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

The current state of the game and why I think Wargaming doesn't care about the PC community.

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
1,536 posts
10 battles

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did.  We know World Of Warships is coming to consoles and in my opinion Wargaming is focusing 90% of their attention on the console release and simply using the PC community as unpaid beta testers for the console versions and the mechanics that will be used there. The CV rework is 100% a beta test for the console version of World Of Warships. It is hot garbage but Wargaming does not care that 95% of the PC community hates it, they are anticipating a big return on the untapped console market.

 With the new players to the game coming in at a tiny trickle =, nowhere near enough to be sustainable I would not be surprised if Wargaming has had meetings and stated to the team that 80% of the money they will make on the PC version has already been maid and there is no need to keep pouring resources into a game that is slowly dying. All the whales who play or played this game are already here or have been here. The only players they are getting now are casual gamers who see an ad or play as a recommendation from a friend. All the hard core Naval combat people knew about this game while it was in development. Wargaming already got our money, there are no more PC whales coming through Wargamings doors. It is there I think they made the decision to use the PC community as beta testers for the console versions. It is also one of the reasons we are seeing so many stock hull ships offered as premiums. The work had already been done and a very minimum amount of resources need to be allocated to get them to the premium store and get some quick cash. Even the Georgia was completed way back in Alpha, it was supposed to be the USN T-10 ship. They chose to go with the Montana instead but they dusted her off and dropped her as a premium to make some quick cash with no real development costs. 

It is just my opinion of course but it does explain the long series of puzzling decisions by Wargaming on what they are doing with the game. 

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 3
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,507
[KSC]
Supertester
2,215 posts
13,109 battles
3 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did. 

...

:Smile_amazed:

...

 

1697654429_giphy(6).gif.de219e5fee7d9919038dcb5dfaa001ec.gif

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
396 posts
13,657 battles

@UssIowaSailor I'm curious how you've formed your opinion. By your profile, you've posted in forums 1,500 times but only played the game 10 times. Is this a posting account and you use another account to play the game or are you addressing this as more of an outsider looking in?

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,086
[WORX]
Members
9,485 posts
17,499 battles
11 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did. 

Lord bless him for he doesn't know what he speaks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[-KAK-]
Members
538 posts
9,911 battles

Um................................................... Ok?

 

Can I have some of whatever you're drinking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,969
[PVE]
Members
3,777 posts
16,140 battles

As I have said before and I believe I am close:  they want a young adult arcade shooter on water.  And that, could be part of what you are alluding to.  The historic and well thought out game was de evolved starting at the cruiser line split.  If anyone can make any sense out of the 8.0 update, I'd love to hear that logic or game play rationale because, the only logical reason to do what they did at 8.0 was to test the market acceptance of a pure arcade shooter with a new meta: the cv....   It failed horribly; and, we are seeing 8.1,2,3 et al. til they figure out another way downwards into a pure shooter....

Otherwise, they would have spent the cash on new Campaigns, Modes of play, events and new, first rate ships...........what did we get: recycled space silliness, stock hull premiums and events what have been watered down.....  I may be wrong and I am guessing at this, gosh, I hope so !  But, there is a deja vu-esk vibe going on recently and I'm having WoTs nightmares......  i.e.:  cv's = artillery; or, Russian Dominance and meta vehicles; or,  Legendary Upgrades for freaking sale; or, yet to come, the "Golden Bullet Trilogy:  golden bullets for BB with re-load booster; golden torpedoes (fire and forget) for DD's with re-load booster; and, Golden AA for ships with radar (proximity munitions....)

Geeze.......  I wish WG would just tell us what they are trying to accomplish for 2019 and that would allow us to put away our tin foil hats.....

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
543
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
1,704 posts
4,097 battles
36 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did.  We know World Of Warships is coming to consoles and in my opinion Wargaming is focusing 90% of their attention on the console release and simply using the PC community as unpaid beta testers for the console versions and the mechanics that will be used there. The CV rework is 100% a beta test for the console version of World Of Warships. It is hot garbage but Wargaming does not care that 95% of the PC community hates it, they are anticipating a big return on the untapped console market.

