Jump to content

Online Toxicity And Openness, Are They Related?


70 replies to this topic

#41 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:28 PM

View PostNovember11th, on 26 September 2017 - 08:12 PM, said:

precisely why we should throw all of our financial support behind MWLL and any battletech/mechwarrior movies/tv series that appear on the horizon instead of throwing our money at PGI.


First, MWLL cannot legally take our money. Second, I will not support any Mechwarrior game that is done on Cry engine. Unreal 4 is something I can get behind, though.

#42 Scout Derek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,016 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationSomewhere where you'll probably never go to

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:29 PM

View PostEl Bandito, on 26 September 2017 - 08:28 PM, said:


First, MWLL cannot legally take our money. Second, I will not support any Mechwarrior game that is done on Cry engine. Unreal 4 is something I can get behind, though.


MWO is expected to be upgraded to Unreal 4 following the release of mw5 most likely.

#43 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:32 PM

View PostScout Derek, on 26 September 2017 - 08:29 PM, said:

MWO is expected to be upgraded to Unreal 4 following the release of mw5 most likely.


There will be 2 very important preconditions for this. First, MW5 has to be considered a success. Second, MWO still has a player base large enough to support it.

#44 Scout Derek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,016 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationSomewhere where you'll probably never go to

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:44 PM

View PostMystere, on 26 September 2017 - 08:32 PM, said:


There will be 2 very important preconditions for this. First, MW5 has to be considered a success. Second, MWO still has a player base large enough to support it.


well yes, I assume those conditions would be met IF, the two are mildly satisfied.

we're still about a year out though, before any of this happens, so I guess we'll wait and see.

#45 Wildstreak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 5,154 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:45 PM

View PostJC Daxion, on 26 September 2017 - 12:14 PM, said:

People always talk about openness and the lack of often, in this game and others. It seems like this is not an issue that PGI only has to deal with. I read this interesting article,. about the subject, and boy was it intersting.


Do you think that openness leads to more toxic or less toxic environments?

https://www.pcgamesn...-randall-tweets

No.

#46 Shifty McSwift

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 10:33 PM

View PostAthom83, on 26 September 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

Again its the case of the loud minority making the majority look like jerks. (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ ...


Well as the majority it is our job to shout down such ideas with logic, where they pop up and when able to, and when the response is "you lot are stealin muh free speeks", we shout him down again, as free speech isn't about the freedom to just spout lies and hate, but about giving everyone a voice and a space to speak. Speech that compromises that very foundational ideal, is generally not protected.

By the way what the hell is that emoji doing? Casting a spell?

OIC it now, he is flipping a table lol. Took me long enough Posted Image

Edited by Shifty McSwift, 26 September 2017 - 10:36 PM.


#47 Tyroki

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The God
  • The God
  • 109 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 12:51 AM

View PostNT Hackman, on 26 September 2017 - 11:00 PM, said:

I'll never understand why game companies/developers think their special snowflakes that should be absolved of criticism. When they mess up and people call them out on it they get upset and play the "it's the consumer's fault" card because they refuse to admit they did something wrong. Of course there's always going to be someone heckling them even when they do everything right, but to get mad that people are fed up with incompetence and disingenuous behavior is just stupid. And the term "toxic" is such a hypocritical thing to say when these people treat their customer's like trash and throw fits over something as small as someone saying they weren't happy with their game.


Aaaand quoting to quote elsewhere.
Well said, though I'll uh... fix up that little mistake in the top line.

#48 JC Daxion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 5,230 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 01:25 AM

View PostBombast, on 26 September 2017 - 05:56 PM, said:


Pretty much why PGI just does whatever. Feedback is meaningless, because of half a decade of people publically 'closing their wallets,' and then just as publically flinging them open and throwing hundreds of dollars at the screen because a new shiny was released, or because they whispered 'Mechwarrior 5' in their ear, or something else.

PGI is the Bell of mechs. They have a monopoly, and they know everyones going to buy from them one way or another. They know what most of people complain about doesn't affect what they buy.



See man, i disagree with this. While yes, they do many things that either i don't like, or would not do, and more often the latter because it is not an issue that is important to me. But the thing is, there are very few things this community can agree one.

