Jump to content


Wargaming's Monopoly.

Wargaming World of Tanks

  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

Thuis001 #1 Posted 11 March 2018 - 08:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5578 battles
  • 383
  • [-SBN-] -SBN-
  • Member since:
    05-29-2015

Hello everyone,

today I wanted to talk about what I think is the single largest issue with WoT, completely eclipsing stuff like P2W tanks, premium ammo, arty etc. Most of which sprout from it. And that is WG's monopoly.

TLDR at the bottem. Enjoy.

Let me explain:

 

When we take a look at the niche WoT has, arcade, WWII era, tank shooter, you see there is no competition at all. I mean sure WT is also a WWII era tank shooter, but it is completely different from WoT. For example it is much more like a simulator then an arcade game. AW on the other hand is closer gameplay wise but is much more modern and focussus mainly on PvE (yes it has PvP but you have to wait too long tbh).  Besides those there are no real tank games from either this era or magnitude. This means WG has a monopoly, take a look at this short video that explains what a monopoly is and why it is bad to have one.

 

Basicly what this monopoly allows WG to do is to pull whatever sh*t they want. Case and point: OP premium tanks, poor monetization methods, poor balance etc. A lot of those issues would not be there if there was healty competition. Why? well let's say there was competition with a game that was the same as WoT gameplay wise, but without all the issues, WoT would start loosing players to that other game as players will move there. And while WoT has a large population on EU and RU that would be a trend that even these populations can't sustain for long. (talking months here if the other game makes it interesting enough to join) WoT would thus have to improve and fast. But even without competition WoT should act like there is one. That is essentially the only way to keep the game healthy over longer amounts of time and to keep improving it. And while stuff like new graphics are awesome, they don't fix the base problems this game has.

 

While I highly doubt someone from WG will read this, and if they will that something usefull will be done with this. I do hope that this gets a bit of an usefull discussion (not asking for too much here I hope XD) going.

As always have a nice day and see you on the battle field.

Thuis001

 

tldr: WoT having a monopoly is bad, and some stuff as to how to improve it.

 

Edit: reduced it to just the Monopoly part.


Edited by Thuis001, 11 March 2018 - 09:38 PM.


gunslingerXXX #2 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:05 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9950 battles
  • 1,395
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014
Inb4 WG fanbois

jack_timber #3 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:08 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31140 battles
  • 1,596
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014

Must say initially found it quite a good piece to the video then it turned into a whine thread.

Oh well never mind there will be another one along tomorrow.

 



NUKLEAR_SLUG #4 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:12 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26618 battles
  • 1,604
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
It's not really WG to blame that nobody else seems capable of coming up with a better product. 

Nishi_Kinuyo #5 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:13 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 6971 battles
  • 3,466
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
If you think they're a monopoly and if you think its such a bad thing, then why don't you create a rival game to counteract it?

Aikl #6 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:34 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,992
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostThuis001, on 11 March 2018 - 07:52 PM, said:

(...)

tldr: WoT having a monopoly is bad, and some stuff as to how to improve it.

 

First off, I do agree that Wargaming's rather comfortable situation in the market does enable them to do practically whatever they want, and it's clearly not to everyone's liking. Not gonna go into details, because it's impossible not to imply the abilities of certain individuals/departments in Wargaming.

 

I'm not sure if your angle is particularly suited for this. One can argue that beyond there being tanks, the definition of 'monopoly' gets a bit watered out. Is WoT the only 'medium-paced, arcade tactical shooter' in existence?

 

Besides, Wargaming hasn't, to my knowledge, actively tried to push people out of the market, nor can I say for sure that they have changed their ways over the years. They simply, in the video's words, made better trees than everyone else.

Frankly, the Wargaming I see today is behaving more or like exactly like they've always done. Nothing's really new. The IS-6 was considered extremely problematic back in the day too, as was the Type 59. Yes, they should have tried to avoid similar situations in the past - but as long as doing stuff this ways works, you can't really blame them for not changing. Heck, I bet someone in Minsk is 'scared' of doing anything different in fear of the customerbase not liking it. Dead serious.

 

(While I certainly do not like certain "balancing masterpieces", it's clearly something many players want. If anything, I think Wargaming's real problem is that they're increasingly making a game that appeals very specifically to one target group. That tends to make it very frustrating for others, and isn't good for the overall 'health' of the playerbase. It's good for a game to be "noobfriendly", but not entirely cater to them. Just like the opposite: A game catering exclusively towards hardcore gaming teenagers won't be 'healthy' either.)



Jigabachi #7 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:39 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17746 battles
  • 17,616
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Fix stuff and listen. What a very new suggestion. Where have you been all those years?

Pansenmann #8 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33253 battles
  • 12,017
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-17-2012

there have been some games that have been praised to heavens

and that should "kill" wot.

well, they surely have gained some players but iirc asides

warthunder - which is designed with a totally different concept

and "aw" - they have not led to death of wargaming

 

wot is a nice game and they (wg) exploited that "market" of ww2 tank enthusiasts

just at the right time and have set a quasi-standard for this special kind of games.

either you copy or you do things fundamentally different, else there is (from my point of view)

no way to get a piece of the cake.


Edited by Pansenmann, 11 March 2018 - 09:45 PM.


Archaean #9 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:44 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14948 battles
  • 1,166
  • [S4LT] S4LT
  • Member since:
    04-25-2015

View PostJigabachi, on 11 March 2018 - 09:39 PM, said:

Fix stuff and listen. What a very new suggestion. Where have you been all those years?

 

He's the hidden ace we've been hiding away!

