30 replies to this topic

[Bombast]

Nik Reaper, on 13 January 2017 - 05:40 AM, said:

To be honest, I'll be buying it whenever it comes out merely out of a need to make a statement that there is a market for it, the actual product is secondary to me.

Shoveling money onto a product and telling the seller before hand that it has nothing to do with the product itself is not how you make a positive change. Being willing to pay without a good idea of the product is how we got to where we are in the gaming industry to begin with - Being willing to pay regardless of the product is only going to make it worse.

[Kdogg788]

Why would you want the actual product to be secondary when you are paying to fund it? Seems like a waste to me and that you should expect a decent product not push money toward something that you will be happy to see released despite its quality.

-k

[Hit the Deck]

I kinda understand what Nik Reaper said.

Perhaps some people just dearly love the franchise (either BT, MW, or both) and prefer that something is coming out rather than watching the franchise fades into obscurity. On the other hand, if a product(s) carrying the name is bad, it will create a negative impact on the franchise and accelerates the death of what they love even faster.

[Bombast]

Hit the Deck, on 13 January 2017 - 06:19 AM, said:

I kinda understand what Nik Reaper said.

Perhaps some people just dearly love the franchise (either BT, MW, or both) and prefer that something is coming out rather than watching the franchise fades into obscurity. On the other hand, if a product(s) carrying the name is bad, it will create a negative impact on the franchise and accelerates the death of what they love even faster.

If you love a franchise, you really need to be prepared to let it die, either temporarily or forever. Franchises that can survive decades of being mauled are far and few between, and most of them can only do so by periodically gutting themselves (Like Star Wars and Comics), and that's an option that doesn't appear available to BT/MW due to the diffuse nature of it's execution (Too many fingers in the pie at this point).

In any case, telling the world you don't care if its good, you just want more, is basically the fastest way of ruining a series.

[Nik Reaper]

Hit the Deck, on 13 January 2017 - 06:19 AM, said:

I kinda understand what Nik Reaper said.

Perhaps some people just dearly love the franchise (either BT, MW, or both) and prefer that something is coming out rather than watching the franchise fades into obscurity. On the other hand, if a product(s) carrying the name is bad, it will create a negative impact on the franchise and accelerates the death of what they love even faster.

I would disagree, and here's why : Most here should know WH40K or something about it right? , That game while it has a cult fallowing on PC , like this other game we know and love/hate , has never been mainstream and it's sales and exposure to the world is much like everything BT including MW, Hell even Mech Assault made positive waves for the franchise even while being the power up pickups game it was.

So why mention WH40K? Because they use to release a game about it about once or twice several years in the form of space hulk and dawn of war games and that was it, and it retained the cult status ( read small population ) and then GW decided to change the strategy and start licensing it to who ever wanted to pay for it, and you know what? There were / will be some great games and the same for crappy low budget totally missing the point games, but the franchise now has a lot more buzz and every so often a wh40k game comes out , do you think that Eisenhorn the 40k inquisitor game would have been made if it had to have been a flagship product for 40K ?.. not a chance.

My point is I would rather have a buzz about the BT property and have it be represented by as many as possible as a potential cash cow , as there will be quality in all that quantity rather than bury it for a lack of sales and buzz.

Bombast, on 13 January 2017 - 05:46 AM, said:

Shoveling money onto a product and telling the seller before hand that it has nothing to do with the product itself is not how you make a positive change. Being willing to pay without a good idea of the product is how we got to where we are in the gaming industry to begin with - Being willing to pay regardless of the product is only going to make it worse.

So , you do realize that things are now the way they are and will be slow to change , and I will not wait till I am 50 for a revolution that might make things worse along the way so some people could avoid the feeling that the industry is gaming them while shoveling a lot of low end product and a few high end ones, that might have not even have been intended as high end ones, and not being up to there standard.

Accept the fact that the industry right now and 4~5 years from now will not change much and to compete a franchise need attention, much like even bad publicity is good in the end, just look at batman arkham knight, terrible PC launch but so much buzz about it I can guaranty that even with lower front end sales it will have a long tail now that it works, and it's hard to gauge how much attention it brought to all things batman even with negative publicity at that point.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 13 January 2017 - 07:49 AM.

[Bombast]

Nik Reaper, on 13 January 2017 - 07:47 AM, said:

Spoiler

So , you do realize that things are now the way they are and will be slow to change , and I will not wait till I am 50 for a revolution that might make things worse along the way so some people could avoid the feeling that the industry is gaming them while shoveling a lot of low end product and a few high end ones, that might have not even have been intended as high end ones, and not being up to there standard.

Accept the fact that the industry right now and 4~5 years from now will not change much and to compete a franchise need attention, much like even bad publicity is good in the end, just look at batman arkham knight, terrible PC launch but so much buzz about it I can guaranty that even with lower front end sales it will have a long tail now that it works, and it's hard to gauge how much attention it brought to all things batman even with negative publicity at that point.

All I'm reading here is '**** the system, I want minez.'

That line of reasoning has never screwed anything up, ever.

[Monkey Lover]

xengk, on 13 January 2017 - 01:41 AM, said:

Assuming work for MW5 start in late 2014/early 2015 after scraping Transverse, that give them roughly 2 years to reach working prototype stage as shown during MechCon.
Another year or 2, and they reach the usual 3 year development time for standalone PC retail title.

The trailer was a few months of work at most. Most of it was scripted and almost everything 3d was reused from mwo.

I don't believe anything has really been started on this game. They're still hiring programmers.


That being said, they have a lot of models already done and can reuse lots of textures,sounds and other stuff from mwo. So end of 2018 sounds like it could happen for single player.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 13 January 2017 - 07:59 AM.

[Nik Reaper]

An interesting question would be if they go for late 2018 q4 release , should they try for a big release dates like other big brand games that come out about that time or aim for a less congested time? , more so as I expect that MW5 will be a full price 60$ game, probly with a collectors edition for 80~100$.. coz everybody is doing it, I don't think it would do well in the general public as even Titanfall 2 did badly while being an objectively good game because of the competition.

Meaning that they lose some of the time for development if thy need to be releasing before the other big AAA games start coming out.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 13 January 2017 - 08:11 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Nik Reaper, on 13 January 2017 - 08:09 AM, said:

An interesting question would be if they go for late 2018 q4 release , should they try for a big release dates like other big brand games that come out about that time or aim for a less congested time? , more so as I expect that MW5 will be a full price 60$ game, probly with a collectors edition for 80~100$.. coz everybody is doing it, I don't think it would do well in the general public as even Titanfall 2 did badly while being an objectively good game because of the competition.

Meaning that they lose some of the time for development if thy need to be releasing before the other big AAA games start coming out.

I wonder how many would pay 60$ I don't think I would. My cap would be around 30$.

[Nik Reaper]

Well looking at the advertisement, and all that it looks like they are aiming for a full AAA game release, but hey 30~40$ works for me too .

Also does anyone know how much Battletech is expected to cost?

Edited by Nik Reaper, 13 January 2017 - 08:45 AM.

[JediPanther]

This is pgi developing it. I doubt if they had four years they could do it and make it half decent as mwo has been in development for the same amount of time. Without a lot of work behind the scenes and help from catalyst and hbs I expect mw5 to be vapor ware until they put out a playable demo of a level or two for free as share ware. At best I expect mw5 to be half as good as duke nukem forever and look at all the developers and who duke went though.

As for two dev teams that really hasn't effected the pace of mwo's development. We have about 3-4 thread on the lack of january road map. pgi gona pgi.