Update 1.4.1 General feedback
Дата: 21.03.2019 20:44:38
Flint_74, on 21 March 2019 - 04:59 PM, said: Well done, not only do you quote someone else's comment in
replying to my post and apparently mis-attribute Srele007's post
from page 4 of this thread to me, but you also then try to put
words in MY mouth by thoroughly and deliberately MISQUOTING what I
actually asked. Congratulations on reaching a new unprofessional
low... You know, maybe if you'd actually gotten off your
high horse for just a second and bothered to read and understand
what I ACTUALLY WROTE you would have seen that I categorically DID
NOT ask WG to stop advertising their products in-game. I absolutely
do understand that this is a free-to-play game and that this is how
WG make most/all of their money, and that's perfectly fine, instead
all I did was quite reasonably ask if the playerbase could have an
option in the games settings to disable the incessant and
thoroughly distracting marketing (a.k.a. intelligence) pop-ups that
appear in the garage, because contrary to what you and WG might
want to believe, not everyone that plays WoT is interested in
spending money on this game, and thus fairly presumably not
everyone wants to see a never-ending stream of mostly redundant and
largely intrusive adverts flashing up on-screen when they're just
trying to play the game and have a little bit of fun while doing
that. So look, with the greatest of respect, if WG aren't
going to provide such a basic option, that's completely fine too,
but at least have the common courtesy to answer the damned question
in even a semi-professional manner, even if the answer is 'no',
instead of bringing the unnecessarily defensive attitude, because
that just reflects poorly, not only on you personally as a member
of WG Staff, but on WG as a whole. And as for the
matchmaking thing, I literally haven't demanded anything, and I
also haven't asked WG to give into anything, or for them to
immediately give the playerbase anything "now", unless asking a
perfectly fair and legitimate question is somehow now considered
making a demand around here? But surely WG aren't so sensitive as
to mistake a fair question for a demand, are they? Instead
I, and rather a lot of people around here apparently, would simply
like to see some actual progress being made to finally resolve the
matchmaking issue, even if that progress comes in the form of much
more regular progress updates being posted, e.g. once a month
instead of once per quarter/once per half year as we've been
getting. And yes WG might well have staffing issues, and scheduling
issues, and all kinds of other internal financial, time, and
manpower issues, that have all conspired to slow down the attempts
to fix the the matchmaking problem, but, once again, this has been
ongoing for the best part of almost two years now, so if the people
in charge of WG can't figure out within that extended timeframe to
simply hire more staff, and/or to make whatever other necessary
changes are required to get such a serious problem affecting their
premier game fixed, then that just reflects poorly on the
decision-making processes within WG. Oh, and one final
thing, I've seen and heard the whole "you don't speak for the
playerbase/community" argument being used before, many times in
fact, I've even seen it dressed up in all kinds of ways too, and
frankly it's tired and it simply doesn't wash anymore, because
bitter experience has repeatedly shown that it smacks of a games
developer/community mangement team living in denial, so by all
means WG absolutely should feel free to brush off individual
players concerns about the state of things as being not
representative, and instead WG should feel free to bury their head
in the sand and ignore what's going on regarding the continuing
valid concerns of this games playerbase if they want to, but WG
should absolutely do all of that entirely at their own peril.
At this point I'll just presume we won't get an option to
disable the pop-ups, and that the disabled team damage thing will
happen when it happens, and that the matchmaking problems will
hopefully be resolved 'soon™'. Thank you for your time.
Geno1isme, on 21 March 2019 - 05:45 PM, said: To be clear: WIth "you" I usually mean WG, not you personally. I'm fully aware that you're just doing your job by defending the company policies (though you have a very defensive style even for WG staff) and can't really do anything about it. Partially this grudge also comes because we don't really have unofficial information channels anymore as you closed basically all the leaks for TBD, TAP and RSR, so we're pretty much stuck with whatever bits of intel you guys can release. Unfortunately for you that also means that we will bug you constantly and every word from you and every picture in articles will now be analyzed to death What would have been nice after the WG Fest announcement is something like Scheduled for Q1: special ammo testing phase 1, frontline return, wheeled vehicles, multithreading Planned for Q2: bond tanks stage 1, ranked battles season 3, CW season 11, special ammo testing phase 2 Planned for Q3: swedish mediums, new premium account, bond tanks stage 2, MM rework Planned for Q4: ranked battles season 4, CW season 12, special ammo rework And not just be informed one or two weeks before things actually go live. And yeah, secrecy is common (not only) in the gaming industry. Doesn't mean we have to like it. It's just even more frustrating with live services.
