Mechwarrior Online Developer Redefines Community Warfare 189
New submitter MeatoBurrito writes "The latest iteration of Mechwarrior was crowdfunded (without Kickstarter) as a free-to-play first-person mech simulator. However, despite promises to the founders, the game has been shifted to a third-person arcade shooter and now the community is rioting. This followed a series of other unpopular decisions; the developers decided to sell an item for real money that had a significant impact on gameplay, crossing the line separating cosmetic/convenience items and 'pay-to-win.' Then they added a confusing game mechanic to limit its use, which had the unfortunate side effect of making some strategies completely useless. From the article: 'PGI’s community practices showcase a fundamental misunderstanding of both freemium development and community management. The developer has never had to deal with such a large player base before, and it has never had to deal with the strains of continuous development before. Rather, PGI seems to be handling Mechwarrior Online in much the same way they might a AAA game: by keeping quiet and only discussing its work in vague terms. ... Mechwarrior Online’s road to launch is a cautionary consumer tale, fraught with anger and betrayal. It shows how a company can take a fan base dedicated to an old IP and completely alienate it through lack of communication, unpopular features, and oathbreaking. It shows how players need to be cautious of supporting a project based solely on the IP backing it.'"
They used a firewall? (Score:3)
I thought that firewalls handled that already.
I've been playing MWO since closed beta... (Score:5, Interesting)
And I wonder what the heck the submitter / article author is smoking?
Yes, they've done some things a lot of folks (myself included) have been unhappy with - I could list several things if you guys want - but the stuff in the summary is largely not true. What item is this he claims they have sold for real money (implying you can't get it with in-game currency) that has crossed the line into pay-to-win? I know of no such item!
The biggest issue they've had recently is the addition of 3rd person view, which upset a lot of us - especially since they promised a separate 'hardcore' queue for those who didn't want to play with folks using 3PV, and then didn't follow through on that. They have made some other moves instead, though, which at least help: the real competition-level 12 vs 12 organized group games will not have 3PV available.
On the plus side, the gameplay is generally fun and they have also done an *amazing* job with the mech designs! Are there things still to be done? Yes - tons! Are there things I would have done differently - yes, but they can't please everyone! But are they completely shifting to an 'arcade shooter'? Heck no! :)
Cool Shot (Score:5, Informative)
I've been playing the game for 6 months. It's been fun, but I've just been finding it too repetitive lately. I'd still recommend it to anyone who likes the MechWarrior concept. Just be prepared to spend time on the forums learning how to play, as no tutorial is provided by the developer.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool Shot (a one time use heat disipation module) is NOT pay to win.
There is an in game module you can get that has the EXACT same effect.
As someone above stated, there have been issues some peopl e have had (3PV) but PTW is not one of them.
Frankly I think the 'uproar' is a tempest in a teapot. The 3PV is annoying, but certainly not game changing. They wasted development time on it, but that is really y only problem with it at this time.
Honestly, this post seems like one guy whining about something he doesn
Re: (Score:2)
The top tier Cool Shot is what the author is saying was pay-to-win. I never used one. I built my mechs to not overheat and thus take advantage of opponents who did.
You must be kidding. Even 3 medium lasers are enough to overheat a mech on all but the coldest maps. With double heat sinks that is.
So you only play with machine guns and Gauss rifles?
Aside from that, yes, Cool shot is pretty much crap.
Re: (Score:3)
The article (past page 1) is NOT about Cool Shot. Cool Shot is addressed on page 1, page 2 is primarily about Ghost Heat, and page 3 is about Third Person View and the many, many, many reversals of previous commitments that PGI has now made.
If you want to make a widely-popular shooter set in the MW universe, that's FINE. Really, it is. It's been done dozens of times.
