You may think you are helping the problem by posting in here, but in fact you are making it worse. No one in here has ever run a successful game for 12 years. You can keep telling yourself that you know the way things work. It is much easier than actually trying to understand.
I don't even know if there's a direct equivalent to what DOC did in other games...maybe someone from Blizzard coming on to a server and shutting it down right as a large raid was being completed? At times it seems CRS is running some sort of subscription fan club rather than a business.
Originally posted by Dantae87 why the hell has this game been popping up on the mmorph forums so much in the past week...used to fly under the radar prio then BAM all i see on topics is this dam game.
The developers of this game have an extremely restricted forum; you need a subscription just to view the threads and it's gotten to the point now that any post that isn't happy thoughts is immediately deleted. They can also go weeks without posting a public update. So several former and current players come here to talk about game changes, it's direction, etc.
Not too many cared and it was a fairly slow conversation, but a short while ago the company decided to do some advertising here and as part of that they implored their remaining players to come here and rebut all the negative comments (apparently updating the game's actual mmorpg.com entry wasn't parr of this brilliant marketing plan). Unfortunately for them, in their fervor to shout down the game's critics they ended up bumping the threads and the negative opinions contained within.
Originally posted by Dantae87 why the hell has this game been popping up on the mmorph forums so much in the past week...used to fly under the radar prio then BAM all i see on topics is this dam game.
The company is doing a big marketing push on this site, big number one. And number two, the company brass has been embroiled in several controversies recently, and everybody comes here to discuss it.
*edit* david06 beat me to it, consider my version to be shorthand for his...
You do a good job of hurting the game without any of our help. You are quite behind all the hater propaganda so I will give you some time to catch up. Thanks for calling.
Originally posted by Stug Talk of making a mountain out of a molehill. Axis were OVERPOP when going for Anterwp, like they are regularily. So the that means when overpop comes around they can have a go at taking it again. Its not the end of the world, unless you someone who is out to score points against the game, its devsn and its players.
For the game's sake I hope that you are just a regular player or fan, and not a CRS employee posting under an alternate account because your post illustrates a now-classic disconnect that the company has with it's player base.
"This is a big deal." "No it's not." "A lot of my friends are pissed off and leaving. I'm thinking about it too." "You are little children if this upset you. We did nothing wrong." **player unsubscribes**
Pre-2012 you can throw in a "If you hate the game so much then why are you here? You're welcome to leave at any time." line by CRS.
Post-2012 it's more like "You're not helping the game by bailing on us. You're not sending a message, you're just being selfish."
People endure the game's many failings because they like to coordinate with each other and capture towns on a persistent map. When you wave your hand and prevent the hardest objective on the map from being captured at the last moment, then disregard the complaints there really isn't a reason to keep playing.
I noticed that you used "overpop" justification as well. If CRS does not think it is appropriate for Antwerp to fall during low population and they will take measures to prevent such a scenario, then just come out and say it instead of pretending that it was "maintenance" or that it didn't happen.
You may think you are helping the problem by posting in here, but in fact you are making it worse. No one in here has ever run a successful game for 12 years. You can keep telling yourself that you know the way things work. It is much easier than actually trying to understand.
Another vague DOC answer saying the players (customers) are all wrong, don't understand blah blah blah. You undertake the server resets at the time you feel like it. Many people find it annoying that you don't have a set time for server resets but just randomly choose a time then say "server down in 15mins", thus negating anyones work. Your always going to piss people off but atleast COMMUNICATE. You could at the very least say to players "we're doing a server reset in 1 hour 30mins, if antwerp not capped it has to go to allies, sorry". Instead you give no warming and show the attitude to players of "stop whining your honoured to play this game". You come across with that attitude players leave, like 100's have done. Subscribers go down then members of CRS which people respect a bit more say "come on guys, leaving is not the right way to put a message across. Now give us $100,000 to make a game you don't want".
'Successful'? It's crumbling by the wayside. If any of the big game companies like Blizzard knew a niche and badly developed game would still be going 11 and a half (not 12) years they would of made one and developed it alot better (and would be alot more successful). The ONLY thing that has kept you going is a core of veteran players who believe in the original CONCEPT of the game. World War 2 online is only still alive because loyal community members are perpared to pay LOTS of money.
