STOP UR TEARS

[Dingiva 16]

Its funny how all the "playerbase" says the game is dead already and blablabla, and they still come back to the forums every day. Being pissed off by a game, but still logging in every day and/or visiting the forums on a regular basis is some kind of retarded.

[Hambo 34]

38 minutes ago, Captain Jack Shadow said:

NO! No...they hide behind the title of EA, which is a bullshit way of getting people to buy an Alpha, when most gamers think of EA as more of a Beta.  The fact is, the term EA needs to go away because the whole point of it is to confuse players into thinking they are buying a more finished product than they actually are.  We already had Alpha, and Beta, and people know what those mean.  The term EA was created to confuse people into buying an Alpha, thinking it was a Beta.

And then their soldiers go out and try to make an excuse for every bad decision, with the BS excuse that it is EA.  Being EA excuses NOTHING.

I think of EA as POST beta as that was how things were done before this current decade... EA was a way to entice the magazines to write reviews and create buzz before the public release.  I know the Definition of EA has changed and I walked into this game knowing full well what I would find.

Unfortunately some companies seem to think PUBG and Fortnite were the norm as far as EA goes. but remember 7 Days to Die?  A good game but 7 years and it's STILL EA.

[Captain Jack Shadow 488]

Just now, Percieval said:

Well, I’ve seen all the stuff you noted from them. So no idea where it comes from. It’s fine if you want to blame them for certain stuff, I do too. But please keep it to the truth. 

I do keep it to the truth.  I would like to see this game become a great game, but too many things stand in the way of that.  I could create a really long post on that, but let's keep it to the important stuff.
 

1. Hire somebody who knows how to program good AI.  The ARK/Atlas Devs are incredibly good at making good looking environments, and incredibly bad at AI.  Thus, we have SotD that look like Evil Corporate Yachts with swivel Cannons, and Merchants with paddle wheels.  You and I both know this is because they don't have anyone who can create AI sailing ships.  To get around that, they free up the AI from having to actually sail with the wind.
2. Taming mechanics that are absurd, and bear no resemblance to real taming.  In fact, they look more like animal abuse.
3. Zero control over the player base.  Thus we have people ringing islands with large gates and using pillars to destroy ships that sail into the area...even areas that should be expected to be safe to sail in.
4. Absurd mechanics such as tames counting as crew, and a single crew member more than allowed, and the ship starts sinking.  I mean, WTF?  No sailing ship in history ever sunk because it had one too many crew.  Yes, let's allow people to ring an island with large gates, but then keep a ship from looking like a boat full of refugees by implementing an absurd mechanic like this.  And what about when the enemy board your ship?  Sorry, but no ship ever sunk from the amount of people that boarded, nor the weight they brought with them.  Ships should have weight restrictions, and the heavier, the lower in the water, thus increasing stability, but reducing speed.  You overload your ship, I can sail away from you and nothing you can do about it. Yeah I get why they did this...maybe.  You don't want a Company to have so many people on board that they can repair so fast you do no damage.  But then, that's where weight comes in, and boarding parties.  If the ships last long enough, it increases the likelihood of a boarding action.  Work on the mechanics to get this going.  Not absurd arbitrary mechanics that punish me for bring a parrot on my shoulder. Or make me have to kill an NPC because one of our guys spawned onto the ship.  These mechanics need a complete rework, but I won't hold my breath.
