Ryan addressed the problem when it was new, and he agreed with us. But the bigwigs at Gameloft obviously didn't think it was a problem. I'm sure they still monitor multiplayer, but their metrics are different from ours as long as they manage to increase IAP sales, they're doing their job right. Just look at the app store's top grossing charts, and you'll see that freemium games are the way to make money these days. So the publishers aren't the only ones to blame mobile gamers have brought this onto themselves by supporting the freemium model.
Don't forget LOCAL multiplayer. It's a complete different thing and every Asphalt fanatic should try it at least ONCE (otherwise you'll miss something important). Sync your GC accounts (all devices the same GC account): All participants have EXACTLY the same cars, upgrades etc. Totally FAIR and a matter of SKILLS only. Have the flying iPads on your sofa! For some local friends and me the career mode is 5% of the game. The infinite FUN and action of local multiplayer is 95%. (We almost never play online multiplayer or those time-limited events.)
At this point I think GL is doing the right thing business-wise even though I don't enjoy it anymore (but I get it, I play it for free and never ever pay so I compromised better gameplay for myself). Why they are doing it right is that A8 is not new anymore. Game steadily loses popularity as is convenient for any game over time. What happens now with the new mp/tournaments is, a, new players are being hooked up to the game with mp thrill, and b, GL is trying to make as much money before the game inevitably "dies". For the "if they want to make money then why don't they charge us initially rather than forcing iaps" argument I'd guess the iap route earns better. People think they spend little, it adds up as they get addicted, profit ensues. Do I like it? Again, no. I find it more than necessary. It is too imbalanced the way it is now. Do I get it? I do. Their choice.
For you guys running the P1, do you think it's a good idea to max it for MP? Right now, I have acceleration, handling, and nitro maxed. Wondering if I should max top speed too--top speed upgrades affect the ranking the most, so do you think the car gets paired up against cars it can beat when maxed? I don't want to be racing Lykans. Right now, I mostly get paired against FXX's and Lambos, which is fine. Also, since the update my MP ranking has gone down about 200 points. I don't really mind since I just want the win streak rewards and maintaining a high ranking was starting to get frustrating.
I would love to see a multi player that we can play our friends from GC with in private room.... and not just have to be actually with the friends we want to play. That would be a hoot
Also regarding the new structure of the game in terms of encouraging IAP, it's totally understandable from GL's point of view. What I'd like to see though is something like this--pay $20 or $30 one time, and unlock higher rewards in the game. Meaning for a one time fee, I'd be more likely to get nitro, tuning kit, and double credits boosters in MP, and maybe I could get +50% credits in tournaments or something like that. The one time charges could even be grouped specifically. Like pay $5, and it unlocks double credits as a reward in MP or something like that. Then GL could have its money, and people who want to play for rewards instead of just buying them outright could have more fun.
If you are racing against FXXs and Lambos, then you should be good i guess if the FXX isnt too good. Then you probably dont need to max it out. Only max it out if you're getting outclassed. That would be something i'd pay for. The problem with that is it goes from IAPs to becoming a pay to win game, which would completely ruin the game. If a person pays for boosts and etc, they would get the best chance to win while everyone who doesnt pay has a slim chance of winning.
I'm working on reading all of the posts from the last day/1.5 days. Thanks for the feedback on everything folks. I'll try to put some stuff together to forward along to the team.
It wouldn't be any different from now. People could still pay for boosts with credits. I wasn't proposing that the flat fee to win boosts would be the only way to get the boosts. It's just that it seems like GL has made good rewards harder to come by in order to encourage people to buy credits with IAP--I'd like an IAP to get better rewards by actually playing the game, which is more fun. It would also be a better deal in the long run for people who play a lot. I agree that pay to win would ruin the game.
