is there any way for communication between gaijin and the community to improve as i believe that one of the biggest issues around this game is the lack of communication between the devs and the player base and how this lack of communication has degraded the relationship between both parties and spawned hate
3 Likes
Lol no.*
*There are plenty of ways, Gaijin doesn’t want to engage with any of them.
8 Likes
All Gaijin cares is money and nothing more, so no way bro
1 Like
I may be biased but i don’t get this. I played several other games with forums…the only game with more “connection” was a indie game that had only 1000 active players or so.
One game from Disney actually forbade devs to take part in forum and closed it when this didn’t work as they intended…
I am pretty sure devs get the info from forum (managed by mods of course)…they just don’t agree with all of it :)
You just need to see an update log to see they “try” to answer…although not pleasing all…OR you can see they publish intended BR changes for discussion.
You are mistaking communication with agreement…and agreeing with all players would be impossible…even agreeing with most would be difficult…not to say it would also have an impact on earnings, for sure. And this is not a NGO.
For instance…I would like to have faster progression as most players do…pretty sure devs know this…
5 Likes
Forums are not transparency. We can complain at each other until blue in the face, yet have no transparency on issues that have many souls interested in them unless it impacts the groups closest to the company’s wallet. It is only when those issues impact the wallet do they even vaguely try transparency, yet even then, it is written so that you’ve to pick it apart to have any hope of clarity, or it is written to avoid any of the actual problem points and directly void the hopes of transparency. “Communication” only works when both parties are interested, and every step of the way they do not bother to be transparent about it and demonstrate their disinterest in feedback.
Especially notable is the Roadmap that was not concluded, nor continued. An actually good piece of both transparency and communication.
1 Like
That. Very much.
I’ve remarked on this before: Hearing doesn’t mean agreeing, and saying something is being looked into doesn’t mean it’s a promise that it’s implemented.
People often think that if their input (or - let’s be frank here - often ‘demand’…) isn’t leading to a result, that means a) Dev’s don’t read those inputs, b) the inputs are actively ignored or c) Gaijin hates [my preferred nation] / [my preferred vehicle] / [my preferred game mode] / [me] (pick one or several).
There’s always multiple sides to every aspect: Feasibility, information, resources (in whatever form), other aspects - and all those need to be balanced and prioritized.
I also have my pet peeves / issues I’d love to see addressed better yesterday than today or tomorrow. Everyone has those, and they’re quite different for everybody, so that “can’t please everybody” aspect makes prioritizing even worse, and understandably leads to a gazillion of cases where players feel left out.
Finally, I also don’t know any game company where one is closer to dev or any staff in general, and yes - contrary to popular belief - they do play this game actively.
1 Like
Q: The Roadmap is an excellent way to see what is planned to come. Are there any plans for a 2025 Roadmap?
A: We used to gather previous Roadmaps when the general plan for changing the game dedicated to one goal was very long and consisted of many steps, and we wanted everyone to see the general goal and progress towards it. And now, there are many changes in the works aimed at improving the game in different directions, on different fronts, both improving stability, and first of all, updating the game graphics, and of course work on improving the game based on your reports and feedback. We plan to regularly cover the progress of development and report on our plans for implementing certain features and adding vehicles, and in the future we may return to the previous Roadmap format.
As for the current Roadmap, we plan to complete most of the remaining parts before the second major update in 2025.
From here:
They do provide feedback…just not what some player want. I personally didn’t really followed the roadmap…but i do miss the Q&A.
1 Like
At the risk of my opinions being struck from the narrative as moderation here is wont to do:
They could quite comfortably have continued with the roadmaps and presented new ones at the start of the year, accounting for what was not finalised, and presented it to the community as continued transparency. No one would have been upset by that. It would have served to quell a lot of the issues people feel they aren’t being heard about. As we’ve many complaints on CAS, both from the players of cas and the players against CAS, that there is very little that could threaten it, a roadmap could have provided players something to look at to see where that is planned down the line instead of wailing into the void. Wailing into the void only to get the reply of “they’re supposedly working on it”, which is a reply especially lacking in credibility without chasing down the source. Especially given there’s not a mote of discourse to be seen on it from official sources here.
It provided people a credible source to point to. It would have given the playerbase something to point to in the event the developers chose not to follow it. Sorry, but at times the developers need to have their feet held to the coals, as demonstrated by their laggardly inclination to implement the nation bonuses, and even then not remotely adequately to matter (which I’m sorry, but from a technical standpoint, this shouldn’t have taken as long as it did unless something was spectacularly botched).