NUKLEAR_SLUG #10 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:47 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26618 battles
  • 1,604
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostJigabachi, on 11 March 2018 - 09:39 PM, said:

Fix stuff and listen. What a very new suggestion. Where have you been all those years?

 

 Unfortunately 'Fix stuff and listen' always seems to really mean 'Listen to me and change all the things I want.'

 



Shivva #11 Posted 11 March 2018 - 09:54 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29175 battles
  • 1,909
  • [J_A_G] J_A_G
  • Member since:
    05-20-2012

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 11 March 2018 - 08:47 PM, said:

 

 Unfortunately 'Fix stuff and listen' always seems to really mean 'Listen to me and change all the things I want.'

 

 

but then he'd have a monopoly on future changes! ;)

250swb #12 Posted 11 March 2018 - 10:16 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 20769 battles
  • 4,573
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015
WG has a monopoly, Porsche has a monopoly on building and selling Porsche, Rolex has a monopoly on building and selling Rolex, you get the idea? They invent something and it's unique and they have a monopoly and can do what they want, and if you don't like it go to another brand. Another car has four wheels, another watch still tells the accurate time, another pixel game still takes up an equal amount of time before you die.

TheComfyChair #13 Posted 11 March 2018 - 10:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 6100 battles
  • 512
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    03-20-2017

McDonalds monopoly should be starting again soon. I only ever win soft drinks or crappy fries :deer:



_Anarchistic_ #14 Posted 11 March 2018 - 11:09 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34798 battles
  • 1,027
  • [SKIL3] SKIL3
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

what monopoly?

 

its a video game, plenty video games

 

it free time, plenty things to do in free time



Captain_Kremen0 #15 Posted 11 March 2018 - 11:24 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 36192 battles
  • 1,115
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011
Quite simply if you dont like the product...just [edited]off. No whine needed just [edited]off. Mongolian cluster [edited]off.

Nishi_Kinuyo #16 Posted 11 March 2018 - 11:28 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 6971 battles
  • 3,466
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostCaptain_Kremen0, on 11 March 2018 - 11:24 PM, said:

Quite simply if you dont like the product...just [edited]off. No whine needed just [edited]off. Mongolian cluster [edited]off.

ᠰᠠᠵᠨ ᠦᠦ ᠨᠥᠺᠦᠷ

:girl:

Please do not be of the insulting the mongolian people.

Edited by Nishi_Kinuyo, 11 March 2018 - 11:30 PM.


AdzTownstrike #17 Posted 12 March 2018 - 12:02 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18853 battles
  • 706
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    05-19-2014
I would argue that its a natural monopoly- Since the amount of time invested into the game makes it almost impossible to match and compete with. Even obsidian couldn't even make a dent in WOT... Thus there is nothing you can do. Wot fills a niche and has a large and loyal fanbase. This is one of they only games which hasn't lost players to fortnite recently. In economic terms a natural monopoly is a good thing to put it on gaming terms: We get a tonne of content which wouldnt be possible if there were 2 competing world of tanks. So the problem isnt with it being a monoply imo. There's more of a problem with a split playerbase since its such a big and long running game noone agrees on any changes and there is no general consensus of what should be done.

Troubledove #18 Posted 12 March 2018 - 12:25 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 41987 battles
  • 2,323
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011
Beating WG is easy. Just make game named "Panzer Game" copy 95% of world of tanks and create genuinely better improvements (ones that are actually improvements rather than something you might prefer personally).

Simple!

WG has no monopoly. WG simply doesn't have competition that puts up pressure to improve. That's why WG can create half-assed solutions.

Path of Exile copied and repeated Diablo 2 concept - and improved it. Blizzard has as much monopoly on ARPG as WG has on pixel tanks. Difference is that someone bothered to do better D2. That someone was not blizzard. Solution to dilemma cannot come from WG. So far War Thunder and Armored Warfare can be considered fails.

_Anarchistic_ #19 Posted 12 March 2018 - 12:28 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34798 battles
  • 1,027
  • [SKIL3] SKIL3
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

View PostTroubledove, on 12 March 2018 - 12:25 AM, said:

Beating WG is easy. Just make game named "Panzer Game" copy 95% of world of tanks and create genuinely better improvements (ones that are actually improvements rather than something you might prefer personally).

Simple!

WG has no monopoly. WG simply doesn't have competition that puts up pressure to improve. That's why WG can create half-assed solutions.

Path of Exile copied and repeated Diablo 2 concept - and improved it. Blizzard has as much monopoly on ARPG as WG has on pixel tanks. Difference is that someone bothered to do better D2. That someone was not blizzard. Solution to dilemma cannot come from WG. So far War Thunder and Armored Warfare can be considered fails.

 

armoured warfare a fail yes but I cant agree about war thunder, totally different game, like comparing orange juice to orange squash

_Sentinel_ #20 Posted 12 March 2018 - 12:47 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14071 battles
  • 269
  • Member since:
    05-08-2011
I must say that War Thunder is shaping up to be a great game too, maybe even better than WoT in many respects, even though they're quite different and it's hard to compare them. WT will soon have tanks from pre WWII up to modern days(M1 Abrams for example), which puts it on a completely different level content wise. Not to mention their different gameplay mechanics which while not necessarily better than those of WoT, make WT quite a unique and enjoyable game. And they'll switch to a newer, better graphics engine soon, just like WoT. At first I was kinda disappointed by WTGF and thought it will be a fail, but I'm quite pleased that they kept at it and improved the game a lot.





Also tagged with Wargaming, World of Tanks

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users