Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Understand: We are only disappointed with the developers

BodkinBarberBodkinBarber BirminghamPosts: 106Member

I thought it would be neccessary to clarify that potentially apart from a few people that potentially have ulterior motives (either positive or negative) I would say that the majority of people who post negativity are not mindless haters as many of the CRS worshipers on here label them as. They are conveying their disapproval of decisions that CRS have made.

 

I can bet you that every player, veteran or current. who has spent anytime in game throughly enjoys the original CONCEPT of this game. That is, a hardcore combined arms combat simulator with WW2 weaponary across a large playing area with an emphasis on teamwork.

 

However CRS have, amongst other things, moved away from that into a battlefield esque sideshow called 'Rapid Assault'. This has angered many players as when they pay their subscription they were under the impression that they were paying for the continued development of World War 2 online when really were actually paying for a pet project that has very little commercial potential and was originally sold to the players as being for PREMIUM subscribers only and that they would have to pay MORE money to unlock more weapons. This is not what players would like, they want development of the game that they percieved they are paying for. You can look at the terms of conditions and say what CRS have done is legal and not fraudelent but such behaviour is poor business practise as it will annoy customers. Many customers have voted with their wallets and have unsubscribed which is why CRS are in their current position.

 

Now as I know what the worshipers on here will say CRS have never done anything wrong and will attack the above opinion to being different and will use the following arguments that CRS spout out

 

"Rapid Assault is being funded by outside investors and not current subscribers"

 

First of, is CRS going to release their fully audited company finances to back up that claim? Nope. Such a statement you have to take their word of it, just like you have to take their word for North Africa going into the map, Rapid Assault going into Beta in late 2011 and that they've never turned a profit throughout their history..... Secondly, they only started coming out with that statement back in early 2012, by then Rapid Assault had been in development for nearly a year (conservative estimate) and so in that time they could have been diverting all their development money from WW2online into developing this project. Thirdly, even if they stay absolutely true to this claim which individuals are doing the development? Are they hiring more people to support the project? No, they are using their ever decreasing existing staff who are diverted away from WW2online development. Thus people are paying the salaries of the people developing Rapid Assault with their current subscription revenue.

 

"Rapid Assault is F2P now and their business decisions are sound"

 

When they 'revealed' it in June 2011 and the Rat Chat afterwards they said that Rapid Assault was for subscribers and trial players only and that to unlock weapons like the 'bazooka' you would have to do a one off payment. As CRS put it, another 'revenue stream'. Now, in terms of business sense this is stupid. First of how are they expecting to attract NEW customers with some outdated pick up and play console shoot em' up? Have they not looked at the market? They are attempting to compete in the mainstream with a product that at best can compete with Call of Duty 2 (released 2005). Secondly, how are you going to attract 'potential' paying customers by expecting them to folk up money. Likewise it is disrestpectful to current customers to expect them to pay more to unlock new gear and the size of the potential 'revenue stream' from purchasing gear is going to be fairly minimal as unlike existing popular MMO's like World of Tanks Rapid Assault will have far less players.

 

You might say that it is different now but you need to understand the perspective on things. It's late 2011, players are angry over countless broken promises and  in  the revelation that their money has gone into development into a side show project with (at the time) a terrible business strategy which has no direct impact on the main game it caused people to leave. Hence why CRS have to cut their staff and have engaged in asking the players left for more money.

 

"I've played Rapid Assault and I enjoyed it"

 

I'm not going to disagree with a truthful opinion, why would I? A person's opinion are their most honest views. However, ever picked up a game and played it for a few hours thinking it's great but then overtime getting bored with it and not playing it? Take Call of Duty. When a new Call of Duty comes out most players will be like "wow this is amazing" but then after a few days they play it and say "this isn't as good as I thought"; thus first impressions do not always last. Same can be the case with Rapid Assault. Sure it's fun to pick up and play at first because it's pretty similar to WW2online. You have the same weapons and game mechanics that you understand and already enjoy in the main game but you've got new pretty enviornments and a different objective. Great. However, how many times are you going to play the 'Dog Green' sceneriao (or any other)? Will your gameplay be varied or linear? Does the amount of development time really justify the small replayibility value?