Q&As are nice. When the questions are pulled from the community, which I will credit, there appears to have been an attempt. But it seems like these questions are incredibly cursory in nature, from my brief review though I admit I am probably too tired to be making well rounded assessments. There’s plenty of issues that these Q&As don’t cover, and assuming they did, the threads are incredibly poorly archived for review, so we run into an issue where perhaps some problems were discussed in the Q&A but we can’t point to them unless we dig through a half dozen old threads that we’ve to chase down manually on account of lacking a label and an inconsistent search system. The primary issues here could be resolved easily by improving archiving, so they can be reviewed more efficiently, alongside requesting staff to be cognisant of how heated issues may be to provide the people putting these questions together a more effective means of making those who are feeling unheard as though people are at least aware of their plight.
Much of the complaints of the lack of communication come from their only being communication from further up when it hits the wallet. Which from a business sense, understandable. As a player? Pretty infuriating. There’s a lot of issues that crop up in the game that just never end up addressed, be it through lack of resources or lack of care because it isn’t deemed important. I would quite comfortably wager that much of the community would feel there is significantly better communication if these decisions were communicated concisely: E.g. at the end of a month/bi-monthly cycle there is a post saying “These wide concerns {list} have been acknowledged but put aside whilst these other concerns {list} are being addressed”.
I am far too tired to be writing something so long; woe betide the soul who trudged through my poor spelling and sentence formulation. I am passing out now.
1 Like
I got you an example.
Old School Runescape.
The recent end-game “Doom of Mokhiatl” boss rewards has been a continous community and developer back and forth on creating appropriate rewards for the difficulty and grind required without powercreeping and breaking existing content. They even went and personally consulted a panel of professional high-end players who make it their habit to utterly break end-game PvM for speedrunning for advice.
Old School Runescape is the poster child of how game development should be done in a corporate space.
Emphasis corporate, because as you said indie games are even better at this.
Right this moment is an alpha being ran over a entirely new gameplay mode with regular back and forth with the developers on the subreddit.
1 Like
Bugs are here
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder
Suggestions:
The tools exist…if they are accurate and up to date we can argue…
Not saying it is perfect, but saying it does not exist i find odd.
Are you being dishonest for the sake of it? I get you’ve got to pull the company line, but even in my tired state I can see you’re trying to pull the wool. Nowhere does this statement indicate these tools don’t exist. Because it doesn’t reference these tools, as you can tell by reading here:
What this does indicate is there should be a concise release from your organisation to the players as to what concerns have been heard (not necessarily bugs, though they can fall under it) with a list of the most notable that have been considered, vs a list of what concerns/actions are currently being pursued (not necessarily bugs, though they can fall under it). Nowhere does this state bug reporting capacity doesn’t exist. Nowhere does it state suggestions don’t exist. It states that communication would reliably be served by actually communicating that concerns within the community are heard, and either being pursued, or indicating resources are currently allocated into other facets of the product. This is not a particularly costly utility to implement, even from the ground up, but I somewhat doubt you’d require to establish it from the ground up. It would take very few people to achieve this, and I would wager you’ve already sufficient people on this forum to spare one individual to do a write up bi-monthly to introduce greater communication with the players.
Suggestions don’t even meet this criteria, because we hear that maybe they’ve been heard, though they could just as easily have been archived in oblivion and forgotten about given we don’t have much transparency regarding this system. And then nothing until maybe 6 months down the line something possibly happens.
I played an indie game that had much better communications…communication was direct between the 3 devs and the 100 players on forum…from a total of around 1000.
We mentioned the issue and in a couple days a dev was explaining the reasons or solutions…
BUT…game eventually went bankrupt…:( and was much simpler…
Actually i was not sure if everyone here knows these “tools”…so i linked them…just that. And just for clarification…i am a player…no connection with the “company”…
My point, not a disagreement…comms exist but are not perfect. IMHO they are better than average for this game type/size.
Nope, there is not.
Same result as talking to deaf, only difference that deaf may read your lips.
As I mentioned before, I’m just sceptical that those “we have heard you” statements will be understood as “we will of course do so”.
And this even more so: If any topic that is pursued is being published, if they for whatever reason need to be delayed/cancelled/changed, will be dissected by the community and used against the devs.
We now have more or less regular channels like the DevBlogs, CM disclosures, Q&A’s, and I also would like more of those, of course.
But a constantly repeated “yes we hear you” will offer near zero additional value, and - see above - only cause other issues.
1 Like