289 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Antares102, on 08 August 2016 - 02:10 PM, said:

Well I just want this game to entertain me till BT comes out
Probably MAD IIC will be the last thing I will consider buying.

like my siggy says... May 2017........

(hopefully Beta Invites are much sooner)

[Alistair Winter]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2016 - 02:08 PM, said:

I used to want a lot of things for this game. Don't get your hopes up.

Bishop has gone full Mad Max on us.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alistair Winter, on 08 August 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

Bishop has gone full Mad Max on us.

I am what this barren waste of a Game has made me into.

Mad Bishop, the Road Warrior. But I ain't going anywhere NEAR no stinking Thunderdome.

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 August 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

I am what this barren waste of a Game has made me into.

Mad Bishop, the Road Warrior. But I ain't going anywhere NEAR no stinking Thunderdome.

New Mordor is around the corner.... soon™.

[Alistair Winter]

Davers, on 08 August 2016 - 01:05 PM, said:

The state of the community: 150 people complain and argue bitterly on the forum, while everyone else happily buys mech packs to play on cold skirmish matches.

The fact that a game with ~50,000 players has a community that is best summed up as "150 people complain and argue bitterly on the forum" should be a red flag, shouldn't it?

If I were PGI's community manager, I'd try to look into creating a bigger community and getting involved with that. Maybe I've got it backwards.

FupDup, on 08 August 2016 - 01:06 PM, said:

Are you saying that the MWO forums have more Information Warfare than the game itself?

Big Tin Man, on 08 August 2016 - 01:09 PM, said:

...Russ just tweeted that the big feature reveal at mechcon will be....
The new skill tree.
https://twitter.com/...747049548722176
SKILL TREE HYPE!!! ALL ABOARD THE HYPE TRAIN!!!!
That didn't work, did it.

It's just... well, I wouldn't mind it so much if there was enough information elsewhere. I mean, it's better than nothing. But it doesn't seem to be the best way of doing things.

[GRiPSViGiL]

I frankly do not care about them talking to us. It is put up or shut up point long ago. If they are talking they are surely BSing us or straight lying to us. The recent round table just shows how out of touch they are with the state of the game and the community. They did seem to hand pick a bunch of nuthuggers who dared not be to critical while one thing was sure and that was it didn't matter who was talking everyone involved seem to miss the real problems with CW and it isn't "buckets".

[JC Daxion]

Alistair Winter, on 08 August 2016 - 01:00 PM, said:

• We need to know more about the big features, like PVE, Solaris, Infotech, Skill trees, etc. Give us something to keep faith in the game, give us something to talk about besides mech packs and small fixes here and there. Give us something to look forward to.

Why? Any post i see on these forums about idea's gets zero discussion but if you want to about something, like LRM\'s or LBX,, or why did you nerf my mech, or PGI sucks.. I see lots of good idea's being tossed around here from time to time, and the threads get very little talk.. But post PGI sucks, the game is dying, and 1k views, and 15 pages...

[Alistair Winter]

JC Daxion, on 08 August 2016 - 03:14 PM, said:

Why? Any post i see on these forums about idea's gets zero discussion but if you want to about something, like LRM\'s or LBX,, or why did you nerf my mech, or PGI sucks.. I see lots of good idea's being tossed around here from time to time, and the threads get very little talk.. But post PGI sucks, the game is dying, and 1k views, and 15 pages...

You were here in 2011, 2012 and 2013. You remember the threads that had lots of fantastic ideas for game modes, maps, community warfare, campaigns, you name it. You remember that.

None of it led to anything, as far as I can tell. No player-created suggestion for a game mode ever made it into the game. No player-created suggestion for a map. Our ideas for skill trees were never used, our ideas for passive/active radar were never used. It didn't stop over night, but it gradually stopped when people realized there was no point, except as an academic exercise.

Show me the cases where those ideas made it into the game, besides fixing tiny details like the 50% cooldown bonus on the DRG-1N.

[Bishop Steiner]

GRiPSViGiL, on 08 August 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

I frankly do not care about them talking to us. It is put up or shut up point long ago. If they are talking they are surely BSing us or straight lying to us. The recent round table just shows how out of touch they are with the state of the game and the community. They did seem to hand pick a bunch of nuthuggers who dared not be to critical while one thing was sure and that was it didn't matter who was talking everyone involved seem to miss the real problems with CW and it isn't "buckets".