But if you want to make something special, something sim-like and first person, and leave out the pay to win elements, then you need to DO that
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, while they did some crowd-funding (the Founders program - I'm one myself, as is my brother) they *do* have a publisher: IGP. I always thought it funny that PGI made the game and IGP published it :)
And yes, as I mentioned they have changed things - some to the disappointment of fans, including myself. But they have definitely *not* gone pay to win (the coolant flush can be purchased with real money or 'researched' and then purchased with in-game XP / credits). I'd prefer they had never put it in, o
What are YOU smoking? (Score:5, Interesting)
Or that the Community Manager's only apparent contribution is getting big names in the "Let's Play" and Game reviewing to make videos of the game...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIn-im_tWEg [youtube.com] Reference Video
Or that instead of a Valve style change log the updates instead focus almost exclusively on purchasable content, there wasn't even a foot note when all the weapon sound effects were changed.
Do I even need to bring up the cluster fuck that is ECM? Bringing in the Raven mech whose role as a dedicated ECM platform is somewhat undercut by the fact that only one of the three versions can mount ECM at all was a bad idea made worse by the fact that ECM was totally overpowered to the point of totally disrupting the team alliance indicators making it impossible to tell who you were shooting at.
Also to remind you the Hero Mech design are Cash money only variants different from any acquired with in game currency that also have a bonus to exp and in game currency.
Really though the main gist of the post is that PGI has failed to keep people happy or to even make enough empty promises to hold off full out rioting, Remember back a few months ago when PGI went ahead and deleted over half the official forums because it was getting unruly, Or we can look at the bottom half of this post http://mwomercs.com/news/2013/08/730-september-creative-developer-update [mwomercs.com] where they admit things are getting so abusive that they are considering calling police on some commentors...
That is not a well managed community, not at all.
I play in a group and have seen several Gold Founders (people who paid $120 to get into the closed beta) walk away in disgust or boredom.
Things are going downhill.
Re: (Score:2)
"I play in a group and have seen several Gold Founders (people who paid $120 to get into the closed beta) walk away in disgust or boredom."
Everyone had the big warning light flashing called "F2P" when mechwarrior went online only. That alone should have told anyone in the know all they needed to know. The reality is the fans who paid for MWO are stupid fucks. They are the reason developers are exploiting gamers, the dumb half of the gaming community is just so huge and missing brain cells.
Re:What are YOU smoking? (Score:4, Insightful)
My brother, who is also a Founder (like I am) nearly walked from the game due to the 3PV issue. Then a few days ago he asked me to join him to play and record (FRAPS) a few games, with the idea of trying to exploit 3PV and post results to the forums.
You know what? After trying we found that yes - sometimes, in just the right circumstances, it could be exploited... but that in PUG matches it didn't really seem to alter the overall match results, and that not a ton of people were using it anyway. Beside that, if you sit in 3PV you are at a disadvantage much of the time for aiming and other important aspects of advanced gameply. He has since started playing a lot again, and we were both greatly encouraged by PGI stating that the pre-organized 12 v 12 matches will *not* have 3PV as an option starting in a couple of patches.
Re:What are YOU smoking? (Score:4, Interesting)
Also to remind you the Hero Mech design are Cash money only variants different from any acquired with in game currency that also have a bonus to exp and in game currency.
And my anecdote? During the "LRMAgeddon" phase of beta, just after missiles' lofted trajectories were dialed back to make cover work, I played a Centurion. It mounted 15 LRM tubes in the left torso, and an AC/20 in the right arm for when the missiles went dry and/or someone got too close for comfort.
A few weeks later, the server was reset and I lost my well-loved war machine. Then I found out that the economy was scaled back to the point of grinding with 'rental' mechs, after a month of evenings I plunked down my C-bills for a new Centurion chassis. I discovered I couldn't fit an AC/20 in the arm, and then I discovered they were selling my variant - but only for real-world money. And once I bought it, I'd earn money and XP 30% faster. The economy seemed to be balanced around those boosts now, for progress became painfully slow, and the game became boring - competing against real-money mecha with perfect builds in a 20-ton Commando, purchased so the 75% "you don't own your mech" penalty to earning money and the 100% "you don't own your mech" penalty to earning experience, is an exercise in futility. Because there is no respawning in this game, I typically spent about 5 minutes playing, 25 minutes spectating to get my money and XP.
Not strictly pay2win, but working your way into the real game content the cheap way became an exercise in masochism.
Re: (Score:2)
And I wonder what the heck the submitter / article author is smoking?
