• Announcements

    • PITTPETE

      NEW Career Subscriptions now available   06/08/2019

      The all new highly anticipated / requested "Career Based Subscriptions" are available through www.WWIIONLINE.com/account only, starting at $9.99! There are three new subscriptions being added; 1) All Infantry at $9.99/mo, 2) All Air Forces at $9.99/mo, 3) All Ground Forces (Army Persona) at $12.99/mo. Continue reading to learn more and get back into the fight now! View the full article on battlegroundeurope.com
    • CHIMM

      18th Anniversary Event Awards!   06/23/2019

      This year we are giving out trophies and awards for the top players during the "Kill a RAT" event! We need the following players to contact @CHIMM at chimm@corneredrats.com with your physical address to mail these out.   @mook2  @dasei88  @c00per  @kardehk  @chau90  @kdped02  @Simcha  @pulfer  @bus0    
ou812

Why isn't this game more popular??

165 posts in this topic

Their still isn't a game like this out there. To play in one game world half the size of Europe is a amazing thing, and with everyone all playing on the same map makes it even more awesome.

And i think most agree that when a massive battle happens, there really isnt any other game that can compare to this. For me i have never played a game that gives me the sense of war like this.

That brings up my main question. Why isn't this game more popular? We have times when their is alot of people online(especially Buckeyes funeral event with over 200 people all in Antwerp which was a sight to see!) which makes it alot of fun! But we also have times where their isn't hardly anyone on, and we all know what makes this game is the players! The more players the more fun!

Is it because not many people know about this game to begin with? Are pc's not as popular as it used to be? When free to play was implemented i thought for sure we would see huge amounts more on.

I know this game though to isn't for everyone. Their are a lot of times where you might not see the enemy for awhile. Some might be more into the fast action of call of duty and battlefield. I think the biggest thing though is a lot of people just simply never heard of this game. What do you all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That brings up my main question. Why isn't this game more popular?

For me the answer is simple.

1. Much gamers like only games with extrem good graphic and BGE have this feature not.

2. Not all gamers in the world unterstand english. If you not unterstand english so you can play only as a normel player here. No chance for HC or somehting other. World war two games are in europe very popular but much here cant unterstand english or only a little bit. Some friends from me have left the game because they unterstand nothing in the Chat and see no future for own militär rise. I can only speak for the axis side but if you cant read english here you must play alone. The axis HC communicates only with players that unterstand english no small translate for the main Important strategy news in some other big languages. After steam relase i think many not englisch understand players left the game soon. Of example if you join new a game and all other players in your team wrote in russian or Italian and you must play alone. What you think make this game much fun that you stay long in this game? (This is not a reproach)

3. Some other famus wwII games have some nice rpg Features.

In Heroes and generels, world of tanks and much other successful wwII mmo games you can modify your stuff.

Edited by sajuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are looking for faster action.

The controls are also not very smooth - infantry movement is not as responsive as the modern games which they are used to. I think this is a huge problem with player retention. Getting used to the infantry movement - both looking around and running - feels like a time warp back to 2001, it takes a long time to climatize. If you can't even move around in the game smoothly, why would you even stick around long enough to learn it, and to learn to love it? Combined arms, and a scaled single-server map of Europe don't mean anything to people if they don't feel "comfortable" in the movement - it's the first thing you experience in game, afterall...

When I convince my friends to try this game they ALWAYS quit after less than 15 minutes of playing.

Would you stick around for an old game that was, compared to what you're used to, unresponsive, hard to learn, and there are players that can kill you before you even know where to look? Or would you go play the new one that looks great and has such small maps and servers that it is always a big fight?

Edited by tuesday12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old game engine etc...are part of the reason, but the main reason is ...

LACK OF MARKETING & EXPOSURE.

Many many gamers & people interested in WW2 simply do not know this game exists.

I know this game was out for almost 4 years on the market before I accidently stumbled upon it by chance. I would have tried it day one if I knew about it.

I know Xoom does about as much as he can do in this area but the fact is there has been almost no budget allocated for marketing and advertising for years now as far as I can tell.

CRS keeps telling us Steam integration will change all this and it is suppose to be a top priority for the future, but we are still waiting for concrete progress on this front.

Edited by krazydog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shorter attention spans need to be attended to in this world. BGE does not have a short attention span. Thus the FRU comes into play to answer this.

