199 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

Most people would like to see MWO redone using UE engine, and delivered as MWO2. However, most people do not want to buy mech packs from the start again, and thus a repeat of the same funding method for MWO2 for MWO will not be successful IMHO.

I have my own thoughts on how to successfully fund MWO2, but what do you all think PGI should/will do?

[InvictusLee]

I would support mwo2, but only after pgi controls the timetable.

[Six-Pack]

MWO has a tonn of issues with player retention. No sane person that is not a fan of BT or MW will stick, much less pay under the current monetization system.

What PGI has to realize is that they are fighting vs DotA/LoL, CSGO, Apex, WoT as a F2P game services all of which have much better deals on how to spent the money on(except for WarThunder prob).

And a tonn of other single player games all of which amount to ~200$ total investment with the DLC's ala Stellaris or Warhammer Total War.

[The pessimistic optimist]

The fact they would be able to develop and code the game because engine is not made out of

[InvictusLee]

Lockheed_, on 09 November 2020 - 12:12 PM, said:

The only reason I am here is I just like mech games.
I don't care about BT. Actually I don't even like the lore of the BT universe.
I'd leave if there was something better out there.

There was something better! HAWKEN, and NO ONE supported it

We NEED BT Lore if we are going to keep MWO alive for the foreseeable future. Its what keeps bringing new blood BT Fans to the game in addition to people who like mech games.

[The pessimistic optimist]

November11th, on 09 November 2020 - 12:25 PM, said:

There was something better! HAWKEN, and NO ONE supported it

We NEED BT Lore if we are going to keep MWO alive for the foreseeable future. Its what keeps bringing new blood BT Fans to the game in addition to people who like mech games.

Hell even got a great turn based Battletech computer game now https://www.paradoxp...GSK-MASTER.html

[Bud Crue]

I think the only way it realistically gets made is to be funded at least partially beforehand. They need to show investors that the MWO property made them a lot of money and that a new version of it would make even more. If such investors are to include the general population they are going to have to get into bed with some well thought of/competent game developers and publicly disclose that relationship.

As long as its just PGI proceeding as PGI alone, I suspect that the vast majority of their past paying customers will not be willing to pay again, regardless of the potential of not having to buy in-game content again.

If they can in fact foot the bill for making a new game entirely on their own and do so, then if the game looks good, I'll pay for it. If paying means buying "my" mechs again to be able to play a new and good game, I'd have no problem with that.

Edited by Bud Crue, 09 November 2020 - 12:29 PM.

[Darian DelFord]

LOL if only we all would have known this when they were offering up Kickstarting ideas.

SirSmokes, on 09 November 2020 - 12:19 PM, said:

The fact they would be able to develop and code the game because engine is not made out of

[InvictusLee]

Bud Crue, on 09 November 2020 - 12:28 PM, said:

I think the only way it realistically gets made is to be funded at least partially beforehand. They need to show investors that the MWO property made them a lot of money and that a new version of it would make even more. If such investors are to include the general population they are going to have to get into bed with some well thought of/competent game developers and publicly disclose that relationship.

As long as its just PGI proceeding as PGI alone, I suspect that the vast majority of their past paying customers will not be willing to pay again, regardless of the potential of not having to buy in-game content again.

If they can in fact foot the bill for making a new game entirely on their own and do so, then if the game looks good, I'll pay for it. If paying means buying "my" mechs again to be able to play a new and good game, I'd have no problem with that.

So. In your opinion, PGIs biggest issue to solve is PGI?

[InvictusLee]

My point stands lol

[Joshua McEvedy]

Nightbird, on 09 November 2020 - 11:20 AM, said:

I have my own thoughts on how to successfully fund MWO2, but what do you all think PGI should/will do?

Hand the license back over to Microsoft so that it can be given to a better, more competent, more honest gaming company.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Lockheed_, on 09 November 2020 - 12:47 PM, said:

I came to MWO after Hawken for PC was shut down.

Never had a change to play that looks very cool but no Mechwarrior is not that game no

[Bud Crue]

November11th, on 09 November 2020 - 12:43 PM, said:

So. In your opinion, PGIs biggest issue to solve is PGI?

