81 replies to this topic

[Dimento Graven]

I'm as much of a PGI critic as anyone, probably more so really, but I do love 90% of MWO. Of the 10% I don't love, probably 80% are just annoyances, and the remaining 20% bugs the **** out of me to the point of blinding rage sometimes.

I love the 12v12 combat. I think FW as far as Clans vs IS is concerned should be 10v12, but I can see where that would have ended up screwing over QuickPlay (because in a 10v12, you don't nerf clans, you don't quirk IS as much - which would absolutely fail in 12v12 Quick Play). This lack of 10v12 doesn't even bother me, I understand why and live with it, it's in a "nice to have and never will" category for me.

I absolutely LOVE the variety of 'mechs. Except for champion versions, I own EVERY 'mech in the game (yes, I went Pokemon) including Heroes. They're neat to look at, they're neat to be in, they're fun to build out in various ways. I hate what they did with weapon placements, where most IS 'mechs fire from their crotches, and the weapons appear to be 'hot glued' onto the chassis artificially increasing hit boxes in sometimes bizarre manners. But that's not a 'game killer' for me (though I do sometimes NOT play certain 'mechs because of how stupidly easy it becomes blowing off arms or side torsos).

Match making pisses me off, but I really feel it's not a problem with match making, but with dwindling population. As far as I know, and have been able to research, PGI is NOT AT ALL advertising MWO anywhere. This game for the past... 5 years at least, has been a "word of mouth" game. The only way you'll hear of it is if you search on BattleTech or robot (and happen to accidentally find the right link). Hell in my testing, just doing a google search on "mech" MWO doesn't even show up on the first page. PGI apparently hasn't invested in ANY advertising. Advertising is what brings your product to the attention of people who may not have heard it before, can update old customers as to any "new" features in your product, and/or reminds them of your existence. Without FRESH players cycling in, EVERY game will die eventually. Maybe MW5 will help that once they announce the generalized pre-order, kind of doubt it, but maybe. This apparent lack of advertising pisses me off. I'm very angry at PGI for that.

Lack of heat affects, the introduction of ghost heat. Stupid, all around just f'ing stupid. Heat affects would be a MUCH easier way of discouraging the alpha centric firing mentality of the average player AND be less ambiguous than ghost heat, more in line with lore, and potentially result in a longer TTK. This has been a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE miss by PGI and it makes me angry at PGI.

The treatment of gauss weapons annoys me. They shouldn't be quite as hamstrung as they are. I'm annoyed only occasionally infuriated by it.

Camo patters, colors, decals, warhorns and other cockpit items. This is cool, and I appreciate the 'free' access through events and 'caches of disappointment'.

Inability of 'mechs to see their feet. Stupid if you're going to give lights the ability to core out and or leg an assault in under 10 seconds. Something about this needs to change.

The lack of physical attacks is hilariously dumb sometimes, and with physical attacks their might be some remediation of the previous issue.

Knockdowns. I loved them. Yeah it was annoying to be repeatedly knocked down. Either you failed, or your team is failing, or it was near the end of the match so there'd be no help possible from your team anyway, so it made zero difference. Still the idiotic and immature cry babies who refuse to play differently whined their way to the complete removal of the feature. Occasionally warping 10 meters to the left or right DOES NOT constitute "warping all over the map" as some of the Chicken Littles have lied in the past, certainly no more game breaking than what happens all the time, now, when a high ping player gets into a small ultra fast light 'mech.

Lots and lots and lots of long standing bugs that have yet to be fixed. Typically a bug is only annoying if it exists for a short while. However, let that bug exist for months/years and it becomes infuriating. That stupid bug that occasionally pops up when switching out consumables, for instance. Or the bug when a group member joins a group and can't see the proper available tonnage amount... PGI, what the heck?

Then there's the "quality of life" features we lack in the game, such as in private lobbies a "team switch" button that swaps team 1 to team 2 and visa versa.

Solaris. Great idea! Only partially implemented in my opinion. Solaris would be a GREAT place for knockdowns and physical attacks. It's limited to 2v2 at most so all the "worst" complaints about it from the past would be completely moot.

Community Warfare. Great idea, but we're back to a lack of population to do it right. I think MWO would need upwards of 4 times its current population to properly support it.

Anyway, I grade MWO a high "B+" as a game, and PGI a "C-" as a publisher.

[Mister Glitchdragon]

Man, watching that video gave me an ache for Hawken. I think my favorite thing about it was the art. Those maps and the mechs. Still got it on my console, somewhere.

[Cyanogene]

jss78, on 29 April 2019 - 08:25 AM, said:

That said PGI hasn't done poorly. The core gameplay has always been good, and their arts team has revitalized the whole franchise.

How's that denial working for you?