 

"Well on the forums and the comments on the frontpage article CRS said they really liked it"

 

The forums are heavily moderated and anything negative will get closed or deleted so what is left is a rather inactive forum with only positives. Likewise, comments on their articles are moderated. Only comments that are positive are allowed so there appears to be a 'ground roots' support for CRS. Nice in theory but internet users are more savvy these days so if a decision such as raising subscription fee's only gets positive and neutraol comments it's odvious something is fishy: http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/25-promotions-a-offers/12339-new-pricing-schedule-2012-activated

 

Interestingly I dropped into the TS at the end of the RA session and heard XOOM asking players (so he can do some 'testimonials for marketing') to email him what they liked and to report any bugs only. What about asking players what they didn't like? The opinions of the players is what important at the end of the day. The developers might like it but if no players like it who is going to play? This is a big contrast to one of their competitors, Hereos and Generals who repeately emphaise to players "help us make the game you want to play" (odviously to attract players who have become disillusihioned with CRS) while the CRS attitude of "If you don't like our development decisions the leave." Though I will admit they have become more welcoming, the post 2012 attitude is "Please come back, leaving is not the way to give us a message, but we're not going to change".

 

"Rapid Assault allows CRS to work on new features for the campaign game"

 

These 'features' they can develop anyway without having to make a completely different game. You don't need a side show shooter to develop RPATS, a new persona (Americans), land mines, new tanks, airplanes, buildings etc. Likewise CRS have contradicted themselves many a time by saying they are severely limited on what they can add to the current engine. Thus they are undertaking expansionary development for an engine that can't take anything new. Sure they can save a few megabytes by cutting the code down but we will get even instability, more CTD's and the server having to be reset more often as it is post 1.34.

 

Many subscribers don't want to talk publicly about CRS they either no it's fruitless, left years ago or  have invested so many years of recreation time and money into the game and don't want to say anything which could bring the end of it. These people will pay more and more just so it won't end because then they're loyalty and investments will all be in vain. We can mostly agree we love the concept of the game but we are disillusioned with the developers and by supporting them blindingly

 

CRS is like an alcoholic. You can be nice and keep giving them the alcohol, comfort them and tell them their ok as they slowly die OR you can step up, tell them to wise up, force them to stop their old ways and turn themselves around because they will only ever get better if they change their ways

«1345

Comments

  • XOOM-CRSXOOM-CRS Portland, ORPosts: 42Member Uncommon

    We continue to have and are equally interested in receiving players opinions regarding Rapid Assault and its development. This is something that is discussed via the WWII Online Forums, RA's Beta Forums, and discussion / e-mails that come in privately.

    The priority was to hear about bugs and ensure that they were to get to the development team, as they always are during any kind of testing.

    WWII Online has benefited from Rapid Assault in many ways as described in another post (which appears to have been moderated by the Staff of MMORPG.com), hopefully those bulleted points are still available for your viewing.

    Both ideas support the studio known as Cornered Rat Software. Our fanbase continues to support WWII Online as we do, and the understanding of building a new vehicle for income (therefore furthering development) has become ever more accepted and understood by the majority of our community who has kept up with us.

    We will never be able to please everyone, and every company / individual / objective will be criticized by those who do not agree with their actions or plan(s). Our mission is the longevity of WWII Online and its future development at all costs, regardless of a critic's intent to place us in a different spot light for their own agenda or discontent.

    Xoom@Playnet.com
    Cornered Rat Software

  • pittpetepittpete poughkeepsie, NYPosts: 233Member
    Xoom, RA has a development team seperate from WWII ONline?

    image

  • XOOM-CRSXOOM-CRS Portland, ORPosts: 42Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by pittpete
    Xoom, RA has a development team seperate from WWII ONline?

    The WWII Online & RA projects have been developed under umbrella of Playnet, Inc. (CRS). Due to that, certain dev components were transferrable to both therefore supporting each other as mentioned in that bullet point list per the previous post.

    Xoom@Playnet.com
    Cornered Rat Software

  • pittpetepittpete poughkeepsie, NYPosts: 233Member

    cc 

    I thought perhaps RA had different employees working on RA bug fixes.

    Don't know if you can say, but is CRS in the process of hiring/contracting out any of the coding work needed?

    Inquiring minds would love to know.

