Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, 6Xero9 said:

1) What? Did you forget what a Pirate was?

2) Again, drop the whole "Can't play something for X time without liking it" cause guess what, opinions can change, and it's not unheard of that additions like torpedoes and submarine turtles can really grind the gears of players that wanted the PIRATE THEMED GAME THAT WAS ADVERTISED.

3) Tell us your arbitrary number for hours to have been played for a review to be unquestioned. Cause I'm willing to bet you also say a review under Y hours shouldn't be allowed to exist.

1. you may Not know but actually Pirates only Attacked unarmed trading ships And Most of them Never actually fired a cannon or Gun at all. Also you Maybe missed it, but if you take a Super close Look in the Trailer you can this 5 Header lizard in the background or the Fire elemental. I know Hydras were almost extinct in the pirate area but Trust me they existed ^^ im Fine if You Tell me you played 1k hours And you opinion changed while playing but i cant See a reason to Play that much if i just Dont like the Game. Sound to me like eating Grass, tastes like shit but it may taste better After 1k hours. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, zottel said:

1. you may Not know but actually Pirates only Attacked unarmed trading ships And Most of them Never actually fired a cannon or Gun at all. Also you Maybe missed it, but if you take a Super close Look in the Trailer you can this 5 Header lizard in the background or the Fire elemental. I know Hydras were almost extinct in the pirate area but Trust me they existed ^^ im Fine if You Tell me you played 1k hours And you opinion changed while playing but i cant See a reason to Play that much if i just Dont like the Game. Sound to me like eating Grass, tastes like shit but it may taste better After 1k hours. 

I guess you're just ignorant as to what advertising a pirate themed game normally entails... Let's put it this way: How prominent was the animal taming in Sid Meier's Pirates!? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That has Nothing to do with beein ignorant,thats how discussions work, you bring an Argument And i Counter argument. But yeah taming Wasnt there in Pirates And im Pretty sure no Hydras too. But why is it Not pirate Themed when you can tame animals? The Game doesnt Force You to tame. You can still Build ships,explore And do treasure Maps Without even taming or buying a tame once. Might get some Problems on PVP Maybe Without tames but beside that no animals are needed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets hope that the devs shift their focus away from crazy fantasy pets and stuff.

Back to the roots, back to pirate life and warfare !

SAY NO TO DRAGONS !

SAY YES TO FRIGATES !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like that the focus is on SP actually.

Next mega patch is not enough content to bring players back, maybe they will add some more endgame content soon.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Realist said:

Not necessarily arguing with you boomer and I do agree with you to an extent, but he technically isn’t too far off. To me the leeway is mainly an excuse for lack of vision as well as a road map.

ark was actually the ultimate dinosaur game that you could actually tame Dino’s. The reason I say this is because in the beginning jeremy did an interview with a journalist. Not verbatim “ever since I was a kid, I have always loved dinosaurs. I always wanted a game with dinosaurs and once I started making video games I thought, wouldn’t it be awesome to have a game where you could actually tame and ride dinosaurs”. In the beginning he was very obsessed with “this is a dino game”. He said this was his passion.

where I agree with you is that yes, everyone had an implant when they first logged in, so yes, they should have known something else might happen. In the beginning the game was very hardly advertised as anything other than a Dino game though. This is where the leeway is the problem. Just by putting one word like “sci-fi” or “fantasy” in the description you not only open up way too many possibilities but you run the risk of people feeling like they got royally screwed. So at that point I can see where he is coming from.

i was pretty pissed off about tek, but hey, I was already pissed about all of the other crap they were doing so I can’t honestly tell you if it was the tek I was pissed at, or the behavior I have come to see as commonplace. Who knows if they were an awesome company I might have just said “well that sucks, but I guess that is what the implants were for”. 