Truth. Personally I thought no one came across as really being remotely on point from that roundtable, be it Russ or the "Community Representatives". (Did we the community choose them, out of curiosity?)

But Russ's stupification over the Long Tom issue..... *smh*

JC Daxion, on 08 August 2016 - 03:14 PM, said:

Why? Any post i see on these forums about idea's gets zero discussion but if you want to about something, like LRM\'s or LBX,, or why did you nerf my mech, or PGI sucks.. I see lots of good idea's being tossed around here from time to time, and the threads get very little talk.. But post PGI sucks, the game is dying, and 1k views, and 15 pages...

We discussed them, heavily for the better part of 4 years. We spent more time debating and idea mongering that PGI has. PGI has shown no inclination to even remotely consider those ideas so why should we waste our time on them any more?

If you want to, feel free. This time next year, you'll be a bittervet, too.

The only thing PGI remotely responds to is salt. So salt they get.

[Rebas Kradd]

In my opinion, PGI's problem is that they remain tone-deaf on what will actually re-energize the game and how players see what's already there.

But that's only half the problem. The community, as well, is divided on what will energize the game.

I still see people in here complaining about weapon balance, for crying out loud. Weapon balance. Does anyone REALLY think that tweaking the LB-X damage spread is going to bring droves of excited bittervets back to MWO, followed shortly by hordes of fascinated new players? I doubt it. I acknowledge it's an easy thing to fix, but let's be honest here - if we are really talking about new content, if we want to discuss things that will revive interest, bring old players back, and get real stirrings about the game in gaming newsmags, then balance changes aren't going to cut it. You'll get a few satisfied purists and that's it.

New gamemodes. That is the biggest way to change how the game is played and the only real thing that will ever get people's heads to perk up.

New maps and new mechs as well. Yes, new mechs are content. That's the revenue river and always will be, no matter how many other small streams people think should be added.

But as long as community threads on balance or the size of the Nova get twelve pages, and any gamemode proposals get one or two at best, PGI is going to continue devoting resources to small QoL stuff. THAT, in my opinion, is a big part of the reason PGI has taken this long to come up with gamemode revamps - the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and we're squeaking the wrong way. The Stock mode could be a boon for the competitive scene. The Assault mode could be awesome. But it's taken them forever to arrive, and we need to rally our complaints behind THAT culprit until some real results come along.

EDIT: And don't talk to me about "how we tried that already, they didn't listen". PGI spent 2013-2014 just fixing the basic game. That's been documented. The design process does take a while and PGI can not handle thousands of requests at the same time. That is also part of the reason the "big stuff" has been delayed. If you don't think they care about the big stuff, leave already. But if you're willing, like me, to think that procedural issues are part of the problem and not apathy, then stick around and keep tooting the horn.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 08 August 2016 - 03:31 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Rebas Kradd, on 08 August 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

In my opinion, PGI's problem is that they remain tone-deaf on what will actually re-energize the game and how players see what's already there.

But that's only half the problem. The community, as well, is divided on what will energize the game.

I still see people in here complaining about weapon balance, for crying out loud. Weapon balance. Does anyone REALLY think that tweaking the LB-X damage spread is going to bring droves of excited bittervets back to MWO, followed shortly by hordes of fascinated new players? I doubt it. I acknowledge it's an easy thing to fix, but let's be honest here - if we are really talking about new content, if we want to discuss things that will revive interest, bring old players back, and get real stirrings about the game in gaming newsmags, then balance changes aren't going to cut it. You'll get a few satisfied purists and that's it.

New gamemodes. That is the biggest way to change how the game is played and the only real thing that will ever get people's heads to perk up.

New maps and new mechs as well. Yes, new mechs are content. That's the revenue river and always will be, no matter how many other small streams people think should be added.

But as long as community threads on balance or the size of the Nova get twelve pages, and any gamemode proposals get one or two at best, PGI is going to continue devoting resources to small QoL stuff. THAT, in my opinion, is a big part of the reason PGI has taken this long to come up with gamemode revamps - the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and we're squeaking the wrong way. The Stock mode could be a boon for the competitive scene. The Assault mode could be awesome. But it's taken them forever to arrive, and we need to rally our complaints behind THAT culprit until some real results come along.