I read the link from the summery http://www.gamefront.com/mechwarrior-online-forum-ragesplosion/ [gamefront.com] (how to write an article!) and links from that. One thing I noticed is everybody on the user side is back tracking, this thread http://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/132638-3rd-person-an-update-and-apology-feedback-thread/ [mwomercs.com] while locked after three pages is full of edits.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I play the game with my 2 brothers and 2 best friends, and a few other people.
I agree with WilliamGeorge - completely.
This ARTICLE is a farse. There is DEFINITELY no item sold for real money that you can't get with free money which changes the game. What a stupid lie. If this exists... TELL US THE ITEM. Why hide it???
Yes, the 3rd person view is SO SO SOOOOOOOOO dumb. I hate it. I want them to take it away... BUT
I will say this - it sucks, completely. It offers the 3rd person user ZERO advantage in almost AL
Re: (Score:3)
The reality is they are targeted a particular audience in the F2P PvP (which I like to call purse vs purse and yes the connotation of those players attacking each other with their cute little Fabergé purses is appropriate) which is highly fractious. For quite a few of them it is not about gaming it is about beating other people and in their mind humiliating them, no matter how much the spend (lame) or cheat to do it. Do anything to upset them (like spill soup on them in a restaurant, beat them t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can only be mechanically competitive 1 out of X hours with a real money spender it's part time pay to win.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You people really can't believe that people sometimes have different opinions can you? Maybe if the account was made yesterday you'd have a point. But maybe it's entirely possible some people just aren't as mad as you are about this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, what exactly are you accusing me of? I'm in no way affiliated with PGI or IGP - aside from being a MechWarrior player. I work for a computer company, but not one that makes or markets games:
http://www.pugetsystems.com/bios.php?name=williamgeorge [pugetsystems.com]
Now I *did* write a blog post on MWO, when it hit open beta, because I really like it. I liked it more at that time, since some of the sillier elements (3PV, coolant) had not been added yet - but even though they've done some things I don't like I still enjoy t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, though in all fairness every past MW game has had it too. I play without it, and am *very* pleased that it will be removed from the serious, 12 v 12 grouped games :)
managing expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
When you "crowdfund" something you are giving money with really no basis for expecting anything in return. This is why I would rather just buy something instead of crowdfund it. I don't do investment, it is risky. I do do Kiva though for small amounts.
This is problem with kickstarter and the like. Managing expectations. It looks like you are buying a product when in fact you are giving money to someone to develop an idea. This illusion of buying a product is reinforced by the limitation on 'fund my life projects'.
In this case a game was produced. It sounds like due to financial constraints of running the game certain compromises had to made. This is standard. The initial concept is almost always unfeasible. Certain comprises have to be made during the engineering process. But the fact remains that apparently the money was used to develop a product that was, in general, like the product being advertised.
What the firm maybe should have done is said that the original product could not be developed, and, BTW, we have no contract to give you anything, so we will just take the work done and make this complete other product, which looks almost the same, but we promise isn't, and you can pay just like anyone else. Which really is what they did but they tried to sugarcoat a bit better than that.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that isn't sustainable.
When people give money to one of these projects, it is a an agreement between fans and developer.
Is it legally binding? No. And that might be part of the problem. The fans were dumb enough to think they didn't need an ability to legally compel the contract.
If fans have no expectation of things actually getting done they're not going to contribute to these projects.
I've personally given a few thousand dollars to various kickstarter projects and all of them have lived up to th
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"We aren't developing for you anymore" is a patently retarded way to read what was actually said.
Here is the actual quote for anyone interested:
"After releasing 3PV we saw an immediate improvement in our target demographic, with a good bump in new player retention!"
A sensible person would read this as "This feature helped the specific demographic (new players) that we intended it to help."
Crazy people read it as "This entire game is now an arcade shooter now get out."
Old hat (Score:2)
It shows how players need to be cautious of supporting a project based solely on the IP backing it.'"
Or as those of us in the old guard of the geek community call it... "The Lucas Effect".
