Jump to content


Why??!!


  • Please log in to reply
129 replies to this topic

SpiritFoxMY #101 Posted 19 June 2018 - 06:52 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5570 battles
  • 3,023
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

I haven't played Rise of Flight and IL-2 in years but most of my favorite YouTubers fly them.

 

There's also 303 Squadron that's in early access that has an airplane customization segment that's kinda like a flashier version of what WoWp has right now. Dunno if its any good though.


Edited by SpiritFoxMY, 19 June 2018 - 06:54 AM.

***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


vcharng #102 Posted 19 June 2018 - 07:48 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 4582 battles
  • 1,084
  • Member since:
    10-25-2017

View PostSpiritFoxMY, on 19 June 2018 - 06:52 AM, said:

I haven't played Rise of Flight and IL-2 in years but most of my favorite YouTubers fly them.

 

There's also 303 Squadron that's in early access that has an airplane customization segment that's kinda like a flashier version of what WoWp has right now. Dunno if its any good though.

 

I bought 303, it's a very thoughtful game, but not even close to the entertainment of WOWP.

Let's just start with the fact that it has only Hurricane to fly....



SpiritFoxMY #103 Posted 19 June 2018 - 08:09 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5570 battles
  • 3,023
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

View Postvcharng, on 19 June 2018 - 03:48 PM, said:

 

I bought 303, it's a very thoughtful game, but not even close to the entertainment of WOWP.

Let's just start with the fact that it has only Hurricane to fly....

 

Actually, Warplanes kinda reminds me of Freelancer :p mouse aim n all. But that game was all kinds of imbalanced between ships...

 

I might have to dig that old thing up now that I think about it.

 

Anyway 303 is still Early Access so maybe it'll grow?


***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


trikke #104 Posted 19 June 2018 - 02:10 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4629 battles
  • 4,310
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

watched phly's video (love that guy) on 303... so interesting seeing the engine mods, and where the guns are placed

 

beautiful plane in the air, but i was never much of a Hurri fan


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore

SlappedbyRommel #105 Posted 19 June 2018 - 05:06 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 2067 battles
  • 410
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-13-2017
WG thanks for removing my post I am sure you must create a positive narrative but its unfortunate you are causing all the grief in the first place. Maybe you will remove this one to.

mnbv_fockewulfe #106 Posted 19 June 2018 - 05:34 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 658 battles
  • 3,554
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View PostPrenzlau, on 19 June 2018 - 12:50 AM, said:

I find it most interesting through the dialectical method, that because a person has an opinion that is perceived as for or against something, then the opposite assumption must be true. In other words, for example, if I'm against Trump then I must have been a supporter for Hillary. So if I see the positive things in this patch, and I see the positive things in this game, and I enjoy playing this game, then..... the opposite assumption MUST be true.

So let's count the positive things in this patch: replays...that's about it.

I must be an apologist for War Games. I must not be able to see any of the negative issues. I must not be able to understand those who have a grievance. So if I am for the game, I am against those who are not for the game. Simple, but fatally flawed.

Claiming the patch is mostly positive without clearly vocalizing why will give that impression to people.

 

Next, the assumption that the "majority" of players have a broken, unplayable or flawed game. There is no way to tell, thousands of players play this game, but to assume the majority of them have the same problems is not something I would support. So if a person discusses their own problems, then that is one thing. Acting like some silent majority obviously "has your back", probably not true.

Allow me to give you a lesson in programing. If you make a mistake in your programing, everyone who uses your program will have that fault in their program. In the case of bugs, every bug in game has the potential to be experienced even if it hasn't been experienced yet. For example: I don't recall ever having the close chat window crash bug. But since other people have had it, I have the potential to the experience the bug. So yes, everyone's game is bugged.

 

Next, the patch and the changes came out three days ago. OK there are issues, some of which are severe, others are minor. BUT is anyone giving WG time to fix anything and react to feedback?

 

They had the opportunity to run a CT, but didn't. All this mess could've been avoided if Persha wasn't so incompetent/trying to force this patch down our throats. Reminds me a lot of the 1.5 update. 

The same old line, "But they did not do it before, or they did a crappy job before, etc". The assumption that WG does not care might be fundamentally flawed in that they cannot possibly address each person's individual issues, so they have to make "macro" changes to cover as many players as possible.

