Updates: Which would you rather have?

[Zomblistic 74]

Updates: Would you rather have Tanki shut down for a few days and all of the updates thrown into the game all at once? OR, would you rather have the updates thrown into the game one or two at a time, as they are now?

 

We are constantly getting updates thrown at us. Some players say they are for the good of Tanki, to keep it interesting, to keep it evolving. Others say that the updates are ruining the game. From what I have read throughout the forums it seems the Devs have a goal in mind, though, in my opinion, it's not quite clear what that/those goal(s) is/are. For now, the Devs are giving us a few at a time, which sometimes interferes with the mechanics/dynamics of the game in another area.

 

Here's what happened to a game I used to play a few years back:

 

Devs wanted to make the game more modern, more appealing to the younger generation (13 to 20 year olds). At that time, before the updates, most of the players were of the older generation (30 and up). It was appealing to the older generation because of the accurate references to Ancient History and Knights of the Round Table era. They asked the Community what they would like to see in the updates. There were suggestions like: Ninjas, guns, Knights that could get on and off horses (RE: American Old West style), changes to battle modes and the list went on and on for pages and pages. 

 

The game was shut down for 3 days, though the forum remained open. When the game was reopened with all the updates installed, no one knew what game they were playing. Characters and weapons were introduced that were impossible during that era. (by the way, the era didn't change). Game play was completely different, mechanics had changed. There was a new tutorial that seemed very confusing. Players said that they had to do the tutorial several times before it started to make some sense. Others never got the hang of it. 

As a consequence, the game lost, I'd estimate, at least 80% of the old players that made the game great. Player participation dropped from approximately 1.2 million to approximately 400,000. But the Devs achieved their goal...To make a game that was more appealing to the younger generation and it worked. 

 

My question to you, Dear Community, which would you rather have? Updates a few at a time, which takes months to implement? OR to have all the updates done all at once, as stated above? 

 

Tanki Devs have a goal in mind, but are not making us privy to what it is. The other game outright told the Community what the goal was, but didn't give us a clear picture of how it would turn out. 

 

Your thoughts and opinions?

 

 

[Maf 32,300]

Well, for a start I think you misunderstand how updates work. Tanki doesn't need to physically shut down in order to do a lot of updates at once. Sure, if devs do decide to add a lot of things at once then the game will have some longer maintenance (usually 4-6 hours), but it doesn't need to shut down for multiple days.

 

With the way developers release updates now, it's actually quite nice to have new exciting things being added fairly often while at the same time not changing too much at a time and giving us time to adjust to the changes. If they were to instead not release anything for a year and then make some kind of massive update, not only would it get negative feedback due to players disliking such massive changes, but they would lose a LOT of players throughout that year of development, because players simply get bored and leave.

 

The game survives on updates. If changes weren't being made, people would get bored of playing the same thing over and over and they would leave. And the worst thing is that in this case it's hard for devs to even understand why people are leaving. If a bad update is released then there is clear evidence of people disliking it based on their feedback in chat and on the forum. The cause of problem is clear and so is the solution. But if players get bored, they don't announce "hey, I'm bored and I will leave the game soon". They just leave. And that makes it hard for devs because players are leaving and there is no obvious cause for it. I don't know if you were here in 2015, but in that year barely any updates were released. And that's also the year when they game had its biggest loss in the player base - people got bored and left.

 

So to conclude, it's much better to release updates in small batches often, than in a big batch all at once.

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

I feel like it is right for Tanki to keep refreshing itself with new updates. However, I feel like Tanki is making the WRONG updates. 

 

"Good artists copy. Great artists steal." - Pablo Picasso (i think it was by picasso)

 

Tanki should "steal" ideas from COD or other shooters and make them better. This would allow Tanki to appeal to all age groups instead of jut one.

 

As Maf stated above, Tanki needs to have a few updates at once instead of all of them at once. The devs would have to think of more updates if they did all of them at once. The game would get boring if they run out after cashing them all in. 

[Zomblistic 74]

Well, for a start I think you misunderstand how updates work. Tanki doesn't need to physically shut down in order to do a lot of updates at once. Sure, if devs do decide to add a lot of things at once then the game will have some longer maintenance (usually 4-6 hours), but it doesn't need to shut down for multiple days.

 

With the way developers release updates now, it's actually quite nice to have new exciting things being added fairly often while at the same time not changing too much at a time and giving us time to adjust to the changes. If they were to instead not release anything for a year and then make some kind of massive update, not only would it get negative feedback due to players disliking such massive changes, but they would lose a LOT of players throughout that year of development, because players simply get bored and leave.

 

The game survives on updates. If changes weren't being made, people would get bored of playing the same thing over and over and they would leave. And the worst thing is that in this case it's hard for devs to even understand why people are leaving. If a bad update is released then there is clear evidence of people disliking it based on their feedback in chat and on the forum. The cause of problem is clear and so is the solution. But if players get bored, they don't announce "hey, I'm bored and I will leave the game soon". They just leave. And that makes it hard for devs because players are leaving and there is no obvious cause for it. I don't know if you were here in 2015, but in that year barely any updates were released. And that's also the year when they game had its biggest loss in the player base - people got bored and left.

 

So to conclude, it's much better to release updates in small batches often, than in a big batch all at once.

I understand how updates work, somewhat. I'm not a Geek, but I have some idea. I was sighting how this one game handled the massive updates. Essentially, they were creating a whole new game, did all the testing to make sure all the elements worked together smoothly and probably didn't want a lot of players complaining while they were working on it.