Just like Star Wars Galaxies (Score:1)
"Arcade shooter"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Hah, how sensationalist. No, they just added a third person camera like all the old Mechwarrior offline games and a bunch of tryhards who seem to know better than the developers -- and these sort ALWAYS think they know better than the developers -- are upset about it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
3PV has minimal impact in the game. No one uses it, it has some moderate drawbacks, and frankly it is just not that great.
Was it a waste of development time. Yes. Is it a real problem. No.
Re: (Score:2)
Doh! (Score:2)
Does this mean that, without crowdfunding, the game would simply not come into being? "Not quite," he says. "The product will be a lot better for players because of the crowdfunding. [gamasutra.com]
This isn't a story, this is a distorted opinion (Score:2)
One-sided opinions does not a story make.
Seems inevitable, somehow. (Score:1)
1: Buy the rights and announce a multiplayer version of a dearly loved series of games, suggest some great ideas, receive lots of money and goodwill.
2: Drag your feet, procrastinate, dumb the game down, fail to implement features and watch it finally drift endlessly as yet another average, money grubbing F2P.
3: ???
4: Profit!
CAPTCHA : pitiable
Wasn't there a mech-style game on kickstarter? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Is HiRez doing this title as well? (Score:1)
I don't get the perspective issue. (Score:3)
I thought the article said a person could toggle between first and third person. Wasn't that always the case in the Mech games? At least I think I recall that in MechWarrior Mercenaries.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The game was initially advertised as a first-person-only multiplayer game. People liked the idea of a first-person-only mech game.
Problem with 3rd person is that it kills a lot of strategy and decisions inherit to a first person only game. An easy example, in a first-person-only game, you can hide behind a rock and be completely hidden. The only way to see what's on the other side of the rock is to walk around the rock (this goes for both the person hiding AND the any attackers). With 3rd person mode, y
Re: (Score:2)
At least I think I recall that in MechWarrior Mercenaries.
Mech II Merc was first-person.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. FPS only.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking to id an arcade game? (Score:1)
There was this Mechwarrior-type arcade game from Japan I saw in a Pizza restaurant. I can't remember the game's full name but I was dazzled by the game play effects. It had Mechwarriors movements as fast as the Flash of DC comic books. The player commit strikes that emit light flashes similar to lightning. The user can switch between two perspectives: fighting view from within the Mechwarrior or 3rd person view as in Mortal combat. I can only remember the name contained "Gundam". Do you know of this ga
Re: (Score:2)
Basically this was an arcade-ized version of the MW4/Virtual World BattleTech game.
It'd drop you as a single cockpit into a bunch of bots and let you shoot it out.
One of the local theaters in my area had one at one time.
Honestly, I've been a BattleTech-head for decades.
And I was prepared to spend some money on MWO. I even opened my wallet for a Founders package.
But the way PGI is shaping up, I have real difficulty justifying giving them any more money. Ever.
Pay-to-win down-your-throat (Score:4, Interesting)
Free-to-play is an awful model, thrust upon gamers because the publishers have decided it must be so. If it can't be online, then it can be pirated, and the notion that there's a nickel in a gamer's pocket that doesn't come to them violates the most dearly-held religious belief of the game companies.
Nobody really likes free-to-play. I don't know anyone for whom it is their first choice of gaming platform. When a gamer hears that some well-known property is coming out as free-to-play, there is a sinking feeling in their collective stomach.
And this physical reaction is very interesting. I've tried a few F2P games, and I find I get an actual nausea from them. One is actually a good game, Planetside 2, but the impossible-to-escape awareness that there's a guy there, tapping you on the shoulder to try to get you to buy something, or to just give him some money, permeates every moment of game-time. If Planetside 2 was a subscription model like Eve, or a dedicated server model, I'd gladly buy the game. But no matter how fun Planetside 2 is (and if you get a good group of people it's a LOT of fun), that nausea never leaves. Whenever you realize that spending another $12 will get you better weapons and armor, and a temporary boost to XP, you get that sick feeling.
Maybe this will change some day, but I see a future with a lot more of these Mechwarrior situations where a community of fans, who have happily PAID MONEY for the game in the past, just decide, "Fuck it" and look for something else to play.
