153 replies to this topic

[Jun Watarase]

Poll : https://goo.gl/sGLtAC

Considering that they could have used the time/money to work on MWO instead, we might have CW phase 4 and the revamped skill tree now instead of "soon". Not to mention things like a proper matchmaking system (instead of the tiers system), fixed hit registration (just try playing at 250ms, hit registration is a mess), a proper critical hit system (the current one is a placeholder left over from beta....more than 4 years ago...), proper re-scale for ALL mechs, etc, etc....

Starting a new project when the current one is a mess seems like a terrible idea to me and is generally only used in business when you want to abandon the old project...I really have to wonder what kind of marketing research they did to conclude that this was a great idea.

The fact that 2016 was mostly mechpacks in terms of updates kind of proves that PGI doesn't have the resources to maintain two full development teams like what squaresoft does (they used to make only one final fantasy game at the same time, but they now work on two at the same time so that when one is released, the next game is halfway done).

Edited by Jun Watarase, 04 December 2016 - 12:46 AM.

[El Bandito]

I'm fine with it, since it is Mechwarrior related. Companies are allowed to spend their profits on future projects, after all. However, the whole Transverse fiasco had left a bad taste back then.

PGI can restart MWO 2.0 by implementing multiplayer for MW5: Mercs, this time with a better engine. And yes, macro transactions will still be there.

Edited by El Bandito, 04 December 2016 - 12:46 AM.

[RestosIII]

We know MW:O money is being funnelled into MW5:Mercs, and I'm fine with that. But I also don't want the game to have a pre-climate change glacial development speed because of PGI being stretched thin. It's complicated. This better be a collaboration work, because otherwise I have my doubts about one or both games not getting enough attention and love. Hopefully, for once, PGI pullsnit off with flying colors. Not holding my breath of spending any cash though until I see something tangible, for either product.

[ScarecrowES]

Jun Watarase, on 04 December 2016 - 12:43 AM, said:

Poll : https://goo.gl/sGLtAC

Considering that they could have used the time/money to work on MWO instead, we might have CW phase 4 and the revamped skill tree now instead of "soon". Not to mention things like a proper matchmaking system (instead of the tiers system), fixed hit registration (just try playing at 250ms, hit registration is a mess), a proper critical hit system (the current one is a placeholder left over from beta....more than 4 years ago...), proper re-scale for ALL mechs, etc, etc....

Starting a new project when the current one is a mess seems like a terrible idea to me and is generally only used in business when you want to abandon the old project...I really have to wonder what kind of marketing research they did to conclude that this was a great idea.

MWO is a successful game. By the measure of its peers, it's larger and more complex in scope. Financially, it's able to bring income disproportionately higher than its investment requirements. While MWO is far from the game it could be... and perhaps SHOULD be... I don't know that it's fair to call it a mess, strictly speaking. Nearly all of it works, and works well... relatively speaking. We only tend to think of it as a mess because of our view of what it COULD be.

Now, in terms of one financial success paying for another project... this is par for the course in any media production system. Financial successes in one product are almost always channeled into the next project. We tend to forget that media has a shelf life. One day, even if it was otherwise PERFECT, MWO will run out of steam. And the next big thing needs to be there waiting to capture that audience if the wheel is to keep spinning. This is the business model the entire gaming industry relies on... not to mention print publishing and film, to name a few.

Beyond that, ME5:M is, ostensibly, the single player campaign that MWO players have been clamoring for. For the last few years, we've been crowd-funding this new single player game through the free-to-play model of MWO. All those mech packs have gone to fund the exact content players have been asking for. I can't see why anyone would be upset with that.

[dervishx5]

Probably would have retained more customers had they let us know what they were doing. I'm not sure the benefits for keeping it secret (press release) are going to outweigh the costs.

[Anjian]

I would approve and I won't mind spending money on the game again on the provision that PGI must also give up map voting.

[Jun Watarase]

RestosIII, on 04 December 2016 - 12:50 AM, said:

We know MW:O money is being funnelled into MW5:Mercs, and I'm fine with that. But I also don't want the game to have a pre-climate change glacial development speed because of PGI being stretched thin. It's complicated. This better be a collaboration work, because otherwise I have my doubts about one or both games not getting enough attention and love. Hopefully, for once, PGI pullsnit off with flying colors. Not holding my breath of spending any cash though until I see something tangible, for either product.

All you have to do is look at the updates for 2016 to know that MWO isn't getting sufficient development time/money.

[Imperius]

It's exactly what I wanted so I'm happy!

[Wrathful Scythe]

It's better than Transverse. Thats for sure.

Honestly, I'm glad. While it may not make MWO better in a short term, PGI is showing that they don't plan on abandoning the franchise anytime soon. That even makes me wanna buy another mechpack.

[Bombast]

ScarecrowES, on 04 December 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

By the measure of its peers, it's larger and more complex in scope.

You're joking, right? What peers are you referring too?

Anyway, on the original topic - It's a loaded and inappropariate. For better or worse, there is no 'MWO Fund.' There's money you haven't given to PGI, and money you have. They can't use the money you didn't give them for anything. They can use the money you did give them for anything they like. They could have spent it all on hookers and blow, and besides the obvious legal ramifications it wouldn't have 'taken' money from MWO.

The question you may be grasping for is 'How do you feel about PGI working on a competing product.' Which Mechwarrior 5 kind of is.

But before you could answer that question, you'd have to get a consensus to see if that's an opinion held by a reasonable percentage of the userbase. And good luck on that **** show.

[Tarl Cabot]

The Unreal engine for MWO, if it were to happen, will be certainly not happen until after the release of MW5 on the Unreal engine and whether or not PGI is able to or wants to renew the license in 2018, and if renewed would extend it to the 2020s. Russ had noted that the license renewal is based on meeting certain criteria. What the criteria is, that info has not been released though.

