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

If you thought the CV rework had gone south, check this out.

93 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
552 posts

 

Welp this is why the games population is stagnating and declining.

 

Who the hell is in charge over at WGing marketing? Like seriously who thought this was a good idea over at WGing?

 

Many players missed out on the chance to get the Mighty Mo, which had been promised by WGing to be kept in the game. Permanently. They took it out citing that it made too much money, which was the entire draw of the ship. But their reasoning for these two ships? Cause it would mean too many T9 ships in the game.

What? No seriously what?

And I agree with Notser, good luck using Coal. They wasn't even enough time to collect the amount of Coal needed (unless you have no other things in life to do) since they added the Arsenal into the game.

 

My take on this though. They are doing this to boost sales. Plain and simple. By giving players who don't have these ships a ultimatum, they are now forcing those players hands into spending real money to get these ships before they are moved from the game for good. Because "indefinite future" means a near 0% chance of them coming back. And no the whole "You can choose not to pay real money" is a dead excuse that needs to be stopped. Cause same is said about Lootboxes (which this game has) and those manipulate the player.

 

 

 

Point is first the CV Rework announcement fiasco (cause it is and it's clear with how many people aren't happy about it) and now this. WGing is shooting themselves in the foot at this point.

 

Hope everyone who wants these has wads of cash on hand to fork over to WGing, cause you are going to have to.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
280
Beta Testers
758 posts
9,489 battles

Important news flah ....  wg is a for profit company. They have developers to pay.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
2 minutes ago, Velled said:

Important news flah ....  wg is a for profit company. They have developers to pay.

I've heard that about Stars Wars Battle Front 2 and just about any game with incestuous MTs and Lootboxes. And I don't buy it and honestly if people still believe that then they are why these sort of practices still exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
889
[INTEL]
Members
1,467 posts
12,036 battles
4 minutes ago, Phasferous said:

 

Welp this is why the games population is stagnating and declining.

 

Who the hell is in charge over at WGing marketing? Like seriously who thought this was a good idea over at WGing?

 

Many players missed out on the chance to get the Mighty Mo, which had been promised by WGing to be kept in the game. Permanently. They took it out citing that it made too much money, which was the entire draw of the ship. But their reasoning for these two ships? Cause it would mean too many T9 ships in the game.

What? No seriously what?

And I agree with Notser, good luck using Coal. They wasn't even enough time to collect the amount of Coal needed (unless you have no other things in life to do) since they added the Arsenal into the game.

 

My take on this though. They are doing this to boost sales. Plain and simple. By giving players who don't have these ships a ultimatum, they are now forcing those players hands into spending real money to get these ships before they are moved from the game for good. Because "indefinite future" means a near 0% chance of them coming back. And no the whole "You can choose not to pay real money" is a dead excuse that needs to be stopped. Cause same is said about Lootboxes (which this game has) and those manipulate the player.

 

Whoever put a Monkey in charge over at the head of the WoWs division was not in the right mind.

 

Take that back, putting a Chimp in charge would actually be a smart idea, since chimps seem to have more intelligence then the average human. So that would be a compliment in this case. :Smile_veryhappy:

 

Point is first the CV Rework announcement fiasco (cause it is and it's clear with how many people aren't happy about it) and now this. WGing is shooting themselves in the foot at this point.

 

Hope everyone who wants these has wads of cash on hand to fork over to WGing, cause you are going to have to.

Anxiously awaiting the release of your new and amazingly perfect game. I hear its going to be totally free, no charge for any content ever, and its projected to attract 50million players a night, per region.

 

 So when?

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
2 minutes ago, Ares1967 said:

Anxiously awaiting the release of your new and amazingly perfect game. I hear its going to be totally free, no charge for any content ever, and its projected to attract 50million players a night, per region.

 

 So when?