[MeiSooHaityu]

Cyanogene, on 30 April 2019 - 09:43 AM, said:

How's that denial working for you?

I don't think what jss78 is wrong. It's fair to levy criticism on PGI, however there still should be credit where credit is due as well.

The game at it's core is pretty good. Specifically PGI found a good way to link torso twisting with arm controls and did it in a way that is both intuitive and fluid. That was something the entire history of MechWarrior struggled with. They also established a good mechlab and the mech designs are top notch. Some may want sized hardpoints, however overall, this is a good core package to a MechWarrior game...again, at it's core.

This isn't to say that it is perfect. The lack of convergence, removal of inverse kinetics and knockdown, and the lack of weight to mech movement is a negative. I find most of these due to intentional design decisions made by PGI, or in some cases design limitations of the game engine/server system in place. Had this been more of a single player focused game, or more of a LAN type setup, maybe some of these issues wouldn't have been an issue. It's hard to say.

Again, not saying criticism isn't warranted, however again, my point is that I wouldn't wholesale dismiss what PGI was able to accomplish either. This game wouldn't have gotten this far if the core gameplay hook was poor. There is clearly a fun game in MW:O, I know this because I wouldn't have played the game so long if there wasn't.

As for the art direction. I think there is a good chance that without the efforts of PGI (love it or hate it), this franchise would still be locked in Microsoft's basement. Without this game at the least showing that there was still interest in the IP, games like HBS's BattleTech might not have been made. Also, without PGI's mech assets, there is a chance that HBS's BattleTech would not have been made, or at the least, would have been a radically different product (not just in look, but in scope as well).

Of course, we wouldn't even have a MechWarrior 5:Mercs on the horizon either.

I'm not here to defend PGI's decisions. I personally think they bit off a bit more than they bargained for with MW:O and I think that has shown over the years (and continues to show) as well. Despite that, I also want to give credit where credit is due too. Remember, companies weren't clamoring to make a MechWarrior game of any type before MWO launched. Even the old MW5 trailer from years prior couldn't secure a publisher and the game died off (with some help from HG as well).

I think PGI has helped revitalize interest in this franchise. I think they and Catalyst together were able to finally get the HG monkey off of the back of the Battletech IP, and I think their efforts helped HBS make an excellent tactical game possible.

Want to criticize PGI and their game or practices, sure go right ahead. There is years of fuel there to fuel that flame. Completely disregard them as making a positive impact of any sort, that's letting the anger get in the way of acknowledging what good there has been done.

[Dimento Graven]

MeiSooHaityu, on 30 April 2019 - 10:28 AM, said:

...

I think PGI has helped revitalize interest in this franchise. I think they and Catalyst together were able to finally get the HG monkey off of the back of the Battletech IP, and I think their efforts helped HBS make an excellent tactical game possible.

...

Oh yeah, you definitely have to give PGI props for more less eviscerating the Harmony Gold IP troll.

While that F'er may not be completely dead, it's gonna take a LONG time for it to come out from under that bridge...

Edited by Dimento Graven, 30 April 2019 - 10:33 AM.

[Cyanogene]

MeiSooHaityu, on 30 April 2019 - 10:28 AM, said:

That response was so damn huge I even left a like for the effort.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Cyanogene, on 30 April 2019 - 10:43 AM, said:

That response was so damn huge I even left a like for the effort.

lol. Fair enough. I'll take what I can get

[Thorqemada]

I never played Hawken, i alredy lost my interest when i saw this CRT on Legs pretending beeing a Mech and i felt insulted and immediately knew it would not be for me.

Did they really manage to spend 28 Millon on it?

What a Mechwarrior game that could have been...

[MeiSooHaityu]

Thorqemada, on 30 April 2019 - 11:00 AM, said:

I never played Hawken, i alredy lost my interest when i saw this CRT on Legs pretending beeing a Mech and i felt insulted and immediately knew it would not be for me.

I know. That mech looked like something that sprung out from the Fallout universe. It's maps did look gorgeous though.

I tried Hawken for a little bit as well, and it also didn't grab me.

[CtrlAltWheee]

RickySpanish, on 28 April 2019 - 02:44 PM, said:

It's almost as if Piranha have managed their game, affairs and fanbase better than the poor souls that made Hawken. But sweet ******** Jesus, we certainly couldn't admit to that on the message board / HPGutterOutreach. No sirree! MWO is failingggg!

Agreed. Credit to Russ for making some big moves.

I'd like to submit that Alex Iglesias is a living god and hiring him is a pillar of mwo's success. Hawken mechs look like ugly trashcans with legs. Somehow Alex made a beautiful trashcan with legs aka the urbie.

