Jump to content

Praise And Prejudice


  • You cannot reply to this topic
47 replies to this topic

#41 Child3k

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 141 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:26 AM

View PostAlexa Steel, on 17 November 2012 - 04:51 AM, said:

Small studios can afford the risk, because they dont have to pay 200+ people or even 50+ people.


That makes no sense.
Think of it: Large studios usually work on more than one title at the same time. So they're less dependent on the success of one single project. On the other hand, small studios often don't have the manpower for more than one or two games at the same time. So if that fails, the smaller company most likely takes a much bigger hit then the bigger one.

Edited by Child3k, 17 November 2012 - 06:27 AM.


#42 Alexa Steel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 505 posts
  • LocationSirius VI-A, Free Worlds League

Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:50 AM

View PostChild3k, on 17 November 2012 - 06:26 AM, said:


That makes no sense.
Think of it: Large studios usually work on more than one title at the same time. So they're less dependent on the success of one single project. On the other hand, small studios often don't have the manpower for more than one or two games at the same time. So if that fails, the smaller company most likely takes a much bigger hit then the bigger one.


Nope most large studios wont work on many titles at once, the really big ones maybe (Bioware, Blizzard). Small studios can take the risk because people do not expect much, they dont have to pay much in terms of lisences, since most small studios either use free or "cheap" engines, or create one themselves. Small studio likely wont submit a second title that hits as big also, because usually you would need more man to meet the expectations. There is more to it, but I dont think you want me to write an essay on this topic.

Small studios(wich might be a collective on freelancers) have more freedom than the big ones, thats a fact.

#43 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,459 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:30 AM

MWO for the mass & for Money ...=a stupid 2d isometric Facebookgame or a PvW game like Battlestar galactica online or Dark orbit

#44 SpiralRazor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 2,691 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:40 AM

View PostDerSpecht, on 17 November 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

A product that is not made for the masses wont earn any money.



Poxnora.....has made literally tons of money.

And the learning curve and power curve is STEEP bro...steep... Its not a game for the masses but people continue to spends lots and lots of money on it..

Why?

Because theres nothing else as good as it on the competitive tactical game market.

LoL...again....not for everyone...but its the #1 competitive MOBA.

View PostChild3k, on 17 November 2012 - 06:26 AM, said:


That makes no sense.
Think of it: Large studios usually work on more than one title at the same time. So they're less dependent on the success of one single project. On the other hand, small studios often don't have the manpower for more than one or two games at the same time. So if that fails, the smaller company most likely takes a much bigger hit then the bigger one.



Unless the small company has is almost all crowd sourced.


Btw, IGP also has Mechwarriors Tactics. Regardless of what they do, they have already garnered enough to pay for the licensing of Battletech/Mechwarrior, and even if there games are total flops, they can license it out to someone else

Edited by SpiralRazor, 17 November 2012 - 07:38 AM.


#45 DerSpecht

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 365 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:50 AM

View PostCSJ Ranger, on 17 November 2012 - 07:30 AM, said:

MWO for the mass & for Money ...=a stupid 2d isometric Facebookgame or a PvW game like Battlestar galactica online or Dark orbit


http://mwtactics.com/

like this?

#46 Johnny Morgan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Canada

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:14 AM

View Postnitra, on 17 November 2012 - 04:37 AM, said:


Waste Land 2 : 2.9 million funded by a niche fan base that publishers have ignored for near 2 decades.



OMG THERE IS WASTELAND 2..... YOU JUST MADE MY DAY!!!

#47 Athomahawk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 225 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 10:16 AM

View PostVassago Rain, on 17 November 2012 - 05:15 AM, said:


They never promised the moon, and as far as I know, they never trolled their own community on their own forums, either.
We weren't supposed to have world of mechs, were we?


You've never played WOT, have you?

#48 Parazaine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 270 posts
  • LocationSurrey, London

Posted 18 November 2012 - 04:22 AM

I have to agree with the OP. I was involved early on in the closed beta and was obsessed with the game....used to play as often as i could (even with all the bugs etc that make the current implementation look 'polished')

These days, I find it increasingly hard to motivate myself to play. The core mechwarrior game i was expecting has degenerated from patch to patch with core mechanics being bodged or plain ignored....the doubled armor has led to many problems but they were not game-breaking on their own....the heat problems (check the forums for the copious discussions about how its 'broken') have recently been further exacerbated by the double-heat-sink bodge solution.

LRM's have been nerfed, buffed, nerfed buffed....i've actually lost count of the number of times and largely due to vocal complaints from the forums. Large energy weapons are unusable (still!) due to the heat system.

Whole classes of core mechs are frankly redundant and unusable (not to mention the future problems for clan tech etc)

Match-making sucks....again due to PGI listening to the forums and deciding (god knows why) that they would introduce an interim solution that serves neither Pugs nor Groups.

Server stability / Net-code still has significant problems

The Alpha testers consistently miss MAJOR bugs that anyone with even a passing familiarity with BT would never have missed.

I have joked with my squad that PGI don't have Alpha testers or if they do, that they need to be fired.

Legendary founder here.....at that time I had passion and belief in PGI and in this francise....something that has largely deserted me.

I have always thought that PGI made a mistake in promising weekly updates....and we can see that in action as we frequently see weeks without updates and poorly bug-tested patches released.

I was under the impression that the PGI team were core BT enthusiasts and that they wanted to make a game that would follow the TT rules as closely as possible in a real=time iteration of the game....instead we see an increasing trend towards marketing the game towards twitch FPS players and turning this into COD with robots.

There are even hints of third-person views etc etc.....the more the team announce, the more disenchanted I become

I know my views are not universal but I suspect that a lot of the core supporters of the game are starting to wonder if their founders contributions have been wisely utilized.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users