I certainly don't see the me-too, uncreative, group-think that goes on in most game companies giving up on the F2P strategy. They're sold on it and it really doesn't matter what the gamers - the customers- want. It's the way of the world now. There's always another crop of 12 year-olds who will spend time on F2P games but they'll move on to the next one long before serious brand-loyalty comes into effect. If Mechwarrior had started out as F2P, I guarantee that it wouldn't have any "community" to be outraged.
Re: (Score:3)
Free to play is not necessarily bad: It just happens that it can be done badly, just like DLC.
Look at, say, Dota 2. You get access to the full game to start. Every hero is available when you turn the game on. Paying more hours provides no gameplay advantage. Paying provides no gameplay advantage. You can pay for cosmetics and to watch pro tournaments in game. That provides plenty of money to keep the game running. It just happens that after someone sinks 1000+ hours into a game, and he's never paid a dime f
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say they couldn't be a little bit fun, but just that there is something off-putting about the model itself.
There will never be a AAA free-to-play title, I believe. Planetside 2 could have been AAA, but the F2P choice has relegated them to a sort of ghetto of half-good games, simply because of the model used to monetize the game.
Same with DOTA 2
Re:Pay-to-win down-your-throat (Score:4, Interesting)
Free-to-play is an awful model, thrust upon gamers because the publishers have decided it must be so
Free-to-play exists because the developers that have nailed it with a good game are making money hand over first, and everyone else wants to do that too.
Nobody really likes free-to-play. I don't know anyone for whom it is their first choice of gaming platform.
Allow me to introduce myself - I'm someone that likes free-to-play!
I've been playing Dota 2 a lot in the last 6-8 months. It is as often frustrating as hell, but it's great fun having a good game with friends.
It is a free-to-play game; they make revenue selling in-game content like clothes and effects for characters. I am totally, completely uninterested in this, but I am by far the unusual one - most of the people I've played have dropped at least the cost of a normal AAA game buying stuff, and I know a few people who have spent over $100 - no doubt there are even more.
There's the occasional in your face thing trying to get you to buy something - usually just an item expiring notice or something - but they are few and far between. I am easily able to ignore it.
I often spend hours a day playing this and cannot believe they're giving something this awesome away for free. Maybe I'll buy something some day - some of the in-game content looks really visually impressive and it gives your character a unique flavour - I can see why people like doing it, although it seems like playing dress up with virtual dolls.
Some games are more obnoxious about it - I play a bit of Tapped Out, the Simpsons game. It is much more in your face trying to get you to buy stuff. I love the game because I love the Simpsons, but it's just idle pleasure for me and I have no plans to drop money in it either.
(plug: I did a review of Dota 2 [ausgamers.com] which outlines the game for noobs. I encourage people to play it because it's F2P done right, it's extremely well engineered and well featured - and it's great fun.)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll still happily trade you all of my Steam trading cards for a copy of The Witcher 3 when it comes out.
"Free-to-play" is just an insulting business model. DOTA 2 would have been immeasurably better if it had just had dedicated servers, LAN games, and a price tag. As it is, playing it just makes me sad.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, I think the free to play bubble is already bursting. A lot of the companies who made their name in that market, particularly Zynga, are in dire financial straits. At the same time, publishers who had made previous statements committing themselves heavily to that model (EA, Square Enix to name two) have started to hedge their bets over the last month or two. EA is talking about the importance of singleplayer and the traditional pay-to-own model again, while Square Enix (the masters of free-to-pl
Re: (Score:2)
The problem isn't Pay-to-Win. It's more basic than that. The problem is Free-to-Play.
It's like having a nice dinner out with a friend who keeps sticking his fork in your plate to take a bite of this or that. Constantly. All night long.
You'd be happy to just buy him a meal. it's not the paying that's the problem. It's the ever-present come-on.
This sounds like something out of the Inner Sphere (Score:1)
Summary bad, article very good (Score:1)
IP? (Score:2)
Trademark?
Game have shifted to 3rd person??? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Did the little astroturfer forget to log into his other account to agree with himself? Laughable at best.
'oathbreaking' (Score:2)
Apparently when a Dev says something will happen (no #pV) and 9 months later they Devs change their minds, it is now considered 'oath breaking'
This is the same logic that people use to say that when a politician says he is for something, then is presented evidence of that position being wrong and changes it, that said politician is wishy washy.
