70 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

Are we still on an island, according to Russ?

[Jun Watarase]

Did you save the star wars developer post for that?

Edited by Jun Watarase, 26 September 2017 - 04:28 PM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

I'm just a person who openly speaks their mind or opinions to someone, the internet allows me to do that with a further range in hopes people improve their flaws and feel good about what they have.

[Nightmare1]

The bottom line should be this: Is your behavior appropriate? Would you act like that in front of someone whom you hope will have a good opinion of you? Is your behavior crude, boorish, or antagonistic? If you can't provide good answers to these questions, then you need to change your behavior. Just because I can be rude to someone, doesn't mean that I should. There's really no excuse for bad attitudes and bad behavior.

A lot of these people act this way because it's an online game and they feel that they can get away with misbehaving. They probably wouldn't act the same way in RL because they know that the people around them, particularly the target of their abuse, would hard-check them, possibly physically. I know that in my workplace, acting out like some of these characters do online would immediately result in a written reprimand and possibly even suspension for unprofessional conduct, offensive language, and/or workplace harassment. I've actually handed out such reprimands myself, but the Internet has less repercussions, so people of poor character feel emboldened in their abuse of others.

In the end, it's about a lack of respect for your fellow players, and a lack of dignity for the offending individual.

Fortunately, PGI (though slow) is working to cut down on the number of caustic players. There was one (I won't name him) who was so bad that he was finally banned for his behavior. I even made it a point to cut a video of him in game for reporting purposes (It got a surprising amount of hits). This shows that PGI is dedicated to improving the quality of our games, and I think it's a positive sign. Unfortunately, this character made an alt recently, which is something many toxic players and hackers do, so we'll never be completely rid of the trash-talkers, but at least we can look forward to matches that aren't filled with toxicity since these bad apples will be checked from time to time by the devs. In the long run, if we're lucky, then perhaps they will even be IP banned so that no one has to deal with them again.

[Athom83]

Tyroki, on 26 September 2017 - 02:30 PM, said:

There is a huge problem with his tweets.
While yes, there are idiots out there that do little more than demand a game be redesigned for them to enjoy, there are still plenty of reasons to be angry/hateful towards certain developers. Especially the scummy, seedy ones that screw people over in one way or another. Some circles will never forgive Randy Pitchford and Gearbox Software over their treatment of Alien's: Colonial Marines, for example. So long as you aren't yelling and screaming and threatening to hunt the douchenugget down, some degree of anger and distrust is a given.

I didn't think A:CM was that bad. Sure, it wasn't the Alien game we all wanted, and there were a fair share of bugs and "features" but it was still a decent game nonetheless.

Tyroki, on 26 September 2017 - 02:30 PM, said:

The moment people stop being angry is when some devs win, and bad practices continue.

The seedy devs and bad practices happen anyway despite the anger. I don't think many people realize how bad the Indie scene on Steam can get with foreign developers ripping assets, plagiarizing gameplay, lying directly to the players, threatening people with physical harm and/or legal action who give a negative review, and screw people over who bought the games for sale on the "greenlight for keys" sites that did pay actual money for the game yet the developer refused to give them their keys.

Tyroki, on 26 September 2017 - 02:30 PM, said:

Edit 2: In PGI's case, they fostered anger through sheer incompetence and greed. Yes, they blamed the 'greed' part on their 'ex-publisher', yet the greed never truly went away. Honestly, if there was an alternative to this game that wasn't Gundam related, I'd probably be there.

Eh... there is Chromehounds. Yah, XBox exclusive and basically no online play anymore. Maybe we should be pushing for Chromehounds 2 for PC!

[InvictusLee]

Idk man.
I want to bash PGI, but I feel like we share alot of the blame too.
I am really really salty when it comes to some of the stuff PGI does...

but at the same time we are throwing our money at PGI during sales and when a new mechpack goes up for pre-sale.

[Bombast]

November11th, on 26 September 2017 - 05:49 PM, said:

but at the same time we are throwing our money at PGI during sales and when a new mechpack goes up for pre-sale.

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.

[Valdarion Silarius]

I think this community is too small to be toxic honestly. Which imo is kinda odd for such a niche franchise and I'm surprised that it isn't more openly toxic. Normally the smaller the community shrinks the more cancerous die hards take over. I wouldn't necessarily call the forums toxic since there are many people that have common sense and are also in agreement when it comes to certain topics and matters. I've only seen 1 or 2 individuals that try to derail a thread from a meaningful discussion every so often.

Try out the old DooM and old Mount and Blade:Warband community. You will see the definition of toxic if you lurk there long enough.

