Jump to content


If WG were a western company...


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

IncandescentGerbil #1 Posted 30 March 2018 - 01:58 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35679 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015
Just imagine a game with western bias. T110e3 v4s with 1500hp engines (because why not), CenturionAXu wih 300mm effective hull armour (ditto), and Mauses with 50kph top speed. Oh, the Russian tanks would look good on paper, but their soft stats would kill them. For instance, loading times being halved by the fact that there's no edited room inside them to move, and so on.

yun9 #2 Posted 30 March 2018 - 02:12 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 5105 battles
  • 504
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
    12-21-2012
10/10 thread, lots of content and interesting thoughts to discuss

ThinGun #3 Posted 30 March 2018 - 02:21 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34596 battles
  • 1,166
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

If WG were a Western company, they'd have sold all your data to the highest bidder, have popup adverts that can only be disabled for 30E per month and would send you emails four times a day detailing 'exciting new opportunities' to buy the latest nerf wagon 7 days before anyone else.

 



_Anarchistic_ #4 Posted 30 March 2018 - 02:45 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37896 battles
  • 1,081
  • Member since:
    01-07-2015

look at how good AW started when half owned by western firm, now fully owned by Russians gone right down the sxxxxxx

 



Shaade_Silentpaw #5 Posted 30 March 2018 - 02:57 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22284 battles
  • 361
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View Post_Anarchistic_, on 30 March 2018 - 01:45 PM, said:

look at how good AW started when half owned by western firm, now fully owned by Russians gone right down the sxxxxxx

 

 

Nonsense. Just more of this "everyone from X part of the world must be like this, everyone from Y part of the world must be like that" crap.

There are PLENTY of western developers and publishers who would run WoT into the ground within a few months.

If anything, that's the way things are done in the west by all the big names - make something, kill it, make the same thing with different skin/name/date on it a year later and resell it to the braindead masses.


Edited by Shaade_Silentpaw, 30 March 2018 - 03:07 PM.


Roudari #6 Posted 30 March 2018 - 03:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 34124 battles
  • 730
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011

View PostIncandescentGerbil, on 30 March 2018 - 02:58 PM, said:

Just imagine a game with western bias. T110e3 v4s with 1500hp engines (because why not), CenturionAXu wih 300mm effective hull armour (ditto), and Mauses with 50kph top speed. Oh, the Russian tanks would look good on paper, but their soft stats would kill them. For instance, loading times being halved by the fact that there's no edited room inside them to move, and so on.

 

So like now but the bias would change towards western tanks?

Balc0ra #7 Posted 30 March 2018 - 03:07 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 65898 battles
  • 16,061
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Post_Anarchistic_, on 30 March 2018 - 02:45 PM, said:

look at how good AW started when half owned by western firm, now fully owned by Russians gone right down the sxxxxxx

 

 

Well to be fair, it's now fully owned by a Russian company as they kicked out the western one for ruining it. As PVP did not die in 3 weeks after the first changes based on what my.com wanted did it?

IncandescentGerbil #8 Posted 30 March 2018 - 03:40 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35679 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015

View PostMuuttuja, on 30 March 2018 - 03:02 PM, said:

 

So like now but the bias would change towards western tanks?

Yep. Would make a pleasant change.



MarcoStrapone #9 Posted 30 March 2018 - 04:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 35206 battles
  • 716
  • [-GODS] -GODS
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013
then it was drugs and not drunks:trollface:

VarzA #10 Posted 30 March 2018 - 05:46 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 19204 battles
  • 1,204
  • [USAGI] USAGI
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

View PostIncandescentGerbil, on 30 March 2018 - 01:58 PM, said:

Just imagine a game with western bias. T110e3 v4s with 1500hp engines (because why not), CenturionAXu wih 300mm effective hull armour (ditto), and Mauses with 50kph top speed. Oh, the Russian tanks would look good on paper, but their soft stats would kill them. For instance, loading times being halved by the fact that there's no edited room inside them to move, and so on.

 

Funny to imagine, but ... realistically, if WG was a western company and actually ran the business they do know, they would probably have gone bankrupt or close to bankrupt, and been under new management .... if they hadn't folded completely.

 

View PostThinGun, on 30 March 2018 - 02:21 PM, said:

If WG were a Western company, they'd have sold all your data to the highest bidder, have popup adverts that can only be disabled for 30E per month and would send you emails four times a day detailing 'exciting new opportunities' to buy the latest nerf wagon 7 days before anyone else.

 

 

Fun fact, what makes you think your data that is in WG's servers is secure or not for sale ?

You gave it away, you gave your data up .... the moment you do that, it stops actually being your data.

 

You shouldn't be worried that much about giving up some email addresses, but the email addresses and the cards used to pay for stuff being kept in clear text. :)

Or some disgruntled IT employee selling that data (guess how most data gets stolen in companies :) )


Edited by VarzA, 30 March 2018 - 05:49 PM.