Changing your mind when presented with evidence is a GOOD thing.
PGI just doesn't care (Score:2)
In any ev
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why shouldn't they be whiny? The online gaming hivemind decreed a long time ago that anything "pay to win" was something that they generally don't want. This was and still is the line for many people where monetizing a product stops being about making a reasonable profit and starts being about wringing consumers for every last penny.
There is no reason, in this day and age, that developers need to be making massive game destroying mistakes like this. There are many business models out there that skirt the "p
Not P2W (Score:3)
There is no reason, in this day and age, that developers need to be making massive game destroying mistakes like this. There are many business models out there that skirt the "pay to win" boundary without crossing it that they could have copied (see LoL, Eve, PS2, etc). It's just incompetence on the part of the developers.
Actually there is not a single p2w item in the game. You can get all the consumables with in game currency as well, though it does take a while to grind the skills to have the cbill (ingame) versions just as good as the mc (pay-currency) versions.
Aside from that you can buy "hero" and "champion" mechs, which have a cbill or experience bonus respectivly. No in-match advantages though, just makes grinding faster, similiar to "premium time" which lets you gain cbills and experience faster.
The only item you def
Re: (Score:2)
So, what you're saying is that there is a game mechanic (the XP system) whose effects are to make the game less fun by turning it into work, but which you can pay real money to lessen, and you don't see that as a problem?
If players imagine that the fun parts won't manifest for 40 hours of play-time (and they must be made to feel that way to think paying real money to reduce that portion of the game is worth it), they might just decide not to bother finding out if the game really does change into something f
Re: (Score:3)
So, what you're saying is that there is a game mechanic (the XP system) whose effects are to make the game less fun by turning it into work, but which you can pay real money to lessen, and you don't see that as a problem?
Yeah, having an "XP system" is obviously a pretty stupid idea. I doubt it will catch on in any MMO or MMORPG.
Re: Not P2W (Score:3)
Too bad this is nothing like an MMO or RPG. You're not leveling up to take on a boss at the end of a lengthy quest, you're just getting dropped into random match after random match. The concept of grinding hours on end to unlock a handful of efficiencies is dreadful.
Re: (Score:2)
if you can pay to xp you can p2w.
pay to xp is pay to win. practically all of so called free social games nowadays do it.
Humans are inherently lazy, if their real job pays more per hour by factors of 100's and lets face it, most do, they'll go for p2w. If your real job doesn't, I pity you, and you're probably not playing games.
Re: (Score:3)
with P2W, you're not really playing games either. Except for the game of "my job is better than your job"
Would Chess be a fun game if you could just buy pawn promotions early?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So, what you're saying is that there is a game mechanic (the XP system) whose effects are to make the game less fun by turning it into work, but which you can pay real money to lessen, and you don't see that as a problem?
Different people have different tolerances for repetitive play, and different amounts of free time that they can spend on it. People with less free time have a tendency to want to advance faster so that they can enjoy different parts of the game; people with more free time tend to prefer to take progress through the game at a more leisurely rate so they can enjoy it for longer. While I haven't played this particular game, it is usual for the cash shop in free-to-play (and even sometimes non-free) games to
Re:Maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
The fan base shouldn't be so whiny and picky. That goes for any fan base or gaming community.
If you want a less whiny and picky fanbase don't, Just Don't base your game's appeal on a continuously-developed-since-1984 tabletop-wargamer-nerd cult hit. Especially not one with several successful-but-now-dated PC game interpretations already built by other developers.
If you have made that mistake, don't double down on the stupid by systematically alienating players and pushing the game toward the direction of being a generic action/arcade title (because that's not a crowded genre where better-funded franchises will crush you like a bug or anything...)
If you want to play the "This is my goddam gameworld, you don't have to like it, the door is that way!" strategy it's idiotic to base the game on a well-established franchise universe: it severely limits your creative options and ensures that you'll have a pack of fanboys with reference materials rules-lawyering you on every point. It's not as though there isn't a market for 3rd-person robot-blaster games, it just isn't called Battletech.
