Jump to content


Learning curve too steep


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
79 replies to this topic

atheist4thecause #41 Posted 20 November 2013 - 09:07 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 77
  • Member since:
    06-20-2012

View PostKiwiav8r, on 20 November 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

View PostActionFigure, on 20 November 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

I believe the learning curve is too steep. The follwing statement may sound silly:

 

"I am having trouble winning, the developer has the responsibility to make me win."

 

With all due respect that view is a bunch of cow dung.  Becoming competant at anything requires ambition, effort and diligence.  If you are not willing to put the time and effort into learning how to play then the game and its community is better off without you.  I came across this attitude in another well known MMO and it was one of the reasons I left because I was not willing to carry slackers.  At least in this game I can just keep calm, shoot them down, and carry on.
 


"Slackers"...in a game. Aren't these things supposed to be fun and not work? lol...Anyways, I think this comes down to semantics. To me, this is more of the OP saying that the tutorial help is not good enough to teach him what he needs to know to get good at the game even if he is willing to put in the extra work. In a game you should never have to go outside of the game to get information. To learn to play this game that's not the case. You have to go outside the game if you want to learn advanced tactics. I haven't even seen the game provide basic information in regards to things like how many points you get for killing ground targets. So to an extent I agree with the OP, but sure it could be worded better.

Heh #42 Posted 20 November 2013 - 09:18 PM

    Sky Whale Historian

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 11,960
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postatheist4thecause, on 20 November 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

"Slackers"...in a game. Aren't these things supposed to be fun and not work? lol...Anyways, I think this comes down to semantics. To me, this is more of the OP saying that the tutorial help is not good enough to teach him what he needs to know to get good at the game even if he is willing to put in the extra work. In a game you should never have to go outside of the game to get information. To learn to play this game that's not the case. You have to go outside the game if you want to learn advanced tactics. I haven't even seen the game provide basic information in regards to things like how many points you get for killing ground targets. So to an extent I agree with the OP, but sure it could be worded better.

I don't think he's talking about a tutorial problem tbh. Aside from the energy mechanics along with hidden traces of WG magic, it's basically straightforward.
Heh - aeromarine biologist

View Posthahiha, on , said:


OMG Heh you have had so many posts O_O

ActionFigure #43 Posted 21 November 2013 - 02:39 AM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

My apology for not replying to individual posts, I simply dont have enough time so I will make this into point form:

1. Flight sim genre is dead, there is not enough flight sim population to keep this game going. Instead I recommend attracting the 60+ millions WOT players, that is why I am suggesting WOWP to focus on WOT players in addition to attracting new players.

 

2. I NEVER said replace the controls, what is wrong with creating a SELECTABLE control scheme specifically for WOT players? There are 60+ millions WOT players, is that population not large enough to create a control scheme just for them?

 

3. 
View Postzen1360, on 20 November 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:
I think the OP has a different view of the game than 90% of us, and thst's fine. His arguments about the market and player retention are ridiculous and not based on any kind of sense, much less "common sense". He simply feels that way personally and calls it common sense to bolster his point. Again, understandable..but incorrect.

 

Your so call 90% is 90% of the people who read and post on this forum. Lets pretend for a moment that 30% of all WOWP players visit this forum regularly, 90% of 30% is 27%, which is hardly representative of the WOWP population. I know this is only an estimate but I think you know my point. My point is most players DONT visit this forum. if they dont like this game, they simply leave without giving the developers a chance to find out why they leave.

 

4.
View Postzen1360, on 20 November 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:
This game is not for everyone. Let me repeat that just so I know you actually got it. This    game    is    not    for      everyone.
Making the game easier just alienates the hard core players that actually spend the money on the game. In fact, during Beta testing it was shown that the more the devs dumed-down the game, the less it got played.

 

* This game was less known at beta testing, your player type distribution is different compare to release.
* I am not saying make the game easier, I am saying make the control more natural to WOT.players.
* I am not alienating "hardcore" players, I am suggesting an optional control scheme targeted specifically for WOT players, you don't have to use it if you dont like it. Also the "hardcore" gamers constitute the smallest proportion of the overall US gaming population. You will be much better off in the marketing point-of-view to focus on converting the "softcore" players.