They care, they're just incompetent. They care more about propelling the game in the direction they want it and if the players like the changes it's an added bonus, not the drive/motivation.

The game has to evolve and go in some direction.

That some direction is not where the players want it.

I like the idea that planes are now custom and can be tinkered with and that since there are negative factors, players have to "learn" and "adapt" to flying their planes.

So you like the tinkering.

Something which there is a lot of resistance to. I could write an essay on why that is.

And understand why it's a bad idea given the current and future state of the game as well as the limitations with the new system.

 

Next, one of the most irritating mind sets that I encounter too much is this idea that WG is doing things "to make money from those who play the game". REALLY? Do you honestly think that they want to you really play for free or spend very little? Nooooo. BUT I don't hold that against them.

As you shouldn't. This is the player base mindset Persha switched for it's loyal player base. It's their fault if their target audience doesn't want to spend money. 

Pick any online game and it is the same way. The play for free part is to get to in the door and to get you involved. Then the compulsion to compete and be like your peers kicks in and before you know it, you have 60 planes and have spend your fair share of money. But once you have done that, I guess they no longer have the option and power to change THEIR GAME. Not yours. Just like when you rent, you don't own it, you just live there.

There are some good restaurant metaphors floating around the forum. In short, suppose you go to your favorite restaurant for some nice, juicy, BBQ. And you keep going to this restaurant because you like the BBQ. And then one day, instead of being served your favorite BBQ, you're served slop. Do you "adapt and overcome" and eat the slop as if it were your favorite BBQ or do you take your business else where? (ok, slop isn't a fair exchange here, insert something like Tia food, the point being, you will not want to continue your business for a different product than what you got before.)  

What amazes me is the hundreds if not thousands of businesses you rely upon in your lives that have the same business plan, sell a product and make money. If the current product is something you no longer like or wish to have, do you rationally think having anyone agree with you makes any difference what so ever? If WG owes you something, I would love to hear that argument? I had a bad marriage for 11 years, do I expect my ex wife to give me those years back? An apologist I am not, a rationalist I certainly am. 
 

There are people who've spent hundreds if not thousands on the game before this. And look how much the game changed to fit their wants. And while I may not have contributed money to the game, my contribution of time is still important because if gives people who paid something to shoot at, or get shot down by...he he

 

I play this game with a "wait and see" perspective and attitude. I image there are more players with the same outlook because players are still playing despite the many logged complaints. Enough positive and interesting things are happening to keep my interest. But I fully realize that this is not a perfect game, BUT it is my choice to stay and play. It is my choice to pay them money or not. I internalize it as my responsibility because it is my choice. There are way too many people who skip this fact and act like they had something taken from them, or some sort of victimization has occurred. This egocentric attitude is the problem. No one is forcing you to do anything. Just like a job you don't like, you can either quit or make the best of it, but stop torturing those around you.

See the above restaurant metaphor.

 

Prenzlau

 


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

 


 


Prenzlau #107 Posted 19 June 2018 - 08:39 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 14122 battles
  • 1,058
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    12-14-2015

 My goodness! What a little surgeon you are. Some people just feel the compulsion to have some sort of contest. Amusing, pointless but I shall indulge. I already know how this is going to end but I can always use the practice in reductionism. 

 

"Claiming the patch is mostly positive without clearly vocalizing why will give that impression to people."

 

I was not clearly vocalizing the reasons because the above comment (that you made) was made under the section where I was demonstrating the dialectical method of opposition. So if I make a comment about the game, if someone disagrees with that comment, we must have opposing viewpoints on all other facts and opinions. I've already been accused of working for or covering for War Games. This is a perfect example. If I am for one thing, I am then against all other things. 

 

"Allow me to give you a lesson in programing. If you make a mistake in your programing, everyone who uses your program will have that fault in their program. In the case of bugs, every bug in game has the potential to be experienced even if it hasn't been experienced yet. For example: I don't recall ever having the close chat window crash bug. But since other people have had it, I have the potential to the experience the bug. So yes, everyone's game is bugged."

 

So everyone's game is bugged. I agree, but I used the terms, "unplayable, broken and flawed". There is no way to know how many people can play with only minor issues, or a mix of major and minor issues, or issues to bad they cannot play at all. My point was that a person should not assume that just because they have their own personal situation of a sort, that the next person has the very same situation and is feeling the same way about it. It is in error for people to post as if some large majority is in full agreement with them, for the forums only have a very small sample size and I would argue that the majority of that sample size are the chronic complainers and the ones who enjoy "piling on". Your statement did nothing to disprove my theory. 

