600 replies to this topic

[Red Beard]

Omigir, on 18 January 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

So why aim to be popular? Why not aim to give a tried and true Battletech/Mechwarrior experience and let people learn to the play the game as it is meant to be played rather then sacrificing key mechanics to become 'popular'?

Because I think they want this game to make money.

[Omigir]

Red Beard, on 18 January 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

Because I think they want this game to make money.

WoT makes money and it is not considered 'popular'

[Red Beard]

I guess I just get the feeling that the developers are aiming for more popularity than World of Tanks. I mean, it is MW after all. I for one, hope that PGI is shooting for a more successful game, in the long term.

[Omigir]

As do I Sir Beard, I think we all are.

As far as popularity goes.. that is relative.

I would prefer classic Mechwarror/BTU game mechanics are not thrown aside with the soul purpose of 'People wont like them' that is like saying 'no one will like your song/picture' before anybody has a chance to really see it.

there are plenty of musicians and artists that were laughed at by their peers but are today widely viewed as visionaries or classics.

as a industry, the game developing community could quickly fall in line with the music industry. How often do you flip on the radio and feel like you spent the last hour listening to the same song only to realize that the radio has played at least 20 different artists? How often do you settle down to play a video game only to realize that its just like last one you got done playing?

[Dlardrageth]

"Popular"? What the... shenaningans did this thread derail towards to now?

Definitions of "popular"

So you're saying MWO might a vessel for drug-dealing? A "blonde bombshell" type of girl? A teenager from high school?

But seriously, without the whole marketing mumbo-jumbo, the whole idea of MWO being a MVP bases on the bssic concept that people are not likely to pay for a game that they hate (over-simplified). Paul will surely contradict me if I start talking rubbish now. So you try to make sure there's some "good vibes" associated with the mentioning of MWO, and hopefully even more. And that encourages people to spend money on "their" game. Which, with the whole "customer satisfaction" mechanic and "social angle" might lead to more people become interested if they hear their friends/acquaintances did in fact spend money on a F2P game. Might even obtain a slight cascade effect there.

At the end of the day very few products failed on the market which were dearly beloved by their targeted customer base. More so, if there was a good and ambitious customer/manufacturer rapport. Although once we're talking about stuff that has been developed "into the blue", so to speak, there it looks differently.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 18 January 2012 - 10:03 AM.

[Khushrenada]

MaddMaxx, on 18 January 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

On the whole Camping issue. With a Contract system you have to accomplish the task to get Paid. The defender has to be there, you took the contract and forced their hand. So you Camp, they win by default and they get Paid. You, you can Camp away but you get sqawdouche for your troubles.

It does seem reasonable that the Dev will have some form of Re-Spawn "area" outside of the Contract game. (Practice Server perhaps)

problem is, that this would only work for merc units... what house unit takes contracts?

[Dlardrageth]

Khushrenada, on 18 January 2012 - 10:24 AM, said:

problem is, that this would only work for merc units... what house unit takes contracts?

Swap out "contract" for "orders" and you got your answer. If the Captain-General calls upon me to render service in the name of the FWL and for the glory of the FWLM, who am I to refuse him? Of course, being the benevolent head of state that he is, he would see that I receive ample compensation for my heroic effort.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Omigir, on 18 January 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

So why aim to be popular? Why not aim to give a tried and true Battletech/Mechwarrior experience and let people learn to the play the game as it is meant to be played rather then sacrificing key mechanics to become 'popular'?

It means I'll have people to play against, and a large enough pool for the match maker to be selective and create balanced games. It means that the game will have more content generated for it. More mechs, more maps, more everything. It means that the game will likely be around for a long time. And lastly a f2p model *needs* to be popular for it to work well.

I'll sacrifice some of the grognard stuff for a vibrant community, and I'm not even worried about it making money. Its not really our job to figure out how to get the casuals in and playing, but you really stand to benefit if they do come.

[Omigir]

TheRulesLawyer, on 18 January 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

It means I'll have people to play against, and a large enough pool for the match maker to be selective and create balanced games. It means that the game will have more content generated for it. More mechs, more maps, more everything. It means that the game will likely be around for a long time. And lastly a f2p model *needs* to be popular for it to work well.

I'll sacrifice some of the grognard stuff for a vibrant community, and I'm not even worried about it making money. Its not really our job to figure out how to get the casuals in and playing, but you really stand to benefit if they do come.

Just from my standpoint, I think that as long as there is new content, and people playing this game, there will always be more coming in. At that same time, there will always be people going out too. Popular is not a requirement for success.

I also am very confident, that if the game does have some 'difficult' mechanics, they just simply would not be enough to strop people from playing. Otherwise no one here would be talking about WoT or EvE at all. These games have huge communities and no shortages of people playing them. Yes, they have room to improve on, and I think that can be done without huge sacrifice to things we all consider to be core parts of BTU

[TheRulesLawyer]

Omigir, on 18 January 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

I also am very confident, that if the game does have some 'difficult' mechanics, they just simply would not be enough to strop people from playing. Otherwise no one here would be talking about WoT or EvE at all. These games have huge communities and no shortages of people playing them. Yes, they have room to improve on, and I think that can be done without huge sacrifice to things we all consider to be core parts of BTU

WoT and Eve aren't games I'd aspire to in terms of popularity. They are both very much niche markets. LoL OTOH.....

