was supposed to be the compromise to keep us caring. It isn't, and isn't showing signs of changing for the better.

I hope they make Coop PVE as well.

[Mystere]

Harper Steel, on 06 August 2016 - 11:58 PM, said:

after seeing that demo I understand PGIs current attitude and actions,,, they see how cool and how enthused those developers are and they look around their own offices and the motivation to even try to compete with what Hairbrained is doing,, is gone..

I am sure that the fact the MechWarrior community Successfully raised $2,785,537 with 41,733 backers into the new game made the PGI developers a bit jealous..
I mean its normal human behavior for them to also be slightly angry.
Look at it from their point of view, here this new company that doesn't even have a demo, just an Idea is able to raise almost 3 million dollars. while PGI who has bee carrying the MechWarrior torch for 4 years is barley able to sell a mech pack..
so their attitude now is evident in their lack of anything except ways to make money....

Not to detract from the point of your post, but ...

FYI, I think I recall seeing somewhere on the forums a copy of a twitter post in which Russ(?) brags(?) about selling 40,000+ Kodiak packs.

Hopefully my memory is not failing me in this instance.

Edited by Mystere, 07 August 2016 - 06:55 AM.