Saar_Lion, on 21 March 2019 - 05:53 PM, said: I haven't played since this "representative" had me banned from the forum for 14 days for helping him make himself look condescending, stupid and useless at his "job". Hope the powers that be don't miss my money and sack him... that would be awful
eekeeboo: If you say: "who was demanding anything?" and you
claim to speak on behalf of the "playerbase" then i will reference
the player base. If you do not like this, please consider not
speaking on behalf of the whole player base. I am answering
the questions you ask, that is simply it. And I am not
on a high horse, I am once again answering your questions. Please
feel free to re-read them. You might not be interested
in spending money on the game, that's your choice, but a game is
interested in getting as many people as possible to spend money,
that's how the business works specially a F2P title.
You are entitled to play the game completely for free, that does
not mean you are entitled to demand better and more features as
someone who has no interest in supporting the game. You support
those who pay bills, not those who give you higher bills.
You say you speak for the community and from what you said
you take the time and effort away from those who pay and make
claims on their behalf. If you take the time to read all of the
comments from the community, not just those that align with your
own opinions, I believe you will be in for a surprise on your
remarks.
Geno1isme, on 21 March 2019 - 05:45 PM, said: To be clear: WIth "you" I usually mean WG, not you personally. I'm fully aware that you're just doing your job by defending the company policies (though you have a very defensive style even for WG staff) and can't really do anything about it. Partially this grudge also comes because we don't really have unofficial information channels anymore as you closed basically all the leaks for TBD, TAP and RSR, so we're pretty much stuck with whatever bits of intel you guys can release. Unfortunately for you that also means that we will bug you constantly and every word from you and every picture in articles will now be analyzed to death What would have been nice after the WG Fest announcement is something like Scheduled for Q1: special ammo testing phase 1, frontline return, wheeled vehicles, multithreading Planned for Q2: bond tanks stage 1, ranked battles season 3, CW season 11, special ammo testing phase 2 Planned for Q3: swedish mediums, new premium account, bond tanks stage 2, MM rework Planned for Q4: ranked battles season 4, CW season 12, special ammo rework And not just be informed one or two weeks before things actually go live. And yeah, secrecy is common (not only) in the gaming industry. Doesn't mean we have to like it. It's just even more frustrating with live services.
eekeeboo: It can appear defensive when it simply matters of fact. I
always mention and repeat I give facts and info as they are, I want
people to be informed and understand the reasons for choices and
circumstances and if things will not change for reasons I can't
share, they need to understand at the least things are that way for
a reason. I'm always happy to be bugged for more
information and we are working on being more forthright with things
like the ST leak and news/updates, we share more information with
CCs directly more than ever who also have embargos and deadlines
etc. This is so that all the information that comes out, is correct
and not misleading (highlighting my first point). The
reason you don't get such a break down is for a multitude of
reasons, but because plans change, and if we said that, people
would have high hopes and say "you broke..." You can preface
with... rough plan, but still people will ignore it. Some things
end up being moved back or not coming at all or even changed
completely, developers will make claims they can stick to 90+% of
the time for those reasons and will pass on info to share when it's
ready so no false promises or issues arise from it.
And I get secrecy isn't as nice as transparency, but not everyone
is reasonable with transparency and good intentions, many people
see plans as concrete timetables and even more don't understand how
literally 24 hours before going live things can be cancelled or
break. 18:45 Added after 0 minutes
Saar_Lion, on 21 March 2019 - 05:53 PM, said: I haven't played since this "representative" had me banned from the forum for 14 days for helping him make himself look condescending, stupid and useless at his "job". Hope the powers that be don't miss my money and sack him... that would be awful
eekeeboo: I wish you luck in your future, if you don't want to be
banned, please follow the rules. Thank-you.
Update 1.4.1 General feedback