172 replies to this topic

[Evinthal]

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

Really? THAT'S the only reason it's not valid? OK, fine - let's say it's a TV then. Here's a shiny new TV - it costs as much as that 40" 1080 LCD over there, and sure it's only black and white and about 300 pixels, but we'll be upgrading it for you to color next month, and I'm sure we'll have those extra scanlines fixed soon. Better?

I guess I just had much lower expectations as to what we'd actually get than you did.

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

And now your only response is to call me a liar? You know, with responses like that I might almost think you're just blindly defending PGI, rather than trying to engage on actual substance.

Sorry if it came off as trying to call you a liar. Honestly it wasn't meant to be so. I just take anything I read posted by anyone on the internet (especially about themselves) with a grain of salt.

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

I'm not even sure what you mean by "pious standards". This is not a stretch. The Aero look and feel was introduced with Windows 7. They held a beta for Windows 7. Nobody considered the NTFS file system to be "in beta" at that time. Nobody would have given them a pass if a system which had been stable for a decade was suddenly fundamentally unstable. Yes, there's some element of regression testing whenever new features are added, but that's not the same thing as the entire product being in beta forever.

The mark who thinks he didn't get conned is the best kind.

You can say I was conned all you want, but that doesn't change that I really didn't have a high expectation going into this as a lot of people seem to have had. I had the extra money to give to something I wanted to give to so I bought a founders pack. No big deal to me.

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

You can continue to play the outraged, insulting fanboi all you want. You can continue to rage about how wrong it is for people to have expectations of a product they're paying for since it's not a car that's going to kill anyone. It won't amount to squat, and all you're going to do is drive more dissatisfied people away even faster.

I really don't think I am raging and I don't know how you got the impression that I was. I can see you clearly had higher expectations than I did.

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

I suppose that MWO might be the game that defeats all these expectations - that it'll be the shining example of how letting the general public at a buggy, incomplete, unsatisfying mess will turn out just fine, as you shout down and insult anyone who is dissatisfied until they go "Wow, you know what? Evinthal's right! Sure the game's buggy and erratic and doesn't run well on my machine and 75% of my matches are utterly lopsided routs, but it's only a problem because I was expecting too much! Now that I realize that it's a perfectly great game as long as I don't expect it to be good because they said 'beta', it's loads of fun!"

It might be, and it might not be. We don't know that yet. I'm just going to wait and see, you are welcome to do so too.

I don't see the last part happening, so it really wasn't needed, but thank you for that delightful little story. It entertained me greatly.

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:

Yeah - that'll be it, and MWO will be the poster child for a new wave of game developers to cash in by selling unfinished products.

Really? I thought Blizzard was the poster child for that with Diablo 3.

[Xeven]

Sure open beta that is fine. Don't start my Premium status untill everything is stable and working properly. Game not working right can cause you to lose in game cash. That translates to real cash if your buying MC. Not interested in losing real cash due to buggy game.

[Name48928]

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

Really? I thought Blizzard was the poster child for that with Diablo 3.

Got a point there. MWO certainly won't be the first "unfinished" game to be released, even though they're just going to open beta.

As a side note, I ran some quick numbers (from vgchartz.com). Preorders and first-day sales of D3 made up 60% of the game's total sales. And I don't see any sales figures for it after 10 weeks ( they were down to 13,500 sales a week by then). Clearly, once word got out, the game had a very short shelf-life.

[Evinthal]

MinionJoe, on 10 October 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Got a point there. MWO certainly won't be the first "unfinished" game to be released, even though they're just going to open beta.

As a side note, I ran some quick numbers (from vgchartz.com). Preorders and first-day sales of D3 made up 60% of the game's total sales. And I don't see any sales figures for it after 10 weeks ( they were down to 13,500 sales a week by then). Clearly, once word got out, the game had a very short shelf-life.

From what I understand Project Pegasus (I think that was the name of it.) had a pretty buggy release too, but that is a game in a really small niche genre.

Don't get me wrong, I really do want the game to succeed, and I can understand why people are concerned.
I am just willing to give it at least another patch, like I was with the first 'economy' patch.

[abriael]

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

It had 16. Debating protip: Don't ask a question you don't know the answer to.

