Jump to content
christian2526

Is dis game already dead?

Recommended Posts

Simple answer: No it's not dead. Patch 0.3 hitting live servers soon, gonna fix a lot of stuff and bring new players back also makes game playable for a wider range of player due to less ram usage. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Games not even out yet. We are just QA testers that bought into the game.

They take feedback from the community on the direction to shape this game.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short answer is Yes very much so , poor performance and main focus is content , cant play the content if the game runs like crap , some people would call this a no brainer 

  • Thanks 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dead means its unplayable as in no one is able to play it.

also you wouldnt call a fetus dead.

ww3 hasnt even released and most people wait till after ea to play.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost 10 year old Modern Warfare 2 has more players just on the official client... Even right after WW3 drops a new patch with new content, so much for players coming back as new patches and content arrives :/

Edited by VoodooGaming
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the positive attitude people have here but lets be honest with ourselves here. I know you cannot directly compare one game to another as there is far too many factors that go into this, but still, plenty of other games, in various genres, that are in much worse state than WW3 is, and yet they bring in a ton of players. Escape from Tarkov would be a great example. Its a shooter with absolutely incompetent developers as far as bug fixing is concerned and yet its extremely popular. 

 

To help the issue out a bit I would honestly remove the god damn currency system cause its a load of crap. I wanted to play some WW3 today but guess what, Im not going to, there is not enough players for me to grind out the damn money for the SCAR which I wanted to mess around with. 

 

I highly doubt that any amount of patches will revive this game. The horrible launch has effectively killed off this game as far as Im concerned. Its sad and I feel sorry for the developers since they do seem like they genuinely care about the game and the community.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, VoodooGaming said:

Almost 10 year old Modern Warfare 2 has more players just on the official client... Even right after WW3 drops a new patch with new content, so much for players coming back as new patches and content arrives :/

They  can release all the new content they like , if it runs like crap its pointless effort , they will finally realize this when there is 20 players left on the server . I still play it because i love the game and the idea , just poor performance and a development team guided by the community will be the down fall of this game.

Edited by Harshilizer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harshilizer said:

They  can release all the new content they like , if it runs like crap its pointless effort , they will finally realize this when there is 20 players left on the server . I still play it because i love the game and the idea , just poor performance and a development team guided by the community will be the down fall of this game.

specs? and what is your standard or performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, TZoningHard said:

specs? and what is your standard or performance.

My performance is fine , i mean sure i could do without the constant 200 sometimes + ping and  i dont have a top end pc but i make it work, im referring to the huge drop in numbers due to those people having performance issues , this forum isnt the only place people speak about this game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2018 at 5:05 PM, StanleyColt32 said:

I like the positive attitude people have here but lets be honest with ourselves here. I know you cannot directly compare one game to another as there is far too many factors that go into this, but still, plenty of other games, in various genres, that are in much worse state than WW3 is, and yet they bring in a ton of players. Escape from Tarkov would be a great example. Its a shooter with absolutely incompetent developers as far as bug fixing is concerned and yet its extremely popular. 

 

To help the issue out a bit I would honestly remove the god damn currency system cause its a load of crap. I wanted to play some WW3 today but guess what, Im not going to, there is not enough players for me to grind out the damn money for the SCAR which I wanted to mess around with. 

 

I highly doubt that any amount of patches will revive this game. The horrible launch has effectively killed off this game as far as Im concerned. Its sad and I feel sorry for the developers since they do seem like they genuinely care about the game and the community.

Very interesting point of view , true , you have some valid points in your post.

And for this Multimedia Product  ww3 PC. game, to get some player base back and make it more FUN !!

I agree in one :

The currency system should be eliminated

Unlock the weapons and add-ons ,make it available immediately for the player , leave the strikes and other upgrades for armor vehicles to unlock as you use them .

The performance of the game , it's improving, but still, we have lots of textures, glitches, ground to fix, collisions and clipping bugs that exist in-game, ( in between other that potentially can appear, as the  game progress in the roadmap ) but they can be iron as the game evolve and we report them .

 

But I agree 100% ppl. is not investing their time to grind a weapon for the game to have fun !! FARM 51 Please don't forget that the player ( gamer ) all that we want, it's to have FUN !!! Get rid of that currency weapon system !

Allow us to have a FULL ARMORY from the start, you already have a pretty sweet customization  going on , dont kill it with currency farce, ppl . dont have time to grind it !! Archaic system.

We still believe in you and appreciate all your efforts and hard work but pls. GET RID OF IT !!!

King regards

Merry Xmas !!

HALCON4 - WW3k4to01

Edited by HALCON4
Thanks .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, HALCON4 said:

But I agree 100% ppl. is not investing their time to grind a weapon for the game to have fun !! FARM 51 Please don't forget that the player ( gamer ) all that we want, it's to have FUN !!! Get rid of that currency weapon system !

