Jump to content


Silentstalker's closing statement. When will WG realise?


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

Dr_LoVe69_makesWoTgreat #81 Posted 08 March 2015 - 03:19 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 55796 battles
  • 3,301
  • Member since:
    12-24-2010

View PostHeinz234, on 08 March 2015 - 02:00 PM, said:

I fail to see why devs that actually listen to the community and actively post on forums are funny.....

 

Listening to and acting upon player wishes are two different things.



Homer_J #82 Posted 08 March 2015 - 03:20 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 32930 battles
  • 36,132
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostHeinz234, on 08 March 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

 

 some fancy graphics to show you how it works.

 

 

Can't beat fancy graphics when it comes to to pulling the wool over someone's eyes.

Panocek #83 Posted 08 March 2015 - 03:24 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29061 battles
  • 12,220
  • Member since:
    05-24-2011

View Postedger2020, on 08 March 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

 

Listening to and acting upon player wishes are two different things.

 

Still, if player have reasonable request/idea, I don't see why it can't be at least considered/discussed.

Dr_LoVe69_makesWoTgreat #84 Posted 08 March 2015 - 03:32 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 55796 battles
  • 3,301
  • Member since:
    12-24-2010

View PostPanocek, on 08 March 2015 - 03:24 PM, said:

Still, if player have reasonable request/idea, I don't see why it can't be at least considered/discussed.

 

It can. But how many reasonable requests you fond here on forums?

Slyspy #85 Posted 08 March 2015 - 04:43 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14711 battles
  • 17,479
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostPanocek, on 08 March 2015 - 03:24 PM, said:

 

Still, if player have reasonable request/idea, I don't see why it can't be at least considered/discussed.

 

Who says that they aren't? I suspect that many user suggestions are also thought of internally. I know that if I were creating a new game I would promise to take on board player feedback and then ignore just about all of it and stick with the vision and plan I already had (and on which my funders have based their loans and investments).

Panocek #86 Posted 08 March 2015 - 04:48 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29061 battles
  • 12,220
  • Member since:
    05-24-2011

View PostSlyspy, on 08 March 2015 - 04:43 PM, said:

 

Who says that they aren't? I suspect that many user suggestions are also thought of internally. I know that if I were creating a new game I would promise to take on board player feedback and then ignore just about all of it and stick with the vision and plan I already had (and on which my funders have based their loans and investments).

 

On RU forum maybe, as there actual developers are operating. I guess if not for language barrier devs could take a look at other servers.

CaptianNemo #87 Posted 08 March 2015 - 08:06 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4142 battles
  • 264
  • Member since:
    04-25-2013

It is not always so much that a good idea is a good idea as much as it is a question of can it actually be implemented into the game without screwing up anything that is currently in the game. AW is already starting to have boundaries and walls set up on how the game works and is designed. The more walls and boundaries in the game the harder it becomes to make a bigger change. Nobody really wants to be "That Guy" at WG who completely turns the game on its head, even if it is for the better. Because then you have community reaction to deal with. Which is ofc important because community = profit = jobs = your vacation to Hawaii.

 

On top of it all it all has to run within a window specifications (Ram, CPU, Graphics, data transfer over the net, etc). And that does not even get down to the "It will confuse the players" list of things people would LOVE to have in a game to make it realistic but have to leave out because of the "RNG" that the player sees when it is actually a realistic mechanical formula. Say for example, how a HESH round reacts to armor and metal when it impacts. Under special conditions it can be silly and maddening for the player even though based upon real would testing it is perfectly normal.



gpalsson #88 Posted 08 March 2015 - 11:56 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 24508 battles
  • 8,965
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View Postedger2020, on 08 March 2015 - 12:02 PM, said:

 

There is a news announcement about that. 

 

Ah yes I saw it.

I thought it was pretty weird how it disappeared. It made me wonder if it was because it was flamed or because it contained wrong info.