World of Warplanes may have 4 maps. I honestly don't know, I haven't been following it that closely. But you might want to rethink that argument, because (1) "getting near open beta" and "open beta is next week" are two completely different things, (2) WG.net's concept of "open beta" doesn't include paying them, and (3) are you REALLY going to suggest that map variety has the same impact on an aerial dogfighting game as is does on something ground-based like WoT or MWO?

Considering that they already announced that those are the maps it's going to go in open beta with, I suggest following your own advice.

The importance of maps in World of Warplanes is very high, considering that 90% of the time is spent at low altitude hugging hills. Pretty much the same importance as it has in world of tanks or in MWO.

PS: World of Tanks didn't have 16 maps when it went into open beta.

Map variety is the smallest problem the game has at the moment.

[Creed Buhallin]

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

I guess I just had much lower expectations as to what we'd actually get than you did.

Indeed. I got interested in MWO because I watched the devs promoting information warfare, and role warfare, and community warfare. That's the game I expected them to release, because it's the game they explicitly promoted. Implicitly, I expected a game that would meet the minimal foundation of a modern internet multiplayer game - decently-sized matches (8v8 is pretty sad) relatively stable performance for both the client and netcode, halfway decent matchmaking, etc. Personally, I expected a game that was loyal to the Battletech universe and corrected the flaws that have plagued other MechWarrior games throughout history, finding a solution for boating and bigger-is-better. On pretty much every count of my expectations, they failed.

And while I gave up participating in the closed beta, I was fine with most of that. I don't honestly expect the netcode to be perfect at this point, or matchmaking to be optimized. Believe it or not, I really do know what "beta" means.

Unfortunately, it doesn't mean charging people for the product, and it doesn't excuse an incomplete product. You may be fine with that - I'm honestly not trying to convince you not to be, even if I do think you fell for a pretty unethical argument on their part. If you're OK with it, then fine. But I'm not OK with it, from a professional perspective. Many, MANY people are not going to be OK with it, from a consumer perspective. You may be OK getting a 20" black and white tube for the price of a 40" HD LCD, with the promise that it'll be something better, but convincing anyone else is going to be a lost cause. What's more, trying to sell people that will leave a very bad taste in their mouth. It's doing to do pretty irrevocable damage to the perception of the game and PGI.

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

Sorry if it came off as trying to call you a liar. Honestly it wasn't meant to be so. I just take anything I read posted by anyone on the internet (especially about themselves) with a grain of salt.

Not a bad stand, generally, but I really am an engineer I could quote Brooks or spout the foundational principles of OO design if you like, or rattle off a few obscure details about usability studies or the quirks of Java Swing, but Google could have provided all that

In the end, I don't think it's relevant. If you look at the history of software, it's right there. "Paying to beta test" was an insult. Have you ever seen a box on the shelf that advertises itself as a beta test? If you look around outside gaming, how often do you find companies charging for a product still in beta test? And pre-orders are borderline, but don't really count. I wasn't impressed with PGI for the founders program given the difference between what they promised and what they actually sold people, but at the very least paying in advance for the finished product, with promises of extra benefits, isn't bad. Actually, literally, charging people a per-day rate to play a blatantly unfinished product is a relatively new development, even if it's not exclusive to PGI.

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

You can say I was conned all you want, but that doesn't change that I really didn't have a high expectation going into this as a lot of people seem to have had. I had the extra money to give to something I wanted to give to so I bought a founders pack. No big deal to me.

Which is, again, fine. But people are not WRONG to have expected a finished product. Again, there's an inherent disconnect between calling something a beta test, and charging for it. By the simple definition of what a beta test is, you really can't do both at the same time. I think that's a big part of the problem here. Some people fall on the side of "It's beta" and don't expect much. Others fall on the side of "I'm paying" and do. Personally and professionally, I'm in the latter camp.

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

I really don't think I am raging and I don't know how you got the impression that I was. I can see you clearly had higher expectations than I did.

Well, this kinda hinted at it:

Evinthal said:

Okay, going to try really hard not to be my normal loose canon self here. Failed.

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

It might be, and it might not be. We don't know that yet. I'm just going to wait and see, you are welcome to do so too.

The concern a lot of people have is that it's not just wait and see. We're all here because we have some interest in MWO. Releasing too early has very solid consequences, with a very strong historical foundation for expecting those consequences. Maybe it'll be fine, maybe it won't, but the one thing I can guarantee is that it won't be perfectly neutral. "Just wait and see" doesn't work.

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

Really? I thought Blizzard was the poster child for that with Diablo 3.