Honestly one of the few is the whole, I want a city map. But just look at other maps, Some love terra, others hate hot maps, some like small maps like the old frozen, others thing the new is far better. So who do they listen to? I really wish they kept the old Terra and kept it around and just removed Domination from the game. god that map sucked with that mode and the PUG zapper. But it would of made a great escort map, and conquest was great on it too. They could of even just moved the base assault spawns to either the sides, and basically had a 4 corner map that could of been a great fun assault map. Maybe they will bring it back.

But i am a perfect example of a person that only played this game in hopes we got mech 5.. Me ending up loving the game was actually quite a surprise.


@others

as far as hating devs and such, I never have. Basically if a game ends up in some way i don't like i just move on. Far to many great games i enjoy for me to play something i don't. Pretty much the only time i ever got mad at a developer was SOE, and that was because they shut down my favorite game of all time "Star Wars Galaxies" Though that company is kinda gone, I don't think i would purchase one from the new one that spawned. Five+ years later and it still grinds my gears. Cryptic on the other hand that shut down "City of heroes" another game in my top 5 of all time, doesn't bother me as much.. though i can say i didn't like how they changed STO right at launch speeding up space combat. I loved the slow game play, but right after i bought my lifetime sub and they launched it it did piss me off. It didn't make me stop playing, it was more the boring ground combat and not much else to do. I was hoping for a more Starwars galaxies experience, meaning i could play the game for 1k's of hours and never pick up a laser and not be bored and always had something fun to do.

I guess my point on that is, when game companies do something i don't like, i do voice my opinion, but i move on quicker than not.


@cant please everyone and who is right?

Getting back to this game, for me there biggest mistake was getting into FW so soon. For me, they should of just came out and said way back, Look we know you guys want FW, but right now our efforts are going to be on the base game. They could of added many more maps, and spend 1k's of man hours making that base good. I think they would of been far better off if they were kicking off FW at the 4 or 5 year anniversary. But again i don't make the calls.. but i'll bet there are tons of people that would of raged if they said that. They raged when it took as long as it did, i can't imagine what would of happened if they did what i think they should have done. But that is kinda what i think this topic is all about. Had they just come out and said that, Hellfire would of rained down. Instead they did what they did, but get crap because the mode isn't up to what people want you know?




@early access

Though honestly these days anything can set off people. Just look at paradox, How dare they charge for DLC! EA and bioware both get crap for that. I honestly don't care. I buy things that i want. Most of the time i wait.. Like I'm going to be grabbing the mass effect 2 DLC, which actually costs more than the 20 bucks i spent on the whole series lol.. but I've played through the game 3 times, and on my 4th so i more than got my money's worth. Sorta like this one, I don't mind spending from time to time because i just enjoy it. I won't bore you with the list of 2-5 dollar games I've bought that never played because i haven't gotten around to them yet, and MWO is a big reason why. Early access is another thing i don't mind, If like something, i'll grab it, if not, i'll just wait and see. Some Early access games have become darn good games, just like some kickstarter games. Others not so much. The same can be said though for tons of games that were just released as full versions. You are not going to like everything.
@early access.

Edited by JC Daxion, 27 September 2017 - 01:33 AM.


#49 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 27 September 2017 - 01:26 AM

the issue is marketing like promises of game devs which they can't deliver. That leads to dissappointed gamers.

Posted Image

if devs would more honestly communicate the expected reality that would be nice.

Thast where we come to many indie devs, they often have less toxic communities because they don't overpromise with shiny faked advertising pictures. Mostlikely because they don't have time and effort to put a ton of hours into making advertising like hell, and not having an own advertising department.

I think the best example is no mans sky where there were promsies and games features that never existed and ther shitstorm was real because that basically was delivering only the bread of the burger.

So if gaming companies would learn to communicate properly with their customers again, they could simply avoid a lot of their trouble with the community.

So it's not a matter of openess, it's a matter what is said and what is delivered. And Sure sometimes you can't deliver what you prmised even if you try, but the current trend at many devs is exxaggerating what they will deliver. And thats not openess thats kinda cheating (or called "advertising"). But then they don't need to wonder about their customers reactions. So the real title would be:

Online toxicity and honesty are they related?


And PGI is not havign much issues because, well they are rather honest with us. They may do many things that do nto work as needed, but they also don't promise stuff they can't deliver. They also fix stuff we are concerned about (some mechs walking styles). They are doing well in their communication even if we would like more interaction in the Forum.