 

"They had the opportunity to run a CT, but didn't. All this mess could've been avoided if Persha wasn't so incompetent/trying to force this patch down our throats. Reminds me a lot of the 1.5 update."

 

That's your opinion. It might even be true. But it does not really challenge my statement that in the future some of these game issues might get fixed. As for the motives of this "Persha". How can you or anyone else truly know?

 

"They care, they're just incompetent. They care more about propelling the game in the direction they want it and if the players like the changes it's an added bonus, not the drive/motivation."

 

None of us, not you or anyone else has enough information to make that judgement. That is your interpretation. It might be true, it might not be, but it is just a theory. How do we know their drive or motivations? Do you personally know these people? Spend time with them? Converse with them in an active conversation about their motives and drives?

 

"That some direction is not where the players want it."

 

None of us really know what that is? We are all filled with idealistic thoughts and fantasies. If everyone that plays this game were to actually have a mass discussion on what direction this game should go, there might be a few broad generalizations that the majority agree with, but you might be surprised how chaotic it might get at having any agreement over all the small things. Everyone is afraid of the unknown. 

 

"As you shouldn't. This is the player base mindset Persha switched for it's loyal player base. It's their fault if their target audience doesn't want to spend money."

 

I would argue the business model has always been the same. We have no idea how much is being spent by players? What I see is a group of frequent forum visitors, reading and absorbing similar posts with similar attitudes and thinking that must represent everyone who play this game but is not posting in the forums. Its just a guess on your part with no real substance. 

 

"In short, suppose you go to your favorite restaurant for some nice, juicy, BBQ. And you keep going to this restaurant because you like the BBQ. And then one day, instead of being served your favorite BBQ, you're served slop. Do you "adapt and overcome" and eat the slop as if it were your favorite BBQ or do you take your business else where? (ok, slop isn't a fair exchange here, insert something like Tia food, the point being, you will not want to continue your business for a different product than what you got before.)"

 

This one is my favorite! A ridiculous analogy. Your completely and utterly missing the point as are a lot of other people. Let me fix this. Let's say I eat at a restaurant in my town that I have been going to for years and I get my favorite entree. Then one day the people who run the restaurant change the menu and then they no longer serve my favorite entree. Do I speak to them about it? Sure, why not. But they say for whatever reason they are sorry but cannot serve that entree anymore they wanted a new menu. So, the rational choice would be to find a new restaurant perhaps, or something similar some place else. Not whine and complain, harass or repeatedly protest outside that restaurant because I can no longer get my entree. In real life we accept things, we move on and adjust. Even though I may have been a great customer and over years spent a lot of my money at that restaurant, the owners of that restaurant are NOT OBLIGATED to keep that entree on the menu just for me. Now back to the dialectical method of opposition. Since I point out that War Games is not obligated to do anything for any player, I must be in agreement with that statement. I must be in agreement that it is ok that War Games has poor customer appreciation and service. I'm only stating that they are not so obligated and that the vast majority when faced with similar circumstance in their real lives would not act so badly. That has nothing to do with my personal feelings. 

 

"There are people who've spent hundreds if not thousands on the game before this. And look how much the game changed to fit their wants. And while I may not have contributed money to the game, my contribution of time is still important because if gives people who paid something to shoot at, or get shot down by...he he"

 

Good for you. Good for you all. But this does not address or explain why a bunch of people seem to think they have the right to act negatively and at times badly in the forums, and some in the game, when they would not do so in their personal real lives outside the game. I think it is great that players care but I keep getting the feeling that players are acting like War Games is their love interest that just broke it off with them and now the tantrums and lashing out is somehow ok. Things are never going to be the same. Let me say that one more time. Things are never going to be the same. 

Next time you play with my post, please don't. It was in the end just a waste of my time. 

 

Prenzlau

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Prenzlau, 19 June 2018 - 08:49 PM.

 

 

 

 


TheMadPizzler #108 Posted 19 June 2018 - 08:56 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 2311 battles
  • 95
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

This conversation could only get better if that fella from Mars added to the pomposity being demonstrated, 'round here recently. 

 

I love reading old dudes bicker.



