70 replies to this topic

[Prototelis]

That was a whole lot of over-promising.

Thing is; game was never going to have the population to support those features. That was always a waste of time.

Battletech doesn't have wide appeal for many reasons.

Edited by Prototelis, 12 August 2019 - 08:03 AM.

[MechaBattler]

If MW5 does well. PGI renews their license. And then Epic buys them out for a few shiny nickels, then maybe lololol. Jokes aside. It's very expensive to develop a whole new game. Granted they could use MW5 as a building block to an MWO2.0 in Unreal. But I don't think PGI has the cash flow to develop MWO2.0. When they could just release DLC for MW5 on the regular. MWO hasn't proven to be cost effective anymore. Why would they go back to the well when they've repeatedly poisoned it? If MW5 sells well. They have a new proven platform to work off.

[Nesutizale]

MWO 2.0 is the DLC for MW5

[Stridercal]

Ahahahahahahaahahahahahahhaahaha!

*deep breath*

AHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAA!

Thank you, OP, i needed this.

[slide]

Reincarnating MWO on another game engine with the same games designs and implementation would be a colossal failure from the second it was launched. Very few people will spend the same kind of money again to repurchase what they had to play what is essentially the same failed game modes on a new engine.

Now granted much of the development will be done with MW5 which will offset the cost of development somewhat as will the existing mech models but without a grand new plan that can incentivize people to play and thereby spend money on something in the game then it is doomed to failure. For me endless Arena Shooter with the grind that entails would barely entice me to play let alone spend money.

There are a million ideas on these forums, but to raise any interest in an MWO2 from me then it needs to embrace much of what that video proposed a few posts back. It needs reasons to play that are more than just grind, it needs RPG and MMO elements and if they want units to actually do and mean something then they need robust unit management and contract systems that make leading or being a member of a unit actually worth while (common goals). But most importantly they need a map that can be changed and have planets that are actually worth taking. I have ideas about that and have voiced them before but not wasting my time again here.

[LordNothing]

Nesutizale, on 12 August 2019 - 11:07 AM, said:

MWO 2.0 is the DLC for MW5

problem with dlc is that you cant pass it off as another title which means no wheelbarrow full of money for pgi (of course i havent read epic's terms for exclusive games yet and probably wont, legalese makes me queasy). either way the job is the same, add mwo to mw5. better to pass it as a new game and make more money.

Edited by LordNothing, 12 August 2019 - 09:18 PM.

[Nesutizale]

I doubt that PGI got that much money out of the deal. Epic didn't wanted MW5 on Epic store when PGI contacted them the first time around and it was mentioned that they got money for advertisment and paying 3 month of development. That is still a lot of money but I doubt they are rolling in money as some people seam to think.

As for not making money with DLC, well there are a lot of DLC that cost money and you could say that MW2 GBL or MW2 Mercs where kinda DLC...without the DL
Today they would definitly be offered as DLC at nearly fullprice so I think DLCs can make you money even without saying its a new game.

I am much more concerned abuot the quality they would have to present to make money of a MWO-2.0 to get back buyers confidance to spend any money on it at all. No matter DLC or a seperate game.
Just porting the game to the new engine isn't enough. It would still find its playerbase, there I am pretty sure but to reach out further, maybe even getting some interest by new people and then keep them interested....that is a very high bar they have to jump over.

Look at the games the kids play today and try to see if that is working with the Battletech franchise at all. Battle-Royal? Nope don't see it working with BT. Fast paste action shooter with building stuff? Yah Mechs burn down stuff not build it.
PGI needs to go back to the drawing board and sit down and see what is the essence of BT and what made it cool. Stompy robots aren't carrieing thing anymore or alone. There needs to be something, some feeling that only BT provides.

[Prototelis]

Battle tech isn't cool tho; if it was it'd have a much wider appeal.

This game has made more money than all the other mechwarrior games combined.

[Wil McCullough]

Nesutizale, on 12 August 2019 - 06:36 AM, said:

That is true. During the novels things changed very often in how they work. Like autocannons sometimes fired one round, sometimes many. Lasers of the same class could oneshot arms of and next time its a scratch...and don't get me started on Mech-Fu. Mechs could sometimes not lift there legs properly and next time you see it, its doing roundhouse kicks. Okay that was MWDA I think but still.....

