Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
boomervoncannon

Interesting take on the issue of EA and Atlas specifically

Recommended Posts

This youtuber is one I have been following for a little while now and typically find his commentary thoughtful, well researched and on target.  He comments on current events in gaming from a players point of view and does not pull punches on the industry without (imo) being unfair.  This recent video of his discusses the issue of paying to beta test, which is arguably what Early Access is. He provides historical context in the first few minutes of the video and then begins to discuss Atlas specifically around the 3:10 mark.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I did not listen to it all but I think when he goes on about a "testing team", while I realize his point, hes a bit off on the creativity smaller companies (people) provide to the game. Its their ideas that make games work not some stuffed shirt telling peeps what they want. Perfect example is the modding that people do has always made the Unreal Engine shine. I have seen what this game can do since UTGOTY 99 and modded things before that.

One of the first editions way back then even had dinos, go figure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nutcutt3r said:

Well I did not listen to it all but I think when he goes on about a "testing team", while I realize his point, hes a bit off on the creativity smaller companies (people) provide to the game. Its their ideas that make games work not some stuffed shirt telling peeps what they want. Perfect example is the modding that people do has always made the Unreal Engine shine. I have seen what this game can do since UTGOTY 99 and modded things before that.

One of the first editions way back then even had dinos, go figure...

If you do listen to the whole thing he does actually go out of his way to say that the new model of EA has value when applied to certain indie developers as it allows them to get projects funded that might not otherwise see the light of day, but that such a model he considers wholly inappropriate for use by large publicly traded companies producing games with budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

This is a nuanced point, something often alien to most public debate these days. Regardless, I think he’s dead on about this. He never directly addresses whether he considers Grapecard to be a fair candidate for this approach, but given that he uses Atlas as his case study for what’s wrong with this system, I’m gonna guess he would tend to agree with my feeling, which is that they don’t fall into the same category as the struggling indie studios previously mentioned given the enormous pile of cash Ark’s success leaves them sitting on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstand.  EA is different from larger companies (like Firaxis, Paradox, or Electronic Arts) releasing a game at full price at "retail" that is trash and then patching it after the fact.

A game that is actually LISTED as "Early Access", ie: literally sold as "this is a Beta" isn't the same thing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I want also add that I recently purchased Satisfactory, by Swedish developers Coffee Stain, the guys who did Goat simulator. Interestingly at $30, it’s at the exact same price point as Atlas, just released as an EA title expected to be in EA for at least a year,  and it’s developers are neither struggling broke nor industry behemoths. In short it is an excellent candidate for comparison to Atlas. Sadly this is where the similarities end, as Satisfactory plays and feels like a fully developed and polished game out of the gate, with non of Atlas’s issues. If Coffe Stain had declared it a finished product, I would never have known the difference.

Does anyone here even remotely regard Atlas as anywhere within a country mile of being a finished product?

Sure one is an MMO and the other is not so an argument could be put forward they are different but still....

same price point 

both EA titles

comparable studios in terms of experience and resources

One offers an EA dumpster fire, the other a product that while technically also EA,  I’d have happily considered sold as a finished game out of the gate.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, HavenDuuk said:

I think you misunderstand.  EA is different from larger companies (like Firaxis, Paradox, or Electronic Arts) releasing a game at full price at "retail" that is trash and then patching it after the fact.

A game that is actually LISTED as "Early Access", ie: literally sold as "this is a Beta" isn't the same thing at all.

See the post I just made. Also if you didn’t actually watch the video, pleas3 do, as it addresses this point.

Edited by boomervoncannon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, HavenDuuk said:

I think you misunderstand.  EA is different from larger companies (like Firaxis, Paradox, or Electronic Arts) releasing a game at full price at "retail" that is trash and then patching it after the fact.

A game that is actually LISTED as "Early Access", ie: literally sold as "this is a Beta" isn't the same thing at all.

