Your argument Raso is for what you think PGI should do in order for the community to expand. My argument is for people to use the resources available now, because it is what we have to use now. There is no announcement as to when PGI will implement any such suggestions you and others are making. If people use the resources available now the community and communication grows now, it doesn't have to wait for something that may never happen.
So how do we do that?
Not trolling. How do we get people to use the resources available now?
How do you get a person who never visits the forms to get on TS?
- No game menu chat - No pre game lobby - No end game lobby
How are you surprised?
Those you just listed very much surprise me. Those are features that a multiplayer game should always have. That helps to lessen the sting of the surprise for everything else.
Your argument Raso is for what you think PGI should do in order for the community to expand. My argument is for people to use the resources available now, because it is what we have to use now. There is no announcement as to when PGI will implement any such suggestions you and others are making. If people use the resources available now the community and communication grows now, it doesn't have to wait for something that may never happen.
Those you just listed very much surprise me. Those are features that a multiplayer game should always have. That helps to lessen the sting of the surprise for everything else.
You're also ignoring the fact that PGI may not have the time or money to make those things currently. We're talking about a very small company.
Hobo Dan, on 04 January 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:
So how do we do that?
Not trolling. How do we get people to use the resources available now?
How do you get a person who never visits the forms to get on TS?
Suggest that every patch email PGI sends out that they give a SMALL amount of patch data in that email then link the full article to the forums. People start looking around from there. Beyond that, people have to make a conscious choice to participate, no one can force them to..
Edited by KuruptU4Fun, 04 January 2013 - 12:02 PM.
It would be nice if they could do both at the same time. Net code will, no doubt, be an ever and ongoing deal as the game grows and the features expand. The added bandwidth of some sort of lobby or mechbay chat system combined with the idea of people teaming up and ACTUALLY using the built in voice chat will now doubt cause that much more stress on the servers.
The way this is usually realized is by using a separate chat server. Same of course when implementing VoIP, which is already in game but in a practically unusable shape because you cannot join a group after the drop ...
So no, servers and netcode usually are not impaired by chat as long as the client bandwidth is sufficient. Which it will be for almost every player, these games and chats use surprisingly little traffic.
General chat channels, also often referred to as a lobby, have been direly missed from the game from the get go. I have no idea why PGI has not implemented them, it is not actually rocket science and there are tools and examples that make them trivial to realize. Such chat systems have been around for about 20 years!
I can only imagine that PGI fails to see the importance of the most useful community tool in a community based game. Or dreads the need to moderate the channels. A task that can be done by community moderators if one wants to keep it cheap. Whichever, chat is required. I hope we will get it soon.
You mean like the ones that invariably you have to Turn Off due to the 9 year olds getting a hold of them and applying their ultimate wisdoms? PASS!
Quote
- No pre-game lobby
Nope, not for Solo Drops. But, every Team Match I get into/create provides a Pre-Game Lobby (at least for my team) who cares about the other Team your going kill shortly anyways.
Quote
- No end game lobby
Again. To what purpose? See #1 again for the usual outcome of such places. PASS!
Quote
How are you surprised?
Pleasantly...
KuruptU4Fun, on 04 January 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:
I've seen you say this before, what the heck does it mean? I'm not current on Swedish idioms....
It is Swedish for. "Us ugly "Bronzers" gotta have someone to blame!" LOL
The way this is usually realized is by using a separate chat server. Same of course when implementing VoIP, which is already in game but in a practically unusable shape because you cannot join a group after the drop ...
So no, servers and netcode usually are not impaired by chat as long as the client bandwidth is sufficient. Which it will be for almost every player, these games and chats use surprisingly little traffic.
General chat channels, also often referred to as a lobby, have been direly missed from the game from the get go. I have no idea why PGI has not implemented them, it is not actually rocket science and there are tools and examples that make them trivial to realize. Such chat systems have been around for about 20 years!
I can only imagine that PGI fails to see the importance of the most useful community tool in a community based game. Or dreads the need to moderate the channels. A task that can be done by community moderators if one wants to keep it cheap. Whichever, chat is required. I hope we will get it soon.
I never knew that's how that worked. Makes sense, though, since voice chat is such a high bandwidth function, that it would get it's own server.
KuruptU4Fun, on 04 January 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:
I've seen you say this before, what the heck does it mean? I'm not current on Swedish idioms....
Perhaps he is making a reference to your status as a legendary founder. Many people feel that some founders have rose tinted glasses or that the head start they have lead many to adopt a FYGM mentality. I've always been confused by the latter. With such an investment already in the game wouldn't people want the game to be all it can be?
