breeeze

Obsidian got fired

62 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, Kolni said:

Aren't you glad Garbad talked you into getting that Founders pack guys? :doge: 

At the time I think I hit unicum overall and was getting smashed by XVM focus. I convinced myself to buy the $100 one as a result of that.

Feelsspaghettiman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it sucks that WG wont have any (good) competition for WoT/WoWs.... you would think someone somewhere would see the amount of money they are making and decide to try and mount a somewhat decent game to get a market share...

WT:GF, to much of a niche to really get big, and Naval forces, well thats a fucking joke and a half, so Gaijin took care of themselfs, and AW cant really go down anymore. Its weird, WG seems to have a monopoly on 2 game types, while not really giving a fuck about WoWp.

I wonder if we will ever get WoT:2.0 seeing as there kinda is a vacuum with AW whittling away   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im glad WoT 2.0 was binned. Just keep what you've got going.

Also, im kinda sad about AW. We needed competition and we didnt get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gatortribe said:

Here it is, everything that went wrong with Armored Warfare (that I know of): https://www.reddit.com/r/ArmoredWarfare/comments/5thjdv/armored_warfare_what_went_wrong/

while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, breeeze said:

while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.

And (aside from the bugs- CryEngine wasn't meant for this) everything was thanks to MailRU. People liked the close quarters pixel hunting BS in Russia, even in Tanks they love close quarters shit (just look at the Paris map). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked AW better than WOT but when I saw the monetization policy of Mail.ru I knew it was time to bail. Pixel hunting got boring quick also. It didn't help I was playing from australia and the ping was always about 250-270 while I can get 150-170 to NAW in WOT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, breeeze said:

while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.

You've really gone and assumed that OE's weren't coming up with solutions for these things (particularly balance issues which my.com/mail.ru prevented them from pushing live), and that the technical issues weren't fixed because of a lack of know-how or motivation on OE's end rather than a lack of funding from mail.ru.

The last sentence makes you try to sound like you had inside knowledge (and correct me if I'm wrong), but this is what I got from talking to a friend who used to work for my.com and his friend on OE's AW team (this may give away who I'm talking about to those in the know), and the reason for the my.com employee to jump to another gaming company was entirely the 'build it for Rasha, fook wot Americans want, bunch of pussy bitches' approach mail.ru took on both a macro and micro level.

It's just a shame I can't quote him in his own voice on a bulletin board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gatortribe said:

And (aside from the bugs- CryEngine wasn't meant for this) everything was thanks to MailRU. People liked the close quarters pixel hunting BS in Russia, even in Tanks they love close quarters shit (just look at the Paris map). 

Well, obviously I wasn't as deep in the whole process, so I can't tell for any specific things. Like, was B2.0 forced by mailru or was it the idea of OE? Did they really block things like adjusting Chally I armor, nerfing Cent 120 dpm or nerfing the ridiculously tiny and strong 2A5 weakspot? The massive ATGM overbuff in 0.18 is probably what broke most of RSOP members, as it screwed up the mid tiers and tournaments aswell. It's just that from my perspective, from what I've seen (including internally), I can't put all the blame on mailru, yes, they screwed up A LOT and even more than I thought after reading your post, but OE contributed their part aswell. Feel free to correct me on specifics, you can pm me too if there's things you don't want to make public.

 

12 minutes ago, thebigpod said:

You've really gone and assumed that OE's weren't coming up with solutions for these things (particularly balance issues which my.com/mail.ru prevented them from pushing live), and that the technical issues weren't fixed because of a lack of know-how or motivation on OE's end rather than a lack of funding from mail.ru.

The last sentence makes you try to sound like you had inside knowledge (and correct me if I'm wrong), but this is what I got from talking to a friend who used to work for my.com and his friend on OE's AW team (this may give away who I'm talking about to those in the know), and the reason for the my.com employee to jump to another gaming company was entirely the 'build it for Rasha, fook wot Americans want, bunch of pussy bitches' approach mail.ru took on both a macro and micro level.