 

5.
View Postatheist4thecause, on 20 November 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:
"Slackers"...in a game. Aren't these things supposed to be fun and not work? lol...Anyways, I think this comes down to semantics. To me, this is more of the OP saying that the tutorial help is not good enough to teach him what he needs to know to get good at the game even if he is willing to put in the extra work. In a game you should never have to go outside of the game to get information. To learn to play this game that's not the case. You have to go outside the game if you want to learn advanced tactics. I haven't even seen the game provide basic information in regards to things like how many points you get for killing ground targets. So to an extent I agree with the OP, but sure it could be worded better.

 

Thanks for filling in this point that I missed, better documentation would certainly help new players.

 

6. What is wrong with creating an optional control scheme? It wont affect you if you dont select it, why are you all arguing about things which doesn't affect you? All it will change is there will be more WOT players which is good for Wargaming.



lostwingman #44 Posted 21 November 2013 - 06:23 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 15 battles
  • 701
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostActionFigure, on 20 November 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

View Postlostwingman, on 20 November 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

Your analogy is fallacious. You have to be good at  math or at least successful to see any benefits. All you have to do in WoWP or WoT is show up. It's how those people exist.

 

Exactly, the direct translation of "You have to be good at  math or at least successful to see any benefits" to WOWP is "You have to be at least successful in WOWP to see that it is fun to play".


No it isn't, that's fallacious again. Obviously people play tanks and for thousands of battles while being wildly UNSUCCESSFUL. That was the point. Failure in these games is not a deterent in and of itself for many of these people. For many people the benefit is just derping around in their vehicle messing around and they really don't care about winning, hence why the phrase "play4fun" is used to dismiss the general pub match players.

Edited by lostwingman, 21 November 2013 - 06:25 AM.

Ground Attack, the new Arty




QuickSilver_1 #45 Posted 21 November 2013 - 06:33 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 298
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013
this game is fun. I love it I am taking my time to learn each level as i go there are better players in all levels but so what have fun.  i was losing alot. I got better 63-64 % and getting better.

ActionFigure #46 Posted 21 November 2013 - 10:31 AM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postlostwingman, on 21 November 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:

No it isn't, that's fallacious again. Obviously people play tanks and for thousands of battles while being wildly UNSUCCESSFUL. That was the point. Failure in these games is not a deterent in and of itself for many of these people. For many people the benefit is just derping around in their vehicle messing around and they really don't care about winning, hence why the phrase "play4fun" is used to dismiss the general pub match players.

 

View PostWhiteTiger_5, on 21 November 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

this game is fun. I love it I am taking my time to learn each level as i go there are better players in all levels but so what have fun.  i was losing alot. I got better 63-64 % and getting better.

 

I think I can reply to the above posts at the same time. You can mess around all you want without caring about losing. You can take all your time and learn each level. However how long do you think this will last? What if you don't improve after 200+ battles what about 300+ battles, if you dont improve NOTHING EVER CHANGES. It will be like reading the same book over and over again, are you sure you can read the same book over and over again exspecially if it is only "4FUN"? Both comments from the above players are making the assumption that if you put in the time you will improve, somehow things will change and not be repetitive. What if for some people even after putting in the time to learn, they dont improve?

 

However like Math, if you change the teacher OR pose the math problem differently, those people who find math difficult can also understand. Its the same here, you change the controls (posing the activity of flying a plane differently) then others who are inexperience at flying planes e.g. some WOT players can also fly.

 

 



SkyWolf__WM #47 Posted 21 November 2013 - 10:35 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 10582 battles
  • 4,778
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012

View PostHeh, on 20 November 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

View PostSkyWolf__WM, on 20 November 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

Just a nit-pick... Y axis is the vertical.


Nope. Y-axis is the axis that indicates the transaction from 1D to 2D.

 

 

 

Huh? 

In 3D modeling Facing an aircraft:

 

X= Left and Right

Z= Back and Forth

Y= Up and Down

 

I'll have to go research it ah reckon.

 

 


***************Fail to Suck****************

I shall use my aircraft and my skill to slightly inconvenience mine enemies.


losttwo #48 Posted 21 November 2013 - 11:26 AM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,990
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

1) Wargaming is only intersted in making a flight game for ANYONE interested in flight games. by making a hybrid SIM/ ARCADE style game. They do not want to attract people not interested in flight games. Just becuase you do not play flight sim genre does not mean it is dead.

