92 replies to this topic

[Ruediger Steiner]

Catalina Steiner, on 25 April 2018 - 05:41 PM, said:

Quote from the Solaris 7 package describtion (Urbanmech)
That's what you bought.

Wrong answer from a Volunteer Moderator, but the perfect example of how PGI treads the community.
PGI made a mistake, an utterly stupid mistake btw. So they fix it after people have already build their Urbi. So now people have to rebuild it, which costs C-Bills.
Did PGI apologize? No! They mention the fix in a short side note.
Did anybody from PGI think one second about the consequences of this fix, that people have to spend C-Bills to rebuild it? No! Cause they just don´t give a ****.
After that dissappointment you get a slap in your face from a Moderator, pointing out that you should just shut up, cause it´s your fault, not PGIs fault, with just a four word sentence. Seriously???
There could have been some ways to get this fixed with almost everybody being happy.
PGI could have said: "Hey, we made a mistake, but we will keep the 4 energy hardpoints."
PGI could have said: "Hey, we made a mistake. We apologize. We will fix it, but you get a Urbi warhorn and 1.000.000 C-Bills for your circumstances."
And what way did PGI choose? As always. Arrogance!

[Fox the Apprentice]

Wishmast3r, on 30 April 2018 - 03:00 AM, said:

[...]
There could have been some ways to get this fixed with almost everybody being happy.
PGI could have said: "Hey, we made a mistake, but we will keep the 4 energy hardpoints."
PGI could have said: "Hey, we made a mistake. We apologize. We will fix it, but you get a Urbi warhorn and 1.000.000 C-Bills for your circumstances."
And what way did PGI choose? As always. Arrogance!

You got exactly what you paid for, which is exactly what was advertised. The items you bought with c-bills to kit out your mech are still in your inventory, so you lost nothing.

[Ruediger Steiner]

Fox the Apprentice, on 30 April 2018 - 04:27 AM, said:

You got exactly what you paid for, which is exactly what was advertised. The items you bought with c-bills to kit out your mech are still in your inventory, so you lost nothing.

You don´t get the point ...

PS: You do relize you don´t get the same amount of C-Bills, if you sell items, for what you bought them?

[laio scotsman]

Fox the Apprentice, on 30 April 2018 - 04:27 AM, said:

You got exactly what you paid for, which is exactly what was advertised. The items you bought with c-bills to kit out your mech are still in your inventory, so you lost nothing.

There's the Countdown page and Solaris release streams, both of which showed it with 4E and the later of which talked about it with 4E. That's advertising 4E. For any other game the smart assumption would be that the store hasn't been updated (especially because the store page was still showing "Street Sweeper" at the time), not that they put it into the game wrong. And now I'm sitting here with 4.7 C-bills blown into skills (a C-bill sink you forgot to mention that's completely non-transferable, as well as the XP spent on it) and an XL engine that are useless on any other mech or the current options for this mech.

So yeah, I'm angry. And probably not going to trust PGI with my money again, if this happens a week after the first time I throw down money for a pack and they do nothing to compensate for it.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Wishmast3r, on 30 April 2018 - 04:47 AM, said:

You don´t get the point ...

PS: You do relize you don´t get the same amount of C-Bills, if you sell items, for what you bought them?

So don't sell them. Use them on a different mech, or store them for later. They're still yours to keep.

[Ruediger Steiner]

Fox the Apprentice, on 30 April 2018 - 07:17 AM, said:

So don't sell them. Use them on a different mech, or store them for later. They're still yours to keep.

It´s my firm belief, that you will never get the point. So i want to stop talking to you.

PS: Telling me it´s not a problem at all, but liking the post of laio scotsman ... who has the same complaint as me ... i just ... wow ... don´t even know how to respond to a person like you ... farewell my little snowflake.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Wishmast3r, on 30 April 2018 - 07:44 AM, said:

It´s my firm belief, that you will never get the point. So i want to stop talking to you.