Edited by Lily from animove, 27 September 2017 - 01:32 AM.


#50 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 06:40 AM

Star Citizen is pretty much an "Inside Look" at game Development and CIG faces tons of toxicity, about pretty much everything. So no, openness does not create a "special" kind of toxicity, it just generates its own "brand" of toxicity. The Dev's can't win either way and given the same choice, I too would simply shut-up and take what BS that generates rather than try and explain to >800 wannabee Armchair Dev's how the real process works, or does not work, whatever the case may be, on any given day.
The only way to WIN that fugly game, is to simply not play... ;)

#51 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 27 September 2017 - 06:47 AM

View PostAlmond Brown, on 27 September 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

Star Citizen is pretty much an "Inside Look" at game Development and CIG faces tons of toxicity, about pretty much everything. So no, openness does not create a "special" kind of toxicity, it just generates its own "brand" of toxicity. The Dev's can't win either way and given the same choice, I too would simply shut-up and take what BS that generates rather than try and explain to >800 wannabee Armchair Dev's how the real process works, or does not work, whatever the case may be, on any given day.
The only way to WIN that fugly game, is to simply not play... Posted Image



well, I guess the issues with SC is that they promised way over what they can deliver. Look at camelot unchained people aren't vey toxic there, if at all, and that game funded also much more than what they wanted (still fraction fo what SC funded). Mostly because they gave pretty much some solid statements of what they gonna do, and what not. And thats not promising rainbowfarting unicorns at the speed of light.

Edited by Lily from animove, 27 September 2017 - 06:50 AM.


#52 Bombast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,709 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 06:57 AM

View PostAlmond Brown, on 27 September 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

Star Citizen is pretty much an "Inside Look" at game Development and CIG faces tons of toxicity, about pretty much everything.


Let's not pretend that Star Citizens problems are related to their developer updates.

#53 Mole

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,314 posts
  • LocationAt work, cutting up brains for a living.

Posted 27 September 2017 - 07:02 AM

I have not read this entire thread but I am going to throw this out there. Maybe PGI rarely ever says anything because it seems every time they do they promptly stick their foot in their mouths. One can only say stupid **** that results in consumerbase shitstorms so many times before you just learn "Maybe I should keep my big dumb mouth shut."

Edited by Mole, 27 September 2017 - 07:03 AM.


#54 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,459 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 27 September 2017 - 11:28 AM

View PostEl Bandito, on 26 September 2017 - 08:28 PM, said:


First, MWLL cannot legally take our money. Second, I will not support any Mechwarrior game that is done on Cry engine. Unreal 4 is something I can get behind, though.

with the same Assets and modelsm serverbased calculation and same Devs the game not looking or playing different in UE4 :D What can created the UE4 what the cryengine not can created????Meleefight ? no problem for the Cryengine, Lighteffects and Outdoor Enviroment Effects=cryengine better (seeing Arek Survival in UE4)...Not the Engine is the problem from MWO

#55 Bombast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,709 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 11:41 AM

View PostOld MW4 Ranger, on 27 September 2017 - 11:28 AM, said:

with the same Assets and modelsm serverbased calculation and same Devs the game not looking or playing different in UE4 Posted Image What can created the UE4 what the cryengine not can created????Meleefight ? no problem for the Cryengine, Lighteffects and Outdoor Enviroment Effects=cryengine better (seeing Arek Survival in UE4)...Not the Engine is the problem from MWO


It's true that an engine change isn't an automatic fix, but its a step in the right direction. By all reports I've seen, UE4 is both capable of more than the CryEngine, and more importantly, it's a LOT easier to work with. The less time developers spend fighting an engine, the more then can spend actually working on a game.

#56 JC Daxion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 5,230 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 12:19 PM

View PostBombast, on 27 September 2017 - 06:57 AM, said:


Let's not pretend that Star Citizens problems are related to their developer updates.



No, their issue is people are just impatient. They want the game, but did not want to wait. though the people that did start out with, hey i want this simple 2-3m game, and that is why i spent money.. Those folks could of just gotten their money back.