And you should consider that instructive. A company with a far, FAR better history and a massively loyal fan base has produced a game which disappointed even the most dedicated players because they tried to exploit it for money, rather than doing what they had to do in making a solid game first. Hm.

[Creed Buhallin]

abriael, on 10 October 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

Considering that they already announced that those are the maps it's going to go in open beta with, I suggest following your own advice.

The importance of maps in World of Warplanes is very high, considering that 90% of the time is spent at low altitude hugging hills. Pretty much the same importance as it has in world of tanks or in MWO.

Or, gee, maybe I could, I don't know... say that I wasn't honestly sure? But I guess if I did that you might QUOTE ME SAYING THAT, and then make yourself look like an ***** for trying to slam me for not knowing something I admitted I didn't know? And we really wouldn't want THAT...

But even if the combat is predominantly low-altitude (could you link something for that? Would love to see the article covering that, assuming you didn't just break the NDA) it's still not as important as a ground-bound game, because you always have the option to go up and over. I also have to admit to some skepticism on the basic claim, since it goes against everything in the basic principles of dogfighting and maintenance of energy.

abriael, on 10 October 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

PS: World of Tanks didn't have 16 maps when it went into open beta.

World of Tanks went to open beta January, 2011. Here's the wiki revision from 10 February, 2011. It's possible they added in one between open beta launch and this rev, or I misread the "In development" tag on Westfield as applying to the wiki article, when it meant the map itself, so maybe 15.

http://wiki.worldoft...Maps&oldid=2497

Would you care to cite a source for your count, whatever it is?

abriael, on 10 October 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

Map variety is the smallest problem the game has at the moment.

Actually, it's really not. Or rather, it's a symptom of the very serious problem. In order to keep people interested, gameplay needs variety. That can come from several different sources - objectives, maps, involved vehicles, strategies... Right now, MWO lacks pretty much all of them. People bring up maps because they don't see it elsewhere, and hope map variety will compensate for the lack of variety in game modes and the current metagame's lack of variety in 'mech builds. But the real problem is that a lot of the other stuff is kinda fuzzy, while the number of maps gives something very concrete, and very easy to blame PGI for. When a player gets dissatisfied with the game, it's an easy explanation that playing the same maps over and over is boring, and it's directly PGI's fault for not making more maps.

[abriael]

Creed Buhallin, on 10 October 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

Or, gee, maybe I could, I don't know... say that I wasn't honestly sure? But I guess if I did that you might QUOTE ME SAYING THAT, and then make yourself look like an ***** for trying to slam me for not knowing something I admitted I didn't know? And we really wouldn't want THAT...

You seem to be rather mad. Yeah. Actually you do. And not just in this post, but overall.

Quote

But even if the combat is predominantly low-altitude (could you link something for that? Would love to see the article covering that, assuming you didn't just break the NDA)

There are plenty previews out there, including mine (http://www.dualshock...es-into-battle/). Press isn't held by the NDA for World of Warplanes.

Quote

it's still not as important as a ground-bound game, because you always have the option to go up and over. I also have to admit to some skepticism on the basic claim, since it goes against everything in the basic principles of dogfighting and maintenance of energy.

World of warplanes is not a simulator. As a matter of fact the ceiling altitude is much lower than it was for real world war II planes, and since a large part of the game's scoring consists in the destruction and defense of ground targets, combined with the fact that there aren't any high altitude heavy level bombers, every battle is a bunch of attackers hugging the ground with a bunch of fighters hunting for them.

Not only people stay very close to terrain, using it as cover, but it also plays a predominant role in the game's targeting and spotting system. Guess what? Exactly like in mechwarrior online.

Sure, you can go over obstacles, and get spotted and nailed into the ground by the first fighter that happens to pass by. Sorry but no, map features play exactly the same importance, even more so because they actually include destroyable targets, while maps in MWO are just a backdrop and provide cover.

Quote

But the real problem is that a lot of the other stuff is kinda fuzzy, while the number of maps gives something very concrete, and very easy to blame PGI for.

Only if one doesn't know what he's talking about. Considering the complexity of the game's maps, their size, the fact that it's still in beta (closed or open doesn't matter), and the time it's been in development, the number of maps is pretty much par for course at the moment. Creating a map for this kind of game isn't just a matter of making a nice piece of scenery, balancing it is a large development undertaking.