2)In world of tanks I use a mouse and keyboard which is the same in world of warplanes and will be the same in world of warships. SO they have met your request and requirement. I can also go into settings and use a joystick if I choose.

3) not everyone that plays a game reads the forums is of course true, I have played WOT for a long time and have looked at the forums perhaps 10 times in the past 3 years. Just not interested in it as much as I am WOWP.

4) this can be summed up with above comments. the controls are natural just like when you switch games in a comsole game and need ot learn new controls schemes such as the difference between Bioshock versus Star Wars Jedi series. Again I play WOT and had no problem switching between game due to it is all the same and is natural I do nto understand what your problem is here with out spacifics. sniper mode works the same way, left and right works the same way, There is no difference and it is all natural.

5) I am sure this game and in game information shall grow with the addition of wiki and so on even in world of tanks there is not much of how to get better at playing. They simple show you how to use the contold and control your tank just like in WOWP. It is peoples choice to go outside, if they dont choose to look things up then so be it. The game is so simple a cave man can do it.

6) Again they have an optional control scheme if one looks in the settings. And again how are the controls any different than WOT.

 



PressureLine #49 Posted 21 November 2013 - 11:41 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 840
  • [FTE] FTE
  • Member since:
    07-31-2012

View Postlosttwo, on 22 November 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

3) not everyone that plays a game reads the forums is of course true, I have played WOT for a long time and have looked at the forums perhaps 10 times in the past 3 years. Just not interested in it as much as I am WOWP.

 

That and the WoT forums are an absolute cesspit.

 

Regarding control schemes, 'Standard' mouse controls used to actually be called "WOT Mouse" (and still is in the game files) I dont think a more direct correlation could possibly be made.

 

The other night I'd just loaded into a match when my old man called. Figuring it would be rude to say "I gotta go, game is starting" I just played with one hand, while talking on the phone... 3 kills... Without touching the keyboard once. If 'point your mouse in the direction you want to fly, when the crosshairs pass over the target: Fire!' is too hard for you, there isn't much that can be done I'm afraid.

 

ps: many of us here are/were tankers (myself included) and had little trouble adapting. My 2 biggest problems are: slow computer, makes anything much above tier 4/5/6 matches a slideshow. Inner ear imbalance, in some flight games I get extremely dizzy (although not so much in WoWp, only when the camera does its silly backflip)



lostwingman #50 Posted 21 November 2013 - 03:23 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 15 battles
  • 701
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostActionFigure, on 21 November 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

View Postlostwingman, on 21 November 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:

No it isn't, that's fallacious again. Obviously people play tanks and for thousands of battles while being wildly UNSUCCESSFUL. That was the point. Failure in these games is not a deterent in and of itself for many of these people. For many people the benefit is just derping around in their vehicle messing around and they really don't care about winning, hence why the phrase "play4fun" is used to dismiss the general pub match players.

 

View PostWhiteTiger_5, on 21 November 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

this game is fun. I love it I am taking my time to learn each level as i go there are better players in all levels but so what have fun.  i was losing alot. I got better 63-64 % and getting better.

 

I think I can reply to the above posts at the same time. You can mess around all you want without caring about losing. You can take all your time and learn each level. However how long do you think this will last? What if you don't improve after 200+ battles what about 300+ battles, if you dont improve NOTHING EVER CHANGES. It will be like reading the same book over and over again, are you sure you can read the same book over and over again exspecially if it is only "4FUN"? Both comments from the above players are making the assumption that if you put in the time you will improve, somehow things will change and not be repetitive. What if for some people even after putting in the time to learn, they dont improve?

 

However like Math, if you change the teacher OR pose the math problem differently, those people who find math difficult can also understand. Its the same here, you change the controls (posing the activity of flying a plane differently) then others who are inexperience at flying planes e.g. some WOT players can also fly.

 

 

Dude...there are hundreds and thousands of examples in WoT of players with tens of thousands of games and god awful winrates who still fire HE out of medium tank guns and just try to ram people. You are literally plugging your ears and going "it's not true! it just can't be true! people just can't do things differently from me! I mean...I'm me!". How many times do I have to repeat myself that many people probably don't even look at their stats let alone their winrate or even care? Get XVM, load up a tier +8, and count how many players with god awful winrates are in every battle with many thousands of battles. They don't care because they don't get their enjoyment from winning, they get it from just derping around with a tank and firing a cannon. If they don't get their primary enjoyment from winning, then they also aren't driven to improve. I literally have no idea why you keep posting from ignorance so hard. Stop it.