It's just a shame I can't quote him in his own voice on a bulletin board.

I have some limited inside knowledge, but yes, I am assuming quite a bit here. In the end we will probably never know the full truth because OE devs don't feel like getting sued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Assassin7 said:

Im glad WoT 2.0 was binned. Just keep what you've got going.

Also, im kinda sad about AW. We needed competition and we didnt get it. 

I asked further and it seems they may not have switched projects, WoT 2.0 might be coming after all. My original source was a Wargaming Seattle employee who was probably just throwing me off track. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Gatortribe said:

People liked the close quarters pixel hunting BS in Russia, even in Tanks they love close quarters shit (just look at the Paris map). 

I remember reading once (I want to say from WG) how different the RU playerbase was from NA/EU.  Over there they love tier differences where those on top get to bully those on the bottom.  They don't want skill to matter, they just want to beat someone up.  The same goes for arty.  They love the trollish nature of the class and enjoy pissing off the enemy.

Given these cultural differences the reality is we won't get a FPS tank game over here if the company making it has any desire to succeed in the RU market.  I was one of those folks who thought having a western dev team was enough.  After what happened with AW it seems clear we'd need every aspect of production to be western based (but given the pimple that WoT is on the NA gaming scene I don't have much hope of that).

3 hours ago, thebigpod said:

You've really gone and assumed that OE's weren't coming up with solutions for these things (particularly balance issues which my.com/mail.ru prevented them from pushing live), and that the technical issues weren't fixed because of a lack of know-how or motivation on OE's end rather than a lack of funding from mail.ru.

Are you saying OE could have fixed shot delay sooner but Mail.RU was telling them to have the personnel that could have addressed it work on other things?  Was Mail.RU that invasive in the day-to-day operations at OE?  What about SIMM?  Whose fault was that?

I'm also failing to see why Mail.RU would care about balance changes outside of premiums.  (Though this does explain OE's silence on stuff like the Zhalo and WZ.)  From experience with WoT I can understand why some lemons are left as is, so folks would spend money to convert XP and skip it, but in WoT (at least when I played) those were the exception.  Balance in AW was awful across the board.  What possible good came from leaving that as is in the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Illy said:

  Was Mail.RU that invasive in the day-to-day operations at OE? 

I don't know for sure on the issue of SIMM or shot delay, but yes, they were that invasive.  As an example, things like having zero cover for the north side of Pipelines map for that team while going to the refinery, that's the sort of thing they blocked every time a developer proposed the changes.  Literally the most minor terrain changes to maps they blocked.  They were into just about every detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“At Obsidian, we are grateful to have had the opportunity to work on Armored Warfare over the last four years. We are happy to hand off Armored Warfare to the talented developers at My.com who, we know, will deliver incredible updates and content to Armored Warfare fans across the world."

Translation:

"At Obsidian, we are currently shitting ourselves"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, breeeze said:

while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.

Let me be blunt: you have no idea how modern software development works.

Mail.ru as the product/project/game owner is 100% responsible for what has happened. They have given the mandate, the specifications and put the result online.

As a developer it kills you mentally if you are not allowed to work on the bugs/balance issues/things that the customers are demanding, because the product owners/management will not let you.

Such big revamp like "balance 2.0" ought to be, could not be an idea of an development studio that is experienced like OE is. It sounds to me like some kind of management bubble aka THE NEXT BIG thing that will save us all.

Again, final decisions on behaviour of the game and priority of tasks: product management. Implementation: development team.

If it was not like this, it makes mail.ru even 120% responsible because they have failed up to set up a healthy structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, InconnuGlitterBoy said:

As a developer it kills you mentally if you are not allowed to work on the bugs/balance issues/things that the customers are demanding, because the product owners/management will not let you.

If everyone was able to sit down and talk to Redfox, the project director, about the future of Armored Warfare and what they wanted to do with it, I think they'd instantly pull out their wallet and invest in the game. Obsidian loved the game, it was their baby, and their passion was unparalleled. I and others lost faith multiple times, but talking to him never failed to show us that there was hope for the game. 