When WGing can no longer sell lootboxes in the US. I don't think Russia will ever care about this but the US is a major market for them. So once they are banned here then we might see that. But otherwise we can only hope.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,260 posts
10,135 battles
8 minutes ago, Phasferous said:

My take on this though. They are doing this to boost sales. Plain and simple. By giving players who don't have these ships a ultimatum, they are now forcing those players hands into spending real money to get these ships before they are moved from the game for good. Because "indefinite future" means a near 0% chance of them coming back. And no the whole "You can choose not to pay real money" is a dead excuse that needs to be stopped. Cause same is said about Lootboxes (which this game has) and those manipulate the player.

 

6 minutes ago, Velled said:

Important news flah ....  wg is a for profit company. They have developers to pay.

 

3 minutes ago, Phasferous said:

I've heard that about Stars Wars Battle Front 2 and just about any game with incestuous MTs and Lootboxes. And I don't buy it and honestly if people still believe that then they are why these sort of practices still exist.

giphy.gif

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
3 minutes ago, Octavian_of_Roma said:

 

 

giphy.gif

In words please. Not sure if this is you saying this is bogus or you agreeing with Velled, or something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,260 posts
10,135 battles

Sure I guess............. You say, "They are doing this to boost sales. Plain and simple".  Okay

Velled says, "wg is a for profit company. They have developers to pay". Okay

I would say those things line up. Yah WG is a for profit company and wants to boost sales.

Then you say, "And I don't buy it and honestly if people still believe that then they are why these sort of practices still exist." - in response to Velled

So are you saying now this isnt to boost sales, plain and simple?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
1 minute ago, Octavian_of_Roma said:

Sure I guess............. You say, "They are doing this to boost sales. Plain and simple".  Okay

Velled says, "wg is a for profit company. They have developers to pay". Okay

I would say those things line up. Yah WG is a for profit company and wants to boost sales.

Then you say, "And I don't buy it and honestly if people still believe that then they are why these sort of practices still exist." - in response to Velled

So are you saying now this isnt to boost sales, plain and simple?

Because you can boost sales without being insidious. Like making the game better, add more Non-Prem content. More ships. More game modes. Advertise your game without relying on Twitch streamers and YouTube creators. Which WGing does a lot. They even do it with YT Creators who aren't actually active players in the game.

Or you can do the EA and WGing way where you've lost profit elsewhere (in this case EU countries who have banned lootboxes) and so you push harder in places they aren't banned like the US and Russia. Cause if you lose profit once place you have to then make it up elsewhere. How you make profit is what matters. Yes a company who makes a product needs to make money. That's how it works. How they then choose to make said profit can either make them a consumer friendly company, or essentially EA and Comcast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts

And I mean if you've watched the video. Notser himself is saying this is anti-consumer. So it's not just some random user on the game forums saying it. It's also a major player in the community who's also helped test ships for this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,260 posts
10,135 battles

Notser has his own opinions on things. My opinion differs on what is an insidious business practice. I dont believe what WG is doing with these ships is that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
718
[WOLF3]
Members
1,498 posts
5,911 battles

Loot boxes:  Premium loot boxes in WoWs deliver more "in-game" value than their price.  They won't be affected by any proposed gambling legislation.  

You may not be happy with what you get, but you never lose money buying them.

You should think of them as a "grab bag".  They are not gambling.

Musashi and Kronstadt:  Artificial scarcity to increase sales.  I have to agree with that. 

Musa is strong, not OP.  Kronk is strong in the right hands, also not OP.

Neither of them are economic windfalls like the Trump Wagon.

I can think of no reason, other than artificial scarcity, for these ships to be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
Just now, Octavian_of_Roma said:

Notser has his own opinions on things. My opinion differs on what is an insidious business practice. I dont believe what WG is doing with these ships is that. 

Honestly I think that's fair. That you don't agree with Noster or myself. I don't agree with you but nothing wrong with that either.

 

I just don't believe that this change is what WGing is making it out to be. And that that have taken a financial hit due to the loss of them being able to sell containers/lootboxes in part of the EU. The chance in container prices did actually correlate shortly after the ban. And I've seen plenty of people on here saying that the container price is higher then it has ever been, even compared to last year. So yes I do thick this is WGing trying to make up for lost profits and this change is a very blatant cash grab for them.