[Valdarion Silarius]

November11th, on 26 September 2017 - 05:49 PM, said:

but at the same time we are throwing our money at PGI during sales and when a new mechpack goes up for pre-sale.

I sure as hell don't. I do agree that a part of the community is at fault for supporting stupid decisions. Yet again, I think those whales are financially secure and really don't care about how they throw their money around which adversely hurts the game more in the long run.

[Tyroki]

Athom83, on 26 September 2017 - 05:31 PM, said:

I didn't think A:CM was that bad. Sure, it wasn't the Alien game we all wanted, and there were a fair share of bugs and "features" but it was still a decent game nonetheless.

It wasn't the game we wanted? It wasn't even the game they advertised!
It took a lot of work for modders to get the game to where it is now, and even they admit it's still not good enough.
A:CM, if you recall, was the result of Gearbox putting their hand up to make something, then throwing the work at someone else entirely while still aiming to reap the rewards. Some of us will never let Pitchford live that one down =P

Athom83, on 26 September 2017 - 05:31 PM, said:

The seedy devs and bad practices happen anyway despite the anger. I don't think many people realize how bad the Indie scene on Steam can get with foreign developers ripping assets, plagiarizing gameplay, lying directly to the players, threatening people with physical harm and/or legal action who give a negative review, and screw people over who bought the games for sale on the "greenlight for keys" sites that did pay actual money for the game yet the developer refused to give them their keys.

Yeah. It's pretty damn bad.
Good thing there are people willing to call these douchenuggets out on their bad practices.

Athom83, on 26 September 2017 - 05:31 PM, said:

Eh... there is Chromehounds. Yah, XBox exclusive and basically no online play anymore. Maybe we should be pushing for Chromehounds 2 for PC!

... Consoles.
Man, I haven't done the console thing since... the original Xbox.
I uh... I kinda miss Phantom Crash.

Jun Watarase, on 26 September 2017 - 04:27 PM, said:

Did you save the star wars developer post for that?

This is back before I'd learned that screenshotting the posts of important people was a necessity.
Back when I was naive enough to figure things like that would be archived through the internet forever.
But that post is what put the nail in that games coffin for me, which is the only reason I remember it.

[kuma8877]

Jun Watarase, on 26 September 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:

snip.

But isn't this how the great games are usually made? Or movies, or books written? Someone's personal vision (or several) is quite often the backbone for such projects (though it may take many additional people to see it to fruition) and if that vision is clouded via committee rule (from outside of the creative circle), what so often happens? It's turned to mushy garbage where bold steps were needed instead to crest into greatness.

Sure, feedback and market research are useful tools, but it's kinda like always living in the past following what was useful before, to dictate what you'll do next. Players clamor for innovation in games/entertainment these days, but if you ask them what they'd do to make a game better, it's quite often, just point to something that's been done before....no innovation or creativity involved at all. Just, do that, but better.

Now admittedly, a F2P game is kind of a different animal with ongoing production and upkeep costs going on, where player feedback can be quite subjective at any given moment and yet important to player retention and game health if not heeded to some degree.

I would offer Warframe as a fairly good example of a F2P game, listening to it's players through the years, while still always striving to achieve the vision of more action, more ninja's and more space to play in.

I honestly think PGI is heading in the direction of a more healthy company internally, which can only lead to better output in the long run. A little slower than I think many of us would prefer, but in a better direction none the less.

[Khobai]

people arnt toxic because devs are secretive. that has nothing to do with it.

the reality is people were ALWAYS toxic. the world has always been full of awful sh*theads that want to ruin everything for everyone else just because they can. that is nothing new. the internet just gave all those toxic people a place to congregate and unify towards a single purpose, and do so anonymously.

devs arnt at fault. whats at fault is the decadence of society as a whole and the absence of basic human decency and civility lol. I blame parents and the school system. they need to do better jobs of making sure their kids dont turn into {Richard Cameron}

wanna fight toxicity? the fight starts at home lol.

Quote

Are we still on an island, according to Russ?

that whole island statement was toxic which is why players responded with even more toxicity. thats a good example of how being secretive and saying nothing actually wouldve been the less toxic choice

if devs cant be diplomatic about what they say its probably best to say nothing lol

Edited by Khobai, 26 September 2017 - 06:49 PM.

[Jun Watarase]

kuma8877, on 26 September 2017 - 06:32 PM, said:

But isn't this how the great games are usually made? Or movies, or books written? Someone's personal vision (or several) is quite often the backbone for such projects (though it may take many additional people to see it to fruition) and if that vision is clouded via committee rule (from outside of the creative circle), what so often happens? It's turned to mushy garbage where bold steps were needed instead to crest into greatness.

