Jump to content


Two Mode Game Suggestion....(Again)


  • Please log in to reply
227 replies to this topic

CorvusCorvax #181 Posted 11 July 2018 - 04:04 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1230 battles
  • 1,072
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postsoshootmenow, on 11 July 2018 - 03:51 AM, said:

[whining deleted]

GROW THE EFF UP OR GTFO.

Follow your own advice, hypocrite.


Edited by CorvusCorvax, 11 July 2018 - 04:06 AM.


Bobby_Tables #182 Posted 11 July 2018 - 05:42 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 2766 battles
  • 980
  • [-DOW-] -DOW-
  • Member since:
    06-16-2014

 

 


Edited by Bobby_Tables, 11 July 2018 - 05:43 AM.


trikke #183 Posted 11 July 2018 - 01:14 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1858 battles
  • 1,327
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postsoshootmenow, on 10 July 2018 - 11:51 PM, said:

Corvus.....I was actually being most specifically and respectfully very sincere.

   I was surprised to see you here because I had asked you to no longer post on this thread due to the relentless confrontational and derogatory nature of your comments against any and every single person and idea that the contributors posted here.

I can assure you, with the most reasonable certainty, that simply....everyone....everywhere....knows precisely what your position and opinion is on this matter.

You have made that most abundantly......clear.

As I have stated before you have gone far beyond the (very acceptable) role of 'devils advocate' here.

Your post regarding the tests you ran was helpful and actually well received by me and I hope others. I actually thought you came back and were willing to try a new cooperative and helpful tac on this matter.

I was actually impressed and thought I had, with sincere intent, very politely and respectfully, replied back.

Then you misinterpreted or simply deliberately decided to misinterpret my single few word phrase that you quoted and began....yet again....with your-nose-in-the-air-chip-on-your-shoulder-looking-for-an-argument-holier-than-thou-and-all-the-rest attitude and began attacking me and others with unfounded and baseless accusations that are far more accurately applied to yourself.

  If you wish to assist us, you and your critique's (as well as required and substantive proposed solutions) are welcome here (No, you may not simply criticize everyone's ideas without putting forth one's of your own that work towards the proposals in this thread).

But be nice and be willing to help with the spirit and helpful intent of the ideas and ideals here. 

   If you are unwilling and/or unable to do those things on a PERMANTLY CONSISTENT basis.....then...since you did not get the message before, let me rephrase in terms you will understand because I am getting tired of going out of my way to be understanding and polite to someone who abusively takes advantage of that and thinks it is 'OK'.

It is not.

SHUT YOUR GO**AMN PRETTY-BOY-SNOT-NOSED-B*TCH-*SS MOUTH UP AND GO SOME F***ING PLACE ELSE.

START YOUR OWN EFFING THREAD OF UNHELPFUL DREAD FAILURE AND DOOM INSULTING & DEMEANING OF ANY PERSON AND ANY IDEA THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN YOURS. NOT THAT YOU HAVE PUT FORTH MUCH AT ALL IN THAT REGARD. ONLY WHAT CANNOT BE DONE.

SUPERSTAR.

MAKE IT AS POPULAR AS YOU ARE ABLE.

WHATEVER.

Is THAT simple enough for you to understand you F***-ING SH&TL&RD!!!???

GROW THE EFF UP OR GTFO.

 

seems excessive... at the very least

 

we're better than this


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore

Noreaga #184 Posted 11 July 2018 - 01:34 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 8 battles
  • 2,935
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    03-05-2012

just to not derail:

 

there should be 2 game modes period, doesn't matter what you or i like. It makes zero business sense to abandon the players you already have, to come back to status quo population size (maybe little bigger or smaller) when you could have had a whole new revenue stream to compliment your already loyal base (no idea why there is loyalty but there is).

 

as to the derails wth happened to this thread?!!? Now I'm going to wait for Freud to come in and attempt to obfuscate our conversations with big words used in the wrong places.  