Anyhow, I don't want to see huge sacrifices either. I just think we can have a game with fits with the BTU that isn't mean spirited towards its players. I mean I think some people would like a mode where their computer would taser them in the junk when they die in game to make it more meaningful. Well at least from reading some of the comments on the boards.

Honestly I'd probably still play a very hard sim of the BTU down to the nitty gritty details. However I've been involved in battletech over 20 years, read novels, etc. I'm not the guy you have to convince.

[SquareSphere]

Well the latest Q&A, it seems like it will be 1 life per match. Once you're destroyed, you'll be dropped into a spectator mode that has the POV of your living teammates.

I'm sure at that point you'd be able to drop from the match and find another one.

[Khushrenada]

Dlardrageth, on 18 January 2012 - 10:40 AM, said:

Swap out "contract" for "orders" and you got your answer. If the Captain-General calls upon me to render service in the name of the FWL and for the glory of the FWLM, who am I to refuse him? Of course, being the benevolent head of state that he is, he would see that I receive ample compensation for my heroic effort.

hmm im not convinced
a house unit is a military unit, as such you get paid for beeing a soldier, you are not beeing paid on a success base like in a company. you get the order to take planet A, but fail and return home alive, you still get your payment (maybe your commander is fired, but not the common soldier).
if you succeed in taking planet A, you come home and get your payment as well (maybe your commander gets a promotion or a medal, again the common soldier MAYBE gets a medale and a "thank you", but no extra payment).

as such i think your concept just won`t work on house units.

besides what are you going to do about those poor guys that just happen to lose a couple of matches without beeing able to fulfill their objective? let them bleed out by repair costs while getting no c-bill?

also WoT actually is giving out a bonus for those who win, they double (i think) your acumulated xp`s and credits of the match. still it happens, that people just camp it out. so even with some sort of bonus for winning/achieving your objectives people sometimes just camp it out...

[Omigir]

TheRulesLawyer, on 18 January 2012 - 11:10 AM, said:

WoT and Eve aren't games I'd aspire to in terms of popularity. They are both very much niche markets. LoL OTOH.....

Anyhow, I don't want to see huge sacrifices either. I just think we can have a game with fits with the BTU that isn't mean spirited towards its players. I mean I think some people would like a mode where their computer would taser them in the junk when they die in game to make it more meaningful. Well at least from reading some of the comments on the boards.

Honestly I'd probably still play a very hard sim of the BTU down to the nitty gritty details. However I've been involved in battletech over 20 years, read novels, etc. I'm not the guy you have to convince.

Well, either way, I think allot of the big issues have been discussed to death, I feel this thread has almost finished its purpose.. Kinda makes me wonder if the devs read over these kinda debates and just laugh at us because they know the answer already?

SquareSphere, on 18 January 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

Well the latest Q&A, it seems like it will be 1 life per match. Once you're destroyed, you'll be dropped into a spectator mode that has the POV of your living teammates.

I'm sure at that point you'd be able to drop from the match and find another one.

I dont recall reading that at all.. then again I already need to re read the blogs : \

[Omigir]

Khushrenada, on 18 January 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

hmm im not convinced
a house unit is a military unit, as such you get paid for beeing a soldier, you are not beeing paid on a success base like in a company. you get the order to take planet A, but fail and return home alive, you still get your payment (maybe your commander is fired, but not the common soldier).
if you succeed in taking planet A, you come home and get your payment as well (maybe your commander gets a promotion or a medal, again the common soldier MAYBE gets a medale and a "thank you", but no extra payment).

as such i think your concept just won`t work on house units.

besides what are you going to do about those poor guys that just happen to lose a couple of matches without beeing able to fulfill their objective? let them bleed out by repair costs while getting no c-bill?

also WoT actually is giving out a bonus for those who win, they double (i think) your acumulated xp`s and credits of the match. still it happens, that people just camp it out. so even with some sort of bonus for winning/achieving your objectives people sometimes just camp it out...

Honestly, I dont think house members/pilots are going to get payed like they do in the real military, I.E. salary that pays out regularly.. you may end up make your bills the same way a mercenary does.

[Dlardrageth]

Khushrenada, on 18 January 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

hmm im not convinced
a house unit is a military unit, as such you get paid for beeing a soldier, you are not beeing paid on a success base like in a company. you get the order to take planet A, but fail and return home alive, you still get your payment (maybe your commander is fired, but not the common soldier).
if you succeed in taking planet A, you come home and get your payment as well (maybe your commander gets a promotion or a medal, again the common soldier MAYBE gets a medale and a "thank you", but no extra payment).

as such i think your concept just won`t work on house units.[...]