If you want a prefab fanatical player base, (which you can get by adopting an established franchise universe), be prepared to keep in mind that, so far as the gamers are concerned, it's your job to turn the universe they care about into a game that does it justice. You are just the means. If you can do that, you get the advantage of having the buzz done for you to some extent; but if you try to push against them, they'll quickly take the stance that you aren't doing your job.
Re: (Score:3)
Specifically, BattleTech has ALWAYS been some sort of 3rd person tactics game
Bzzt! You're forgetting the BattleTech Virtual World pods. So no. Not "always".
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, those should have been branded as Mechwarrior, rather than BattleTech. They were entertaining. Expensive though. And as arcadey as arcade games get. Worse than Mechwarrior 4 (which is infamous even among Mechwarrior player, let alone hard core BattleTech fans).
Re: (Score:2)
Actually. No they shouldn't.
Up until MW4, they were a completely separate product from the MechWarrior brand.
It was only with MW4 that the products co-mingled. Mainly because it wasn't until then that consumer-grade video cards were powerful enough to rival the custom-made setups previously used in BT pod construction. Essentially MW4 started as a back-port of the VWE BattleTech engine to a consumer-grade setup (I've actually seen some of the backporting they'd done for the Red Planet game).
Then a bunch
Re: (Score:2)
My comment was in reference to the experience, not the software lineage or the hardware required. BT pods played like MechWarrior, not Battletech.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the fanbase funded it, or funded some ego anyway.
Investigations and lawsuits should follow.
If I pay for something, bastard, you best give it to me or I will walk off with a soiled knife and your yarbles in my pocket.
Haters Making Much of Nothing ... (Score:3, Informative)
The reality is that the "Hater Community" got their panties in a twist when PGI didn't "kow tow" to their demands ... that "Haters" predicted the changes would kill the game, which they didn't, and now they are basically forced to double-down and spread even more negativity.
I play at the competitive level, and the game is in the best shape it has been in so far ... there is one big outstanding issue (HSR/Hit Detection) that once fixed will make MWO a solid platform ... There is still lots of stuff that need
Re: (Score:2)
So what would call someone like me, who isn't a "hater", but is sorely frustrated that we are weeks from release and so far we have none of the features we were sold on.
You call out Hit Detection as a bug, but you missed some pretty significant bugs:
1 - Movement / stuck on terrain. Getting stuck on cigarette butts is getting old
2 - Heat. PGI has severely mismanaged the heat system due to a lack of understanding of the IP they bought.
3 - Built in Comms.
4 - Community anything. A lobby? anything?
5 - Jump J
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're just a stupid asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that's a complete dick move on their part. But when you see "We may, from time to time at our sole discretion and without notice or liability, create, amend, change, or delete any content from the IGP Offerings." at the top of their terms, that should raise a *huge* red flag before you reach for your wallet in the first place.
I don't know about your jurisdiction, but mine has "unfair contract terms" legislation. One of the Act's cited examples of a term which is unfair and therefore not enforceable in any contract is a term which:
Quoting from government advice on interpretation of this law:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is why I don't fund anything on Kickstarter.
Make the product first and then try to sell it, not "Gimme money while I promise the sun and the stars and still work on it..."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clever developer would allow people with 1st person view choose if they want to play with 1st person view players only or allow 3rd person view players too. And same option for 3rd person view players.
Choices (Score:1)
Re: Background (Score:2)
Wait, I'm confused. I played mw4 but not mwo. After reading the article it seems to me there is that cool shot item ( how long to grind that out?) that makes alpha striking better than ever. 3rd person jump sniping further supports that. I stopped playing mw4 due to disliking the hill humpping and jump sniping alpha strike gameplay. I see that as a bad thing IMHO, but others might enjoy it I guess...but why was mw4 jump sniping bad vs mwo jump sniping being good?
Re: (Score:2)
After reading the article it seems to me there is that cool shot item ( how long to grind that out?)
It costs 15k GXP (one time XP cost) to upgrade coolshot-9 modules into coolshot 9x9 modules which are identical to the coolshot 18 (pay currency version).
At around 50-100 GXP per match (~8 minutes) thats about 20-40h of playing the game to be able to upgrade it. Its not used much though (there are non-consumable modules which are better on basicly every build).