 With the new players to the game coming in at a tiny trickle =, nowhere near enough to be sustainable I would not be surprised if Wargaming has had meetings and stated to the team that 80% of the money they will make on the PC version has already been maid and there is no need to keep pouring resources into a game that is slowly dying. All the whales who play or played this game are already here or have been here. The only players they are getting now are casual gamers who see an ad or play as a recommendation from a friend. All the hard core Naval combat people knew about this game while it was in development. Wargaming already got our money, there are no more PC whales coming through Wargamings doors. It is there I think they made the decision to use the PC community as beta testers for the console versions. It is also one of the reasons we are seeing so many stock hull ships offered as premiums. The work had already been done and a very minimum amount of resources need to be allocated to get them to the premium store and get some quick cash. Even the Georgia was completed way back in Alpha, it was supposed to be the USN T-10 ship. They chose to go with the Montana instead but they dusted her off and dropped her as a premium to make some quick cash with no real development costs. 

It is just my opinion of course but it does explain the long series of puzzling decisions by Wargaming on what they are doing with the game. 

World of Tanks is about ten years old.  Of course it is going to be more successful than WoWs.  Also, can we get a citation, that is some form of proof, that WoWs has generated 10% what WoT has generated?

About the stock hulls being used?  Ever wonder why the driving scenes in the Flintstones were all the same?  Or why Spiderman swinging his way through New York was all the same?  To reuse the animation work.  Many of the older Disney movies borrowed heavily from previous movies.  Any walking scene with Bugs Bunny, Tweety Bird and Tom & Jerry was mostly reused.

So yeah, Wargaming is going to reuse stuff.  It makes sense not just on saving money, but also saving time.  And frankly... do you expect them to completely redo from scratch the Pennsylvania when they have a perfectly serviceable Arizona to start from?

As for beta testing, so what?  Of course they are going to use things from the PC version in order to create the console versions.  I bet you're one of those folks who complains that we don't have cross compatibility between consoles and PCs, but god, don't make a port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,172
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts

Wow... this has got to be troll post. Did you look up anything or are you just making up everything as you go? For one, Warships actually is more profitable per-player than Tanks is in the last year (tanks is on a serious down turn) and was about even the year before that. Likewise consoles make FAR less money for Freemium games, anyone with even a little knowledge of gaming as a business knows this, with the most profitable Freemium games being predominately mobile, and then PC after that; this is due to a number of factors, least of which is that consoles charge exhortation prices for uploading patches (i.e. new content) and as such DLC content is released in bursts, not constant streams, which does not work with Freemium economies (whale's will buy a new ship per month, but not 10 ships released in one month every 10 months) and likewise console players are typically more 'stingy' with DLC (which is why the Game's as a Service model is geared HEAVILY towards PC releases/PC centric titles). *AND* this ignores that WG is a Russian Company, where most of their profits COMES from Russia, and the market penetration for consoles is VERY poor in Russia and thus not going to net them much sales.

Frankly the move to release console versions is baffling in most lights; I suspect it will be treated as a crappy port/loss leader that hopes to serve as advertising for their PC titles (play it on the Console, like the idea, hate the implementation, and shift to PC which actually DOES happen and is 1 of the reasons PC gaming has (re)grown in the past few years)

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
543
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
1,704 posts
4,097 battles
18 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

As I have said before and I believe I am close:  they want a young adult arcade shooter on water.  And that, could be part of what you are alluding to.  The historic and well thought out game was de evolved starting at the cruiser line split.  If anyone can make any sense out of the 8.0 update, I'd love to hear that logic or game play rationale because, the only logical reason to do what they did at 8.0 was to test the market acceptance of a pure arcade shooter with a new meta: the cv....   It failed horribly; and, we are seeing 8.1,2,3 et al. til they figure out another way downwards into a pure shooter....

Otherwise, they would have spent the cash on new Campaigns, Modes of play, events and new, first rate ships...........what did we get: recycled space silliness, stock hull premiums and events what have been watered down.....  I may be wrong and I am guessing at this, gosh, I hope so !  But, there is a deja vu-esk vibe going on recently and I'm having WoTs nightmares......  i.e.:  cv's = artillery; or, Russian Dominance and meta vehicles; or,  Legendary Upgrades for freaking sale; or, yet to come, the "Golden Bullet Trilogy:  golden bullets for BB with re-load booster; golden torpedoes (fire and forget) for DD's with re-load booster; and, Golden AA for ships with radar (proximity munitions....)

Geeze.......  I wish WG would just tell us what they are trying to accomplish for 2019 and that would allow us to put away our tin foil hats.....