EDIT: And don't talk to me about "how we tried that already, they didn't listen". PGI spent 2013-2014 just fixing the basic game. That's been documented. The design process does take a while and PGI can not handle thousands of requests at the same time. That is also part of the reason the "big stuff" has been delayed. If you don't think they care about the big stuff, leave already. But if you're willing, like me, to think that procedural issues are part of the problem and not apathy, then stick around and keep tooting the horn.

Valid.

But... here's the deal. Really successful games? The Devs have a vision, and they stick with it. Sure reality cause plans to have to be altered, alternate ideas tried, etc. But the goal, the vision itself, does not change. Look at HBS and their games. Look at their take on Battletech. Have they had to make changes, compromises, etc, based on resource realities, engine limitations, etc? Certainly.

But the final products were still able to fulfill the original goals and sales pitch.

Now look at MWO. Yes, we the community are fractured. So is every single community for every single game ever written. End of the day, that is irrelevant because the Devs are not supposed ot be building the game according to the Communities vision of how things should be.

Even if they had pushed through things like CoF that is very divisive in this community, the majority would have stayed. How do I know? Um, look at the player retention for WoT, CoD, etc. Not all players there like it either, but because it fits with the "bigger picture" of the game the Devs are pushing, it's accepted, even if not loved.

It's PGI's responsibility to have a vision, to have a goal, a direction a plan, and to stick with it. Not to vacillate and yo-yo back and forth at every murmur on the forums, or twitter. And if their vision was a good one? Players would have stayed, regardless of mechanics they may not love.

But PGI has, at least since Open Beta, never had a strong vision, or objective, that they stuck too.

And that's entirely on them, not the playerbase.

[Bud Crue]

Alistair Winter, on 08 August 2016 - 03:22 PM, said:

You were here in 2011, 2012 and 2013. You remember the threads that had lots of fantastic ideas for game modes, maps, community warfare, campaigns, you name it. You remember that.

None of it led to anything, as far as I can tell. No player-created suggestion for a game mode ever made it into the game. No player-created suggestion for a map. Our ideas for skill trees were never used, our ideas for passive/active radar were never used. It didn't stop over night, but it gradually stopped when people realized there was no point, except as an academic exercise.

Show me the cases where those ideas made it into the game, besides fixing tiny details like the 50% cooldown bonus on the DRG-1N.

Why on earth would we need or want player suggestions to be incorporated into the game when instead we get features like goodie crates, and machine gun quirks, and domination, and a mode killing nuclear strike function? Player suggestions are not needed when we already have gaming perfection and a dev team that knows better than anyone on how to make this game better.

As to the round table: We will get bucket consolidation because that is needed to keep CW minimally functioning, but will we get anything else?

As to the community mood: bleak. I've said what seems like countless times PGI NEEDS TO GIVE ITS CUSTOMERS VISION...A REASON TO CARE AND BE EXCITED ABOUT THE GAME. Instead we get a three month road map with the largely the same features mentioned in the last road map. Well. Shucks. I for one am just giddy with excitement over that. Make us as excited with what you are hoping to do with this game as the HBS guys exhibited in their pre-pre-alpha video for BattleTech.

[Alistair Winter]

Rebas Kradd, on 08 August 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

PGI spent 2013-2014 just fixing the basic game. That's been documented.

Could you elaborate? I kind of feel like they never touch the basics. How long before they did anything about TAG and NARC? How long before they changed ECM? How long have jump jets been hoverjets?

I do think that the basic gameplay in MWO is better than ever, in terms of mech variety and weapon variety (AC2s, flamers, pulse lasers, SRMs, all those were considered terrible for years). Quirks really have improved this game. It may not be the most elegant solution, but quirks definitely work. But in terms of making fundamental changes to the basic game, I feel that PGI almost never does that.

I would have loved for them to take a closer look at how missile locks and guided missiles work, for example. Or fix the balance between weight classes (heavy mechs being far too agile and, thus, overpowered). Or change the way modules work, and maybe start looking at the number of modules for mechs. And let's not forget collisions (knockdowns are a different story) or actually making water feel like water instead of thin air.

So I'm not sure what you mean by fixing the basic game. Please elaborate on that, if you would.

[Davegt27]

more important then skill trees

Quote

and the rep of the final temp feature

anyone want to say Russ is talking about?

[Stone Wall]

50,000 players? wow that's a good number.