5. Wonky animations.  Jumping 10 feet in the air as you exit the water, is absurd.  Should have been fixed in ARK.  I have little faith that it will be fixed here.
6. Building structures that won't snap into place because why? 
   Why is it so bad for a building structure to collide with anything?  It's literally the worst building system I have ever seen, making it impossible to build good structures in many areas.  Luckily, most unofficial owners set noclip so that these are not an issue.  Why is it an issue in the first place?  Because people find exploits? Deal with those exploits without making building structures refuse to snap into the terrain because collision.  The last picture shows how absurd the system is, when you can't even place a ladder into a hatch it's designed for.  Ahhh...but EA...amiright?
7. Lions jumping out of the water, onto my large shipyard.  Yeah, the lion's jumping is absurd.  I'm going to post a video on Youtube the next time I see a lion run down the hill, jump, and launch itself over my schooner in the bay.  It's a bird...it's a plane...no...it's Stupid Kitty!  Put a red cape on them.   At least the sheer absurd numbers of them were reduced, and Alphas aren't supernatural.  3 bears should handle an Alpha Pig, especially when assisted by a handful of people with guns.
8. No delay timer on decay at Freeports, yet there are things to do there besides just spawn into the game and get your first ship.  Merchants, and Treasure, to name a few.  So a delay, with equal cooldown timers, makes sense.  But we don't have them.  And furthermore, you DO want some big ships to be seen there, as it is inspiring to the new players who log in and see a variety of ships at anchor.   You just don't want it to be overcrowded, or used as a safe space.
9. Lack of ORP, encouraging PvE action instead of PvP.  ARK and ATLAS aren't much in the way of PvP, and most videos prove this, for anyone who hasn't experienced it.  Most raids are not by large groups against large groups.  They are against empty bases and ships, or lightly defended bases and ships.  AI does nothing to stop this because AI is fallible and predictable. Ever watched HOD bypass somebody's defenses in ARK, in less than 15 seconds?  We play on a 5x5 unofficial, and had a reset to fix many issues.  With a vanilla Brigantine, before the reset, we demolished somebody's entire fleet of schooners, Brigs and Galleons, as well as some AI towers they have created with Cannons, and NPCs.  We did this with one Brigantine, and 16 small cannons.  12 on the gun deck, 2 facing forward on the Fo'c'sle, and 2 facing aft on the Quarterdeck.  It was an amazing defense they had put in place, but was easy for us to cut through it.  Completely wrecked the fleet, and the base.  Now we have ORP.  It makes sense.  PvP should be about PvP, and for that both P's need to be there.
10. A skill tree that makes no sense.  Volumes have been written on this.  It sucks and drives people from the game when they can't do what they want to do, in the game.  ARK did not allow you to do everything, but you had a lot more freedom to alter what you do each day, without a mindwipe.

