20 replies to this topic

[Novakaine]

A successful company diversifies.
Have you given any consideration to vehicles?
Given the success of WOT.
Who would not be interested in a futuristic tanks and vehicles mode.
Not mechs verses tanks, but TOT mode.
The Battletech universe has a plethora of them.
And I think it would greatly renew interest in MWO.
Just an idea.

[Buster Machine 0]

Would love to see this happen!

[shaytalis]

This would qualify as something new and unique filling a niche that doesn't exist yet.

[FireStoat]

I'll confess that I'd be into a new first person shooter set within the Battletech setting that focused on conventional vehicles and arms. Tanks, VTOLs, and maybe even power armor infantry with multiple weapon types.

[Nesutizale]

MW:LL wants its ideas back ^_°

I think the topic of haveing tanks and other vehicles in MWO has been asked a lot in the past. Be it an "all in one" mode or seperate modes.
Still I doubt we will ever see that.

A game that I would like to see is a "spy / stealth" game where you play as one of the secret agencys/special forces of the BT universe like DEST. With gameplay ranging from stealth infiltration, FPS combat to tanks and Mechs action.

I think the BT universe offers enough background material to create basicly everything you can think of and I would like to see that beeing used. BT is more then just mechs...also its mostly known for mechs.

[Nameless King]

Novakaine, on 31 May 2019 - 10:18 PM, said:

A successful company diversifies.
Have you given any consideration to vehicles?
Given the success of WOT.
Who would not be interested in a futuristic tanks and vehicles mode.
Not mechs verses tanks, but TOT mode.
The Battletech universe has a plethora of them.
And I think it would greatly renew interest in MWO.
Just an idea.

I would not be interested and think World of Tanks is horrible

[tacorodwarrior]

And you want PGI to develop this? With all the experience from this fantastic game. You want PGI to do another game with Long Tom and Boreal Vault and 60 second countdown timers and no matchmaker for 7 years and no maps for 2 + years and with weapon flap bugs and texture bugs on every map and invisible walls and ZERO advertising to bring in new customers and with a ridiculously unfriendly UI and and with premade high skilled players getting the defence on ridiculously difficult to attack siege maps (like Boreal Vault) and with no player ranking system and with a grinding system you can actually complete and who rebrands itself for a game mode that 6 people play from time to time and that have fantastic game mode like "Escort" and who have never once given what their customer base has SCREAMED for and that only last night claimed that the recent faction play update was getting very positive feedback and that makes you change loyalty and change drop decks daily now and a developer that does not keep backups of their game so they can roll back an update that was nothing short of an abortion. YEA sounds great count me in I would love that. GOOD IDEA. the only thing that should be typed in these forums from now on is the request for PGI to hand back the license.

[meteorol]

PGI tried to diversify with Transverse.

And boy were they shat on for trying it. They raised a grand total of around 1000 $ within a month before shutting the project down, accompanied by the cheers of malicious joy of this very community.

Pretty sure they burned their fingers hard enough to not try something similar again.

[FRAGTAST1C]

tacorodwarrior, on 01 June 2019 - 05:46 AM, said:

And you want PGI to develop this? With all the experience from this fantastic game. You want PGI to do another game with Long Tom and Boreal Vault and 60 second countdown timers and no matchmaker for 7 years and no maps for 2 + years and with weapon flap bugs and texture bugs on every map and invisible walls and ZERO advertising to bring in new customers and with a ridiculously unfriendly UI and and with premade high skilled players getting the defence on ridiculously difficult to attack siege maps (like Boreal Vault) and with no player ranking system and with a grinding system you can actually complete and who rebrands itself for a game mode that 6 people play from time to time and that have fantastic game mode like "Escort" and who have never once given what their customer base has SCREAMED for and that only last night claimed that the recent faction play update was getting very positive feedback and that makes you change loyalty and change drop decks daily now and a developer that does not keep backups of their game so they can roll back an update that was nothing short of an abortion. YEA sounds great count me in I would love that. GOOD IDEA. the only thing that should be typed in these forums from now on is the request for PGI to hand back the license.

