293 replies to this topic

[hammerreborn]

StalaggtIKE, on 16 January 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

Misinformants like this is why there is so much internal strife, resulting in us being ignored.

Cause clearly the people playing in group matches and not pugging are the misinformed people. Nope, has to be the people who agree with PGIs statement that ECM is working with intended that are the idiots and not the sniveling brats that post ECM is broken 5000 times because they got killed by a raven or saw more than one in a game. OH MY GOD THERE WAS 2 RAVENS, ECM IS BROKEN FIX IT PGI OR I QUIT

[Grraarrgghh]

Allan Wren's entire segment in this episode is exactly how the majority of the community feels about posts like this:

http://mwomercs.com/...anuary-16-2013/

Stalkerr, on 28 November 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

RSS Feed: http://hlvoice.com/podcasts/vcrs.xml

Edited by Grraarrgghh, 16 January 2013 - 09:24 AM.

[Thirdstar]

hammerreborn, on 16 January 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Cause clearly the people playing in group matches and not pugging are the misinformed people. Nope, has to be the people who agree with PGIs statement that ECM is working with intended that are the idiots and not the sniveling brats that post ECM is broken 5000 times because they got killed by a raven or saw more than one in a game. OH MY GOD THERE WAS 2 RAVENS, ECM IS BROKEN FIX IT PGI OR I QUIT

You're just wrong hammer. Just wrong. You didn't even read the quoted text, at all. You just trolled the hell out of a guy who was making a good point.

[Lukoi Banacek]

StalaggtIKE, on 16 January 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

That's sounds great and all. I just would like to hear them say this, instead of making assumptions. Again are we getting info from 3rd party sites? Post info HERE!

Don't they do that sort of thing via Command Chair Forums?

And secondly, they don't owe us feedback. At all. Ever. I'm glad that we get some but the sense of entitlement is misplaced. It's better PR to "feed the beast" so to speak with information from the Dev perspective but its not required. And it certainly doesn't need to be in the form of open threads that invite non-constructive debate which inevitably overshadows healthy constructive debate on these types of forums.

So, closed threads with minor, periodic updates are what we get. But some folks are entirely too impatient and expect there to be daily (if not more often) feedback and commentary from the Devs.

Personally...I think a bugs forum and the occasional highly moderated feedback forum on very specific balance issues or suggestions would work better than the current vent/rant nonsense we see on most gaming forums, this one being no exception.

[Carnivoris]

Grraarrgghh, on 16 January 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

It's always been complete garbage. BattleTech fans are the worst.

No. Battletech fans simply demand a higher level of service when it comes to their beloved and, usually, lifelong passion. I'm not even an old-school TT player. I do, however, want more from the dev team. Their communications have been abysmal for months. They're attempting to communicate with Garth's weekly post but half the questions he answers are completely irrelevant. I've seen this before and it has always ended badly.

Lukoi, on 16 January 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

And secondly, they don't owe us feedback. At all. Ever.

Yes, they do. Anyone who's spent money on this game is basically an investor. That's the nature of crowdsourcing. We're paying money to a company to bring us the best game they can. If we're unhappy with our purchase, we get to complain. We don't get to sue or sell our shares or anything else. But we get to complain and let our voices be heard. We should also get the common courtesy from the dev team to address the issues we've raised beyond a "we're working on it".

I'm not even really that concerned with bugs and things. I know they're working on it and such a post saying that would be a waste of time. I am, however, concerned with the bigger picture being ignored and squashed. What are the plans for clans? What are plans for CW? Do they still exist or have they been scrapped altogether?

Hearing things like "Don't ask about X" from PGI is very disheartening and I haven't spent a dime since they came out and said that. I won't, either. Because of the way PGI is handling these things, I have no faith that any money I invest will go to the promised product.

It's quite apparent after today's news regarding MW:LL that they've got better things to spend their money on than making the game they promised us.

Edited by Carnivoris, 16 January 2013 - 08:45 AM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

p.s. forum posters...especially the loud obnoxious types make up the smallest percentage of playerbase usually...most people are content to play, leave when bored/frustrated and live their lives without campaigning or crusading via forumwarrioring. So again, I'm not surprised in the slightest that they don't interface with us via forums and frankly would rather they spent their time fixing the game and getting it ready for "live beta" or whatever we call it these days in the f2p market.