I currently have 22 hours on the game (18 are probably playtime) and I have unlocked everything I want. Fully customised AK, Leo, Abrams, Wolverine.

I don't see a problem in having a currency system, I like it way more than a forced path.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@joveice

Well good you like it and got all what you wanted , cool !  We are glad that you are enjoying the game and the system how it is .

Me and my whole team and other branches don't like  it  :) just ruin our immersion of gameplay.

But that's our appreciation on this multimedia Product , we know that there will be ppl. that are ok with it and others that felt not so happy 😒 to have to grind the weps. to get cash, to be able to unlock stuff and others like you,  👌 that just got what they wanted and are happy with it.

We think that having the weapons free , will be more avant-garde and equal battle fair , to starters and veterans of the game.

Other games implemented and we just love it !

But that's our 2 cents.

It's on Farm 51 to choose, it's their multimedia Product project  " our game " that we bought from them.

So cheers man.

Merry Xmas 🎅

 

p.s.

It's not dead .... just trying to survive now, the learning curve of the launch and developing process, against huge Studios, corporations , but they need to get their ideas and plans together fast or sudden dead can still happen !!

We have seen this happen before, with other titles, so.. 💣..  it's not easy , the game still can  💥 die fast ☠️ .

Edited by HALCON4
Reply member name, :)
  • Like 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't care about the progression/ currency system either way (I only use a few weapons and a couple of vehicle configurations in general (I know what I like kinda thing), I explored a lot more loadouts and configurations when currency wasn't a thing) although I could see how the progression/ currency system could hinder bug finding and testing of weapons, gadgets & loadouts. But I do recall that when I first started playing WW3 at the start of November seeing a fair few people saying they wouldn't play until a progression system was added, not sure if the people saying this actually returned to the game or not. But with people saying that you can understand why the devs added progression/ currency so soon.

Edited by VoodooGaming
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah progression of some sort is wanted badly by lots of players. The currency system isn't even progression to me since every thing is free pretty much with how much I play.

When people complain about 9 hours to get a gun in the TTS or some thing I was like "casual" Spent 365 hours in a single month to get 75% for a level in BDO.

Got to make the people that dont play much happy but Really need a different form of progression for the top end players.

 

The gun are side grades and horizontally balanced. There is no disadvantage to not being able to buy X weapon ect...

Tanks are the one thing that cost lots of money along with other streaks but its is a non issue for me as we get so much money.

 

If everything was free a lot of players would see not point into trying to achieve something.

 

Paying money to ahve some sort of unlock is ill taste and invites p2w arguments even if by fairy tell the weapons are all equal to each other it will still be a hot button topic for people.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A light progression will be an alternative, we prefer none, all weapons and gadgets unlocked from the gecko. at your hands to the do the job and focus in GAMEPLAY !

The advertising video of this particular Multimedia product WW3, shows soldiers choosing weapons, gadgets, scopes all the gear ready out from the gecko , so you are ready to engage !

BUT >>>>

Then you open the game and BANG!!  surprise NOOBlet, grind that weapon for cashola to pay for what " you want " and that's the difference between what you want and what you NEED.

ppl/ here is confused in how this work.

This in our opinion, an old game design strategy, to try to give longevity to a multimedia product and It doesn't have to be this way .

remember  : 

The game is the reward.

Even with these caveats, I've gotten a surprising (to me) amount of pushback when arguing against the idea of unlockable content in games, both in public and in private conversations with friends. The main counter-argument is that games are inherently and uniquely driven by a reward loop in ways other art forms are not. Locking certain parts of the game away, the argument goes, gives players more incentive to work through the content they do have access to. It makes the locked content that much more satisfying when it is finally available.

Personally, if the only reason you're playing a game is to unlock other parts of the game, then it's probably not a very good game. Players should want to play your game because the gameplay or the story is inherently fun or interesting, not because they'll earn some random virtual trinket or watch a completion counter tick up toward 100 percent. If that's really all you want out of a game.

The golden age of the code

This isn't all that radical of an idea when you look back at gaming history. In the 8- and 16-bit days, it was relatively common for developers to include level select codes, invincibility codes, "all weapon" unlock codes, and the like in games. Show me a gamer that didn't use the "idkfa" and "iddqd" codes in Doom or the "infinite money" code in SimCity 2000, and I'll show you a gamer that probably didn't get as much enjoyment as they could have out of those games. Some games went even further, leaving in "debug mode" codes that gave players total control over the game world with sometimes hilarious results. And after-market devices like the Game Genie or Pro Action Replay were available to add in this kind of functionality to many console games even if developers left it out.

In recent gaming generations, though, it's become more common for developers to squirrel away unlockable content as a kind of carrot spurring players along. You want all the characters for multiplayer fights in a Super Smash Bros. game? Sorry, you have to grind through dozens of single-player matches first. Want to play Diablo 3 on "Master" difficulty? Sorry, you have to work your way through an easier version of the game first, because... it's more fun that way? Why can't we just play these games how we want, when we want?