Another example is War of the Roses, that has just been *released* (IE: not beta) with only 7 maps. And it's a commercial package that you actually have to pay for. From what I've seen of Piranha's plans, this game will at least match that number by actual launch.

In many ways MechWarrior Online and War of the Roses are very similar games in their scope and structure, and guess what? People that are playing it love War of the Roses.

I suggest you step a little back on the hating, because you seem to be scrambling for excuses to blame PGI and hate on the game for some reason. Open beta or no, it's still a beta, and a beta of a free to play game. No one is held at gunpoint to shell out a single buck in order to play, and at the moment it has a ton of potential to be great.

PS: yes, you're wrong to expect a finished product from a beta. That's why it's called a beta. Having a working cash shop during the open beta is by now quite the standard between free to play MMOs, and there's nothing wrong with it, since it's completely optional. No one is forcing you to pay a dime in the beta. So you saying that PGI is "charging for the beta" is inherently a falsehood.

They're charging for perks that will carry over into the launched game, and anyone is free to pay for them or ignore them. The beta is, by all means and purposes, entirely free.

Edited by abriael, 10 October 2012 - 06:12 PM.

[Antros]

I don't really mind the premium time counting down officially at some point (obviously at some point I mean during a "beta" status) as long as the game doesn't reset in some way without resetting the premium time as well. Rather not play for a month or so, earn xp and upgrades just to have it wiped out.

I'm not saying they can't do it I'm saying that's a little underhanded.

Edited by Antros, 10 October 2012 - 05:51 PM.

[Garamanus]

I still can't get the last patch to work, unauthorised access or something .
Don't tell me I have to buy it for it to work...

[Vaux]

Evinthal, on 10 October 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

Eh, October 16th is going to be the patch we get endo steel structure, double heat sinks, and a bunch of other things too (working guardian ECM/BAP/command consoles possibly) from the looks of it (if they go according to the BETA posts.). I've heard that the lag issues were from mech's with command consoles dropping from the game, though I don't know if it is true. I just really hope that things are better on the 16th, if it is indeed open beta time.

How about better then .01% matchmaking?

Dodger79, on 10 October 2012 - 09:50 AM, said:

Open beta in the current state? Damn, i wasted 120$ on a game that will most probably die before christmas when i hoped the will polish it some more to attract new players and not scare them off like with the current build...

I'm glad I downgraded my legendary founders. This thing is being rushed and in the end it'll be the founders who pay the price.

[abriael]

Antros, on 10 October 2012 - 05:51 PM, said:

I don't really mind the premium time counting down officially at some point (obviously at some point I mean during a "beta" status) as long as the game doesn't reset in some way without resetting the premium time as well. Rather not play for a month or so, earn xp and upgrades just to have it wiped out.

I'm not saying they can't do it I'm saying that's a little underhanded.

They already said they won't do wipes after the open beta starts.

Considering that all premium time does is granting more rewards (experience and cbills) for battles, that's not an advantage that goes away once your premium time expires. All you earn during your premium time will carry over even if you stop being premium. It's not like other freemium MMOs that take away access to what the premium account gives you once you decide to go free.

As a matter of fact, premium time only helps you to get up to speed faster, so the earlier it goes into effect, the better it is for you.

Edited by abriael, 10 October 2012 - 06:04 PM.

[Vaux]

abriael, on 10 October 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

You seem to be rather mad. Yeah. Actually you do. And not just in this post, but overall.



There are plenty previews out there, including mine (http://www.dualshock...es-into-battle/). Press isn't held by the NDA for World of Warplanes.



World of warplanes is not a simulator. As a matter of fact the ceiling altitude is much lower than it was for real world war II planes, and since a large part of the game's scoring consists in the destruction and defense of ground targets, combined with the fact that there aren't any high altitude heavy level bombers, every battle is a bunch of attackers hugging the ground with a bunch of fighters hunting for them.

Not only people stay very close to terrain, using it as cover, but it also plays a predominant role in the game's targeting and spotting system. Guess what? Exactly like in mechwarrior online.

Sure, you can go over obstacles, and get spotted and nailed into the ground by the first fighter that happens to pass by. Sorry but no, map features play exactly the same importance, even more so because they actually include destroyable targets, while maps in MWO are just a backdrop and provide cover.