Most gamers today want to max out their graphics card and are seeking heavy action games with nice graphics. BGE graphics is dated and reflects this.

Where BGE succeeds and others fail is in realism, and modeling. no battle is ever the same and teamwork is essential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shorter attention spans need to be attended to in this world. BGE does not have a short attention span. Thus the FRU comes into play to answer this.

I know many hear want the ride in from the FB and etc like when the game first came out, but judging by the player base now, the FRU and spawnables are important to the majority now.

The other day I was playing allied and we were getting pounded by the Axis air. I asked if air support was on the way in, and everyone responded it was too far away to fly. It was three towns from the closest air field. Axis were flying about 8 towns, yet three towns were too far for the players to fly. This backed up what I am seeing by what the players are migrating to.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know many hear want the ride in from the FB and etc like when the game first came out, but judging by the player base now, the FRU and spawnables are important to the majority now.

The other day I was playing allied and we were getting pounded by the Axis air. I asked if air support was on the way in, and everyone responded it was too far away to fly. It was three towns from the closest air field. Axis were flying about 8 towns, yet three towns were too far for the players to fly. This backed up what I am seeing by what the players are migrating to.

Autopilot on, walk away attend to other tasks. Come back to PC when almost to town.. works for me lol. Just wish the autopilot beeped on disconnect so i dont smash into terrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, it was reasonably popular for a while: At least up until 2006 (and maybe afterward), the game bounced around pretty steadily between 11-14k subscribers. That's not exactly breaking any AAA records, but it's more than enough to sustain a niche game like this.

I don't want to badmouth the old team — a lot of them managed to keep this thing afloat long after it should have died — but it basically came down to bad management. The company's was struggling with money since day 1, most of the code (especially the older stuff) is an absolute nightmare to maintain and keep developing off of, and some of the decisions made to "broaden the appeal" of the game ended up scaring off the niche this game appeals to.

People keep blaming short attention spans and crap like that, but I personally think that's garbage: This wasn't exactly a AAA title in 2001, so I think it's silly to pretend that competing with them now. We fill a niche that will never go away, and as long as the company designs with that in mind — both in terms of business and design decisions — then I think we can both recover our old numbers and perhaps even grow beyond them someday — within reason, of course. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...some of the decisions made to "broaden the appeal" of the game ended up scaring off the niche this game appeals to.

A guess on my part, based on going-on-fifty-years of business experience:

Some of those decisions may have been made in response to investors/owners who said, "Look, I didn't invest with the goal that the game would be a stable niche product that never made a profit. The shooter market is huge, you've said you have ideas for how to get 0.01% of that business which'll be a hundred times the revenue we have now, I'm running out of patience, let's get out of this niche rut and get going."

Then halfway along that new path, the money ran out of patience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most of the code (especially the older stuff) is an absolute nightmare to maintain and keep developing off of

May I ask what the gimmick there is? About the only truly convoluted programming language would be something like cobol yes? Surely the things aren't written in Assembly or something right? That would just be madness.

People keep blaming short attention spans and crap like that, but I personally think that's garbage: This wasn't exactly a AAA title in 2001, so I think it's silly to pretend that competing with them now. We fill a niche that will never go away.

Ahh, but it is going away, and has for quite sometime. The only other game from that era that maintains any of its original glory is Starcraft 1, and that is slowly getting ate up as well. Quake, HL/TFC/CS 1, EQ, DAoC, all pretty much in the tank. You could make an argument that FF11 is doing ok, but not really.

I think what is making this stick are the people and not the game at this point, otherwise why are you trying to change it? Why go through all this hassle and bother of streamlining changes and making heads or tails out of a dillion lines of C or whatever it is. It has to adapt.

During WBS when the server pop was pretty healthy, all kinds of weirdness was happening at least on my end, that turned a couple people away who I know are over the whole RA fiasco and gave it try again.

As much as it sucks to hear, no amount of marketing or whatever would salvage it until the basic gameplay is fixed... that means changing the netcode or whatever it is that makes it a slideshow when more than 5 people are around you. Friendly tanks are going down the road doing endos and wheelies whilst other stationary tanks and ATG's are flying off into orbit, and somewhere along the line the MP40 and Kar98 turned into the 1940's version of the Corner Shot. Without some semblance of consistency/realism in that regard, any gains you would get from steam or marketing would be transient.

