Jump to content


Lets be honest


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

Hochstepanzerjager #41 Posted 20 July 2016 - 10:46 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 581
  • [SBSDZ] SBSDZ
  • Member since:
    02-08-2013

View Postdityboycom, on 18 July 2016 - 11:11 AM, said:

lesbihonest, the game is pretty stout in its current state, if they got rid of bots, adjusted the match maker to 3v3 minimum but 60 second wait times to build larger games instead of launching whenever 3v3 was ready, I'd come back. I'm sure others would as well.

 

For that 1 they saved by adding bigger matches with make believe people, they lost 2 who couldn't be bothered with the meaningless fodder they added on the field to pad stats.

 

TBF, Dity, even that wouldn't get me to come back at this point.  What I would have to see to even consider my coming back would be a serious overt commitment from WG to FIXING the game and reversing their repeated screwups.

 

First off, that means kicking Persha to the curb. Persha has done little other than screw up the game for 2 years. Time to move on and let fresh eyes have a shot at it. Maybe the next bunch can actually fix the damn problems that Persha has caused with their habit of sweeping known issues under the rug and "fixing" things that weren't broken to start with.

 

Second, opening up their damn wallets and ADVERTISE like we've been telling them to do for 2 years now.

 

third, Add in end game content. It's been 2 years, you've had enough time by now to do this. Stop being lazy.

 

And lastly, FFS, put in some new damn content beyond end game. the current game does not have enough play modes. It never did. We told you this back in Beta, but much like everything else, WG, you ignored us. Now you're reaping what you sowed. Personally, I'd like to see a complete ground up re-design and re-launch, but that may be wishful thinking on my part, but it does make the most sense in the long run.

 

View PostPorkins_Jr, on 18 July 2016 - 04:56 PM, said:

 

Running out of time? Don't think so. They've all but guaranteed another 6 months at least, and from what others have said they might linger this game on indefinitely, because they don't want the bad press of a shutdown. If they wanted an opportunity to shut it down quietly that could have taken place long ago.

 

They don't want the bad press of a shutdown? They can't get any worse press than what they already have from creating this hot mess of a game and then screwing it up patch after patch for 2 years.

 

Not that their reputation was that good from Tanks to start with, but damn....Seriously? This game is a new level of incompetence I didn't believe even WG was capable of.


Edited by Hochstepanzerjager, 20 July 2016 - 10:48 AM.



"Fly with your head, not with your muscles" - Maj. Erich Hartmann


dityboycom #42 Posted 20 July 2016 - 01:36 PM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 1 battle
  • 9,287
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

View PostHochstepanzerjager, on 20 July 2016 - 06:46 AM, said:

 

...

 

I agree, Tanks is at least a normal level of incompetence that most video game companies show, because their ideas don't mesh well with what the community expects. This game is just blatant disregard for the community, and the community has responded by no longer pressing battle.

Porkins_Jr #43 Posted 20 July 2016 - 02:55 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 5,280
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    12-10-2013

View Postdityboycom, on 20 July 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

 

I agree, Tanks is at least a normal level of incompetence that most video game companies show, because their ideas don't mesh well with what the community expects. This game is just blatant disregard for the community, and the community has responded by no longer pressing battle.

 

No one is going to take you seriously until you get to 10000 battles. :D

dityboycom #44 Posted 20 July 2016 - 03:04 PM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 1 battle
  • 9,287
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

View PostPorkins_Jr, on 20 July 2016 - 10:55 AM, said:

 

No one is going to take you seriously until you get to 10000 battles. :D

 

Chemnut and I ransacked the servers the other night, no need for 10,000 battles, when after 20,000 + some of the guys still don't know the basics.

Porkins_Jr #45 Posted 20 July 2016 - 04:55 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 5,280
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    12-10-2013

View Postdityboycom, on 20 July 2016 - 11:04 AM, said:

 

Chemnut and I ransacked the servers the other night, no need for 10,000 battles, when after 20,000 + some of the guys still don't know the basics.

 

You should flight with me, you'd get to 10,000 easy teaching me how to fly fighters, ask Hammy.

Noreaga #46 Posted 20 July 2016 - 05:03 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 8 battles
  • 3,073
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    03-05-2012

View PostHochstepanzerjager, on 20 July 2016 - 05:46 AM, said:

 

TBF, Dity, even that wouldn't get me to come back at this point.  What I would have to see to even consider my coming back would be a serious overt commitment from WG to FIXING the game and reversing their repeated screwups.

 

First off, that means kicking Persha to the curb. Persha has done little other than screw up the game for 2 years. Time to move on and let fresh eyes have a shot at it. Maybe the next bunch can actually fix the damn problems that Persha has caused with their habit of sweeping known issues under the rug and "fixing" things that weren't broken to start with.

 

Second, opening up their damn wallets and ADVERTISE like we've been telling them to do for 2 years now.

 

third, Add in end game content. It's been 2 years, you've had enough time by now to do this. Stop being lazy.

 

And lastly, FFS, put in some new damn content beyond end game. the current game does not have enough play modes. It never did. We told you this back in Beta, but much like everything else, WG, you ignored us. Now you're reaping what you sowed. Personally, I'd like to see a complete ground up re-design and re-launch, but that may be wishful thinking on my part, but it does make the most sense in the long run.

 

 

They don't want the bad press of a shutdown? They can't get any worse press than what they already have from creating this hot mess of a game and then screwing it up patch after patch for 2 years.

 

Not that their reputation was that good from Tanks to start with, but damn....Seriously? This game is a new level of incompetence I didn't believe even WG was capable of.

they listened to us about the game modes, just implemented it in ships instead of here... the story of what not to do in game development.


Nimis obnoxii curare


Hochstepanzerjager #47 Posted 21 July 2016 - 04:43 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 581
  • [SBSDZ] SBSDZ
  • Member since:
    02-08-2013

View PostNoreaga, on 20 July 2016 - 12:03 PM, said:

they listened to us about the game modes, just implemented it in ships instead of here... the story of what not to do in game development.

 

That's the most egregious part about it all.  While that's great and is helping make Ships a good game, their lack of action implementing those things HERE, in the game that needs them to do well also, is almost criminal in it's neglect and incompetence.



"Fly with your head, not with your muscles" - Maj. Erich Hartmann


MelBrooks #48 Posted 21 July 2016 - 04:57 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 12 battles
  • 1,445
  • Member since:
    01-18-2014
Honestly,  Porkins they do not know what to do. They know they screwed the pooch on this massively and are caught in their own trap. They will minimally invest in this because of the terrible ROI so far. Even if the game is profitable for the small resources they have dedicated to it, I'm sure there is still a rather large red number on their initial development investment given our player base for the last couple years. So, I believe we are and will remain stuck in no man's land. Minimal future investment because the return is not there and not willing to shut the title down because of the fear of bad publicity. Situation I would never be caught in, nor will I support it either.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users