[wDraco]

For me what is ruinning the game, is the same stuff over and over again, there are bugs sure and they are already vastly known.

The real problem is that the devs must implement a way that, the game can be played with team vs team, so that a ladder can be created and the game gets some new breath.
A lobby must be created so that we can choose the oposition and by doing that also implement a tonnage max. so that you dont have 8 Atlas or 8 Ravens on the other side.
Or leave to the comunity a way to put rules in competetive gaming.
The future of this game will be the TEAMS not the ocasional player.

[Woky]

I'm not sure exactly that failing to do every single suggestion brought up on the forums constitutes ignoring of the testers. Several of the "suggestions" I see are contradictory or seem to be based on very narrow views of the game. I feel like they may have meetings about some balance issues where they sit around and talk about different view points on some of the balance issues, and then look at things that make the initial statement of imbalance untrue.

There's also the issue of prioritization for the many tasks that we have. With limited resources, do we pour all resources into one single task at a time, do we split across several or do the developers focus on 2-3 key issues at a time. PR issues like how to deal with a community that demands new net code be made by the texture artists and weapons balance take place with a random series of changes to the number 1-2 people think is right.

I really doubt they are ignoring beta testers. In all honesty just the data they gather from what you take in to a match vice how good you do in that match is probably invaluable information that is likely where most changes come from. Just by playing to the best of your ability and by bringing the best mechs you can slap together provide really good metrics on whats overpowered, underpowered and what's merely flavour of the month.

My last point is that a lot of feedback doesn't take into account things the developers know about the future of the game that the community cannot know at this point. One case is Streak SRMs. We know they seem to have a low skill ceiling and that they absolutely wreck in a light vs light fight. We know that lights are hard to kill with direct fire weapons due to lag shielding we also know that the ecm is the lights defense against streaks and the reason that a raven beats a jenner more often than not. What we dont know is how a change to ecm or streaks will affect the future when they get the net code fixed up and lights start dying more often to direct fire weapons or get shot to death while lying flat on their *** from a tackle.

[hammerreborn]

Carnivoris, on 16 January 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

No. Battletech fans simply demand a higher level of service when it comes to their beloved and, usually, lifelong passion. I'm not even an old-school TT player. I do, however, want more from the dev team. Their communications have been abysmal for months. They're attempting to communicate with Garth's weekly post but half the questions he answers are completely irrelevant. I've seen this before and it has always ended badly.

And when he said he wanted to change the format so he could answer substantial questions with substantial responses there were at least three threads yelling at him for it, with polls and everything calling him an *****. It always ends badly for them, and the fact that he still bothers shows his dedication to the playerbase more than anything else.

And they communicate all the time, I don't even understand this argument. Other than the holiday vacation when hasn't there been a response in constructive feedback posts in the command chair or in the patch feedback threads? You mean when the netcode guy says netcode is going to be final around the end of feburary, the lead designer saying they got the MG/flamer buffs in place and are testing now, EMP effects are being looked at for PPCs, a timetable for all content/feature releases, and various weapon balance fixes they are looking at means the communication is bad?

[Tennex]

Woky, on 16 January 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

I'm not sure exactly that failing to do every single suggestion brought up on the forums constitutes ignoring of the testers. Several of the "suggestions" I see are contradictory or seem to be based on very narrow views of the game. I feel like they may have meetings about some balance issues where they sit around and talk about different view points on some of the balance issues, and then look at things that make the initial statement of imbalance untrue.

Fact is there are problems with the games, and they are very slow to fix them. Now I know being completely negative does not speed things up. But they need to take a look at things objectively and say, wow there are some issues in the game that need fixing. Instead of writing it off and pretending like theres no problem at all while alienating their player base

[Lukoi Banacek]

Carnivoris, on 16 January 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

No. Battletech fans simply demand a higher level of service when it comes to their beloved and, usually, lifelong passion. I'm not even an old-school TT player. I do, however, want more from the dev team. Their communications have been abysmal for months. They're attempting to communicate with Garth's weekly post but half the questions he answers are completely irrelevant. I've seen this before and it has always ended badly.