One thing that needs to show back up as well at some point is the training server, that's how I learned the game. DragonKP from BKB held my hand for 2 hours explaining how it all worked on Ventrilo.

Please note, I am not flaming you guys for trying, quite the opposite infact. Several times we have heard what is coming down the pike and even though the new semi's have some issues, it is apparent to everyone that CRS is doing *something* at the very least trying to change things up. You mentioned the previous management and all I will say is the the communication from the "new kids?" thus far has been worlds better. There's a good chance you will actually read this. Know it's appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People keep blaming short attention spans and crap like that, but I personally think that's garbage: This wasn't exactly a AAA title in 2001, so I think it's silly to pretend that competing with them now. We fill a niche that will never go away, and as long as the company designs with that in mind — both in terms of business and design decisions — then I think we can both recover our old numbers and perhaps even grow beyond them someday — within reason, of course. :)

There are almost 27,000 steam users playing ArmA 3 and Arma 2 Operation Arrowhead right now, anyone that says there isn't a market for non-twitch FPS must have their sights set really high.

As much as it sucks to hear' date=' no amount of marketing or whatever would salvage it until the basic gameplay is fixed... that means changing the netcode or whatever it is that makes it a slideshow when more than 5 people are around you. Friendly tanks are going down the road doing endos and wheelies whilst other stationary tanks and ATG's are flying off into orbit, and somewhere along the line the MP40 and Kar98 turned into the 1940's version of the Corner Shot. Without some semblance of consistency/realism in that regard, any gains you would get from steam or marketing would be transient.[/quote']

Yeah those are serious problems but the basic gameplay in WW2online was always mediocre to "borderline unplayable", many endured it though because on top of the actual combat there was an awesome player-driven metagame due to it being a big sandbox with simple rules. The sandbox and meta got coded-out in favor of pitched battles arranged by company-controlled personnel on each side(AOs, HC and brigades) and the game lost much of it's appeal. It needs bug fixes and basic features but also the greater appeal back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the game bounced around pretty steadily between 11-14k subscribers.

Big difference between subscribers and actual players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
May I ask what the gimmick there is? About the only truly convoluted programming language would be something like cobol yes? Surely the things aren't written in Assembly or something right? That would just be madness.

No, the problem isn't the language; it's just bad design and poorly-written code. To give just one example of many, there's a file in the client code that's over 15000 lines long. That's some bad juju right there. :D

Ahh' date=' but it is going away, and has for quite sometime. The only other game from that era that maintains any of its original glory is Starcraft 1, and that is slowly getting ate up as well. Quake, HL/TFC/CS 1, EQ, DAoC, all pretty much in the tank. You could make an argument that FF11 is doing ok, but not really.[/quote']

There's a difference between the games and the niche they cater to. There are a lot of old game styles that got the "There's no market for X" treatment for the last decade, but really that's just in terms of the percentages that the big studios aim for: The more "hardcore" are now outnumbered, but that's not because their numbers have dwindled; it's because there was a massive influx of other types of players.

The proof of this is in the renaissance of "unmarketable" games made by smaller studios: The success of games like the ARMA series, Euro Truck Simulator, Amnesia, etc. all prove that there are just as many players wanting these old styles of games as there were in the 90's, if not even more. The fact that the big studios don't make these kinds of games anymore doesn't mean the market isn't still there; it just means that smaller developers get to take a stab at them. :)

As much as it sucks to hear' date=' no amount of marketing or whatever would salvage it until the basic gameplay is fixed... that means changing the netcode or whatever it is that makes it a slideshow when more than 5 people are around you. Friendly tanks are going down the road doing endos and wheelies whilst other stationary tanks and ATG's are flying off into orbit, and somewhere along the line the MP40 and Kar98 turned into the 1940's version of the Corner Shot. Without some semblance of consistency/realism in that regard, any gains you would get from steam or marketing would be transient.[/quote']

It looks like that will actually be greatly improved in 1.35, and hopefully the training server will come shortly afterward. It's a lot slower than everyone would like, but we are moving foward. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is just great to see developers on this thread showing their concern and in some cases opposing views and philosophies.

BADGER has never been one to shy away from considering ways to make the game more instant action and VICTARUS seems to lean more towards longer travel and non combat tactical movement time, within reason.

