456 replies to this topic

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Sprouticus, on 22 January 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

For people complaining about collision and lobby being lower priority....

what would you take off the table:

new maps
new front end UI (2.0)
new mechs
netcode
weapons/equipment balancing? (ECM, modules, ER weapons, etc)
private matches
CW

In my mind all of those things (which appear to be higher priority than collisions and a lobby system from what I read) SHOULD be a higher priority. I thin most if not all of us would agree.

New UI front end should be replaced by collisions in that list, and from reading Bryans post it would appear private matches and CW are rolled into the same development.

[Big Giant Head]

QuantumButler, on 22 January 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

Collisions are literally the only damn thing I care about and I am legitimately mad they're so damn low priority.

They're a core game play mechanic, not some piece of pointless fluff, far more important than stupid community warfare.

Yeah, agree, but devs are fair we are just gonna have to w8. I mean, id like to sacrifice CW for fully customized Mech warfare first.

QuantumButler, on 22 January 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

Fix the outstanding gameplay issues like collisions and shoddy netcode before some silly CW that will probably just be capture the red oilrig x 20 or whatever. .

I think they need more developers to boost mech warfare development as it is the core of this game. -IMO

Edited by Big Giant Head, 22 January 2013 - 02:02 PM.

[MonkeyCheese]

Love all the responses and cant wait for the future of this game, Keep up the good work

[Terminal Mehmet]

Shumabot, on 22 January 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

How are you more excited than before when the majority of the answers are copy pasted "sometime later this year" answers from the last time they did this..?

It's all in one place and the answers are clear. I can see what we've got coming and what they've said we don't. Basically, the haze of the last year is clears up what I thought we had coming, along with several new things I hadn't seen before. No better time to do a recap than when you're switching formats, after all.

But if you're asking why I'm not in an e-rage about X,Y or Z missing, it's because I don't get worked up about internet space robots.

[DragonsFire]

Excellent list of answers guys, good to see the direction of the game and to get further insight on some of the design decisions.

To those of you who can't understand why your personal pet feature/gripe/etc is not currently a high priority, perhaps it's time to walk away for a while until that item becomes a priority. Understand that in the world of development, everything is high priority, and nothing is. That is, a case can be made for each item to be a high priority from a certain point of view, in the end, it's the developers that have to make the call because it has to fit into their established internal roadmap for future feature and end user integration.

So again, I suggest that you take a break for a while, because no video game is worth the heart attack or aneurysm many of you seem so intent on giving yourselves.


Edit: Also, many thanks to the CR folks as well. It certainly can be a thankless job all too often.

Edited by DragonsFire, 22 January 2013 - 02:03 PM.

[Xendojo]

Thank you very very much for clear and concise information. We have been info-starved and now, I for one appreciate the satiation.

Even though a few of the answers were not the ones i wanted, it's still good to have them.

Again thank you and keep up the good work!

[QuantumButler]

Sprouticus, on 22 January 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

For people complaining about collision and lobby being lower priority....

what would you take off the table:

new maps
new front end UI (2.0)
new mechs
netcode
weapons/equipment balancing? (ECM, modules, ER weapons, etc)
private matches
CW

In my mind all of those things (which appear to be higher priority than collisions and a lobby system from what I read) SHOULD be a higher priority. I thin most if not all of us would agree.

Everything aside from bugfixes and netcode should be lower priority than collisions.

My ranking would be

Bugs

Netcode

Collisoons.

in that order.

[Shumabot]

Sprouticus, on 22 January 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

For people complaining about collision and lobby being lower priority....

what would you take off the table:

new maps
new front end UI (2.0)
new mechs
netcode
weapons/equipment balancing? (ECM, modules, ER weapons, etc)
private matches
CW

In my mind all of those things (which appear to be higher priority than collisions and a lobby system from what I read) SHOULD be a higher priority. I thin most if not all of us would agree.

Front end UI, Private matches, CW, Modules.

Then, after the six hours it takes for them to up collision damage numbers (collision exists in the game, it just does a near meaningless amount of damage) they can go back to doing those things.

You conflate priority with time, it takes thirty seconds to math out a change to collision that would be a functional stop gap measure. It would take maybe twenty minutes to implement it in their own code and a week to push it to game via a patch. This fix would make the game significantly more playable, would get them a larger user base, and would indicate that they're actually working on this game at their offices.

[Garth Erlam]

GrimlockONE, on 22 January 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

This should sum it up for you.

Aww man, seriously? Can't I at least be the Joker? Or Deadpool! The Community Manager with The Mouth!

