Jump to content


Off Topic " WoT vs AWF

WoT Vs AWF

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

drackleon #1 Posted 05 August 2014 - 06:46 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20618 battles
  • 389
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

 

 

Another company in the fight to the top of this kind of game!!!

 

In my opinion, BB WoT :)

 

PS: Even having different concepts the game type is the same ... Tank vs Tank!!!

 

I hope that the relationship that the AWF has with their community to be better than Wot have


Edited by drackleon, 05 August 2014 - 07:26 PM.


M1tchy #2 Posted 05 August 2014 - 06:54 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 33520 battles
  • 2,742
  • Member since:
    04-19-2012
Hehe, I saw arty lol. some will never go there now :tongue:

Balc0ra #3 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:00 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67308 battles
  • 17,039
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Can't really compare the two form a game play perspective as they focus on different eras and objectives.  As I see it, it will be a nice change of pace to play it.

But will it drag many away form WOT? Well WOT had 50K at peak hours when War Thunder Ground Forces came. The next day it was back to 100K again. It will drag people a way for a short time, but in the long run? No I doubt it.

 

As I said. It will be a nice change of pace. I like the WWII era more, so its not gonna suck me all the way in. But to fire that up when WOT gets to retarded at times, yeah def. More so then WT.


Edited by Balc0ra, 05 August 2014 - 07:01 PM.


Ohaithar #4 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 407 battles
  • 1,918
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

One is a modern tank game, one is a WWII tank game. Yeah, two different concepts, just like Hawken and MWO.

 

However, I still noticed one thing. Whenever a new tank MMO is released, everyone thinks it will beat WoT, then they complain about the company screwing up and quit. This happened with WT GF, it may happen with AW if Obsidian manages to screw up.



Flyntlock #5 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:03 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 24302 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    07-30-2010
Looks pretty though..i may well invest some time and energy into it.

Ohaithar #6 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:04 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 407 battles
  • 1,918
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

View PostFlyntlock, on 05 August 2014 - 08:03 PM, said:

Looks pretty though..

 

It's CryEngine 3. Why wouldn't it look pretty?



cherry2blost #7 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:20 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19294 battles
  • 945
  • [BAD-A] BAD-A
  • Member since:
    12-19-2010
WoT has many faults...however the gameplay is addictive in a way that few other games have managed. .. WTGF was probably the biggest disappointment of all.... just not as addictive as WoT. ..yes it's great to have more other tank games to play... but for a quick fix if you have a spare 15 minutes you can't really beat WoT. ... anyway will play it.... will probably like it... but WoT will still be installed long after the others... will be playing it probably until Star Citizen finally launches and then will probably not be back for quite some time....

Chimeratech #8 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:31 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18066 battles
  • 3,430
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-12-2011

View PostOhaithar, on 05 August 2014 - 07:04 PM, said:

 

It's CryEngine 3. Why wouldn't it look pretty?

 

no i think it's cry engine 1 



SDGsteve #9 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:36 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 23764 battles
  • 136
  • [-XFS-] -XFS-
  • Member since:
    12-30-2012

Worth a try it will need to be good to leave WOT but expecting the same complaints as we get here in WOT arty in the game :arta:

I personaly dont mind arty I do have the BC 155 58 awsome to play & nightmare to be against :hiding:

 

Will stay with WOT invested alot of time building garage and learning now trying to get better taking a while but will get there someday :smile:

 

 

 



mad0mat #10 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:44 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 14544 battles
  • 2,207
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-21-2012

Do you really think that people like me, with 10k or more battles, with unlocked tanks and stuff will just drop WoT and go to this other game? Sure I will try it, but knowing myself I will be back in WoT day after. I tried WT: GF - nope. MWO - nope. Planteside 2 - nope. Hell I even bought BF3 back in days to play it - nope. I can't be bothered enough to start a fresh game.

 

I hate grinding. One that implemented this bull back in BF2 times should be condemned. Times before that whole grinding thing were golden - you played what you liked right from the start. Now all games revolve around one freaking future - grinding.


Edited by mad0mat, 05 August 2014 - 07:45 PM.


Ohaithar #11 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:51 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 407 battles
  • 1,918
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

View Postmad0mat, on 05 August 2014 - 08:44 PM, said:

I hate grinding. One that implemented this bull back in BF2 times should be condemned. Times before that whole grinding thing were golden - you played what you liked right from the start. Now all games revolve around one freaking future - grinding.

 

There was grinding back then. Grinding for skills.



