In Re Skills Tree -Russ's Twitter Account
#1
Posted 10 March 2017 - 03:25 PM
1) Apparently in some alternative universe known as "Twitter" PGI has been "as communicative as possible" regarding the skills tree. Oddly I had thought the official forum where they asked US to give them feed back would be a more reasonable place for that "communication", but I guess not.
2) Tonight there is an NGNG broadcast where all the mysteries and explanations regarding the Skills Tree will be disclosed and discussed.
3) There is to be a further node cost reduction before the skills tree goes live.
4) Apparently the skills tree is a "major balance effort" despite balance not being mentioned as a goal of the skills tree.
5) There is more but you can go check out his whole thread at:
https://twitter.com/...7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
#2
Posted 10 March 2017 - 03:28 PM
#3
Posted 10 March 2017 - 03:30 PM
#4
Posted 10 March 2017 - 03:37 PM
Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 March 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:
?!?
What are you talking about?!
Russ said right there that "they have been as communicative as possible". I am certain, that somewhere within all of their copious communications that they have addressed all of your questions and concerns.
Come now, be reasonable...somewhere in the total count of zero posts from PGI since PTS 2.0 dropped I think they have told you everything you needed to know, don't you?
#5
Posted 10 March 2017 - 03:44 PM
#6
Posted 10 March 2017 - 03:51 PM
I'd prefer to pay 100 million c-bills for a skill system that I actually find enjoyable and interesting rather than paying 10 million c-bills and get stuck with this huge mess of randomly positioned nodes and 9000 skills per mech, which is likely to be as boring a mini-game as module hunt ever was.
#7
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:11 PM
Could it be that they are scared of rapid responses and criticism? Well they could just make announcements with locked posts and walk away. Nothing wrong with that.
Maybe it's that they have trouble with sentences longer than 140 characters?
#8
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:31 PM
- Cherry-picking examples of people who profit from the module refund
- "Keep in mind that this is an ongoing process, so this is all work in progress".
- MWO isn't an RPG, so you can't compare it to WOW skill trees
#9
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:35 PM
Alistair Winter, on 10 March 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:
Wait, what? They have to keep the cost high, because people who invested C-Bills into Modules - that they get a 100% refund on - are punished... somehow?!
IGP, this is a new low...
#10
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:42 PM
Jay Leon Hart, on 10 March 2017 - 04:35 PM, said:
Wait, what? They have to keep the cost high, because people who invested C-Bills into Modules - that they get a 100% refund on - are punished... somehow?!
IGP, this is a new low...
Yeah. It's probably the worst argument I've heard in a while.
And now Phil and Daeron are literally going on a 10 minute rant about how people are too negative and expecting too much from PGI, while Russ & Chris Lowrey are just silent and listening.
Oh, crap, that was actually the end of the podcast. They just ended it with that huge rant about how players are inconstructive and expecting too much as a result of their feedback. Way to end the show on a high note. "Y'all are expecting too much, you don't know what you don't know, ok, thanks for supporting our channel and subscribing, we are sponsored by nick*s jerky, good night!"
#11
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:46 PM
Alistair Winter, on 10 March 2017 - 04:42 PM, said:
And now Phil and Daeron are literally going on a 10 minute rant about how people are too negative and expecting too much from PGI, while Russ & Chris Lowrey are just silent and listening.
Oh, crap, that was actually the end of the podcast. They just ended it with that huge rant about how players are inconstructive and expecting too much as a result of their feedback. Way to end the show on a high note. "Y'all are expecting too much, you don't know what you don't know, ok, thanks for supporting our channel and subscribing, we are sponsored by nick*s jerky, good night!"
That was a total waste of time. Costs...blah, blah, blah...we listen, you just don't like what we say sometimes....blah, blah, blah...vague vibe of oh poor us, stop being mean...blah, blah, blah.
Other than the lower costs on nodes (45K) they said NOTHING.
#12
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:50 PM
Man, if only! Wouldn't it be great if we had a way to talk about these things and PGI could respond? Oh well, something like that could never exist.
...
If they want people to "stop being negative" how about we (collective "we") have a conversation?
I can't believe this is annoying me so much, but the audacity of some people...
#13
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:50 PM
TLBFestus, on 10 March 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:
Oh, and don't forget how Russ blocks anyone who delivers him criticism on Twitter.
#14
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:52 PM
Bud Crue, on 10 March 2017 - 04:46 PM, said:
That was a total waste of time. Costs...blah, blah, blah...we listen, you just don't like what we say sometimes....blah, blah, blah...vague vibe of oh poor us, stop being mean...blah, blah, blah.
Other than the lower costs on nodes (45K) they said NOTHING.
Yeah, I didn't understand this podcast at all. Why have a podcast unless you mean to 1) provide some new information or 2) present some sort of olive branch to the community? I joined a bit late, so I may have missed something in the beginning, but it seems like this was just PGI & NGNG saying "We hear you, but we're gonna go ahead as planned anyway". So... why are you telling us this? To yell at the people who said something rude in Twitch chat? I don't get it.
Edited by Alistair Winter, 10 March 2017 - 04:53 PM.
#15
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:52 PM
Jay Leon Hart, on 10 March 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:
Man, if only! Wouldn't it be great if we had a way to talk about these things and PGI could respond? Oh well, something like that could never exist.
...
If they want people to "stop being negative" how about we (collective "we") have a conversation?
I can't believe this is annoying me so much, but the audacity of some people...
I know right? I am way more irritated over the assertion that they are being communicative and then NOT communicating, than I am over ANY aspect of the skills tree -including the nerfing of bad mechs aspect that I have been harping about since the PTS was announced.
#16
Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:59 PM
I left my twitter, my tumbler and my facebook at the bottom
I sent two emails back in autumn
You must not've got 'em
There probably was a problem at the email server or somethin'
Sometime I misclick addresses too often when I jot them
But anyways, **** it, what's been up, man?
#17
Posted 10 March 2017 - 05:13 PM
Alistair Winter, on 10 March 2017 - 04:52 PM, said:
Bud Crue, on 10 March 2017 - 04:52 PM, said:
I know right? I am way more irritated over the assertion that they are being communicative and then NOT communicating, than I am over ANY aspect of the skills tree -including the nerfing of bad mechs aspect that I have been harping about since the PTS was announced.
It's human arrogance. I'm sure they project these attitudes towards their general player base because they simply "know what they are doing". Besides we are just a bunch of stupid customers that just want a decent battletech first person shooter. Why should we listen to your input on how to improve the quality of our viably minimal product? We have a bunch of steam potatoes and nostalgia whales that will buy our 3067 mechs regardless of whatever you say about our game!
Hey kid, want to buy a mech pack?
#18
Posted 10 March 2017 - 05:59 PM
If you don't want to have a convo, it's always easier to blame it on everyone else that doesn't share your views.
#19
Posted 10 March 2017 - 06:24 PM
Oh and
I DEMAND FREE MECH BAYS FOR ALL THIS OTHERWISE WORTHLESS UNUSABLE CBILLS IM GOING TO GET BACK FROM 400 MODULES BECAUSE OF YOUR CBILLS COSTS REDUCTIONS FOR THE SKILL TREE ! PTS 1.0 COSTS WERE FINE !
Edited by Cadoazreal, 10 March 2017 - 06:26 PM.
#20
Posted 10 March 2017 - 06:33 PM
Bud Crue, on 10 March 2017 - 03:25 PM, said:
4) Apparently the skills tree is a "major balance effort" despite balance not being mentioned as a goal of the skills tree.
odds, always kind of garnered that was the idea from the get go. Guess I just paid attention.....
Deathlike, on 10 March 2017 - 05:59 PM, said:
If you don't want to have a convo, it's always easier to blame it on everyone else that doesn't share your views.
when the other side if only interested in saying "**** you, do it my way".... what conversation is there to be had?
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users