SlappedbyRommel #109 Posted 19 June 2018 - 09:03 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 2067 battles
  • 410
  • [JG52] JG52
  • Member since:
    01-13-2017
He must be on Prozac?

AkiraGasaraki #110 Posted 19 June 2018 - 10:58 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 518 battles
  • 15
  • Member since:
    08-31-2012
I really disliked everything before 2.0. However....they needed to leave it at the first or second update after the 2.0 shift. 2.0 was the beginning of WoWp being the best WG game. They went from garbage to perfection (imo). Then...the slowly took a nosedive. How do you fix something....then re-break it?

legoboy0401 #111 Posted 19 June 2018 - 11:11 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1887 battles
  • 1,838
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View PostAkiraGasaraki, on 19 June 2018 - 02:58 PM, said:

I really disliked everything before 2.0. However....they needed to leave it at the first or second update after the 2.0 shift. 2.0 was the beginning of WoWp being the best WG game. They went from garbage to perfection (imo). Then...the slowly took a nosedive. How do you fix something....then re-break it?

 

By being WG. That's what WG does.

An average player with an average goal: greatness, someday. Today, mediocrity will have to suffice. But no matter, I will always play to the best of my ability, and I will always strive to make the best of my ability just that little bit stronger and better.

 

#Failureisalwaysanoption

 

#Givingupneveris


mnbv_fockewulfe #112 Posted 20 June 2018 - 02:47 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 658 battles
  • 3,554
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View PostPrenzlau, on 19 June 2018 - 08:39 PM, said:

 My goodness! What a little surgeon you are. Some people just feel the compulsion to have some sort of contest. Amusing, pointless but I shall indulge. I already know how this is going to end but I can always use the practice in reductionism. 

Pointless? Nah, for my entertainment. Considering the word, "Reductionism has a red line under it, I'm going to assume you made up that word instead of looking up it's definition. However, deconstructionism is a concept I apply to long posts deserving of having every point brought up covered. Consider it an act of respect.    

 

I was not clearly vocalizing the reasons because the above comment (that you made) was made under the section where I was demonstrating the dialectical method of opposition. So if I make a comment about the game, if someone disagrees with that comment, we must have opposing viewpoints on all other facts and opinions. I've already been accused of working for or covering for War Games. This is a perfect example. If I am for one thing, I am then against all other things. 

You seem really hung up on this principle. When people criticize you for liking the patch it's because it appears to run counter to the common logic of the posters on the forum. Saying you like the tinkering is fine, but ignoring all of the obvious problems with the implementation of the system is where I disagree with you. If people are making erroneous accusations, you can safely ignore them and focus more on the people giving you rational opposition.  

 

So everyone's game is bugged. I agree, but I used the terms, "unplayable, broken and flawed". There is no way to know how many people can play with only minor issues, or a mix of major and minor issues, or issues to bad they cannot play at all. My point was that a person should not assume that just because they have their own personal situation of a sort, that the next person has the very same situation and is feeling the same way about it. It is in error for people to post as if some large majority is in full agreement with them, for the forums only have a very small sample size and I would argue that the majority of that sample size are the chronic complainers and the ones who enjoy "piling on". Your statement did nothing to disprove my theory. 

By virtue of everyone's game being bugged, it is potentially unplayable, and inherently broken and flawed. The thing with bugs is that they can be sporadic in when and how long they take affect. I can guarantee you that everyone how's touched the game for at least 100 battles has had their game broken for at least one battle. Very rarely will a large sample of players experience a bug that will make the game unplayable permanently. The people who play more will experience more bugs than people who play less. But people who play less than 100 battles in 6 months aren't contributing to the online population. 

 

That's your opinion. It might even be true. But it does not really challenge my statement that in the future some of these game issues might get fixed. As for the motives of this "Persha". How can you or anyone else truly know?

Saying that it's my opinion that this mess could've been avoided fails to recognize the mess that is update 2.0.5. There are objective reasons why this patch is a mess that I shan't bother to mention here, because one can read the forums for that information. 

Persha is the art company responsible for the 5 year debacle that is WOWP. What I know or don't know of their motives has nothing to do with forcing the patch down our throats. What conclusion I come to matters, because it is resolving me not to play their game.   

 

None of us, not you or anyone else has enough information to make that judgement. That is your interpretation. It might be true, it might not be, but it is just a theory. How do we know their drive or motivations? Do you personally know these people? Spend time with them? Converse with them in an active conversation about their motives and drives?

