29 replies to this topic

[ShaneoftheDead]

Situation: PGI announces a new campaign to fund Mechwarrior Online 2!

• Totally new server and game code
  
• Implemented with the lessons learned from MWO
  
• Re-use of Mech models.
  
• Optimization of graphics
  
• Redesigned Faction Warfare

.
Question: Would you fund it via a Founders Package?

[ice trey]

I wouldn't.

I would fund a Mechwarrior game.
I would not fund an online game.
In fact, I was already feeling shaky when HBS announced that they broke the multiplayer backer level. Microsoft squeezed out a real **** in Mechwarrior 4 when they tried to make it with multiplayer in mind. Multiplayer games always feel like mindless work to me and always comes at the cost of atmosphere and lore.

Edited by ice trey, 21 November 2016 - 01:52 PM.

[Jep Jorgensson]

Honestly, I would not. How can we trust them to deliver on MWO2 as promised when they failed at the first one? If it was someone else doing it, then maybe. But the bottom line is that: If we cannot trust them to deliver on even most of what they said the first time, why should we bother trusting them with both the game and our money yet again? On what basis can we actually trust them? Besides, they have made a mountain of money off of us already and it obviously is not being used to fix the countless bugs still in the game after how many months or even years? So why would they need more from us? They do not. They just want more from us. Simple as that.

Edited by Jep, 21 November 2016 - 02:22 PM.

[Dreadgorth]

As long as pgi is at the helm of a mwo2 reboot then HELL NO!

[Wraith 1]

"Hey guys, we're making a sequel to MWO!"



"Oh, and we got rid of all the people in charge of balance and game design. Also we made some gamemodes that have meaningful objectives beyond 'just kill everyone.'"

[Mighty Spike]

If it would be a real simulation hell yes

[Saint Atlas and the Commando Elf]

Yes, if there would be absolutely no other Battletech game available or in development. Otherwise no.

[The Basilisk]

Absolutely no, not from this company.
I am a founder and still feel, even after years of punishing, excruciatingly slow development, PGI did only deliver...maybe half of what they promised and are now going back on several parts they promised.
So....If we could get Activision Blizzard to do an other MW title (MW2, Ghostbear legacy, MW2 Mercenaries...soooo cooool)
Thats what I would back at any time.

[xSONOHx]

Dosen't really make sense, should just improve current game. So I'm going to have to say no.

[Kalimaster]

Sorry, I've already invested in this game. While not perfect, I can see areas that can be improved. Why a second game....so people can whine there too. No thanks.

[ShaneoftheDead]

PGI would have to convince me they were serious about it. I would need to see semi-detailed development plan with reasonable milestones. I would need to see a plan on how they expect Faction Play to work with player led units both Mercenary and Loyalist.

If they could convince me, I would.

[Tibbnak]

ShaneoftheDead, on 23 November 2016 - 01:55 PM, said:

PGI would have to convince me they were serious about it. I would need to see semi-detailed development plan with reasonable milestones. I would need to see a plan on how they expect Faction Play to work with player led units both Mercenary and Loyalist.

If they could convince me, I would.

That's basically what they did with the first kickstarter, but they didn't really follow through.

[Will9761]

I would not fund MWO 2, after the experience of this game. Besides, they need to fix their own game first. If Mechwarrior 5 became a good game, I would be both happy and pissed at the same time. Happy because we would finally have an acceptable return to Battletech, along with HBS' turn-based game. But pissed because so many of the elements included in MW5, would not be presented in MWO and would further exacerbate how little PGI cares about the game. I could possibly see someone taking the assets of MWO and turn it into their own "MWO 2" using the Unreal Engine, just like HBS using their assets with Unity for Battletech, or just stick to MWLL. But, the latter would be more accepted by people who hate PGI and believe MWO to be tainted.

[Koniving]

Saint Atlas and the Commando Elf, on 22 November 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

Yes, if there would be absolutely no other Battletech game available or in development. Otherwise no.

Don't encourage them to shut down other games.
We know they will.

Mighty Spike, on 22 November 2016 - 01:45 PM, said:

If it would be a real simulation hell yes

Check out my hypothetical thread for a real time battletech simulation discussion.

We might not get it so long as PGI's incompetently at the helm, but we can fantasize about it.

[Koniving]

If I were to get into any MW / Battletech game from the pilot's perspective, online or otherwise, I know one thing I would look for.

If it's CryEngine, it better be made with all the tools that Star Citizen has... otherwise screw this, it better be an Unreal Engine game.

Lets be honest, UnrealEngine is what PGI had the most experience with and what they should have gone with in the first damn place.

[Void Angel]

I already did; they called it "Mechwarrior 5: Mercenaries."

[Johnny Z]

They should stick to and upgrade this game.

[Void Angel]

Like if they made a single-player version with an upgraded engine that could - if feasible - be rolled over to MWO? Nah, that'll never happen.

[VXJaeger]

No ******* way if PGI was to make it.

[Karl Streiger]

not with this company - and as said - MP games are meh

as it seems that even HBS is forgetting about their promisses in bringing MP first.

Where is my campaign? I've paid you for the campaign not a better looking megamek

Edited by Karl Streiger, 01 November 2017 - 11:38 PM.