PS: Telling me it´s not a problem at all, but liking the post of laio scotsman ... who has the same complaint as me ... i just ... wow ... don´t even know how to respond to a person like you ... farewell my little snowflake.

And there are the insults...

Let's examine the (paraphrased) difference between your posts:
Wishmast3r: "PGI owes us free stuff because we are entitled to a reward as an apology."
Liao Scotsman: "Fox, you missed that there were streams that advertised the extra energy hardpoint [...] and that's why I'm upset, and voting with my wallet."

...and you wonder why I liked his perfectly reasonable response, and had to convince myself not to report yours to the mods (edit: I'm talking about the one where you decided to just go for insults instead of reasonable discussion)? Yeah, let's stop here.

Edited by Fox the Apprentice, 30 April 2018 - 07:36 PM.

[Scanz]

i hope in Mw5. we have mode like in mwll (bf4)

[Jonathan8883]

The Solaris ban window is too short. I just had the maps I wanted auto-banned because the system did it before I had a chance to even click.

[MovinTarget]

Jonathan8883, on 06 May 2018 - 04:55 AM, said:

The Solaris ban window is too short. I just had the maps I wanted auto-banned because the system did it before I had a chance to even click.

Kinda saw this coming which is why i suggested the countdowns scale to the # of available maps; 10 secs for the first and second bans and 5 seconds for the 3rd and 4th...

Edited by MovinTarget, 06 May 2018 - 06:37 AM.

[D V Devnull]

MovinTarget, on 06 May 2018 - 06:37 AM, said:

Kinda saw this coming which is why i suggested the countdowns scale to the # of available maps; 10 secs for the first and second bans and 5 seconds for the 3rd and 4th...

Might need to make those subsequent ones at least 7 seconds minimum... Not everyone's computer performs quite the same way.

~D. V. "I knew PGI was making an error shortening those... Called this, back a few pages." Devnull

[MovinTarget]

D V Devnull, on 06 May 2018 - 09:16 AM, said:

Might need to make those subsequent ones at least 7 seconds minimum... Not everyone's computer performs quite the same way.

~D. V. "I knew PGI was making an error shortening those... Called this, back a few pages." Devnull

Well my point was that you could do 5 secounds later on b/c they would be loaded by then...

[D V Devnull]

MovinTarget, on 06 May 2018 - 09:42 AM, said:

Well my point was that you could do 5 secounds later on b/c they would be loaded by then...

I got your point... The most likely problem is Jonathan8883's computer having an odd configuration, causing this...

Jonathan8883, on 06 May 2018 - 04:55 AM, said:

The Solaris ban window is too short. I just had the maps I wanted auto-banned because the system did it before I had a chance to even click.

...because it's apparently stuttering on the Map Ban Animations, and the Server is behaving like everyone's local, failing to wait until they're able to actually click. This person might need hardware upgrades, or perhaps a change of some type of software (i.e. Security-related, or perhaps Peripheral Drivers) that's messing with MWO's Client Performance. Or, in the 'worst case scenario', it might be that this person (and possibly others who aren't quite so vocal) deals with physical disabilities, such that they're forced to use a slower desktop mouse setting, with the end result being that they can't move the pointer fast enough to actually hit the buttons. (How they manage to play in actual matches goes beyond what I can figure, so let's not delve there.) These reasons are why I'm saying PGI's decrease of allowed time-to-vote is detrimental, as I previously foresaw these possible issues with making quick decisions. However, being as they're likely unable to afford doing so, or are meeting a physical/mental limitation as I've outlined, PGI's effectively created a Bug that needs fixing.

It would have been better if PGI had created a mechanism to nail only those who were dragging out the voting time, and shorten only the problem-causer's allowed voting time until they had voted a certain number of times more. That way, those who are actually voting, and just really having trouble with their computer/body/brain, would not always be wrongfully hampered. Heck, aren't there Accessibility Laws/Standards that are being violated by PGI here?

~Mr. D. V. "Sometimes, I feel like I'm alone in seeing the problems in PGI's ham-handed changes..." Devnull