[Hambo 34]

43 minutes ago, Dingiva said:

Its funny how all the "playerbase" says the game is dead already and blablabla, and they still come back to the forums every day. Being pissed off by a game, but still logging in every day and/or visiting the forums on a regular basis is some kind of retarded.

It's almost like they want to find out if anyone misses them yet...

[Captain Jack Shadow 488]

43 minutes ago, Dingiva said:

Its funny how all the "playerbase" says the game is dead already and blablabla, and they still come back to the forums every day. Being pissed off by a game, but still logging in every day and/or visiting the forums on a regular basis is some kind of retarded.

Get over yourself and use logic.  I do not say it is dead.  I point out things in the game that need to be fixed, if the game is to flourish.  Many others do the same.  We may not all agree on what is wrong with the game, but there IS plenty wrong, that needs to be fixed.

[Percieval 1,067]

5 minutes ago, Captain Jack Shadow said:

I do keep it to the truth.  I would like to see this game become a great game, but too many things stand in the way of that.  I could create a really long post on that, but let's keep it to the important stuff.
 

1. Hire somebody who knows how to program good AI.  The ARK/Atlas Devs are incredibly good at making good looking environments, and incredibly bad at AI.  Thus, we have SotD that look like Evil Corporate Yachts with swivel Cannons, and Merchants with paddle wheels.  You and I both know this is because they don't have anyone who can create AI sailing ships.  To get around that, they free up the AI from having to actually sail with the wind.
2. Taming mechanics that are absurd, and bear no resemblance to real taming.  In fact, they look more like animal abuse.
3. Zero control over the player base.  Thus we have people ringing islands with large gates and using pillars to destroy ships that sail into the area...even areas that should be expected to be safe to sail in.
4. Absurd mechanics such as tames counting as crew, and a single crew member more than allowed, and the ship starts sinking.  I mean, WTF?  No sailing ship in history ever sunk because it had one too many crew.  Yes, let's allow people to ring an island with large gates, but then keep a ship from looking like a boat full of refugees by implementing an absurd mechanic like this.  And what about when the enemy board your ship?  Sorry, but no ship ever sunk from the amount of people that boarded, nor the weight they brought with them.  Ships should have weight restrictions, and the heavier, the lower in the water, thus increasing stability, but reducing speed.  You overload your ship, I can sail away from you and nothing you can do about it. Yeah I get why they did this...maybe.  You don't want a Company to have so many people on board that they can repair so fast you do no damage.  But then, that's where weight comes in, and boarding parties.  If the ships last long enough, it increases the likelihood of a boarding action.  Work on the mechanics to get this going.  Not absurd arbitrary mechanics that punish me for bring a parrot on my shoulder. Or make me have to kill an NPC because one of our guys spawned onto the ship.  These mechanics need a complete rework, but I won't hold my breath.
5. Wonky animations.  Jumping 10 feet in the air as you exit the water, is absurd.  Should have been fixed in ARK.  I have little faith that it will be fixed here.
6. Building structures that won't snap into place because why? 
   Why is it so bad for a building structure to collide with anything?  It's literally the worst building system I have ever seen, making it impossible to build good structures in many areas.  Luckily, most unofficial owners set noclip so that these are not an issue.  Why is it an issue in the first place?  Because people find exploits? Deal with those exploits without making building structures refuse to snap into the terrain because collision.  The last picture shows how absurd the system is, when you can't even place a ladder into a hatch it's designed for.  Ahhh...but EA...amiright?
7. Lions jumping out of the water, onto my large shipyard.  Yeah, the lion's jumping is absurd.  I'm going to post a video on Youtube the next time I see a lion run down the hill, jump, and launch itself over my schooner in the bay.  It's a bird...it's a plane...no...it's Stupid Kitty!  Put a red cape on them.   At least the sheer absurd numbers of them were reduced, and Alphas aren't supernatural.  3 bears should handle an Alpha Pig, especially when assisted by a handful of people with guns.
8. No delay timer on decay at Freeports, yet there are things to do there besides just spawn into the game and get your first ship.  Merchants, and Treasure, to name a few.  So a delay, with equal cooldown timers, makes sense.  But we don't have them.  And furthermore, you DO want some big ships to be seen there, as it is inspiring to the new players who log in and see a variety of ships at anchor.   You just don't want it to be overcrowded, or used as a safe space.
9. Lack of ORP, encouraging PvE action instead of PvP.  ARK and ATLAS aren't much in the way of PvP, and most videos prove this, for anyone who hasn't experienced it.  Most raids are not by large groups against large groups.  They are against empty bases and ships, or lightly defended bases and ships.  AI does nothing to stop this because AI is fallible and predictable. Ever watched HOD bypass somebody's defenses in ARK, in less than 15 seconds?  We play on a 5x5 unofficial, and had a reset to fix many issues.  With a vanilla Brigantine, before the reset, we demolished somebody's entire fleet of schooners, Brigs and Galleons, as well as some AI towers they have created with Cannons, and NPCs.  We did this with one Brigantine, and 16 small cannons.  12 on the gun deck, 2 facing forward on the Fo'c'sle, and 2 facing aft on the Quarterdeck.  It was an amazing defense they had put in place, but was easy for us to cut through it.  Completely wrecked the fleet, and the base.  Now we have ORP.  It makes sense.  PvP should be about PvP, and for that both P's need to be there.
10. A skill tree that makes no sense.  Volumes have been written on this.  It sucks and drives people from the game when they can't do what they want to do, in the game.  ARK did not allow you to do everything, but you had a lot more freedom to alter what you do each day, without a mindwipe.

Then please make a seperete thread for this since it is a good post. People can argue about it. 

Edited January 22, 2019 by Percieval

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

1 hour ago, Percieval said:

Well, I’ve seen all the stuff you noted from them. So no idea where it comes from. It’s fine if you want to blame them for certain stuff, I do too. But please keep it to the truth. 