I do not envy your position of finding the right balance between making the units in the game more valuable to the player without breaking their interest in the game completely. 1.35 will hopefully do a lot to tamp down the general dissatisfaction with lag related issues. From what I was able to see I think it will do a whole lot to maintain subscriptions that are lost for these reasons.

Some of the players these days are either hold overs that wanted the game to be more fast paced and action accessible and new ones that are looking for something other than what Battleground Europe can provide.

That is part of the reason BADGER, or any player for that matter, runs into times when no one is interested or can be bothered to fly to the objective. A player base has been developed with rule sets with one hand deep in one pot and one still lingering in the other. Until recently, leaning heavily to faster action and lowering battle times. It's no wonder as the current player base has a game design that actually creates some of these behaviors through a spawning mechanism that encourages and reinforces such attitudes. What's are the solutions though? Make planes spawn in air close to target (bad idea)? Provide more air bases to cover the map (OK, but begins to stretch the maps realism some)? Draw more long attention span gamers and pilots to the game by making the game more of a long attention span game (probably the best option)?

I would imagine it is more about allowing flyers to change targets in air and addressing the fish bowl affect. In other words, I lean more towards trying to attract more long attention span or strategic/tactical gamers by addressing the main issues flyers have been concerned about that are related to flight and target acquisition, not necessarily flight time.

Obviously I lean towards creating that balance of having the right amount of travel and non-combat operations (something that is easily tolerated in other similar military simulation first person shooters). I do understand the reasoning and realize many players feel differently about the spawning mechanisms and pure battle time, but is a shorter attention span or a" surge tactics box shooter" the game CRS really wants to develop. I hope not.

To the OP...There are many reasons players come and go. No one has the total answer to this question. My view is that a perfect storm of events occurred that created the lower subscription rates. More games (including a resurgence and unparalleled growth of not only the FPS but military and specifically some WWII FPSs ) to chose from, general disinterest from playing the same game for a long time, real life changes. But specifically something generally under CRS's control. There was a large schism of communication between PB and Development and the games attempt to be something it could never be and remain the same game. Finally, in addition to these conditions and most actually because of them CRS's vision faltered, in hindsight, to it's own and the player bases detriment.

In cases where a small development team is building a niche game for a target audience it is critical for the development team to create an on-going dialogue with the player base in order to make sound decisions. However, the development team must have clear vision of what the game should be and what that target audience is, understanding it and how that shapes decisions around the clear vision. I think CRS is on the right path here and that they have done a lot to create what I just described.

We seem to be trying to sustain and create Battleground Europe, the brutally realistic WWII online experience. Do we have to make some concessions to Brutally Realistic? Yes, but only if it reinforces and accommodates better gameplay within the clear vision of what the game should be and what many players that try the game expect it to be.

A good example is the upcoming change to deploying MSPs only by a truck. From a realism standpoint this is a much better option within the vision of what I think BGE should be. Start with a base and begin to devise ways to make that work efficiently and reinforce the vision of what a good battle's development should look like. It will not always go down that way, no mechanism or rule can prevent player mismanagement, but when it does work and play out as designed it will be the hook that many players come back for time and again. Once you find the appropriate major mechanism that as a development team you know is consistent with the vision then look for ways to support the mechanism to make gameplay better within that vision.

I think that is what you are already doing. I also think if your vision clarifies into providing a well developed long attention span true strategic and true tactical World War II military simulation first person shooter and capture that niche strongly most of us would have the game we want and a game that more people hunger for than you think.

Thank you,

S!

P.S. Slow down the strategic part of the game. Really think about what tolerable level that part of the game could be slowed down to for everyone's benefit and enjoyment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove AOs

Remove TOES

Allow leaders to lead instead of moving Brigades and playing Map master.

Players want to be led, and will follow real ingame leaders.

Give Players the ability to create their own battles/attacks no matter how big or small.

Make RDP count.

Let CINCs actually be accountable for Tier choices the way it used to be.

Its not like all this crap that was put into game has changed anything.

10 years later and TZ 3 still decides the map.

Contact old squad leaders and make deals with them to get the vets back.

Invest time in dealing with TZ3 wisely.

Underpop caps faster.

Overpop with 30 second max spawn delay caps slower.

Only frontline towns can be capped.

There are so many positives to some of these ideas.

CRS broke and made a mess of their game.

Make it simple and let us have fun again.

Im sure it wont be easy to code/recode but stop making this game so complicated for a few HC nuts that want to become master of the universe.

