135 replies to this topic

[Sjorpha]

Good video.

I don't really understand the logic behind "FP has to be taken down" in order to revamp it. Why can't the current version just stay up as it is while developing the new version? How would an old version running in any way interfere with making a new one? That just makes no sense to me.

If the change/improvements are significant they can still relaunch it with all the hype, trombones and salutes, they can also change the name back to "Community Warfare" if the originally intended feature set (or one of comparable magnitude) is implemented.

I'm all for a major rework/relaunch like this, but please simply leave the current version quietly running in all it's mediocrity meanwhile, so that the small but dedicated FP community can play their game until then.

Also let us consider a realistic timeline for such a relaunch, PGI typically manages about 1 major new feature per year with 2018 being solaris. A CW relaunch of sufficient quality would be at least as demanding in terms of development as solaris would it not?, if they start on it this summer/fall you can expect relase in fall 2019 or even spring 2020. People who play MWO exclusively for CW/FP can't really be expected to stand for a 1 years downtime or more, or at least that seems unreasonable. The game mode exists in some sense already, enough people play it to make matches fairly consistently, so leave it running.

Edited by Sjorpha, 08 March 2018 - 05:56 AM.

[Mystere]

Sjorpha, on 08 March 2018 - 05:55 AM, said:

Good video.

I don't really understand the logic behind "FP has to be taken down" in order to revamp it. Why can't the current version just stay up as it is while developing the new version? How would an old version running in any way interfere with making a new one? That just makes no sense to me.

As others have already mentioned, it is probably to pad the Solaris numbers.

Edited by Mystere, 08 March 2018 - 06:12 AM.

[Khobai]

Trying to fix CW would just be pissing away money anyway. Its a lost cause. Its a financial blackhole.

PGI would be far better off spending the devtime working on MWO2 and not repeating the same mistakes.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 08 March 2018 - 06:10 AM, said:

Trying to fix CW would just be pissing away money anyway. Its a lost cause. Its a financial blackhole.

PGI would be far better off spending the devtime working on MWO2 and not repeating the same mistakes.

MWO2?

[Asym]

Sjorpha, on 08 March 2018 - 05:55 AM, said:

Good video.

I don't really understand the logic behind "FP has to be taken down" in order to revamp it. Why can't the current version just stay up as it is while developing the new version? How would an old version running in any way interfere with making a new one? That just makes no sense to me.

If the change/improvements are significant they can still relaunch it with all the hype, trombones and salutes, they can also change the name back to "Community Warfare" if the originally intended feature set (or one of comparable magnitude) is implemented.

I'm all for a major rework/relaunch like this, but please simply leave the current version quietly running in all it's mediocrity meanwhile, so that the small but dedicated FP community can play their game until then.

Also let us consider a realistic timeline for such a relaunch, PGI typically manages about 1 major new feature per year with 2018 being solaris. A CW relaunch of sufficient quality would be at least as demanding in terms of development as solaris would it not?, if they start on it this summer/fall you can expect relase in fall 2019 or even spring 2020. People who play MWO exclusively for CW/FP can't really be expected to stand for a 1 years downtime or more, or at least that seems unreasonable. The game mode exists in some sense already, enough people play it to make matches fairly consistently, so leave it running.

Ah, if they didn't close FP, there'd be no one to play Solaris in the nymbers they need at a minimum to actually launch the game to observe for bugs and errors. There is a minimum number of players required. God knows what the Solaris version of MM needs to function either. Now, the real questions is: will they turn FP back on. I'd bet they don't have a choice at this point: too many of us have left MWO "full-time" and only play events and have ZERO interest in Solaris. They are starting to see "our $$$" not flowing and mech sales I think appear slower than they want. IMO.

Ah, time will tell since "history" is the only real measure of the valifity of assumptions...

[Asym]

Mystere, on 08 March 2018 - 06:13 AM, said:

MWO2?

Too late for that I think. Last night everyone was playing Eve online? The week before that Ark. The week before that PS2.... Before that, WoW's which they despised a year ago?