 

 


Nimis obnoxii curare


jack_wdw #185 Posted 11 July 2018 - 01:59 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 534 battles
  • 301
  • Member since:
    09-28-2012

View PostNoreaga, on 11 July 2018 - 01:34 PM, said:

just to not derail:

 

there should be 2 game modes period, doesn't matter what you or i like. It makes zero business sense to abandon the players you already have, to come back to status quo population size (maybe little bigger or smaller) when you could have had a whole new revenue stream to compliment your already loyal base (no idea why there is loyalty but there is).

 

as to the derails wth happened to this thread?!!? Now I'm going to wait for Freud to come in and attempt to obfuscate our conversations with big words used in the wrong places.  

 

 

Indeed I don't know where this rant from SSMN comes from.
Corvus apologizes in the previous post, be a true gentleman, accept apologies and get it over with...

And indeed two gamemodes should have been offered.
I think it's marketing 101, grow on your current customerbase don't replace it, don't antagonize you faithfull customerbase. Offer your customerbase something more, don't replace the things they like.

Anyway i prefer a 1.9 mode with no ties to wg/persha, they keep making the same mistakes for 5 years. the game started with a big premise and pre 1.5 numbers show there is a potential for this game.
Most players decided to let it go, because WG/Persha keeps screwing up the game more than they are doing good.
So either the chinese will have to host a second server somewhere in the world, or we need to set up a crowdfund to buy ourselves the rights for 1.9.
 



CorvusCorvax #186 Posted 11 July 2018 - 03:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1230 battles
  • 1,072
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postjack_wdw, on 11 July 2018 - 01:59 PM, said:

Indeed I don't know where this rant from SSMN comes from.
Corvus apologizes in the previous post, be a true gentleman, accept apologies and get it over with...

And indeed two gamemodes should have been offered.
I think it's marketing 101, grow on your current customerbase don't replace it, don't antagonize you faithfull customerbase. Offer your customerbase something more, don't replace the things they like.

Anyway i prefer a 1.9 mode with no ties to wg/persha, they keep making the same mistakes for 5 years. the game started with a big premise and pre 1.5 numbers show there is a potential for this game.
Most players decided to let it go, because WG/Persha keeps screwing up the game more than they are doing good.
So either the chinese will have to host a second server somewhere in the world, or we need to set up a crowdfund to buy ourselves the rights for 1.9.
 

It would be nice to have a game with two modes, but since 1.5, it has been pretty obvious that WG does not really consider the desires of the player base.  Like I said above, I do not have confidence that Wargaming would tolerate a competing product in their 2.x marketplace, especially one of their own making.

 

A lifetime ago, I was part of a development team that brought GPS mapping hardware and software from drawing board to market.  We had to constantly fight feature creep, because as soon as the marketing folks dreamt up another feature that they couldn't live without, it would take the code guys six weeks to incorporate it.  Then we'd have to field test it, then try and break it with stupid inputs and requests for stupid outputs.  Every product's bottleneck was the coding on the control or processing software.  The hardware guys would be done in a week, and the software guys would still be getting coffee.

 

That experience showed me that coding is not just something that you wave a magic wand and finished product pops out.  Not only that, but customer input, while valuable for product development, is not cost effective to implement immediately, even when the request is simple and is obviously an addition that makes sense.  Wacky and weird suggestions are 10x more likely.  :)

 

The seeming hostility of WG to player-based suggestions on functionality and gameplay, and especially their pointed comments about not returning to a 1.x style, even as an optional mode, are what gives me pause about the feasibility of even purchasing the code from WG.  THen there is the spectre of trying to run a competing product in their already-established marketplace - unless they are getting a giant chunk of that revenue, I can't see anyone in their right business mind wanting that to go forward.