 

You won't agree with me from what you've said but that's perfectly okay.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
1 minute ago, Captain_Slattery said:

Loot boxes:  Premium loot boxes in WoWs deliver more "in-game" value than their price.  They won't be affected by any proposed gambling legislation.  

You may not be happy with what you get, but you never lose money buying them.

You should think of them as a "grab bag".  They are not gambling.

Musashi and Kronstadt:  Artificial scarcity to increase sales.  I have to agree with that. 

Musa is strong, not OP.  Kronk is strong in the right hands, also not OP.

Neither of them are economic windfalls like the Trump Wagon.

I can think of no reason, other than artificial scarcity, for these ships to be removed.

Let me ask you this, what is the difference between the lootboxes in SW: Battlefront 2 and the containers in WoWs?

Tell me what sets them apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,042
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
7,866 posts
21,077 battles
28 minutes ago, Velled said:

Important news flah ....  wg is a for profit company. They have developers to pay.

News flash, angering your customers does not increase your income........

I have zero problem with companies making a profit, I love the free market and want Wargaming to do well because I enjoy their product (WoWS). What I don't like is the lack of options. When Wargaming made that video with the two Russian guys and they said that there were too many Musashi and Krons in the game, I just looked at the monitor and said "DUH!". There have been 4 total ships available for free xp. The MO's time was short and the Nelson is a tier 7 and arguably the worst choice of the 4. With such limited options, what were the players supposed to buy? Just so much stupid that it is hard to fathom. 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
2 minutes ago, Taylor3006 said:

News flash, angering your customers does not increase your income........

I have zero problem with companies making a profit, I love the free market and want Wargaming to do well because I enjoy their product (WoWS). What I don't like is the lack of options. When Wargaming made that video with the two Russian guys and they said that there were too many Musashi and Krons in the game, I just looked at the monitor and said "DUH!". There have been 4 total ships available for free xp. The MO's time was short and the Nelson is a tier 7 and arguably the worst choice of the 4. With such limited options, what were the players supposed to buy? Just so much stupid that it is hard to fathom. 

You put it very well. You can make income but you won't if you just piss off all the people keeping your boat afloat. Not pun intended. xD

 

I bought the Nelson and I like it, but I know it has some major weaknesses. I mean all the ships in this game do, but I agree that this game has a serious lack of substance and content. Which is why the games grind is so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,900
[HYDRO]
Members
3,473 posts
4,940 battles

 While artificial scarcity has been touched already, I think the wording of the announcement for the removal for these two ships was pretty careful.

I don't believe this will be the same as the removal of Missouri, since Mo was far too profitable to even bother with any other premium. So hopefully once WG believes the ships aren't that popular, they should return.

However, by the exact same logic, Alaska, a ship with huge hype that was awaited since the start of the game should be removed about a month after her introduction due to her popularity :Smile_teethhappy:.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
1 minute ago, warheart1992 said:

Artificial scarcity that has been touched already, I think the wording of the announcement for the removal for these two ships was pretty careful.

I don't believe this will be the same as the removal of Missouri, since Mo was far to profitable to even bother with any other premium. So hopefully once WG believes the ships aren't that popular, they should return.

However, by the exact same logic, Alaska, a ship with huge hype that was awaited since the start of the game should be removed about a month after her introduction due to her popularity :Smile_teethhappy:.

From the sounds of it, Notser doesn't think either of these ships (more so the Musashi) will be coming back. Ever.

And honestly because he's part of the community testing team for the game, I'd have take it word for it. I mean unless another tester can say otherwise on here then it's all we really have. Logically speaking Noster and the other testers already have knowledge before the rest of us. And Noster has nearly always been very open and vocal with the player base about the ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
906
[-WTP-]
Members
1,343 posts
3,137 battles

WG is a free game. I don’t see how loot boxes would be taken out. The entire crap show with SWBF2 was that you paid 60 bucks for a game, only to have loot boxes thrown in your face, which was a blatently pay to win model with the star cards. I mean in the beginning people were talking about how EA was using the basic pay to win model from mobile games.  Now that is bad....