It's too late for a large number of players who have moved on. They voted with their feet and will not allow PGI another chance nor spend a single penny, no matter the consequences... Their accounts are still active but we don't appear on the leaderboards anymore....don't play enough. I don't play enough. I still watch MWO's progress because it is a mature game in a mature game cycle within a small niche market. Great data for research !!! Which, along with a host of other FPS's and F2P's, are being studied from a human factors point of view...

If PGI survives this, it will be interesting to see how they do this.... I just don't see Solaris being an expansion of the arena FPS market because a fair size of the player base has been posioned and are really less than trusting of anything PGI does....

[Sjorpha]

Asym, on 08 March 2018 - 06:13 AM, said:

Ah, if they didn't close FP, there'd be no one to play Solaris in the nymbers they need at a minimum to actually launch the game to observe for bugs and errors. There is a minimum number of players required. God knows what the Solaris version of MM needs to function either. Now, the real questions is: will they turn FP back on. I'd bet they don't have a choice at this point: too many of us have left MWO "full-time" and only play events and have ZERO interest in Solaris. They are starting to see "our $$$" not flowing and mech sales I think appear slower than they want. IMO.

Ah, time will tell since "history" is the only real measure of the valifity of assumptions...

If pooling players to solaris was the goal, then the mode to shut down is not FP because not only does it have a small player base but is also the mode that competes the least with Solaris in terms of gameplay, so dedicated FP players are the least likely to go to Solaris because FP is down, their alternative for large group play would be group queue, not Solaris.

It would make much more sense to close solo quickplay queue if getting more people to play Solaris is the idea.

You don't need nearly as many players to run a 1v1 or 2v2 mode though, 100 players and you have 25-50 matches already while QP needs a 500-1000 or so to work out with matchmaking being at all noticable. FP of course only needs enough on each side to form a match since there is not matchmaking issues, technically 12 per side but realistically 30+ for group size tetris.

So basically if FP can function with the small population it has then Solaris can work with even less than that, and since there will probably be at least as many playing solaris as is currently playing FP I don't really see a problem.

[sycocys]

Shutting down QP would definitely be the way to go if putting people in Solaris was their actual goal.

[Mystere]

Sjorpha, on 08 March 2018 - 06:27 AM, said:

If pooling players to solaris was the goal, then the mode to shut down is not FP because not only does it have a small player base but is also the mode that competes the least with Solaris in terms of gameplay, so dedicated FP players are the least likely to go to Solaris because FP is down, their alternative for large group play would be group queue, not Solaris.

It would make much more sense to close solo quickplay queue if getting more people to play Solaris is the idea.

sycocys, on 08 March 2018 - 06:54 AM, said:

Shutting down QP would definitely be the way to go if putting people in Solaris was their actual goal.

It's a choice between disappointing a smaller number of people and creating a full-scale riot.

[Bud Crue]

Khobai, on 08 March 2018 - 06:10 AM, said:

Trying to fix CW would just be pissing away money anyway. Its a lost cause. Its a financial blackhole.

PGI would be far better off spending the devtime working on MWO2 and not repeating the same mistakes.

The promise of CW is what PGI based the existence of this game on originally.

That promise is what drew an awful lot of us to this game in the first place and certainly what got a lot of us spending.

Many of us, still -even those who do not actively play CW (FP) anymore- still hold out hope that CW will one day be made at least as minimally viable as it was in phase 2, but hopefully even better than that. If PGI kills CW -even momentarily- it sends a signal to us that CW and its promise is well and truly dead.

I don't think PGI, or many of the members of this community apparently, realize how much that hope of a viable CW is one of the primary reasons many players are still around. PGI screws with that illusion at their peril. It may be crap, but it's potential to be more than crap is how many justify putting up with the rest of the mediocrity (and worse) of this game. Take it away even temporarily and you lose those folks, likely, permanently.

[Novakaine]

Hmm would my lurm Stalker be viable in Solaris?

