115 replies to this topic

[Inatu Elimor]

Yes, like you I can be salty at times. MM sucks, balance sucks, mechs sucks, team sucks etc.
But the saltiness is prove of your very commitment to the game.
I have not experienced a game sofar that carves out more your very "warrior" individuality.
What works for me, doesn't necessarily work for you.

Because MWO wants you to understand your capabilities, and more important, those you don't have.

Yes, to understand this takes time, effort, experience. It's confronting you with yourself. Painfull at times.

But that's why I like MWO somuch.

This thread is meant for all who have to say somethig positive about it.

Keep MWO alive !

cheers,

Inatu

Edited by Inatu Elimor, 14 November 2018 - 11:41 AM.

[Armored Yokai]

Meh.

Nascar peekaboo ac2 point and click adventures online.

This game is 40% of what it can truly be and people only play it because it's all we have for now.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

Russ...is this you?

[Inatu Elimor]

Armored Yokai, on 14 November 2018 - 11:40 AM, said:

Meh.

Nascar peekaboo ac2 point and click adventures online.

This game is 40% of what it can truly be and people only play it because it's all we have for now.

Meh. You don't understand the game.

[Inatu Elimor]

Marquis De Lafayette, on 14 November 2018 - 11:42 AM, said:

Russ...is this you?

One of the problems of the internet nowadays is that software developers put in people that have an alliance with the company and have them say something positive. Honestly, I'm an independant player. But like I said: your remark says something about your involvement into this game. Like democracy, MWO it's the best solution of all bad possibilities (Do I qoute Churchill??).

Edited by Inatu Elimor, 14 November 2018 - 12:01 PM.

[Armored Yokai]

Inatu Elimor, on 14 November 2018 - 11:43 AM, said:

Meh. You don't understand the game.

I do and having played every single game minus the (MPBT3025) involving the battletech universe, I can say MWO truly is 40% of what it can be.

Knockdown, RPG elements, Union Dropship, Proper CW managing and much much more

[Jables McBarty]

Meh, I love it for what it is, don't hate it for what it's not.

[Inatu Elimor]

Armored Yokai, on 14 November 2018 - 11:58 AM, said:

I do and having played every single game minus the (MPBT3025) involving the battletech universe, I can say MWO truly is 40% of what it can be.

Knockdown, RPG elements, Union Dropship, Proper CW managing and much much more

See my post above.

A sidenote: you are touching a sensisitive issue that hurts MWO at the core from the time it got beta. MWO was developed initially by funds of backers. That begs the issue who is the boss: the software developers or the backing community ? Whatever you believe, there is a mutual dependency, like in democracy. How you feel about this ?

Edited by Inatu Elimor, 14 November 2018 - 12:26 PM.

[Bud Crue]

Came for the nostalgia, stayed for the community.
The game is adequate. It’s “development” runs from sloppy to suicidal with rare moments of “well that’s better than a kick in the teeth”. But the community, all of it, the goods and bads and everyone in between, make the shortcomings of the game seem minor and make playing it always entertaining. Occasionally rage/despair inducing sure, but still entertaining.

[Spheroid]

No this is objectively bad game. Break down the various game design elements and compare them to known industry success stories.

Lots of fail in this game.

[Khobai]

PGI said the game was minimally viable

and sadly thats all PGI ever intended it to be

Spheroid, on 14 November 2018 - 12:28 PM, said:

No this is objectively bad game. Break down the various game design elements and compare them to known industry success stories.

Lots of fail in this game.

well successful developers dont aim to make minimally viable products from the start. they try to make the best products they possibly can and then seek to improve them constantly.

somewhere along the line PGI just stopped caring about making MWO the best game they possibly could. And only became concerned with milking as much money as they could out of the minimally viable game they already made. i.e. "would you like to buy a mech pack?"

Armored Yokai, on 14 November 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

PGI can't code in features because the current version of cryengine is a Frankenstein mixture of code

yeah but that excuse only works for certain things... like why CACs cant switch between cluster and slug munitions.

it doesnt explain why we dont have a decent core gamemode. certainly cryengine isnt the thing thats preventing them from having a gamemode that doesnt feel like some alpha testing gamemode. alpha testing gamemodes like assault just have no business being in a full release of a game...

Edited by Khobai, 14 November 2018 - 12:37 PM.

[Armored Yokai]

Inatu Elimor, on 14 November 2018 - 12:03 PM, said:

A sidenote: you are touching a sensisitive issue that hurts MWO at the core from the time it got beta. MWO was developed initially by funds of backers. That begs the issue who is the boss: the software developers or the backing community ? Whatever you believe, there is a mutual dependency, like in democracy. How you feel about this ?

MWO is still backed by the cash kings, but PGI can't code in features because the current version of cryengine is a Frankenstein mixture of code. For some reason PGI decided to fire the coder that was helping build MWO.

