Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
NotSynpax

The real reason for the WoWs decline

158 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
1,362 posts
4,392 battles

With so few players wg needs to get more money out of each player.

 So they rush unfinished ships, Bad gameplay components and anything else that makes them quick cash.

Spitting out multiple ships a month without proper testing. And game modes not many want.

  With so few players wg needs the wallet warriors to spend not only more per purchase but to purchase more often.

And thats basically whats happening here. 

 Is there a small decline in server numbers? Yes. 

But a good decision from wg could easily bring back players and acquire new ones. Wg track record shows this wont happen though.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
15,660 posts
4,036 battles

I remember when I became a CBT member. Everyone was already saying "this is/will kill the game."

 

2... 3? Not sure how long tbh years later it's still running strong. Though I do notice it seems most people only play 6mo-1yr before moving on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
9,304 posts
On 8/29/2017 at 11:00 AM, awiggin said:

 

Have you bothered to look at the actual stats? :Smile_amazed:

 

https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/na/total

 

And after you look at our stats, look at Asia (Down 60% from peak)

And EU/RU (Down 50% from peak)

 

HvYL1aB.png

 

I doubt the game is going anywhere for awhile, but it's already seen it's best days, two years out of beta....

I can't say the lack of team play is the primary driver, but you'd really have to be out of touch with reality if you think the game is doing well.....

 

 

Gives new context why Wargaming wants to add more Russian premiums, Pan Asian ships and anime content to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,362 posts
4,392 battles

To think wg could of sat and did nothing else but to leave wot alone back in 2013 that game would probably still have the 100k players on the server and not the peak of 25k now.

 Theyve ruined clan wars. Team battles. Company battles. Arty. And so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,091
Members
19,906 posts
5,447 battles
11 hours ago, VGLance said:

 

It is very capable of delivering that kind of content and did so with strongholds.  There is always another option that can help with it and that is additional forms of currency.  Fuel, supplies, faction support (think Japan might provide you with certain bonuses if you play more Japanese ships, etc.).  The possibilities are endless, and the more content provided, the richer the environment and longer people will stay.

 

Agreed. I played the original Planetside for almost 2 years, despite it being twitch-based and me not being good at it, because I was playing to help accomplish a goal.

 

I only stopped playing WW2OL because it simulated warfare TOO well, being 4 parts boredom (try driving a Matilda from one town to another, on a 1/8 scale map of France and the Low Countries, merely to reinforce that town's spawn list) to 1 part adrenaline-fuelled excitement.

 

11 hours ago, Crucis said:

There are no factions in this game.  Only nations.

 

Actually, there are two opposing factions in every match. If you had a framework similar to the Fire and Ice thing, they could be persistent. But unless you are going to have something akin to Planetside or WW2OL, not much use for them.

 

10 hours ago, AraAragami said:

Hard to feel accomplished when your tier 5 cruiser been removed from the match by one of the five 16-inch-armed battleships on the enemy team.

 

Bad example. A Tier 5 BB will remove your Tier 5 CA just as easily. A Tier 7 BB can remove  a Tier 7 CA just as easily as a Tier 5 CA.

 

10 hours ago, AraAragami said:

 

It's been a long time since you played Emerald, Furutaka, Omaha, Konigsberg, or Kirov, huh?

 

Furitaka, yes. Not really playing IJN cruisers at all these days. Kirov? Not a big fan of it in general, don't like the playstyle. Emerald? Wouldn't play it if MM was +/-0. Omaha and KBerg? I play them regularly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,091
Members
19,906 posts
5,447 battles
6 hours ago, Taylor3006 said:

I think that you hit on a very excellent point. I prefer strategy games for the most part and I really don't love WoWS because of the "FPS" feel to it. I really want to love the game, I just can not. WoWS does fall in the middle of these two types of games, maybe it will never see the numbers of players because it really isn't either one of these common game types and will only appeal to a niche market. Really a great point Skpstr, one that makes my feelings about the game more clear.

 

I'm normally pretty hardcore strategy too. Back when I had the time, (and after finding an honest host that didn't edit save files so Germany had a fleet of H39s by 1940 lol) I played the crap out of Hearts of Iron multiplayer. Still my favorite online gaming experience to this day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,128
[SALVO]
Members
17,978 posts
18,611 battles

@Skpstr I'll give you that the team Fire and team Ice (or was it Water) could be classified as "factions".  I just hate it when people calling nations "factions".  It's pure intellectual laziness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
12 hours ago, Eisennagel said:

 

Gives new context why Wargaming wants to add more Russian premiums, Pan Asian ships and anime content to the game.

Nice observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×