 

It’s a bit stupid to think people expect something different from EA, when it is an Alpha. 

Please name all of the alphas you paid to be part of.

[Percieval 1,067]

8 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

Please name all of the alphas you paid to be part of.

ARK and ATLAS. What does it matter? I made those decisions to do so. Just like it is their decision. If you don’t want to pay for an alpha then don’t pay for an alpha. Some people are still shocked about stuff I can’t even imagine being. 

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

1 minute ago, Percieval said:

ARK and ATLAS. What does it matter? I made those decisions to do so. Just like it is their decision. If you don’t want to pay for an alpha then don’t pay for an alpha. Some people are still shocked about stuff I can’t even imagine being. 

Ark wasn’t an alpha. It was EA. That is what matters. You are conflating a thing people paid for with a thing they didn’t.

[Percieval 1,067]

2 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

Ark wasn’t an alpha. It was EA. That is what matters. You are conflating a thing people paid for with a thing they didn’t.

Early acces is Alpha. 

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

 

3 minutes ago, Percieval said:

Early acces is Alpha. 

No. It is not. The difference between the two is paying for it. That is why I asked you to name all the alphas you paid to be in.

Edited January 22, 2019 by boomervoncannon

[Percieval 1,067]

3 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

 

No. It is not. The difference between the two is paying for it. That is I asked you to name all the alphas you paid to be in.

Early Access is either Alpha or paid-alpha. Or at least it says so. I don’t mind it, I think it’s a good business move. But we have heard all these comments from people over at ARK, it’s just a flashback. 

Edited January 22, 2019 by Percieval

[Scorpionshawn 134]

On 1/21/2019 at 9:15 AM, Khalista Flintlock said:

Awesome! That means as toxic people leave that like to complain, there will be more land for people that want to play

Kudos!

You know what happens when a game cant get new players that in EA???? Devs start working on other projects they are clearly more about turning a buck than making a master peace!

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

Just now, Percieval said:

Early Access is either Alpha or paid-alpha. Or at least it says so. I don’t mind it, I think it’s a good business move. 

Okay. You don’t mind it. Understandable. But do you agree that when a person pays money for something, they have a right to have higher expectations than when they do not?

[Captain Jack Shadow 488]

Once again, the problem is with the term EA itself.  As was pointed out by somebody else, EA actually started as something Post Beta, for select people to get into so they would go out and spread the word on how great the game was.  Gamer Media, and those who were leaders of very large gaming Orgs, were who was typically invited.  And this was before so much content was on YouTube and Twitch.

We always had Alpha, and Beta.

Alpha, we knew to be that some of the ingredients of the cake were present, and and assembled, while others were still being bought or prepared.

Beta, the cake has been cooked, and icing is on, but some decorations are still being tweaked.

Alpha, very much a work in progress, play at your own risk...it's not really a game yet.  Many missing mechanics, many things will change.

Beta, the game is pretty much done, and some testers are helping to fine tune the balance, and find bugs.  A bug, like a gun firing backwards...not a gun missing from the game.

EA has caused nothing but confusion.  It confuses players as to what they are actually getting.  Advertising doesn't help because they make it appear to be a complete game.  So it is NOT the fault of gamers that they expect the game to be more polished than it is.  You can't have it both ways.  You can't give the impression that it is one thing in the advets, to sell more copies, and then cry about EA when the game turns out to be far less polished than the advert implied.

7 minutes ago, Percieval said:

Early acces is Alpha. 

Not true.  The descriptions imply that it is to be closer to a Beta, and Steam did tighten the rules a bit because gamers expect Early Access to be something closer to Beta.

[Percieval 1,067]

Just now, boomervoncannon said:

Okay. You don’t mind it. Understandable. But do you agree that when a person pays money for something, they have a right to have higher expectations than when they do not?