Superbigel #12 Posted 05 August 2014 - 07:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 54 battles
  • 587
  • Member since:
    03-14-2012

Well for one it does look better than WoT. Thanks to CryEngine. But other than that, the tank movement looks quite unrealistic in a very arcade way. Like the tanks dont even have weight. Meanwhile Wargaming is about to introduce new more realistic tank movement. They also seem to use shell physics...something which SerB or Storm stated will never arrive to WoT due to being too problematic and hard.

 

And then there's the armor stuff. Will they use weakspots as WoT? multiple layers or armor? or simply no armor zones at all, just click and boom.

 

Then it's the cheats problem. I hope it will be server side as WoT, otherwise it will suck big time. If they deal with these two points then it's a good start IMO.


Edited by Superbigel, 05 August 2014 - 08:08 PM.


Ohaithar #13 Posted 05 August 2014 - 08:01 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 407 battles
  • 1,918
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

View PostSuperbigel, on 05 August 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

Then it's the cheats problem. I hope it will be server side as WoT, otherwise it will suck big time. If they deal with these two points then it's a good start IMO.

 

Solid enough encoding can make hacking less common if it's client side.



Somnorila #14 Posted 05 August 2014 - 08:13 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 55950 battles
  • 2,027
  • [4-YOU] 4-YOU
  • Member since:
    10-13-2012

View PostBalc0ra, on 05 August 2014 - 08:00 PM, said:

Can't really compare the two form a game play perspective as they focus on different eras and objectives.  As I see it, it will be a nice change of pace to play it.

But will it drag many away form WOT? Well WOT had 50K at peak hours when War Thunder Ground Forces came. The next day it was back to 100K again. It will drag people a way for a short time, but in the long run? No I doubt it.

 

As I said. It will be a nice change of pace. I like the WWII era more, so its not gonna suck me all the way in. But to fire that up when WOT gets to retarded at times, yeah def. More so then WT.

Agree with you. It depends on how the game will really be like, War Thunder had its appeal mainly because of the commercials but compared to WOT sucks big time. If it will feel like WoT but with modern tanks and will look better but maintain a decent framerate on older PC`s too i guess many will leave. But i guess it`s doubtful that will be a polished game and so good and engaging and suited to appeal so many people and the professional gaming community to present a serious threat to WoT. We will see what happens....


Edited by Somnorila, 05 August 2014 - 08:15 PM.


Harland #15 Posted 05 August 2014 - 08:36 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16648 battles
  • 450
  • Member since:
    07-26-2012

Any competition for Wargaming is good news... if the pressure is high enough they might actually get their thumbs out of their a***s and at least try to make WoT actually good. Monopolies never were a good way to ensure quality. WoT is just one example.

 

But hey, at least it's free...



Ohaithar #16 Posted 05 August 2014 - 08:38 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 407 battles
  • 1,918
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

View PostHarland, on 05 August 2014 - 09:36 PM, said:

they might actually get their thumbs out of their a***s and at least try to make WoT actually good.

 

Ya rite.



EdvinE20 #17 Posted 05 August 2014 - 08:51 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Community Contributor
  • 36045 battles
  • 892
  • [-AEG-] -AEG-
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011
Hope this will make WG start thinking.

Rozwal #18 Posted 05 August 2014 - 09:38 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 7622 battles
  • 71
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011
I will definitely try it when it comes out, cause I just love tanks no matter what time period they are from.

Oghmanas #19 Posted 05 August 2014 - 10:52 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13596 battles
  • 296
  • Member since:
    03-20-2011

There's actually going to be a PvE element to the game, so this is something I'm looking forward to. But I'm kind of concerend how the game will succeed in the genre. Basically, Armored Warfare has to offer at least the stuff that World of Tanks has in order to compete. Large variety of maps and vehicles, in-depth stat tracking, achievements etc. If we take War Thunder for instance, it has barely any of that in its current state. I know they'll be adding more stuff later on but for now, personally, I'm feeling like I'm done with that game after grinding just a few tiers. There's very little sense of progression and any epic games that you had just kind of go unoticed.

 

World of Tanks has laid the foundations for the tank-warfare genre. Pretty much like World of Warcaft did with the MMORPG in the sence. And so any developers that wish to fix themselves in the market have to follow the standard, whilst adding a touch of something fresh of their own.

 

That's just my opinion in any case. :smile:



Sturmtiger_304 #20 Posted 05 August 2014 - 11:04 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 19603 battles
  • 4,081
  • Member since:
    08-18-2010
WoT has only hit jackpot with the gameplay, and the support for potato computers. AWF will most likely end up like Crysis 1, 20% could actually make the game run.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users