From those 300+ new builders you are generating $9000 revenue a month alone. Then you add in the loyal community members with their second accounts and your revenue runs into 10's of thousands of dollars a month (maybe even into the hundreds of thousands). Thus you could probaly keep this game running for a long time yet, people will still pay up but that by no means can be called 'success'
You created a niche game that attracts players with big loyalty (alot ex armed forces) and deep pockets. Your only success is making a game that caters to a lucrative market not in any developing success
"This is a big deal." "No it's not." "A lot of my friends are pissed off and leaving. I'm thinking about it too." "You are little children if this upset you. We did nothing wrong." **player unsubscribes**
Pre-2012 you can throw in a "If you hate the game so much then why are you here? You're welcome to leave at any time." line by CRS.
Post-2012 it's more like "You're not helping the game by bailing on us. You're not sending a message, you're just being selfish."
The Antwerp fiasco was the last straw for me. I dont think I can forgive the game makers after how theyve treated their PB and some of the better officers players and leaders of the game. Campaign 88 isnt Axis vs Allies, its Axis vs CRS/Allies.
During this campaign too much BS has occured for it to be a coincidence.
The Axis Cinc, who is one of the more active (pro-active even) officers is AWOL, he is currently non-existent. He was an ex squaddie of mine for a year and this is totally out of character for him.
Overpop in which SD kicks in was changed from 10% to 5% mid campaign, meaning all it takes is 5% overpop on one side to cause spawn delay, funnily enough this was changed when ASA were reforming OPs again. It even seemed to even be exagerated.
Allied divisions were given much more armour than their Axis counterparts. Allied armour brigades were given 52 tanks vs 36 in the Axis brigade. This was changed only after it was questioned, although doc never admitted to it.
Resupply timers were changed from 7hrs to 8hrs AFTER the Allies pushed through the north and captured the northern airfields close to the German factories.
Axis still perservered with all this shit and managed to roll some towns, culminating in Aarschot which provided a breakthrough chance. Doc logs on mid battle and announces the server coming down. People race to finish off the town. When it was apparent Axis were going to finish the town in the final 5 minutes with the ab @ 50% doc locks the game so capping cannot continue, and so 'saves' the town and multiple others should the breakout have occured.
Antwerp, that was the final straw for me (as well as the condescending way doc spoke to alot of our higher ups and the PB, especially those who dont go around brown nosing doc and call things how they - you guys know who you are). Antwerp is second to none the most difficult town on the map, and it was captured after a long 5hr battle with just a final few cps left to clean up. Doc comes on, announces the server going down, and so nullifies the efforts of all the soldiers fighting for the past 5 hours as well as takes away a possible campaign winning capture. It seemed the allied Cinc was privy as to why the server was brought down (he was in TS with the rats), but noone from GHC were. The aftermath included people banned and people walking out. What I thought was true PR gold though was after creating all this distrust and malcontent on the Axis side by cheating them out of the most significant cap this campaign, instead of playing alongside the Axis to try and help them cap it back, doc was playing allied defending antwerp tonight lol!! wtf is wrong with this company??
Let it be known I in no way begrudge the Allied community, I have been very lucky to play alongside many of them in the past when they visited Axis for a campaign or two, theyve all been truly great guys.
Either way I cannot with any faith recommend this game anymore. If I play a game, I want to play with each team having the ability to win, not have a winning side decided before and game manipulation to occur to ensure it. It is a real shame, its a great concept and has a great community, I made many friends. Too bad about the owner though!
A lot of what you guys say here is true, can't argue that.
I will point out that David you're wrong on the 300 builder accounts.
That 300 number was new subs, heroes & the welcome back soldier for a month subs.
I hope they seriously have hired someone or are in the process of hiring someone to work on the game instead of just managing what they have.
I dont know what to think about this "goal of 300 new subs ect by febuary" I cant see it showing how healthy the game is to manage to get a new dev thus an update. Someone could just sub for only a month then unsub. I think the game needs hell of alot more subs to pay for a dev and update it contentwise, fix the server problem so we dont need reboots.
The Antwerp fiasco was the last straw for me. I dont think I can forgive the game makers after how theyve treated their PB and some of the better officers players and leaders of the game. Campaign 88 isnt Axis vs Allies, its Axis vs CRS/Allies.
