Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Tiberius_theron

Either you are not reading the official forums or you are ignoring the community. Which is it?

Recommended Posts

Either you are not reading the official forums or you are ignoring the community. Which is it?

How many dozens of threads showcasing people's stuffed wolf and Alpha pens do we need before the message sinks in? This can't possibly be that hard or time consuming to fix. You've adjusted spawn rates already, so we know you can do it. I've just now killed 27 wolves in a killing pen we were forced to make and 8 Alpha's. All within a hour. They are ruining the fucking game.

The current situation is fucking asinine and it's making people give up the game. I've personally lost 6 friends to it, because the tedium of fighting massive packs of wolves and Alphas just to engage in the tedium of farming all goddamn day to have a couple hours' worth of fun is too much.

I have personally submitted tickets, screenshots, video, ccc, etc. Never heard a word back!

Reduce wolf and Alpha spawn rates, speed, damage, health, and damage reduction!

ENOUGH, IS ENOUGH....

Edited by Tiberius_theron
  • Like 7
  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

Either you are not reading the official forums or you are ignoring the community. Which is it?

How many dozens of threads showcasing people's stuffed wolf and Alpha pens do we need before the message sinks in? This can't possibly be that hard or time consuming to fix. You've adjusted spawn rates already, so we know you can do it. I've just now killed 27 wolves in a killing pen we were forced to make and 8 Alpha's. All within a hour. They are ruining the fucking game.

The current situation is fucking asinine and it's making people give up the game. I've personally lost 6 friends to it, because the tedium of fighting massive packs of wolves and Alphas just to engage in the tedium of farming all goddamn day to have a couple hours' worth of fun is too much.

I have personally submitted tickets, screenshots, video, ccc, etc. Never heard a word back!

Reduce wolf and Alpha spawn rates, speed, damage, health, and damage reduction!

ENOUGH, IS ENOUGH....

Ever think they are maybe testing stuff?  Like AI ................................................. you self entitled crybabies... 

Edited by Bolognapwny
  • Like 5
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Olivar said:

Early Access might not be for you

I'm sorry.......fuck off with that early access BS. I was Ark early access for 2 years. When you see something wrong and report it. Instead they nerfed tames due to a crying streamer, and nerfed guns. That tells me they are listening to the wrong people.

Edited by Tiberius_theron
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bolognapwny said:

Ever thing they are maybe testing stuff?  Like AI ................................................. you self entitled crybabies... 

We’re the testers. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tiberius_theron said:

I'm sorry.......fuck off with that early access BS. I was Ark early access for 2 years. When you see something wrong and report it. Instead they nerfed tames due to a crying streamer, and nerfed guns. That tells me they are listening to the wrong people.

Sorry but he/she right on the money with that.  Just because they do not respond and do not put in changes immediately that you think should be there does not mean they are not reading the forum or talking about possible changes going down the line.  This game will be broken and piss off more people than Ark did over the next 2 years of development, you signed up for that by deciding to pay again for the EA experience.   

 

Just for reference, we get patch notes when they are done with a patch and what they are immediately considering coming up.  This does not include all the things they do on a daily basis or what they could be considering worthy of going in a future patch.   I understand all of us want them to be more open about their planning, but that would lead to people getting more upset over broken promises when features they want disappear from those notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other point I'd like to make...  The GM and Forum Moderators are not the Developers!  At best they are the interface between us and the Devs.

Getting mad at the Devs and taking it out on the forum staff is not the way to deal with game problems.  As with reporting alleged "hackers" and "griefers", Screen shots and/or clips with time and date stamps are the best evidence to prove there is a problem.  Even then Devs probably have to find time to work on bugs between scheduled tasks, unless there is a dedicated department for bugs... It does happen in rare cases.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hambo said:

One other point I'd like to make...  The GM and Forum Moderators are not the Developers!  At best they are the interface between us and the Devs.

Getting mad at the Devs and taking it out on the forum staff is not the way to deal with game problems.  As with reporting alleged "hackers" and "griefers", Screen shots and/or clips with time and date stamps are the best evidence to prove there is a problem.  Even then Devs probably have to find time to work on bugs between scheduled tasks, unless there is a dedicated department for bugs... It does happen in rare cases.