Ground Attack, the new Arty




losttwo #51 Posted 21 November 2013 - 04:08 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,990
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012
can you describe what an easier control scheme could be? What solution could WOWP develope to make the game easier than it is now ?

Heh #52 Posted 21 November 2013 - 07:15 PM

    Sky Whale Historian

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 11,960
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostActionFigure, on 21 November 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

I think I can reply to the above posts at the same time. You can mess around all you want without caring about losing. You can take all your time and learn each level. However how long do you think this will last? What if you don't improve after 200+ battles what about 300+ battles, if you dont improve NOTHING EVER CHANGES. It will be like reading the same book over and over again, are you sure you can read the same book over and over again exspecially if it is only "4FUN"? Both comments from the above players are making the assumption that if you put in the time you will improve, somehow things will change and not be repetitive. What if for some people even after putting in the time to learn, they dont improve?

 

However like Math, if you change the teacher OR pose the math problem differently, those people who find math difficult can also understand. Its the same here, you change the controls (posing the activity of flying a plane differently) then others who are inexperience at flying planes e.g. some WOT players can also fly.


If you don't learn after that many battles, then you will have to do more to learn. Not everyone learns at the same speed ya know, but we aren't slowing the majority that can actually learn at a higher speed.

 

As for your math argument, that's different. People struggle with specific parts of math, such as advanced calculus for a good amount of adults, distributivity for some 7th graders, division and double digit multiplication for some kids in primary school, not the entire damn concept of math. In here, we're talking about a gaming genre. For example, I never played rhythm games, suck at them, and never bother trying even the most basic steps. That does not mean the company should make the rhythm game easier, it means I have to either stop playing rhythm games or try getting better at them. It's the exact same thing with WoWP.


Heh - aeromarine biologist

View Posthahiha, on , said:


OMG Heh you have had so many posts O_O

lostwingman #53 Posted 21 November 2013 - 08:37 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 15 battles
  • 701
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postlosttwo, on 21 November 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

can you describe what an easier control scheme could be? What solution could WOWP develope to make the game easier than it is now ?


Full auto-pilot railshooter mode.

 

AKA, MUH BOMBAHS!!!!!


Ground Attack, the new Arty




ActionFigure #54 Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:31 AM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postlostwingman, on 21 November 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

View Postlosttwo, on 21 November 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

can you describe what an easier control scheme could be? What solution could WOWP develope to make the game easier than it is now ?


Full auto-pilot railshooter mode.

 

AKA, MUH BOMBAHS!!!!!

 

I did not expect to have to provide a solution when I started this topic, much like I dont expect to have to provide a patch when I report a bug. But now that you asked, a simple solution would be:

 

UNLOCK THE FRONT FACING GUNS (make it like a tank destroyer (TD)) - Most WOT players are not used to shoot in the direction of where they are moving. If you unlock the front facing MG and allow some gun movements then it will play like a TD (note that I am not asking for a full turret mode). At the moment in WOWP the default control scheme has two aiming reticles; one representing where you want to go and the other representing the direction you are actually moving. The front facing MG should lock on to the first reticle (the one representing where you want to go).



Worlds_Okayest_Dad #55 Posted 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 86 battles
  • 742
  • [SICK] SICK
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
^^^       :teethhappy: unlock the front facing MGs. Thats it, this guy has to be trolling

von_Krimm #56 Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:04 PM

    Feedback Airedale

  • Community Ace
  • 435 battles
  • 1,348
  • Member since:
    01-09-2012

View PostBad_Lag, on 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

^^^       :teethhappy: unlock the front facing MGs. Thats it, this guy has to be trolling

 

perhaps he is simply ignorant of how projectile weapons were employed.  Of course, to every tradition there is the exception....

300px-Vultee_XP-54_Swoose_Goose_11210.jpg

 

The nose section could pivot through the vertical, 3 degrees up and 6 degrees down for the .50cal mounts while the twin 37mm cannons remaind fixed along the center axis.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Krimakov, 22 November 2013 - 04:07 PM.