During this campaign too much BS has occured for it to be a coincidence.
...
Let it be known I in no way begrudge the Allied community, I have been very lucky to play alongside many of them in the past when they visited Axis for a campaign or two, theyve all been truly great guys.
Either way I cannot with any faith recommend this game anymore. If I play a game, I want to play with each team having the ability to win, not have a winning side decided before and game manipulation to occur to ensure it. It is a real shame, its a great concept and has a great community, I made many friends. Too bad about the owner though!
DOC has frequently invoked the historical win/loss ratio to justify tweaks in the current version of the game. This is foolish for many reasons, as no new player really cares about a campaign fought in 2004 and the game was drastically different back then, among other things.
That hasn't stopped him from apparently holding it as the #1 priority though.
I just wish they would stop being dishonest about it, just come out and say "WW2online is a simulated battle between two teams, the developers will intervene on each side as they see fit to ensure equity." That would probably kill marketing though.
Originally posted by ObiClownobi I imagine it was the event being discussed by yourselves in several other threads, at least one of which was dedicated to the said event.
It's funny that so many threads have been made by a few to make it look like this game has any value or popularity.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I definitely don't think Doc coming in here and giving his usual cryptic 'you weren't there man' vibe helps anything.
On the other hand, its pretty cringe watching players overstate their own and their friends' influence on the game. It was a colossal screw up, hi, I'm CRS, nice to meet you.
Originally posted by pittpete Honestly, if you are afraid to use your real game name its hard to take anything that person says seriously.
Does it matter if anyone uses their gamename in a forum which isnt dedicated to this game?unless you want a witchhunt?
To me it does.
These same people who are here bashing the game are still playing it on a daily basis.
If you don't like the game, thats fine.
Most normal people move past it.
Some here create accounts because they hate the developers and won't give up.
There is a big difference.
Thats why me and many others come here in to point out the players whose agendas go farther than the game.
Comprende?
Excuse me?
I do play the game, my username has nothing to do with you, I am a normal person thank you very much, I think both sides are pathetic, take it to PM
This forum is not ww2online so people have the right to express themself if its not a personal attack like insults or threats, if you don't like it jog on
Originally posted by pittpete Honestly, if you are afraid to use your real game name its hard to take anything that person says seriously.
Does it matter if anyone uses their gamename in a forum which isnt dedicated to this game?unless you want a witchhunt?
To me it does.
These same people who are here bashing the game are still playing it on a daily basis.
If you don't like the game, thats fine.
Most normal people move past it.
Some here create accounts because they hate the developers and won't give up.
There is a big difference.
Thats why me and many others come here in to point out the players whose agendas go farther than the game.
Comprende?
I have read through the TOS for Battleground Europe and it is within CRS power to ban you for whatever reason they like so it is very rational thing to do. Many players on here have pre paid plans or on the builders program so if they get banned they would be significantly out of pocket. If CRS allowed threads on people's real thoughts on their NON-PUBLIC forums then people's true feelings would be there. Antwerp? Aarchost? Rapid Assault? High montly fee's? You can't mention those without getting your thread closed and being one step closer to a ban.
The people who scrape the bottom of the barrel (such as calling individuals out) to defend CRS but they themselves feel let down by CRS are just as bad as anyone who hates something for the point of hating
I definitely don't think Doc coming in here and giving his usual cryptic 'you weren't there man' vibe helps anything.
On the other hand, its pretty cringe watching players overstate their own and their friends' influence on the game. It was a colossal screw up, hi, I'm CRS, nice to meet you.
Amusingly I don't think it was him. It sure gave some people a thrill and showed you how they get banned and treat people.
Originally posted by pittpete Why can't you use your WWII name?
Why don't you give us your full name, location and IP adress so we can check whether your an actual player or just an account made by a CRS employee? I could make an account and call myself bronco69 and pretend to be him when i'm really not.
It's a sign that someone feels they are losing an argument when they descend into questioning the integrity of an individual
Comments
and neither have you.