Four years of first hand experience of broken promises, lack of communication, stupendous displays of stubbornness, and failure after failure is enough information to judge that WG is incompetent. Realize I run the risk of being shut up for saying that. Plus I gave them the benefit of the doubt of having honest intentions, what more do you want me to do? Lick their boots?  

 

None of us really know what that is? We are all filled with idealistic thoughts and fantasies. If everyone that plays this game were to actually have a mass discussion on what direction this game should go, there might be a few broad generalizations that the majority agree with, but you might be surprised how chaotic it might get at having any agreement over all the small things. Everyone is afraid of the unknown. 

None of us know the direction the players want the game to go in? Read the forum for 4 years, we do not want the game to become more arcade. That we can agree with. And direction is the broad strokes anyway, so thanks for proving my point and making the second half of you statement moot.

 

I would argue the business model has always been the same. We have no idea how much is being spent by players? What I see is a group of frequent forum visitors, reading and absorbing similar posts with similar attitudes and thinking that must represent everyone who play this game but is not posting in the forums. Its just a guess on your part with no real substance. 

I am an elitist, I don't believe I speak for everyone in the game. I do however believe since I bother to post on the forum that my opinion should be listened to, not by mere virtue of speaking up on the forums, but by my commitment to the game and a deep understanding of its mechanics and nature.

 

This one is my favorite! A ridiculous analogy. Your completely and utterly missing the point as are a lot of other people. Let me fix this. Let's say I eat at a restaurant in my town that I have been going to for years and I get my favorite entree. Then one day the people who run the restaurant change the menu and then they no longer serve my favorite entree. Do I speak to them about it? Sure, why not. But they say for whatever reason they are sorry but cannot serve that entree anymore they wanted a new menu. So, the rational choice would be to find a new restaurant perhaps, or something similar some place else. Not whine and complain, harass or repeatedly protest outside that restaurant because I can no longer get my entree. In real life we accept things, we move on and adjust. Even though I may have been a great customer and over years spent a lot of my money at that restaurant, the owners of that restaurant are NOT OBLIGATED to keep that entree on the menu just for me. Now back to the dialectical method of opposition. Since I point out that War Games is not obligated to do anything for any player, I must be in agreement with that statement. I must be in agreement that it is ok that War Games has poor customer appreciation and service. I'm only stating that they are not so obligated and that the vast majority when faced with similar circumstance in their real lives would not act so badly. That has nothing to do with my personal feelings. 

 

Then we agree on the lesson of the analogy. Thereby making your first statement about the analogy being ridiculous, invalid. However, if by stopping to serve the very popular BBQ that you were not the only one to enjoy, it's their risk for losing their paying customers. And it's your loss that you can no longer enjoy your favorite BBQ, because no one else can make it just how the restaurant was able to do it.

And honestly, stop having this ridiculous pity party. If someone is making false accusations against you, ignore it! This is the internet, people will actively try to hurt your feelings!    

 

Good for you. Good for you all. But this does not address or explain why a bunch of people seem to think they have the right to act negatively and at times badly in the forums, and some in the game, when they would not do so in their personal real lives outside the game. I think it is great that players care but I keep getting the feeling that players are acting like War Games is their love interest that just broke it off with them and now the tantrums and lashing out is somehow ok. Things are never going to be the same. Let me say that one more time. Things are never going to be the same. 

Next time you play with my post, please don't. It was in the end just a waste of my time. 

 

Nice bait and switch. If you're going to argue my point, oh wait. You didn't. I have nothing more to say then about your post. 

Prenzlau

 


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

 


 


trikke #113 Posted 20 June 2018 - 07:10 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4629 battles
  • 4,310
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostTheMadPizzler, on 19 June 2018 - 04:56 PM, said:

I love reading old dudes bicker.

 

literally that is all we have left...  please let us have our fun?


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore

Bluegoose02 #114 Posted 20 June 2018 - 08:29 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6048 battles
  • 218
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    08-19-2012

Wow none of you have over 4000 battles and your trying to tell me why this game sucks. Play it and see all the problems .

 



SonicPariah #115 Posted 20 June 2018 - 09:07 PM

    Community Manager

  • Administrator
  • 427 battles
  • 879
  • [WGATX] WGATX
  • Member since:
    05-22-2016

View PostSlappedbyRommel, on 19 June 2018 - 05:06 PM, said:

WG thanks for removing my post I am sure you must create a positive narrative but its unfortunate you are causing all the grief in the first place. Maybe you will remove this one to.

