91 replies to this topic

[TheArisen]

Vxheous, on 16 April 2019 - 12:42 AM, said:

I can't see them not securing the license, otherwise they would've stopped developing MW5

This right here. If they weren't confident of getting the license then they wouldn't be working on MW5.

[PhoenixFire55]

Anjian, on 15 April 2019 - 05:25 PM, said:

I am considering a scenario that another gaming company may have given Microsoft an offer to buy out the license.

Dear Lord, please make it so!

[Bud Crue]

TheArisen, on 16 April 2019 - 01:39 AM, said:

This right here. If they weren't confident of getting the license then they wouldn't be working on MW5.

I initially assumed the same, but then his demure on even discussing the potential future of MWO at mechcon and citing specifically to the license renewal as the reason made me think otherwise. As it is for all we know the terms of the license for F2P online format may be distinct from whatever may govern MW5. Who knows?

Again, no biggie. Just wondering if anyone had heard how its coming.

[Horseman]

PhoenixFire55, on 16 April 2019 - 01:48 AM, said:

Dear Lord, please make it so!

The license, not MWO. Another party buying out the license would mean you kiss goodbye to MWO forever unless said party also buys it out from PGI (which it probably wouldn't, MWO doesn't contain sufficient microtransactions to provide a sense of pride and accomplishment to the shareholders).

Edited by Horseman, 16 April 2019 - 02:04 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Horseman, on 16 April 2019 - 02:03 AM, said:

The license, not MWO. Another party buying out the license would mean you kiss goodbye to MWO forever unless said party also buys it out from PGI (which it probably wouldn't, MWO doesn't contain sufficient microtransactions to provide a sense of pride and accomplishment to the shareholders).

And I am fully aware of that. MWO is fubar. I'd rather have another company make an attempt at making a new game, because it surely can't be a worse/more lame attempt than what PGI did. And I'm surely rather have another company do a new game than have em solve this garbage pile of bandaids and crutches on a 10 year old engine that (somehow) nobody alive knows how to use properly anymore.

[Bud Crue]

PhoenixFire55, on 16 April 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

And I am fully aware of that. MWO is fubar. I'd rather have another company make an attempt at making a new game, because it surely can't be a worse/more lame attempt than what PGI did. And I'm surely rather have another company do a new game than have em solve this garbage pile of bandaids and crutches on a 10 year old engine that (somehow) nobody alive knows how to use properly anymore.

A beautiful dream, right there.
I can’t imagine it will ever happen though. I suspect that PGI is who we are stuck with developing MWO now and in the future.

Edited by Bud Crue, 16 April 2019 - 02:21 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Horseman, on 16 April 2019 - 12:06 AM, said:

Or at the console versions of Mechwarrior 2 which also had that.

Beat me to it



P.S. I have MechWarrior 2 on PlayStation.

I bought new-old stock a few years back because I was curious (and because at the time I couldn't get my PC copy to run). It's still fun, but its limitations are very glaring (especially with no Mechlab and the maps being severely reduced in size and complexity). The controls are a bit awkward (could have really benefitted from dual analogue support), but weren't too hard to get the hang of once I got some practice with it.

I think it was a game that would have been good had it come out towards the middle or end of the PlayStation lifecycle, but since it released early in the console's life (and was probably a rather rushed port job to begin with), it wasn't as good as it could have been (or should have been).

Still, I enjoyed it enough to play through both campaigns.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 16 April 2019 - 02:34 AM.

[Horseman]

PhoenixFire55, on 16 April 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

And I am fully aware of that. MWO is fubar. I'd rather have another company make an attempt at making a new game, because it surely can't be a worse/more lame attempt than what PGI did.

Well... they can turn it into a lootbox-driven P2W mobile game and completely **** on the lore and setting for the sake of a quick cash grab. It's been a trend lately.
I struggle to see how that wouldn't be worse.

Edited by Horseman, 16 April 2019 - 02:51 AM.

[TheArisen]

PhoenixFire55, on 16 April 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

And I am fully aware of that. MWO is fubar. I'd rather have another company make an attempt at making a new game, because it surely can't be a worse/more lame attempt than what PGI did. And I'm surely rather have another company do a new game than have em solve this garbage pile of bandaids and crutches on a 10 year old engine that (somehow) nobody alive knows how to use properly anymore.

Be careful of what you wish for. Also frankly MWO might not be amazing but it is a good game

[MeiSooHaityu]

TheArisen, on 16 April 2019 - 03:34 AM, said:

Be careful of what you wish for. Also frankly MWO might not be amazing but it is a good game

PGI didn't do nearly what I hoped it would with MWO, however despite that, it entertained me for years and I had a lot of fun with it. It is a shame it isn't living up to it's full potential (at least in my mind), but it has been a fun game for me to play, so I also can't say that PGI did a bad job either.

