Bonusweb WG Interview: WoT 2.0 Considered

Thanks to Jalt for this one

Hello everyone,

in recent Czech Bonusweb portal article, there was interview with Chris Keeling, American World of Tanks product manager. The interview took place during the recent E3 fair in the USA.


The interview starts with the usual PR garbage (bla bla we’re successful bla bla free to win bla), he goes on how they see War Thunder as a competition and how it is good to actually have a competition and how people saying “this patch destroyed a game” are mostly just trolls, but then it takes an unexpected turn.

Apparently, according to the interview, Wargaming is considering “World of Tanks 2.0″, in two options – either a completely reworked World of Tanks game on new engine with improved graphics (then the player data/accounts etc. would be transferred, this is the case if the game was another game with the same WW2 theme), or a completely new tank game from scratch (in which case nothing would be transferred).

The rest of the interview is garbage again – “we have historical battles and the gameplay is balanced and fun” (yea, right, that’s why it us getting removed in 9.2) and “we have people who expertly measure each tank so it’s completely historical bla bla” (right, that’s why for example Churchill was resized in HD instead of being done correctly the first time) etc.

Either way, the mention about the new engine is interesting. You might have recently read about the Wargaming interest in Crytek. It was actually not true (Crytek later denied any financial issues), but – who knows?

46 thoughts on “Bonusweb WG Interview: WoT 2.0 Considered

  1. ” either a completely reworked World of Tanks game on new engine with improved graphics (then the player data/accounts etc. would be transferred, this is the case if the game was another game with the same WW2 theme), ”
    - I am for this

    “or a completely new tank game from scratch (in which case nothing would be transferred).”
    - I am against this, UNLESS its a modern day WoT. Like AW.

    Best Case scenario:
    Both happen. WoT patch 1.0 gives us option 1. WG also does option 2 as a seperate game. Shared WG account too.

    Bonus: Fix WoWP

              • Woras stop being a scum, if MindChanger likes WoWP more than WT its his problem. :P

                But if you like something doesnt make that game better than the one you dont like it. I enjoy WoWP at least as much as i do enjoy WT (if not more) but WT did a much better job at optimising, balancing the game imo. :)

            • On the other hand:
              Whoever made the War Thunder UI should shoot themselves. No, really, it is DOG shit.
              War Thunder’s UI was made by a very stupid and incompetent person. And damn it, I cant enjoy the game because of that.

              • UI is easy in WT to understand i dont have any problem
                the oonly issue is to figure out how the god-awfull reaserch system works

                • Lol so true. first time i played WoT/WoWP i figured out how interface, researching system, chat, etc works in about 1 day. Im still struggeling to understand WT and where are those buttons :)))

      • WoWP is a big fail WT wins with K.O. in everything. At the moment there are 2k online player on WoWP EU wow such a good game.

        As for the tanks in a nutshell:
        Wot >>>>> WT:GF

        It’s funny because the cases are so similar:
        WG has a very good tank game, tries to make a game about planes: fails
        WT is a very good game, tries to make a tank game: so far fail

        conclusion? Go for the ships! :D

      • As much as I dislike WT’s wot-esque grindfest, I enjoy the gameplay, as it’s actually close to how real planes handle IRL (obviously, in Realistic and Aim, depending on how “updated” the FM is). I also enjoy the relatively realistic damaging.

        As someone who has been with both WT and WoWP since alpha, I don’t understand how anyone can defend WOWP, besides as a free gold generator for WoT in tournaments. Planes in WOWP have absolutely nothing to do with reality, and the gameplay is objectively far worse (hello shovelware 360 arcade game stylings). I mean, goddamn, you don’t even have a cockpit view on ANY plane.

        However, don’t take this as a defence of Gaijjin, they’re also horrible. They just made a better framework to fuck over the consumer on.

    • there will never be a Patch 1.0 it will be 10.0 the 0.X.X was removed with 8.0…

      i dont know whats the Point of another Game i mean what would it be like?

      • To make more profit maybe?

        I mean they would program a game WITH NEWER engine and NEWER frame. Which would appeal to more people on the market.