Oh everyone can have their own expectations of everything and on different levels. If I go back to ARK EA, it was pretty shit too. If I’m honest I’m not surprised by anything anymore. I have played 260 hours at this moment, having a blast and I’m not even on unofficial yet, I think my money’s well worth it. Me and my crew pretty go well around everything. We had the FoY pretty quickly, we managed the SoTD spam, the OP alpha’s (spam) pretty good. Maybe it is because of experience or because I set the expectation level really low. When I bought the game I didn’t expect anything especially for the first few weeks. But if there are people that have had higher expectations of the game because they needed to pay for it.. I don’t know if they thought it all the way through. When I read the interviews - and not only about the 40K man servers - but also all the other mechanics they told us about, I knew it was either gonna be chaos or fun. At this moment it’s a little of both, and I believe that is because of expectations. With higher ones, you just have chaos. 

7 minutes ago, Captain Jack Shadow said:

Once again, the problem is with the term EA itself.  As was pointed out by somebody else, EA actually started as something Post Beta, for select people to get into so they would go out and spread the word on how great the game was.  Gamer Media, and those who were leaders of very large gaming Orgs, were who was typically invited.  And this was before so much content was on YouTube and Twitch.

We always had Alpha, and Beta.

Alpha, we knew to be that some of the ingredients of the cake were present, and and assembled, while others were still being bought or prepared.

Beta, the cake has been cooked, and icing is on, but some decorations are still being tweaked.

Alpha, very much a work in progress, play at your own risk...it's not really a game yet.  Many missing mechanics, many things will change.

Beta, the game is pretty much done, and some testers are helping to fine tune the balance, and find bugs.  A bug, like a gun firing backwards...not a gun missing from the game.

EA has caused nothing but confusion.  It confuses players as to what they are actually getting.  Advertising doesn't help because they make it appear to be a complete game.  So it is NOT the fault of gamers that they expect the game to be more polished than it is.  You can't have it both ways.  You can't give the impression that it is one thing in the advets, to sell more copies, and then cry about EA when the game turns out to be far less polished than the advert implied.

Not true.  The descriptions imply that it is to be closer to a Beta, and Steam did tighten the rules a bit because gamers expect Early Access to be something closer to Beta.

A bets 2 years before it’s release? Nice job to Steam then. I believe the companies can make it op themselves and everyone would come to the conclusion that it’s definitely an alpha.

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

1 minute ago, Percieval said:

Oh everyone can have their own expectations of everything and on different levels. If I go back to ARK EA, it was pretty shit too. If I’m honest I’m not surprised by anything anymore. I have played 260 hours at this moment, having a blast and I’m not even on unofficial yet, I think my money’s well worth it. Me and my crew pretty go well around everything. We had the FoY pretty quickly, we managed the SoTD spam, the OP alpha’s (spam) pretty good. Maybe it is because of experience or because I set the expectation level really low. When I bought the game I didn’t expect anything especially for the first few weeks. But if there are people that have had higher expectations of the game because they needed to pay for it.. I don’t know if they thought it all the way through. When I read the interviews - and not only about the 40K man servers - but also all the other mechanics they told us about, I knew it was either gonna be chaos or fun. At this moment it’s a little of both, and I believe that is because of expectations. With higher ones, you just have chaos. 

So to go back to my question, you agree that it’s reasonable for people to have higher expectations of something they paid for vs something they didn’t?

[Percieval 1,067]

6 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

So to go back to my question, you agree that it’s reasonable for people to have higher expectations of something they paid for vs something they didn’t?

Sure. But knowing wildcard, it’s definitely more about common sense. Or with any EA title, paid or not. 

Edited January 22, 2019 by Percieval

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

1 minute ago, Percieval said:

Sure. But knowing wildcard, it’s definitely more about common sense. 

Okay, so since we can agree that some level of expectation beyond that of previous unpaid alpha and beta testers is reasonable, I think a big part of the question is what should people reasonably expect EA to mean, what’s the minimum standard developers should be held to when offering an EA product? By virtue of payment EA is qualitatively different from alpha, and I think Captain Jack is exactly right when he says the problem is the term itself, because it is undefined.