 

In the process of a product going from the idea in someone's mind to a functional item for sale in the marketplace, there are a series of benchmarks and obstacles that must be attained and overcome.  identifying the obstacles ahead of time and evaluating them against the potential for profit and loss can make or break a project.  If you come up on an unforeseen roadblock, it can kill your projected release date, throwing off your marketing and sales, and potentially creating a shift of your customer base to other, competing products.  Or, the roadblock could be insurmountable - killing the entire idea.  Identifying potential obstacles in product development is not 'devil's advocacy', but a way to challenge folks into putting resources in the right places at the right times.  Like if you crowdfund, and raise the entire amount to buy the code, that's extra awesome, right up until you read the fine print in the contract that states you can't operate the software in Europe or the Americas.  Cool, you now own software you can't use.

 

I really would rather not rain on someone's parade, or kill the fantasy of "let's all just go back to the way it was."  But reality is harsh, sometimes.  I think Wargaming would generate a lot of good will by adding a Deathmatch mode using the current flight models and UI, and call it "King of the HIll" mode.  No respawns, no GAA or bombers, just you, your airplane, and your wits against whatever comes.  Make it super-simple and maybe folks would not only be attracted to it, but also to the Conquest mode.  And Attrition.  Heck, I still want to see the "Bomber Flight" mode where you defend or attack the bombers headed for your base.  When your base (or the other guy's base) is destroyed, the survivors win.  

 

Now, calculate the odds that WG would be interested in these suggestions.  ;)



soshootmenow #187 Posted 12 July 2018 - 01:29 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 29 battles
  • 101
  • [335TH] 335TH
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

OK....After two-plus days of scouring additional filings on the licensing agreement with WG & Kongzhong there is some more useful information.

Here is one of the main reference links. There is also a link on how to convert the language for the Kongzhong WOT version which may or may not help with their WoWP site.


 

https://www.sec.gov/...v435329_20f.htm

http://forum.worldof...other-language/


 

     The first link is to a filing from 2016. A good deal of financial information, company structure, and expectations but it also has descriptions of various business and legal items that may or may not impact their business.

     The largest section of their revenues is derived from internet games of which World of Tanks constitutes the vast bulk of that with approximately 44 million players followed by a distant second but not insignificant World of Warships. World of Warplanes is mentioned but I have yet to find a reference to their registered users for that game.

They changed their pricing model a couple of years ago to what appears to be something similar to what WG uses in that it might be free to play but you buy in-game merchandise (slots, equipment, premium time and vehicles, ammo, etc....).

    I checked several sources but they all seem to point to the same thing as far as the license agreement goes.

My take on all of what I found is the following....


 

...WG retains proprietary rights to the game and software.

...Kongzhong is licensed to use (but has not purchased nor do they own) the game and to market it generally as they see fit within their current agreed upon territory for a set fee to be paid.

    (so they are in a way somewhat beholding to WG and I doubt they are going to piss them off on a whim)

...The agreement has standing and has not only been if effect for roughly eight years but in fact has expanded on more than one occasion.

...**Most importantly (so far) is that Kongzhong does have the right to sub-license the game(s)**. But I do not know if either the primary agreement or an issued sub-license is totally confined within their territory or if expansion under certain circumstances would be permitted.

  

   This could present another possible opportunity if WG could be persuaded to bestow their 'blessings' upon such an endeavor. After all.....even by WG's own statements and actions.....we are talking about putting in to action what they consider to be a 'dead' version of the game. And this version could provide an additional revenue stream when there is currently only the PRC, Hong Kong, and Macau area in effect now.

 Their own statements would also apply regarding anything they might consider to be 'competition' to their current 2.0 version of the game.

The very same business model I am suggesting here (as a possible viable alternative to a WG provided two-mode game) actually already exists. And it is up, running, and assumingly not affecting WG's model of running 2.0 as the player base would seem to have settled into the current two camps (pro 1.9 and pro/tolerating 2.0) and is unlikely to drastically change from the existing status quo in any meaningful way. After nine months I think that tree has already been shaken out and things are as they are.

    More to follow later.