What?!?! Ryan/Fabian, please take note! You may find this feedback to be of interest. I'm posting this on behalf of an asphalt 8 player that is too busy doing other stuff to post. He/she/it was once in the top 100, topped out at about 1782 rank, and crashed way down racing a Lykan. From here on out I'll just say 'I' when I mean that other person. I have over 2k mp wins, over 7 million credits, every available car maxed, etc. I used to race slow cars for rank like the rest of you. The 370z was my weapon of choice. If you think the mp system is broken now, you should know that such a viewpoint is irrational. The mp system was broken before the china update! Here's why: you had to game the system to know which car to race in order to win consistently. Hacking aside, you would get completely pwned if you were stupid enough to drive a db9, countache, bently, fx50, urus, Maserati, m6, testarossa, sl65, viper, ruf rt 12 s, or Bugatti. A lot of other cars gave you a chance to win, but only if you were lucky enough not to run up against a good driver in on of the top tier cars. Only a handful of cars were really competitive. The worst part is that the old matching system is mostly unchanged for people with ratings of about 1400 or lower. And, apparently, a lot of you are (ab)using the survolt still, which is the most over-used mp car ever. As a z driver, let me just say that I am sick of survolts! Face it, the car rating system is, and always has been, hosed. Gameloft needs to ignore ratings and instead match based on track times when the cars are driven by skilled (top 1000) drivers and on actual acceleration when fully boosted. There is no way the db9 should face off against a survolt! A survolt can put up better track times than the Bentley with better acceleration off the line to boot. Car rating means nothing. In the mean time, if you guys want to have more fun in multiplayer, I suggest you use this thread, or a blog or something, to coordinate mp meets where you all agree on a date and time to log in and run a particular selection of cars, maxed out, fully boosted, and ready to go. If enough of you show up in the same ride at the same time, you will probably get matched against one another frequently enough that you will enjoy the outcome. You may get put into a punishment race against faster cars, but hey, shiitake mushrooms happen, right? And let's be honest, what good is all that rank if you won't race? I put my butt on the line with the Lykan many times, no matter what. Losses be damned! Have Ryan show up at the meets and stream races. It would be a blast, and it doesn't have to be the Lykan. If you can't agree on which cars, have someone like turbo do quick local races in vs mode to show us potential track times for each car so when can see which cars would be truly competitive, at least within the rules that the mp server will use when matching. Survolt vs zagato would be a great matchup, but the servers won't create that matchup unless it's to punish a high-rank survolt driver. Gameloft, you can fix this by introducing tle-style mp tournaments. Set it up so people have to race in the cars you mandate if they join. Put them in brackets of 8, and run them once every hour or two. Make some tournaments rank restricted, so low-rank players can join a tournament that high-rankers can't join, and put a floor on some of them to attract your top talent. All races would have no rank gain/loss, and instead you'd gain or lose rank according to how far you got in the tournament at its end. The pick-up (pug) nature of standard mp makes things disorganized and exacerbates problems with the car rating system. Get mp organized! It would fit in with your tle emphasis. You can also give more rank to the guys driving in higher rank mp tournaments if you're so hell-bent on making us drop d class for s class. We players can't set up interesting pairings like, all Audi s4s vs Audi rs3 sportbacks, but you can (yeah the rs3s would probably have the edge, but you never know . . .) That is all.
Interesting. I like the idea of a MP bracket, if there's a way to make the logistics practical. Maybe if there was one race per day. You get to race once, and if you win you can access the race on the next day. Keep it going until only 1000 people are left, and give nice rewards. I don't think it's practical to expect everyone to sign in at an exact time.