[Inatu Elimor]

Spheroid, on 14 November 2018 - 12:28 PM, said:

No this is objectively bad game. Break down the various game design elements and compare them to known industry success stories.

Lots of fail in this game.

So why you still playing ? Also, you break the rules of my former post. It's okay. In democracy we listen to each other.
Obviously you don't.

Edited by Inatu Elimor, 14 November 2018 - 01:03 PM.

[Inatu Elimor]

Inatu Elimor, on 14 November 2018 - 12:57 PM, said:

So why you still playing ? Also, you break the rules of my former post. It's okay. In democracy we listen to each other.
Obviously you don't.

I apologize. In democracy I cannot force you to comply. Again, it's okay. But I want you to reconsider your position.

Edited by Inatu Elimor, 14 November 2018 - 01:07 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

Inatu Elimor, on 14 November 2018 - 12:03 PM, said:

See my post above.

A sidenote: you are touching a sensisitive issue that hurts MWO at the core from the time it got beta. MWO was developed initially by funds of backers. That begs the issue who is the boss: the software developers or the backing community ? Whatever you believe, there is a mutual dependency, like in democracy. How you feel about this ?

PGI has basically gave everything the people wanted from "more rewards in cw" to "nerf this mech into the ground".

If there is anyone to blame its the community.

[MechaBattler]

It could be a lot better. But it could also have gone a lot worse. It's kinda in the middle. But I feel like the learning curve makes it hard for people to get into it. A lot of the 'successful' games tend to be VERY accessible. They try to make them idiot proof and instantly gratifying. Not so much in MWO. You're gonna get your *** kicked as you learn. And the game doesn't stroke your ego with shiny pop ups for doing the most rudimentary task. The MechWarrior Academy is as close as it comes to that.

But "Successful' and a 'good game' don't always go hand in hand. This could be a good game if it ran better. If we had more maps to play on. If "Facton Warfare" felt more like you're fighting a war with you favorite factions and you had some level of immersion. Like how they promised dropships would actually do something and we'd be able to choose where we go on the star map. I think with clever UI design and immersive elements you could achieve that without going too far into the nitty gritty of which factions are winning. I mean I sure as hell don't care who's stupid tag is on a planet. You could have a team fighting on Tau Ceti, while other team thinks they're on Tortuga or whatever. It wouldn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. As long as the presentation up to the battle and the out of combat unit management mechanics where there to give purpose and immersion that you're fighting in the Battletech Universe.

Everyone has ideas for how this game could be better. But is no where within the realm of the reality for developing this game on an old crappy Cryengine. Hell they would have been better off building it off the older cryengine. Even if it looks old. Never should have gone for the shiny graphics. ;o

Edited by MechaBattler, 14 November 2018 - 01:36 PM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Spheroid, on 14 November 2018 - 12:28 PM, said:

No this is objectively bad game. Break down the various game design elements and compare them to known industry success stories.

Lots of fail in this game.

It's successfully funded itself for six years, and is currently funding the development for an even more ambitious title in the series. While MWO has failed in many regards, you can't deny its successes.

And you can't pin it all on BattleTech's existing fanbase either. If the fanbase of an existing franchise is all it took to make a successful game, Mechwarrior Tactics wouldn't have failed the way it did.

[Aiden Skye]

I'm not as vested into MWO as I used to be but I still like to play now and then. The game isn't horrible but it's not perfect and it could indeed be better. For me my main gripes are that most game modes come down to the same thing - a team deathmatch usually with some form of nascar. Game still performs pretty bad for how it looks, hopefully we can get a switch to Unreal one day.
And none of game modes make me really feel like I'm a part of a Mechwarrior universe. It is what it is.

[process]

MWO fills a spot that no other game does, and for all its flaws, does a lot of things better than previous first person Mechwarrior titles. I hope they can learn from their mistakes and do right with Mechwarrior 5.

[Jables McBarty]

Inatu Elimor, on 14 November 2018 - 12:03 PM, said:

See my post above.

A sidenote: you are touching a sensisitive issue that hurts MWO at the core from the time it got beta. MWO was developed initially by funds of backers. That begs the issue who is the boss: the software developers or the backing community ? Whatever you believe, there is a mutual dependency, like in democracy. How you feel about this ?

In the end, the software developers. They own (or lease) the IP rights, they get to make the decisions. That's how capitalism works (or doesn't, depending on where you're standing).

If the backers wanted a real say, they should have demanded ownership stakes in the development company.

IDK what PGI said during the backing stage. I knew it was happening, but since I had no money or chance of being able to play the game on my $200 laptop w/ integrated graphics, I didn't pay in. It sounds like they made some pretty big promises, and it also sounds like the backers should have figured out pretty early on what PGI was actually capable of.

Also, I think the 'mechs look really cool (that's my nice thing )