I'd trade a Dinker, a Badger, a Deadlock, a Shilling and even a Hellmann for what we have today. No offense meant, but leaders need to be leading attacks not pointing the herd to a spot and yelling GO,GO,GO!!!!

Edited by Pittpete
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Lack of instant gratification, non-stop arcade type action, and Spawn Delay. I can't get my nerdy, gamer daughter interested. She laughs when she watches me guard a cp or fb. This is a serious cultural problem beyond this game.

- Fantasy/Sci-fi themed games are more popular. My argument that WWII was Lord of the Rings in reality hasn't worked with those type of players

- Lag. Although one massive server is attractive, many don't want the lag that comes with it. Also the quality of internet service varies in speed and cost which effects the users experience. My ISP Sux!(note spelling) Its expensive, slow, and prone to bottlenecks and outages.

- Language- if you don't at least read and write in English you're kinda screwed. I ran across a game with an instant translator (or so advertised). Could it be possible to develop for this game. If not CRS should do more to promote the creation of foreign language squads. I think everyone will agree that the 250 is one of the strongest squads in the game.

-Steep learning curve. This game needs a comprehensive manual covering all aspects and mechanics of the game. Asking questions in game is very inefficient and often questions go unanswered. How is it you access HQ troops? It came up in once game, but I've already forgotten.

- HC/AO system takes away from the strategic feel of the game and often feels more like Wack-a-Mole. As a result, squads are less important since HC funnels us into an AO/DO as its cannon fodder. If the HC/AO/fru system hasn't attracted more players and drove away many, many, many others, why keep it? (What's the definition of insanity?)

-The biggest problem-Marketing. Effective marketing cost bundles. How many new players might be picked up from a slickly produced TV network commercial airing during the Super Bowl? (one can dream). Being self-employed, marketing is where most of my money goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remove AOs

Remove TOES

Allow leaders to lead instead of moving Brigades and playing Map master.

Players want to be led, and will follow real ingame leaders.

Give Players the ability to create their own battles/attacks no matter how big or small.

Make RDP count.

Let CINCs actually be accountable for Tier choices the way it used to be.

Its not like all this crap that was put into game has changed anything.

10 years later and TZ 3 still decides the map.

Contact old squad leaders and make deals with them to get the vets back.

Invest time in dealing with TZ3 wisely.

Underpop caps faster.

Overpop with 30 second max spawn delay caps slower.

Only frontline towns can be capped.

There are so many positives to some of these ideas.

CRS broke and made a mess of their game.

Make it simple and let us have fun again.

Im sure it wont be easy to code/recode but stop making this game so complicated for a few HC nuts that want to become master of the universe.

I'd trade a Dinker, a Badger, a Deadlock, a Shilling and even a Hellmann for what we have today. No offense meant, but leaders need to be leading attacks not pointing the herd to a spot and yelling GO,GO,GO!!!!

Everything you said was on point!!!!! I think if you allow any town to be cappable on the front lines. It will bring back squads again! I remember back in early 2,000s i was in Lafayette Federation. A guy named Shlomsky was a leader and it was awesome!!! The squad would get together and we would join on any town, and stick together.

I remember too when certain squads would only play in the North or South of map, and would ask for permission to the other squads if they could help or if they needed help. I just remember it being a lot more squad based gameplay, because the players truly had a say in the map!

That was also the time when their was no mobile spawns. Everyone would load up in trucks at the fb in head into town. But a lot of times you were heading in with tanks and other trucks with atgs. It really gave that sense of "war" and a "massive" feel too it. Something i think the adding of mobile spawns take away now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BADGER has never been one to shy away from considering ways to make the game more instant action and VICTARUS seems to lean more towards longer travel and non combat tactical movement time' date=' within reason.[/quote']

No matter if it is in the player base or company, everything is number based. The same percentage of players that want something, usually will equal the same percentage of employees that feel the same.

Listening to the player base and watching it is clear to see the difference of opinions. Since the dawn of the game, attacks target the easiest target. Just like water looking for the quickest path, the majority of players do the same. Quick set up the frus, and get as many as possible, without setting off the EWS, this is stated on most attacks today. Once the fru is up, or the spawnable is up, then the call is to spawn quick, the spawnable is up. The leaders in the field who yell this, they know that the players will respond to the quickest and easiest path to a fight.

