degolocc

Registered Users
  • Content count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Green Tag

About degolocc

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday
  1. Well you choosing to not play for 5 days is a bit different then being told you can't play the campaign for 5 days. That was my point. Sure, I can test things out. Hell I can play for free on the test server. But that isn't what I pay for. 5 or 6 days is about a quarter of our subscription time per month. Far too long to have a downtime for a paid game. Should be down for 2 days at the most, and NEVER on a weekend, IMO. Obviously, we don't make the rules, but as a paying customer we are entitled to voice our disagreement.
  2. Fair enough, so will us subscribers get credited an extra 5 or 6 days on our subscriptions? Because I didn't resubscribe after a 6 year break, a couple weeks ago, just to miss out on a whole week of play... Your answer will be telling.... 18 bucks for a month of play ain't cheap. So I personally expect my service to be in full swing for that 30 days. Not missing a week. If my phones service took a week break, best believe I would find another service. Just my opinion of course....
  3. I think if CRS came up with a way to market wwii online as a persistent hardcore wwii simulator, instead of a "game" nothing more or less, then they would draw the right crowd. Face it, this game as it is, will never be more than a niche audience favorite. Let me explain why. Trying to make this game more "arcade-like" and fast paced might draw some new players in, for the wrong reasons, and their stay will be short term. The type of younger gamer of today has a short attention span and hardly plays the same game for months, let alone years. They move on as soon as the next AAA title is released, never to return. So seeking out that type of player, the fortnite, PUBG, COD style players.. is a waste of CRS's time. Especially when there is already a more arcade version of wwiionline already out called H & G and they do a good job just for what it is, except smaller maps for battles, and the persistent map is only for high command. But basically, it's similar but faster paced game with updated graphics, smooth arcade like gameplay, and guys able to be shot 3 or 4 times before they die. So you see, it wouldn't do them any good to try and make their game more like a game that already exists and does it better than this game could do it. The charm of this game is the realism, and they should stick too it, slower paced and all. The core ppl who play this game have played on and off for 15+ years. That being said, changes like the FMS are a GOOD thing and I am happy to see it. Finding the balance between realism and fun is a tedious tight rope walk, but I think CRS might pull it off. I honestly also wish they would go back to letting free accounts have at least one armor and one plane too, instead of just rifle, for the sake of population. Especially in the later AM hours.
  4. VERY enjoyable squad, I have a blast every time I log in to play with these guys.
  5. I think this game is fine the way it is as far as being realistic, and big. This game is one of the few games over the years that has not catered to casual carebear, has not made drastic changes to easy mod, and has remained hardcore for the most part. I'm thinking about resbbing after being gone for 6 years, the last few days on the free trial have been pretty epic. And the graphics update helped a lot, the game used to look pretty horrid, now it's decent, when you keep in mind the sheer scale of the game. Would love to see more players, but TBH, I'm very surprised and happy that there is still as many people playing after all these years.