Anyway, it's a hot potato for Obsidian right now I'm sure.



jabster #89 Posted 09 March 2015 - 08:04 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12761 battles
  • 26,279
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostSlyspy, on 08 March 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

 

Who says that they aren't? I suspect that many user suggestions are also thought of internally. I know that if I were creating a new game I would promise to take on board player feedback and then ignore just about all of it and stick with the vision and plan I already had (and on which my funders have based their loans and investments).

 

It would be interesting to have a game developed using a voting system by players to decide what changes to make, although when I say interesting I mean interesting as in watching a car crash is interesting.

 

Do WG take on-board user suggestions from the EU - not sure to be honest and I can see why WG may take the easier option of assuming the RU server generally reflects the player-base so using that as the primary source/focus of player feedback.

 

WG's overall attitude to customer feedback can sometimes be refreshingly blunt, instead of the standard we take your views very seriously while at the same time quickly filling them in the rubbish bin. The bit I do find strange is that sometimes they almost seem to go out of their way to antagonise large sections of the player-base. Adding Stalin inscriptions and then having a senior member of WG staff saying, in a rather insulting way, that it was only certain countries that have a problem with it - really?



ApocalypseSquad #90 Posted 09 March 2015 - 10:39 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 27189 battles
  • 2,213
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View Postjabster, on 09 March 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

 

It would be interesting to have a game developed using a voting system by players to decide what changes to make, although when I say interesting I mean interesting as in watching a car crash is interesting.

 

To be honest I think that could work - so long as it was assumed that the 99% of players who did not express an opinion were quite happy with things the way they were...

 

Which I suspect is pretty close to WG's approach. 



JayKocaine #91 Posted 09 March 2015 - 11:10 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10447 battles
  • 20
  • Member since:
    12-07-2014
In the end players will always come back to WoT, no matter how good AW will be. 

People have spent far too much money and time into it to just stop playing it completely. 
In WoT being there first, they have already secured a player base, no matter what other games come out and people that have spent considerable money, will always spend that little bit more, to "keep" what they have bought out of a sense of pride/ambition/guilt.

gpalsson #92 Posted 09 March 2015 - 11:19 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24508 battles
  • 8,965
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View PostApocalypseSquad, on 09 March 2015 - 09:39 AM, said:

 

To be honest I think that could work - so long as it was assumed that the 99% of players who did not express an opinion were quite happy with things the way they were...

 

Which I suspect is pretty close to WG's approach. 

 

Considering how many stupid suggestions we see an average day on these forums, I am pretty sure we would have a terrible game after about 1 year.

Many suggestions require large changes that bring little to no value.

 

There is also an obvious conflict of interest. 

Creators want to make as much money as possible, with as little work as possible.

Players want to spend as little money as possible, with as much content as possible.

 

It would never work.



clixor #93 Posted 09 March 2015 - 11:31 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 55042 battles
  • 3,183
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

View PostIllGiveItYa, on 09 March 2015 - 11:10 AM, said:

People have spent far too much money and time into it to just stop playing it completely. 
In WoT being there first, they have already secured a player base, no matter what other games come out and people that have spent considerable money, will always spend that little bit more, to "keep" what they have bought out of a sense of pride/ambition/guilt.

 

This only represents a small portion of the players. The majority of players are 'casual' players who stop playing after 1k battles. And online games performance is usally measured in growth. Combine the two and you'll see why it's so important for WG to keep attracting new players as that's where the money is.

 

So just saying that in the modern gaming world there is not such a thing of a 'secure' player base.

 

Unfortunately, to be frank, WG shows little vision which is typical of a newish company accustomed to large growth until now. My thoughts on this they better start to listen to the more hardcore players as well. 



Cobra6 #94 Posted 09 March 2015 - 11:55 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16531 battles
  • 17,655
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Wargaming used to be like this back when World of Tanks was still in (Closed) beta. Unfortunately it went downhill from there.

 

The last good thing they did was give everyone the T34 who had it in his garage. They would no longer do such a thing because they don't need the players to have a nice opinion anymore. They've grown so large that it doesn't matter if they piss off their players.