This is the problem.  There is no standard anymore as to what is Alpha and what is Beta.  The thing is, most people buy, assuming that it is beta, but more often than not, it is Alpha.  Then the Devs get caught up in putting out content, not bug fixes, because the model is now that the EA is the live release, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, and what keeps people buying is the new content, not the bug fixes, in many cases.  So we play games that are unpolished, and never actually get polished.  So we play it this way, and move on to the next unpolished game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

This youtuber is one I have been following for a little while now and typically find his commentary thoughtful, well researched and on target.  He comments on current events in gaming from a players point of view and does not pull punches on the industry without (imo) being unfair.  This recent video of his discusses the issue of paying to beta test, which is arguably what Early Access is. He provides historical context in the first few minutes of the video and then begins to discuss Atlas specifically around the 3:10 mark.

 

Hey no one made any of us buy this game, Some people understood it was early access. What this guy fails to mention is this game cost cash for the servers... Back in the day as he said those games was single player not online games. They have to pay for the servers some how. I just don't understand why you guys buy an Early Access game and then do nothing but bitch and cry about it.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

Hey no one made any of us buy this game, Some people understood it was early access. What this guy fails to mention is this game cost cash for the servers... Back in the day as he said those games was single player not online games. They have to pay for the servers some how. I just don't understand why you guys buy an Early Access game and then do nothing but bitch and cry about it.

Because at this stage it’s worth about 10 dollars 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ButtPirate said:

Hey no one made any of us buy this game, Some people understood it was early access. What this guy fails to mention is this game cost cash for the servers... Back in the day as he said those games was single player not online games. They have to pay for the servers some how. I just don't understand why you guys buy an Early Access game and then do nothing but bitch and cry about it.

First of all, I’m not bitching or crying about anything. All criticism is not bitching or crying so let’s just get that out of the way upfront. If you can’t distinguish between mindless complaints and reasoned, fact supported criticism you should learn to tell the difference before deciding anything you don’t agree with is the former.

 Second of all everyone is fully aware servers cost money. MMO’s have been in existence for over 20 years now and somehow for years and years companies managed to cover the cost of those servers without doing so at the expense of the development process by either producing an unfinished, unpolished game or charging players for “Early Access” as a revenue generating and shoddy replacement for actual legitimate beta testing of their game behind closed doors. Therefore, your point about server costs is clearly an irrelevant red herring. The cost of servers is just one of numerous development costs when producing a game and clearly cannot justify the consumer unfriendly change in industry practice.

The underlying point here is about whether Early Access as a substitute for traditional alpha and beta testing is appropriate as an excuse for substantially established studios to dump unfinished products onto the market, label them Early Access, and get away with charging full price.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, ButtPirate said:

Hey no one made any of us buy this game, Some people understood it was early access. What this guy fails to mention is this game cost cash for the servers... Back in the day as he said those games was single player not online games. They have to pay for the servers some how. I just don't understand why you guys buy an Early Access game and then do nothing but bitch and cry about it.

You don't seem to understand the problem, or why we are discussing this.  This is about how gaming has changed, and not for he better.  The process has been corrupted, and monetized.  Great for the developer, shitty for the gamer.  We are trying to educate gamers to stop doing this.  The man describes how games used to be professionally tested, and polished, before the customer received the game.  Devs use a con game to get players to buy in early.  The gamer is sold on the idea that it is better to get the game now, unfinished, because it will pay dividends to them buy being there on day 1.  PvE?  Better be here day 1 to get the best location for your base.  Late to the party and there won't be anyplace left for you to build a base, or at best, you get the scraps.  Same for PvP.  Want the best base location?  be here day 1.

So you get here, and play a game that has many many problems and balance issues.  Missing game content, missing mechanics, etc...  By the time the game is polished, you are tired of it, and moving on to a new, early access.  But, then...the game never really gets polished, because creating new game content is what keeps the revenue stream coming in, not fixing bugs...not polishing the game.  Thus, for instance, ARK still has issues.  But just as most of the bugs were fixed, I was at the point that the game held little appeal to me anymore.  What would be great is to have the game polished, WHEN I buy it, not years after I buy it.

