I hope that these commanders are as described just alternative strategies other than requirements for winning. Haven't been playing yet today so can't really say.
I'm not personally concerned about whether or not they're OP, but actually that they are indeed alternate strategies (which look really cool!), that I won't be able to get. I already paid for the game, and have no way of accessing them. What sort of sense does that make?
I paid for a game, that isn't even the game it's made out to be. All I get are mundane commanders, with units that don't help me play the game as it's meant to be played, or how I want to play it. That's totally a shit thing to do.
At the very least - at the very least, give us in-game currency to unlock this shit. Turn it into a F2P game, which isn't F2P, where you earn super sweet and shiny Nazi-Gold to buy WW2-Points to buy sweet new commanders - whatever. Just don't do it this way.
This way of business is bad for your reputation. Christ, not even F2P games like LoL make core content of their game completely inaccessible. you can at least still use in-game currency for that stuff.
And before we go there, I really don't want to have to grind in-game currency for a game that isn't F2P. I already paid for the game, so give me the game I paid for. Instead, it's like I'm buying a 'lite' version of a smart-phone game.
Having a bad reputation doesn't earn you more customers. And when you're not as big as EA, who can plug away a million into advertising their game, you rely on what is really, the best form of advertising: word of mouth. In a world of twitters, facebook, streaming and absolute connectivity - your reputation is damned important.
Right now, the reputation my friends have got from this game recently is "The game is damned awesome, but it's not worth buying, because they're diming you for fundamental game features after you already buy the game. And you can't even use an in-game currency to access them. Buy this game instead: *insert alternative"
And then there are my friends who do have the game. I tell them what I've had to say on this so far, and none of them are willing to buy the commanders. We have alternative games to play, and we'll just buy a clever little indie game on steam, instead.
They certainly won't get any more money from me, because you're right, I've already paid for the game, and they've already got my money. But they won't be getting my friends' money, because they listen to my opinion over what metacritic has to say. Even if every player just got one friend to buy the game, you double your money. When you make it so that none of your existing players are encouraging their friends to buy the game, you're losing out on WAY more money than bleeding a reluctant player-base, that isn't all that big.
If they want to make some extra money, then sell skins. Infantry skins, more vehicle skins. That's a start, and if there were more to choose from, I'd probably buy one or two, if not because I want them, but just to support the company. Though, I won't be supporting them if they want to grab at my money at every opportunity.
This policy could well change if we all just collectively not buy the new commanders.
I certainly won't be buying any of the commanders. Whether or not it causes my interest in the game to cease, remains to be seen - but I certainly will be warning my friends before they buy CoH2 about the sinkhole of money they'll need to be prepared to face if they want to enjoy the game how they will be expecting to.
Unfortunately, the premium idea is better than what we have now.
and that's sort of why I fear, assuming they change their stance, is something that will be seriously considered as the alternative here. I suppose until then all i can do is make disgruntled grumbles and mutters beneath my breath, and hope for the best
Gah, I'd hate to spend more on the game. If they create a very solid game, and build on its community, then the game will make more money than they could ever do by milking the small regular player-base the game already has.
there are always new customers, but there's only so much you can make existing players pay for more of the game they already paid for.
I see a lot arguments, that state, for obvious reasons, that the company need to get money from somewhere to continue the support, and while I agree that a game needs to have been making good money to fund that support - you just cannot bring in more money by taking more from the people who've already given you plenty. There are always more customers, who will pay for your game, and get a friend to buy their game, and stream the game, tweet about it, and spread news about the game, and make more people investigate it, and buy it, when you create a solid, fun platform which people love using all the various commanders, maps, and being a part of a community who aren't getting dimed at every turn.
If they seriously want to see their five-year commitment plan for the game being worth the investment, then they should stop this process immediately. No one will buy this trivial content more than once, and thereafter all's left are a disenfranchised playerbase who refuse to support your game - and they'll never be able to convince their friends to buy the game when they look on steam and see all this DLC that they'll want, buy won't want to fork out an extra £60 for, simply to enjoy the game as it was meant to be.
It's not like there just aren't any more people on this planet to buy the game. there are millions more than you could expect, within reason, to buy the game. Encourage them to buy it by making a fantastic game, instead of bleeding dry the few thousand loyal players who'll let themselves get duped by premiums (I think the premium idea is a bad one!), and necessary DLC.
