144 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

Can anyone actually explain to me what the point of this thread is? Like.. what is the goal?

Is there anything new?

[MustrumRidcully]

Shredhead, on 07 January 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Lost it there. No credibility in this so-called review.

Did you stop reading right there, or did you get to the point where he talked about several meter high bushes and how River City is the only map that shows off the real size of mechs in comparison with the environment?

[John Clavell]

While that review dose touch on some credible aspects where the game could be improved. Much of its is hyperbole and fact less gibberish. 80 meters tall Battlemechs? Giant anime death robots online is that way. The sense of scale in MWO is very accurate, go play some MW4 to see bad scale.

Many of the issues discussed in the review, while able to talk about the problem fall apart because the reviewer seems oblivious to the causes. Basically I get the sense the reviewer don't even understand the mechanics of the game correctly, let alone the issues which are negatively impacting the game. A review is meant to be objective. This is a boring, uninformed opinion piece which is way to personally invested, dressed up like a game review.

[Snib]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

Let's Face Facts: This Forum is Filled with People Who Don't Understand Software Development.

Nobody cares about software development. We're the customers.

[MustrumRidcully]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

Let's Face Facts: This Forum is Filled with People Who Don't Understand Software Development.

Well, at least I am an actual software developer. Unforutnately, I am not sure I know what I am doing here. That's why I never wanted to work on something serious, like Nuclear Reactor software.

But I fear the truth is that the Nuclear Reactor software developers are just as bad as me, they just believe they are better, which is why they took the job. *shudder*

[Sayyid]

While I dont agree 100% with the points brought up I do agree with you.

My POV is PGI just bit off more than they could chew and are now choking on it. Lets look at some facts.

PGI wanted to make a new Battletech-Mechwarrior game for the MMO market.
PGI stated it would be on a massive scale like the old EA/Kesmai game Multiplayer Battletech (MPBT).
PGI decided to make it in 3049 so they had time to code in all of the basic game items before the arrival of the Clans.
PGI wanted factions/houses, mercenary units, and planetary conquest, like MPBT.

So far PGI has failed on 3 of these goals so far. When I was in school 25% is not a passing grade.

[Theron Branson]

I do think PGI is more worried about the money then the actual gameplay. My opinion on what PGI needs right away is the organized battle match maker so unit vs unit battles can happen and the Community Warfare pillar. I've become exhausted with these 15min matches that go no where and have no results. I know this game is a com[lete ripoff of WoT and that's basicly how they do it but come on PGI, do NOT make a WoM please. I would love to know how much money they made with the xmas and new years crap that you can get for the mechs. Again, I know everyone needs to make moeny but how about actually make a game worth playing in the long run so people will continue to play instead of adding premium tanks (I mean Mechs). Be orginal PGI and create a real Mechwarrior game please. I've sunk money into this game and they will not see another dollar from me until the community warfare is implemented. The scary part is, is that there hasn't been any mention of this since August which scares me.

[Rotaugen]

I am not part of the doom and gloom crowd, but not a total white knight either. There are obvious bugs. I'll play a few rounds, then reset the client instead of waiting for the crash. I still crash occasionally anyway. Lack of collisions is a major issue. But, I think the game is better than it was a few months ago. If the same problems exist in 6 months, then I'll be worried. Until then, I will just keep going. Part of the problem with new user experience is the stock trial mechs. A bunch of "jack of all trades, master of none" choices. I run a second account just to test trial mechs and the new player experience . Not so great. My main account that uses Teamspeak is a completely different game. Ingame VOIP would be a big help. Still have faith in PGI though. They know what the issues are. Ask me this question again in 6 months.

[MaddMaxx]

Livewyr, on 07 January 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

Can anyone actually explain to me what the point of this thread is? Like.. what is the goal?

Is there anything new?

There is NO point. There is obviously NO goal and NO there is nothing new.

I feel that Mr. Clavell's second paragraph sums it up rather well.

I really do appreciate the fact that at least the OP did allowed us to call him an ******* again though. He did get that part correct, again.

[Snib]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

You epitomize the target of my post.

The uninformed layperson who only cares about ME ME MINE MINE NOW NOW.

ME CUSTOMER. YOU GAME MAKER.

YOU MAKE GAME. YOU MAKE GAME NOW.

No,me the customer. You want my money? Then give me something I want to pay for.

So take your irrelevant drivel to someone who cares. I'm the customer. I couldn't care less.

[Valore]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

Let's Face Facts: This Forum is Filled with People Who Don't Understand Software Development.

You don't need a degree in software engineering to see the difference between good and bad practice when it comes to community interaction.

A hilarious recent episode was when WarZ launched on Steam recently. A whole bunch of us were saying the Steam launch was a joke, and that it was nowhere near a good idea. Naturally the forums were teaming with people saying we were idiots who didn't understand software development and were needlessly speculating.

EL OH effing EL.

At least the devs there, rubbish as they were, had the humility to suck it up and issue a statement saying they'd made a mistake.

[Snib]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

Hey guess what all powerful consumer:

Vote with your dollar and not your mouth.

See ya later.

I did. I used to be a founder.

[Valore]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

Comparing WarZ to MWO is the real "EL OH effing EL" here.

False analogy much?

Not really. Both games appear to have their share of rabid defenders who refuse to countenance anything at all could possibly be wrong, despite all evidence to the contrary.


You're a perfect example.

What has PGI done for you that makes you so sure you're the one who's right?

Edited by Valore, 07 January 2013 - 06:44 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

Well maybe you could "used to be" a forum poster too and seal the deal.

