Viktor Drake, on 13 June 2017 - 02:43 PM, said:
Actually your not correct at all. The Hardcore Battletech Nerds were the founders like me and way back in closed beta, PGI announced that they had decided that the founders didn't matter because we weren't the demographic they were trying to appeal to. They lost a ton of the lets call them "Backers" that were looking for a true Battletech experience out of the game.
So sorry, your wrong, this game isn't built for the Hardcore Battletech Nerds, not even close. Most of us wanted MW:LL to be honest only with better quality graphics, more stability and updated game play.
(victor, please don't take this whole post as directed at you.. It is more of a general post about what you posted about.. ok?
)
You know it's funny how many people call themselves hardcore battletech nerds, yet point to previous BT games like Mech warrior 3 which was extremely flawed and broken. (though a fun game if you could deal with the bugs, and didn't mind restarting missions)
Mech 4 fixed a bit, but still had issues, the biggest one being a race to assaults. Heck even with all the mektek packs adding tons of stuff they didn't really do anything to address the core issues with the game, and many of the add ons just made um worse.
Mech commander 1, was fun, but you could easily break the campaign with a few key salvages, or just confuse the AI or pull cheap tactics with mine layers and such.
Mech 2 was a bit easier over all, and worked well. But again you could simply confuse the enemy AI if you wanted to. I thought balance was a bit better too if you kept away from the all the cheap exploits. Mech commander 2 was the most polished/balanced of all the old titles IMO. At least you could control the AI's a bit, unlike what could be asbolutly stupid pilot action in mech 4. Though that game you could just own everything yourself, so they were more fodder anyway.
That is not to say they all weren't fun games, But come one be real here. This version is basically balanced better than any of the previous titles, and has far few bugs over all. From at least the pvp and balance stand point. (mech 4 wasn't to bad on the bug issue) I do think this game could do better with maps. I recall some of the very mountainous maps in Mech 4 as being really great. But this game is more of the arena shooter. How you going to please? Every time they release a large map half the population says they are to big.. and small map, half say its to small. It's a no win situation with everything in the game.
To me this population has a huge issue with What they wanted the game to be, and what it is. That is where the problem is. I see people bring up MWLL all the time like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's really not. It is neat for what it is, and has it's fans, but so does morrowwind and no one would say, release that game today as is and it would be a total hit. If this game had that games level of polish i would hate to see the reaction from this crowd.
To me the biggest issue this game has is the player base. Like many games previous that were driven into the ground because people couldn't deal with decisions. I hope that does not happen here, and with single player and BT coming i think they are growing, not shrinking despite the negative responses from some.
Just take the Clan autocannon as a tiny example. There are still people loosing their minds that the clan AC isn't worth using even if it is just a place holder. So many things in this game are like that too. Makes me sad that folks can't just enjoy what we have. A pretty darn fun mech arena shooter. Best arena shooter on the market IMO, which is why i play.
this game reminds me a lot of some great games i saw go under.. and years later i talk to someone about how great they are. I get a blank look and people saying really? I heard nothing but bad things about it so i never bothered. It's really why i stopped listening to any internet rhetoric in the first place. After avoiding mass effect 3 for years.. (never got around to playing any of them actually) but i just kept putting it off because i rarely saw anything positive about it. I finally played and thought.. Wow people said this was the worst game ever because they didn't like the art direction the game took in the last 15 mins of a 100 hour trilogy.
It's ok that a game doesn't live up to all your expectations. Is it fun to play though, play it, if not i can only hope folks find something they like. But honestly i find that less likely. Steam is a perfect example because you can stalk people!
Read a negative comment, then click on their profile and see what they actually like, or how they act on other games forums. More often than not some nerd rage hating on a game is a trend no mater what game they are talking about.. Even games they put 1k's of hours in get thumbs down and worse game ever if a patch hits they don't like.
this game has thousands of players.. If they all posted about it on their FB's, twitters, what ever.. maybe folks might find it fun. I'm sure tons of the players have kids, why aren't they playing it? Want to grow a game, kids is how you do it. They are typically more forgiving about short comings when it comes to lore as well.. So win/win right?
as always, Happy gaming
3