Edited by Legio_X_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,495
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
9,051 posts

Are you mad because a free XP ship was replaced by another? Well, many others got this free ship when it was available by simply playing more often than you. Do you complain because a ship you wanted to buy with coal has been removed? Again, if you devoted your time and effort entirely to obtaining coal to get that one ship then you would be able to get it before the switch. Are you upset because one Premium for sale in the shop has been replaced by another? Well, if you don't like what's now available then don't buy it, nobody is forcing you to do so.

This is a "pay for convenience" game.  I noticed a player in a tier VIII Premium the other day come up with one of the very first awards in chat. He was paying for the convenience of not having to grind to tier VIII and power to him if that's what he wanted to do as it helps keep the game going.  In very few instances has this game ever been "pay to win" and changes in the overall game have usually been made if a Premium became too vastly overpowered in comparison to the regular ship lines.

In my two or so years of play, I've found that WG bends over backwards in trying to keep the game interesting and to make sure that even its free to play players have balanced ships with an opportunity for all the necessary perks. As someone who has played computer games since I had to program my own games on an Apple, the effort WG puts into constantly updating the game and trying to keep it interesting is simply amazing. The game I played seriously before this, a popular RTS game, had a total of three expansions and about five patches in its 10-year history.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
552 posts
3 minutes ago, Legio_X_ said:

WG is a free game. I don’t see how loot boxes would be taken out. The entire crap show with SWBF2 was that you paid 60 bucks for a game, only to have loot boxes thrown in your face, which was a blatently pay to win model with the star cards.

Except lootboxes were banned in parts of the EU regardless of if it was a paid game or not. Which itself makes a clear statement.

On top of that you have to remember that lootboxes (and thus the containers in WoWs) prey upon those who either have gambling addictions are can easily be given the habit. That's the issue with the very concept of Lootboxes.

Doesn't matter if the game is paid or free. They still manipulate and trick the players brain into think "Just one more couldn't hurt". Why do you think underage gambling has become rampant in the UK due to lootboxes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,495
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
9,051 posts
5 minutes ago, Phasferous said:

Except lootboxes were banned in parts of the EU regardless of if it was a paid game or not. Which itself makes a clear statement.

On top of that you have to remember that lootboxes (and thus the containers in WoWs) prey upon those who either have gambling addictions are can easily be given the habit. That's the issue with the very concept of Lootboxes.

Doesn't matter if the game is paid or free. They still manipulate and trick the players brain into think "Just one more couldn't hurt". Why do you think underage gambling has become rampant in the UK due to lootboxes?

Sellers have been doing this since human history began. The main purpose of advertisers is to convince people that they need something that they really don't.

Lootboxes are no different than an old arcade game where you paid a quarter for five minutes of enjoyment. States hold lotteries, which are essentially lootboxes, ones with a very pathetic return rate.

Edited by Snargfargle
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
906
[-WTP-]
Members
1,343 posts
3,137 battles
2 minutes ago, Phasferous said:

Except lootboxes were banned in parts of the EU regardless of if it was a paid game or not. Which itself makes a clear statement.

On top of that you have to remember that lootboxes (and thus the containers in WoWs) prey upon those who either have gambling addictions are can easily be given the habit. That's the issue with the very concept of Lootboxes.

Doesn't matter if the game is paid or free. They still manipulate and trick the players brain into think "Just one more couldn't hurt". Why do you think underage gambling has become rampant in the UK due to lootboxes?

In my opinion loot boxes don’t bother me in a free game. Now something I paid for and they have them that’s a different story.  Maybe I think differently on the matter because I can control my gambling ie: loot box buying.

yes I know some people have problems in that department, but how you can juggle between people who have control and from those that don’t? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×