    Thanks

     

    image

  • mrcheapymrcheapy Bettendorf, IAPosts: 56Member

    So will WW2OL benfiet from Rapid Assault now or later after 1.35? 

     

    Since you sadly no longer have a coder, can you still release the 1.35 patch? If there are any bugs , can you even fix the source code? 

  • AbyssussAbyssuss Banja LukaPosts: 85Member

    I played RA not so long ago, it does have some "ok" ideas, having said that there is a lot wrong with the game, I posted on the forum about RA and was instantly shot down, allow constructive feedback on the forum CRS not instalock threads if it's not singing the game's praises.

    Do I think RA will be sucessful in it's present state? (I said present state fanboys,chill....) no, CRS are trying to break into a oversaturated market with BIG companies making waves (Activision,EA). If you want it to be a real success you really need to drag your unity engine kicking and screaming into this century, it sadly wont compete with EA's Frost engine as in todays market eye candy and content is king.

    For Xoom, if you want to keep wwii online alive, you really should consider just scaling down the operation on RA and atleast give the playerbase 1.35 then go back to RA. I don't think no CRS fanboy or hater can disagree with that sentiment. It boils down to update WOL show us,the playerbase, you still care for the product.

  • StugStug Coffee County, TNPosts: 387Member
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    For Xoom, if you want to keep wwii online alive, you really should consider just scaling down the operation on RA and atleast give the playerbase 1.35 then go back to RA. I don't think no CRS fanboy or hater can disagree with that sentiment. It boils down to update WOL show us,the playerbase, you still care for the product.

    Im not sure if you read the same thing, but review the post below in the sense that if I am not mistaken I thought thats what they were doing (italics for emphasis I added) .  The current sub drive is about getting enough support to put 1.35 into the game.

    "Game Development

    Our ability to update the game is dependent on our ability to fulfill the top priority (the subscription drive). At the end of the day, we need to remember that running these servers, and paying for the staff required to update the game client and server is what delivers, despite all of the enthusiasm we can muster. Here's a link with many development discussion articles.

    If you want to get a feel of the new development items included in 1.35, as a premium subscriber, you can test BETA out by going here: BETA DOWNLOAD / INFO"

    From:  http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/23-reports/12732-set-sail-2013

    I think that shows the playerbase they want to get 1.35 in (and they care for the playerbase in that sense).

    Would you agree?

  • StugStug Coffee County, TNPosts: 387Member
    Originally posted by mrcheapy
    So will WW2OL benfiet from Rapid Assault now or later after 1.35?    Since you sadly no longer have a coder, can you still release the 1.35 patch? If there are any bugs , can you even fix the source code? 

    Mrcheapy - see the post above pointing out that is exactly what the sub drive is all about (as I read it) - sorting the 1.35 patch.

     

  • AbyssussAbyssuss Banja LukaPosts: 85Member
    Originally posted by Stug
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    For Xoom, if you want to keep wwii online alive, you really should consider just scaling down the operation on RA and atleast give the playerbase 1.35 then go back to RA. I don't think no CRS fanboy or hater can disagree with that sentiment. It boils down to update WOL show us,the playerbase, you still care for the product.

    Im not sure if you read the same thing, but review the post below in the sense that if I am not mistaken I thought thats what they were doing.  The current sub drive is about getting enough support to put 1.35 into the game.

    "Game Development

    Our ability to update the game is dependent on our ability to fulfill the top priority (the subscription drive). At the end of the day, we need to remember that running these servers, and paying for the staff required to update the game client and server is what delivers, despite all of the enthusiasm we can muster. Here's a link with many development discussion articles.

    If you want to get a feel of the new development items included in 1.35, as a premium subscriber, you can test BETA out by going here: BETA DOWNLOAD / INFO"

    From:  http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/23-reports/12732-set-sail-2013

    I think that shows the playerbase they want to get 1.35 in (and they care for the playerbase in that sense).

    Would you agree?

    I'm talking about resources...why waste time beta testing RA and fixing the bugs in that game when the main core game hasnt had a bug fix in a long time, surely CRS has coders still,they don't need more subs for bugs fixes do they?

  • StugStug Coffee County, TNPosts: 387Member
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    Originally posted by Stug
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    For Xoom, if you want to keep wwii online alive, you really should consider just scaling down the operation on RA and atleast give the playerbase 1.35 then go back to RA. I don't think no CRS fanboy or hater can disagree with that sentiment. It boils down to update WOL show us,the playerbase, you still care for the product.