But if it is renewed, the MW5 could likely be the foundation for the combat engine of a MWO on the Unreal engine. It is that one way of looking at it?

[Brizna]

They aren't doing anything everybody else does. This is how all companies work, channeling some of the profits from older products into the production of new ones. As soon as you pay them for a product, be it a mech pack or whatever, it is their money and they con do with it whatever they wish, even burning it in company holidays in the Caribbean.

[Wecx]

ScarecrowES, on 04 December 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

MWO is a successful game. By the measure of its peers, it's larger and more complex in scope. Financially, it's able to bring income disproportionately higher than its investment requirements. While MWO is far from the game it could be... and perhaps SHOULD be... I don't know that it's fair to call it a mess, strictly speaking. Nearly all of it works, and works well... relatively speaking. We only tend to think of it as a mess because of our view of what it COULD be.

Now, in terms of one financial success paying for another project... this is par for the course in any media production system. Financial successes in one product are almost always channeled into the next project. We tend to forget that media has a shelf life. One day, even if it was otherwise PERFECT, MWO will run out of steam. And the next big thing needs to be there waiting to capture that audience if the wheel is to keep spinning. This is the business model the entire gaming industry relies on... not to mention print publishing and film, to name a few.

Beyond that, ME5:M is, ostensibly, the single player campaign that MWO players have been clamoring for. For the last few years, we've been crowd-funding this new single player game through the free-to-play model of MWO. All those mech packs have gone to fund the exact content players have been asking for. I can't see why anyone would be upset with that.

Man you have a weird definition of large and complex scope.

[Jun Watarase]

Yea there is a MWO fund. It comprises of all the development resources PGI has.

When they use some of that to work on another product (MW5), it takes time and money away from MWO. Look at 2016 and how little updates the game has had. That's a direct consequence of splitting development time and resources.

Case study : Look at what CCP did with the World of Darkness MMO. They constantly diverted resources away from WoD to work on Eve online instead. This obviously resulted in the WoD MMO being pushed back.

If you have say, 10 developers and you assign them to work on two different games at once, the progress on one game is going to be slower than if you had assigned all 10 to work on that one game at once. This isn't rocket science people.

Whether or not they are "allowed" to do it was never the question. Whether people approve of them doing it was, especially when it results in less development for MWO.

Edited by Jun Watarase, 04 December 2016 - 01:09 AM.

[DaZur]

Keep in mind they're sharing 3d and art assets... As such, both benefit. MM5 gets a running start and MWO gets (eventually) something akin to a "refresh" potentially porting into Unreal.

Or... MWO dies on the vine and as Bandito inferred, between DLC and some online module... Mechwarrior lives on to see another day.

Edited by DaZur, 04 December 2016 - 01:07 AM.

[ScarecrowES]

Bombast, on 04 December 2016 - 01:02 AM, said:

You're joking, right? What peers are you referring too?

I would point you to any other free-to-play online multiplayer-only combat game. The closest peer is likely World of Tanks and its derivatives. By comparison, MWO has more maps, more modes, more vehicles, more customization. It's a MUCH bigger game than its competition and players have much more to do in it.

[Anjian]

Tarl Cabot, on 04 December 2016 - 01:02 AM, said:

The Unreal engine for MWO, if it were to happen, will be certainly not happen until after the release of MW5 on the Unreal engine and whether or not PGI is able to or wants to renew the license in 2018, and if renewed would extend it to the 2020s. Russ had noted that the license renewal is based on meeting certain criteria. What the criteria is, that info has not been released though.

But if it is renewed, the MW5 could likely be the foundation for the combat engine of a MWO on the Unreal engine. It is that one way of looking at it?

Yes.

You need a separate game to test prove the engine, and once you have proven it, and gathered enough working experience with it, you are already way ahead in doing it for MWO. But for that to happen effectively, MWO and MW5 must share a lot of both content and code.

[Bombast]

ScarecrowES, on 04 December 2016 - 01:07 AM, said:

I would point you to any other free-to-play online multiplayer-only combat game. The closest peer is likely World of Tanks and its derivatives. By comparison, MWO has more maps, more modes, more vehicles, more customization. It's a MUCH bigger game than its competition and players have much more to do in it.

Wow.

World of Tanks has more fully fleshed out modes. A non-forced competitive scene. Community Warfare that is both accessible and rewarding. A functional, partially skill based MM. A fully realized advancement path. It's not perfectly balanced, but it does a better job then this game, and does actual statistical analysis to figure out what to change. The armor system alone is more complex then most of MWO.

It also has more maps, more modes, and more vehicles.

Have you ever played WoT?

Edited by Bombast, 04 December 2016 - 01:18 AM.

[Anjian]

ScarecrowES, on 04 December 2016 - 01:07 AM, said:

I would point you to any other free-to-play online multiplayer-only combat game. The closest peer is likely World of Tanks and its derivatives. By comparison, MWO has more maps, more modes, more vehicles, more customization. It's a MUCH bigger game than its competition and players have much more to do in it.

I kind of doubt that from a financial standpoint, the Wargaming empire has revenues of over $500 million last year, and they may well exceed that this year. They are big enough to go buying their game engine, other gaming companies and franchises. All mainly because its World of Tanks franchise.

And you don't need more maps, more modes, more vehicles and more customization. You only need better maps, better modes, and better execution and quality in your content.

[Gaden Phoenix]

All I can say it is their money now. After we give it to them, they can do what they want with it.

I am happy at least with the money they did MW5, and not just kept it in the bank or spent it.

Also more then likely they got some investors to fund MW5.

Edited by Gaden Phoenix, 04 December 2016 - 01:34 AM.