Pasting over what I said from the discussion on another thread, which pretty well sums up my own opinions on this method of money-making:
Up until this point, I suppose I hadn't felt like I was missing out, since the other commanders are just rejiggles of abilities I already have, and I guess, the odd ability I don't have. But that's fine - I haven't really, wholly felt like I've been missing out on one ability.
What annoys me is that if this progresses how it is, which is no doubt the plan, then there are going to be a plethora of units unavailable to me, simply because I don't wish to pay the extra money for them. I'd rather spend the extra money buying a beer at dinner this weekend, or buying some extra shopping. Or having it go towards a subscription on an MMO, or onto buying another little, cool indie game on steam. I steer clear of F2P models because I hate feeling like I'm missing out on the full potential of the game, because I'm not the sort who likes to spend lots of money on one game, for however long the developers choose to create the content - and that's my own gripe, unique to me. not saying all feel like that. This is why I buy my games, and subscribe to them - because I like to avoid this scenario. Now, I've bought the game, and I'm still having to buy content for it? And this isn't just simple cosmetic-stuff, fluff. These are entirely new units that affect how I play the game, and I how I play against other people.
That's shit, man - and I hope, truly, we see Relic go back on this decision to charge for fundamental content.
For folks who've played hundreds of hours, it will of course seem like great value. But, those who don't play all that much, who make a large part of the player-base?
Definitely not good value.
I will not be buying these commanders, or any of the other commanders. To me, it seems like this is the beginning of many more commanders to come, full of interesting units and refreshing play-styles that look really quite exciting, and form a great game that people will talk about. Instead, what people will talk about is how they have to pay for the game, then buy all the commanders, just so they simply feel that they're getting the game they were supposed to pay for. This will not attract new players.
I'm not a fan of the F2P model, so I have a bias against anything that resembles it, and I know there are plenty of people out there more liberal with their money who don't mind f2p models. However, this is not a F2P game, and I don't want to be stuck with mundane base-commanders, somewhat lacking in their tactical ability, while I know there are others out there with more money to spend than I who get to enjoy the game as it's intended. I makes me feel duped, and I wasn't even a pre-orderer.
Regardless of how cheap they are, core, fundamental parts of the game should -not- require more money. Of course, I can still play with the old commanders, but I'm sure as hell missing out, and that's all I'm going to feel when playing this game. When I think of their 5 year commitment to the game, and how soon this paid content has come out, I don't feel there's a good future down the line. How much money will I need to spend to play this game how it's meant to be played, over the next five years? that's not a question I should be asking, when I already paid for the game.
If I, like any other gamer here, play more than one game, and want to buy many more to come, I have no interest in paying more for just one of my many games, especially so when I know that it is not just the one time payment, like a fully-fledged expansion. When I have alternative games to play, then I'll just play them instead. I like this game, but I don't play it as often as the most dedicated player-base, who are always in the minority, of any game. This is milking your loyal fans, and driving off new players, and evne less, encouraging their loyalty.
Skins, and non-integral aspects of the game, charge away. I'll even buy some to support to company, but I wont be supporting the company if they want to well, rip me off.
If there's a boycott, you'll certainly have my support. This move has kind of annoyed me, and I'm hoping that we're wrong, because the information about it all has not been very clear, or concise.
I suppose something to consider is that the ZiS isn't an AT gun, but a field gun, as described. Whether this is an actual difference, is beyond my knowledge, but in my conjecture, I assume that a field gun means it fills a more versatile role.
Wouldn't seem to me to be a bad idea to add a muni-cost ability for having AP rounds for 10secs or so, though! Would happily exchange that for the barrage ability, if necessary, too.
PAKs would need a buff to make them maintain the same usefulness in their role, too, mind, but that's for a thread about the Pak!
I'm having this problem too. Got auto-patching enabled, but no patching happens
Not entirely sure what you mean, Capiqua, but my version is the English one. Were you suggesting that you must change the games language to another, and back to English to get it to work?
Have you tried verifying the integrity of the installation files through steam?
Just in the middle of doing this. I'll post here if it solves it!
-------------------------- UPDATE ONE
Verifying the cache spurred on the steam update for the game, which only took 15/20 seconds, at which point I thought it had worked. Though, when launching the game I still got the following message on the menu screen:
"Game version out of date. Automatch will be unavailable and no XP will be granted."
I'll try another cache verification and see where it takes me!
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