I don't know why but I read that entire thing with Ed Byrne's voice in my head

[Karl Streiger]

meteorol, on 01 June 2019 - 06:18 AM, said:

PGI tried to diversify with Transverse.

And boy were they shat on for trying it. They raised a grand total of around 1000 $ within a month before shutting the project down, accompanied by the cheers of malicious joy of this very community.

Pretty sure they burned their fingers hard enough to not try something similar again.

ah well Transverse, the issue was not the Game not even the use of Founders Money, the issue was communication. PGI sucks when it comed to communication, you have hollow oaths combined with lack of any communication mixed with mocking and even abising the community.
A complete different behaviour to its customers and Transverse might not have been a total desaster.
and WoT with BT vehicles will not work not when you keep the TT values as a strict guideline.
Most missile tanks will kill any other tank in a single volley.

[Anjian]

Diversification usually means going to different platforms, consoles and mobiles.


You don't want to go to mobile unless you are really in it for the money. '

[Koniving]

....I shared this idea multiple times today alone, let alone over years...

No one (edit one person) seemed interested.

Someone shared it in its own thread but said "WoT" in the same post and a picture of a Battletech tank.

The thread floods with support for it.

<.<
Clearly I must be doing something wrong.

Edited by Koniving, 01 June 2019 - 09:29 PM.

[Koniving]

Anjian, on 01 June 2019 - 09:00 PM, said:

Diversification usually means going to different platforms, consoles and mobiles.
You don't want to go to mobile unless you are really in it for the money. '

Most mobile games struggle to make money and rely heavily on ads and the like.
The only benefit is how immensely cheap it is and low expectations.

[Koniving]

I know the tank I want.

The only one which annihilated an Atlas in a single salvo and proceeded to kill or disable 7 Enforcers, many of which were tournament-rules (basically in BT standards, overpowered as **** compared to stock without getting into pure cheese territory), in its final stand after getting tracked, achieving it all within 30 seconds.



(No wonder why OP doesn't want tanks up against mechs...)

[Khobai]

what exactly would vehicles bring to the game that mechs dont?

its literally just more of the same thing. you think people will buy it because it has wheels instead of legs? no lol.

the problem with MWO isnt that it doesnt have tanks. The problem is that game lacks depth and the mechs are all too samey, lack any uniqueness or diversity, and once youve played one laser boat youve played them all. Adding more tanks that are equally samey isnt going to fix the problem. Adding laser tanks instead of laser mechs doesnt fix the problem that the game has no real depth.

I mean id be cool with npc vehicles in some of the gamemodes. That would add some immersion. I just dont think selling vehicle packs is going to keep the game afloat. People will see right through it.

Edited by Khobai, 01 June 2019 - 11:35 PM.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 01 June 2019 - 11:28 PM, said:

what exactly would vehicles bring to the game that mechs dont?

its literally just more of the same thing. you think people will buy it because it has wheels instead of legs? no lol.

The best of both worlds would be to add QuadVees. You get to have both a quad mech and a tank in one unit that can transform between both at will. BATTLEMECHS ROLL OUT!

Also we would finally get to have literal nascars in this game because one of the QuadVees uses wheels instead of tracks.

Edited by FupDup, 01 June 2019 - 11:31 PM.

[Khobai]

yeah I mean quads are the same problem though. theyre just more of the same.

the whole reason mech packs failed miserably is because we dont need more of the same. we need the mechs we already have to be more different.

[Burning2nd]

fantastic idea...

anyone have any idea of a company that could provide that?

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 01 June 2019 - 11:44 PM, said:

yeah I mean quads are the same problem though. theyre just more of the same.

the whole reason mech packs failed miserably is because we dont need more of the same. we need the mechs we already have to be more different.

Quads have a completely different movement system from bipeds tho, but I will admit they have an issue with lacking critslots because they replace their arms with legs (losing about a dozen or so slots in the process).

[Captain Polux]

A successful company understands their products and customers.

Also, I'm down for tanks in this game