Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Forgotmyoldaccount

  1. Many of my friends whom I've spoken to, have zero interest in the game. Whatever hype world war 3 had has waned down greatly. Many people on the steamhub and other forums I frequent pretty much agree; the game is dead. The only people who cant see the truth are the few diehard fanboys. Tell me why should I play a dead game with zero players? How long should I wait until the servers fill up? Do I want this game to die? No, it's already dead. It's a walking corpse now. The developers didn't allow community servers at launch and that's what truly killed this game. I'm mad that I held out hope for another early access sham. I dont believe this game will ever recover or even live up to the potential it had. And if it does, good on them but I dont think anybody will be playing by that point. Just like almost all the other early access shams. By forgiveness, I meant the tendency for people to humanize and empathize with corporations and allow said corporations to continue to get away with broken promises and other misdeeds, because the customers have so much emotional investment in a company. Ala valvedrones, blizzard fans, apple users, etc.
  2. I was not aware of the server browser being implemented, as I've been unable to get into the game for the past few hours due being unable to update. I've deleted and redownloaded this game several times today. I was in a match this morning and typed my original post up after that experience, and only posted it later today. The player numbers while artifically inflated are still low. I came here to air my greivance about a game that failed to live up to it's potential. I see the same trend with world war 3 as I did with dayz. Hit the ground running, fizzled out and now is only a shell of it's former self. Usually I dont purchase early access games, due to the old addage "Early Access, Never Finished." But I gave this game a chance. The final product of most early access games is not much different, other than content additions and performance improvements. There are some exceptions but they are few and far inbetween. I'm the kind of person that does not believe in the humanization or defense of corporations, especially when they screw up. I am not a fanboy of any sorts.
  3. Too little too late. What is there more to add? The steam player numbers speak for themselves. You had something great with alot of potential and instead of optimizing development time to improve the game what did you focus on? Excessively useless customization and other minor features that make no sense to implement this early on. Where's the performance improvements? The map reworks? The server browser? Etc, etc. I dont feel like this game will amount to anything great and I dont have the time or interest to wait months on end for patches to fix alpha level issues. Good luck with your future endeavors. No man's sky didn't recover, it's still bland, boring and mediocre. All the good press for 'fixing' the game is nothing more than just shilling to sell more copies. Your hope is misplaced. I've seen it before with many other early access titles. Real suggestions and criticism are ignored. I've seen many well though out threads flat out ignored. I guess many people are complaining because they are burned out by early access. World War 3 was the last straw for me and probably alot of other people. P.S. I dont believe in forgiveness anymore. A company is not a person and no they do not deserve another chance if they screw up.
  4. And I dont think anything will save it. The devs have made so many misteps early on that it's detracted so many players and potential buyers. I had such high hopes for this game, but now I realize they were misplaced. What shame. I guess there will never be a proper competitor to battlefield then.
  5. I want fun, not a lecture on why I shouldn't have fun.
  6. Still though a 2x multiple from the get go is very low. I can understand if it was with some top tier helmet, but then it would need a downside. Some games/mods I played, implement a penalty to peripheral vision. Where as others bundle armor and helmets into one unlock and have one general downside like a mobility penalty. Although I like how tarkov does it, with the face hitbox, that really balances it out. But only from limited angles.
  7. Is this true? If so then it's pretty stupid. Head: I never liked a 2x headshot multiplier, it feels way too low. And robs you of the kill. Headshot multiplier should be at 3x at the minimum. I've played some games and mods where 5x was the basic headshot multiplier. Use a helmet and it dropped down to 3.33-4x. Torso: Is this with or without armor? Without I can understand. Limbs: Ok just no. I've done some experimenting and a limb multiplier should be at .66x for the lower limb and .75x for the upper limb. Not counting armor of course.
  8. They almost all feel the same. And I think and reason is the choice of engine. Most games use the same two engines; UE4 and Unity. And most modern games end up feeling way too similair to one another. Even if they're from different genres, the quirks of the engine seep through and affect the gameplay. It can be a racing game, a first person shooter, a fighting game or a strategy game and it will feel all too familiar. Like a bad case of deja vu. Again I'm not saying all but most. Some games like tarkov and gears 4 feel different enough. P.S. I honestly had no idea world war 3 was on UE4 until I played it for the first two minutes. I immediately recognized the movement system, mouse performance and the general vibe was that of a UE4 game.
  9. I tend to not like it when damage is dictated just by caliber it overpowers certain guns and makes others weak as hell.
  10. By tactical shooters I meant games where you have to think and outsmart your enemy. I.E. Not run and gun like cod or modern battlefield. I agree true milsim games are few and far inbetween, but many games advertise themselves as such, because they dont display ammo, health, crosshair and other UI elements. Basically they're all just trying to be cod hardcore mode the game. Honestly I wish someone would remake operation flashpoint so all the mislims would have their promised game and leave the rest of us alone.