It is an arcade shooter on water, but it cannot be anything but an old man's shooter.  There's practically no twitch to it, and there is no way WoWs could be Counter-Strike or BattleRoyaleHideNSeekSuperFort Mega Edition.

They have, what, three stock hull BBs for the IJN.  Oooh, so many.

Space silliness?  That is their April Fools event that they use to test new stuff in a mode that's not super serious.

Arty?  Every single ship in the game is arty.  What's your point here?

What Russian dominance?  If you take a look at the various WoWs stats webpages, the "dominance" of the Russian ships is not evident.  Some RU ships are on top, sure, but so are many USN, IJN, RN and so on...

And what the heck are you talking about?  What golden bullets are in game, exactly?

Could you please share what the hell you're drinking, snorting, smoking or injecting?

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,684
Alpha Tester
6,181 posts
3,058 battles
41 minutes ago, TheOmegaDuck said:

Can I have some of whatever you're drinking?

I don't think you want whatever he's on. It's probably what led him to formulate this opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
385
[STURM]
Members
666 posts
5,439 battles
51 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did.  We know World Of Warships is coming to consoles and in my opinion Wargaming is focusing 90% of their attention on the console release and simply using the PC community as unpaid beta testers for the console versions and the mechanics that will be used there. The CV rework is 100% a beta test for the console version of World Of Warships. It is hot garbage but Wargaming does not care that 95% of the PC community hates it, they are anticipating a big return on the untapped console market.

 With the new players to the game coming in at a tiny trickle =, nowhere near enough to be sustainable I would not be surprised if Wargaming has had meetings and stated to the team that 80% of the money they will make on the PC version has already been maid and there is no need to keep pouring resources into a game that is slowly dying. All the whales who play or played this game are already here or have been here. The only players they are getting now are casual gamers who see an ad or play as a recommendation from a friend. All the hard core Naval combat people knew about this game while it was in development. Wargaming already got our money, there are no more PC whales coming through Wargamings doors. It is there I think they made the decision to use the PC community as beta testers for the console versions. It is also one of the reasons we are seeing so many stock hull ships offered as premiums. The work had already been done and a very minimum amount of resources need to be allocated to get them to the premium store and get some quick cash. Even the Georgia was completed way back in Alpha, it was supposed to be the USN T-10 ship. They chose to go with the Montana instead but they dusted her off and dropped her as a premium to make some quick cash with no real development costs. 

It is just my opinion of course but it does explain the long series of puzzling decisions by Wargaming on what they are doing with the game. 

Uhhh... citation needed?

Seriously, you throw around lots of numbers without actually saying where you got them.

Wait...

Now that I look at it, you sure have a lot of weasel words in there. "Probably." "in my opinion." "I would not be surprised." This is just you not liking a recent change or two and deciding to doom-say instead of providing reasons or suggestions.

And as for your thing about stock hulls... would you rather that WG throw away all the work they put in the stock hulls when they removed them to make the tech tree ships in question better? Why shouldn't they release them as premiums in a tier where they fit better?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,684
Alpha Tester
6,181 posts
3,058 battles
20 minutes ago, Gasboy said:

Ever wonder why the driving scenes in the Flintstones were all the same?  Or why Spiderman swinging his way through New York was all the same?  To reuse the animation work.  Many of the older Disney movies borrowed heavily from previous movies.  Any walking scene with Bugs Bunny, Tweety Bird and Tom & Jerry was mostly reused.

I know this is a bit of a nitpick, but classic Looney Tunes rarely reused animation like Hanna-Barbera cartoons did. Chuck Jones, one of the lead guys behind the classic cartoons, hated the concept and chastised it as lazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,608
[5D2]
Supertester
2,308 posts
22,562 battles

This is word vomit with a dash of stupidity laced diarrhea. . . I dont feel well after reading it... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
543
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
1,704 posts
4,097 battles
2 minutes ago, 1Sherman said:

I know this is a bit of a nitpick, but classic Looney Tunes rarely reused animation like Hanna-Barbera cartoons did. Chuck Jones, one of the lead guys behind the classic cartoons, hated the concept and chastised it as lazy.

Rarely doesn't mean never, and there's at least a decade of Looney Tunes where he was not in charge of the animation.  Regardless, there are still repeated scenes of animation that you can find easily in classic Warner Brothers stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
794 posts
1,707 battles
1 hour ago, UssIowaSailor said:

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did.  We know World Of Warships is coming to consoles and in my opinion Wargaming is focusing 90% of their attention on the console release and simply using the PC community as unpaid beta testers for the console versions and the mechanics that will be used there. The CV rework is 100% a beta test for the console version of World Of Warships. It is hot garbage but Wargaming does not care that 95% of the PC community hates it, they are anticipating a big return on the untapped console market.