Well it looks like DOC and some of the allied players think that this is funny. If you still have access to the forums the link's below.
http://forums.battlegroundeurope.com/showthread.php?t=413059
I don't even know if there's a direct equivalent to what DOC did in other games...maybe someone from Blizzard coming on to a server and shutting it down right as a large raid was being completed? At times it seems CRS is running some sort of subscription fan club rather than a business.
The developers of this game have an extremely restricted forum; you need a subscription just to view the threads and it's gotten to the point now that any post that isn't happy thoughts is immediately deleted. They can also go weeks without posting a public update. So several former and current players come here to talk about game changes, it's direction, etc.
Not too many cared and it was a fairly slow conversation, but a short while ago the company decided to do some advertising here and as part of that they implored their remaining players to come here and rebut all the negative comments (apparently updating the game's actual mmorpg.com entry wasn't parr of this brilliant marketing plan). Unfortunately for them, in their fervor to shout down the game's critics they ended up bumping the threads and the negative opinions contained within.
The company is doing a big marketing push on this site, big number one. And number two, the company brass has been embroiled in several controversies recently, and everybody comes here to discuss it.
*edit* david06 beat me to it, consider my version to be shorthand for his...
You do a good job of hurting the game without any of our help. You are quite behind all the hater propaganda so I will give you some time to catch up. Thanks for calling.
Talk of making a mountain out of a molehill.
Axis were OVERPOP when going for Anterwp, like they are regularily. So the that means when overpop comes around they can have a go at taking it again.
Its not the end of the world, unless you someone who is out to score points against the game, its devsn and its players.
What a silly post. I'm not out to score points against anyone, I was defending Antwerp when the server went down.
Whether or not they were overpop, hours and hours of work attacking the most strategically important town on the map was destroyed unnecessarily.
For the game's sake I hope that you are just a regular player or fan, and not a CRS employee posting under an alternate account because your post illustrates a now-classic disconnect that the company has with it's player base.
"This is a big deal."
"No it's not."
"A lot of my friends are pissed off and leaving. I'm thinking about it too."
"You are little children if this upset you. We did nothing wrong."
**player unsubscribes**
Pre-2012 you can throw in a "If you hate the game so much then why are you here? You're welcome to leave at any time." line by CRS.
Post-2012 it's more like "You're not helping the game by bailing on us. You're not sending a message, you're just being selfish."
People endure the game's many failings because they like to coordinate with each other and capture towns on a persistent map. When you wave your hand and prevent the hardest objective on the map from being captured at the last moment, then disregard the complaints there really isn't a reason to keep playing.
I noticed that you used "overpop" justification as well. If CRS does not think it is appropriate for Antwerp to fall during low population and they will take measures to prevent such a scenario, then just come out and say it instead of pretending that it was "maintenance" or that it didn't happen.
Another vague DOC answer saying the players (customers) are all wrong, don't understand blah blah blah. You undertake the server resets at the time you feel like it. Many people find it annoying that you don't have a set time for server resets but just randomly choose a time then say "server down in 15mins", thus negating anyones work. Your always going to piss people off but atleast COMMUNICATE. You could at the very least say to players "we're doing a server reset in 1 hour 30mins, if antwerp not capped it has to go to allies, sorry". Instead you give no warming and show the attitude to players of "stop whining your honoured to play this game". You come across with that attitude players leave, like 100's have done. Subscribers go down then members of CRS which people respect a bit more say "come on guys, leaving is not the right way to put a message across. Now give us $100,000 to make a game you don't want".
'Successful'? It's crumbling by the wayside. If any of the big game companies like Blizzard knew a niche and badly developed game would still be going 11 and a half (not 12) years they would of made one and developed it alot better (and would be alot more successful). The ONLY thing that has kept you going is a core of veteran players who believe in the original CONCEPT of the game. World War 2 online is only still alive because loyal community members are perpared to pay LOTS of money.
From those 300+ new builders you are generating $9000 revenue a month alone. Then you add in the loyal community members with their second accounts and your revenue runs into 10's of thousands of dollars a month (maybe even into the hundreds of thousands). Thus you could probaly keep this game running for a long time yet, people will still pay up but that by no means can be called 'success'
You created a niche game that attracts players with big loyalty (alot ex armed forces) and deep pockets. Your only success is making a game that caters to a lucrative market not in any developing success
Pretty much sums everything up. Bravo
A lot of what you guys say here is true, can't argue that.