Jat is a lead community manager or something like that, however from what noticed, 3/4 of the time he is offline and all he visits is few bug reports then back offline, he doesn't check suggestions or other parts of the forum like here where like 1/3 of posts is about infuirating animals. Propably doesn't even check all the bug reports.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bolognapwny said:

Ever think they are maybe testing stuff?  Like AI ................................................. you self entitled crybabies... 

Wildcard has never tested anything. Regardless of whether it was EA or not. We have always been the very first people to see any build in a play environment because Wildcard, by their own admission, pretty much ships any build as soon as the code compiles. 

2 hours ago, Vaenix said:

Sorry but he/she right on the money with that.  Just because they do not respond and do not put in changes immediately that you think should be there does not mean they are not reading the forum or talking about possible changes going down the line.  This game will be broken and piss off more people than Ark did over the next 2 years of development, you signed up for that by deciding to pay again for the EA experience.   

 

Just for reference, we get patch notes when they are done with a patch and what they are immediately considering coming up.  This does not include all the things they do on a daily basis or what they could be considering worthy of going in a future patch.   I understand all of us want them to be more open about their planning, but that would lead to people getting more upset over broken promises when features they want disappear from those notes.

The problem is that the OP is not necessarily wrong either. The developers use us as their only form of testers, meaning that most of them have never played the game, likely will never play the game, and that problem is exacerbated by the fact that they really don't care for or listen to community feedback. Most of the changes made via community feedback come from issues highlighted by Reddit or this community that generate what could potentially generate a PR firestorm and hurt their public image 

What Wildcard does/has/will do, is not an "EA" experience. Most EA games use the community as a testing ground, and reacts to how the community responds to changes/content/mechanics. Wildcard inherently ignores the community and uses EA as a cover for the fact that their company, as a whole, cannot produce content that is not broken.

Compare and contrast actual EA projects by similar indie companies. Wildcard vs GGG, Ark/Atlas vs Path of Exile, is a very common and fairly accurate comparison. In Ark/Atlas, Wildcard puts out literally impossible content that persists for 8 months and is part of the core and integral PvE experience, ignoring (And in some cases openly mocking/degrading people giving feedback, as was done with the Ark Boss system). GGG releases bugged/impossible boss content and patches the boss out for further inhouse testing inside 24 hours (OG Vaal). 

We shouldn't normalize Wildcard's EA cycle, because it is not normal. 

Edited by Ellentro
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about each of you, but if I get pissed off enough from bad game mechanics to rage quit, I never come back. I warn people off the game. I actively try to get my friends to play something else. It would take sworn statements from my three best friends, my brother, and the pope to get me to come back to a game. 

If I just get tired of a game there's a good chance I'll come back to it eventually, but bad dev choices will poison the well. I spent $300+ on Black Desert. They did some pvp nerf (core system, not class balance) about 4 months after release and I uninstalled and never looked back. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Wildcard has never tested anything. Regardless of whether it was EA or not. We have always been the very first people to see any build in a play environment because Wildcard, by their own admission, pretty much ships any build as soon as the code compiles. 

The problem is that the OP is not necessarily wrong either. The developers use us as their only form of testers, meaning that most of them have never played the game, likely will never play the game, and that problem is exacerbated by the fact that they really don't care for or listen to community feedback. Most of the changes made via community feedback come from issues highlighted by Reddit or this community that generate what could potentially generate a PR firestorm and hurt their public image 

What Wildcard does/has/will do, is not an "EA" experience. Most EA games use the community as a testing ground, and reacts to how the community responds to changes/content/mechanics. Wildcard inherently ignores the community and uses EA as a cover for the fact that their company, as a whole, cannot produce content that is not broken.

Compare and contrast actual EA projects by similar indie companies. Wildcard vs GGG, Ark/Atlas vs Path of Exile, is a very common and fairly accurate comparison. In Ark/Atlas, Wildcard puts out literally impossible content that persists for 8 months and is part of the core and integral PvE experience, ignoring (And in some cases openly mocking/degrading people giving feedback, as was done with the Ark Boss system). GGG releases bugged/impossible boss content and patches the boss out for further inhouse testing inside 24 hours (OG Vaal). 