Yes, they do. Anyone who's spent money on this game is basically an investor. That's the nature of crowdsourcing. We're paying money to a company to bring us the best game they can. If we're unhappy with our purchase, we get to complain. We don't get to sue or sell our shares or anything else. But we get to complain and let our voices be heard. We should also get the common courtesy from the dev team to address the issues we've raised beyond a "we're working on it".

I'm not even really that concerned with bugs and things. I know they're working on it and such a post saying that would be a waste of time. I am, however, concerned with the bigger picture being ignored and squashed. What are the plans for clans? What are plans for CW? Do they still exist or have they been scrapped altogether?

Hearing things like "Don't ask about X" from PGI is very disheartening and I haven't spent a dime since they came out and said that. I won't, either. Because of the way PGI is handling these things, I have no faith that any money I invest will go to the promised product.

It's quite apparent after today's news regarding MW:LL that they've got better things to spend their money on than making the game they promised us.

Really? I don't think the courts would agree with your assessment at all. If I order coffee from starbucks and don't like it I can complain, I can ask for my money back...I could even sue to get my money back based on the value of it...but they aren't required to listen to me, cater to my demands for changes or any of that.

The exact same premise holds true for cries of balance problems in FPS like BF3 and MMO's like Age of Conan, WoW, etc. They don't OWE us feedback unless they want to based on their PR priorities.

Again it's an issue of how much PR they think is good for them vs how self-entitled some of this playerbase thinks it is. Two very disparate ends of the spectrum apparently.

And really, you're arguing as if they don't give us feedback on occasion. As has been illustrated by numerous examples, they do give us feedback....just not to the degree some folks, like yourself apparently, would prefer.

If you don't like it....sue. But I think you'll find your sense of entitlement grossly over-stated. You're not an investor. You pitched in money for a game in BETA because you either had hope for the product or you sought to gain something for it ingame (i.e. trading time for grind with premium time, or pretty paint schemes for your Mech to please your sense of aesthetics). You did not sign on as an investor in a legal sense.

[Congzilla]

The people who actually care about testing just play the game and submit support tickets with what they find, they don't sit around here complaining about the same known issues over and over.

[Heffay]

Tennex, on 16 January 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

the ECM issue hasen't even been acknowledged

They have acknowledged it.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Congzilla, on 16 January 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

The people who actually care about testing just play the game and submit support tickets with what they find, they don't sit around here complaining about the same known issues over and over.

Truth.

[Flawless]

Grraarrgghh, on 16 January 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

List?

1) every problem presented is blown way out of proportion

2) no incremental change is good enough for this community

3) typically the criticism misses the "constructive" part

4) you rehash problems they have addressed every ******* day until they are fixed

5) unrealistic self-entitlement

6) narrow view of game development

7) everything is aired in public like dirty laundry rather than emailed directly to PGI

8) most ideas are myopic and don't take other playstyles/setups/people into consideration

This^
Never thought I would see the day that a LAO got it right.

It looks like the community is starting to tear themselves away from the good will of the Dev team.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Flawless, on 16 January 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

This^
Never thought I would see the day that a LAO got it right.

It looks like the community is starting to tear themselves away from the good will of the Dev team.

not all of us

[Congzilla]

Heffay, on 16 January 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

They have acknowledged it.

Exactly, they said at the time of it going in game that they would not touch it for quite a while. With big additions like that you need a lot of in game data to see exactly what is going on with it.

[malibu43]

Grraarrgghh, on 16 January 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

List? 1) every problem presented is blown way out of proportion 2) no incremental change is good enough for this community 3) typically the criticism misses the "constructive" part 4) you rehash problems they have addressed every ******* day until they are fixed 5) unrealistic self-entitlement 6) narrow view of game development 7) everything is aired in public like dirty laundry rather than emailed directly to PGI 8) most ideas are myopic and don't take other playstyles/setups/people into consideration

Quoted for truth.

Also, the OP seems to have "Beta Tester" confused with "Strategic Game Content and Development Consultant."

[Felix]

I got a good laugh at the goon fanbois

Thanks for that

[Grraarrgghh]

Felix, on 16 January 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

I got a good laugh at the goon fanbois

Thanks for that

Apparently not taking video games seriously is fanboyism. Also it's spelt 'Boy' Avril.