I like my <CENSORED> like I like my <CENSORED> ; aged <CENSORED> to <CENSORED> years and mixed-up with <CENSORED> .If you take fire from the spouse-AA about the former, launch flares and dump chaff: $$$visa$$$amex$$$vonKrimm2.png

ActionFigure #57 Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:23 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostKrimakov, on 22 November 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

View PostBad_Lag, on 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

^^^       :teethhappy: unlock the front facing MGs. Thats it, this guy has to be trolling

 

perhaps he is simply ignorant of how projectile weapons were employed.  Of course, to every tradition there is the exception....

300px-Vultee_XP-54_Swoose_Goose_11210.jpg

 

The nose section could pivot through the vertical, 3 degrees up and 6 degrees down for the .50cal mounts while the twin 37mm cannons remaind fixed along the center axis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This community is stuck in thinking that this game should be as close as possible to the real thing. If you try to make it as close as possible to the real thing then this will become a flight sim. History have proven that the flight sim genre is a failure and it is now dead.

 

You dont need to make the guns move in the game models you only have to make the bullets fly where your reticle is.

 

It a simple tweak and then the 60+ millions WOT players become potential customers for WOWP.



Heh #58 Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:30 PM

    Sky Whale Historian

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 11,960
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostActionFigure, on 22 November 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

I did not expect to have to provide a solution when I started this topic, much like I dont expect to have to provide a patch when I report a bug. But now that you asked, a simple solution would be:

 

UNLOCK THE FRONT FACING GUNS (make it like a tank destroyer (TD)) - Most WOT players are not used to shoot in the direction of where they are moving. If you unlock the front facing MG and allow some gun movements then it will play like a TD (note that I am not asking for a full turret mode). At the moment in WOWP the default control scheme has two aiming reticles; one representing where you want to go and the other representing the direction you are actually moving. The front facing MG should lock on to the first reticle (the one representing where you want to go).


That's it, you've gone beyond the credible line. Plane guns were FIXED. 100%. They did not move unless mounted onto a turret. The dispersion in guncam footage? That's the plane itself moving, not the guns. WG does bend reality to get their way, but they don't make it ridiculous aside from the skorca climb rate and the incredibly stupid gun dispersion.

 

Now, I don't want it to be a sim either, but I don't want it to be a pure rabid fantasy game either. Neither does WG, hence why we actually have energy retention mechanics unlike several arcade plane games.


Heh - aeromarine biologist

View Posthahiha, on , said:


OMG Heh you have had so many posts O_O

von_Krimm #59 Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:45 PM

    Feedback Airedale

  • Community Ace
  • 435 battles
  • 1,348
  • Member since:
    01-09-2012

View PostActionFigure, on 22 November 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

View PostKrimakov, on 22 November 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

View PostBad_Lag, on 22 November 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

^^^       :teethhappy: unlock the front facing MGs. Thats it, this guy has to be trolling

 

perhaps he is simply ignorant of how projectile weapons were employed.  Of course, to every tradition there is the exception....

300px-Vultee_XP-54_Swoose_Goose_11210.jpg

 

The nose section could pivot through the vertical, 3 degrees up and 6 degrees down for the .50cal mounts while the twin 37mm cannons remaind fixed along the center axis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This community is stuck in thinking that this game should be as close as possible to the real thing. If you try to make it as close as possible to the real thing then this will become a flight sim. History have proven that the flight sim genre is a failure and it is now dead.

 

You dont need to make the guns move in the game models you only have to make the bullets fly where your reticle is.

 

It a simple tweak and then the 60+ millions WOT players become potential customers for WOWP.


In your opinion.  My (and many others) opinion is that completly un-realistic ballistics is what would doom the game.  BTW, we went through a phase in OBT where the bullets tracked to the target; the overwhelming opinion of the player base was to get rid of the effect as it destoyed any semblence of skill and made it all about having the most guns on an aircraft.

Edited by Krimakov, 22 November 2013 - 04:47 PM.

I like my <CENSORED> like I like my <CENSORED> ; aged <CENSORED> to <CENSORED> years and mixed-up with <CENSORED> .If you take fire from the spouse-AA about the former, launch flares and dump chaff: $$$visa$$$amex$$$vonKrimm2.png

ActionFigure #60 Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:50 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostHeh, on 22 November 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

Now, I don't want it to be a sim either, but I don't want it to be a pure rabid fantasy game either. Neither does WG, hence why we actually have energy retention mechanics unlike several arcade plane games.

 

Who cares about what YOU want, IF and I am saying IF 60+ millions WOT player wants it then Wargaming should make it.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users