#Login Register
Status Update - COMMUNITY HELP NEEDED. Please Read.
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
Thread Closed


04-27-2014, 12:20 AM #21
archq n00b
*
Status: Offline Posts:2 Threads:0 Joined:Apr 2014
I wouldn't suspend CTA entirely. Given that's a huge reason why the game has any players at all. Maybe try limiting the game size for a spell and making the games public. So that way even if the game is full, it won't have every active player in it & new players will be able to join to at least spectate.

Advertising: At this point, if you're going to do something then you're going to do it right. You're not going to make this game successful by making a forum post every few days or signing up for some search engine advertising. You need real exposure. Unfortunately, the game is not ready for such exposure.

You have one thing going for you. There aren't really a whole lot of people who will put forth the effort to confirm that this game is a massive failure. Has had bugs for years, had multiple "plans for success" & multiple failures. To be honest, I wouldn't even call them failures because none of you have ever been 100% dedicated. But back to the point.

Before you get real exposure. There is one thing, one experience that cannot be faulted,difficult and/or buggy. Going from the splash page to getting into the game. You are not going to retain any players when they have to jump through hoops just to find an empty lobby. Getting into a game may seem relatively easy for yourself & others but that's because we have experience with similar issues. And have for years.

If you doubt me, then do this:

Get some friends. Casuals & hardcore a like. The ones that you haven't mentioned and/or tried to get into the game before, preferably. Otherwise this test will be null. Take them to the main page and say, "Ok, now I want you to sign up and get into a game. Without my help". Make sure they are using their own laptop and/or rig. Time them. Watch them. Now imagine these potential players going through the same process. The process itself weeds people out. This process needs to be the easiest part of the game, by far. Being web based, just further emphasizes this.

Doing it right: Forming an indie studio, if not just for perception purposes. Entering an official Beta ( More like Alpha, but people are less inclined to participate in these. Especially for a no name title ), with patch notes for every patch. Making the signing up process & getting into the game universally seamless. Once that's done, getting real exposure. Gaming websites. Official AC Beta V 0.178.. Etc. Actual beta. With actual fixes. Actual patches. Actual development line. Actual progress. Consistency.

Stop wasting peoples time. Including yours. You're either going to do it all the way or fail at the half way mark. That's all there is to it. That's it.

If you can't do these things. You have two options.

A) Put a coat of wax on your car & sell it.
B) Take it to the junk yard.

Because right now, all you're doing is letting it rot in your driveway. Just to come out every year to shine a rim and claim a new road to glory. Obviously doesn't work...


Good luck.
This post was last modified: 04-27-2014, 12:23 AM by archq.

04-27-2014, 04:22 AM #22
Chris AC Operations Team
*
Status: Offline Posts:95 Threads:19 Joined:Apr 2014
Thanks for your feedback, but I have a few comments:

archq Wrote:I wouldn't suspend CTA entirely. Given that's a huge reason why the game has any players at all. Maybe try limiting the game size for a spell and making the games public. So that way even if the game is full, it won't have every active player in it & new players will be able to join to at least spectate.

I didn't say we would suspend CTA entirely. CTA is an inclusive group at the moment. Yes, it keeps players here, but we have what, 50? New players will not get the CTA concept right away and therefore it is a bad tool to use to get that first or second day player into a game. CTA will be temporarily suspended during peak times when advertising picks up so we can focus on getting new players in newbie-friendly public games. The CTA concept would not work as a public game because it would be much more chaotic. The last thing I want to see is a new players join a public CTA and then get kicked off of a team because he/she is bad or is making teams uneven. No way. Also, new players on spectate is bad. New players in games, playing them, is good.

archq Wrote:Advertising: At this point, if you're going to do something then you're going to do it right. You're not going to make this game successful by making a forum post every few days or signing up for some search engine advertising. You need real exposure. Unfortunately, the game is not ready for such exposure.

