131 replies to this topic

[Ratpoison]

Juodas Varnas, on 23 June 2017 - 11:58 PM, said:

And i'd probably not do that.

I would definitely support transferring to UE4 from this butchered abomination of a Cryengine. I'd fund the **** outta it.
Especially if it came with complementary quads.

Moving to a new engine will require a new mode to showcase it and get attention. Solaris would be perfect for that, so how about both?

[Deathlike]

Ratpoison, on 23 June 2017 - 11:50 PM, said:

A lot of people on this forum really seem to love hating on any suggested payment option for content without offering any suggestion on how said content can be monetized in order to, you know, fund development for said content. Paying salaries for the entire development team is extremely expensive, and it has to have a way to fund itself with the productivity. Solaris will need its own maps, its own UI, its own sound and graphical effects, probably its own mechs, and it absolutely needs to have quality voice acting. That's a hell of a lot of salaries to pay, and there's no way in hell that giving it away for free is going to fund it. If the players aren't willing to do it then it simply wont happen, and we get to go back to monthly mech packs because they provide proven stable funding for the current level of development. The Urbie had to get a hell of a lot of preorder support to get funded because light mechs repeatedly failed to monetize well even though they cost just as much to make. Solaris is the same, on a much bigger scale.

And no, an empty statement like "make the core game better" is not a monetization suggestion, or even a development suggestion. It's simple negativity that offers nothing, and is exactly why the developers "don't listen" to you. Any suggestion you want to be heard needs to take into account development costs, technical limitations, opposing community opinions, effects on balance, and most importantly you need to be respectful about it. No company in any market is going to take business suggestions from spiteful, aggressively negative people who line every suggestion with "you all suck and fail at life" like a child throwing a tantrum. The forums fail to do this so often that it's very easy to see why PGI doesn't interact with them more.

TL;DR: Yes, I would absolutely help put down preorder money to prove to PGI that developing Solaris is financially viable, and I would encourage everyone who wants to ever see it happen do the same because it wont pay for itself.

The problem is that CW/FP was founded on a promise back in Beta, and look how it turned out.

I would not put money in the hands of people that aren't capable of delivering a product that they claimed would be the endgame of sorts... especially in the aspect that they didn't even come close to any of their own specified guidelines/implementation specs when they kept mentioning it.

[Ratpoison]

Deathlike, on 24 June 2017 - 12:16 AM, said:

The problem is that CW/FP was founded on a promise back in Beta, and look how it turned out.

I would not put money in the hands of people that aren't capable of delivering a product that they claimed would be the endgame of sorts... especially in the aspect that they didn't even come close to any of their own specified guidelines/implementation specs when they kept mentioning it.

Sure, you can hold onto your petty grudge, refuse to check your own unrealistic expectations, ignore over 5 years of changes and a publishing rights buyout, and MechWarrior can go back to having no games for another decade. Happy?

[Deathlike]

Ratpoison, on 24 June 2017 - 12:24 AM, said:

Sure, you can hold onto your petty grudge, refuse to check your own unrealistic expectations, ignore over 5 years of changes and a publishing rights buyout, and MechWarrior can go back to having no games for another decade. Happy?

It's not a grudge when even the people that support PGI wonder why they spent all the time to put out.... what was put out.

If you put in a feature that doesn't really work as intended and not really work on the core issues... what makes you think the Solaris version would be better?

Like, a lot of that stuff you're mentioning is really "sure, but does that justify the results?" I would say no here.

I have no qualms with the idea that we have no game, because right now, we don't have much of a game beyond adding more mechs to the game. Leaderboards are mostly inconsequential. CW/FP is requires bribes before it gets filled. If things don't work properly on their own, it's probably a design issue... and that's on PGI.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 June 2017 - 12:28 AM.

[Ratpoison]

Deathlike, on 24 June 2017 - 12:26 AM, said:

It's not a grudge when even the people that support PGI wonder why they spent all the time to put out.... what was put out.

If you put in a feature that doesn't really work as intended and not really work on the core issues... what makes you think the Solaris version would be better?