Only if one doesn't know what he's talking about. Considering the complexity of the game's maps, their size, the fact that it's still in beta (closed or open doesn't matter), and the time it's been in development, the number of maps is pretty much par for course at the moment. Creating a map for this kind of game isn't just a matter of making a nice piece of scenery, balancing it is a large development undertaking.

I suggest you step a little back on the hating, because you seem to be scrambling for excuses to blame PGI and hate on the game for some reason. Open beta or no, it's still a beta, and a beta of a free to play game. No one is held at gunpoint to shell out a single buck in order to play, and at the moment it has a ton of potential to be great.

PS: yes, you're wrong to expect a finished product from a beta. That's why it's called a beta. Having a working cash shop during the open beta is by now quite the standard between free to play MMOs, and there's nothing wrong with it, since it's completely optional. No one is forcing you to pay a dime in the beta. So you saying that PGI is "charging for the beta" is inherently a falsehood.

They're charging for perks that will carry over into the launched game, and anyone is free to pay for them or ignore them. The beta is, by all means and purposes, entirely free.

Check out War Thunder if you haven't. It's very much superior to World of Warplanes.

Edited by Vaux, 10 October 2012 - 06:04 PM.

[abriael]

Vaux, on 10 October 2012 - 06:03 PM, said:

Check out War Thunder if you haven't. It's very much superior to World of Warplanes.

I have, love it, but they're two massively different games. One is basically an arcade shooter with planes, the other is a full fledged online sim (and unfortunately I have a feeling that the first will be much more popular, not that WoWp is a bad game, quite the contrary, I'm just more into sims personally). Still have to get around writing a preview for it.

Damn fall season, too many games, too little time.

Edited by abriael, 10 October 2012 - 06:16 PM.

[Antros]

abriael, on 10 October 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

They already said they won't do wipes after the open beta starts.

Considering that all premium time does is granting more rewards (experience and cbills) for battles, that's not an advantage that goes away once your premium time expires. All you earn during your premium time will carry over even if you stop being premium. It's not like other freemium MMOs that take away access to what the premium account gives you once you decide to go free.

As a matter of fact, premium time only helps you to get up to speed faster, so the earlier it goes into effect, the better it is for you.

I'm playing catch up on the forums so I'm missing half the stuff that's being said.

Thanks for just telling me what's up as opposed to what I'm use to and being ridiculed for not reading instead of playing.

[abriael]

Antros, on 10 October 2012 - 06:11 PM, said:

I'm playing catch up on the forums so I'm missing half the stuff that's being said.

Thanks for just telling me what's up as opposed to what I'm use to and being ridiculed for not reading instead of playing.

Haha, that's ok, some people think that everyone should know everything at all times. Luckily they don't, or I wouldn't have a job

I blame the internets.

[Bloody]

As a closed beta player i can say this is a bad decision. The client at this point hangs on exit. Which should tell you the state of the game. Many games lag out and players are complaining of inadequate server / client bandwidth. you can imagine how much worst it will be when open beta comes.

[The Farmer]

My primary concern for the open beta is how new players are greeted in MWO at the moment.

I have played MechWarrior games since I was old enough to move a mouse/joystick, I am familiar with the gameplay system. As a result when I played my first MWO match I was already comfortable with the movement system, weapons groups, heat, etc. however for the uninitiated this is a new and somewhat novel system.

Friends of mine that were also granted access to the Closed Beta gave up on the game quickly. They would drop into their first game, walk into a wall, overheat and subsequently die. They would get frustrated and just give up playing. Now this is something of an exaggeration but the point remains the same. You wouldn't drop the uninitiated onto a battlefield.

What I am ultimately proposing is something of a tutorial. I appreciate that most of you that play now wont need it but once the game enters Open Beta it wont just be us anymore. It doesn't need to be anything fancy. Hell, just drop them solo into a map with some targets and some text regarding movement, targeting and weapons groups.

I think something as simple as this would make the learning curve a lot more gentle for those new to the MechWarrior ip.

Cheers.
Farmer.

Edited by The Farmer, 14 November 2012 - 09:37 PM.

[Lokust Davion]

Guys please support PGI and IGP... theyre obviously running out of money and need our help.. please add your donations thru paypal by clicking the founder's program.

[Hyzoran]

I am skeptical, however something tells me that PGI wouldn't decide to do this unless they had one hell of a patch planned for next week, maybe its already done and they are doing extensive testing to make sure they get it right for Open Beta..... hopefully.