 

Cobra 6



Commander_Chris #95 Posted 09 March 2015 - 04:47 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22021 battles
  • 1,110
  • [TFUK] TFUK
  • Member since:
    09-05-2012

Notice how WG have moved this too Off-topic? They are trying to hide it from General Discussion even though that is where it belongs. Proof yet again that WG don't give a damn what the average player thinks.



Cobra6 #96 Posted 10 March 2015 - 08:43 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16531 battles
  • 17,655
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Yeah funny isn't it:teethhappy:

 

Cobra 6



Trent #97 Posted 10 March 2015 - 02:36 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 10516 battles
  • 2,433
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

View PostHeinz234, on 08 March 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

View Postgpalsson, on 08 March 2015 - 09:45 AM, said:

Funny how SS'es thread in News on AW forum where he announces skill based MM has since been deleted.

 

Funny?

I fail to see why devs that actually listen to the community and actively post on forums are funny.....

 

""

Regarding the Matchmaking Article

Hello everyone,
Regarding the matchmaking post published earlier this week - the developers took a close look at your feedback and while we were all pleased that it was quite positive, there are still things that need to be explained in more details - some community members raised very valid questions and we would like to answer them without forcing you to search the entire forums for developer posts or dozens of portal articles for updates.
For this very reason, we pulled down the original matchmaking post - we will rework it to include all your feedback and to answer the hottest questions, along with some fancy graphics to show you how it works.
So stay tuned, because it's only gonna get better and better ""

 

Guess you "missed" that one :D

 

 

Of course it's funny.

 

If something like that happened on WoT forums/portal, what do you think the reaction would be? "Gee, I wonder what was so terrible in this thread they decided it's best to not just close it, but to eradicate it from existence?" :P

 

However, if they really felt that the best way to listen to community and gather feedback on MM was to simply nuke the whole thread and the news article - then yeah, it is laughably, first-day-on-the-job amateurish and inviting conspiracy theories.

 

How long did it take between the disappearance and mods/admins managing to come up with an official explanation? More than 24 hours? I might be wrong here, though, as the whole thing kinda coincided with the whole English part of AW forums going down.

 

View PostCommander_Chris, on 09 March 2015 - 03:47 PM, said:

Notice how WG have moved this too Off-topic? They are trying to hide it from General Discussion even though that is where it belongs. Proof yet again that WG don't give a damn what the average player thinks.

 

Discussing what a certain widely-known Obsidian employee says about his own company and their competition (along with the games they develop) is off-topic, but the mod/admin moving the thread should clearly state so. If not as a part of his job, then at least as part of damage control in a response to certain news lately - but then again, WG EU is terrible about any kind of coordinated action (phrase "children in fog" comes to mind), so nothing new here, right? ;)



Fighto #98 Posted 18 March 2015 - 05:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38074 battles
  • 1,090
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

View PostCaptianNemo, on 07 March 2015 - 03:48 PM, said:

 

That is where you are so wrong. If you had any knowledge of FTR News you would never print such B.S. If he was truly bashing WoT, and he has in the past, you would clearly know it. He didn't claim everyone used it he claimed that everyone could get away with using it on the WG EU because they are a bunch of complete idiots, and they are(majority are). He threatened to quit because it takes serious time, he got very depressed several times(not to mention sick as he was very ill for a time) and he ran the whole thing at a loss even with donations.

AW would fail if it was released as originally designed. Thankfully that will not be the case.

 

Its not an opinion , he did it, it's fact . he went on a rampage of negativity and turned around and ran an article that every one was cheating in WOT.  A few days later AW is awesome and WOT is crap, if you honestly think he wasn't affiliated in some way with War gaming then you are very naive, his attitude changed when new pay master arrived on the scene says it all really.

If he honestly ran that at a loss then thats down to his inability to maximize his hits , either using ads or affiliate programs .

 

 


Edited by Fighto, 18 March 2015 - 05:57 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users