So even though Jeremy talked a lot about dinosaurs being his passion, Ark had a clear vision and a coherent road map from day one as a science fiction game where Dinos were a central feature, not, as some who hated tek tried to claim, a Dino game where they shoe horned tek in after the fact. The reason we know this aside from the aforementioned elements is the coherent and in depth game story presented in the game’s explorer notes, some of which were also in the game from day one. The notes, if actually read instead of ignored, point immediately to a suggestion of humans from different places and historical eras being present on the ark at the same time, thus reinforcing a science fiction core concept from the beginning,

The point is not that anyone is required to like tek, or fantasy torpedoes and submarines, but rather that it is inaccurate to claim these things are “unrelated” and thrown in arbitrarily. Doing so is attempting to substitute your own desire for a purely Dino or pirate themed game for the actual developers vision that is of a broader scope.  No one is required to like that broader scope, but claiming it doesn’t exist or wasn’t communicated is factually inaccurate and unfair to the developers. Also, if you don’t like that sort of thing, you should probably brace yourself because my guess is we will see more of it not less by the time Atlas’s initial development phase of EA is done.

Your assessment of your own emotional reaction to Ark’s development is more fair minded than those who stomped their feet and threw their food and demanded “their” purely Dino game back. They were willfully denying facts, you at least recognize you just didn’t like what they chose to do with the game. I got no truck with anyone saying “I don’t like what they’re doing with this game” but that is qualitatively different from saying “they promised me a pirate/Dino game and now they’re breaking that promise by putting this other stuff in.” None of us were ever promised any such thing, and if you don’t like that throwing in a single word like sci fi or fantasy can give developers broad leeway to expand upon a central concept you would prefer they hewed more narrowly to, then that’s a view you’re entitled to as long as you’re not twisting it to assert you were somehow done wrong when the developers vision doesn’t match your personal desires.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forget where it has been awhile but it was said that half or more people don't pay attention to steam reviews. Not sure how true that really is but can say many people I know including myself don't read steam reviews. 

 

Several people I know liked the game at start and played 1000 plus even more hours then a few updates later didn't like where they seen the game goin and stop playing. They now don't like it so yes you can have 1000 plus hours in a game and not like it.  Myself I don't like a bunch of stuff about it but over all think it is a pretty good game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Puppies4ever said:

Looks like that the focus is on SP actually.

Next mega patch is not enough content to bring players back, maybe they will add some more endgame content soon.....

 

They promised a 40k+ MMO "Pirate" game. We got some fantasy hybrid mix with Submarines, Wooden ships that shoot magically powered torpedoes out of Cannon bays (??), a zoo of magical creatures no one asked for and a development focus on Single-player.  Man did they deliver.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grongash said:

They promised a 40k+ MMO "Pirate" game. We got some fantasy hybrid mix with Submarines, Wooden ships that shoot magically powered torpedoes out of Cannon bays (??), a zoo of magical creatures no one asked for and a development focus on Single-player.  Man did they deliver.

Guys, let's be honest...
Since the first trailer we known there will be Hydra, Fantaisy, Dinosaurs, Dragon, Magics, etc..

Don't be the "Oh how could we know"
It's since the beginning, as of the tek part in Ark

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, globytheoldpirate said:

Guys, let's be honest...
Since the first trailer we known there will be Hydra, Fantaisy, Dinosaurs, Dragon, Magics, etc..

Don't be the "Oh how could we know"
It's since the beginning, as of the tek part in Ark

I am not complaining about the fantasy part. My issue is with the focus. Every time they add a new tame instead of a new Ship-class the game dies a bit more.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also reviews like this that hurt the game:

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198015192553/recommended/834910/

For those that can't see it for any reason, not sure if you need a Steam account, but basically this is what it says:

Negative Review
"Horrible game."
0.0 hrs last two weeks
0.3 hrs on record
Review left on 27th July 2019

So what we have here, is someone that has played ATLAS for a total of around 18 minutes. 18 minutes is not long enough for a game of this type. The player has also not played in the last two weeks at all, yet left the negative review today, 27th July.

Now you may say that anyone with an ounce of a brain would look at that review and take zero notice of it because of the length of time played, the quality of the comment, and the fact they haven't played for at least two weeks yet still decided to post a neg review today.

But, this is where the issue is, because people won't spend the time skimming through all the reviews and reading all the comments. Most people will look at the % and make a decision. So reviews like this hold more power because of that. These types of reviews are very common unfortunately.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, [GP] Guybrush Threepwood said:

It's also reviews like this that hurt the game:

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198015192553/recommended/834910/

For those that can't see it for any reason, not sure if you need a Steam account, but basically this is what it says:

Negative Review
"Horrible game."
0.0 hrs last two weeks
0.3 hrs on record
Review left on 27th July 2019

So what we have here, is someone that has played ATLAS for a total of around 18 minutes. 18 minutes is not long enough for a game of this type. The player has also not played in the last two weeks at all, yet left the negative review today, 27th July.