That's definitely an interesting concept. I know the team is evaluating the multiplayer scene to see what improvements/tweaks can be made. I'm sure they are open to different ideas, so I'll need to sync up with them and see what their thoughts are on the current system. I definitely enjoy reading the ideas you all are coming up with! Very creative solutions
The main thing i do have a problem with is telling a gamer they have to pay to do well in a game. Money should not be a barrier in the main mechanics of a game. IAP should always be optional, not something you need if you ever want to be successful. But they'll probably do that anyway and that will be the day this app gets deleted. Its almost like looking at myself a couple months ago ha. If some dont know/remember, i used to bash multiplayer before the update (matching up with cars 40+ points above you, making some cars useless, etc), but not as much as now. It went from above average to bad. But anyway, back to your post. This post will criticize a couple things and i will come at you. Hopefully you wont take it personal, just me expressing myself. Apologizes in advance, Im a very honest person. 1. If you are going to speak on behalf of players like me, dont. You would have to know us to speak on our behalf, atleast for me. Because unless you've known me since i first joined this thread, then you dont know me well enough to generalize me. To compare stats: 1873 rank, 2.4 K wins, 16.8 million credits, every car maxed except Mclaren P1 and Aston Martin Zagato (i will use both online). I used to race slow cars until i was around 1500. My choice of weapons: Scion, 599xx, Gallado, Shelby (used to be, not anymore), Mclaren Spider (used to be until Sesto domination). 2. I am not irrational and you are in no position to call me irrational. Like i said before, months ago i was complaining about multiplayer for car ranking and bad car balancing reasons among other things. This is nothing new, multiplayer just got worst. Right now, i only use the Survolt because its either use that or dont play at all (the Lykan is not an option for me). I'd rather play. I've always hated the Survolt, from the first couple of weeks i started playing this. I still complain about it on a daily/weekly basis. But i have no choice. 3. I agree that the car ranking system has been sub-par for as long as i've played. Your idea is interesting but it has flaws. Basing off track times is naive, as you should already know there are many factors that play into the final track time, not just a clean race from start to finish. Then, what happens when some cars are outmatched by any car in its surrounding times? This will make more cars become irrelevant. Not to mention that most cars will then become stale since it will only get matched up with maybe 2-3 other kinds of cars. There will be no variety in the racing. Gameloft would just be better off re balancing the less used/outmatched cars to make them competitive while also rebalancing the already over powered cars. They should also take into notice that acceleration and nitro are the most important things in multiplayer. 4. That idea has potential but it would be too spread out. There have been times were i would play someone i know on here 1-2 times then never see them again until like the next day. Something many players have been asking for would be better suited which is player lobbies. Allowing players to invite friends in a lobby similar to how local multiplayer is but over Wifi/3G/4G/etc. They can have lobbies for Player/Social matches (unranked) and Ranked matches. Then we wouldnt have to synchronize times where we might be able to play against each other. 5. I do like the last idea of time limited multiplayer events. There are a couple improves to your model though. 8 in a bracket isnt good at all. How often does someone in 8th ever get a chance to win? Exactly and its worst if every player is skilled. The idea is very ambitious but wouldnt work for a game like this were car positions off start and "who gets nitro first" will determine the winner. Rarely does it ever come down to straight skill. That may work for another car game though. The way time limited multiplayer events should work is allowing it to work like reg multiplayer with random matchups but only 4 players allowed. The matches shouldnt be based off player skill because then you are segregating the community and forcing them to use certain cars. Thats the main problem with current multiplayer, no need to continue that. It would work if we werent forced to use certain cars. The rest like you said would be good (like there being tournament specific rank that doesnt affect multiplayer rank).
I don't speak for anyone but 'me'. And anyone who has read this thread over the last 50+ pages is definitely in a position to call out complainers for being irrational. Did you really think it was a good idea that the sesto could destroy the veneno, ruf ctr 12, f12berlinetta, and sometimes even the fxx evolutione (depending on the driver)? Have you seen what the cts-v can do to people? It's a massacre. The other day, I took the cts-v for a spin, got matched vs a boosted, maxed 599xx, and won. It was an ordeal, but I took first and held the lead to the end. You know how much of a beast that car is. If I can beat that with a 1454 cts-v, what else could I beat? A mediocre driver in a maxed c7? Been there, done that, under the old system. If you think that's balanced , you're . . . Look that ain't right, at least not according to the rating system. If that's how they want the cars to run, fine, change the ratings. Wait, they can't, because the ratings determine buy order and relative pricing, which has been more-or-less fixed since launch, aside from some price tweaks. The old system was awful, just like the new system is awful. It's the same system. Gameloft just decided to slap around people who figured out how to work the system, like I did, and every cts-v/sesto/599xx/mcclaren f12/370z/ats/mini-driving player out there. For the vast majority of players out there, nothing changed, except that it seems to be a lot easier to gain rank now in races with fewer than 8 drivers, especially in