Like, a lot of that stuff you're mentioning is really "sure, but does that justify the results?" I would say no here.

I have no qualms with the idea that we have no game, because right now, we don't have much of a game beyond adding more mechs to the game. Leaderboards are mostly inconsequential. CW/FP is requires bribes before it gets filled. If things don't work properly on their own, it's probably a design issue... and that's on PGI.

As usual with posts complaining about FW, a whole lot of negative talk with no actual suggestions on how it could be done better with a userbase this small. Perhaps you haven't ever played community warfare modes in other games, but they are pretty much all like this or worse. If you can seriously stay this bitter for this long over flaws that showed up in the most difficult to create multiplayer mode in all of gaming, then your support wasn't ever genuine. You put all your faith in a concept you didn't actually understand, and that is no one's fault but your own. Being bitter about it isn't going to make your dreams come true, and it wont improve the game or the franchise.

[Juodas Varnas]

Ratpoison, on 24 June 2017 - 12:16 AM, said:

Moving to a new engine will require a new mode to showcase it and get attention. Solaris would be perfect for that, so how about both?

Quadruped mechs > Solaris

Though, i would love to have a Quadruped mech IN Solaris.

[Ratpoison]

Juodas Varnas, on 24 June 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

Quadruped mechs > Solaris

Though, i would love to have a Quadruped mech IN Solaris.

We already know it wont happen without an engine change, so funding features that encourage an engine change is directly in your best interest.

[Deathlike]

Ratpoison, on 24 June 2017 - 12:40 AM, said:

As usual with posts complaining about FW, a whole lot of negative talk with no actual suggestions on how it could be done better with a userbase this small. Perhaps you haven't ever played community warfare modes in other games, but they are pretty much all like this or worse. If you can seriously stay this bitter for this long over flaws that showed up in the most difficult to create multiplayer mode in all of gaming, then your support wasn't ever genuine. You put all your faith in a concept you didn't actually understand, and that is no one's fault but your own. Being bitter about it isn't going to make your dreams come true, and it wont improve the game or the franchise.

I have actually posted about fixes for it, but these are not "quick fixes" as fixing the flaws in FP/CW is not that simple. Of course it goes unanswered but even then, it's not like PGI had a good plan or though of the consequences of their own actions like the Long Tom. I'm willing to bet that whatever "Secret Squirrels" that exist probably mentioned the Long Tom to potentially be problematic.

Other games strive to put time and effort, if not just for polish, but for actual results. Not every game is perfect, nor the same... but seeing other F2P games that do things right, by comparison, makes what PGI is doing to be "woefully insufficient"... and that's being nice.

Part of feedback actually REQUIRES developer intervention to weed out the bad ideas, and ask for certain level of clarification of things AND improving upon it. None of which gets exhibited here on a regular basis.

Just lumping people that have concerns and let them get ignored and the problem manifesting itself in an obvious form to all to see... well, it's not like people said nothing.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 June 2017 - 01:20 AM.

[maxdest]

new Solaris games / map modes inserted into quick play with normal voting.

breaks 24 players into multiple games if needed (e.g would form 12 1vs1 games)

Every week there is a Solaris mode picked for tournament, and a leaderboard runs for a full week. To participate in leaderboard need to have premium time running. Top level participants get a prize, but more importantly a title and a rank they can display until next time that Solaris event runs.

Pre sales would be similar to mechcon -
- early access to new maps in testing grounds (but not elsewhere)
- a batch of triggersble premium time at a discount
- some cosmetics / titles

However important thing is all maps and modes available to all ( but you can't win the leaderboard without using premium time)

[Chound]

Tarogato, on 23 June 2017 - 07:39 PM, said:

I've always suggested Solaris as a rotating schedule, it would look something like this,

Week 1 --- 1v1
Week 2 --- FFA
Week 3 --- 4v4
Week 4 --- back to 1v1, and so on.