Oh, I won't be asking much. I'd settle for blackjack, rum&hookers. May sound more like a pirate, but hey, my unit isn't exactly known for being the paragon of virtue and what not inside the FWLM. You get "parade units" for that.

Quote

besides what are you going to do about those poor guys that just happen to lose a couple of matches without beeing able to fulfill their objective? let them bleed out by repair costs while getting no c-bill?

Well, if they totally fail to achieve anything in battle (mostly hypothetical, I know), why should they receive a LP award? Getting your whole unit wiped out without having destroyed a single enemy nor having gotten even close to your objective should not yield bountiful LP rewards IMO. C-bills for repairs... there some compensation is debatable. IMHO.

[SquareSphere]

Omigir, on 18 January 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I dont recall reading that at all.. then again I already need to re read the blogs :

It's from today's Q&A

InnerSphereNews, on 18 January 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

What will happen to a pilot when their mech is destroyed, from the angle of information warfare? Will the pilot be booted from the match, allowed to observe as a "spectator" or locked to their destroyed mech (with a voluntary or involuntary ability to exit the match)? –Mezzanine

[PAUL] If it were up to me we’d format your C: drive but Bryan has suggested that we auto eject the pilot into a first person spectator view.
[DAVID] There will be no free roaming spectator mode. Dead players will likely see their destroyed ’Mech for a few seconds and then be able to cycle through the viewpoints of their living allies.
[BRYAN] We’re very aware and concerned about spectator mode giving teams using Teamspeak like communications and advantage. More than likely we only allow spectators to view what the current target view (pilot) can see.

Edited by SquareSphere, 18 January 2012 - 11:31 AM.

[Omigir]

oh sh* i almost forgot!.. I DID FORGET! ahh!
*goes to read*

[MaddMaxx]

Khushrenada, on 18 January 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

hmm im not convinced
a house unit is a military unit, as such you get paid for beeing a soldier, you are not beeing paid on a success base like in a company. you get the order to take planet A, but fail and return home alive, you still get your payment (maybe your commander is fired, but not the common soldier).
if you succeed in taking planet A, you come home and get your payment as well (maybe your commander gets a promotion or a medal, again the common soldier MAYBE gets a medale and a "thank you", but no extra payment).

as such i think your concept just won`t work on house units.

besides what are you going to do about those poor guys that just happen to lose a couple of matches without beeing able to fulfill their objective? let them bleed out by repair costs while getting no c-bill?

also WoT actually is giving out a bonus for those who win, they double (i think) your acumulated xp`s and credits of the match. still it happens, that people just camp it out. so even with some sort of bonus for winning/achieving your objectives people sometimes just camp it out...

Well now you are asking to have the Dev somehow change Human Nature. Some folks will do stuff just because, no ryme nor reason need be attached. Best we can hope for is that whatever system they implement, camping will be counter productive to the end goal of winning the Match.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 18 January 2012 - 11:38 AM.

[Khushrenada]

Omigir, on 18 January 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

Honestly, I dont think house members/pilots are going to get payed like they do in the real military, I.E. salary that pays out regularly.. you may end up make your bills the same way a mercenary does.

i know, i was just trying to lay out why i dont think the system posted by Dlardrageth will work for a house unit.
in the end you get c-bills and xp for what you damage/kill/achieved in general i guess. anything else than that simply won`t work.

Dlardrageth, on 18 January 2012 - 11:21 AM, said:

Well, if they totally fail to achieve anything in battle (mostly hypothetical, I know), why should they receive a LP award? Getting your whole unit wiped out without having destroyed a single enemy nor having gotten even close to your objective should not yield bountiful LP rewards IMO. C-bills for repairs... there some compensation is debatable. IMHO.

again, thats clear, i just read your post like "if they can`t take the objective, they get nothing at all"
which as a matter of fact would be the case in a contract. what contractor would pay you anything if you can`t take the objective he hired you for (means you have to win)?

[BahamutZero]

Sorry for the wall of text

I'm not sure if any of you are fans of RTS but I love and play Starcraft 2 every day. There is a custom map called Star Battle That is a guilty pleasure of mine. It is similar to a Dota/league of legends format. You're in space with space ships and have a base that spawns fighters every few seconds. You control your ship and the point of it is to either kill all the opposing players or their home base. The catch is there is no respawn, once your ships destroyed its gone. If another player leaves or disconnects and their ship is still intact you can take control of it but that doesn't apply here. I know its different because that game is top down but even after you die you have vision of everyone on your team. when ever most people are killed they just leave the game. But personally If I like the team I am on I gladly stay and watch. Being a cheerleader is kinda fun. Those games aren't short either, average is 25+ if all the players are capable they can last upwards of 40mins - 1hr each.

Now I'm in no way saying copy it! But I think there are some elements to those style of games that would work well in MWO, and I personally am a fan of no respawns. Especially if the games are estimated to only last 20 mins. Depending on the map sizes, I don't think anyone is going to be rushing into battle. Most people(at least the ones playing smartly) will be cautions so its unlikely anyone will die within the first 5 mins.