Re:free-to-play flat out lie. (Score:5, Informative)
They were selling all of the mechs people want to play with for cash. The entire stable of mechs. All for sale.
This is very wrong, so much so it must be an intentional lie. Out of 93 'mech variants, only 12 are cash-only. 81 are available for in-game currency.
Can you download and drop into an atlas and go killing? Hell no. You got a very very limited selection of what to do. And what you could do with it.
As a new player, you'll start out in a selection of trial 'mechs while you earn in-game currency to purchase your own 'mech (that you can then customize to your liking for more in-game currency). To facilitate this, you get a rather hefty in-game currency bonus for your first 25 games. At the end of those 25 matches, you'll have enough both to purchase and customize and Atlas, if that's what you want.
Every battle quickly shaped up to be paid players stomping the shit repeatedly out of free players.
Almost the entire point of the mechwarrior series was behind a credit card. Thats not any sort of free to play. That's flat out pay to play
It's also not true. The Hero 'mechs (the cash-only 'mechs) aren't superior to the in-game currency ones, and there's generally not enough of them on a team to make a difference anyway. People generally play in regular, non-Hero 'mechs. What is happening though is that organized teams "stomp the shit" out of disorganized groups of non-team players. But hey, it's a team game.
these people ruined it.
While there's no love lost between me and PGI, they haven't actually ruined the game yet. They seem to do their damndest to get there, but they haven't quite managed yet. At its core, the game is a really great 'mech simulation; it's just all the other bits that suck.
Oh and the fact that it's getting less and less BattleTech with every patch. That sucks really bad as well.
Re: (Score:1)
You can also bet that people willing to pay are also willing to put in more effort to create more organized and skilled teams. Fact it, they dedicate more to the game, so they are better at it.
Re: (Score:2)
The GP is making a serious effect to misinform Slashdot. Literally NOTHING he posted is true. There is a subset of the userbase that I believe is intentionally trying to tank the game through misinformation after they realized that PGI is not going to make the game exactly the way thy want (#SAVEMWO). They are children who refuse to acknowledge that compromise in game making happens.
As StJobe said, there have been decisions made by PGI I dont agree with, but all the crap posted in the GP is just dead wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
At its core, the game is a really great 'mech simulation; it's just all the other bits that suck.
It isn't a really great 'mech simulation. It is a good robot simulation that pretents to call things with the same names as in the Battletech Universe. But don't think for one second that the things in MWO act or work like the things named the same way from Battletech, because they don't. As such, it is pointless to call this game "Mechwarrior" and be a licensed property of Battletech. Absolutely nothing is correct and true to the Battletech Universe, which has lead to all the balance issues that the develo
Re: flat out lie is your post (Score:1)
You must have been playing a very different version than I've been playing. Your entire post is so off the mark!
They were selling all of the mechs people want to play with for cash. The entire stable of mechs. All for sale.
The entire stable of mechs are purchasable with real money, yes. However all but a few are only purchasable with real money, and those are only variants of mechs that are available with in game currencies. And the vast majority of those are considered to be sub-par. You can purchase every single chassis with in game currency you earn by playing the game.
Can you download and drop into an atlas and go killing? Hell no.
If an Atlas is one of the trial mechs, t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gah, don't remind me.
Mythic was so bad as a MMO developer they gave rise to the next level of fail after Epic fail: Mythic fail.
And still I played that damn game for 2.5 years...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Duke Nukem Forever has the stink of development hell all over it.
Compare it to other games that got stuck there and it is pretty similar, Daikatana, Too Human, The Bureau: Xcom declassified, Ailens: Colonial Marines.
After a certain point of time in development a game is guaranteed to ship incomplete and buggy.
Actually no (Score:2)
They have been reading to many BattleTech novels (aka Game of Thrones IN SPACE).
Re: (Score:2)
A simple fix would be to allow players to simply get put into different battle/match queues by selecting a choice of:
A) "only play with people with 1st person view"
B)"only play with people using 3rd person view"
C) "play with both 1st person and 3rd person views available to all players in the match"
Wow! An amazing concept tha