Sure, feedback and market research are useful tools, but it's kinda like always living in the past following what was useful before, to dictate what you'll do next. Players clamor for innovation in games/entertainment these days, but if you ask them what they'd do to make a game better, it's quite often, just point to something that's been done before....no innovation or creativity involved at all. Just, do that, but better.

Now admittedly, a F2P game is kind of a different animal with ongoing production and upkeep costs going on, where player feedback can be quite subjective at any given moment and yet important to player retention and game health if not heeded to some degree.

I would offer Warframe as a fairly good example of a F2P game, listening to it's players through the years, while still always striving to achieve the vision of more action, more ninja's and more space to play in.

I honestly think PGI is heading in the direction of a more healthy company internally, which can only lead to better output in the long run. A little slower than I think many of us would prefer, but in a better direction none the less.

The thing with books/movies is that they are very much hit and miss. Give a writer full control and they may make the next hit, or more likely, it will be a dud. Wanna see what happens when editors don't enforce quality control? Japan has this thing where they keep making manga/light novels that are all basically blatant copies of each other with minor variations. Their editors dont step in and say "wait a minute this is just a ripoff of that popular series...".

If you want to do your own thing, OK, self publish then. People do it all the time with indie movies or whatever. But you have to accept that because its your vision, its often not what other people want and it wont generate much money. Thats why hollywood execs or editors often step in to make your stuff more mainstream, and depending on whether they are any good, it may or may not be an improvement.

In PGI's case, they really need someone to step in and say "Uh, what? Nerf the DRG-1C? Can you provide any evidence to show that players requested this change? No? Then you aren't doing it."

PGI's "vision" or what passes for it these days just bears no resemblance to what was promised to founders or even what battle tech is about really.

If PGI or ANY company really, wanted to make lots and lots of money, all they have to do is give customers what they want. But instead, they are off doing their own thing to make themselves happy. It would be like if Coke came out with New Coke then told everyone to deal with it when they said they didn't want it replacing classic coke. It would be incredibly dumb and damaging to sales.

[Kiiyor]

Bombast, 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.

I agree to an extent; if you find a way to satisfy market demand while earning the best money, you do it. Mechpacks might not be the most savory content delivery method, but it is a demand that has an audience. I'd prefer new maps.

I'm not sure about the 'feedback is meaningless' thing through. I think the mistake everyone makes here is in assuming that PGI is full or people wringing their hands and laughing maniacally while concocting new and evil plans to maintain their 'minimum viable product'. It's certainly how they're treated. There have been a few adjustments recently that show they do indeed listen:

Viktor Drake, on 15 September 2017 - 03:21 PM, said:

Ok I started off complaining but now I have to actually give props where props are due.

Thank you PGI, I personally really appreciate that you have listened to our feedback on the Rewards Package and have revised it to be more fair to everyone involved.

I will be honest and say I am not sure it is 100% where it needs to be for everyone concerned and I will also be honest and say I will still have to pony up additional $$$ if I want to qualify for the Top Tier which is still a bit irksome, but the fact that you actually looked at the rewards program, evaluated it based on our feedback and improved it to be much more fair goes a long way with me.
For that I will give you my thanks.

Viktor Drake, on 15 September 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

Now I understand why PGI doesn't listen to us all that much. Complain about PGI and your thread will have 100 pages of replies. Thank them and it is a ghost town.

There's more, but I couldn't be bothered searching further.

They used to post in closed beta, directly with us. They used to explain their thought processes, and actually engage in rational discourse about balance and design decisions. Then, they would have to sift through hundreds of posts, with as many attacking them viciously for their decisions as there were with people agreeing with them. People trying to organize boycotts. People asking for their home addresses. People attending town halls with the express purpose of derailing them. People dedicating themselves, in their own words, to killing MWO.

You could see the passion PGI had for their title, which is passion I'm certain is still there.

I guess it's hard not to become jaded though where people try an organize a boycott over an increase in missile damage of 0.2 (which happened) or when people threaten to sue (lol) because SRM splash damage is removed and they can no longer one-shot enemies with a hit in the general vicinity of the cockpit. When people start gofundme's to try and get Microsoft to remove the Mechwarrior rights. When the premade and solo queues are split and people threaten the devs with physical harm because they can't seal club like they used to.

In pretty much any other industry, that **** is not tolerated at all - yet it seems to be commonplace in games.

I just wish we could go back to the old days of actual discourse with PGI outside of twitter - but if I were them, I wouldn't do it either.

[Asym]

Yes, OP they are !

I published a forum piece on toxicity earlier and what Overwatch is experiencing in terms of lost time cleaning up the messes toxic players create w/i the game itself...

