Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Scorpionshawn

Atlas numbers dropping fast!

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Sneakydude said:

You have no weight on comparison here. Totally different issues. The only thing that is weighted here is Same engine, somewhat same dev team, and maybe the same cheating hoes that where in ARK... otherwise nope not going to pass those numbers as the same weight.

It kind of has even more weight. So many people have said arks launch was way worse.

mind you, the fanboys said that at the atlas launch because they were trying to defend the atlas launch. If we go off what they said however, then since arks launch was way worse and still did way better, then that holds a ton of weight

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hodo said:

Just do what I did, and add him to your ignore list... Him and his forum alt AngryTango.

You really are dense Hodo. Seriously? LOLOL  And if you really did bother to ignore me than I am honored. Since in our last run in I had you dead to rights. You accused me of being "triggered" because you failed to come up with defensible case. Can't beat 'em? Ignore. What a beautiful thing. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup here is Arks launch numbers.... THE ATLAS TROLLS ARE LIARS 

ark up.jpg

Atlas number way down and they had Ark players to drawn from!

ATLAS DOWN.jpg

Edited by Scorpionshawn

Share this post


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

It kind of has even more weight. So many people have said arks launch was way worse.

mind you, the fanboys said that at the atlas launch because they were trying to defend the atlas launch. If we go off what they said however, then since arks launch was way worse and still did way better, then that holds a ton of weight

Exactly! 

Oh wait! I got excited for a moment thinking that he actually did ignore us. :classic_blink:But that can't be the case, right? Otherwise how is he seeing that we are even making comments? If you ignore someone, can you still see their comments? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Scorpionshawn said:

Umm yeah its even worse than that because Atlas had a player base to draw from "Ark" 

Ark in 2015 did not and totally created its own... so my child yes Atlas is another Dark and Light and Ark well it was a far better start than this game!

Its great being called a child when i am almost 50 LOL

35 minutes ago, Realist said:

It kind of has even more weight. So many people have said arks launch was way worse.

mind you, the fanboys said that at the atlas launch because they were trying to defend the atlas launch. If we go off what they said however, then since arks launch was way worse and still did way better, then that holds a ton of weight

I found ark better but then again private server was a much better experience that what i read about ARK on official.

Edited by Sneakydude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Hodo said:

Just do what I did, and add him to your ignore list... Him and his forum alt AngryTango.

He really isn't worth ignoring is the problem. 

30 minutes ago, Scorpionshawn said:

Umm yeah its even worse than that because Atlas had a player base to draw from "Ark" 

It's debatable. 

The player base they are trying to cater to within the Ark community is not the entire Ark community. Atlas was created for the mega-tribe PvP groups that comprise the vast majority of the PvP player base. This game completely forfeits any major PvE aspects, has limited modability, and is not unofficial friendly. 

Expecting Atlas to compete with Ark is idiotic to an extreme. It never will be able to compete with Ark. One of Ark's greatest failings in the end, was the fact that it tried to appeal to far too many audiences. Atlas shouldn't have this problem as it is a game primarily focused on PvP without the myriad of issues that made PvP in Ark so lackluster (Breeding and Dinos in general). 

That being said, regardless of where/whether Atlas had a better start then Ark, or vice versa, it still remains a fairly successful game that routinely exists in the Steam top 20 and has a fairly large and stable playerbase. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Its being great being called a child when i am almost 50 LOL

Lets get away from that and stay on topic! 

FACTS ARE FACTS!

Atlas sank in the first 30 days where Ark thrived 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Angrytango said:

Exactly! 

Oh wait! I got excited for a moment thinking that he actually did ignore us. :classic_blink:But that can't be the case, right? Otherwise how is he seeing that we are even making comments? If you ignore someone, can you still see their comments? 

Yeah no clue there. Guess the threat of ignoring was an empty one. Kind of sucks really. Made my day when he said it

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

He really isn't worth ignoring is the problem. 

It's debatable. 

The player base they are trying to cater to within the Ark community is not the entire Ark community. Atlas was created for the mega-tribe PvP groups that comprise the vast majority of the PvP player base. This game completely forfeits any major PvE aspects, has limited modability, and is not unofficial friendly. 

Expecting Atlas to compete with Ark is idiotic to an extreme. It never will be able to compete with Ark. One of Ark's greatest failings in the end, was the fact that it tried to appeal to far too many audiences. Atlas shouldn't have this problem as it is a game primarily focused on PvP without the myriad of issues that made PvP in Ark so lackluster (Breeding and Dinos in general). 