I would say lets stick to the latest rules as they are the most common factor overall.

The ac thing in lore is pretty contradictory. Since it refered to the amount of lead the ac shot down range and not the caliber of the round, basically it meant that there was serious overlap between "vanilla" acs and lbx/racs.

[Vellron2005]

I posted a topic similar to this when MW5 was just announced.. I got beaten down by the "oh nooz, I don't wanna re-buy all meh mechs!" crew..

Good luck OP..

Good luck.

[Prototelis]

Uhm, that might be because monetizing on already developed content that many of us already paid for is ******* stupid.

If there is a MWO2, it will for sure be monetized differently or fail right out of the box.

[Nesutizale]

Wil McCullough, on 13 August 2019 - 12:43 AM, said:

The ac thing in lore is pretty contradictory. Since it refered to the amount of lead the ac shot down range and not the caliber of the round, basically it meant that there was serious overlap between "vanilla" acs and lbx/racs.

True. I think a point that one could make, also its not consistant in the novels, is that you say that different manufacturers build guns with different atributes but when broken down to a single round of Battletech they all do the same damage.

For example you could say that an AC10 could be both a single shot or a stream of bullets. In a round of BT they would both do 10 damage no matter how they are delivered to the target.
The real problem only comes in when you try to do a realtime representation as there is quite a differance if you shoot just one bullet for 10 damage or if you shoot 10 that each do 1 damage.

[Wil McCullough]

Nesutizale, on 13 August 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

True. I think a point that one could make, also its not consistant in the novels, is that you say that different manufacturers build guns with different atributes but when broken down to a single round of Battletech they all do the same damage.

For example you could say that an AC10 could be both a single shot or a stream of bullets. In a round of BT they would both do 10 damage no matter how they are delivered to the target.
The real problem only comes in when you try to do a realtime representation as there is quite a differance if you shoot just one bullet for 10 damage or if you shoot 10 that each do 1 damage.

Yeah which means technically, it's possible to have an ac5 that behaves just like a shorter ranged rac2 that doesn't jam. Funny as hell.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Prototelis, on 13 August 2019 - 12:26 AM, said:

Battle tech isn't cool tho; if it was it'd have a much wider appeal.

This game has made more money than all the other mechwarrior games combined.

I'm not sure about MWO making more money than all others combined. I don't know if PGI releases those figures, but if they did, it would be good to link. Even if it was the case, other MechWarrior titles didn't have this business model to support ongoing monetization, and of course inflation as well.

If we are going to concentrate more on the industry influential route, MechWarrior 2 was probably the most important title. That game pretty much solidified the brand and led to a decade long successful run. I know it is hard to believe now, but not only was MechWarrior 2 a visual powerhouse for the time, but it also launched around the time that 3D accelerator cards were starting to become popular, and it helped promote those as well. It wasn't unusual to buy a 3D card and have a custom version of MW2 included to promote it.

Really though, I think BattleTech's main issue is marketing/promotion more than anything. Games tend to sell well when a AAA publisher is actively hyping/publicizing a title over years, showing demos at E3, and paying magazines/online publications for constant coverage.

Essentially if you can create a hype machine around a game, you are going to sell a lot of copies of a game. Games like Anthem for instance were new titles with no previous established games. People knew almost nothing about the lore and the characters and their motivations. All they knew is a demo looked pretty and that Bioware is making it. Off of that premise it sold millions of copies.

One could say BattleTech isn't cool, but really, it just hasn't been promoted in the way that has generated a hype machine around it. At least, IMO.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 13 August 2019 - 02:42 AM.

[Prototelis]

Yeah well, thats what happens when b and c level authors write your universe.

Mechwarrior 4 sold about twice as many copies as Mechwarrior 2; but wasn't as highly ranked in sales for its time.

Edited by Prototelis, 13 August 2019 - 02:50 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Prototelis, on 13 August 2019 - 02:43 AM, said:

Yeah well, thats what happens when b and c level authors write your universe.

