Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
FatalCrazy

25k Reviews negative in Steam is unjust !

Recommended Posts

 

ATLAS have currently 25k reviews negative in steam.
Currently the game is very good, players are not reviewing their reviews.
 Unfortunately, this note is unfair to the present day of ATLAS.

The game had a lot of problems just at launch. Developers are working hard to deliver great quality and incredible game play.

We may need Youtubers to show that today we have something quite different from the release.
 The game is amazing and does not deserve such notes on steam.

Edited by FatalCrazy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Half of them were made in the first few weeks yes. And yes they were all negative. So we’ll see. 

Share this post


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

 

ATLAS have currently 25k reviews negative in steam.
Currently the game is very good, players are not reviewing their reviews.
 

That
is
like
your
opinion
man

Seeing as how the game sold between 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 units on PC, and approximately 0.2% and 0.5% of those individuals still play, I'm gonna Err on the side of, the other 99.5% to 99.8% and say; "No my dude.... It's not good, I can tell because some of the numbers and because I've seen a lot of bad games in my time".

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That
is
like
your
opinion
man

Seeing as how the game sold between 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 units on PC, and approximately 0.2% and 0.5% of those individuals still play, I'm gonna Err on the side of, the other 99.5% to 99.8% and say; "No my dude.... It's not good, I can tell because some of the numbers and because I've seen a lot of bad games in my time". 

A game with many negative reviews, makes the buyer "player" maybe he will not test due to the large number of negative comments. This is bad, today the ATLAS is a great game and should not have this amount of negative reviews in steam is unjust.

I tried to offer the game myself, when the person looks at the amount of negative comments, many no buying or want to test.
So I am trying to change this reflection in the store, the game is very good today and the developers should have this recognition that they worked and are leaving a great game for the players.

I agree with you, each has their opinion, but there are a lot of negative comments, but that was because the beginning of the game everything was bad, which is not in present day.

 

Edited by FatalCrazy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Inigo said:

That
is
like
your
opinion
man

Seeing as how the game sold between 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 units on PC, and approximately 0.2% and 0.5% of those individuals still play, I'm gonna Err on the side of, the other 99.5% to 99.8% and say; "No my dude.... It's not good, I can tell because some of the numbers and because I've seen a lot of bad games in my time".

Sources? 1M copies is extremely far fetched. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FatalCrazy said:


Currently the game is very good, players are not reviewing their reviews.
 Unfortunately, this note is unfair to the present day of ATLAS.

 

It fits the current state of the game as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FatalCrazy said:

A game with many negative reviews, makes the buyer "player" maybe he will not test due to the large number of negative comments. This is bad, today the ATLAS is a great game and should not have this amount of negative reviews in steam is unjust.

I tried to offer the game myself, when the person looks at the amount of negative comments, many no buying or want to test.
So I am trying to change this reflection in the store, the game is very good today and the developers should have this recognition that they worked and are leaving a great game for the players.

 

Yeah, I get the feeling that you don't understand how business and consumerism works.

The reviews for this game are working as intended. 

They released a MOD for ARK as a full fledged game, which was broken upon release, and further remained broken for months. And even when it became mostly stable, it was and still is full of many issues that involve crashing, bugs/glitches that involve losing massive amounts of progress, duping, massive lag, etc.

So when people Pay Money for an Early Access game that should reasonably be in a BETA level state, and are met with an Alpha Level game that can barely run, it is going to be reviewed appropriately. And it has.

That is the double-edged sword of Early Access, they want to fund their development by releasing into Early Access, the caveat to this is, it has to be in a good enough state in order to sufficiently sustain itself, if it is not good, then what is happening to ATLAS, happens... That is how it works my dude.

You can champion and white knight all you want my dude. Wasted effort unless you are being paid to market for them.

9 minutes ago, Percieval said:

Sources? 1M copies is extremely far fetched. 

Steam Spy, a website designed to catalog steam user profiles that are set to public. So it has recorded between 1-2mil copies of ATLAS in player libraries on the steam platform. It does not include how many were refunded, only how many were recorded in unique user libraries.

Edited by Inigo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Inigo said:

Yeah, I get the feeling that you don't understand how business and consumerism works.

The reviews for this game are working as intended. 

They released a MOD for ARK as a full fledged game, which was broken upon release, and further remained broken for months. And even when it became mostly stable, it was and still is full of many issues that involve crashing, bugs/glitches that involve losing massive amounts of progress, duping, massive lag, etc.

So when people Pay Money for an Early Access game that should reasonably be in a BETA level state, and are met with an Alpha Level game that can barely run, it is going to be reviewed appropriately. And it has.

That is the double-edged sword of Early Access, they want to fund their development by releasing into Early Access, the caveat to this is, it has to be in a good enough state in order to sufficiently sustain itself, if it is not good, then what is happening to ATLAS, happens... That is how it works my dude.

You can champion and white knight all you want my dude. Wasted effort unless you are being paid to market for them. 

Steam Spy, a website designed to catalog steam user profiles that are set to public. So it has recorded between 1-2mil copies of ATLAS in player libraries on the steam platform. It does not include how many were refunded, only how many were recorded in unique user libraries. 

Do you think it's fair that the game is rated bad on steam just because of the problems in beginning.

Currently the game is good, you play it or not recognize, it's not my problem.
Yes, I will continue to promote the game, it is my favorite game and I will bring more people with me.
I recognize today that we are on the right track, developers greatly improved the game.

I see no problem just because they used ARK to develop this game.  The game brings me fun, that's what matters to me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do play it, it's still a dumpster fire. 