  11. @Artaxiad300062 The devs deserve every last penny. If you dont like certain people playing 'your game' then you should have no problem reimbursing them out of your own pocket. @ranmoru456 I hate what modern FPS games as a whole have become. I hate how casualized most modern FPS games currently are. Especially the Battlefield series it has been slowly dying since bad company 1. Every new release, it gets closer and closer to becoming just another Call of Duty with vehicles. Call of Duty itself hasn't been good as a PC multiplayer game since the original Modern Warfare. World at War was meh. Modern Warfare 2 was when they killed dedicated servers and the MP experience. Black Ops 1 was the last good singleplayer cod game I enjoyed. Everything after that has been such garbage. And on the flipside, I hate milsims and the milsim community because they want to turn every single game in the FPS genre, into another Operation Flashpoint clone. Which admittedly was a good game, but there are not enough hardcore milsim players to support more than a handful of hardcore milsim titles. Some people have taken to referring to the milsim community as; MISLIMS or MISLUMS, as a joke on their ferver and digital jihad of sorts to turn every game into another hardcore milsim. No offense intended. Most games are now either too casual or too hardcore. I want the 'Core' experience again. I want something perfectly balanced in between the two extremes. I think the best online experience that I ever had that came close to this ideal, was the short lived Battlefield 2 mod known as Project Reality .5, before the devs went off the deep end. Yes I know Project Reality still exists but it's not the same as it was 12 years ago. Modern PR is nothing more than another milsim mess. At times it feels more of a tedious chore, than a game. But ironically it's still the best milsim experience out there. Because it is still somewhat fun. PR's successor; aka Squad is just plain ol' boring and way more tedious. Please dont misunderstand. I do like tactical shooters, I really do. I just hate the slow pace and sluggishness of most tactical games.
  12. If you want me to stop playing, I can send you my paypal and you can personally return to me the 23$ I spent.
  13. Well what is this game trying to be like then? At times it feels more call of duty, while at others it's got this milsim vibe to it.
  14. I have a soft spot in my heart for wood and steel guns. I cant explain why. I understand the practical applications of rails, but they're just so ugly compared to the sleek lines of some classic guns. Wood stocked firearms can have just as many attachments as railed firearms. Like the AKM it has a side rail for soviet optics, which can just as easily mount a pic rail adaptor and host other sights. I once saw an AK74 with pic rail inserts into the handguard vent holes, with a wooden foregrip protruding out from underneath the handguard and an rpk style bipod. I cant remember if it was on TV or online.
  15. Structure and Balance. But, If you are not willing to introduce a class system, then please atleast the make rpg a gadget. It gets a bit too spammy when someone is running rpg + ammo.
  16. Not just in this game but overall. It provides too much of an advantage with very little disadvantage. And it takes up two valuable inputs on the keyboard. The best lean system was ironically in bf4 where it was integrated in the ADS system and enough of the head poked out where it was enough of a trade off.
  17. How about a 'sight window' in the corner of the screen? It could magnify when clicking on it or hovering over it.
  18. I agree burst fire is a liability. I understand why some people may want to use it. I'd just love for the ability to modify trigger groups. Regarding double tap. I meant that certain actions would make more sense in the context of gameplay if you could double tap for them. Iron sight toggling is the best example. Another great example is when console games bind 2 or more functions to the same button. I cant remember what game it was but you chose stance by pressing Circle on the playstation controller. Once for crouch, one more time for prone. Holding cricle would immediately take you into prone. X made you get up immediately. Tapping R1 changed fire mode, holding opened the weapon select wheel. I dont think it was socom, I know it was a PS3 era game.
  19. How about current weapon sight pictures appear at all times in the customization menu?
  20. I do not like pressing middle mouse to bring up secondary weapon sights. I prefer the ability to double tap right click to bring up secondary sights. It makes more sense and provides a better feel of flow to the gameplay. It could be timed so that 2 right clicks within a certain time frame bring up alternate sights. And double right clicking will swap back and forth between primary and secondary sights.
  21. I love the depth of tactical games, but I hate the slow pace of tactical games. I used to love playing BF2 realism mod(not project reality) back in the day before the gamespy shutdown.
  22. I prefer a class system because I feel it would be beneficial for gameplay. I dont feel that the way I suggest it be done, would impede on player freedom too much. Almost the entire weapons selection would be available to all classes, the only things being restricted would be specialized pieces of kit. I've noticed that most people who run ammo almost always use a rocket launcher and semtex grenade and that gets very spammy. Very few people run medical supplies, because there is little to no incentive. I'm not too familiar with the extent of the armor system, but I feel that the prevalence of heavy armor usage homogenizes gameplay. Right now I just go for the legs.
  • Create New...