 


 


 


 



mnbv_fockewulfe #188 Posted 12 July 2018 - 02:21 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 247 battles
  • 2,759
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

look at the results of this poll.

http://forum.worldof...рните-назад-19/


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe.png


 


soshootmenow #189 Posted 13 July 2018 - 01:49 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 29 battles
  • 101
  • [335TH] 335TH
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

ummmm.........wow!!

I did not even have to translate the page(s) to get that straight right off.

GEEZUS!......and I thought we were partisan in the NA and EU.

Left to their own devices this might be another Stalin-type purge.

I thought it was overwhelming in the NA with the very high 70% - 80% range.....but NINETYTHREE PERCENT!!!!???

I am surprised they have not broken out the AK's in a real and open revolt!!!!



mnbv_fockewulfe #190 Posted 13 July 2018 - 02:12 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 247 battles
  • 2,759
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View Postsoshootmenow, on 13 July 2018 - 01:49 AM, said:

ummmm.........wow!!

I did not even have to translate the page(s) to get that straight right off.

GEEZUS!......and I thought we were partisan in the NA and EU.

Left to their own devices this might be another Stalin-type purge.

I thought it was overwhelming in the NA with the very high 70% - 80% range.....but NINETYTHREE PERCENT!!!!???

I am surprised they have not broken out the AK's in a real and open revolt!!!!

 

Forum is vocal minority comrade.:bajan:

Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe.png


 


CorvusCorvax #191 Posted 13 July 2018 - 03:53 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1230 battles
  • 1,072
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 13 July 2018 - 02:12 AM, said:

 

Forum is vocal minority comrade.:bajan:

 

^^^Exactly.

 

Just like here, you get 20 or so very regular posters, about 40 more who aren't as regular, and the odd drive-by posting.  The majority of players probably have never posted in the forum.  Heck, I played for years and never set foot in the forums.

 

I didn't look at the raw numbers, but it seemed like a relatively small fraction of the overall player total has voted in these polls.



mnbv_fockewulfe #192 Posted 13 July 2018 - 09:07 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 247 battles
  • 2,759
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View PostCorvusCorvax, on 13 July 2018 - 03:53 PM, said:

 

^^^Exactly.

 

Just like here, you get 20 or so very regular posters, about 40 more who aren't as regular, and the odd drive-by posting.  The majority of players probably have never posted in the forum.  Heck, I played for years and never set foot in the forums.

 

I didn't look at the raw numbers, but it seemed like a relatively small fraction of the overall player total has voted in these polls.

 

However, considering there are 20 regular posters, there are many more irregular posters, and many many more readers (people who read but don't post at all).

Consider Mel got more upvotes on his OP in his "Summery" thread then there are people who replied.

We aren't that minority, I make joke.


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe.png


 


soshootmenow #193 Posted 14 July 2018 - 03:49 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 29 battles
  • 101
  • [335TH] 335TH
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

Apologies All for the incomplete information that should have been referenced.

The poll shows 574 for the 1.9x version and 63 for the 2.0 version for a total sample size on the RU server of 637.

Not by any means a deciding bit of representative information but not insignificant either considering it was executed on the RU forum only.


 

I also saw this spectacular little piece of information from my Clan boss, Maj Radmo that was posted to our Clan pages.


 

Hi all .
i talked to the planners for world of war planes they are going to add another mode to the game with the same mechanics as are old 1.9 game ..we will see what happends with this ! they did not give me a date ,, take care all and good hunting !!!.......................... MAJ_Radmo



soshootmenow #194 Posted 14 July 2018 - 03:53 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 29 battles
  • 101
  • [335TH] 335TH
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

To say the above is 'wonderful' information that might actually give me....some......hope would be the understatement of the year.

 

 

Thankyou Radmo for your efforts in advancing this cause and the information you have provided.



mnbv_fockewulfe #195 Posted 14 July 2018 - 03:55 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 247 battles
  • 2,759
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View Postsoshootmenow, on 14 July 2018 - 03:49 AM, said:

Apologies All for the incomplete information that should have been referenced.