I will point out that David you're wrong on the 300 builder accounts.
That 300 number was new subs, heroes & the welcome back soldier for a month subs.
I hope they seriously have hired someone or are in the process of hiring someone to work on the game instead of just managing what they have.
The Antwerp fiasco was the last straw for me. I dont think I can forgive the game makers after how theyve treated their PB and some of the better officers players and leaders of the game. Campaign 88 isnt Axis vs Allies, its Axis vs CRS/Allies.
During this campaign too much BS has occured for it to be a coincidence.
The Axis Cinc, who is one of the more active (pro-active even) officers is AWOL, he is currently non-existent. He was an ex squaddie of mine for a year and this is totally out of character for him.
Overpop in which SD kicks in was changed from 10% to 5% mid campaign, meaning all it takes is 5% overpop on one side to cause spawn delay, funnily enough this was changed when ASA were reforming OPs again. It even seemed to even be exagerated.
Allied divisions were given much more armour than their Axis counterparts. Allied armour brigades were given 52 tanks vs 36 in the Axis brigade. This was changed only after it was questioned, although doc never admitted to it.
I dont know what to think about this "goal of 300 new subs ect by febuary" I cant see it showing how healthy the game is to manage to get a new dev thus an update. Someone could just sub for only a month then unsub. I think the game needs hell of alot more subs to pay for a dev and update it contentwise, fix the server problem so we dont need reboots.
Does it matter if anyone uses their gamename in a forum which isnt dedicated to this game?unless you want a witchhunt?
Which is why the best advice we can give people is:
If you are interested in the idea of a 24/7 dynamic WWIIOL simulator and haven't had a go try the game yourself and see if you like it.
(Rather than listening to a load of players counter-arguing who killed who etc)
DOC has frequently invoked the historical win/loss ratio to justify tweaks in the current version of the game. This is foolish for many reasons, as no new player really cares about a campaign fought in 2004 and the game was drastically different back then, among other things.
That hasn't stopped him from apparently holding it as the #1 priority though.
I just wish they would stop being dishonest about it, just come out and say "WW2online is a simulated battle between two teams, the developers will intervene on each side as they see fit to ensure equity." That would probably kill marketing though.
It's funny that so many threads have been made by a few to make it look like this game has any value or popularity.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
On the other hand, its pretty cringe watching players overstate their own and their friends' influence on the game. It was a colossal screw up, hi, I'm CRS, nice to meet you.
To me it does.
These same people who are here bashing the game are still playing it on a daily basis.
If you don't like the game, thats fine.
Most normal people move past it.
Some here create accounts because they hate the developers and won't give up.
There is a big difference.
Thats why me and many others come here in to point out the players whose agendas go farther than the game.
Comprende?
Excuse me?
I do play the game, my username has nothing to do with you, I am a normal person thank you very much, I think both sides are pathetic, take it to PM
This forum is not ww2online so people have the right to express themself if its not a personal attack like insults or threats, if you don't like it jog on
comprende?
I have read through the TOS for Battleground Europe and it is within CRS power to ban you for whatever reason they like so it is very rational thing to do. Many players on here have pre paid plans or on the builders program so if they get banned they would be significantly out of pocket. If CRS allowed threads on people's real thoughts on their NON-PUBLIC forums then people's true feelings would be there. Antwerp? Aarchost? Rapid Assault? High montly fee's? You can't mention those without getting your thread closed and being one step closer to a ban.
The people who scrape the bottom of the barrel (such as calling individuals out) to defend CRS but they themselves feel let down by CRS are just as bad as anyone who hates something for the point of hating
Amusingly I don't think it was him. It sure gave some people a thrill and showed you how they get banned and treat people.Why don't you give us your full name, location and IP adress so we can check whether your an actual player or just an account made by a CRS employee? I could make an account and call myself bronco69 and pretend to be him when i'm really not.
It's a sign that someone feels they are losing an argument when they descend into questioning the integrity of an individual
pittpete
NY
Been playing since Feb 2003
BTW your other post was a great post.
I'm not here to call people out.
Like I said, hard to know if people are serious and not just padding posts to add to their personal vendettas and agendas.