That being said, regardless of where/whether Atlas had a better start then Ark, or vice versa, it still remains a fairly successful game that routinely exists in the Steam top 20 and has a fairly large and stable playerbase. 

All im saying is a lot of the Atlas kool aid drinkers kept telling people

"Its only EA thats why the numbers drop its normal for EA and Ark had a worse start"

I got the prof right there from Steam charts that these people are a bunch of liars or dont fact check so why should anyone listen to them. :skull:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sneakydude said:

Its great being called a child when i am almost 50 LOL

I found ark better but then again private server was a much better experience that what i read about ARK on official.

Same thing with atlas man. Except with this game unofficial will become even more popular.

Share this post


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

 

A complete troll, you are aren't you? welcome to ignore my good lad.

 

2 minutes ago, Realist said:

Same thing with atlas man. Except with this game unofficial will become even more popular.

Yes i agree it will.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2019 at 6:18 AM, Realist said:

Nope, not like this. This decrease is way more than what should be. I was even surprised by how much it has dropped. I was expecting these numbers not to happen until 3 months in not 1 month in

At the same time, it's still pretty predicable that it would happpen. The same thing happened in Ark at first release. The initial wave of hypers left, and since there's no PvE to do in this game, so did the PvErs. 

 

Just now, Scorpionshawn said:

Lets get away from that and stay on topic! 

FACTS ARE FACTS!

Atlas sank in the first 30 days where Ark thrived 

You haven't cited any facts what so ever though. You cherry picked statistics, failed to present them in an objective way, and then claimed them as fact.

Ark experienced a very similar shortfall of users, it simply took longer for it to happen because Ark released with far more content then Atlas did. 

In reality, you have no idea how statistics work, nor how to even interpret them as they relate to populations and how they shift in relation. I wouldn't claim that it's "Facts" when you're fundamentally unable to conclude what a fact is from a given data set. 

1 minute ago, Scorpionshawn said:

All im saying is a lot of the Atlas kool aid drinkers kept telling people

"Its only EA thats why the numbers drop its normal for EA and Ark had a worse start"

I got the prof right there from Steam charts that these people are a bunch of liars or dont fact check so why should anyone listen to them. :skull:

I have literally never seen anyone claim that. Every game has a wave of hype, then a population dip when those groups leave. It's natural, and normal. For any game. EA or not. That is what you're looking at and fatally misinterpreting.

See, here's the problem. You fundamentally don't know what you're talking about, so when people talk to you about it, you call them liars and say they don't fact check. It also doesn't help that you're trying to tell people not to listen to them despite being objectively wrong about almost everything about the issue at hand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude still on this post trying to twist fasts like he is running for congress. Im not even going to read your post anymore its clear your in denial!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

At the same time, it's still pretty predicable that it would happpen. The same thing happened in Ark at first release. The initial wave of hypers left, and since there's no PvE to do in this game, so did the PvErs.  

Well it did take longer(4-5 months) until this big of a drop but we don’t need to argue about it, so I won’t continue that.

you are correct as far as the hypers and with this game the pvers. The one very important thing I want you to look at is that ark had multiple spikes. The only reason for those multiple spikes were the addition of multiple dinos on a regular basis.

here is where atlas will be in big trouble. They have already shown they don’t want this game to be about tames(big mistake to be honest). Next, even if they add a ship every once in a while, a ship that is just a different size isn’t going to attract people.

we also need to discuss that along with the ships, the travel will always be just as slow as before. Sailing for hours will get old. I mean come on(not you), after a year of sailing that long it will get old. I actually do expect some sort of fast travel to be implemented at some point. After that happens(game would die without fast travel after a year) ships will be obsolete.

there is a lot of others I would be willing to calmly discuss with you and I will make sure to always be respectful of you agree to do so as well.

2 years of early access. They also said no paid dlcs(which I do not believe), but if they stick to that they are in for a world of hurt financially and population wise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Realist said:

Well it did take longer(4-5 months) until this big of a drop but we don’t need to argue about it, so I won’t continue that.

you are correct as far as the hypers and with this game the pvers. The one very important thing I want you to look at is that ark had multiple spikes. The only reason for those multiple spikes were the addition of multiple dinos on a regular basis.

here is where atlas will be in big trouble. They have already shown they don’t want this game to be about tames(big mistake to be honest). Next, even if they add a ship every once in a while, a ship that is just a different size isn’t going to attract people.

we also need to discuss that along with the ships, the travel will always be just as slow as before. Sailing for hours will get old. I mean come on(not you), after a year of sailing that long it will get old. I actually do expect some sort of fast travel to be implemented at some point. After that happens(game would die without fast travel after a year) ships will be obsolete.

there is a lot of others I would be willing to calmly discuss with you and I will make sure to always be respectful of you agree to do so as well.