SABAOTH #11 Posted 30 March 2018 - 05:53 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36793 battles
  • 2,914
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostIncandescentGerbil, on 30 March 2018 - 01:58 PM, said:

Just imagine a game with western bias.

 



Slyspy #12 Posted 30 March 2018 - 06:47 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14194 battles
  • 16,611
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View Post_Anarchistic_, on 30 March 2018 - 02:45 PM, said:

look at how good AW started when half owned by western firm, now fully owned by Russians gone right down the sxxxxxx

 

 

AW was always owned by a Russian firm. They simply employed for a short time a Western development team which really needed the cash.

 

If WG were a Western company then they'd have a better PR department. 



unhappy_bunny #13 Posted 30 March 2018 - 06:53 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 17997 battles
  • 2,561
  • [-OC-] -OC-
  • Member since:
    08-01-2012

If WG was a western company, they would get taken over by one of the big players MicroSoft or EA, or,Sony, and the game would only be available on consoles, would be updated every year and each update would cost £50 a time. 

Players would have even less input into the game and this forum would become even more toxic. 



Balc0ra #14 Posted 30 March 2018 - 07:02 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 65898 battles
  • 16,061
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postunhappy_bunny, on 30 March 2018 - 06:53 PM, said:

If WG was a western company, they would get taken over by one of the big players MicroSoft or EA, or,Sony, and the game would only be available on consoles, would be updated every year and each update would cost £50 a time. 

Players would have even less input into the game and this forum would become even more toxic. 

 

Tbh... I would say Blizzard Activision and EA if WG was a US based company. They would be on the door the second they heard it was doing well. I'm sure if EA had it, it would be free up to tier 5. Tier X would be behind a pay wall I'm sure. The only reason WG has a game on console is that they approached MS first, not the other way around. MS never really had any interest in MMO's or f2p titles for the most part.

Hedgehog1963 #15 Posted 31 March 2018 - 12:03 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51189 battles
  • 7,427
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

Someone else sore that Russian tanks are the best?  So why not play Russian tanks?

 



clixor #16 Posted 31 March 2018 - 12:21 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 50994 battles
  • 3,028
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

Technically, WG is from Cyprus, so also a western company :)

 

But yeah, if WOT was developed by a western company there would have been Defenders and Chryslers in 2012. One thing i always liked about WG is they sometimes gave the community the finger and just did what they wanted. Listening to the plebs is exactly what ruins games. You have to have a vision and not always do just because the majority wants it. But ofcourse, that only lasted until the real big money was in the picture and shareholders took over.



DracheimFlug #17 Posted 31 March 2018 - 12:25 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostMuuttuja, on 30 March 2018 - 03:02 PM, said:

 

So like now but the bias would change towards western tanks?

 

View PostIncandescentGerbil, on 30 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

Yep. Would make a pleasant change.

 

Why the assumption that it would be 'western' tanks? It would most likely be US tanks instead of Russian/Soviet, and other countries would be just as badly off. Although it is possible that German tanks would be second best just so Americans could feel more patriotic over having won WWII.

 

View PostBalc0ra, on 30 March 2018 - 07:02 PM, said:

 

Tbh... I would say Blizzard Activision and EA if WG was a US based company. They would be on the door the second they heard it was doing well. I'm sure if EA had it, it would be free up to tier 5. Tier X would be behind a pay wall I'm sure. The only reason WG has a game on console is that they approached MS first, not the other way around. MS never really had any interest in MMO's or f2p titles for the most part.

 

They tried back in 1999 with Asheron's Call and ran it five years before selling to Turbine. 



Bexleyheath #18 Posted 31 March 2018 - 02:13 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4836 battles
  • 305
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    01-07-2018

View PostHedgehog1963, on 31 March 2018 - 12:03 AM, said:

Someone else sore that Russian tanks are the best?  So why not play Russian tanks?

 

 

Because it's unsportsmanlike.They're also very ugly and crude, not the sort of tank a proper gentleman would command. 

vcristi #19 Posted 31 March 2018 - 02:39 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 66623 battles
  • 406
  • [3NRGY] 3NRGY
  • Member since:
    08-10-2011

View PostIncandescentGerbil, on 30 March 2018 - 02:40 PM, said:

Yep. Would make a pleasant change.

 

Really? Why?

German_Dunc #20 Posted 31 March 2018 - 12:32 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37009 battles
  • 1,887
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

For all the vodka fuelled lunacy, RU cluster bias, terrible balancing, and often idiotic map design, the game is still chugging along almost ten years later.

 

Electronic Arts could kill this game in a matter of weeks. We'd all be falling through the glitched scenery, with true P2W loot crates, and servers crashing constantly. Then it would quietly slide off the update list and eventually end up on GOG as abandonware.

 

The Western concept of product lifecycle and killing it when sales/popularity dip is apparently alien to WG - I mean, WoWp is still alive. Long may it continue, 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users