 

To be clear, I'm not arguing that games should simply descend into chaotic grab bags of content with no coherent organization. Games can and should still need to present missions, levels, quests, etc. in a logical, ordered progression with built-in limitations on character abilities and stats as players progress. My argument is that there should be some option—a code, a sub-menu checkbox, an on-screen prompt, whatever—for players to skip to the next portion of the game whenever they want, just as DVD owners can skip around the ordered scenes of a movie as they choose. And if a player wants to use a rocket launcher in the first level, rather than waiting for it to unlock it in level 9, why should the game tell them they can't?

A few caveats: first, this argument applies primarily to single-player games. For issues of competitive balance, it makes sense to not let players have complete control over the gameplay experience during online matches.

I would argue, though, that the recent trend toward multiplayer modes that let players earn new classes, weapons, and other perks only by grinding through X matches or getting Y kills distorts the online competitive landscape more than a "flat" system with everything available from the get go.

I also wouldn't want this kind of system to get in the way of the idea of in-game Achievements, high scores, or other marks of skill that should only be earned "honestly," by playing the game as originally designed. Plenty of games already handle this situation, though, by disabling Achievements and high score postings when players use built-in cheats. The idea of unlocking everything immediately also doesn't apply to extra content that a developer chooses to sell for real-world money; that's another contentious discussion in and of itself.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now for you INFO. this quote come from another thread but inclusive in the matter .

Please read if you have the time and intersted , dont scan it, maybe you can learn 2 or 3 things here:

 

  On 12/6/2018 at 8:11 AM, Ragir said:

Lemme jump in for a bit, as I think I might shed some light on the situation.

We're not really planning what to do with micritransactions right now. We have a vague plan on possibly selling camo patterns and visual customization items and we had this plan even sine we decided to not make WW3 a F2P game. This decision was done mostly because we kept having to design around it and it was not going to result in a balanced game - so we scrapped this idea and went with a half price model with additional gameplay content available for everyone.

This approach is very player-friendly, but at the same time, keeping the company up is very costly, server cost is marginal compared to salaries for ~60 people (do the math yourself how much each month goes out in salaries). Then there's the cost of software, building upkeep and so on, so we need to make money somehow to stay afloat after everyone has bought WW3 and is only playing.

This is where a fair and balanced microtransaction model could come in. We want to keep working on this game for a long time and keep adding new stuff and supporting it. As we said, we don't want to sell items or gameplay elements, but when it comes to cosmetics - they don't change gameplay (we keep all skins mostly realistic and subdued, so there's no bright pink 'funny' stuff).

I'd also like to ask for your opinion on an option for unlocking everything for people that don't want to take part in the grind. I myself don't have much time to play and for me the unlocks will take a lot of time, especially if we start to add new stuff. For me getting everything unlocked forever is a good way of keeping me in the game- but what's your opinion?

 

CHEERS

Merry XMAS  to ALL and Happy new YEAR 2019 !!

 

P.S. NO to Micro-transactions. Period. no negotiable.

Edited by HALCON4
XMAS to ALL !! new Ragir comment about unlocking weapons.
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2018 at 5:39 PM, maddinii said:

Simple answer: No it's not dead.  bring new players back

You guys say that every patch and we are at  average 372.2 players in last 30 days. WW3 is dead. Get over it.

     
     

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Yolocaust1337 said:

You guys say that every patch and we are at  average 372.2 players in last 30 days. WW3 is dead. Get over it.

     
     

 

 

We are on 0.3 and this game is out for 2 Months now. Wtf is that "average 372.2" players from? If you talking about steamcharts look again. The daily player count has doubled since 0.2 ! 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, maddinii said:

 

We are on 0.3 and this game is out for 2 Months now. Wtf is that "average 372.2" players from? If you talking about steamcharts look again. The daily player count has doubled since 0.2 ! 

YpXscab.png

 

We both know that it's gonna go back to 300-400 peak in couple of days.

Edited by Yolocaust1337

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's early access and the developers are working to get updates out, I'd say that's a lot further than most games make it. Having to work for what you want is the nature of life, I'm not sure why that would be the basis for complaints. I'm just happy to be a part of a really fun looking game that's starting out- Don't shoot them down before they even have a chance to get some steam up.

EDIT:

Any time something is launched, there's going to be high numbers and then as they adjust to being launched the numbers are going to drop considerably, it happens in business as well. Over time, if they do it right, there will be a slow but steady increase in players. But it isn't dead just because it dropped off, that's normal.

Edited by CC1001 "Hundred"
Merged posts to avoid double-posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Predicting the future is a thing apparently. Why do people not simply get banned, if they don't wanna play? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

critisims is still cririsims and predicting the future is analytical prediction and nothing wrong with it.

saying game will die because you arent doing x from randos that dont really know what they are talking about or being able ot logically explain how they are right is plain negative but I stand behind them saying what they want even if its just plain negativity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...