s-class. You, and I, and the other people out there that were in or got close to the top 100 abused a flawed system. Yeah there were lag and hacker problems that pushed people out of s-class, but that doesn't even begin to address the problem of people getting into cars like the poster child for awful - the lowly db9 - and losing just because of the car choice. They beat themselves. For any of us to complain now because we can't escape the awful-ness of the mp system is myopic, at best. Don't like getting run off the road by a Lykan when you play a sesto? Now you know what every 1337B db9 driver felt like when they lose again and again and again to 1318B survolts. At least the cars beating your sesto have a higher rating, not that that's much consolation. Anyone that didn't like getting beat down in a crapmobile got railroaded into a narrow selection of cars driven by people serious about winning races and gaining rank. Didn't like it? Still wanted to drive your "slow" car for style points or to be a fanboy? Then you got burned. Now they're funneling us into an even smaller group of cars that can still take all comers, if we're at high rank. Same crap, different flavors. I'm sorry that your rankmobiles all got hosed. So did mine. Now we're suffering like the stupid noobs that never got anywhere, no matter how good they were, because they drove the wrong car in multiplayer for too long. Only for us, now, all cars are the wrong cars, except the Lykan and the survolt . . . And I think you can get away with driving the dart now, too, which is hilarious. If you really did rail against the old system to the point that you were thinking about quitting over it, or saying the whole thing was broken , or what have you, then great, good for you. But it looks to me like most of the vocal critics were happy enough to at least keep racing as long as the rank kept pouring in. How many of the top 100 are sitting on the sidelines, doing one race every two weeks to keep up their rank? Yeah, the new system is worse overall, but it only seems that way to those with any kind of player rank. To everyone else, it's business as usual. As far as the feasibility of people coordinating a common time, bear in mind that that is a player response with no support from Gameloft. I just think it would be cool if Team TouchArcade could pull it off. Remember, for every runningbird and turbo and darkzero, there are hundreds of readers out there that would love to get a shot at them. Just one guy saying hey, "I'll be here at high noon for an hour in a BMW m6, bring it!" would generate a response. Getting two or more of you OCD tle racers in the same place would be pandemonium. The m6 occupies what is usually a dead zone populated by the few people driving the cts-v, vantage, maybe zagato, and sometimes the f430 (though the f430 usually gets pushed up vs the gtr, 599xx, etc.). Bringing in several hundred forum warriors all at the same time to that rating slot would be amusing, to say the least. Now for track time, be honest here. What else matters? To win, you establish position by getting the jump off the line or passing everyone and then you get into the nitrous flow to starve everyone behind you and maintain or improve position. There is a direct causal link between low track times and winning mp races, so long as the acceleration profile is sufficient to establish position. If you are in the lead with the car that has the best track time possible among all cars in the race and you have as much as or more than enough nitrous to fend off guys at your back long enough to make the rest of the race a time trial, you win unless you make a mistake. Yeah, there are some cars out there with excellent track times that consistently fail in multiplayer due to acceleration issues and/or matching issues. Things work a little differently for cars that have to play catch-up due to poor acceleration, in that they miss some bottles that other cars don't, which is why I recommend matching those cars against cars with times a few seconds worse on their reference times but better acceleration profiles. Why would maxed zagato vs maxed survolt be a good matchup? The zagato has a slightly better reference track time, but the survolt can starve the zagato, or wreck it off the line. But the zagato might catch up. It would be too close to call. A car with a poor acceleration profile should never be expected to beat another car with a similar reference time and a superior acceleration profile. Nitrous bottles play too great a role. In Iceland, even the havoc bonuses can make a difference. Matching cars on track times and acceleration profiles would work. It would take a lot of data logging to do it right with all the part-modded cars out there, but it could be done; done right, it would make more cars competitive in mp. A lot more. For mp tles: Look, 4 player or 8 player, it's all good with me. Just do it, Gameloft. Gameloft is going to want rank segregation to cater to da nubz. And don't get me wrong , I am totally down on there being a d or c-class tournament for ranks 1500 and up, just keep in mind that if the winner is going to gain x ranks for that tournament, Gameloft will want to give y rank for an s-class tournament for the same rank category, where y>x. Point being, if you are an ats fanboy or something, you just wait for an ats tournament to roll around and you jump in knowing you gain rank if you get hi enough, period. No ats versus scion bs involved. If the tournaments roll around once per hour or so, and finish before the next one, everyone gets a chance to play, and things stay busy. They could run 2-3 at the same time to give people options. It would be a trip to race some unloved mp cars like the m6, the vantage, or the spano. It would be even better if they had some mp tles with part-modded cars as participants, and they gave you the option to run your maxed out ride in nerf mode for the duration of the mp tle. Again, that requires some fine-tuning, but that's what data logging is for Gameloft! Put your QAs and testers to work! I would love to see maxed Audi s4 vs ~1200 db9 or countache. The z wins that race easily, but does the s4? Let's find out!