I have been gaming for over 20 years, and I see a huge difference in the quality of games, now.  But, as I said, this is up to the gamers to fix because so long as they buy into these games before they are polished, the developers/publishers have no incentive to alter their current business model.

Edited by Captain Jack Shadow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, boomervoncannon said:

First of all, I’m not bitching or crying about anything. All criticism is not bitching or crying so let’s just get that out of the way upfront. If you can’t distinguish between mindless complaints and reasoned, fact supported criticism you should learn to tell the difference before deciding anything you don’t agree with is the former.

 Second of all everyone is fully aware servers cost money. MMO’s have been in existence for over 20 years now and somehow for years and years companies managed to cover the cost of those servers without doing so at the expense of the development process by either producing an unfinished, unpolished game or charging players for “Early Access” as a revenue generating and shoddy replacement for actual legitimate beta testing of their game behind closed doors. Therefore, your point about server costs is clearly an irrelevant red herring. The cost of servers is just one of numerous development costs when producing a game and clearly cannot justify the consumer unfriendly change in industry practice.

The underlying point here is about whether Early Access as a substitute for traditional alpha and beta testing is appropriate as an excuse for substantially established studios to dump unfinished products onto the market, label them Early Access, and get away with charging full price.

Kind of funny how this guy thought you were crying really. You are one of the guys “on the other side” lol. That isn’t meant as an insult, you just have typically been more on the side of wildcard.

just funny seeing someone say you are one of the complainers.

good video though. And yeah wildcard is not on the small end anymore. When they were developing ark and hadn’t sold over 12 million copies then sure but not now. 

And to be honest I think they have gotten worse now then back before when they were smaller and new

Edited by Realist

Share this post


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

Because at this stage it’s worth about 10 dollars 

How would you know? You cant even play it...…..

Share this post


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

How would you know? You cant even play it...…..

Yes, I don’t play the game yet. Yes I am waiting for console. By you saying I don’t play the game helping you feel better or something? If it is then cool go a head and I’ll never bring it up again. If it is supposed to be meant as some kind of insult or argument ender then still go ahead. If it didn’t work 3 months ago, it won’t work now. 

Shouldnt have to remind you from a business standpoint a potential customer is just as important if not more important than a customer.

i don’t care if you don’t like what I say or even if you think it’s relevant. I have been on arks twitter and arks forum for years with people saying way worse things lol.

that is what reviews are for. If I am looking for a product on amazon and it has bad reviews, I am well within my rights to deem the product too costly.

this has become a very common thing. People don’t like other people’s opinions so they will desperately try to find a way to make what they say irrelevant. It never actually works though. In an argument of opinions there is never a wrong or right.

Share this post


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

Yes, I don’t play the game yet. Yes I am waiting for console. By you saying I don’t play the game helping you feel better or something? If it is then cool go a head and I’ll never bring it up again. If it is supposed to be meant as some kind of insult or argument ender then still go ahead. If it didn’t work 3 months ago, it won’t work now. 

Shouldnt have to remind you from a business standpoint a potential customer is just as important if not more important than a customer.

i don’t care if you don’t like what I say or even if you think it’s relevant. I have been on arks twitter and arks forum for years with people saying way worse things lol.

that is what reviews are for. If I am looking for a product on amazon and it has bad reviews, I am well within my rights to deem the product too costly.

this has become a very common thing. People don’t like other people’s opinions so they will desperately try to find a way to make what they say irrelevant. It never actually works though. In an argument of opinions there is never a wrong or right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/15/2019 at 12:26 AM, Realist said:

Because at this stage it’s worth about 10 dollars 

Bull shit. I'm having a blast. I've got a wall with 32 heads on it at home and bookcases full of blueprints and chests full of gold and loot from pirating. been on the move for days with a bloodthirsty crew. It's been 3 days since wipe. Don't ever presume you know a damn thing not even having bought or played it after this update. Its been sick. H2gPICJ.jpg