Could even have a week of 2v2 as well. Rotating schedule alleviates queue/bucket issues, so could realistically have as many "modes" as you like.

swap 4v4 and FFA so FFA is the last event. That would make it the equivalent of Galetera.
wk 1 1v1
wk2 2v2
wk3 4v4
wk4 FFA again there would be an option for solo matches but you must have the requirted number of people. At solaris you chose 1v1 or group according to the group tourney schedule similar to competative but no declared teams more like the group mode in qp.

[Chound]

Summon3r, on 23 June 2017 - 07:43 PM, said:

if they are looking for additional revenue streams (which it certainly sounded that way) solaris pay 2 play is an absolute no brainer with p2p DLC's. FFA of some number of course. MLL has a very fun solaris they could look at.

They could make Solaris as a mode using premium time or mc the way the private lobby was

[Tarogato]

Chound, on 24 June 2017 - 01:27 AM, said:

They could make Solaris as a mode using premium time or mc the way the private lobby was

Russ just tweeted that Solaris would be available for F2P. So I dunno how they plan to monetise it.

[Chound]

kapusta11, on 24 June 2017 - 12:10 AM, said:

• 10 players FFA, everyone's on their own
  
• Map: Solaris Coliseum. Dynamic cover pops up/down from the ground, lights attached to it change color to signal cover blocks movement.
  
• Week long event/game mode
  
• For the duration of the event players allowed to play specified chassis. For example, this week everyone plays Banshee 3E, players can use whatever loadout they want but in order to enter the queue they must use Banshee 3E
  
• Leaderboards. Hiding the entire game won't work, you'll need high score in order to be ranked high on the leaderboard.
  
• MC rewards for the top 10 players
  
• C-bills and MC (mechbays) sink

some people may not have the chassis required and would be left out. People need to be able to use anyt mech unless it's a special event. so maybe all mechs of a certain class or sorted by tiers. one match 10 mechs a counter on how many mechs currently waiting for drop displayed so player can elect to exit back out if needed

[Ratpoison]

Deathlike, on 24 June 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

I have actually posted about fixes for it, but these are not "quick fixes" as fixing the flaws in FP/CW is not that simple. Of course it goes unanswered but even then, it's not like PGI had a good plan or though of the consequences of their own actions like the Long Tom. I'm willing to bet that whatever "Secret Squirrels" that exist probably mentioned the Long Tom to potentially be problematic.

Other games strive to put time and effort, if not just for polish, but for actual results. Not every game is perfect, nor the same... but seeing other F2P games that do things right, by comparison, makes what PGI is doing to be "woefully insufficient"... and that's being nice.

Part of feedback actually REQUIRES developer intervention to weed out the bad ideas, and ask for certain level of clarification of things AND improving upon it. None of which gets exhibited here on a regular basis.

Just lumping people that have concerns and let them get ignored and the problem manifesting itself in an obvious form to all to see... well, it's not like people said nothing.

Your seething negativity makes it plainly obvious why your suggestions don't get heard. It's all over nearly all of your posts and your profile. You aren't willing to even acknowledge what they do without implying extreme incompetence on an unfair level. F2P games, especialy today, are full of cesspool cash vampires that have no concern for the players or games at all, fully embracing pay to win mechanics in the name of profit, and PGI has absolutely handled this game better than most of them. You unfairly expect results on par with companies that have budgets a dozen or more times larger than PGI has ever had, and project your disappointment onto them rather than checking your own unrealistic expectations.

The amount of work PGI has put into community demanded features(like that long tom you hate) is staggering compared to most F2P games of its size, yet you put them on par with the most extortive F2P games in existence. Of course, I don't expect you to change at all after commiting to this attitude for 28k posts, but you absolutely stand as a strong example to others of how spiteful negativity stagnates progress and communication.

Edited by Ratpoison, 24 June 2017 - 02:35 AM.

[Sunstruck]

I love Solaris, I would support the expansion.

You could use the different class arenas like a division system. Mechwarriors just starting out fight in the woodland lower class arenas, and as you gain wins can progress to the larger arenas, untill your reach the grand tournament with the top 128 (I think it was) contenders.

