375 replies to this topic

[MrVei]

new weapons, and that will only happen after they stop changing the few we have now. they need to start from the ground up on weapons stats. after that we could have new weapons and i would spend money again.

[Kirkland Langue]

This thread convinced me to draw a line in the sand. One that is a simple yes or no.
Knockdowns. If they readd mech knockdowns - I'll buy another mechpack.

The day they removed knockdowns demonstrated that they were more than willing to scrap mechanics that could have easily been tweaked. It is this mentality which has led the promise of a living MW universe becoming something that is no more than an arena shooter with very long queue times, and almost no variety in play styles.

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Imperius, on 04 October 2016 - 03:16 AM, said:

Just search their old videos on their YouTube.

Here is another one for us who bought top of the line pc's for "High Fidelity" graphics.

Oh man that game looks cool! Where can i download that game? And whats it called?

[Charlie Grant]

I'd probably spend more money on classic 3025-era mechs. Personally I think the javelin should be near the top of that list.
I'd also buy a pve adventure. If it was good, I'd buy more.
I'd pay a micro-transaction fee to enter the Solaris arena.
I'd pay for something I didn't know I wanted, so surprise me with something cool, pgi!

[BLOOD WOLF]

Lostdragon, on 04 October 2016 - 06:46 AM, said:

Yeah, I could, but the thing is I want to enjoy MWO and keep spending money on it. PGI just makes it really hard. What would happen to the game if everyone took anyear off? It would go under. I am not one of those people who wants PGI to fail because I doubt we will get another MW game if they do. If I take a year away from the game I am unlikely to ever return. I hope they can turn things around and keep people like me interested but it doesn't look good.

I took 6 months off last year or in 2014, I am not sure. I am sure the game will survive if people take a break for awhile.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 04 October 2016 - 10:37 AM.

[Alteran]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 October 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

I think most of the playerbase is well aware of the population plunge. Sadly, it's the Devs who don't seem to be able or willing to connect cause to effect, and discern WHY the players have walked. And if you try to have a grown up conversation and explain to them why (sadly a lot off people just rant at them, too, which doesn't help anyone) it seems like they just want to take their ball and go home.

I've tried to keep honest and open, generally respectful communication with Russ since Closed Beta, and I guess, I have a better than average track record, but so many things... so many issues could be avoided with honest communication, a committed direction for the game, and a willingness to park their pride for the good of the game.

I don't know if you have followed Tom Clancy's The Division, but they did in <8 months that MWO took 3 years to do. They took a game with over >115K daily users (according to Steam Stats) and fell off the top 100. The Division is visually stunning (you require a very good video card). The Division has incredible leveling game play. The Division has Dev's that don't listen to the community and their wants/needs.....

The MWO Devs/Russ have done what so many Dev's have done, ignore the silent majority and not pay heed to the 'whiny finger pointing' posts. Less than 10% of any game population actually will use a forum to communicate with the game makers. Most rely on in-game "note passing" to get their information on what is going on. Their wants/needs are relayed to the Dev's through nasty, one-sided posts which Dev's ignore. If the Dev's (not just talking MWO Dev's) look past the name calling, finger pointing and kiss my @SS, and got to the actual point of why the post was made in the first place, they'd see that forum warriors have a real concept and fixes to game play issues. Don't get me wrong, this is exhausting work, but the Dev's need to do it.

The Division made $300M in initial sales, according to Ubisoft, they have the bank to take The Division in any direction they wish, BUT they also have the pride factor. Who in their right mind, after purchasing The Division, will ever dump $70-120 on another Massive/Ubi Soft title? I know I won't. I'll wait for the release and give it a few months. Then I'll check the FORUMS!!!! to see what is really going on. I'll look for the whine/*****/moan posts and look into the deep issues that the posters have and then decide to purchase or not. It's those posts that have the real game play issues and ways in which the Dev's 'could' fix the problem.

^ is why I didn't throw a dime at HBS. It is the reason why I won't buy it immediately after release (well I really try not to). I can't/won't go through another promise this and get that from a game.

[Nemesis Duck]

Hire some washed out, outta work, wargame designer from the 80s-90s who worked on successfully launched products to design CW for you (SSI wargames or General series (Panzer, etc.) come to mind). Make sure they incorporate an economy.

The rapid departure of some hatcheteering, cyclic fiends would help free up funds to pay for the design and development.

It's time to put the big pants on or wither away.

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

Alteran, on 04 October 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

I don't know if you have followed Tom Clancy's The Division, but they did in &lt;8 months that MWO took 3 years to do. They took a game with over &gt;115K daily users (according to Steam Stats) and fell off the top 100. The Division is visually stunning (you require a very good video card). The Division has incredible leveling game play. The Division has Dev's that don't listen to the community and their wants/needs.....