 

I was here long before 2015. I remember that year. Some players left because of boredom, that's true (players are still complaining about boredom), but others left because they felt their suggestions were falling on deaf ears (some players still feel that way). 

 

I prefer a few updates at a time, but I wish the Devs would tell us what the ultimate goal is. Or do they even have a goal? I read that the game is evolving, but I haven't seen anything that says what it's evolving into. Put a single cell in a petri dish, feed it, watch it grow, watch it change. You ask, "What's it doing?" Answer: "It's evolving." You ask, "Into what?" Answer: "It's evolving."

[Maf 32,300]

I prefer a few updates at a time, but I wish the Devs would tell us what the ultimate goal is. Or do they even have a goal? I read that the game is evolving, but I haven't seen anything that says what it's evolving into. Put a single cell in a petri dish, feed it, watch it grow, watch it change. You ask, "What's it doing?" Answer: "It's evolving." You ask, "Into what?" Answer: "It's evolving."

They talked about it a few times during streams. The goal is to keep the game somewhat the same as it is now, keeping the original concept and gameplay style, but adapting it to better compete against newer, more advanced games and catering to the current population of gamers. That involves adding features such as Matchmaking and changing the game's economy to be more friendly towards new players. The game has been losing popularity and players since 2014, so devs want to change it in a way that old active players stay, but new ones also come and get into the game.

[ThirdOnion 4,898]

"Good artists copy. Great artists steal." - Pablo Picasso (i think it was by picasso)

That quote is actually in AlternativaPlatform's office. Tanki has stolen a lot of mechanics.

 

I prefer a few updates at a time, but I wish the Devs would tell us what the ultimate goal is. Or do they even have a goal? I read that the game is evolving, but I haven't seen anything that says what it's evolving into. Put a single cell in a petri dish, feed it, watch it grow, watch it change. You ask, "What's it doing?" Answer: "It's evolving." You ask, "Into what?" Answer: "It's evolving."

They definitely have a goal, work towards which was started during 2016. I think a quote from Hazel-Rah sums it up best: "You might say it will be a remake of the game . . . right on the game." If you want a better idea of what is going on, here is a section of a livestream from last year where Hazel-Rah talks for about the future of Tanki Online and the development team's attitude towards updates. It's about 10 minutes long.

 

As a player though, I am not a fan of how work on this rather vague goal is progressing. We are in an intermediate stage with a lot of incomplete features, constant changes, and not much in terms of a finished product. I suspect that this is why a lot of players, including myself, liked older Tanki more, when the game was more stable and there were fewer changes.

Edited February 12, 2018 by ThirdOnion

[Nicola_M 1,563]

Tanki should "steal" ideas from COD or other shooters and make them better. This would allow Tanki to appeal to all age groups instead of jut one.

But Tanki already appeals to all age groups.  There's kids, middle-aged and oldies playing.

[Matt_Black 203]

Not really bothered as long as the updates make sense.

 

Introducing a new game mode but not releasing assault into pro matches, where it might actually be fun for both teams with out the drugs. And hilarious to play in low grav games. 

 

Way too many team games ending in blowouts. 

 

If the TankiX MM system is the model for TO then I can't see it being popular. As player I like being able to chose to join or leave when I like or sit on the same map for an hour or two. will this still be possible with MM?

 

Use a different stat to match players to games. Rank is just an indicator of how long and how much you play the game, not if you are any good at it. Could the K/D ratio provide more balanced matches? Grade the matches by a range of K/D instead of rank. Still going to have it's problems I know. Rank games by efficiency perhaps. Would using a range of stats to allocate players to maps be also a way of equipment allocation? If you have m3 gear could you have it de-ranked to play in lower ranked games? So instead of alternative accounts to play for fun when the middle rank grind gets too boring you could have your garage temporarily de-modified so you can play in lower ranks for fun. 

 

Link supplies use to experience points. Less drugs= more points. Not good from a dev point of view as revenue will fall but for a gaming perspective I have to say that it's a much more fun game to play when your opponent doesn't suddenly get 4X more powerful than you. 

 

Supplies and overdrive active time linked to rank or experience. Noobs as it stands, the better you get the less time it works for. It would them work like a handicap system helping to even the playing field. 

 

 

Not fussed by lack of whizzy graphics and cool animations. Gameplay is far more important and after a while of playing I turned the majority of the  graphics off on TankiX as they detracted from playing the game (but I still don't like it!). Pong has about he worst graphics you can get in a game but I bet if your old enough to remember it you spent hours playing it.

[ThirdOnion 4,898]

If the TankiX MM system is the model for TO then I can't see it being popular. As player I like being able to chose to join or leave when I like or sit on the same map for an hour or two. will this still be possible with MM?

When MM is released there will be a custom battle list where anyone will be able to create PRO battles for free. You will be able to play on any map you want for however long you want to, the only catch is you won't be able to complete missions in non-MM battles.

[Nicola_M 1,563]

When MM is released there will be a custom battle list where anyone will be able to create PRO battles for free. You will be able to play on any map you want for however long you want to, the only catch is you won't be able to complete missions in non-MM battles.

So basically if you play non-pro battles, then you have lost the choice of any map or battle.

I like the current setup where we have a Battle List and we can join whatever maps we want, and be able to adjust our equipment to suit.

Like others, I really don't like the sound of MM.

Edited February 12, 2018 by Nicola_M