(feel even better placing in the Light Event)

[Rebas Kradd]

Alistair Winter, on 08 August 2016 - 03:46 PM, said:

Could you elaborate? I kind of feel like they never touch the basics. How long before they did anything about TAG and NARC? How long before they changed ECM? How long have jump jets been hoverjets?

I do think that the basic gameplay in MWO is better than ever, in terms of mech variety and weapon variety (AC2s, flamers, pulse lasers, SRMs, all those were considered terrible for years). Quirks really have improved this game. It may not be the most elegant solution, but quirks definitely work. But in terms of making fundamental changes to the basic game, I feel that PGI almost never does that.

I would have loved for them to take a closer look at how missile locks and guided missiles work, for example. Or fix the balance between weight classes (heavy mechs being far too agile and, thus, overpowered). Or change the way modules work, and maybe start looking at the number of modules for mechs. And let's not forget collisions (knockdowns are a different story) or actually making water feel like water instead of thin air.

So I'm not sure what you mean by fixing the basic game. Please elaborate on that, if you would.

Hitreg, missile damage, the kaleidoscope bug that took them forever to track down...this is the stuff I remember eating up a lot of 2013. Matthew Craig (their tech director) also mentioned internal telemetry tools that weren't there to start with, there was the first ELO matchmaker, the PTS, 12v12, and of course, our favorite roadblock, UI2.0. It's not like 2013 was empty. It just wasn't sexy.

PGI overall hasn't done a good job of providing a coherent picture of their development history, so I've had to piece this together. This part was hearsay, but fits with the rest...

https://www.reddit.c...are_pgi/cee9rmo

Quote

As commercial software developer for over 12 years now, many of the things I've seen are unfathomable. Then I got an inside line from some unit members/non unit members who cozied up to certain members of PGI. I heard how they pissed through employees like it was going out of style (at least, the new guys, the old guys never left) which resulted in a constant need to update talent, added functions which were undocumented, et al. It started making sense. But sometime around July or so they started getting their **** together with hiring and things really firmed up. Primarily because they hired a dedicated debugger, who apparently had never initially been hired for that to begin with. It was basically pure dumb luck they found someone who could at least clear up all the cryengine bugs. The cryengine issue was a debacle in and of itself from what my hearsay-sources tell me. Basically the first 6 months of OB were spent just trying to fix the engine itself, which was horrendously buggy.

Then you've got Berg and Russ commenting on an enormous backlog, and it fits with the rest as well.

https://www.reddit.c...ilar_to/cgqgwjl

https://www.reddit.c...piranha/chotofb

Which is why I still insist on including publisher pressure as one of the issues. They handed PGI a huge crunch, and they had to cut corners to meet it. It's a combination of issues - developer, engine, and publisher. Anyone who insists on there being one cause isn't living in the real world, or has an axe to grind.

So whether it's maps, gamemodes, matchmaker, tutorial, mech scale, UI, or whatever - they've pretty much been in Get Out of Minimum Viable State for the last couple of years. Can't think of much else now that hasn't been iterated upon. It feels like they're only now coming up on the part where they get to really dream again.

Of course, now that they're there, I agree with Bishop Steiner they REALLY need to produce a coherent vision that will get people excited. What Russ has offered up so far, revolves mostly around e-Sports and not around the universe, lore, or Faction Warfare element of it. There's been talk of UI and Solaris, but Russ honestly isn't very good at delivering focused talks in his Townhalls, so we don't really know what's up. PGI could really use a better speaker.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 08 August 2016 - 04:09 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

Davegt27, on 08 August 2016 - 03:59 PM, said:

more important then skill trees
anyone want to say Russ is talking about?

I interpreted this as them fixing the final temporary feature. The skill tree was a placeholder, intended to be replaced much sooner than 2016.

[Big Tin Man]

Rebas Kradd, on 08 August 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

In my opinion, PGI's problem is that they remain tone-deaf on what will actually re-energize the game and how players see what's already there.

But that's only half the problem. The community, as well, is divided on what will energize the game.

I still see people in here complaining about weapon balance, for crying out loud. Weapon balance. Does anyone REALLY think that tweaking the LB-X damage spread is going to bring droves of excited bittervets back to MWO, followed shortly by hordes of fascinated new players? I doubt it. I acknowledge it's an easy thing to fix, but let's be honest here - if we are really talking about new content, if we want to discuss things that will revive interest, bring old players back, and get real stirrings about the game in gaming newsmags, then balance changes aren't going to cut it. You'll get a few satisfied purists and that's it.