Now you may say that anyone with an ounce of a brain would look at that review and take zero notice of it because of the length of time played, the quality of the comment, and the fact they haven't played for at least two weeks yet still decided to post a neg review today.

But, this is where the issue is, because people won't spend the time skimming through all the reviews and reading all the comments. Most people will look at the % and make a decision. So reviews like this hold more power because of that. These types of reviews are very common unfortunately.

At least they show up the ingame time now. There should be improvement to make reviews from "high hour" players more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, boomervoncannon said:

So even though Jeremy talked a lot about dinosaurs being his passion, Ark had a clear vision and a coherent road map from day one as a science fiction game where Dinos were a central feature, not, as some who hated tek tried to claim, a Dino game where they shoe horned tek in after the fact. The reason we know this aside from the aforementioned elements is the coherent and in depth game story presented in the game’s explorer notes, some of which were also in the game from day one. The notes, if actually read instead of ignored, point immediately to a suggestion of humans from different places and historical eras being present on the ark at the same time, thus reinforcing a science fiction core concept from the beginning,

The point is not that anyone is required to like tek, or fantasy torpedoes and submarines, but rather that it is inaccurate to claim these things are “unrelated” and thrown in arbitrarily. Doing so is attempting to substitute your own desire for a purely Dino or pirate themed game for the actual developers vision that is of a broader scope.  No one is required to like that broader scope, but claiming it doesn’t exist or wasn’t communicated is factually inaccurate and unfair to the developers. Also, if you don’t like that sort of thing, you should probably brace yourself because my guess is we will see more of it not less by the time Atlas’s initial development phase of EA is done.

Your assessment of your own emotional reaction to Ark’s development is more fair minded than those who stomped their feet and threw their food and demanded “their” purely Dino game back. They were willfully denying facts, you at least recognize you just didn’t like what they chose to do with the game. I got no truck with anyone saying “I don’t like what they’re doing with this game” but that is qualitatively different from saying “they promised me a pirate/Dino game and now they’re breaking that promise by putting this other stuff in.” None of us were ever promised any such thing, and if you don’t like that throwing in a single word like sci fi or fantasy can give developers broad leeway to expand upon a central concept you would prefer they hewed more narrowly to, then that’s a view you’re entitled to as long as you’re not twisting it to assert you were somehow done wrong when the developers vision doesn’t match your personal desires.

That is why I just said I do see where he is coming from. I didn’t say he was completely right but I am looking at both sides and understanding both. 

And yes, I usually try to just stay straightforward with most things. They definitely strayed off of the playbook with the sub though. Not in the sense that you are thinking and not because I am saying the submarine shouldn’t be here.

the reason is because the sub is something I would consider to be the equivalent of a tekish type of content. The reason is see that as so weird is that they are only 7 months in and it took a long time for tek to reach ark. They did the development of evolution pretty well in ark. 

Basically what I am saying is that the sub is fine for being in the game but the way they added is was more like throwing it in there instead of waiting awhile and letting evolution happen naturally. Yes I know it isn’t atlas evolved. Just feels like the timeline got tweak a little too soon 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not take this thread off-topic with a personal fight.  You can discuss the matter in PMs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RealistI know what you mean. But think some Kind of Story will be added later to the Game.i'd really like to See those tiny Fragments of Story like they had with the explorer notes. I mean the background Storys has already been made. The submarine And Torpedos etc. Could be Technology from ancient Times where the Islands were still in the Air. So we Discover those technologys bit by bit And learn about the past. Would also like to See them Change powerstones abit. Like kill the Guardian And get the artifact Key. Look Into all those buildings to find the Fragment of the Stone then Charge it with the essence And then go to the Cave Which now unlocks a Dungeon which Needs to be completed And fight the Boss inside to restore One powerstone. Also make every Dungeon different, One underwater Maybe so You Need to find a way to Stay underwater longer like food or oxy Equip. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, globytheoldpirate said:

Guys, let's be honest...
Since the first trailer we known there will be Hydra, Fantaisy, Dinosaurs, Dragon, Magics, etc..