I'd also like to say that MWO's monetization is way better. Russ has some brass balls. He got rid of the rule of three, we got the $20 base package, the pre-orders come with actually desirable perks, he sells camos for like $1, he gives away customer appreciation mechs each year, he does mechcon. CW was a bitter disappointment, and the game has issues, but basically I'm happy.

I disagree with some design choices, but the basic business model of asking for $20 each month that comes with 3 mechs, 3 mech bays, 6.5mm cbills, new colors, and 30 days premium time... that works for me.

[MeiSooHaityu]

One thing to think about. Look how many "Live Service" games from much larger companies with much more money failed/are failing. Hawken with 28 million, and look how it went down.

Even the giants like Bioware/EA with Anthem or Bethesda/Zenimax with Fallout 76. Heck, even Apex Legends sounds like it is having issues. Having a lot of resources and a lot of money doesn't automatically mean success when it comes to live services. Almost like it is more of a gamble than some companies give it credit for.

P.S. Also let me throw in Red Dead Redemption Online .

Some of these games might bounce back, but if they do, it only shows how much they had to hustle to make up for their initial hubris. These games aren't just throw out whatever, and are a guarantee to last a decade.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 30 April 2019 - 11:23 AM.

[Koniving]

When I tried the tutorial and saw a lot of what I kept suggesting to PGI for MWO's training before we got one..


It was... up and down.

[jss78]

MeiSooHaityu, on 30 April 2019 - 10:28 AM, said:

I don't think what jss78 is wrong. It's fair to levy criticism on PGI, however there still should be credit where credit is due as well.

The game at it's core is pretty good. Specifically PGI found a good way to link torso twisting with arm controls and did it in a way that is both intuitive and fluid. That was something the entire history of MechWarrior struggled with. They also established a good mechlab and the mech designs are top notch. Some may want sized hardpoints, however overall, this is a good core package to a MechWarrior game...again, at it's core.

This isn't to say that it is perfect. The lack of convergence, removal of inverse kinetics and knockdown, and the lack of weight to mech movement is a negative. I find most of these due to intentional design decisions made by PGI, or in some cases design limitations of the game engine/server system in place. Had this been more of a single player focused game, or more of a LAN type setup, maybe some of these issues wouldn't have been an issue. It's hard to say.

Again, not saying criticism isn't warranted, however again, my point is that I wouldn't wholesale dismiss what PGI was able to accomplish either. This game wouldn't have gotten this far if the core gameplay hook was poor. There is clearly a fun game in MW:O, I know this because I wouldn't have played the game so long if there wasn't.

As for the art direction. I think there is a good chance that without the efforts of PGI (love it or hate it), this franchise would still be locked in Microsoft's basement. Without this game at the least showing that there was still interest in the IP, games like HBS's BattleTech might not have been made. Also, without PGI's mech assets, there is a chance that HBS's BattleTech would not have been made, or at the least, would have been a radically different product (not just in look, but in scope as well).

Of course, we wouldn't even have a MechWarrior 5:Mercs on the horizon either.

I'm not here to defend PGI's decisions. I personally think they bit off a bit more than they bargained for with MW:O and I think that has shown over the years (and continues to show) as well. Despite that, I also want to give credit where credit is due too. Remember, companies weren't clamoring to make a MechWarrior game of any type before MWO launched. Even the old MW5 trailer from years prior couldn't secure a publisher and the game died off (with some help from HG as well).

I think PGI has helped revitalize interest in this franchise. I think they and Catalyst together were able to finally get the HG monkey off of the back of the Battletech IP, and I think their efforts helped HBS make an excellent tactical game possible.

Want to criticize PGI and their game or practices, sure go right ahead. There is years of fuel there to fuel that flame. Completely disregard them as making a positive impact of any sort, that's letting the anger get in the way of acknowledging what good there has been done.

Thank you -- I was specifically thinking of how PGI's 3D assets were likely crucial for HBS's success. The franchise was essentially long-dead, now we have an online first-person shooter, a great turn-based game, and soon a single-player/coop first-person game too. All building on the same arts assets.

Also we have fairly young people introduced through the video games now buying Catalyst's tabletop boxed sets.

I also forgot the whole HG lawsuit. It's really a huge thing Russ did there, and I hope it's not soon forgotten. It was DECADES that the games couldn't show the franchises most venerable 'mechs, and now they're in MWO, rolling into HBS BT, and also coming back to tabletop.

So yeah, that's pretty good. So good it's oddly irrelevant how good MWO actually is. But it's not a bad game, after years the the core gameplay in the Quickplay queue is pretty cool. The whole game mode design beyond that, as I allowed, has always struck me as something PGI struggles with. This includes how to set up the solo players, the small groups of 2-4 and the big groups into games that are fun for all, but also map design etc.