    Im not sure if you read the same thing, but review the post below in the sense that if I am not mistaken I thought thats what they were doing.  The current sub drive is about getting enough support to put 1.35 into the game.

    "Game Development

    Our ability to update the game is dependent on our ability to fulfill the top priority (the subscription drive). At the end of the day, we need to remember that running these servers, and paying for the staff required to update the game client and server is what delivers, despite all of the enthusiasm we can muster. Here's a link with many development discussion articles.

    If you want to get a feel of the new development items included in 1.35, as a premium subscriber, you can test BETA out by going here: BETA DOWNLOAD / INFO"

    From:  http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/23-reports/12732-set-sail-2013

    I think that shows the playerbase they want to get 1.35 in (and they care for the playerbase in that sense).

    Would you agree?

    I'm talking about resources...why waste time beta testing RA and fixing the bugs in that game when the main core game hasnt had a bug fix in a long time, surely CRS has coders still,they don't need more subs for bugs fixes do they?

    Your welcome to that view - my business perspective view is the only way they can actually finance sustained servicing of the game is a sustained cash flow. Anything else is the boom to bust of old times and clearly more subs (bottom lines) will mean they can do more of anything. So a sub drive is a way of securing additional support whilst pushing forwards.

    So, they are trying to address 1.35, as evidenced by this CRS update. Just on their own terms.

     

  • Company0Company0 Oklahoma City, OKPosts: 36Member
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    Originally posted by Stug
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    For Xoom, if you want to keep wwii online alive, you really should consider just scaling down the operation on RA and atleast give the playerbase 1.35 then go back to RA. I don't think no CRS fanboy or hater can disagree with that sentiment. It boils down to update WOL show us,the playerbase, you still care for the product.

    Im not sure if you read the same thing, but review the post below in the sense that if I am not mistaken I thought thats what they were doing.  The current sub drive is about getting enough support to put 1.35 into the game.

    "Game Development

    Our ability to update the game is dependent on our ability to fulfill the top priority (the subscription drive). At the end of the day, we need to remember that running these servers, and paying for the staff required to update the game client and server is what delivers, despite all of the enthusiasm we can muster. Here's a link with many development discussion articles.

    If you want to get a feel of the new development items included in 1.35, as a premium subscriber, you can test BETA out by going here: BETA DOWNLOAD / INFO"

    From:  http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/23-reports/12732-set-sail-2013

    I think that shows the playerbase they want to get 1.35 in (and they care for the playerbase in that sense).

    Would you agree?

    I'm talking about resources...why waste time beta testing RA and fixing the bugs in that game when the main core game hasnt had a bug fix in a long time, surely CRS has coders still,they don't need more subs for bugs fixes do they?

    To my knowledge resources are not being contributed to RA at this time.

     

    The subscription drive is an attempt to raise funds to increase development staff. Rapid Assault sessions have been tailored for stress testing, bug reporting, presentation to existing customers, and show casing potential business opportunities.

  • AbyssussAbyssuss Banja LukaPosts: 85Member
    Originally posted by Company0
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    Originally posted by Stug
    Originally posted by Abyssuss
    For Xoom, if you want to keep wwii online alive, you really should consider just scaling down the operation on RA and atleast give the playerbase 1.35 then go back to RA. I don't think no CRS fanboy or hater can disagree with that sentiment. It boils down to update WOL show us,the playerbase, you still care for the product.

    Im not sure if you read the same thing, but review the post below in the sense that if I am not mistaken I thought thats what they were doing.  The current sub drive is about getting enough support to put 1.35 into the game.

    "Game Development

    Our ability to update the game is dependent on our ability to fulfill the top priority (the subscription drive). At the end of the day, we need to remember that running these servers, and paying for the staff required to update the game client and server is what delivers, despite all of the enthusiasm we can muster. Here's a link with many development discussion articles.

    If you want to get a feel of the new development items included in 1.35, as a premium subscriber, you can test BETA out by going here: BETA DOWNLOAD / INFO"

    From:  http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/23-reports/12732-set-sail-2013

    I think that shows the playerbase they want to get 1.35 in (and they care for the playerbase in that sense).