All you are doing is displaying fanaticism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think all the negativity and toxicity was deserved either, I also play atlas everyday and I still enjoy it. And I play pc and xbox too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always wondered if ARK never existed how this game would be viewed.  Seems a lot of users prejudices originate with ARK.  Also the launch was a damn disaster, but things have steadily improved since then.  Ways to go but its definitely in a much better state now than it ever was. 

Share this post


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

I've always wondered if ARK never existed how this game would be viewed.  Seems a lot of users prejudices originate with ARK.  Also the launch was a damn disaster, but things have steadily improved since then.  Ways to go but its definitely in a much better state now than it ever was. 

Just ask yourself the question what would’ve happened if the 10K people they expected played instead of the 60K they got because of the streamers. 

Edited by Percieval

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Inigo said:

They released a MOD for ARK as a full fledged game

Rockstar’s GTA Vice City, San Andreas, Bully, and Manhunt, is just a mod for GTA 3. L.A. Noire is just a mod for GTA 4. Red Dead Redemption 2 is just a mod for GTA 5...

Rockstar have made some pretty outstanding games over the years and you’ll be shocked to know they were built off of previous games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Cap’n Ro said:

Rockstar’s GTA Vice City, San Andreas, Bully, and Manhunt, is just a mod for GTA 3. L.A. Noire is just a mod for GTA 4. Red Dead Redemption 2 is just a mod for GTA 5...

Rockstar have made some pretty outstanding games over the years and you’ll be shocked to know they were built off of previous games.

Yeah but all of those mods were awesome 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

L.A Noire was a stand alone built on it's own engine that's only connection to GTA anything was the Publisher. 

The rest of those games were on the Render Engine or the RAGE engine(Rockstars own engine), using an engine doesnt constitute it being a mod in any way, an engine is a compiler for your models, assets, scrips, etc that operate within the engines physics. 

That's still a grasping at straw level reach there though.

You're talking about a high level publisher funding decent sized game studios, or multiple studios to work on a single game, these games that were also put out pretty far apart with newer engines and better builds, graphics, etc... Which lets be honest, we're all pretty damn good. 

Keep in mind, you're not talking about a Dev/Publisher that got their pants sued off for breach of contract for developing a competing game in secret while working for another company, poaching employees, etc. for 40m and had sell out to a chinese company to say afloat while pushing out paid DLC during Early Access, you're also not talking about a Dev team that started work on a promised dlc, that somehow morphed into its own standalone using entirely reused assets, core programming, etc. that incorporated all the bugs, exploits and poorly built foundation while slapping on some plaster and paint to make it look different.

You're talking about Mother----ing Rockstar games and all the studios they employ my dude. They are not even remotely comparable.

 

 

Edited by Inigo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Inigo said:

L.A Noire was a stand alone built on it's own engine that's only connection to GTA anything was the Publisher. 

The rest of those games were on the Render Engine or the RAGE engine(Rockstars own engine), using an engine doesnt constitute it being a mod in any way, an engine is a compiler for your models, assets, scrips, etc that operate within the engines physics. 

That's still a grasping at straw level reach there though.

You're talking about a high level publisher funding decent sized game studios, or multiple studios to work on a single game, these games that were also put out pretty far apart with newer engines and better builds, graphics, etc... Which lets be honest, we're all pretty damn good. 

Keep in mind, you're not talking about a Dev/Publisher that got their pants sued off for breach of contract for developing a competing game in secret while working for another company, poaching employees, etc. for 40m and had sell out to a chinese company to say afloat while pushing out paid DLC during Early Access, you're also not talking about a Dev team that started work on a promised dlc, that somehow morphed into its own standalone using entirely reused assets, core programming, etc. that incorporated all the bugs, exploits and poorly built foundation while slapping on some plaster and paint to make it look different.

You're talking about Mother----ing Rockstar games and all the studios they employ my dude. They are not even remotely comparable.

 

 

And yet here you are bashing an indie studio for having the audacity to build a new game off an existing one. Fuck me, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold the phone, Indie studio? See they aint Indie if they're owned by Snail Games. Wildcard aint Indie. Grapeshot aint Indie, theyre owned by Snail Games, they're offices are literally down the hall from each other(their own words), that is literally the opposite of Indie.

I'm bashing a studio that has a long track record of bad decisions. Like you know Diverting staff and assets away from your flagship game you promised to fix and pouring it into an offshoot studio and "new game" that's even worse than the first one it was made from. 

Hahahaha the best part was when you said Indie Studio... lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Inigo said:

Hold the phone, Indie studio? See they aint Indie if they're owned by Snail Games. Wildcard aint Indie. Grapeshot aint Indie, theyre owned by Snail Games, they're offices are literally down the hall from each other(their own words), that is literally the opposite of Indie.

I'm bashing a studio that has a long track record of bad decisions. Like you know Diverting staff and assets away from your flagship game you promised to fix and pouring it into an offshoot studio and "new game" that's even worse than the first one it was made from. 

Hahahaha the best part was when you said Indie Studio... lol

 

🎣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Inigo said:

Hold the phone, Indie studio? See they aint Indie if they're owned by Snail Games. Wildcard aint Indie. Grapeshot aint Indie, theyre owned by Snail Games, they're offices are literally down the hall from each other(their own words), that is literally the opposite of Indie.

I'm bashing a studio that has a long track record of bad decisions. Like you know Diverting staff and assets away from your flagship game you promised to fix and pouring it into an offshoot studio and "new game" that's even worse than the first one it was made from. 

Hahahaha the best part was when you said Indie Studio... lol

 

We may not always agree on things but I agree with this. When wildcard first started  with ark and before the lawsuit(scorched earth happened) they were actually an indie company, but once they sold over 10 millions copies and got bought out by snail games they definitely cannot be co side red indie anymore. 
 

but yeah, even though they aren’t indie they are no where near comparable to the behemoth rockstar is. They poop gold regardless of what anyone says.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...