Like I posted the other day, which I think you are referencing, when calling for air, players just laughed at me and said it was too far for air support. When I looked at the map, we were 3 towns away from an air field.

The in the game, teamwork is next to none on the field in most parts of the map. The game has developed many tools through the years to encourage team work, only to cost numbers in subscriptions. I know all the tools are not here that is wished for, and many are far from perfect, but the outline of the tools requested are in the game to funnel more players to a single point to increase teamwork and give the best chance for massive battles. That was the goals of the AOs and the TOEs. They were the answer to the community in an up roar years ago over players taking areas of the map with no fight, behind the line captures, the ability of a small group to move the map quickly with little resistance.

Do not get me wrong, many times I do see great teamwork. When I do see it, it reminds me of the old days and how the squads worked together within their brigades to accomplish some great things. TOEs and AOs I believe came way too late. They are items that work only when the population is there to fill every one of the brigades and allow it to work like it did on paper back when the game first came out. Joining a brigade created a team to join. Taking pride in protecting your part of the map. Still, please do not take this as I am saying it was perfect, it was far from it, but at least it gave something to attach to in order to create the feeling of being needed, and something that pride could be taken in on the larger scale.

A good example was 3 CD, and their pride of the Namur area. They would fight every minute of the day to protect their portion of the front. They took great pride in it. I believe they faced the Iron Wolves, but I could be wrong, if I am, I am sorry. I remember both sides took pride on their area there. They would give each other a hard time, in a fun way.

As for the speed to battle. Back when I was in leadership, I realized there were players who wanted quick fast action, and those who liked to take their time, organize, plan ahead, etc. To balance, we would over stock for operations. Those who were the ones who wanted to help organize, plan ahead, take the time to plan for an attack, etc, they would help over stock supply in certain areas of the map. This allowed us to not only have supply for big offenses, but to also please the quick to action crowd by providing them the quickest path to action possible.

Me, I have the attention span of less than a second. If I am not busy in a fight, I am easily bored. Even in my leadership days, if I was not busy in a battle, or talking with troops to get them ready for battle, I was alt tabbed out of the game working on paperwork, web pages for the HC, or anything else that would keep my mind busy. Most of the time I would get on a truck, alt tab out, do other things, and come back when it was ready to fight. Just like the player who responded in the other thread about setting the autopilot, going and doing something else, then come back and check if they were at the fight later.

I love spawnables, I am also the one who spawns in and sees that the fru is a million miles from the target, then despawn to find a closer one. When I see someone on side chat yell that the spawnable is up, I am quick to respond to that. I will also stay away from big cities since I know it takes forever to walk to another cp to capture it.

Now you can see why I stand behind the need to keep some aspects for the players who want as fast as possible action, since I am one myself. Some say I am sick in the mind, I am betting they are right lol.

While all this is true, I also respect those who want it to take longer for their reasons. I know the world does not revolve around me, and I believe the game has things to offer both crowds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if you allow any town to be cappable on the front lines. It will bring back squads again! I remember back in early 2' date='000s i was in Lafayette Federation. A guy named Shlomsky was a leader and it was awesome!!! The squad would get together and we would join on any town, and stick together. [/quote']

I remember that squad, I was once a member of it long ago. I also enjoyed the freedom of the front line, and I remember all the complaints that the community had on the forums over it having too much freedom and allowing the least amount of players needed to take towns. So while you and I enjoyed it, the voice of the community on the forums were pushing for something to be done to fix it. I actually have the back up database from the HC forums on my local old PC here. I was reading through some of the old posts and it is amazing how the complaints of today are 100% opposite of those days. What people are asking for today are complete backwards of what they were threatening to quit over back then. I was reading some posts by 11bgod, and the crew just the other day, and it brought up many great memories, but also took me back to the topics of those days.

Many of my own personal thoughts of the game remain the same, but there are some areas that I personally have evolved.

As some pointed out in this thread, there is not one single thing that moved us to where we are today, but the combination of many. I still believe in the dream of what this game can be. I look forward to that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remember that squad, I was once a member of it long ago. I also enjoyed the freedom of the front line, and I remember all the complaints that the community had on the forums over it having too much freedom and allowing the least amount of players needed to take towns. So while you and I enjoyed it, the voice of the community on the forums were pushing for something to be done to fix it. I actually have the back up database from the HC forums on my local old PC here. I was reading through some of the old posts and it is amazing how the complaints of today are 100% opposite of those days. What people are asking for today are complete backwards of what they were threatening to quit over back then. I was reading some posts by 11bgod, and the crew just the other day, and it brought up many great memories, but also took me back to the topics of those days.