[LordNothing]

game death is the thing i worry about. i can play all my old dos games just fine, all the games from there to about the mid 00s as well. so why are we bothering with all these dead end games which cannot even be preserved for artistic value post server abandonment. this is certainly where mwo is headed eventually. the video i posted over here has some interesting thoughts on the subject.

[Y E O N N E]

Koniving, on 29 April 2019 - 11:31 PM, said:

In 2014 using a scout-class, I would have to disagree. True there wasn't any insta-gibbing, but between being spotted to being dead there was hardly enough time to get into a full sprint (which mind you is almost instant), jump and spin in the air to make a counter shot, before even finishing that maneuver I'd be dead... and never-mind any repair ability, the maps were tiny and the animation could hardly finish before another contender would swing by to strike me even after hiding. It is worth pointing out though, that I was a player that had not levelled out anything, got the base unit and took it to combat., then bought a scout and immediately took it to combat. Likely against people level 20 or however it went.

My experience is exactly the opposite. Scout class could dance around the Heavies with near impunity, the combination of Flak Gun and Grenade Launcher was ridiculously strong. It typically took 2 or 3 players ganging up on me to finally take me down, because judicious use of cover, self-repair, and feint retreats extended engagements for minutes.

Quote

My point being I'm not a stranger to twitch shooters and wouldn't want you to think "oh its just because he sucks." Though I do admit I often prefer to play slower moving tankier characters than ultra-fast characters even in said shooters, perhaps because the fast ones don't tend to survive after the first mistake they make. Level one starting scouts did get killed with lightning speed, sadly, against upgraded machines and weaponry.

Well, the starting mech in Hawken was a Medium, not a Scout, and ironically it was one of the most powerful mechs in the game all the way until the end because the combination of SMG/Assault Rifle with a TOW varied between strong and OP.

[A Rabid Raccoon With A Shotgun]

Y E O N N E, on 30 April 2019 - 05:59 PM, said:

My experience is exactly the opposite. Scout class could dance around the Heavies with near impunity, the combination of Flak Gun and Grenade Launcher was ridiculously strong. It typically took 2 or 3 players ganging up on me to finally take me down, because judicious use of cover, self-repair, and feint retreats extended engagements for minutes.



Well, the starting mech in Hawken was a Medium, not a Scout, and ironically it was one of the most powerful mechs in the game all the way until the end because the combination of SMG/Assault Rifle with a TOW varied between strong and OP.

FYI Scout never had nades, scout was strictly flak cannon/heat cannon/miniflak w/ TOW launcher. The only reason why Assaults/CRT or anything with SMG/Vulcan/AR got strong was because near the end 505 Games pushed to try and gain the CoD/BF crowd and failed.

[Y E O N N E]

A Rabid Raccoon With A Shotgun, on 30 April 2019 - 08:54 PM, said:

FYI Scout never had nades, scout was strictly flak cannon/heat cannon/miniflak w/ TOW launcher. The only reason why Assaults/CRT or anything with SMG/Vulcan/AR got strong was because near the end 505 Games pushed to try and gain the CoD/BF crowd and failed.

IIRC, "Scout" was the name of a specific mech and I'm conflating that with the Light/A class. I might also be mis-remembering the HEAT cannon as a Flak on the Infiltrator. Flak and TOW on the Scout was also ridiculously strong in CQC until they nerfed the rate of fire on it to the point where it was straight-up inferior to the Mini Flak.

CRT was always fairly strong, from tech Alpha to end. It got mega-buffed when they nerfed health on A-class and removed recoil as a thing that you had to account for.

[A Rabid Raccoon With A Shotgun]

Y E O N N E, on 30 April 2019 - 09:19 PM, said:

IIRC, "Scout" was the name of a specific mech and I'm conflating that with the Light/A class. I might also be mis-remembering the HEAT cannon as a Flak on the Infiltrator. Flak and TOW on the Scout was also ridiculously strong in CQC until they nerfed the rate of fire on it to the point where it was straight-up inferior to the Mini Flak.

CRT was always fairly strong, from tech Alpha to end. It got mega-buffed when they nerfed health on A-class and removed recoil as a thing that you had to account for.

Infil had EOC rep, heat and AR with a nade, scout was super strong in CQC because of it's high speed low dodge time.

[Y E O N N E]

A Rabid Raccoon With A Shotgun, on 01 May 2019 - 10:05 AM, said:

Infil had EOC rep, heat and AR with a nade, scout was super strong in CQC because of it's high speed low dodge time.

Infiltrator had HEAT, too.

Unlockables, my dude.

[kuma8877]

Early days, Hawken was a lot of fun. Like really fun. But if you'd step away for a bit, it was sometimes like coming back to a completely different game in the same skin. Weird sensation as a player.