Giving PGI $120 didn't give me rose tinted glasses, it gave me 4 mechs and a couple more months of frustrating patches that bent or broke gameplay. I'm not going to scream "give me what I want and I want it now" because I'm not entitled to it for donating that money. Neither am I going to say "this isn't working so fix it like this or give me my money back" either. I'm just like you in wanting things to be built or changed to make this game better which is why I did it.
I'm 38 years old and I understand that suggesting what I want will not make it happen, but if what I have can help achieve it then I will gladly donate it. As frustrating as it's been I still feel like I'm getting my money's worth. Mostly because I've found a good group of friends to play this game with.
Erm -encoded voice traffic in all but the heaviest modern codecs uses sod all bandwidth, but requires quite low latency as there's no time for error correction. Low latency wouldnn't be a problem on regional servers.
The best online experience I've ever has was in the first two SOCOM: US Navy Seals games on PlayStation 2.
A dozen servers for various regions of the world, in those a dozen lobbies, and in each of them, well over a dozen rooms. Persistent rooms where hosted and maintained by various individuals and groups, and in the course of playing the typical player would get a feel for where to get a good game.
A typical user experience would have several randoms drop into the room hosted by clan Pretty Cool Guy {PCG}, perhaps with another premade when clan Smoke Weed Everyday {SWE} pay a visit, to form a make-shift team up. After a bit of banter, the match begins, and it's pretty pugtastic with both teams struggling to work as a team, but as the smoke clears after the match, and after a few drop outs and new entries, the second game begins.....and so it goes for another hour or two, and, by the end of which, those who were formally randoms are gelling together, bringing out the best in each others abilities, setting up some epic games.
The next day the typical user can expect to drop into the same room and find he already knows 70% of the other users through previous play, instantly forming an effective team with little effort, and certainly no third party software.
It's this quality of players effortlessly forming ad-hoc social groups/teams, with complete unknowns and randoms, that sets this style of matchmaking apart from any COD-esque random pickup experience, and necessary, unlike the aforementioned COD, if the game has no respawns and requires any large degree of teamwork.
TL:DR version: Watch the video.
Quote
BrushlessNitroSlayer
To this day it is still the greatest game I have ever had the true honor of playing. Man 03 04 and 05 were the greatest days of my video game career. To this day I still talk to my Clan from SOCOM 2.
Quote
southsideslondon
lol i think i lost a job to socom 1 and 2. was talking to a player on confrontations about good old days of socom 1 and 2 and how good it was and what a good bunch of people that was on it. i was (HH)ashman back then
Quote
agnostos137
The last real multiplayer experience. What? Actually using strategy and communication to win games? That's unheard of!
Quote
kg919
Pistols only:) long days and nights. Bloodshot eyes. And never being able to make your girlfriend understand why u spend more time on socom than u do with her
Quote
SwitcherooU
You died? Go wait in the dead lobby and think about how you ****** up, and how you won't **** up next time. ******* respawn games.
Quote
reddxt
Playing socom as a young teenager at the time were the best years of my life.
Quote
NorthernDutchman 4 months ago
By far the best online shooter ever. I've played every shooter since and nothing has been as intense or strategic as Socom 2. Damn, I miss it.
Quote
xxxR4MB0xxx
best online shooter ever. no killstreaks, no perks, no map, its all about communication and teamwork.
When i was one of the first being invited in CB and i saw this rudimentary multiplayer GUI I was sorat shocked, but i thought 'oh well, is beta, is one of the first clients, it s good enough for what we need now"
This was happening almost 1 year ago.
Many years ago there was an online Microsoft game lobby, cant recall exact name. It was MSN games or something similar.
It was based on you logging in and landing in a huge server. From there you could open your Game Room (8 ppl i guess) and give that room a name or description, so other players knew what were you running there.
Then you could make the room either open or locked (by invite). If open, anyone could join and you had a Room Chat before launching game - at that time there was no VOIP yet -
Then finally ppl was chatting, preparring for launch, clickking ready and the Host was Launching.
When game over, everyone was back in the room. Either a chat to discuss the drop, or just get ready to the next one.. or whatever.. or just leave the group and join another of the INFINITE rooms available.
hey guys, this was longer than 15 years ago.. and it was working great. Today i would expect AT Least this or something quite better.
so, my question is ... WHY IN THE ******* HELL a game created to be a multiplayer game does not have any of this?
I've seen you say this before, what the heck does it mean? I'm not current on Swedish idioms....
Legendary Founders are in fact to blame for every problem in MWO. And any time any of us suggest anything that differs from certain accepted points of view, is decried as "Gold Vision."
4
KuruptU4Fun, on 04 January 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:
