Jump to content


Armored Warfare (Life Support)

Armored Warfare

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#21 Skywalkre


    Garry F!@#$%g Owen

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ
  • Interests:military history, psychology, gaming (computer, board, simulation, console), sci-fi

Posted 05 December 2017 - 1346 PM

SS had a comment in the AW subreddit I found... amazing.  He states there are thousands of active PvE players on the NA server (which is believable because for a recent event they had something like 800 players achieved the PvE requirements), they're paying customers (paying for what I wonder?), and that PvP (I'm guessing he's including GO games in this figure) accounts for just half a percent of all matches on the NA server.


I'm just... shocked at those numbers.  AW PvE was some of the most brainless gaming I've come across in years and the number and variability of missions is basically nonexistent.  That that many folks are willing to keep at it and spend money is just hard for me to comprehend.  I guess seeing pixel tanks on screen, regardless of what you're doing with them, is all that matters to some folks?  :blink:


Edit: The underlying point to this is that if they're able to keep the game going with the joke that is their current PvE model I have little hope they'll improve or drastically alter it to something more engaging.  That coupled to how slow they are in changing broken aspects of the core gameplay in PvP means there's little hope of this title ever not sucking (which was always low to begin with).  I keep holding out hope, but... there's really no reason to.

Edited by Skywalkre, 05 December 2017 - 1358 PM.

  • 0

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users