But as fast as it ballooned to basically the largest and most ambitious space game ever made.. those people really need to relax and wait. Look at the other space games that have come out since then. You have mass effect that just launched which is probably the closest, but way different in many ways. that took a ton of cash and a huge company that was already established. and elite dangerous that is no where near what SC is going to be. And then No mans sky, which again is not even close.


SC had to build the company from scratch, and so many things changed as it's scope increased. I don't mind the wait. Personally i would of taken the small quick 2-3 year game.. But i am much happier waiting for what could be the most epic space game ever made. I'll just keep my fingers crossed. I can't wait to run my own server!

#57 Lord0fHats

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 619 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 12:30 PM

View PostAthom83, on 26 September 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

Again its the case of the loud minority making the majority look like jerks. (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ ...


This for one.

For two I find there is an inverse relationship between how well you know someone, and how likely that person is to be an *** toward you. Reality is most people don't give a **** about other people unless those people can effect their lives. Now most people are nice anyway because they're not {Richard Cameron} but there's still plenty of {Richard Cameron} in the world and when they interact with people on the internet they don't fear consequences because there really aren't any. What? PGI gonna ban people for not liking their game? Yeah that'll go over well, and that's exactly what people will say when they get banned for being verbose in saying how much they don't like PGI's game.

So there's really nothing to be done about it except growing up, accepting that some people will never grow up, and moving on with life Posted Image

Edited by Lord0fHats, 27 September 2017 - 12:30 PM.


#58 Bombast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,709 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 12:35 PM

View PostJC Daxion, on 27 September 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

SNIP


Yeah, sure. That's it. It's all the 'fans' fault.

Didn't they say that about No Man's Sky too?

Edited by Bombast, 27 September 2017 - 12:35 PM.


#59 JC Daxion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 5,230 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 02:10 PM

View PostBombast, on 27 September 2017 - 12:35 PM, said:


Yeah, sure. That's it. It's all the 'fans' fault.

Didn't they say that about No Man's Sky too?



I'm not sure i get your point.. the game is not even out yet really.. yet the trolling goes on an on. so yea, raging about something that is not released.. Umm that is kinda on you.

No man's sky most of the stuff i read was about it not reaching expectations, but most of that was people reading into what they wanted, and not actually what was in the game, or was in yet. Or getting all pissed off about some promo picture or something. I recall some how they tricked them into buying it was some issue. I dunno about you, but i never got tricked into buying a game.

Sorta like how people get angry when graphics don't live up to what is on the box. (witcher 3 had an issue with this, but it hardly hurt it's sales, but when it launched there was an outcry about it. People might of hesitated a bit, till the roar of greatest game ever made out weighed the graphics are not what they said by about 100 to 1)

I guess when you grew up playing games that had epic box covers with knights and dragons, or hot race cars, and yet the game inside was nothing but some blips on a screen you kinda realize advertising is what it is. In a day where you can just watch game play vids on youtube basically day one, there is zero reason to buy a game you might not like. the last time i picked up something i didn't like. I think it was WOW back at launch.. I liked it enough, in many ways, but SWG was better and i never went back. Since then i think i picked up about 200 games.. It isn't to hard to figure out what you will like if you put the slightest bit of effort in.

No man's sky has come a very long way since launch. Diablo 3 was another one, yet the game has a huge following and tons of updates. No man's sky has been in the steam to 50 a few times recently.. What i find hardest is to sift through the crap reviews filled with salt to actually get an honest review.. Not a nerf rage fest cause a game cost 60 bucks, or has some DLC. Now that is the real trick..

Edited by JC Daxion, 27 September 2017 - 02:10 PM.


#60 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 27 September 2017 - 02:55 PM

I think toxicity develops from dissonance.

That is, you start with a developer statement on "we're making this game".

Perhaps the statement resonates with potential players, so they play.

Over time, a developer can drift from the original "mission statement". Worse, they may seem to (or straight up DO) contradict it in the name of The Vision. This causes dissonance between playerbase and developer.

Dissonance causes players to feel hurt. They hit back and become toxic. PGI has been VERY good at causing dissonant events in the process of development, and has amputated players as they become toxic. This means less potential toxicness, but it also dampens the feeling players have in being part of game development. They contribute less, financially and otherwise as a developer continues to follow their ideas and tends to ignore more of the playerbase.

Apathy and pain are poor ways to boost your game population or convince them to buy another Mechpack.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users