The poll shows 574 for the 1.9x version and 63 for the 2.0 version for a total sample size on the RU server of 637.

Not by any means a deciding bit of representative information but not insignificant either considering it was executed on the RU forum only.


 

I also saw this spectacular little piece of information from my Clan boss, Maj Radmo that was posted to our Clan pages.


 

Hi all .
i talked to the planners for world of war planes they are going to add another mode to the game with the same mechanics as are old 1.9 game ..we will see what happends with this ! they did not give me a date ,, take care all and good hunting !!!.......................... MAJ_Radmo

 

No offense, but the grammar is throwing me for a loop, did he say he proposed for a 1.9 gamemode, or did the devs actually agree to 1.9? Can I see the response in writing? (fingers crossed)


Edited by mnbv_fockewulfe, 14 July 2018 - 03:55 AM.

Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 

mnbv_fockewulfe.png


 


jack_wdw #196 Posted 14 July 2018 - 07:59 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 534 battles
  • 301
  • Member since:
    09-28-2012
Sounds like the Soon™ we've heard already too many times.

soshootmenow #197 Posted 14 July 2018 - 01:52 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 29 battles
  • 101
  • [335TH] 335TH
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

I will try to get some more detailed info on this from Radmo if he is on later tonight. See who he talked to and what else was said. For all I know right now they might have just said that to shut him up or something. Let's see how the details flesh out on that.

jack_wdw is exceedingly correct in his statement.



CorvusCorvax #198 Posted 14 July 2018 - 06:30 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1230 battles
  • 1,072
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postjack_wdw, on 14 July 2018 - 07:59 AM, said:

Sounds like the Soon™ we've heard already too many times.

 

Considering ALL the statements that have come before, and the development decisions from 1.5 on, I have some serious doubts that 1.x gameplay is coming SOON.  Or ever.

Reitousair #199 Posted 14 July 2018 - 07:43 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 5608 battles
  • 329
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

Hmm, I've been lurking in this thread to have a reason to make popcorn and to see where a suggestion like this would go after ten pages of "discussion" which probably only around 7-8 pages are actually discussion.

 

I think it would be quite interesting to have a mode reminiscent of old times added back in, though it would be lovely if it was a permanent mode, not like (War of) Attrition where it's loved by people but is only run during events.

 

The funny part about Chinese dealings is a brief summary of it, is that if you want to sell your game in China you have to partner with a Chinese company for it, which usually means they can effectively take your intellectual property and run with it in China. War Thunder for example has a separate Chinese client which has its own vehicles and I think they're working on a Chinese tech tree? However playing on the Chinese server to try and relive 1.9 probably isn't the best thing, since Chinese servers are usually not well-maintained and the lag issues as Corvus found out can be quite brutal. Wonder if things will work better if you can connect to a VPN to play on the Chinese server as to hide your tracks and maybe try and lower your ping.


I do fly Chinese aircraft a fair amount so... *ahem*

CHINA NUMBAH WAN

 

I even made a custom skin for my IL-10M!

 


soshootmenow #200 Posted 14 July 2018 - 08:32 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 29 battles
  • 101
  • [335TH] 335TH
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

Thankyou Reitousair

I do (generally) understand the way the Chinese business system works and you are correct about the lag. My thoughts were more along the lines of possibly having the Chinese company that already has a license agreement possibly expand the territories they serve. Namely in the RU and EU initially which I believe would lower the lag issues to a playable level even for someone like me in the NA Region.

The main goal of this thread is to find a viable way to get the mode back that we all want to play. Ideally that would be to have WG bring it back as an additional mode as described in my proposal on page one of this thread.

But I am also exploring other options should my original idea not pan out. Actually having possible alternatives that can be proposed could grant us a little more room for both motivation and negotiations. It also would keep WG from being the sole 'holder of the keys' so to speak.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users