I don't know where you got that the above information was our strategy...or you were just saying that the above things won't work.

archq Wrote:Before you get real exposure. There is one thing, one experience that cannot be faulted,difficult and/or buggy. Going from the splash page to getting into the game. You are not going to retain any players when they have to jump through hoops just to find an empty lobby. Getting into a game may seem relatively easy for yourself & others but that's because we have experience with similar issues. And have for years.

We have three active developers working to improve the game, something we haven't had...ever. We are paying for it. What you said above is the whole reason we switched to web-based, something that the previous poster did not understand. So yes, you are correct. We want it as seamless and easy as possible. One click and into a game that has players in it (not a locked CTA).

archq Wrote:Stop wasting peoples time. Including yours. You're either going to do it all the way or fail at the half way mark. That's all there is to it. That's it.

This was the sentiment when we first announced that we wanted to move forward. Understandable then, but it's a little different now. It will take time but we have the pieces in place like never before. I suggest you sign onto AC and keep up with our activities! If I'm not mistaken, you haven't logged in since February. Come join us!
This post was last modified: 04-27-2014, 04:26 AM by Chris.

Chris/RareOps - AC Operations Team
Armor Critical Website
Facebook

04-27-2014, 10:14 AM #23
BANEski n00b
*
Status: Offline Posts:1 Threads:0 Joined:Apr 2014
I agree with Meek's post 100%. I stopped playing SOLELY due to the fact that there was no longer a client and mate, I bloody love this game. Even though the game mechanics have not changed, for me personally, browser based is a turn off.

04-27-2014, 10:23 AM #24
cyro Forum Administrator
*
Status: Offline Posts:742 Threads:153 Joined:Jan 1970
(04-27-2014, 10:14 AM)BANEski Wrote:  I agree with Meek's post 100%. I stopped playing SOLELY due to the fact that there was no longer a client and mate, I bloody love this game. Even though the game mechanics have not changed, for me personally, browser based is a turn off.

I can understand having a preference but for the browser/client issue to be the reason to not play the game you claim you love seems absurd to me.

tocs.

04-27-2014, 11:21 AM #25
Yosh Unregistered
 
(04-27-2014, 10:23 AM)cyro Wrote:  
(04-27-2014, 10:14 AM)BANEski Wrote:  I agree with Meek's post 100%. I stopped playing SOLELY due to the fact that there was no longer a client and mate, I bloody love this game. Even though the game mechanics have not changed, for me personally, browser based is a turn off.

I can understand having a preference but for the browser/client issue to be the reason to not play the game you claim you love seems absurd to me.

I totally agree with you but hey people can be weird like that. It's a shame. Some people won't play if it's browser based and some won't give the game a chance if they have to download a client. You can't please everyone.

ArmorCritical is different than what it always was and some people didn't give it a fair chance when it first transitioned. Most likely because the game always had a stand alone client. The web browser launched with more bugs than it has now so that played a part in it for sure.

In the end, It's the same damn game it has always been.
This post was last modified: 04-27-2014, 11:26 AM by Yosh.

04-27-2014, 12:57 PM #26
niveus AC Developer
*
Status: Offline Posts:358 Threads:64 Joined:Mar 2014
(04-27-2014, 10:14 AM)BANEski Wrote:  I agree with Meek's post 100%. I stopped playing SOLELY due to the fact that there was no longer a client and mate, I bloody love this game. Even though the game mechanics have not changed, for me personally, browser based is a turn off.

Steve?!?! Bro how are you? I started playing PoE again! Logon to steam bro

04-27-2014, 11:01 PM #27
LineOf7s n00b
*
Status: Offline Posts:26 Threads:1 Joined:Apr 2014
Something I'm a little confused about regarding the web-based versus client-based argument: why not have BOTH? Aren't they almost identical code-wise anyway (at least as far as joining servers and running the game goes)? Whilst no-one in charge seems to have shown any great dislike to tossing away a great deal of hard work on a whim during the changeover, I find it very hard to believe you've scrapped the entire code-base and started from scratch.