[Relishcakes]

If i remember right the reason that the development team stopped responding to people here because of the massive amount of hate they would get over every single thing, so they still read them(or so they claim) but i think because of what happened...things said here carry little weight.

Also, I dont understand what was meant when he said "clan ac's are there because ammo switching couldnt be a thing." I mean..okay, thats why we have the iterations that we have now...great..why then do they feel like they need a buff to make brawling work again?

Maybe what he said was going to make sense...had there been more time, but as is...no..

Personally, as a light pilot who almost singularly plays my cougar C I dont want to see lasers become absolutely garbage like what i see from most posts demanding balance but at the same time a large majority of the mechs available arent usable because they are almost specifically a brawling chassis.

I have no idea how to fix this. All I'm doing is trying to raise awareness so that someone who does know how to do something like that, can do so themselves.

[Darth Hotz]

justcallme A S H, on 07 March 2018 - 08:28 PM, said:

There is no justifiable reason to take a PC software system, offline, to improve it. It can be coded/dev'd and deployed.

The only reason to take it offline was to push people toward Solaris (1v1). Most people play FP for the Team Aspect (12v12) and thus, not everyone is interested in Solaris

PGI will not be able to improve Faction Play enough in a single month. Look how long it took just to get Long Tom fixed, properly. Some 9 months. There is zero cofindence in a 1-2month "down time" to "fix" anything.

What I dont understand is, where is Dane's info coming from that the break should be used to fix up FP? I havent read this anywhere else. I think there is a higher probability that this break might be forever, so PGI can follow their Esports dream with solaris and have an end with this game mode they fragged up beyond recognition. FP is sick, thats sad but true and I doubt the will ever cure it because its sick in its roots (no meaning of captured planets, bottleneck maps, mercs decide the outcome of every event, etc, etc, etc).

I think the anouncement to give FP a break is the first ring of its death bell. For PGI this king (that actually was an imposter) is dead, and they hail the new one, Solaris.

Goodbye to the "Thinking Person's Shooter" that is focused on teamplay and welcome to a 1on1 shooter that has the high potential to become a complete desaster because of this games obvious balance problems.

[Bud Crue]

Novakaine, on 08 March 2018 - 07:41 AM, said:

Hmm would my lurm Stalker be viable in Solaris?

Of course. Balance is "nearly perfect" and "as close as it has ever been" according to various devs. An 85 ton LRM boat should therefore be just fine against say a laser vomit Marauder IIC. Its intuitively obvious given how great the balance is.

/s

[Hobbles v]

The fp shut down is for solarus. Its not for them to put any work. Leave it running and do a shutdown if they actually have some improvment to do during it.

I know you dont care because ISEN turned tail on the mode months ago.

[Khobai]

Quote

MWO2?

yes using unreal engine instead of cryengine

cryengine is a developmental deadend

[Windscape]

Novakaine, on 08 March 2018 - 07:41 AM, said:

Hmm would my lurm Stalker be viable in Solaris?

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Wynn_Goddard

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 08 March 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

yes using unreal engine instead of cryengine

cryengine is a developmental deadend

If both MWO:Solaris and MW5 flop, there will be no MWO2. PGI's margin for failure is much smaller that what many of the current player base apparently think.

[Iron Heel]

Watched Paul and Russ, digested what was said, and under the narrow auspices of a monetary tranaction I asked myself seriously if this was anything other than MW/BT game, the way the customer base is referred to, responded to, talked at and not to, would I do business with these 'gentlemen'?

Edited by Iron Heel, 08 March 2018 - 10:34 AM.

[Nightbird]

FP isn't a car where you have to park it to work on it.

Other than that, PGI just needs to play the game enough to get a feel for it. Mid range laser vomit is thriving not because those weapons are OP, but because they are jack-of-all-maps. Let people choose mechs after the map is revealed, and you'll see a lot more brawl on close range maps, dakka on hot maps, and ERLL/LRM on ranged maps.