I have a lot of faith that MW5:Mercs will be a fun game. I am keeping my expectations in check though. I think that is important for people to do. I did that with HBS's BattleTech and it lived up to (and in many ways surpassed) what I was expecting. I am taking that same philosophy with MW5.

[LordNothing]

Vxheous, on 16 April 2019 - 12:42 AM, said:

I can't see them not securing the license, otherwise they would've stopped developing MW5

mw5 would be complete by that time. it could also be the primary reason they did not use the f2p model for that game. there is probably a clause where by if the game is complete prior to the deadline they can still sell it. though it might affect whether or not they can produce dlc or how much time they have to work on it. they might also have the option of a complete buyout of the license but mw5 will have to not fail.

[VonBruinwald]

LordNothing, on 16 April 2019 - 07:48 AM, said:

mw5 would be complete by that time. it could also be the primary reason they did not use the f2p model for that game. there is probably a clause where by if the game is complete prior to the deadline they can still sell it.

This. My guess, is they're no longer allowed to develop once the lease expires. This means they can't create new mechs/weapons/features for any existing games. Support would likely be permitted in a limited form (bug-patching). Sales would still be permitted.

It also explains the push for mod support. Even if they can't develop the game any further it becomes very difficult to stop the community providing post-dev support/mech packs.

Edited by VonBruinwald, 16 April 2019 - 09:52 AM.

[Horseman]

VonBruinwald, on 16 April 2019 - 09:52 AM, said:

Sales would still be permitted.

That would entirely depend on the contract. Activision had to remove their Transformers games from sale entirely once the license expired.

[VonBruinwald]

Horseman, on 16 April 2019 - 09:54 AM, said:

That would entirely depend on the contract. Activision had to remove their Transformers games from sale entirely once the license expired.

There's a lot that depends on the wording of the contract. And possibly further complications depending on the settlement with HG. My guess is as good as any other at this point.

[MechaBattler]

I don't think we'll hear anything about the license renewal until post MW5 launch. Microsoft probably wants to see how well a single player version of the game will do in this day and age. Especially as MWO's profitability has been in decline. Which is why PGI is tacking on everything they can think of for the MW5 pre-orders. If it can still turn a good enough profit. Then Microsoft doesn't have much reason to revoke the IP. I doubt Microsoft wants to put one of their own studios behind it. And with PGI they get money for very little to no risk on their part.

Edited by MechaBattler, 16 April 2019 - 01:54 PM.

[LT. HARDCASE]

PGI would not be developing MW5 for a September 10th release if the license was in jeopardy on December 31st.

Sales being removed after 2 months would be one of the biggest scandals in gaming history.

[ThreeStooges]

MechaBattler, on 16 April 2019 - 10:24 AM, said:

... Especially as MWO's profitability has been in decline. Which is why PGI is tacking on everything they can think of for the MW5 pre-orders. If it can still turn a good enough profit. Than Microsoft doesn't have much reason to revoke the IP. ..

Exactly why I have no interest in pre-ordering the game. All the pre-order junk is mostly for mwo. While it would be nice to have it makes little to no sense to get when we have no idea how long mwo will be around. No one knows the thing of an engine mwo uses so all we get in mwo are mxl changes and mech packs. How about some actual content for a few years like monthly new maps or more bt weapons?

[Bud Crue]

LT. HARDCASE, on 16 April 2019 - 11:03 AM, said:

PGI would not be developing MW5 for a September 10th release if the license was in jeopardy on December 31st.

Sales being removed after 2 months would be one of the biggest scandals in gaming history.

I suspect that the “license extensions” that Russ cited to regarding his unwillingness/inability to speak to the future of MWO (both at the Mechcon Q&A as well as in one of the NGNG twitch cast thingies in February) are very different than what may be governing MW5. I too assume that MW5’s licensure is all in order to the extent necessary to allow PGI to make and market the MW5 game for some reasonable period. I presume they are different licenses or at least clauses in a greater agreement, given Russ’s citation of such license extensions as being an apparent bar to his hypothesizing about MWO’s future whereas they are obviously going full stream ahead regarding MW5’s development.

I am not interested in that game or its licensure status however. Rather, I am asking about whatever license extension Russ was on about regarding THIS game and if anyone has any information as to their extension/resolution. It would seem that no one has heard anything definitive. So be it. Maybe Russ will mention during his next NGNG thing.

[MechaBattler]

@TheThreeStooges They can do stuff even with their janky engine. The Mechwarrior Academy shows it's possible to do some actual content. But I'm guessing they realized how much work would have to go into it. So they decided instead to go singleplayer route and use a better engine to do it.

I agree though. More maps and new weapons would at least keep things fresh. Even if it was just 2 new weapons for each faction every six months. It would give us something to look forward to and speculate on.

[Khobai]

PGI really needs their own IP

they should bring back TRANS|VERSE lol