The MWO Devs/Russ have done what so many Dev's have done, ignore the silent majority and not pay heed to the 'whiny finger pointing' posts. Less than 10% of any game population actually will use a forum to communicate with the game makers. Most rely on in-game &quot;note passing&quot; to get their information on what is going on. Their wants/needs are relayed to the Dev's through nasty, one-sided posts which Dev's ignore. If the Dev's (not just talking MWO Dev's) look past the name calling, finger pointing and kiss my @SS, and got to the actual point of why the post was made in the first place, they'd see that forum warriors have a real concept and fixes to game play issues. Don't get me wrong, this is exhausting work, but the Dev's need to do it.

The Division made $300M in initial sales, according to Ubisoft, they have the bank to take The Division in any direction they wish, BUT they also have the pride factor. Who in their right mind, after purchasing The Division, will ever dump $70-120 on another Massive/Ubi Soft title? I know I won't. I'll wait for the release and give it a few months. Then I'll check the FORUMS!!!! to see what is really going on. I'll look for the whine/*****/moan posts and look into the deep issues that the posters have and then decide to purchase or not. It's those posts that have the real game play issues and ways in which the Dev's 'could' fix the problem.

^ is why I didn't throw a dime at HBS. It is the reason why I won't buy it immediately after release (well I really try not to). I can't/won't go through another promise this and get that from a game.

HBS hasnt let me down yet. They dont ever promis much in the first place.

They stick to what they do best, and thats make a simple single player turn based rpg from pen and paper/TT games made during the 80s. They don promise spectacular graffics or an in-depth game engine... Nope, just simple, point and click adventures.

I absolutelly loved shadow run. And i got exactly what i expected to get.

[Lostdragon]

BLOOD WOLF, on 04 October 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

I took 6 months off last year or in 2014, I am not sure. I am sure the game will survive if people take a break for awhile.

My point was there are a lot of people upset with the lack of content and lack of progress. If the Mechcon announcements are not major features that will be delivered quickly then I think MWO will lose a significant portion of the paying customer base. They won't necessarily all stop playing or take a break but I think PGI is going to have a much harder time pushing mech packs without new modes maps, etc.

The "let them eat cake" attitude is not going to fly. I already have more mechs than I can reasonably use and some people have a lot more than me. I don't have any desire to buy mech packs just to collect them, but I will buy them to support a healthy game that is delivering good experiences and fun play. I think the mood of the playerbase is worse than it has ever been and if things don't get better soon then it will be too late. I doubt PGI can afford for even 25% of the people who regularly buy mech packs to stop buying for six months, let alone a year, and I think that will happen soon.

[Alienized]

only thing putting my wallet open again... uhm..

players with enough brain to not only wanna play CoD in robots.
can't stand that BS happening during the battles without any team coordination.
only egoism and retardation.

[Clownwarlord]

OK consider this ...

Phoenix Pack ($80.00) 4 mech chassis (12 total mechs)
Clan ($240.00) 8 mech chassis (24 total mechs)
Resistance ($80.00) 4 mech chassis (12 total mechs)
Clan Wave 2 ($120.00) 4 mech chassis (12 total mechs)
Resistance 2 ($80.00) 4 mech chassis (12 total mechs)
Clan Wave 3 ($120.00) 4 mech chassis (12 total mechs)
Urbie ($40.00) 1 mech chassis (4 total mechs)
Clan IIC ($80.00) 4 mech chassis (12 total mechs)

Now:
Marauder ($70.00) 1 mech chassis (7 total mechs)
Warhammer ($70.00) 1 mech chassis (7 total mechs)
Rifleman ($70.00) 1 mech chassis (7 total mechs)
...

As you can see the new mech pricing kinda makes it so you don't want to buy. While yes you can get a mech $10.00 now, you use to get them cheaper in some cases when you bought a mech pack. Also now you usually only get 1 mech chassis where as you use to get 4 different mech chassis. You also use to get LIGHT mechs. Now it usually is a Heavy or Assault and rarely a Medium.

My suggestion bring back actual mech packages with more than one chassis, otherwise it kinda makes it daunting to buy a new mech pack every month. $70.00 times 12 is $840.00 ... yeah ... .

[smokefield]

Quote

I don't have any desire to buy mech packs just to collect them, but I will buy them to support a healthy game that is delivering good experiences and fun play.

this and the last post are another good point of view.

[Kael Posavatz]

I do like the idea of Living Legends-style/size maps. I would feel strongly encouraged to jump through hoops to pay for that.

As to light mechs, they could do what they were doing back in...2014, I think? Just put hero up, followed a month for variants for MC, and then variants for C-bills. I'm not sure it'd be a great option, but I don't think the current marketing strategy would make a light mech attractive.

