103 replies to this topic

[The pessimistic optimist]

Prototelis, on 08 October 2019 - 04:18 PM, said:

lol, no you aren't. It isn't a lifetime exclusive lawl.

So I was right then I was never talking about MW5 being exclusive I was talking about Epic store exclusives forcing people to use it store front. So my point still stands build a better product and don't force people to use it that's not real competition build a better store that people want to use that is real competition .

Edited by SirSmokes, 08 October 2019 - 04:23 PM.

[Prototelis]

I would concede to "compelled," but not forced. You cannot be forced to own a luxury item lol.

You can wait and give epic money, or you can wait and give epic money. I can concede that no matter what you're being forced to pay epic, should you choose to buy mechwarrior 5.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Prototelis, on 08 October 2019 - 04:50 PM, said:

I would concede to "compelled," but not forced. You cannot be forced to own a luxury item lol.

You can wait and give epic money, or you can wait and give epic money. I can concede that no matter what you're being forced to pay epic, should you choose to buy mechwarrior 5.

If they buy exclusive right it's forced and not the timed exclusives. And even timed is shady and not really trying to build a better product.

Edited by SirSmokes, 08 October 2019 - 05:23 PM.

[Prototelis]

SirSmokes, on 08 October 2019 - 05:22 PM, said:

If they buy exclusive right it's forced and not the timed exclusives.

lawl, guess what isn't happening here as of right now?

Still can't be forced to buy a luxury item lawl.

[FLG 01]

Y E O N N E, on 02 October 2019 - 05:15 PM, said:

All of the Civil War tech is also recycling various mechanics, which is why none of the equipment that would require even marginally more work than copy+pasting an existing item and tweaking its stats were actually included.

As you so nicely said: It's worse than that. The whole Civil War update was a poor excuse to sell the MW:4-Mechs like the Hellspawn to the MW:4-lemmings. The FCCW-era itself was largely ignored, especially its lore and its actually important Mechs (some of which would have done really well in MW:O).
Perhaps it is even worse than that. PGI repeatedly showed a very poor understanding of the lore: a Steiner vs Davion event (yeah, remember: civil war, not 5th SW), not knowing it is a bad idea to sell the Fafnir with a Davion paintscheme and without a Steiner paintscheme, no immersion whatsoever.

Now this is very important for MW:5. A single player game depends on immersion, and a single player game set in this universe depends on how well they deal with the lore. So far, PGI has failed in a spectacular way on both fronts.
Therefore I will definitely wait and see what PGI can do with a dedicated single player game.

Y E O N N E, on 02 October 2019 - 05:15 PM, said:

Solaris was always going to be a horrendous waste of resources because only a fleetingly small portion of the community actually wanted it in the first place.

I would argue that is another side effect of the MW:4 hype that dominated the forums for a while. People pushed for MW:4-reloaded really hard but MW:O was never a good platform for that, being a multi player game. S7 was a fun minigame inside the main campaign driven game of MW:4. It was never a main feature: that was the thrilling narration of the Civil War.

[Phoolan Devi]

I keep my pre-order!

I still don't get the reason for canceling it, other than being a cheapskate and a self centric entitled kid.

[FLG 01]

Phoolan Devi, on 09 October 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

I still don't get the reason for canceling it, other than being a cheapskate and a self centric entitled kid.

People care for their own financial well-being and personal interest when conducting a business transaction?

The horror! What's next? Free markets? Capitalism? I hope you alarmed your local party officials.

[Phoolan Devi]

FLG 01, on 09 October 2019 - 05:37 AM, said:

People care for their own financial well-being and personal interest when conducting a business transaction?

The horror! What's next? Free markets? Capitalism? I hope you alarmed your local party officials.

Why did they pre-order in the first place then?

Cancelling a pre-order and keeping the benefits ain't free market!

Your comment makes absolutely no sense!

[Prototelis]

If I had pre-ordered I still would have canceled even though I don't care what platform the game is on. Unless you really wanted to play the beta there was no reason not to because of all the free swag.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Prototelis, on 08 October 2019 - 05:30 PM, said:

lawl, guess what isn't happening here as of right now?

Still can't be forced to buy a luxury item lawl.

Ok my be forced is the wrong work how about no other choice if you want to buy the product if it's a Epic store exclusive and the point still stands that's not really trying to be legitimate competition to steam

Edited by SirSmokes, 09 October 2019 - 11:40 AM.

[WarHippy]

Khobai, on 08 October 2019 - 02:23 PM, said:

But what Steam is doing (charging an outrageous 30% of all sales) isnt good for the industry either. Its also only good for themselves.

So dont act like the alternative of Steam was any better. Steam and Epic are both chokeholding the gaming industry. Both options were bad for PGI.

PGI picked the least bad of two terrible options from their perspective.

Pay 30% royalties or pay 12% royalties and get a guaranteed sales bonus of a couple million up front and piss a couple people off who preordered? which would you choose? Its kindve a no brainer why they went with epic.