Also melee is a big part of the unique solaris mechs made for the gladitorial circuit. The table top Solaris 7 box set came with special mechs that had like claws and other meelee weapons. There are a lot of famous mechs ax-man, hatchet man that were a big part of solaris.

I could go on and on about Solaris 7 since its really my favorite part of the battletech universe.

Also theres the spectator element, watching matches, or even betting small amounts of cbills, I guess that would be a role twitch could play. Would there be scheduled finals?

[Bud Crue]

Ratpoison, on 24 June 2017 - 02:27 AM, said:

Your seething negativity makes it plainly obvious why your suggestions don't get heard. It's all over nearly all of your posts and your profile. You aren't willing to even acknowledge what they do without implying extreme incompetence on an unfair level. F2P games, especialy today, are full of cesspool cash vampires that have no concern for the players or games at all, fully embracing pay to win mechanics in the name of profit, and PGI has absolutely handled this game better than most of them. You unfairly expect results on par with companies that have budgets a dozen or more times larger than PGI has ever had, and project your disappointment onto them rather than checking your own unrealistic expectations.

The amount of work PGI has put into community demanded features(like that long tom you hate) is staggering compared to most F2P games of its size, yet you put them on par with the most extortive F2P games in existence. Of course, I don't expect you to change at all after commiting to this attitude for 28k posts, but you absolutely stand as a strong example to others of how spiteful negativity stagnates progress and communication.

You've been around since 2012. You've seen the "amount of work PGI has put into community demanded features". Surely you can't have helped but notice that the "community demanded features" we have now in terms of CW or the arena shooter that forms the basis of this game is NOTHING like what PGI once promised nor continues to promise? Yes, surface changes. Yes, constant tennis like changes to mech an weapons values. But beyond that, PGI's development of this product is not remotely what the community was promised nor what PGI even continues to promise. The "seething negativity" within some elements of the community is simply a consequence of that continued failure.

Consider the town hall last night. The community both here, and on reditt and even twitter has been in a lather regarding energy rebalance for the last week. Yet, PGI dismisses those concerns with two questions that come down to "we have some internal values that we balance against" ...and that's it. That is not what was asked, that is useless "information" it is insulting, condescending and frankly lazy. It is, in short, exactly how PGI engages its community and has for the last 5 years and people have every right to be "negative" about it.

As to your larger point, it is likewise totally reasonable to expect in the future based on precedent from the past. Based on CW's initial bait and switch introduction and its subsequent development cycle of ignore it for six months at a time, break it, and repeat; it should not be surprising that some people feel less than excited -even quite negative- about PGI's current promise of a Solaris mode.

We all hope for the best, but you would be an idiot to expect some shocking alternative to a minimally viable product, if that is all that has been delivered in the past. Thus, what you see as negativity, I see as a realistic outlook.

[Imperius]

Ratpoison, on 23 June 2017 - 11:50 PM, said:

A lot of people on this forum really seem to love hating on any suggested payment option for content without offering any suggestion on how said content can be monetized in order to, you know, fund development for said content. Paying salaries for the entire development team is extremely expensive, and it has to have a way to fund itself with the productivity. Solaris will need its own maps, its own UI, its own sound and graphical effects, probably its own mechs, and it absolutely needs to have quality voice acting. That's a hell of a lot of salaries to pay, and there's no way in hell that giving it away for free is going to fund it. If the players aren't willing to do it then it simply wont happen, and we get to go back to monthly mech packs because they provide proven stable funding for the current level of development. The Urbie had to get a hell of a lot of preorder support to get funded because light mechs repeatedly failed to monetize well even though they cost just as much to make. Solaris is the same, on a much bigger scale.

And no, an empty statement like "make the core game better" is not a monetization suggestion, or even a development suggestion. It's simple negativity that offers nothing, and is exactly why the developers "don't listen" to you. Any suggestion you want to be heard needs to take into account development costs, technical limitations, opposing community opinions, effects on balance, and most importantly you need to be respectful about it. No company in any market is going to take business suggestions from spiteful, aggressively negative people who line every suggestion with "you all suck and fail at life" like a child throwing a tantrum. The forums fail to do this so often that it's very easy to see why PGI doesn't interact with them more.

