3036 replies to this topic

[QuantumButler]

BeakieHelmet, on 04 March 2013 - 08:45 PM, said:

It's to be expected.

Garth flip flops more than a US president.

[Zerstorer Stallin]

MacKoga, on 04 March 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

• Someone in PGI said no to paying for consumables, and was ignored. This person needs more power over decisions in PGI.

• Someone in PGI spearheaded the move for paying for consumables, and steamrolled over objections. This person needs less power within PGI.

This is not to be punitive, but to improve the strength of PGI and protect its product integrity and thus indirectly its relationship with its customers. This is because the balance of power within PGI will shift towards decisionmakers who are more in tune with what we, your customers want, and away from decisionmakers who make us unhappy with your product.

Thank you for your consideration. I know changing power structures is difficult, but wouldn't that be easier than letting everyone go if the game tanks?

I agree 100%. Who every is making these choices about the game direction needs to have their role revisited.

[Bguk]

Adrian Steel, on 04 March 2013 - 08:52 PM, said:

They went full WoT.

What's next, gold AC rounds? Sharks with laser beams? Sad day.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Bguk, on 04 March 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

What's next, gold AC rounds? Sharks with laser beams? Sad day.

Sharks with lazor beams attached to their heads?

We shall charge them, ONE...MILLION C-BILLS!

Edited by mwhighlander, 04 March 2013 - 08:58 PM.

[Tarman]

mwhighlander, on 04 March 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Sharks with lazor deth beams you say...?

Did we jump them? Maybe not quite yet. The ramp is being towed into position though, and the Fonz has his skis on.

Still plenty of chances to grow a beard instead but this could sour a whole lot of people on this game on pure appearances, let alone if this is the first real step down the path of evil. Like the game needs some more bad press.

[JadePanther]

Man is this thread still cruisin along?

Lemme get out some popcorn for it..

[Chemistry Warden]

Bguk, on 04 March 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

What's next, gold AC rounds? Sharks with laser beams? Sad day.

mwhighlander, on 04 March 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Sharks with lazor beams attached to their heads?

We shall charge them, ONE...MILLION C-BILLS!

http://shirt.woot.co...ckin-laserbeams

There's a shirt for that

[Noobzorz]

Gargoth, on 04 March 2013 - 08:39 PM, said:

Ok, so you people are going to QQ about before it is even in game?
How about giving it at least one week, try it out, see how it works...
...and then maybe cry, moan and whine about it?

P2W.. its not the problem here.
it is players that are not willing to spend any money on game, and when they implement something necessary, that needs to be paid for, oh for the love of.. then the crying starts.

Get a grip.

This is a great attitude to have. .

. . . for general gameplay features.

What we are talking about is real money expenditure conferring a measurable advantage.

Well guess what Einstein, we know how this works. We've seen it in game already. We've seen it in World of Tanks, we've seen it in Battlefield heroes, we've seen it in Age of Empires Online, Crossfire, Ghost Recon Online, Combat Arms, etc. etc. etc.

Every time we were told it wouldn't be pay to win. Every time it was. Every time it escalated.

Every.

Time.


If you are supporting this, either you have no common sense, or you have no idea what's going on and no idea about the state of the industry. In either case, you should stop sitting on the fence like a good little boy and start letting PGI know that you aren't interested in this.

Because if they tell us "this time is different," it isn't.

[Akkuflex]

The very moment that coolant flush for MC gets introduced I'm out of this game for sure. I'm not having WoT pay2win premium consumables again, and I strongly asume that this will be the case for many others.

Good day.

[Thirdstar]

Adrian Steel, on 04 March 2013 - 08:52 PM, said:

They went full WoT.

It's funny because I've used WoT as an example to illustrate my points so very often that i've lost count. I also pointed out how much the Devs want MWO to BE WoT.

[Helmer]

MacKoga, on 04 March 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

• Someone in PGI said no to paying for consumables, and was ignored. This person needs more power over decisions in PGI.

• Someone in PGI spearheaded the move for paying for consumables, and steamrolled over objections. This person needs less power within PGI.

This is not to be punitive, but to improve the strength of PGI and protect its product integrity and thus indirectly its relationship with its customers. This is because the balance of power within PGI will shift towards decisionmakers who are more in tune with what we, your customers want, and away from decisionmakers who make us unhappy with your product.

Thank you for your consideration. I know changing power structures is difficult, but wouldn't that be easier than letting everyone go if the game tanks?

DontGetCrabs, on 04 March 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

I would like to be the devils advocate here before I beat down PGI anymore. This reaks of publisher ********. I know PGI cannot bite the hand that feeds them in a public setting, but if anyone has contact with the PGI crew please ask if this the workings of IGP ********.

Interesting that these two posts are so close to each other. Amazing how people are bashing Garth , and Paul, and yet there are other people who have alot more say than they do about the development of MWO.



Cheers.