Many of my own personal thoughts of the game remain the same, but there are some areas that I personally have evolved.

As some pointed out in this thread, there is not one single thing that moved us to where we are today, but the combination of many. I still believe in the dream of what this game can be. I look forward to that day.

A laffayette video! Badger your in it at 6:27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2. Not all gamers in the world unterstand english. If you not unterstand english so you can play only as a normel player here. No chance for HC or somehting other. World war two games are in europe very popular but much here cant unterstand english or only a little bit. Some friends from me have left the game because they unterstand nothing in the Chat and see no future for own militär rise. I can only speak for the axis side but if you cant read english here you must play alone. The axis HC communicates only with players that unterstand english no small translate for the main Important strategy news in some other big languages. After steam relase i think many not englisch understand players left the game soon. Of example if you join new a game and all other players in your team wrote in russian or Italian and you must play alone. What you think make this game much fun that you stay long in this game? (This is not a reproach)

Easy solution...TEAMSPEAK!!! Get your squad on a TS channel. Have the person who speaks and reads the best English translate what's being said on the chat channels by saying it in your native language over TS. Other groups do this. Why not yours?

In Heroes and generels, world of tanks and much other successful wwII mmo games you can modify your stuff.

This is exactly why I DO play here...no pay to win and no buffed equipment that makes people who pay for the best stuff into super soldiers.

-Irish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In Heroes and generels, world of tanks and much other successful wwII mmo games you can modify your stuff.

There are a few cases where you could allow players to choose between weapons in a single loadout and maintain realism, such as Lebel/MAS36 for the french and Walther/Luger/MauserC96 for the germans.

However, I don't think there are enough times where this is the case to justify adding any sort of loadout customisation considering this is a feature that would take a lot of coding to implement.

What they could do though, is add new unit types to represent some of this. Like Reducing the numbers of Rifleman: MAS36 and adding some Rifleman: Lebel1886 for instance.

And now my weekly plug quota for the Lebel has been filled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Easy solution...TEAMSPEAK!!! Get your squad on a TS channel. Have the person who speaks and reads the best English translate what's being said on the chat channels by saying it in your native language over TS. Other groups do this. Why not yours?

This is exactly why I DO play here...no pay to win and no buffed equipment that makes people who pay for the best stuff into super soldiers.

-Irish

This is not what i mean and so easy is the solution really not if you think.

I can read english good but many other people in germany not.

I have no problem only my english speaking is not so good.

But if someone is new and join a teamwork game for testing it and he understand nothing he left the game soon.

It is true that he can join easy TS3 but a random new player make this not.

He install the game testing it somthing and then he stay or left the game.

Of example if i look under google (In german

language) about BGE i found almost very bad and negative posts in other gamers sites and online games magazines about BGE. The most of them say that BGE have a bad graphic engine and really much other say that entry in this game is very hard because no help and they game is very complex. Many wrote that they have nothing understand from this english game and he left this "bad dreadful" game .

(You can say now that he can join so easy TS3 but new players make this not)

The same here, i do not like World of tanks and heroes and generals to but this games are very successful and this is true. Players can achieve a lot there but in BGE is that not so good i think. If you play much und have a good skill you can jump from rank one to rank six in 2-4 weeks with no problem. But then there is no real goal more for random players. He can join then all tanks and guns.

I like this game so much but the game makes itself very difficult to find new player.

Edited by sajuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be help if someone join this game new from russia, china, germany or a other country he have from the beginning (automatically) one of his six default chat a special chat open with his own language.

I know that new players can join manually a specially languages chat but if you are new you have no idea about this feature.

Then put in HC some players from all big languages and give them a order that they wrote from time to time in her language chat some information.

(strategy, fru open and other stuff that helps beginner for a nice entry gameplay and good ingame feeling)

If now a new player join this game he see from the beginning wow great there are people that i can ask something and he can answer my questions.

Easy but very effective....

The first impression of a new game is Important for a new player.

Really i think if BGE have this fetuare at steam releases it will help much that many more players stay in here.

Edited by sajuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.