    Would you agree?

    I'm talking about resources...why waste time beta testing RA and fixing the bugs in that game when the main core game hasnt had a bug fix in a long time, surely CRS has coders still,they don't need more subs for bugs fixes do they?

    To my knowledge they have no experienced coding development resources remaining. They contracted RAMP out to fix the stats server. The subscription drive is an attempt to raise funds to get a new coder in, get him trained to the way WWIIOL is written and move forward from there.

     

    RA isn't being bug tested/fixed. There were investors interested in parts of the game (Underlying engine? Not sure) that would provide CRS with increased cashflow to help towards the coder.

    Thanks for explaining it in black and white, I understand now,subs for new dev team :)

  • ginzoginzo Bell Gardens, CAPosts: 23Member

    So the scuttlebutt is that there are no coders or artists working at CRS because of the precipitous drop in subscribers due in large part to 1.34's length of development and the state in which it was released in?    So out of the all of the founding Rats, only Jim Mesteller (Maypol), Doc, Killer, Bloo, and Gophur remain? 

    According to this development update (http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/index.php/component/content/article/15-community-events/12648-subscription-drive-a-plan) the goal is to bring 4500 new subscribers to the game which will allow CRS to hire a programmer to finish 1.35.      I wonder if this entails hiring a short term, contract position (perhaps H-1B visa) programmer to put the finishing touches on 1.35.   If they do get hire a programmer I wonder how long will it take to bring him or her up to speed with WW2OL's ancient code.   I wonder who will guide this new person through the learning process since Doc, Killer, and Gophur don't speak C++.  

    The "big bucket" post Gophur made last year mentioned CRS' work on side projects to keep the company afloat.   Could one of  their side projects include this licensing agreement between Playnet and Reaper Miniatures (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/80884/)?   Here's  a URL for one of Reaper Miniatures' IP of Reich of the Dead (http://reichofthedead.com/) with a Playnet Inc. logo.  Purely speculation on my part but I wonder if CRS currently employs programmers and artists but that those resources are focused on Reich of the Dead and Rapid Assault. 

  • pittpetepittpete poughkeepsie, NYPosts: 233Member

    Ginzo, new update to the subscriber drive from the forums

     

    300 HERO BUILDERS BY FEB. 15th 2013


    Soldiers,

    WWII Online needs 300 HERO Builders by Feb. 15th 2013. More HERO Builders to WWII Online will help pave the way to success. Because it is easier to make a personal decision to help support the game you love, we have adjusted our goal to reflect existing users making a bigger difference.

    Be recognized by the community in and out of game for your contribution, by paying on month-month terms with no locked in pricing. Even if you can only help a few months at a time, your support is needed.

     

    I think it's doable and some positive posts by DOC lately have suggested perhaps good news ahead

    S!

    image

  • RigamortisRigamortis Nextdoor, CAPosts: 205Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by pittpete
    Ginzo, new update to the subscriber drive from the forums   300 HERO BUILDERS BY FEB. 15th 2013 Soldiers,

    WWII Online needs 300 HERO Builders by Feb. 15th 2013. More HERO Builders to WWII Online will help pave the way to success. Because it is easier to make a personal decision to help support the game you love, we have adjusted our goal to reflect existing users making a bigger difference.

    Be recognized by the community in and out of game for your contribution, by paying on month-month terms with no locked in pricing. Even if you can only help a few months at a time, your support is needed.
      I think it's doable and some positive posts by DOC lately have suggested perhaps good news ahead S!

     Interesting language they are using now....they "REQUIRE" 300 Hero accounts BY Feb 15th.  They are even spamming it in game now.  So it went from 1000 new subs / hero accounts,  down to 300 "REQUIRED" HERO account by a particular date.  Such cryptic language,  something is going on!  Inquiring minds want to know!  Hmm......

  • rendusrendus smyrna, TNPosts: 327Member
    Originally posted by Rigamortis
    Originally posted by pittpete
    Ginzo, new update to the subscriber drive from the forums   300 HERO BUILDERS BY FEB. 15th 2013 Soldiers,

    WWII Online needs 300 HERO Builders by Feb. 15th 2013. More HERO Builders to WWII Online will help pave the way to success. Because it is easier to make a personal decision to help support the game you love, we have adjusted our goal to reflect existing users making a bigger difference.