To put it bluntly, yes. Their history with the MWO supporters and players has not been good enough to suggest that that community would be willing to fund a promised future reboot of MWO. But who knows really? Maybe all those folks who per-ordered MW5 made them a ton of cash, and those same folks would ante up again for MWO2.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Lockheed_, on 09 November 2020 - 12:57 PM, said:

I think Hawken was just too fast for the average Mech jockey. The movement in Hawken was insane. Especially the in-air stuff, with dodges and 180s. And then there was shield play, where you'd drop a dome shield and dodge in and out of it. The average new player would grab one on these super fat heavies and then call everyone else a cheater.

Those were smaller mechs https://www.sarna.ne...l_(Battle_Armor) Mechwarrior has walking buildings

Edited by SirSmokes, 09 November 2020 - 12:58 PM.

[InvictusLee]

Bud Crue, on 09 November 2020 - 12:55 PM, said:

To put it bluntly, yes. Their history with the MWO supporters and players has not been good enough to suggest that that community would be willing to fund a promised future reboot of MWO. But who knows really? Maybe all those folks who per-ordered MW5 made them a ton of cash, and those same folks would ante up again for MWO2.

i know i would, and its not like i love pgi. Hate the company in fact, but they are earnestly trying to do good with the license and i have to give that too them. I've literally spent thousands on MWO, and I'd do so all over again if it meant the franchise continues to live and thrive as a whole.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Lockheed_, on 09 November 2020 - 01:04 PM, said:

Oh I am aware of that, but I think one of the reasons why Hawken failed is that the average Mech jockey, at leat at that time, did not have the reflexes to handle a fast game like that. People were used to MW4 and other games, not something where you could doge projectiles with your jump jets and espeically with lights would be airborne half of the fight.

Well if they ever add in the really small stuff like Battlearmor like Elementals that could be in the game

[crazytimes]

I'm not starting the grind and money spent to start again from scratch for the same game by the same company. If they divert resources to a MWO 2, then I just move on to another F2P game.

[Capt Deadpool]

Getting back to the most basic level of things, the most successful multiplayer video games tend to be easy to learn, difficult to master and/or have some element of fulfilling grinding.

With regards to the former, MWO has always been the reverse: difficult to learn, easy to master compared to many of the very popular FPS games and e-sports and RTS games. Sure in comp you can strategize for different maps, terrain, create synergistic loadouts, counters to likely opponent loadouts and strats, counters to those counters etc. until the cows come home.

BUT the core game mechanics are at a significantly lower skill ceiling than CS 1.6 or CS:GO for example, where 99.99% of the gaming population will never even sniff the skill required at even the medium level of organized comp play, yet through time-played and practice, this offers near limitless potential for skill progression, which is its own innate reward system and keeps many of the most ancient veterans still playing (reminds me of playing golf in this respect, actually). Yet the basics of the game are easy to pick up and grasp for new players, while MWO can be quite frustrating and demoralizing for new players in numerous ways. There are tons of other examples of games like the CS franchise.

However, I am not sure if the je ne sais quoi of MWO is this reversal of skill floor/ceiling, or if somehow World of Tanks/Warplanes do something different, as I have not played other titles more similar to MWO... But what I know is that if MWO2 is going to be something perhaps more successful than a niche title, it will need a way to make the new player experience far more enjoyable and have a way to retain veterans and give them something to work towards.

Edited by Capt Deadpool, 09 November 2020 - 01:40 PM.

[InvictusLee]

I mean. We cant please everyone, though we might try.

[jss78]

An engine upgrade would give MWO a longevity it can't otherwise have.

It could well be reasonable to cost-effectively upgrade the present MWO, and I'm not at all opposed to doing this. But there are limits to what that can achieve.

A lot of the debate revolves around "bringing back the community". In the long term this cannot be your game plan. A lot of players won't play a game for 5+ years no matter how well you develop it. Some might come back, many won't.

In the long term you need entirely new players in significant numbers: not just bring back the community, but also RENEW the community. New faces and perhaps ones not topped by gray hair.

You cannot do this with a game that looks 10 years old. Unreal-engined MWO2 drawing in MW5's/HBS BT's/Catalyst's player bases and other new players could achieve it.

Edited by jss78, 09 November 2020 - 01:44 PM.