[MacKoga]

Customer-alienating business idea aside, here's what I dislike about the proposed Air/Art/Coolant consumable module approach, from a gameplay perspective, and what I think would be better:

Air & Artillary support:
Air support and artillary raining down up to twice per mech per team, means 16/24 per side, or 32/48 big explosions in a match. That would mean they would have to be not too powerful, or the mech weaponry wouldn't matter much. Visually, this is probably going to distract from the spirit of mech vs. mech battle. Thematically, ordinance will need to be overly weak to not have instant destruction anytime a team came loaded up.

But we do want some big explosions, and were intrigued with Role Warfare. Ignoring the RW concept for now, what would work would be to have far fewer mechs on a side likely to have Air & Artillary support, and have each strike be more (appropriately) powerful. A heavy, multi-slot, chassis-limited Command Console would enable access to Air & Artillary. Every match a Command Console equipped mech would have their full complement of strikes (it would either be a set number per match, or be more like a weapon with a many-minutes-long cooldown).

This would not use any modules, though I suspect it would be fine to add permanent, normal modules that might make targeted airstrikes land more accurately, or regenerate 5% faster, etc., but not necessarily seem like a better module than any of the others.


Coolant:
The vast majority does not want P2W, which the current system would be. Many of us dislike even the notion of coolant in the game at all. That is for a separate reason, which I will now address:

Coolant in other MW games felt like a free powerup, without much tradeoff. A little like cheating. We hate this.

We do like options, and I suspect most of us would be ok if there was a Coolant Purge System piece of equipment, that took actual tonnage and standard slots. Slots and tonnage that could have gone to heatsinks, weapons, ammo, Command Console, etc. It would be a limited use system, possibly just 1x per match, and ideally would be balanced so that most people wouldn't use it, but some, like 5-15% might. I suspect that this would be something the community would be ok with.

If permanent, standard modules were to be used in conjuction with this, they would probably just slightly improve the heat drop of the purge.


Thank you for your consideration. PGI, we want you to do well and have an excellent product we want to introduce our friends to, which is why this thread is what it is. If it's money you need, ask us and I'm sure many of us will have all sorts of implementable suggestions that the community, and your bank accounts, will like.

[Gandalfrockman]

Akkuflex, on 04 March 2013 - 09:04 PM, said:

The very moment that coolant flush for MC gets introduced I'm out of this game for sure. I'm not having WoT pay2win premium consumables again, and I strongly asume that this will be the case for many others.

Good day.

Pretty sure this is the consensus at this point.

[Talrich]

I've bought MU, so the trolls can park the freeloader accusations at the door. No, I haven't tried a cooling module, but I reject the idea that I have to try it to know. I haven't played World of Tanks either, but I know what gold ammo is, and you probably do too. I've read up on the cooling module, and it troubles me.

To me the larger issue is the game's reputation. I've recruited many friends to play this game, but you know what, I had to reassure several people "no, this isn't pay-to-win" and "no you won't just get stomped on by the veterans". People trusted my endorsement, so yeah, I'm a bit worried about that trust being betrayed. MWO still can grow, but this is a real risk to recruitment

Even if the cooling module is irrelevantly weak, we're going to start hearing that explanation for every death to energy weapons. Hacks! Premades! Coolant modules! You can fill in the blank with whatever sour-grapes parting chat you want. In the end, too many games like that and it's another player lost back to WoW. That's one less ally, one less opponent, and one less potential paying customer to give PGI the funds to keep the development rolling.

To conclude, I think consumables, whether by c-bills or MU are unwise. The code can be fixed. The reputation damage may be irreversible.

Best,
-Talrich

P.S. - Anyone who hasn't seen Penny Arcade Extra Credit's Video on microtransactions in games, highly recommended: http://www.penny-arc...crotransactions

[Royalewithcheese]

JadePanther, on 04 March 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

popcorn

The only consumable worth shelling out cbills for.

[Tarman]

Thirdstar, on 04 March 2013 - 09:05 PM, said:

It's funny because I've used WoT as an example to illustrate my points so very often that i've lost count. I also pointed out how much the Devs want MWO to BE WoT.

I always wonder if it isn't IGP that wants MWO to be WoT instead of PGI.

AAAAA ACRONYM OVERLOAD

But I do wonder how much is devs and how much is devs' moneysuit bosses. Moneysuits are known for knowing jack-all about stuff their "holdings" are actually doing or trying to do.

[JadePanther]

Royalewithcheese, on 04 March 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

The only consumable worth shelling out cbills for.

More priceless than cbills or scrap

[jakucha]

Adrian Steel, on 04 March 2013 - 08:52 PM, said:

They went full WoT.

WoT gives you actual damage dealing boosts you can use potentially the entire match. Coolant module will give you a one time (or two times with CBill version) heat reduction that's really only useful for laser weapons.

[JadePanther]

jakucha, on 04 March 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

WoT gives you actual damage dealing boosts you can use potentially the entire match. Coolant module will give you a one time (or two times with CBill version) heat reduction that's really only useful for laser weapons.

or maybe massive SRM boats..

[Bguk]

jakucha, on 04 March 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

WoT gives you actual damage dealing boosts you can use potentially the entire match. Coolant module will give you a one time (or two times with CBill version) heat reduction that's really only useful for laser weapons.

Useful with every weapon that deals heat. Which is every weapon in game. Which boosts damage simply by allowing the mech to fire more times.