To quote Obeyrist,

Quote

I really wish I could explain just how excited Obsidian was about the game and the passion they had for making it special. If everyone could talk to Redfox for like 5 minutes, they would have been sold on the future of the game, it was that apparent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2017 at 1:29 PM, Illy said:

I remember reading once (I want to say from WG) how different the RU playerbase was from NA/EU.  Over there they love tier differences where those on top get to bully those on the bottom.  They don't want skill to matter, they just want to beat someone up.  The same goes for arty.  They love the trollish nature of the class and enjoy pissing off the enemy.

Given these cultural differences the reality is we won't get a FPS tank game over here if the company making it has any desire to succeed in the RU market.  I was one of those folks who thought having a western dev team was enough.  After what happened with AW it seems clear we'd need every aspect of production to be western based (but given the pimple that WoT is on the NA gaming scene I don't have much hope of that).

A lot of the proposed changes in WoT reflect this bias.  The part that really amuses me is when I watched Straik streaming WoT and his supporters were making 10-15 ruble contributions.  Literally pennies.  Then I watch Zeven or Anfield raking in $100+ a night on a good night and you realize the very different economies of the EU/NA vs RU markets.  

A day may come when Russian game developers have the courage to chase a global audience, when they forsake their CIS market and break all bonds with the puny ruble, but it is not this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This saddens me, though doesn't surprise me.  I loved AW from day one and still would if I could get matches.  I thought even in it's most buggy forms it was far superior to WoT, faster, more realistic, more difficult, less pubtard friendly (minus the Chally 1).  My spidey senses told me for the past year though, don't spend money on premium tanks, they'll be vaporware. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2017 at 1:01 PM, Gatortribe said:

My original source was a Wargaming Seattle employee who was probably just throwing me off track. 

That is exactly what they were doing because revealing what they are doing right now would get you fired and worse with the current contracts and NDAs all of them have. Seattle is not worth digging into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/11/2017 at 11:13 PM, Epic said:

Love how SS responded, and it is gone now... If he wasnt a corporate shill, but more like the guy that ran FTR back in the day he would tear AW/OE/mail.ru a couple of new assholes several times over the last year.

>Implying SilentShitter wasn't bitching about WG only because he was a stupid cunt, who didn't get a job at WG.

Oh my sweet summer child...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it actually known when OE stopped developing Armored Warfare?

Who is Nakoomba?

I am also curious about the whole "balance 2.0" thingy. It's really a bad way to pull out a game out of mud IMHO. As a player I'd prefer to see small patches addressing the most inhernt issues one by one and as a developer it is also easier todo. Who came up with this idea?

You can slap me, but in good faith and without doing any research I have bought the Christmas tank package, just to see them offer gold for less and less money every couple days. Something was very fishy already in December.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Solono said:

That is exactly what they were doing because revealing what they are doing right now would get you fired and worse with the current contracts and NDAs all of them have. Seattle is not worth digging into.

After poking some people at Obsidian to ask around, they found that WoT 2.0 is indeed still in the works, so that's exactly what it was. Maybe one day we'll get an official announcement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering what it took to get things like indirect fire removed I'm curious what mail was saying behind the scenes in response to these types of changes.

AW and MWO are case studies for devs to beware the dev/publisher divide. If you don't control the monetization scheme of the game you are developing then you'll be more likely to run into design issues.

After poking some people at Obsidian to ask around, they found that WoT 2.0 is indeed still in the works, so that's exactly what it was. Maybe one day we'll get an official announcement. 

Do you have those 40+ pages of notes available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2017 at 10:47 AM, Xelos said:

Do you have those 40+ pages of notes available?

I'm keeping that private to protect those who contributed to it. It's odd to look back at it, so many things that were planned features (new commander system, new crew system, wear and tear tank customization, armor viewer, muddy tanks, etc) never got to see the light of day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.