Shumabot, on 22 January 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Front end UI, Private matches, CW, Modules. Then, after the six hours it takes for them to up collision damage numbers (collision exists in the game, it just does a near meaningless amount of damage) they can go back to doing those things. You conflate priority with time, it takes thirty seconds to math out a change to collision that would be a functional stop gap measure. It would take maybe twenty minutes to implement it in their own code and a week to push it to game via a patch. This fix would make the game significantly more playable, would get them a larger user base, and would indicate that they're actually working on this game at their offices.

It also impacts: Hitboxes, latency, movement, balance, etc.

And please avoid the 'obv. PGI aren't working lolz' comments, you know damn well these guys are working their asses off.

[Shumabot]

Terminal Mehmet, on 22 January 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

It's all in one place and the answers are clear. I can see what we've got coming and what they've said we don't. Basically, the haze of the last year is clears up what I thought we had coming, along with several new things I hadn't seen before. No better time to do a recap than when you're switching formats, after all.

But if you're asking why I'm not in an e-rage about X,Y or Z missing, it's because I don't get worked up about internet space robots.

Except we knew all that last time. Nothing here is new info. You may not get worked up, but apparently you get excited about re-reading answers month after month. I'm not sure that's better or more healthy.

[SmoothCriminal]

Cheers guys, that summed up a load for all of us. Happy to wait it out (and glad to hear you're as keen for CW to be implemented correctly as I (we) am (are)).

[GrimlockONE]

Damn this thread and my constant refreshing...waiting for Garth to like my meme that I posted earlier. Alas, it seems the like will not happen. Must concentrate on homework...and not forum posting.



*** update ***


YES!!!! stay tuned for second meme...under construction.

Edited by GrimlockONE, 22 January 2013 - 02:07 PM.

[Mao of DC]

Bryan Ekman, on 22 January 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Q: In the offical trailer you show an Atlas making a "hot drop". Are there any plans for a game mode where one side defends and the other side makes a hot drop? Maybe for when a unit makes it's frist drop on a contested planet when community warfare is implmented?
A: Yes, we are exploring asymmetrical gameplay modes.

Q: Any plans for a Solaris VII map or maps? It will let you guys make a Free-For-ALL game mode. Pilots could even place wagers on the outcome or even a manditory buy in to create the winners purse.
A: Long term (year or more out ) yes.

Thank you SO MUCH for answering my questions you have just made my month. Because of that I will defend the devs against anyone who says you guys don't listen to us.
On a side note I can't wait to make a "hot drop" onto some world and take it for my Merc Corp. It's gonna be so FUN!!!

[Shumabot]

Garth Erlam, on 22 January 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Aww man, seriously? Can't I at least be the Joker? Or Deadpool! The Community Manager with The Mouth!

Is this a weird allegory for you getting stabbed in the side by one of your back end developers and then you fly a netcode fix into the forums before visibly exploding and disappearing to France with someone from the mechwarrior tactics team, letting someone else take over..?

[Kraven Kor]

OMG ACTUAL INFORMATION NOMNOMNOM

[Suprentus]

Some of the answers are a little worrisome, but at least they are answers.

One question I was hoping to see answered though was...

NPCs/anything AI controlled. Yes, no, maybe, eventually?

[Ken Fury]

Garth Erlam, on 22 January 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Aww man, seriously? Can't I at least be the Joker? Or Deadpool! The Community Manager with The Mouth!

You can be a Birdwarrior (you know you want to, Credits for the gif go to 7c Nickel)

[John Hartson]

Thanks for the answers.

I think you're doing a great job and I am sorry to hear (read) that some people do not understand how difficult it is to satisfy such a large community. Keep up the good work and make MWO a game that is worth playing for a long time.

See you on the battlefield.

[Garth Erlam]

GrimlockONE, on 22 January 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

Damn this thread and my constant refreshing...waiting for Garth to like my meme that I posted earlier. Alas, it seems the like will not happen. Must concentrate on homework...and not forum posting. *** update *** YES!!!! stay tuned for second meme...under construction.

*cough* Three posts up. *cough*

Quote

Is this a weird allegory for you getting stabbed in the side by one of your back end developers and then you fly a netcode fix into the forums before visibly exploding and disappearing to France with someone from the mechwarrior tactics team, letting someone else take over..?

It's actually a very clever allegory, where I imply a boring, non-super hero is a crappy person to be equated with, and would prefer a sociopathic criminal mastermind, or a sarcastic (Canadian) super-hero who regenerates like Wolverine but hides his face behind a mask, sheltering the world from his terrible scars.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Since you decided to shy away from the aforementioned format where you would be giving more in depth answers to 5 questions. Can you address ECM with any more detail than "We are looking at it?".

ECM is literally the easiest thing to fix in this entire list. Why are there so few details after all this time? Especially considering you added two new modules to counteract ECM (per your patch notes) which do not do that.