I didn't say Steam was good for the industry. Given it has already been said by Epic the 12% isn't sustainable I'm going to at least give Steam the benefit of the doubt that what they are charging for a vastly superior platform is at least more realistic. I would love to see more competition for Steam but EGS and how they are going about it isn't it.

[The pessimistic optimist]

WarHippy, on 09 October 2019 - 11:58 AM, said:

I didn't say Steam was good for the industry. Given it has already been said by Epic the 12% isn't sustainable I'm going to at least give Steam the benefit of the doubt that what they are charging for a vastly superior platform is at least more realistic. I would love to see more competition for Steam but EGS and how they are going about it isn't it.

And that's how I feel. Competition is good for everyone what Epic is doing is not be competition. If Epic were being competitive they wouldn't need exclusive deals to get you using there store. Epic know there store front is crap compared to steam and have to give you no choice but to buy it on Epic store if you wish to play it.

Edited by SirSmokes, 09 October 2019 - 12:18 PM.

[ShiverMeRivets]

SirSmokes, on 09 October 2019 - 12:18 PM, said:

And that's how I feel. Competition is good for everyone what Epic is doing is not be competition. If Epic were being competitive they wouldn't need exclusive deals to get you using there store. Epic know there store front is crap compared to steam and have to give you no choice but to buy it on Epic store if you wish to play it.

Nonsense. Epic are trying to break into a market completely dominated by Steam. This is a very hard thing to pull off and having a good platform is not enough - not to mention that it is nearly impossible to come out with a competitive platform from day 1 against someone with 10 years of development and experience ahead of you.

To break into such a market and start to gain experience operating/developing their platform, epic must make users ... USE their platform. If their platform was even equal to steam, why should users bother to try it? Even if it was better than steam they still will have difficulty in pulling users over from steam - users are often lazy, don’t care, loyal to their current platform out of habit, or blindly follow popular trends (as we can see very clearly in these boards). The only ways to get them to try your platform is by offering free stuff, and stuff that they want but can’t get elsewhere.
This is exactly what Epic are doing. It makes business sense, even if you don’t like it.

[The pessimistic optimist]

ShiverMeRivets, on 09 October 2019 - 11:22 PM, said:

Nonsense. Epic are trying to break into a market completely dominated by Steam. This is a very hard thing to pull off and having a good platform is not enough - not to mention that it is nearly impossible to come out with a competitive platform from day 1 against someone with 10 years of development and experience ahead of you.

To break into such a market and start to gain experience operating/developing their platform, epic must make users ... USE their platform. If their platform was even equal to steam, why should users bother to try it? Even if it was better than steam they still will have difficulty in pulling users over from steam - users are often lazy, don’t care, loyal to their current platform out of habit, or blindly follow popular trends (as we can see very clearly in these boards). The only ways to get them to try your platform is by offering free stuff, and stuff that they want but can’t get elsewhere.
This is exactly what Epic are doing. It makes business sense, even if you don’t like it.

Like I said call me when you have a better product

[Nesutizale]

Epic is working on it. There are constant updates but when I look at the roadmap I think they released the launcher to early but I bet that came because they wanted to have some of the bigger titles you can currently buy there as their startingpoint.

I mean what sense would it make to have a full flashed out launcher but no interesting games on it. Wait a year until the next wave of big titles come in or release it barebone and hope that the big titles and exclusive titles make up for it?

Well we will see if their calculation pays off or if it will dissapear or become a minor launcher that exist in the shadow of steam.

[VitriolicViolet]

[redacted]

Edited by Tina Benoit, 11 October 2019 - 10:15 AM.
Piracy

[Gakuseinozen]

I'll be purchasing MW5.

I came into MWO in about 2016, played for a few months and then left (don't remember why). Recently came back this year and I've had tons of fun. For all of MWO's faults, it's still really fun for me... I get a huge adrenaline boost every time I play, and I just love Mechwarrior in general. I played all of the early PC games so the nostalgia is a factor for me as well.

Yeah, PGI as a company seems to be run very badly, but if the product is fun and I'm getting value for my money, that's all I need to make my decision. The broken promises, all the balancing drama and whatnot from PGI hasn't really affected me as much since I came in late and had no real expectations from the game, but I do understand the viewpoints of those that have been in this since the beginning.

[Phoolan Devi]

Prototelis, on 09 October 2019 - 09:35 AM, said:

If I had pre-ordered I still would have canceled even though I don't care what platform the game is on. Unless you really wanted to play the beta there was no reason not to because of all the free swag.

What you mention is the most interesting part of all. PGI is absolutely generous with those who refund, letting them keep their MW:O goodies, but those people still give PGI s**t and complain and go on about how bad PGI is supposed to be. That's what I call entitled little fu*kta*ds!

I personally would feel bad to cancel because I would be a cheapskate and ashamed of it!

[Prototelis]

Phoolan Devi, on 11 October 2019 - 09:42 AM, said:

PGI is absolutely generous with those who refund, letting them keep their MW:O goodies,

100% I'm pretty sure its because it would have been a pain in the *** to remove that content from individual accounts and not an act of good faith.

[Jackal Noble]

^
^
^
^
^