New gamemodes. That is the biggest way to change how the game is played and the only real thing that will ever get people's heads to perk up.

Agreed, minor weapon balance changes won't bring hordes of bittervets and noobs back into the game, only new content can do that. So assuming PGI is working on new features and content which takes time, how can they show us that they're in tune with what is actually happening in the game until they can deliver new content?

Adjust balance. It's easy and incremental. All you have to do is turn one dial one notch and watch it for a month. So much good PR and feedback can come from such a small thing, that they are listening and they are making changes to improve balance. You don't need a PTS for bumping LBX damage by 0.1. This doesn't need months of playtesting in their custom builds. Let us be the test drones on stuff that is this minor.

When you're tone deaf to what will bring the players back as far as content and vision, and then you ignore the simple things that show you at least understand the game and the issues with it, you give the impression that you have no idea what is going on. This is where PGI is currently at.

[JC Daxion]

Alistair Winter, on 08 August 2016 - 03:22 PM, said:

Show me the cases where those ideas made it into the game, besides fixing tiny details like the 50% cooldown bonus on the DRG-1N.

Yes, i have seen lots of grand idea's.. but that it what they are.. But i have seen tons of things that have gotten in, the little things.. IF that is what it takes to get things fixed, and improved, then why not..

For example, I loved your idea about improving achievements. (though i have posted about it, and others have too) And to me, that is something while perhaps small, is something that could be used to build community, and get some good positive vibes.. It is not a rework of an entire system, or complete re-balance. It is just an addition to things. Sorta like when they were working on the GUI and suggestions were made, and they got um in sooner than later.


Maybe get a good thread going of lots of achievement ideas.. and maybe a list of say 25 or 50, and maybe some community voted on Decals for say the top 3 or something.... then submit it, and get the community behind it as a whole.. I think perhaps they might enjoy seeing 300 people blowing up the forums with a 50 page thread about something positive.. verse the only time anyone can agree on anything is when there mini-map didn't rotate... (though personally i wish it had a check box for that.. I'd rather it be locked, but zoomed in, but i'm hoping that gets added)


see my point?



@fixing the basic game?

Perhaps he is talking about when PGI first took over control and they basically spent a year, improved hit-detection, worked on the back-end, added the new mech lab, made the game more modular, added the quirks system? A lot of folks think not much was done, but i think it was a big step in the right direction, which has lead us to being able to see many improvements over the last year, like adding many maps, updating old maps, getting video issues, graphics improvements, normalizing all the mechs, more polish than we have seen in years.. ect

[Rebas Kradd]

Big Tin Man, on 08 August 2016 - 04:09 PM, said:

Agreed, minor weapon balance changes won't bring hordes of bittervets and noobs back into the game, only new content can do that. So assuming PGI is working on new features and content which takes time, how can they show us that they're in tune with what is actually happening in the game until they can deliver new content?

Adjust balance. It's easy and incremental. All you have to do is turn one dial one notch and watch it for a month. So much good PR and feedback can come from such a small thing, that they are listening and they are making changes to improve balance. You don't need a PTS for bumping LBX damage by 0.1. This doesn't need months of playtesting in their custom builds. Let us be the test drones on stuff that is this minor.

When you're tone deaf to what will bring the players back as far as content and vision, and then you ignore the simple things that show you at least understand the game and the issues with it, you give the impression that you have no idea what is going on. This is where PGI is currently at.

Fully agreed. Incremental balance is needed.

The problem is, when everyone harps on that, and gamemodes get left out of the community dialogue to a huge degree, PGI goes "Oh, I guess they don't care about gamemodes that much, let's bump it back." And that's what happens, in favor of loads of QoL stuff that people gripe about instead. So in a way, the community is just as responsible for the direction of the game as PGI, and needs to start tailoring its complaints a bit more deliberately.

And the gamemodes HAVE been left out. Weapon balance, mech rescaling diagrams, hitbox diagrams, UI problems, hitreg, matchmaking, pricing, more balance...practically everything BUT the gamemodes gets discussed, it feels like. The gamemodes should be the foremost complaint. Fixing the rest won't change player numbers significantly.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 08 August 2016 - 04:15 PM.