I'm not really seeing e-sports here. And Russ indicated that an engine upgrade would be needed to make Solaris which would be needed for e-sports so... I think they need to focus on stuff to do/player immersion. As it is, everything QP/Group/Scouting/Invasion plays like glorified skirmish.

Also, unless there is a dire need, radical changes to core gameplay mechanics should be avoided. I mean, the game has been out of beta for almost three years, and they want to do both ED and a radical overhaul of skill-trees.

[Alteran]

Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, on 04 October 2016 - 10:58 AM, said:

HBS hasnt let me down yet. They dont ever promis much in the first place.

They stick to what they do best, and thats make a simple single player turn based rpg from pen and paper/TT games made during the 80s. They don promise spectacular graffics or an in-depth game engine... Nope, just simple, point and click adventures.

I absolutelly loved shadow run. And i got exactly what i expected to get.

But they did make promises. They now have obligations to the Kickstarter founders for all the different levels of funding that they achieved. If you as a KS founder get your game and they only deliver 1/2 of what was promised, how are you going to feel? You get your game, all the features are there as promised, but the delivery is 1/2 assed, are you going to be satisfied?

Wow.... I'm a complete BitterVet. Yikes...

I'm done financially funding hopes, dreams and 1/2 finished products. I'll invest in finished products with features that I will gladly support.

[Moldur]

As vague as this is going to sound, I hope it resonates with some of you.

I'll spend money on MWO once the game appears to expand its scope.

MWO is like a tiny lake that is just big enough to allow boats onto it. No matter how many different boats, no matter how shiny and new, no matter how advanced or quirky... You'll always be driving it around the same tiny lake with nothing else to do.

[C E Dwyer]

Lostdragon, on 04 October 2016 - 05:57 AM, said:

I think the biggest issue is PGI put the cart before the horse during the early phases of the game. They created a MVP with only quick play and started selling mech packs before they even began designing what was supposed to be the game's ultimate feature, Community Warfare.

What your saying here is exactly what Wargaming did with World of Tanks and World of Warships, a company with a bigger turn over, and larger staff.

Both games started off with just two nations and they have progessively added nations and the months go by WoW still has no Campaign game, and WoT's is far less complex than even what we have here.

In WoTs case once you go into group play matches the onus is on you, there is zero match making, the bads and the goods get put against each other, and only the big unit's with top grade players have any chance of holding ground let alone winning the season.

You can argue quite reasonably, that Mech warrior online, has broader scope and more ambitious make up, than either of these games, so why do people vent against P.G.I when a bigger richer company brings less to it's games.


Wargaming didn't lie to it's customers, they didn't brag about how great and how developed their campaign game was going to be, (World of Warships still lacks anything but quick play) they just produced a game with the attitude of if you don't like it play something else, and outside of Asia, it's the most successful of its type.

This is the big difference, and people cannot, or will not, let their bitterness go over being deceived by P.G.I.

Edited by Cathy, 04 October 2016 - 12:08 PM.

[Flak Kannon]

Hi Bishop.

I've been crying about his for a while..


Only way I'll spend is if they invest the income into; not more mechs, not decals, not more colors or Camo patterns..


But content.


I expect 6-12 new QP maps.

I shall keep dreaming.




Enjoi

[DeadEye COTP]

A marketing director who actually understands how marketing works, doesn't slap an arbitrary price on everything, and open certain things up to c-bills; at least some minor customization options.

When I looked through the costs just over a year ago, it was well over 2k USD if you were only to buy hero mechs and some colours. If you include patterns, decals, and other cosmetics the total cost to buy everything is pushing over 5k USD.

The funniest thing is that anyone with even a sliver of common sense would just play the game for free and enjoy it for what it is based on their money grubbing business model.

[Kyle Kowalski]

http://mwomercs.com/...ger-wasp-thorn/

MORE LIGHTS

MORE QP MAPS

[Kin3ticX]

I still buy MC but not mechpacks. I use MC to pretty up my old mechs with decals and oneshot camos.

The last mechpack I bought was a Kitfox pack just so I could have a clan mech at clan launch. FBJ gifted me a Warhammer and a Hunchback IIC pack.

Powercreep is always going to be a problem with the 1 mech a month model because they will make every 3rd or 4th mech pack a power item pack. Lets be honest with ourselves, power creep power sells. They are just less good at going back and sharing that with older mechs. I saw how many Kodiaks walked around at launch so its obvious it sold like hotcakes.

Anyways its not really a knock on PGI because they need money to operate but their business model sometimes chips away at their own game balance efforts.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 04 October 2016 - 12:33 PM.