I started on ARC more than fourteen years ago idling and/or chatting in the lobby for days at a time, long long before I even started playing the game, because I could tuck the client away on the taskbar and alt-TAB away from it as and when I needed to. It just doesn't work the same in a web browser, because a web browser is used for other things as well. Now I won't even accidentally find myself in the lobby whilst heading for the forums because you changed the domain you host them on. *shrug*

Lastly, I'm not what you'd call a big player of free Flash games and such, but I like to keep a finger on the pulse so occasionally when I find the time I'll poke around sites like Kongregate and run through a few to see what they're like etc. There are THOUSANDS to pick from and my time is precious. If I came across an 'interesting looking' one that required me to sign up first before I could even check it out.... well pffft~ - screw that. Plenty more fish in that particular pond. Now, I may just be totally ADHD or something, but I doubt it's just me. With that in mind, might it be a sensible sort of thought to consider having the ability to play the game under a "Guest" account? No login, no sign-up... just a big "PLAY AS GUEST" button above the other big buttons to sign in or register. A way for people to check things out before committing their holy-of-holies email address to Another Random Person On The Web who may or may not sell that email address to spammers or something.

If you like your criticism to be tangible and constructive, then BEWM, there you go. MWAH.

04-27-2014, 11:46 PM #28
Chris AC Operations Team
*
Status: Offline Posts:95 Threads:19 Joined:Apr 2014
Line: the banner that we are going to use for advertising will link to a page similar to what we had up on Kongregate - the person will click "PLAY" on a map and automatically enter on a guest name (after accepting the run java prompt ). See http://armorcritical.com/kongregate/games/

That is also already a feature on the armorcritical.com main page, although it is not ideally displayed. "PLAY FOR FREE" right now is the centerpiece and takes you to the registration, but the "PLAY" buttons on the bottom do put you into a game after typing a quick guest username.

Chris/RareOps - AC Operations Team
Armor Critical Website
Facebook

04-28-2014, 02:22 AM #29
Yosh Unregistered
 
(04-27-2014, 11:01 PM)LineOf7s Wrote:  Something I'm a little confused about regarding the web-based versus client-based argument: why not have BOTH? Aren't they almost identical code-wise anyway (at least as far as joining servers and running the game goes)? Whilst no-one in charge seems to have shown any great dislike to tossing away a great deal of hard work on a whim during the changeover, I find it very hard to believe you've scrapped the entire code-base and started from scratch.

I started on ARC more than fourteen years ago idling and/or chatting in the lobby for days at a time, long long before I even started playing the game, because I could tuck the client away on the taskbar and alt-TAB away from it as and when I needed to. It just doesn't work the same in a web browser, because a web browser is used for other things as well. Now I won't even accidentally find myself in the lobby whilst heading for the forums because you changed the domain you host them on. *shrug*

You can still tuck the lobby away onto your taskbar with any modern internet browser. Open the lobby as a private/incognito mode or even create a new tab as a new window. This makes it so you're not having to use the same window you are using to browse the internet.
This post was last modified: 04-28-2014, 02:34 AM by Yosh.

04-28-2014, 05:09 AM #30
meek n00b
*
Status: Offline Posts:36 Threads:0 Joined:Apr 2014
I tried signing on to play for a few minutes last night.

And surprise surprise. This piece of shit game froze my chrome browser twice. That has NEVER happend to me before and to even entertain the thought of returning and playing this game when thats going on.. I just shake my head, web based is the dumbest **** ever.

And before this attempt at playing, I tried playing a few months ago and I couldnt play in a server for more than 10mins before the server closed. We we're trying to run good pubs and games just kept closing.

Are you THAT blind that you dont see what a fucking turnoff this game has become? You guys are just patting eachothers backs saying good job to a clear shit GAME compared to Spark.

Bring a client back and run both if you want ur unappealing web game to have any kind of stability.
This post was last modified: 04-28-2014, 05:10 AM by meek.




Thread Closed


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)