Jump to content

r_a_d_i_s_h

Members
  • Content Count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by r_a_d_i_s_h

  1. @Borreh I understand the steps listed in the how-to for the PTE, and this might be a stupid question, but what exactly am I doing when I add the key and opt into the beta? Am I installing a different (PTE) version of the game, the same way games like R6 have a totally separate Test Server version? Or am I making my existing WW3 game into a Test Server? Or am I able to choose to play on either Test or Live server? Sorry if dumb question, Ive never used the beta option in Steam before and I have no idea how it works.
  2. Makes sense. Thanks. And no worries, I could have just as easily missed that part on my end.
  3. If I understand this correctly, the 0.1.1 Patch is only for PTE right now, correct? If I am correct, was this always the plan? My understanding was that the 0.1.1 Patch would be available to everyone. I could have missed that part though.
  4. I really like this. I feel like you and I have a very similar play style.
  5. Yeah, that's my understanding too. I think once the game goes into official release, battlepoints will serve as in-game currency to purchase or unlock weapons, mods, etc.
  6. So, snipers are interesting in this game. I don't know quite what it is, but using a sniper in this game is not the same as in games like BF (for example). In BF (at least in BF1), when I use a sniper I feel a much more pressing need to constantly move, while in WW3 I feel much more "safe" holding a position for a longer period of time. And I'm not talking about camping with a sniper (I def know the difference, lol). But there is just something about WW3 that makes it much more inviting to play in the open while maining a sniper. I don't know, maybe its just me. I will say, I agree with your statement that too many people just expect things to be changed around their needs. I know I have been guilty of that myself from time to time, and by the time someone points it out its too late.
  7. See, thank you. That’s a clear and logical discussion post. I appreciate it. I did not mean to insinuate that the dev team were charlatans stealing our money. If that is how my post(s) came off, I apologize for the misconception. My take was simply that EA is not the same thing as a kickstarted (something you echo in your post as well). The game is fun! I’m playing it right now, and have 77 hrs in it so far. That’s why I’m as critical as I am - because I give a crap about it! If I didn’t care about the success of this game, I wouldn’t waste my time posting here just to get flamed for not having the same opinion as everyone else.
  8. Honestly man, I'm over it. Like I said in my post (which you conveniently left out of your quote reply btw), I honestly hope I'm wrong about the game. I hope it succeeds.
  9. Your use of multi-colored bold text has shown me the error of my ways. It has clearly become futile to criticize the game in this forum - the only people left in here are the fanboys that would rather blindly chant along than to see flaws which will kill an otherwise fun game be fixed. I honestly hope I'm wrong. I honestly hope that the glaring problems with this game's fundamental design are fixed in time, before the game goes the way of Islands Of Nyne. It would be a shame to waste the awesome gunplay it has.
  10. Thank you for so condescendingly telling me that I am either an illiterate, or that I am purposefully misusing a strawman argument. May I be so kind as to return the favor by saying that unfortunately people prefer to live in their hugbox world, rather than see a misdirected game (bugs aside, Im talking about fundamental game structure) for what it is. On your topic of funding resources - early access is NOT kickstarter. Yes, EA should be used to fix unforeseen game bugs. But EA should not be used to fund a game while it is still trying to figure out what its main objectives are. So you telling me that the dev's comment "this game is already a huge success" is ok from a funding point of view just tells me that you have no idea what EA is meant for. If you need more clarification, I'd be happy to draw you a diagram.
  11. Yes, and companies should make money. In fact, companies should make as much money as they can while providing a service or product. What is your point here? Where did I say anything to the contrary?
  12. That last paragraph. That’s exactly why you are taking all of the criticism about the game’s bugs, issues, and overall lack of direction so passively. Because you already made your money. As far as you’re concerned, mission accomplished. Thank you for being so transparent. At least about this. Oh and lmao at comparing yourself to Rainbow Six. Cmon bruh.
  13. Wait, you got banned for a glitch in the game? Wtf? That’s like being arrested for bank fraud because the bank made an error and put extra money in your account. Devs, can you confirm that his account was banned for a game glitch?
  14. What part of my post was amusing to you? The part about how people treat your game as a TDM mode because your game designers don’t know how to design a proper PvP multiplayer? Or was it the reminder that trying to play your game as intended causes people to rage quit, resulting in 20 vs 10 teams. Laugh away my friend, but I stand by my original post - if basic gameplay mechanics aren’t fixed (I’m not talking about bugs here), you will lose the entire already-shrinking player base. Ahhh, I see. People aren’t smart enough to avoid it. It’s definitely not the fact that the map allows the enemy team to access all spawn points. Have you even played this game?
  15. Lol so much this. Its way too tempting to not use snipers when people do this over and over again.
  16. Really? Now that’s interesting. That would bring and keep new players while things get sorted out. Hey man! Yeah, I remember playing against you (and with you) today actually. And I remember talking to you in-game about this exact topic. I agree with everything in your post. I totally do. But there is a reason that CoD plays the way it does and BF plays the way it does - the games are designed for their individual game styles. That’s where WW3 falls short. Not in the mechanics and gun play. Those are great (hit reg could be better but hey, it’s EA). It just feels like it’s trying to cater to both the CoD and BF game styles while falling short in both. The game just feels like it doesn’t know it’s own identity.
  17. Lol ok. FFS, just make a team deathmatch mode. Everyone just treats it like a TDM already due to the awful map and spawn design anyway. At least that way people will keep playing it instead of being frustrated in trying to capture bases for points. You made a game with good gunplay and fun encounters. Capitalize on that instead of trying to make a game you aren’t capable of making.
  18. Devs, this magic new patch better fix some fundemental game mechanics. Otherwise I see your player count dwindling.
  19. Ok thanks. That makes sense.
  20. Proving you wrong is not the same thing as insulting you. Then again, I’m guessing you’re the type to get insulted frequently and easily. I’m done talking to you now. You bore me.
  21. Yeah I thought so. You had no idea what you were talking about. You were just hoping I was another stupid kid who would be impressed by big words. By the way, your plebeian use of the phrase “bell curve” tells me as much as I need to know. A bell curve is a layman term for the normal distribution. Not the binomial distribution. If you’re gonna pose as an intellectual at least get your jargon right. And at the end of it all, we are back where we started - your idea of a “cheater” is a player with a high k/d.
  22. Omg please expand on this. Please enlighten me on how the binom dist applies in the slightest bit regarding your posts. I am sincerely excited for this.
×
×
  • Create New...