LMAO....now this made me laugh out loud for sure!!! I would be there no matter what....I am not the best player out here for sure, but....I am your Huckle Berry ....Win or Loose Hey I am in there most days....I just did not like the fact that I wanted to race my A class and get matched with good drivers in Lykans and or hte hackers that were over taking the game....thats not a fair race no matter what. I agree with the beat down of low rankers....But man most of my rank came in A class via Sesto. I worked the vast majority of what I have left in that car Not an ATS or 370Z It is not a fair system all in all not then and certainly not now. Cheers Edit: You speak for "this Person" very well I might add
It depends on how long each update takes and also, what the update includes. Some updates might include cars and tracks. Other updates might just include new tracks OR new cars. It all depends
You can call out other people (i dont speak for them) not me, just to make that clear. No, those cars should not be getting slaughtered by the Sesto, i know this. No its not balanced, like i said in my post. No car on this game should be so dominate in its class that nothing near it can compete. Changing the rating does nothing unless they rebalance the cars. Again, i've been complaining about these things. None of this is new to me, i always said the multiplayer was flawed in the old system. If you were here for 50+ pages, you'd have seen that. Hmm, guess not. The difference from some people is that im complaining about the new problems that make an already flawed system worst. All the complaints i had about the old system went unheard obviously so im not going to sit and keep bringing it up. Either it gets fixed or not. It was either complain and play or complain and stop playing. I played because on the old system for me, it was atleast something i can enjoy. Now its not as enjoyable and just yesterday i started playing multiplayer on the regular again. Look, i understand what you are saying, the car balancing is bad. I get that, i would love for it to be better also. I've been complaining for a while that i cant even use my favorite cars (Corvette C7, Nissan GT-R, Ford Shelby, Ferrari Italia, Lotus Exige, etc) online since they were so un-competitive. I complained but i also got over it and adjusted. If they ever decided to rebalance the game, then i would love it because GT-R is definitely better than its portrayed. Ofcourse we dont agree with the new update because it only affects us. And it business as usual to other people why? Because they are unaffected by it. Common sense. The reason the whole meet up and playing thing wont work its for many reasons. The lobbies lock in very fast now. Not everyone is on the same time zone, not everyone has so and so maxed out car, everybody in the lobby will be affected by the cars which are drastically better (there will 9 times out of 10 be other players using better cars than you because of the update so everybody will be racing for 2nd or worst). The way you describe the acceleration and matching lap times at the end finally make sense. You put more explanation and detail into it, good. Matching on overall car stats and acceleration should be the way it goes. The problem right now isnt the ranks, its how unbalanced the ranks are and misleading. The change itself though would be pointless though. There is almost one factor in whether someone wins a race or not. And that comes down to whoever gets the first nitro bottle on most maps (Barcelona, Tokyo, The Great Wall, Monaco, London, Venice, French Guiana, Alps). My old suggestion would slightly solve this problem. The whole Zagato vs Survolt example wouldnt change a thing. Any good player knows which cars are competitive with which cars, so if im a Survolt player, im going to wreck the Zagato instantly. The chance to catch up or beat me is not about to happen. So im going to knock you out, then i win. See? Its too simple. Might as well just nuke everything about multiplayer while you're at it and re-invent it. Or play another game with multi that satisfies you and not complain about this one. I mean that in a general sense, not directed at you.
High S Cup Koenigsegg Agera R: 1:08:978 – 1:02:176 Mercedes Benz Silver Lightning: 1:01:799 – 1:01:362 – 1:01:117 Final Placing: 1st
I'm already tired of Chinese annoying Cliffs, Fireworks and Dragons. I'm already tired of Chinese annoying Cliffs, Fireworks and Dragons. I'm already tired of Chinese annoying Cliffs, Fireworks and Dragons. I want a track that benefits SPEED... A true competition!