    Be recognized by the community in and out of game for your contribution, by paying on month-month terms with no locked in pricing. Even if you can only help a few months at a time, your support is needed.
      I think it's doable and some positive posts by DOC lately have suggested perhaps good news ahead S!

     Interesting language they are using now....they "REQUIRE" 300 Hero accounts BY Feb 15th.  They are even spamming it in game now.  So it went from 1000 new subs / hero accounts,  down to 300 "REQUIRED" HERO account by a particular date.  Such cryptic language,  something is going on!  Inquiring minds want to know!  Hmm......

    Lowering the bar, how lowwww can they goooooo?

  • AbyssussAbyssuss Banja LukaPosts: 85Member
    Originally posted by rendus
    Originally posted by Rigamortis
    Originally posted by pittpete
    Ginzo, new update to the subscriber drive from the forums   300 HERO BUILDERS BY FEB. 15th 2013 Soldiers,

    WWII Online needs 300 HERO Builders by Feb. 15th 2013. More HERO Builders to WWII Online will help pave the way to success. Because it is easier to make a personal decision to help support the game you love, we have adjusted our goal to reflect existing users making a bigger difference.

    Be recognized by the community in and out of game for your contribution, by paying on month-month terms with no locked in pricing. Even if you can only help a few months at a time, your support is needed.
      I think it's doable and some positive posts by DOC lately have suggested perhaps good news ahead S!

     Interesting language they are using now....they "REQUIRE" 300 Hero accounts BY Feb 15th.  They are even spamming it in game now.  So it went from 1000 new subs / hero accounts,  down to 300 "REQUIRED" HERO account by a particular date.  Such cryptic language,  something is going on!  Inquiring minds want to know!  Hmm......

    Lowering the bar, how lowwww can they goooooo?

    System Message spam, asking to upgrade to hero account, Im quite worried why there is a certain day and month to get it :(

  • SzyporynSzyporyn Posts: 122Member

    Thinking about the hero thing, but have to admit I do not feel secure about spending a lot of money as I now know 2 lifetime builders who has been banned no money returned.

  • AbyssussAbyssuss Banja LukaPosts: 85Member
    Originally posted by Szyporyn
    Thinking about the hero thing, but have to admit I do not feel secure about spending a lot of money as I now know 2 lifetime builders who has been banned no money returned.

    I'm on the $12.99 a month sub, thats me being generous but $30 a month makes it the highest sub mmo ever,if you got the money go for it buddy, always a risk with everything

  • OtotheJOtotheJ here, NYPosts: 52Member

    How an mmopg that has 18 players on one side during off peak server times bans anyone for other than cheating or subjects 50 people to 200 second spawn delay is beyond me.  When you ban players because they are vocal critics with those numbers it starts to look like that seen from hitlers bunker.

    You should really pay the airfare for your last subscribers and serve some purple drank when the game does come down

     

  • XOOM-CRSXOOM-CRS Portland, ORPosts: 42Member Uncommon

    Did someone say, PURPLE DRANK?

    Xoom@Playnet.com
    Cornered Rat Software

  • david06david06 Chantilly, VAPosts: 183Member

    Yeah, it's disappointing.


    So if China and RA haven't succeeded, then all those dev hours and all that time subscribers waited patiently was for nothing. Around late 2010 I remember subbing two accounts for one year, helping out with a facebook advertising fund, thinking that I was helping out a indie studio and now that the China wait was over they could get to improving the main product.


    It's still amazing to me that CRS has done a complete 180 and they've kept a straight face. Not too long ago Rapid Assault had to succeed if you wanted to keep playing WW2online, everything was "one big bucket"

    image

    Suddenly we have these assurances that no money from the WW2online subscriptions are being used on Rapid Assault. I guess one of their builders/investors/chumps finally told them that linking their subscriber's money to a crappy WW2 shooter wasn't a good idea.


    What takes the cake though is the fact that we were told "You don't know anything about running a business or coding a game, although you may think you do." by DOC many times over the years with his chorus chuckling in the forums, but now we're watching them with their failed Call of Duty 2 clone and them fumbling around with basic marketing and web design. It's total amateur hour.