[Captain Jack Shadow 488]

1 minute ago, Percieval said:

Oh everyone can have their own expectations of everything and on different levels. If I go back to ARK EA, it was pretty shit too. If I’m honest I’m not surprised by anything anymore. I have played 260 hours at this moment, having a blast and I’m not even on unofficial yet, I think my money’s well worth it. Me and my crew pretty go well around everything. We had the FoY pretty quickly, we managed the SoTD spam, the OP alpha’s (spam) pretty good. Maybe it is because of experience or because I set the expectation level really low. When I bought the game I didn’t expect anything especially for the first few weeks. But if there are people that have had higher expectations of the game because they needed to pay for it.. I don’t know if they thought it all the way through. When I read the interviews - and not only about the 40K man servers - but also all the other mechanics they told us about, I knew it was either gonna be chaos or fun. At this moment it’s a little of both, and I believe that is because of expectations. With higher ones, you just have chaos. 

I think the issue is that when you look at what we were given in the beginning, you scratch your head and think things like "Who the fuck thinks it's good for the game to have so many OP predators, and Alphas that are near invincible and make taking a tame out of your base, a fool's errand?"  Or, "What moron thought it as a good idea to put 10 SotD in one small section of a Grid, such that anyone who sails there in a Brigantine, is toast.  Who doesn't think that would cause people to rage quit, and leave the game for good?"

The truth is, it was amazing lack of foresight, not to understand that people would come for the ships, and adventure on the high seas...not base building, and taming, and battling wolves, and growing crops.  Like it or not, people came for the ships, and when the game crapped in their face on that issue, they left, never to return...most of them.  They have the impression that this is ARK with ships.  To get them back, the game is going to have to completely shed that image.  I don't think most people who wanted to play this were interested in a hardcore survival game.  And honestly, most people aren't interested in the constant struggle, day in and day out.  They like it as something in the beginning, but at some point, they expect their efforts to solve most of those problems.  Like yesterday, we were out treasure hunting.  We went into a polar region.  All of respec'd for this...had on fur armor and most of our points into fortitude...and the cold was still killing us.  So what did we do?  We killed each other right before going ashore to get the treasure.  Thus,  resetting our stats.  Vitamins up, and HP up.  But we all collectively agreed that it was stupid that with so many points into fortitude, and fur armor on, we were still dying.  Fur armor itself should just about eliminate that.  Why have fur armor if it isn't going to keep you warm?  To most people, this is where survival games go wrong, and why so many people don't stick with them.  Struggling with everything is fun in the beginning, but eventually becomes irritating.

[Percieval 1,067]

1 minute ago, boomervoncannon said:

Okay, so since we can agree that some level of expectation beyond that of previous unpaid alpha and beta testers is reasonable, I think a big part of the question is what should people reasonably expect EA to mean, what’s the minimum standard developers should be held to when offering an EA product? By virtue of payment EA is qualitatively different from alpha, and I think Captain Jack is exactly right when he says the problem is the term itself, because it is undefined.

My idea of an EA is coding is there, ideas are there, maps animals base mechanics are there and we are there to play it for load adjustments & balancing. Sure they’re doing a pretty shitty job at most of those but I expected it since they were shit over at ARK. 

[Percieval 1,067]

1 minute ago, Captain Jack Shadow said:

I think the issue is that when you look at what we were given in the beginning, you scratch your head and think things like "Who the fuck thinks it's good for the game to have so many OP predators, and Alphas that are near invincible and make taking a tame out of your base, a fool's errand?"  Or, "What moron thought it as a good idea to put 10 SotD in one small section of a Grid, such that anyone who sails there in a Brigantine, is toast.  Who doesn't think that would cause people to rage quit, and leave the game for good?"