We shouldn't normalize Wildcard's EA cycle, because it is not normal. 

I'm not saying normalizing it, but if you get upset to the point where raging forum posts becomes the norm, you should probably avoid this type of game whether it's in the hands of a good developer or not.  

Early Access games are not for everyone, that is why there is a disclaimer.  There will be changes whether they are considered "broken" by some players or not by others and the player base will change and grow due to that.  If you go into an EA game expecting patches to be absolutely perfect and resolutions to happen over night for things that may be complex to solve problems, you are going to have a bad time no matter what team you are talking about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Vaenix said:

I'm not saying normalizing it, but if you get upset to the point where raging forum posts becomes the norm, you should probably avoid this type of game whether it's in the hands of a good developer or not.  

Early Access games are not for everyone, that is why there is a disclaimer.  There will be changes whether they are considered "broken" by some players or not by others and the player base will change and grow due to that.  If you go into an EA game expecting patches to be absolutely perfect and resolutions to happen over night for things that may be complex to solve problems, you are going to have a bad time no matter what team you are talking about. 

So you contradict yourself in the same post?

Let's point out some, fundamental, issues with your post;

Raging in forums is *the only way to get Wildcard's attention*. They do not respond to well reasoned, thought out, calm and collected feedback. They only respond when the segment of their community upset about an issue is so great that it threatens their public image.

That leads to the point that, this is not normal for an EA game. This is actually very rare. I have played hundreds of EA titles. Ranging from the bad like Shattered Skies/WWZ/ISS, to the good with GGG/PoE. Ark/Wildcard/Atlas EA games are a complete enigma because they do not follow the EA cycle. They do not release patches for testing, they do not rely on, expect or intake community feedback. 

No one expects perfection in EA games. They expect improvement. That is the entire premise of EA games. However Wildcard, yet again, defies the stereotypical norm, by consistently regressing in its patches. Very few EA games actively go backward and/or fail to learn from their mistakes, and Wildcard is, alone in my experience, the only company that, as a whole, gets progressively worse in their content releases as time goes on and (As a company) they gain experience in the field. 

 

 

You are, despite saying you aren't, trying to "Normalize" Wildcard's behavior. This is *not* normal. Not for an EA game. Not for a gaming studio *in general*. 

Edited by Ellentro

Share this post


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

Wildcard has never tested anything. Regardless of whether it was EA or not. We have always been the very first people to see any build in a play environment because Wildcard, by their own admission, pretty much ships any build as soon as the code compiles. 

The problem is that the OP is not necessarily wrong either. The developers use us as their only form of testers, meaning that most of them have never played the game, likely will never play the game, and that problem is exacerbated by the fact that they really don't care for or listen to community feedback. Most of the changes made via community feedback come from issues highlighted by Reddit or this community that generate what could potentially generate a PR firestorm and hurt their public image 

What Wildcard does/has/will do, is not an "EA" experience. Most EA games use the community as a testing ground, and reacts to how the community responds to changes/content/mechanics. Wildcard inherently ignores the community and uses EA as a cover for the fact that their company, as a whole, cannot produce content that is not broken.

Compare and contrast actual EA projects by similar indie companies. Wildcard vs GGG, Ark/Atlas vs Path of Exile, is a very common and fairly accurate comparison. In Ark/Atlas, Wildcard puts out literally impossible content that persists for 8 months and is part of the core and integral PvE experience, ignoring (And in some cases openly mocking/degrading people giving feedback, as was done with the Ark Boss system). GGG releases bugged/impossible boss content and patches the boss out for further inhouse testing inside 24 hours (OG Vaal). 

We shouldn't normalize Wildcard's EA cycle, because it is not normal. 

But what is GS doing then? Because as far as I know, they release patches for the community to test. Is there some feedback system on other EA games where you fill in forms then? Because until now they have reacted and patched issues that the community wrote about and we see Jat in the bug reports section more than in this one. 

If they fixed issues highlighted on Reddit or here, they are still fixing it, or am I wrong with this one? 

In your experience, if the servers were very bad. Were the devs fixing those first before balancing issues or did they do it at the same time? 

To me prioritizing stuff that breaks your public image isn’t a bad thing, it’s kind of understandable. 