Mechwarrior 4 sold about twice as many copies as Mechwarrior 2; but wasn't as highly ranked in sales for its time.

Don't forget too though that the industry was different in '95 vs '00. A lot more PCs were in homes in 2000 then there were in 1995, so the market/install base was a lot smaller when MechWarrior 2 released vs when MechWarror 4 released.

If this graphic is to be believed, just looking at the US, there is roughly a 20% ~ 30% increase in computers in the home from 1997 to 2000. In 1995, that number would have been even less.




That is why going purely off of sales figures when dealing with titles that old isn't necessarily fair. Even if MW4 sold better physically, it might not have sold as well ratio wise when looking at the amount of computers in the home. MW4 might still be on top even with that taken into account, but it would be good to see some sort of number with PC install base taken into account.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 13 August 2019 - 02:59 AM.

[LordNothing]

Vellron2005, on 13 August 2019 - 01:42 AM, said:

I posted a topic similar to this when MW5 was just announced.. I got beaten down by the "oh nooz, I don't wanna re-buy all meh mechs!" crew..

Good luck OP..

Good luck.

it was a bit early i think. all the refundes were still raising a ruckus and pgi took forever to get things into order by moving those threads to bt discussion. so far it hasnt been that bad.

this is my ten thousandth post. i need a new game lol.

Edited by LordNothing, 13 August 2019 - 04:20 AM.

[LordNothing]

Nesutizale, on 13 August 2019 - 12:11 AM, said:

I doubt that PGI got that much money out of the deal. Epic didn't wanted MW5 on Epic store when PGI contacted them the first time around and it was mentioned that they got money for advertisment and paying 3 month of development. That is still a lot of money but I doubt they are rolling in money as some people seam to think.

As for not making money with DLC, well there are a lot of DLC that cost money and you could say that MW2 GBL or MW2 Mercs where kinda DLC...without the DL
Today they would definitly be offered as DLC at nearly fullprice so I think DLCs can make you money even without saying its a new game.

I am much more concerned abuot the quality they would have to present to make money of a MWO-2.0 to get back buyers confidance to spend any money on it at all. No matter DLC or a seperate game.
Just porting the game to the new engine isn't enough. It would still find its playerbase, there I am pretty sure but to reach out further, maybe even getting some interest by new people and then keep them interested....that is a very high bar they have to jump over.

Look at the games the kids play today and try to see if that is working with the Battletech franchise at all. Battle-Royal? Nope don't see it working with BT. Fast paste action shooter with building stuff? Yah Mechs burn down stuff not build it.
PGI needs to go back to the drawing board and sit down and see what is the essence of BT and what made it cool. Stompy robots aren't carrieing thing anymore or alone. There needs to be something, some feeling that only BT provides.

i like the old school term "expansion pack", as 99% of my games collection is on disc. "dlc" never really caught on for me. technically everything you buy that is digital is dlc these days. last product i bought that actually contained a dvd with an out of date copy of steam on it, and a certificate with a serial number (steam key, idk, im not well versed in the steam jargon).

i think the thing im trying to get at is will epic consider a dlc an exclusive or are there different terms for those?

Edited by LordNothing, 13 August 2019 - 04:17 AM.

[LordNothing]

Wil McCullough, on 13 August 2019 - 02:30 AM, said:

Yeah which means technically, it's possible to have an ac5 that behaves just like a shorter ranged rac2 that doesn't jam. Funny as hell.

it would have to be kept within reason. if a weapon variant has a positive advantage over the baseline then it also needs to come with a proportionate disadvantage. and those advantages and disadvantages should be kept within a narrow margin, say between 5 and 15%. as long as all ac5s do the same damage in the same slice of time what does it matter?

[Nesutizale]

LordNothing, on 13 August 2019 - 04:05 AM, said:

i think the thing im trying to get at is will epic consider a dlc an exclusive or are there different terms for those?

I would say by the time PGI finishes the first DLC the year will be over and the exclusive deal be done. As far as I can tell Epic is only interested in selling the main product / complete games and not so much in any addons/dlc/expansions...whatever its called these days.