Image result for everything you just said was wrong meme

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
947
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
2,343 posts
5,943 battles

Games like this sometimes reach a "coffin corner" where any move the dev makes results in a life threatening stall.  We've been here for a while and the new CVs are just a particularly rough bit of turbulence. Let's just hope the pilot knows what they are doing and laid off the vodka before the flight.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,872
[SIM]
Members
4,649 posts
7,770 battles

Last I heard, WoWs console has no CVs? That could have changed, admittedly. The rework is not the result of WG catering to controller players, it’s what they did to address the fact that only a tiny cross-section of the game’s player base enjoyed using RTS CVs, and an even smaller fraction enjoyed playing against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,547
[PVE]
Members
19,833 posts
11,995 battles

Yeah, because they hate the PC community so much that you can get $82 worth of premium camo for an easy Directive grind. :Smile_sceptic:

:Smile_facepalm:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
543
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
1,704 posts
4,097 battles
1 minute ago, Kizarvexis said:

Yeah, because they hate the PC community so much that you can get $82 worth of premium camo for an easy Directive grind. :Smile_sceptic:

:Smile_facepalm:

But but, I have to click the battle button! D: D: D: :( :( :( Oh noes is me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,547
[PVE]
Members
19,833 posts
11,995 battles
2 minutes ago, Gasboy said:

But but, I have to click the battle button! D: D: D: :( :( :( Oh noes is me!

:Smile_teethhappy:

Yep, wait until Wednesday when they discover the four 3M credit missions and the 10M credit mission. There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

 

Of course 4 of the 10 will have nothing to do with credits. One will be the premium CV mission. So to complete the Directive, you will need to grind 3M credits if you have a premium CV and 6M if you do not.

 

Same for next week with the four 10k base XP missions and the one 35k base XP missions. They won't think that the three Daily crates takes 5,350 base XP and they will have a week to do the missions. I'm sure the world will end when those missions drop.:Smile_sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
[BNKR]
Members
1,573 posts
2,090 battles

Would you mind posting links to where you collected the evidence for your post? I'd like a chance to review the data myself. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,547
[PVE]
Members
19,833 posts
11,995 battles
1 minute ago, RagingxMarmoset said:

Would you mind posting links to where you collected the evidence for your post? I'd like a chance to review the data myself. Thanks!

I would suggest a dark and smelly orifice that you don't talk about in polite company.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,925
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
11,088 posts
15,092 battles
1 hour ago, UssIowaSailor said:

World of Warships is 4 years old now, commercially even the most optimistic person would say the PC version has been a huge disappointment. Compared to how successful World of Tanks was, World Of Warships probably generated about 10% of the revenue WOT did.  We know World Of Warships is coming to consoles and in my opinion Wargaming is focusing 90% of their attention on the console release and simply using the PC community as unpaid beta testers for the console versions and the mechanics that will be used there. The CV rework is 100% a beta test for the console version of World Of Warships. It is hot garbage but Wargaming does not care that 95% of the PC community hates it, they are anticipating a big return on the untapped console market.

 With the new players to the game coming in at a tiny trickle =, nowhere near enough to be sustainable I would not be surprised if Wargaming has had meetings and stated to the team that 80% of the money they will make on the PC version has already been maid and there is no need to keep pouring resources into a game that is slowly dying. All the whales who play or played this game are already here or have been here. The only players they are getting now are casual gamers who see an ad or play as a recommendation from a friend. All the hard core Naval combat people knew about this game while it was in development. Wargaming already got our money, there are no more PC whales coming through Wargamings doors. It is there I think they made the decision to use the PC community as beta testers for the console versions. It is also one of the reasons we are seeing so many stock hull ships offered as premiums. The work had already been done and a very minimum amount of resources need to be allocated to get them to the premium store and get some quick cash. Even the Georgia was completed way back in Alpha, it was supposed to be the USN T-10 ship. They chose to go with the Montana instead but they dusted her off and dropped her as a premium to make some quick cash with no real development costs. 

It is just my opinion of course but it does explain the long series of puzzling decisions by Wargaming on what they are doing with the game. 

Bored GIF

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×