      • The version number never changed…check the res_mods folder and the loading screen in the upper left corner: 0.9.1 #xyz

      • That never changed. People nowdays just use 9.x instead of 0.9.x because it’s easier. check the version as wot is loading or the res mods folder

    • If its true what WoT product manager said … I have to smile. … I have to smile very loudly.

      WG is not able to adjust technical parameters of one single tank – Type 59 – to make it available for all players. And now some WoT manager claims that WoT as a game will be re-worked completely.

      WG management is late several years with incorporation of reasonable suggestions of players to WoT, and now … they want to start from scratch again ???

      Ok, WarThunder and Armored Warfare developers can organize big parties to celebrate such news from their competition.

  2. WoT2.0 is logic future to go.
    WoT is a great arcade-iy game as it is, puts balance as priority (well, implementing it lacks here and there but goal is clear), so it’s good for esports and competitive play (as good as you can get in this kind of game).
    OTOH, historical battles suck and will suck because of the above – you just can’t expect to make good HB or good historical content with fantasy balance factor as a priority, and you won’t make the kind of players you cater too like that.

    If you want to make 2.0 you want completely different game – to have both and to cater to wider variety of customers, instead of transferring – and possibly lowering their numbers as a consequence.
    I imagine 2.0 to be without tiers completely and without levels – balancing done in a different way completely – i toyed with this idea two years ago already, before WT…
    Maybe go even further from WoT and create “everlasting battle”, where instead of grinding vehicles and buying slots, you grind human lives and buy more humans(as balance factor)? Where you just fight and getting new vehicles is more tied to your progress (or bribing, as a game feature), but with main stress put on fighting than progressing? That’s just a draft and it would need huge amount of work+money and a lot of human supervisors (as high commanders) over battlefield afterwards. It’s just a draft, so…

  3. “either a completely reworked World of Tanks game on new engine with improved graphics”

    Coming at 2020? :)

  4. I think many people would just quit if they didn’t transfer accounts. Enduring “grinds” once again from scratch – hell no.

  5. WoT 2.0 in 2020 and probably will be postponed untill 2025 : wake up it’s WG they cant plan a patch how do you want them to remake the whole game

  6. If you don’t transfer the accounts and such then none of the past player base will play it. I can only speak for myself but I have spent 100s of pounds on WOT and am sure many others have a least bought something over the time playing it I would not even bother in a new game. Its like people who have spent years playing MMOs like world of warcraft they have invested so much time and money they would never go to a new game.

  7. “Crytek later denied any financial issues”

    The same Crytek whose UK staff walked out because they weren’t being paid?

  8. “we have people who expertly measure each tank so it’s completely historical”
    i would like to meet guys who measured the wt e100, e50, e75, e100 and rest of the “WG fantasy line” tanks, they have to be on some really strong shrooms or something…

  9. quote: “It was actually not true (Crytek later denied any financial issues)”

    actually it’s quite true, a lot of people inside Crytek spoke, last I heard, people at UK studio refused to go to work

  10. Crytek’s cashflow problems are real. WG deciding to buy it is quite likely a baseless rumor. Will Crytek implode and close? Who knows.

    Also, what engine can WoT use that will play on the shitty computers that seem to be predominant in Russia?
    I do believe that Bigworld has hit its boundaries and cannot go beyond them in the graphics department. But at the same time, it is more than adequate for the task of rendering tanks as long as you don’t try to use HD models.

    • Maybe they won’t aim for the russians anymore? Maybe they will create a game aimed at North America/ Europe where( not always) people have at least half decent pcs? There are a lot of people to entertain and to get bucks from in EU/ USA. With making a new game with a new engine they will open up a whole new theatre of audience while maintaining the steady income of money from RU who are playing WoT.

  11. Yeeah Crytek’s little money issue is real because I was hoping WG wouldn’t buy them because I didn’t want them dicking around & pulling an EA with the game “Homefront: TR” But it seems because of Cryteks money issue they shelved the game & stopped any & all work on it..soo yea

  12. A successor of WoT will not happen, cannibalize a user base of an existing product that you own? This would be stupid, a new game is very costly and risky.

    They will continue their thing, with great announcements, and then they don’t deliver in time (like havoc, release target was 9.1/9.2) and only evolve if they have to (if wt:gf didn’t exists, there were no HD models to be seen any time soon). As long they get away with that, they will continue this.