Edited by Percieval

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 weeks in of 2 years pre-release EA development and you think they're ignoring you... ffs.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ellentro said:

So you contradict yourself in the same post?

Let's point out some, fundamental, issues with your post;

Raging in forums is *the only way to get Wildcard's attention*. They do not respond to well reasoned, thought out, calm and collected feedback. They only respond when the segment of their community upset about an issue is so great that it threatens their public image.

That leads to the point that, this is not normal for an EA game. This is actually very rare. I have played hundreds of EA titles. Ranging from the bad like Shattered Skies/WWZ/ISS, to the good with GGG/PoE. Ark/Wildcard/Atlas EA games are a complete enigma because they do not follow the EA cycle. They do not release patches for testing, they do not rely on, expect or intake community feedback. 

No one expects perfection in EA games. They expect improvement. That is the entire premise of EA games. However Wildcard, yet again, defies the stereotypical norm, by consistently regressing in its patches. Very few EA games actively go backward and/or fail to learn from their mistakes, and Wildcard is, alone in my experience, the only company that, as a whole, gets progressively worse in their content releases as time goes on and (As a company) they gain experience in the field. 

 

 

You are, despite saying you aren't, trying to "Normalize" Wildcard's behavior. This is *not* normal. Not for an EA game. Not for a gaming studio *in general*. 

They release patches for testing.

Can they be more smart to test them out for themselves first? Definitely.

Is that their decision to make? Yes.

Could I know this from my time at ARK EA? Yep. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nightstrasza said:

Jat is a lead community manager or something like that, however from what noticed, 3/4 of the time he is offline and all he visits is few bug reports then back offline, he doesn't check suggestions or other parts of the forum like here where like 1/3 of posts is about infuirating animals. Propably doesn't even check all the bug reports.

You cant pay that man enough to read every thread from people who have no business here prior to release.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Percieval said:

But what is GS doing then? Because as far as I know, they release patches for the community to test. Is there some feedback system on other EA games where you fill in forms then? Because until now they have reacted and patched some stuff that the community wrote about and we see Jat in the bug reports section more than in this one. 

If they fixed issues highlighted on Reddit or here, they are still fixing it, or am I wrong with this one? 

In your experience, if the servers were very bad. Were the devs fixing those first before balancing issues or did they do it at the same time? 

To me prioritizing stuff that breaks your public image isn’t a bad thing, it’s kind of understandable. 

The problem is whose fixing them, and their underlying motivation for it;

Whenever there's an issue (Whether that's game breaking content/mechanics/bugs/issues), the people addressing and fixing them are not people with the technical skill set to do it, or really, even to comment on it. As much as I like Jat, he's absolutely clueless about the game, how it works or how it's played. He's a PR major doing his job.

When the people addressing all of the issues in the community, are PR people, it's because they are a PR issue, not a gameplay issue. That is fundamentally bad because the developers inherently do not care, and all Jat is doing is trying to placate the community and keep them from rioting. 

The few times in Ark history I have seen non-PR people speak to the community, they have caused the issues to compound. For instance, my comment about Ark Bosses. There was a fairly infamous thread on the official Ark forums where people were complaining that the bosses were fundamentally and mathematically impossible to do without exploits. One of the devs piped in, called everyone idiots (No, I'm not joking, literally called everyone idiots), and then got shown up when someone posted a video of 20 gigas dying to alpha brood in 35 seconds. They then deleted pretty much half the thread, banned about 60 people, and beamed any boss related posts (and posters) on sight for about a week. 

As for why they release patches. They release patches because it's their job. It has nothing to do with whether or not they get testing or not. As we've been told in Ark, repeatedly, the games they make are made by their developers, and the community feedback is irrelevant for the course and direction they take.

 

Also, we need to stop referring to them as Grapeshot. It's Wildcard. They're just trying to justify the fact that they live in a permanent EA cycle by changing their name. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I'm sorry.......fuck off with that early access BS. I was Ark early access for 2 years. When you see something wrong and report it. Instead they nerfed tames due to a crying streamer, and nerfed guns. That tells me they are listening to the wrong people.

