Once you start dividing people across modes there will be an issue of the Que times, ofc the devs will use it ones something good is suggested but they won’t mid selling it for money like War Thunder.
Note that the game already have 4 campaigns which means a total of 4 modes, I doubt creating more or even doubling it in this case would be of any good for the game, it either the whole game moves into a direction or not rather than creating as many modes to harm the Que times (that they would be happy to sell the solution/suggestion for).
It doesn’t harm que times in my opinion just like on warthunder. i think the people who oppose different game modes like in every other fps or in warthunder are in the minority and when the game gets a large enough following it should be implemented. there is a reason its so widely used, it adds replayability and in my opinion a campaign is not a game mode, rather a change of scenery with the same game modes. three or two different modes ( arcade, realistic or sim) would not hurt the game , narrowing it down to one mode will
Yes but it’s too early to begin such thing as you yourself said get large enough (it might have seen boost with the pay to get access to test) while testing we need to play with bots. I see from where you are coming for sure since most of us played War Thunder before this to an extent (regardless to what extent), believe it or not what War Thunder does isn’t always as straight forward or even applicable in the game.
It would be problematic to the extend on how far you should go to each respective mode, for example in the open alphas you could see that it should you the grenade throw trajectory, this was removed by the developers stating that it’s arcadish, while at the same time you could find it that it displays if the shell would penetrate or not like it does in War Thunder arcade mode in tank fights.
Such thing would exhaust the development capabilities of the team already considering how slow needed changes are coming (or big enough to be considered a change), aside of it there are other games that does the ultra realistic/simulation & so on (not talking specifically WWII just FPS in general). All I’m saying it’s too early to starting talking into a topic of such magnitude & even at a time where the game is still trying to take shape (requirements doesn’t help to start into the topic that’s it).
I can’t recall ever seeing a shooter that does an arcade, realistic, and simulator mode all in one. Almost like it requires too many resources and stunts the development of the game. The only games that have anything similar are games such as call of duty, with their “hardcore mode” (which gets only a couple percent of the player base I might add), which is just a damage multiplier. Having different modes that each have different movements in a fps style game is nothing more than a waste of dev time.
The only different modes there should be in game is different objective selection such as being able to choose between invasion or conquest.
Who are you to decide what is a waste of the devs time? Further more there is no widely accepted article available or any research that shows that developing more game modes “stunts” the growth of a game. Infact it has been PROVEN to add replay ability to games furthering their life. when you say these things it is purely your opinion and not based on facts. If you can provide sources proving me other wise than Ill concede. Another thing to add is HC on COD does not only capture a “small percentage” of the player base you should really cite a source proving other wise. Many games that are FPS do not have one game mode thats insane you’d even try to make that argument
COD shows player numbers. The players in hardcore mode is a fraction of that in the normal modes. THAT IS A FACT. How does dedicating resources to something that requires tons of time and basically is making multiple games in the same game stunting the games growth? Probably because thats literally how development time works. Name a single fps game that runs an arcade, realistic, and simulator mode then if you think its such a common thing. I’ll be waiting for eternity for you to give me one. THAT IS A FACT. As I’ve stated, having different modes such as conquest and invasion will lead to replay-ability, trying to say that I said otherwise is a STRAIGHT OUT LIE. I said having different fully fleshed out realism styles will be too much for such a small dev team like this to ever accomplish. Don’t tell me I can’t say that because thats my opinion, because the truth is dev teams aren’t doing this to begin with because its not cost effective. Don’t sit here and tell me that your pipe dream is easily achievable and is totally cost effective until it has been done. If it can be done, PROVE IT before you state false bullcrap like you just did.
I didn’t you did. Btw thanks for citing sources (oh wait you didn’t) and quit pretending like you know how much time allocation it takes the devs to do anything. You still only state opinion I mean for christ sake it’s literally only one google search away to see FPS games that have different modes that add or relieve difficulty you’re actually being lazy if you’re going to say other wise. Keep playing word games like a child and using the specific examples of Arcade , realistic , and simulator when you know damn well what I’m talking about and being willfully ignorant. Take two seconds to actually fact find and do your research before you try and have a serious discussion. I mean seriously man use your noggin, two game modes is going to add more replay ability than let’s say 5? Really man seriously go do some research.
Furthermore you should be able to grasp the concept that players are not bound to one game, and will opt to leave if they get board. However if they had different modes to get them interested or to change pace they may stick around longer. Name one fps game, just one game that only has two game modes btw. XD
Funny enough most of the giantly popular games have one gamemode that was executed very well.
Among us (no diffrent gamemodes)
Fortnite (Battle royale)
Minecraft (survival/multiplayer)
It is almost always not worth it to try to cater your game to a larger audience by introducing more gamemodes as at the core of it all: you can not make everyone happy. Making sure the people that you know will like your game, in this case generally WW2 shooter fans, will enjoy the game the most. This can only be done through solid gameplay and progression, not by introducing niche gamemodes that never quite satisfy people’s needs.
If theres one that uses different modes then state it. I have to cite sources but your word is all we need? Stop being such an absolute hypocrite. I’m claiming that there are none, youre claiming they exist. It’s not my job to provide a name of a game because I’d have to list every single game ever made and you’d still ignore it because you are incapable of accepting you’re wrong. But I’ll list a bunch here for you that are very popular that are only one game mode (or honestly style would be more appropriate). COD (arcade), Battlefield (arcade), Post Scriptum (Simulator), Esacape From Tarkov (Simulator), Enlisted (Semi-Realistic). Do I need to go on? None of these games have different mode selections that change how the core gameplay is. Call of Duty isn’t going to make a game that has two different modes, one thats COD and the other in an Escape From Tarkov simulator style, this would require tons of more development time and would stunt game growth because the majority of the playerbase will still want the normal COD style and the devs will be spending dev time on the EFT style instead of what most people want. Add to the fact that the EFT guys can do it better than the COD guys could because the EFT guys have been working on their game for years and have lots of experience developing the game.
And stop acting like this is a conversation you can twist the words around in. Its a message system, the words are right there. Your the one who stated that they wanted an arcade, realistic, and simulator mode. I’m not the one “Playing word games like a child” to quote you when you’re the one whos ignoring everything I’m saying to act like you’re right.
I asked you to cite sources that prove what you say are facts. Post scriptum has a player base of on average 1000-2000 players via steam charts. If you’re trying to tell me rn you can’t change the difficulty on call of duty or battlefield then it’s really you who can’t admit you’re wrong. You don’t know how much it would take to develop a change in values that add or relieve damage. Youre the one who can’t admit he’s wrong and when asked to state some fps, said you were going to state a ton (only stated 5) and even used the game in question to inflate the list. Like c’mon man admit you were pretending like you know what’s best for the devs and you’re idea that fps should only come with 2 game modes is preposterous and never been the case for most of history. I mean seriously man ONE google search and 20 minutes of research prove you’re talking purely out of opinion
No need to nitpick an argument in a discussion, man.
One could compare difficulty with selecting diffrent squads in Enlisted. Sure, the experience is a bit diffrent, but at its core you are still playing the same game/gamemode.
Its not nitpicking, my arguement has always been about damage taken and how it can be manipulated. Warthunder does the same shit with arcade , realistic , and simulator.
And my argument has always been that diffrent gamemode generally do not give a lot for a game’s popularity. War thunder is much less popular than WoT, which only has 1 main gamemode.
seriously go do some research.