Why, he doesn't give PGI money as a forum poster. He may even be costing them (a tiny little) bit.

[Valore]

And my suggestions that patch notes are terrible and need to be improved, while PGI's handling of the community also needs improvement is not constructive?

[Snib]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

Well maybe you could "used to be" a forum poster too and seal the deal.

Or I could just stay around and keep telling PGI what I, the customer, would like to see for me to give them my money again. Just a thought. Keep on trolling.

[OlF]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

....
Vote with your dollar and not your mouth.
...

I wonder how many founders activated their premium time or haven't activated it yet.

[Valore]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

I never said you weren't providing constructive criticism. However comparing to WarZ isn't constructive, and it's frankly downright moronic. FYI, the only reason the WarZ people issued their little mea culpa was because they got pushed into a corner over false advertising and are being sued in court, and have been unabashedly smeared on social and traditional media. There is simply no comparison to be made there.

And what do you mean "handling of the community?" You want them to post in General Topic every day? That's b-lls--t.

They do a Q&A nearly every week or two, answering some 30 questions. They do monthly blog updates.

I mean, seriously, be less of an f'ing child.

Get a job or something.

Do something useful.

Stop complaining.

So we can confirm you're not for false advertising, but this:

Rifter, on 06 January 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:

I honestly thought the game had a chance up untill about 3 weeks ago. Now im pretty sure its going to crash and not exsist in one years time.

The tipping point for me was CW and the way they started handling it. We go OB and they announce it will be in game in 90 days, all is well. we have a outline of it from the PC gamer article and most people are happy with the timeline. It gets to the 60 day mark when they should be done planning, done coding, and into testing of CW so people start to ask questions about it in the middle of dec, a perfectly reasonable thing to do when asking about a feature that should by this point be in testing so all info about it should be readily available.

They respond by locking all threads that mention CW, taking all post which referance the 90 day after OB timeline and deleting them and outright refusing to answer all CW related questons in the one official place we have to ask questions which is the ask the devs thread.

You dont handle something as major as CW by sweeping it under the rug and hoping we all forget what we were told. To me this was the tipping point between probable sucess and probable failure for the game.

is perfectly okay with you?

Leave the thread if it upsets you that much. You seem really worked up about it for someone who's so confident he's right.

[Snib]

M A L I C E, on 07 January 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:

You're not a customer if you're not already paying for anything.

Just a little crash course on the definition of a word.

You done now?

KTHX.

just when I thought you couldn't possibly dig that hole you're sitting in any deeper. impressive.

[Tice Daurus]

Ok....*sigh*....


As much as I don't like the inflammitory title here....I read the post. And I hope the guys at PGI are reading this one, because this is coming from one of their staunch supporters here. I voted NO.

Why? Because I don't think you realize that PGI is a small company, they are trying their best, and they are doing their hardest to bring us this game and make it work. HOWEVER...the OP does have valid points. Communication is VITAL here, and I while I know that the DEV's are hard at work, they also need to be open and give us more communication here. Not with interviews. Just give us the vital facts. Give us all of the patch notes of bugs they've fixed so even the small stuff gets mentioned. Ok so you fixed a tiny glitch on a map? Fantastic. If we see EVERYTHING you've worked on from one patch to the next, we can then see the game improving and provide you valid feedback that yes it's fixed or no it's not fixed. That's what I thought beta testing was when I first signed on here.

We find stuff.
We report stuff.
You acknowledge it's broken.
You fix stuff.
You notify us that you fixed it.
We retest it and confirm if it is indeed fixed or no it's not fixed and let you know it's fixed or not.

That's the process I thought it was supposed to be.

The process now is:

We find bugs,
we report it,
you acknowledge it,
and then later on...changes are made but then there's no real notification on what is fixed or not in the patch notes except for major bugs or problems. Ok let me correct that. There is notification on critical things you've worked on. But the small stuff? Small glitches? There's no notification on that stuff. Maybe it's personal pride for us BETA testers. We want to know and be acknowledged that if one person found a tiny bug, that caused a small problems on say the Forest Map of F9 where people were getting stuck, and you fixed it, that person could take that and say, ok, they fixed it, and I was the one that reported it, and now it's fixed. Now I can go back to F9 and see if they fixed it.

Ok it's fixed! YAY! Awesome.


As for your commitment dates? Do I understand that committments dates haven't been met? Yes. Do I understand there are reasons behind them that are valid? Yes. But that still doesn't mean you shouldn't have them listed as to when and where and if you are not meeting them, if a valid reason is given, it's understandable. Communication is key here. Talk to us. Let your customers know what's going on, and give them the truth. If you are open and honest and direct, they will understand if there is an inconvienence, and they will ask when they can reasonably expect it to be remedied and if you can correct the problems, they'll stick around. The reasonable people will support you and say, "Well, they might miss a deadline or two, but they are trying and they definitely keep us informed."
And if any griefers come on, we can slap 'em down and tell 'em to "F*** off! They are doing their best!"
We want to support PGI because many of us believe in you guys that you want to give us this great game and we want you to do that. But you are making it harder for us to do this as the days go on. Maybe it's your moderators. Maybe it's IGP. Maybe it's you. I dunno. But that's what's harming you guys. We DON'T know what's going on fully. Help us help you. Let us know what's going on. And I will say I'm not trying to point fingers here. I just want to help PGI as best as I possibly can because I believe in Mechwarrior: Online.

Edited by Tice Daurus, 07 January 2013 - 07:26 AM.