 

Off-Topic, Derailing, or inappropriate comments will be removed. Feedback or criticism (constructive or otherwise as long as it is On-Topic) is always welcome and appreciated!

mnbv_fockewulfe #116 Posted 20 June 2018 - 09:07 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 658 battles
  • 3,554
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

View PostBluegoose02, on 20 June 2018 - 08:29 PM, said:

Wow none of you have over 4000 battles and your trying to tell me why this game sucks. Play it and see all the problems .

 

 

Look at the sig.

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

 


 


Ace_BOTlistic_Cosmo #117 Posted 21 June 2018 - 03:29 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 1443 battles
  • 5,163
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 20 June 2018 - 09:47 AM, said:

 

 

wow... why would anyone think we are making up the stability issues many of us are experiencing...

want proof, well...

geezis, they are updating a quick patch to fix the problem

arguing that there is no problem is an ostrich who is also a bullhead...

the game suxs in it's present state

we can't even play this crappy game...

why do people just love to strike a pose and say ...

eat the crap and quit yer bitchin'

pathetic lil suck ups without any payoff...

egos are always going to control some people

they don't even try to disguise because they don't recognize

sad little fool tools

play on

 

 

 


if the pilot's good, see, I mean, if he's really..sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low [he spreads his arms like wings and laughs],

you oughtta see it sometime, it's a sight. A big plane like a '52. VRROOM! There's jet exhaust, fryin' chickens in the barnyard.


Reitousair #118 Posted 21 June 2018 - 04:48 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 13072 battles
  • 702
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

View PostBluegoose02, on 20 June 2018 - 01:29 PM, said:

Wow none of you have over 4000 battles and your trying to tell me why this game sucks. Play it and see all the problems .

 

 

I think this position is a tad ignorant, do keep in mind some people are largely pre-2.0 players who haven't found 2.0 to be to their liking. But it doesn't take a thousand battles to notice a few flaws in the game, like optimization on some maps seems to be quite poor, to the point of rendering them nigh unplayable at times (though 2.0.5 has given me higher FPS on some maps.) There seem to be new bugs and server issues that come with every major patch, now while these do get ironed out (sometimes, some of the bugs getting patched the day after writing this have been around for months) they can still prove quite troublesome since most people want a largely flawless patch to experiment with new stuff, not have to deal with new issues on top of new things. There's also plane balance/matchmaking/population, some planes are abnormally strong partially due to a serious lack of population (less people to counter them), flights can create uneven matches (like the infamous 2v1), and the population is so small that it's quite breathtaking to see 4v4's and above. I have well over 4000 battles in 2.0 and I have played from OBT to 1.5, so I hope that satisfies your requirement of an experienced pilot to tell you why the game isn't what it has the potential to be.

 

Still this latest patch is a right mess, it seems that these new systems were rushed out the door and very poorly implemented, I believe that with refinement these new systems can be made into something great, but for the most part this patch has come off as dropping the ball. So much potential to be an amazing patch, most of which gone to waste. At least we got replays back?


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

CHINA NUMBAH WAN

 

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

Premium plane reviews can be found here. Special project equipment spreadsheet can be found here.


SOLxCAT32 #119 Posted 21 June 2018 - 05:14 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 2677 battles
  • 72
  • [HVAR] HVAR
  • Member since:
    10-10-2016

View PostBluegoose02, on 20 June 2018 - 02:29 PM, said:

Wow none of you have over 4000 battles and your trying to tell me why this game sucks. Play it and see all the problems .

 

 

You don't even have 4000 battles kek

Edited by SOLxCAT32, 21 June 2018 - 05:14 AM.

[HVAR]SOLxCAT32 - Top 25 NA - Streaming here

 

"A glass of windex a day keeps the superunicums away"


Perrigrino #120 Posted 21 June 2018 - 12:52 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7132 battles
  • 403
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    10-02-2013

View PostCorvusCorvax, on 18 June 2018 - 08:08 PM, said:

Having one's integrity impugned is a badge of honor in any online forum.  It means that you have made a point that people cannot logically counter.  So they will attack *you*, instead of your idea.

 

So they will attack *you*, instead of your idea.

 

Wow! out of the mouths of babes...






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users