2 years of early access. They also said no paid dlcs(which I do not believe), but if they stick to that they are in for a world of hurt financially and population wise.

Its not something you can really predict. There's a variety of ways to make the game better, and to draw bigger crowds. Ark showed that pretty well, it took that game well over a year to develop into itself really and that's for a game with a huge amount of appeal for a variety of communities (PvE/RP/PvP/Unofficial/Modding). 

This game will, likely, never be as universally successful as Ark. It simply doesn't try to appeal to the sheer amount of players that Ark tried, and to some degree, succeeded in doing. 

This game can, and likely will, attempt to primarily appeal to the "Mega-tribe" groups and form a stable playerbase from them, as opposed to Ark, which attempted to appeal to everyone. Just because the population is lower then Ark, doesn't mean it isn't successful. It just means it's a niche game. There are many successful games out there that don't have 100k people playing them everyday.

 

I flame Wildcard plenty on just about everything. Including for/in this game. However, I do believe that they are more competent then a troll (Scorpianshawn) who posts threads every 3 hours about how the game sucks because he got wiped/lost everything. I also don't particularly subscribe to the belief that the games overall direction is a bad one (Appealing to mega-tribes and groups larger then 15). ATLAS/ARK/Wildcard/Grapeshot are notorious and well known for being so horrifically bad at executing upon a concept that, despite how good the original concept is, it's ruined by that execution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Scorpionshawn said:

Dude still on this post trying to twist fasts like he is running for congress. Im not even going to read your post anymore its clear your in denial!

You can't even spell faCts or proOf right. I'm not twisting facts, I simply don't trust someone who apparently can't even spell to interpret something as complicated as statistics. Which is a good thing because you conveniently missed the fact that Ark had the same 20% population dip that Atlas did, simply at a later date, making your entire  "My opinion is fact" declaration laughable. 

Edited by Ellentro

Share this post


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

You can't even spell faCts or proOf right. I'm not twisting facts, I simply don't trust someone who apparently has the mental capacity of a toddler to interpret something as complicated as statistics. Which is a good thing because you conveniently missed the fact that Ark had the same 20% population dip that Atlas did, simply at a later date, making your entire  "My opinion is fact" declaration laughable. 

621038815_ATLASDOWN.jpg.ddbf10d2204fc693ad8b893626a2133f.jpg

Share this post


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

621038815_ATLASDOWN.jpg.ddbf10d2204fc693ad8b893626a2133f.jpg

image.png.3a40dd16cef7e723b2bb61a40c859974.png

Seems odd how the one above (Atlas) looks in relation to the one below (Ark). It's almost like this is an obvious and repeating occurrence. 

Edited by Ellentro

Share this post


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

20% population dip

If you go into the detailed chart it's a lot worse than the month-by-month summary makes it look. 50% would be more accurate

Share this post


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

If you go into the detailed chart it's a lot worse than the month-by-month summary makes it look. 50% would be more accurate

 

Share this post


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

If you go into the detailed chart it's a lot worse than the month-by-month summary makes it look. 50% would be more accurate

Yeah, to be frank, the numbers aren't really what I'd consider even remotely debatable. The entire issue has so much nuance to it that we could debate the merits of various parts of them to death and both be almost entirely correct.

I'm simply disagreeing with the OP because he fundamentally misconstrues and cherrypicks statistics to show that his "DOOMSDAY" threads are right. He doesn't actually care about the game, he simply wants to bash it because he got wiped and wants to be able to win official PvP while being a solo player. 

Edited by Ellentro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the people that post everything is broken and nothing works yet there are plenty of people that play fine.. Sure there are bug and your going to loose stuff but what EA game doesnt. +

 

PS Love the video from day one saying the game is broken....

352c16ab0c98a5115634592fa45be090.png
 

Edited by Pax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 months ago they posted that Atlas was a new Ark DLC then they pulled the add and said they had a all new game called Atlas so people would pay money for it. Here is prof of more lies

 

Share this post


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

5 months ago they posted that Atlas was a new Ark DLC then they pulled the add and said they had a all new game called Atlas so people would pay money for it. Here is prof of more lies

 

Nothing in that post is proOf of lies. It just showcases the fact that Wildcard does some shady shit, which anyone who played Ark would have known already. 

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  

×