You are just crying that - except you - nobody else thinks that you are "the community", and that your opinion isnt worth more than from other people. There is nearly daily patches of way more important stuff. And you cryboy cant live with that. You cant handle that you´re not as important as you think. Youre not the shining moon. You are just a small star, like everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ellentro said:

Also, we need to stop referring to them as Grapeshot. It's Wildcard. They're just trying to justify the fact that they live in a permanent EA cycle by changing their name. 

No. No we don't. By that logic we need to stop referring to any sister or outsourced studio by name. This is common practice in the industry. Wildcard is still polishing ARK meanwhile project leads and new talent are developing Atlas.

If they were trying to hide anything they start by hiding all association with ARK not advertise it in their trailers. This is financial if anything. Tax cuts go a long way combined with crowd funding.

Edited by Nari
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ellentro said:

So you contradict yourself in the same post?

Let's point out some, fundamental, issues with your post;

Raging in forums is *the only way to get Wildcard's attention*. They do not respond to well reasoned, thought out, calm and collected feedback. They only respond when the segment of their community upset about an issue is so great that it threatens their public image.

That leads to the point that, this is not normal for an EA game. This is actually very rare. I have played hundreds of EA titles. Ranging from the bad like Shattered Skies/WWZ/ISS, to the good with GGG/PoE. Ark/Wildcard/Atlas EA games are a complete enigma because they do not follow the EA cycle. They do not release patches for testing, they do not rely on, expect or intake community feedback. 

No one expects perfection in EA games. They expect improvement. That is the entire premise of EA games. However Wildcard, yet again, defies the stereotypical norm, by consistently regressing in its patches. Very few EA games actively go backward and/or fail to learn from their mistakes, and Wildcard is, alone in my experience, the only company that, as a whole, gets progressively worse in their content releases as time goes on and (As a company) they gain experience in the field. 

 

 

You are, despite saying you aren't, trying to "Normalize" Wildcard's behavior. This is *not* normal. Not for an EA game. Not for a gaming studio *in general*. 

Whatever you say bud.  If you want people to stress out and rage over a game feel free.  They don't respond to that at all no one really does.  But by all means, promote crying and raging on the forums, it certainly makes the games playerbase look real mature and solves all the problems in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering how bad this game was day 1 until now they have made huge improvements.  Biggest ones being server stability.  They have a ways to go, but these changes do not happen over night.  I honestly have no clue how big their team is so its hard to determine how much can be fixed, modified, added during the course of a week.  So far I am happy with the progress.  Lots been made in a relatively short period of time and I enjoy the rapid fire updates.  Shows me they are actively working day and night to improve the game's infrastructure and client.

 

P.S.  If Wildcard ever reads this I would LOVE to see a flowchart and/or pictures of the server/network infrastructure that runs this game.  Spent  5 years in a data center and now am an engineer for a huge company.  Enterprise class systems turn me on.

Edited by DocHolliday
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Nari said:

No. No we don't. By that logic we need to stop referring to any sister or outsourced studio by name. This is common practice in the industry. Wildcard is still polishing ARK meanwhile project leads and new talent are developing Atlas.

If they were trying to hide anything they start by hiding all association with ARK not advertise it in their trailers. This is financial if anything. Tax cuts go a long way combined with crowd funding.

Wildcard hasn't done just about anything to Ark since Extinction hit. It's a ghost staff supporting a game they intend to cease supporting. The entire reason why Wildcard is now Grapeshot is because they don't want the stink they generated with Extinction, and Ark in general, to follow them. Sure, it's also financial since Atlas was/is an Ark DLC, but they wanted to fully monetize it via avoiding the Ark Season Pass holders. Albeit, they did a poor job of covering the tracks, they do a poor job at a lot of things. 

16 minutes ago, Vaenix said:

Whatever you say bud.  If you want people to stress out and rage over a game feel free.  They don't respond to that at all no one really does.  But by all means, promote crying and raging on the forums, it certainly makes the games playerbase look real mature and solves all the problems in the world.

Yeah but here's the thing. I don't want to rage or stress out over the game. I'd love to give clear, concise and well thought out feedback. I still do at times. However, as proven by four years of recorded history, rage and angst is the only thing capable of getting a reaction from Wildcard, and only if that rage and angst reaches critical mass and/or some game news website does a story on it. 

Edited by Ellentro

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  

×