TL;DR: Yes, I would absolutely help put down preorder money to prove to PGI that developing Solaris is financially viable, and I would encourage everyone who wants to ever see it happen do the same because it wont pay for itself.

I've told Russ multiple times how to sell maps. Last night he shot that idea down for good. MWO is pvp only! Ok, so enjoy only being able to sale mech packs!

My suggestion I've offered for years was to add single player missions for the maps. Each new set of missions would feature a new map. The map would be added for free for pvp and paid for by us who would like some PVE action!

Or you could just upgrade the game to Unreal already and look into random map generation. Honestly the game has had very few "balanced" maps since the beginning. So please spare me that excuse. You still could hand craft some pvp focused maps for the precious pvp comp mode that stole all the balance suggestions I wanted implemented into group queue!

[sycocys]

While I have no particular interest in Solaris (or would likely pay for it myself) - if they ran it as a p2p "expansion" mode, I'd have zero issues with that. If it becomes super popular then more people will probably buy it and it will by just having fewer mechs on the field be far more balanced than anything else the game has to offer.

If they really can prove that they can produce GOOD game content with something like Solaris, then I'd consider paying for other expansion modes like - PVP Campaigns (lesser scale of faction warfare, just 2 teams matching up for multi match "story" driven type matches), Tech restricted modes (IS v IS/ Clan v Clan/ Stock), a take all challengers/survival mode (teams drop, winning team stays on the field against whatever team lines up next- no repairs, win until you die) and such things that would offer more interesting gameplay.

But they'd also have to commit to continue to develop the two f2p modes (would be foolish not to, but PGI) so that there could continue to be a general population pool and places where everyone could duke it out. Really for the game to continue to survive they have to come up with a better monetization plan than mechpacks because that market is already crazy oversaturated as it is.
For the pvp game mode expansions is probably the best model they could do, past the probably the next best thing they could do is port the whole game to unreal and sell MW5 as mini single player and team campaigns (which will also give them the ability to add be ai for more pvp modes).

[Wibble in a Clan can]

I have long thought a Campaign mode or 2 is the way to go for mwo. You could do this for solaris- have a budget allocated, a dropdeck isolated from main account for the "season". Get as far as possible with salvage and winnings + limited budget to repair etc. The sort of management features ppl have always been wanting in mwo. To monetise-free to play players could "quickplay" the mode, but campaign features and prizes would be limited to paying players (???maybe)

Same idea can be applied to regular quicklpay & FW modes (essentially added management on ui side and seeding FW/quickplay cues to help with bucket issues. Each campaign/mission requiring a certain # of victories with allocated number of mechs/lives. Increase victories required or reduce budget/number of mechs to add challenge) but Solaris is a great place to start.

I would pay for such features-and game modes with variable metrics beyond 4v4 and 12v12.

Also for added features involving map packs- such as single player missions, AI-wave mode (solo/team) on said maps etc.

Edited by Wibble in a Clan can, 24 June 2017 - 05:35 AM.

[Tordin]

TheB33f, on 23 June 2017 - 07:48 PM, said:

Beside adding melee to the game, 1v1 and/or FFA queue is probably the feature I want the most.

I want solaris in my body.



Maybe do something similar to Overwatch's brawl?(different tab,multiple modes on rotations) Maybe a spectator placing cbill bets system a la Salty Bets? One thing for sure is it needs to be simple. I want to click a button and fight somebody.

Oh and get my boy George Ledoux/Duncan Fisher on the job.

Totally agreed. I would love FFA with maybe 6, 12, 16, 24 players etc. Survival of the fittest. With even max numbers of every class. Like if theres 16 player FFA. 4 lights, 4 mediums, 4 heavies, 4 assaults.
And ofcourse with George Ledoux (Duncan Fisher) onboard.