F2P games have no control mechanisms..... They're free ! Toxic players have no stake in the game itself.... No cost of bad behavior even if caught: just create another account........

F2P's are open arena's and in today's screwed-up concept of electronic morality, where, toxic is normal because there is no cost to the annomous words.....we're reaping what has been sown......

[Bombast]

Kiiyor, on 26 September 2017 - 07:28 PM, said:

I'm not sure about the 'feedback is meaningless' thing through. I think the mistake everyone makes here is in assuming that PGI is full or people wringing their hands and laughing maniacally while concocting new and evil plans to maintain their 'minimum viable product'. It's certainly how they're treated. There have been a few adjustments recently that show they do indeed listen:

I may have misspoke. What I meant was that the people here, as a whole, have next to no credibility, because they needless engage in hyperbole that they abandon at the drop of a hat for even the faintest scrap of shiny.

Everyone keeps on saying they wont spend a penny until maps are made a priority, until a Mad Cat Mk II drops and they just gotta have it. Continual balance upsets and poorly conceived and quickly abandoned mechanic changes have people putting the check books away, until someone mentions a single player campaign and then its spend baby spend. People cancel their pre-orders because FP is still a mess, but a single good loyalty variant will send those people back to rebuying those mechs, plus the other 3 packs they need to get it done.

So when PGI does something that seems counter to what the players say they want, I don't blame them, because half of the people here have a bipolar wallet. As a whole, this community just lacks any sort of consistency, and in the face of that, PGI may as well just do whatever the hell pops into their minds, because trying to read 'ours' is impossible.

Edited by Bombast, 26 September 2017 - 07:40 PM.

[kuma8877]

Jun Watarase, on 26 September 2017 - 07:06 PM, said:

The thing with books/movies is that they are very much hit and miss. Give a writer full control and they may make the next hit, or more likely, it will be a dud. Wanna see what happens when editors don't enforce quality control? Japan has this thing where they keep making manga/light novels that are all basically blatant copies of each other with minor variations. Their editors dont step in and say "wait a minute this is just a ripoff of that popular series...".

If you want to do your own thing, OK, self publish then. People do it all the time with indie movies or whatever. But you have to accept that because its your vision, its often not what other people want and it wont generate much money. Thats why hollywood execs or editors often step in to make your stuff more mainstream, and depending on whether they are any good, it may or may not be an improvement.

In PGI's case, they really need someone to step in and say "Uh, what? Nerf the DRG-1C? Can you provide any evidence to show that players requested this change? No? Then you aren't doing it."

PGI's "vision" or what passes for it these days just bears no resemblance to what was promised to founders or even what battle tech is about really.

If PGI or ANY company really, wanted to make lots and lots of money, all they have to do is give customers what they want. But instead, they are off doing their own thing to make themselves happy. It would be like if Coke came out with New Coke then told everyone to deal with it when they said they didn't want it replacing classic coke. It would be incredibly dumb and damaging to sales.

When it comes to the rate of entertainment technology development, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the vast majority have no idea what they want yet...because they have no idea what is possible. It's not like coke and pepsi. Soda isn't a very dynamic market compared to entertainment technology. Fortune favors the bold and all that.

Of course you're going to have mostly duds across the sphere of potential authors, just like you have across TV shows, or movies, or inventions...why should games be any different? That's how you get to the greats.

Perhaps PGI's short term vision was actually about surviving a fairly damaging business break up, while maintaining the game's development as best they could manage until things stabilized and growth could begin anew? I know it's not entirely focused on BT lore, but it seems to have been something dealt to them by the real world that could have made some original plans less feasible or even possible. In hindsight, better communication early on would've probably kept the salt from getting to where it is today, but from my time here I've seen plenty of positive growth. Plenty of silly missteps too, but you have to live to learn.

[InvictusLee]

Bombast, 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.

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.

[Bombast]

November11th, on 26 September 2017 - 08:12 PM, said:

precisely why we should throw all of our financial support behind MWLL...

It would be illegal for whoever's currently 'developing' MW:LL to accept money.

November11th, on 26 September 2017 - 08:12 PM, said:

...and any battletech/mechwarrior movies/tv series that appear on the horizon instead of throwing our money at PGI.

That isn't happening.

[Scout Derek]

Bombast, on 26 September 2017 - 08:20 PM, said:

It would be illegal for whoever's currently 'developing' MW:LL to accept money.



That isn't happening.

Yep. PGI put a cease and desist on their development, as Nintendo do on that fanmade Pokemon game when it came out.

This is done simply because the developers are afraid it will harm their revenue and player population, though that line seems a little harder to see when we're talking F2P vs F2P. then again, MWO was being just recently being made at the time, and beta was allowed only be those who purchased founder packs.