The truth is, it was amazing lack of foresight, not to understand that people would come for the ships, and adventure on the high seas...not base building, and taming, and battling wolves, and growing crops.  Like it or not, people came for the ships, and when the game crapped in their face on that issue, they left, never to return...most of them.  They have the impression that this is ARK with ships.  To get them back, the game is going to have to completely shed that image.  I don't think most people who wanted to play this were interested in a hardcore survival game.  And honestly, most people aren't interested in the constant struggle, day in and day out.  They like it as something in the beginning, but at some point, they expect their efforts to solve most of those problems.  Like yesterday, we were out treasure hunting.  We went into a polar region.  All of respec'd for this...had on fur armor and most of our points into fortitude...and the cold was still killing us.  So what did we do?  We killed each other right before going ashore to get the treasure.  Thus,  resetting our stats.  Vitamins up, and HP up.  But we all collectively agreed that it was stupid that with so many points into fortitude, and fur armor on, we were still dying.  Fur armor itself should just about eliminate that.  Why have fur armor if it isn't going to keep you warm?  To most people, this is where survival games go wrong, and why so many people don't stick with them.  Struggling with everything is fun in the beginning, but eventually becomes irritating.

Oh sure stuff needs to be changed. I liked your post in the other thread, but people could expect all of the above. The devs had a view on the game (official servers) and we are here to play it. I don’t mind it but if people want to play ship fights all day.. i don’t know what to do for those people. Me personally the game is perfect in the way of ships, base building treasure hunting etc. But I get not everyone wants to grind, I got used to it after ARK. 

[DAZE 12]

6 hours ago, Percieval said:

Oh everyone can have their own expectations of everything and on different levels. If I go back to ARK EA, it was pretty shit too. If I’m honest I’m not surprised by anything anymore. I have played 260 hours at this moment, having a blast and I’m not even on unofficial yet, I think my money’s well worth it. Me and my crew pretty go well around everything. We had the FoY pretty quickly, we managed the SoTD spam, the OP alpha’s (spam) pretty good. Maybe it is because of experience or because I set the expectation level really low. When I bought the game I didn’t expect anything especially for the first few weeks. But if there are people that have had higher expectations of the game because they needed to pay for it.. I don’t know if they thought it all the way through. When I read the interviews - and not only about the 40K man servers - but also all the other mechanics they told us about, I knew it was either gonna be chaos or fun. At this moment it’s a little of both, and I believe that is because of expectations. With higher ones, you just have chaos. 

THIS!!! Ppl expected rdr2 from 7$ game which says gonna be released in 2 years in steam description. How ppl expect devs read all their wine, when they cant read couple of words on the main Page? (karma) 

[Khalista Flintlock 13]

19 hours ago, Scorpionshawn said:

Yup maybe you should find another game and I never said that to anyone once till now... Despite how people feel about me on the forums

I don't have the time or care to read through all your posts, but just a quick scan shows this. While it may or may not be the truth. The point is people that play even though some things are broken, even though it frustrating with lag, all the other things that are common complaint. The game will improve from creative suggestion, accurate bug reporting, and a bit or patience. 

Accurate bug reporting is not "HELP! This clan from (insert country here)  is sinking my ship with a glitch!" 
Creative suggestion is not "devs are stupid for adding X because of Y"
Patience is not "i have played X amount of hours and have wait all of X hours for a fix to Y and nothing is changed"

These are things that toxic and unproductive community members do. There are several posters that make point by point problems and suggest new mechanic's or ways they might be fixed or changed for the better. Those are the people that want the game to be amazing, those are the people that should stay around. Just because there is a glitch, or a workaround, doesn't mean you should use it. 

So when I say that the people that are toxic can leave more land for the people that love that game, that is what I mean. Also.... Play the game not the forum, are you serious 370+ posts! More time on forums than in game....... 

[Hambo 34]

21 hours ago, boomervoncannon said:

Okay. You don’t mind it. Understandable. But do you agree that when a person pays money for something, they have a right to have higher expectations than when they do not?

So, how many items do you buy from the "As seen on TV" racks in the local drug/variety store that have no chance of delivering what they promise?  I never do.

I have never been "paid" for alpha testing.  Microsoft used to give us release copies of the software after the testing was over (hence I never bought Windows after Vista, and I may have been given my copy of XP as I was in charge of company rollouts to 1000+ workstations and servers at the time).., They once gave me a netbook with Windows7 Pro installed because my name was drawn from a list of reported bugs.  Beta testing only gives what I would call "Early Early Access"... You still have to buy the game at release.