Don't be the "Oh how could we know"
It's since the beginning, as of the tek part in Ark

Don't forget the undead in the trailer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Puppies4ever said:

Army of the Damned 😉

Yes. More of the fantasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think you all have forgotten about having a kid and character dying from old age. It supposed to be implemented also i hope devs didnt forgot it.

Back to the topic. I changed my review while ago to positive but still i think ATLAS have not much to offer now, its playable, i had almost zero issue with performance or DC. But reviews will not "invite" new players to the game. There have to be some Mega update , mechanic change or smth like that. Or this game will end like Citadel Forge with Fire. Look at this game, it is also as i know made by some few ppl from ARK. And after 2 years of making there is still not much to do in game and there is almost zero players on servers, there is like 60 ppl who are giving some feedback . I wanted to install it again and try to play after so long time but before that i have read comments after update...its suprising how old players lost hope for Citadel, they wrote that there is zero content and when they do they add 1 creature. Sounds fammiliar ?

ATLAS will need new players but to have those smth have to be made quickly. 

Edited by Cascco
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean its kinda a Sandbox Game so its also for us to find something to do. Not like Minecraft had mich to do except Building in the beginning. I can keep myself busy with trading breeding And Doing Community Events but yeah, beside that there is not much to do After collecting the powerstones And Doing Kraken And ICE Cave. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You did all of that and probably in 4 month, you get to the point were all you do is feeding your pets and NPC and wait for another content. Its EA ok but still for over more than a month devs are focusing on singleplayer, non dedicated and unnoficials. So for over 1 month ppl are logging only to check "if its all ok".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cascco said:

You did all of that and probably in 4 month, you get to the point were all you do is feeding your pets and NPC and wait for another content. Its EA ok but still for over more than a month devs are focusing on singleplayer, non dedicated and unnoficials. So for over 1 month ppl are logging only to check "if its all ok".

Cant deny that argmument,i still have my Fun with trading And Events etc. But its true that new content for Multiplayer or rather officials takes too long. The Performance patches were awesome tho, it had a massive impact on our base which makes it even more awesome to walk through it ^^ i guess no One expect a content Patch to Change the whole Game Expierience but they could Give us some Little Things for now. Even if its something you Need to Grind for but the reward should make up for it. Make Named sotds Which glow purple or so And have a 5% Chance to drop a sailskin or so for each powerstone Island And there you have Little Work Which keeps us busy for a time

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, [GP] Guybrush Threepwood said:

It's also reviews like this that hurt the game:

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198015192553/recommended/834910/

For those that can't see it for any reason, not sure if you need a Steam account, but basically this is what it says:

Negative Review
"Horrible game."
0.0 hrs last two weeks
0.3 hrs on record
Review left on 27th July 2019

So what we have here, is someone that has played ATLAS for a total of around 18 minutes. 18 minutes is not long enough for a game of this type. The player has also not played in the last two weeks at all, yet left the negative review today, 27th July.

Now you may say that anyone with an ounce of a brain would look at that review and take zero notice of it because of the length of time played, the quality of the comment, and the fact they haven't played for at least two weeks yet still decided to post a neg review today.

But, this is where the issue is, because people won't spend the time skimming through all the reviews and reading all the comments. Most people will look at the % and make a decision. So reviews like this hold more power because of that. These types of reviews are very common unfortunately.

this seems a bit like seeing what you were looking for, there are countless examples of positive reviews from people with very little time played as well but that wouldn't make the point you are looking for does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not Wether the Review was positive or negative,it was rather about the 30 minutes gametime And the plain "horrible". I was not even playing cause i was stuck in Charakter creation Menu And making my Char for 30 minutes. Sure i could say i Dont like the graphic style or bla but then i would Not even bother to Write a Review about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kanwulf said:

this seems a bit like seeing what you were looking for, there are countless examples of positive reviews from people with very little time played as well but that wouldn't make the point you are looking for does it?

Nice attempt at belittling my post little child.

I went on to the review section, clicked on today for negative reviews (which was yesterday), there was only one and that was it. I didn't spend time searching for a specific review, and my point was to show an example of a negative review, so why would I pick a positive review?

I'm sorry that you are incapable of understanding the point, so you make a fool of yourself by assuming and belittling. My point was to show how such reviews hurt the game, so there was nothing wrong with my example was there because it does hurt the game.

You are acting as if my point was to say how crap this game is and just pick up crap reviews about it.

Again, nice try troll.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×