    At this point I would be more inclined to support the game if the IP was just bought up by a random group of players who would then run the server(s). I think they would at least be more open to volunteer assistance, wouldn't waste everyone's money on side projects and wouldn't routinely deride their customers.

  • HodoHodo Raeford, NCPosts: 542Member

    As David06 said so well above.  

     

    I would be more inclined to support the game if it were less likely to throw away money on random ventures that have very little to do with the original concept of the game.  

     

    I can remember the China Deal back when it was first mentioned, and how it was puffed up to be the BIG THING to get CRS the funding to push the game another 10 years!  

     

    Instead it has turned into a Chinese Poo-Poo Platter of fail.  

     

    I am not saying that CRS has failed horribly on WWIIOL, no, they have done well, but not as well as they could have if they would have concentrated on the original product advertised and released back in 2001.   If only they had concentrated on that product improved it and shaped it with as much dedication as they did initially, the first 3 years.   They would have a REALLY great WWII sim game at this point.    Instead it has a little of everything and a lot of missing.  

     

    Imagine if they would have completed the European Theater of Operations, the rest of Northern France, all the way to Paris and Southern England and northern Germany with Denmark.  That stayed in the Blitzkrieg timeframe 1940-41. 

    Then openned the North Africa Theater, set in a later timeline, say 41-43.   

    Then did the Eastern Front, 1943-44.

     

    Finally Italian/Southern front 1944-45. 

     

    In the 11 almost 12 years of this game we would DEFINATELY have two of those done if not 90% done at this point.   I mean if EVE, run by CCP, which came out a couple of years AFTER WWIIOL, can have not one but 18 major patch expansions over 9 nearly 10 years, is simply astounding.   

    When you look at the two game companies you realise how much actually went wrong for CRS, as oppossed to CCP.   Both had great ideas, both had new games on a scale most major companies avoided like the plague.   Both had finacial problems and server issues on launch.   But one stuck to its guns and continued to produce the game they set out to make.   The other wavered and made excuses for internal failings.  

    So much crap, so little quality.

  • boobitsboobits Cumberland, BCPosts: 27Member
    Originally posted by Hodo
    As David06 said so well above.     I would be more inclined to support the game if it were less likely to throw away money on random ventures that have very little to do with the original concept of the game.     I can remember the China Deal back when it was first mentioned, and how it was puffed up to be the BIG THING to get CRS the funding to push the game another 10 years!     Instead it has turned into a Chinese Poo-Poo Platter of fail.     I am not saying that CRS has failed horribly on WWIIOL, no, they have done well, but not as well as they could have if they would have concentrated on the original product advertised and released back in 2001.   If only they had concentrated on that product improved it and shaped it with as much dedication as they did initially, the first 3 years.   They would have a REALLY great WWII sim game at this point.    Instead it has a little of everything and a lot of missing.     Imagine if they would have completed the European Theater of Operations, the rest of Northern France, all the way to Paris and Southern England and northern Germany with Denmark.  That stayed in the Blitzkrieg timeframe 1940-41.  Then openned the North Africa Theater, set in a later timeline, say 41-43.    Then did the Eastern Front, 1943-44.   Finally Italian/Southern front 1944-45.    In the 11 almost 12 years of this game we would DEFINATELY have two of those done if not 90% done at this point.   I mean if EVE, run by CCP, which came out a couple of years AFTER WWIIOL, can have not one but 18 major patch expansions over 9 nearly 10 years, is simply astounding.    When you look at the two game companies you realise how much actually went wrong for CRS, as oppossed to CCP.   Both had great ideas, both had new games on a scale most major companies avoided like the plague.   Both had finacial problems and server issues on launch.   But one stuck to its guns and continued to produce the game they set out to make.   The other wavered and made excuses for internal failings.  

     

    Problem is one game has someone called DOC and one didn't.  

  • MouzurXMouzurX ZeelandPosts: 44Member

    No the difference between those 2 games is this:

    WW2ol Released 2001: 2002-2006 12.500  subscribers

    Eve 2003 released: no data till 2011 400.000 subs(after that steady 400-450) 

    You can do a lot more with the numbers of subscribers eve had.

    WW2ol was partially funded by doing stuff for the government(simulation stuff) but nowadays they don't a lot of that anymore, so they needed more funding which they wouldn't get from WW2ol since subs has been extremely stable. Therefore china/RA.

     

«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.