RsuQXZp.jpg

Edited by Enki Anunnaki
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Bull shit. I'm having a blast. I've got a wall with 32 heads on it at home and bookcases full of blueprints and chests full of gold and loot from pirating. been on the move for days with a bloodthirsty crew. It's been 3 days since wipe. Don't ever presume you know a damn thing not even having bought or played it after this update. Its been sick. H2gPICJ.jpg

RsuQXZp.jpg

I'm with you on this.  Realist can of course say it doesn't look like it is worth it to them - based on what others are saying, but you get out of it what you want.  Most of my crew is waiting for the NA PvE server to come up, but I really missed the game while it was down.  A few of us are playing on the EU PvE and it is great to play again!  We are more of a build and explore type - not a true pirate type as you are, but people can enjoy it their own way!  

To be more on topic - I have been a gamer since the early days of computer gaming - UO was my first MMO and I have played MANY!  I am a little torn regarding the EA thing, but in all honesty, I knew what I was getting in to.  I do not feel at all that I was deceived by GS about what they were selling.  They said from the get--go that it is a 2 year development process.  They said that wipes could and most likely will occur.  I honestly believe that the dev team has been listening to complaints and suggestions - the new claim system (like it or not) is evidence that they are willing to change things and try something new.  If this wasn't EA, they wouldn't have had the number of players that it really requires to see how these systems will/won't work.  

Bottom line - I didn't go in to this blind - none of us did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2019 at 3:04 PM, Fly200 said:

When you plop your flag down and idiots spam your flag with foundations to contest is just stupid!  When you open na pve please go back to old claim system with limits to flags per company!

 

On 4/14/2019 at 11:26 PM, Realist said:

Because at this stage it’s worth about 10 dollars 

 Look at ARK. I bought it for $10 when it was first released in 2015 and wow, what a shit can it was initially. It took almost a year for the game to even be playable for me because of optimization issues but now I've spent over 1,300 hours in it. 

Now look at Dayz. I bought into early access in 2013 and it's still a pile of trash with a lot of the same bugs as when it started. I tried logging in just a few months ago and died before I could even finish loading in, loaded in and promptly fell through the world with a zombie attacking me while I fell, and then the servers crashed. Haven't tried again since. I've gotten a few hours of enjoyment but the frustrations and bugs far out-weight any enjoyment. 

That's the gamble. Sometimes it's not even worth $10 but then others you are getting a whole lot of bang for you buck. Only time will tell and it's way too early to say what this game is worth. I have over 500 hours in Atlas so far and for $25.00 I've already gotten a lot of enjoyment from the game. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Bull shit. I'm having a blast. I've got a wall with 32 heads on it at home and bookcases full of blueprints and chests full of gold and loot from pirating. been on the move for days with a bloodthirsty crew. It's been 3 days since wipe. Don't ever presume you know a damn thing not even having bought or played it after this update. Its been sick. H2gPICJ.jpg

RsuQXZp.jpg

Yeah no one should take REALIST serious. She is just a jelly troll. Doesn't even own the game. for the 29.99 I spent I'm very pleased the product.

 

Edited by ButtPirate

Share this post


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

 

 Look at ARK. I bought it for $10 when it was first released in 2015 and wow, what a shit can it was initially. It took almost a year for the game to even be playable for me because of optimization issues but now I've spent over 1,300 hours in it. 

Now look at Dayz. I bought into early access in 2013 and it's still a pile of trash with a lot of the same bugs as when it started. I tried logging in just a few months ago and died before I could even finish loading in, loaded in and promptly fell through the world with a zombie attacking me while I fell, and then the servers crashed. Haven't tried again since. I've gotten a few hours of enjoyment but the frustrations and bugs far out-weight any enjoyment. 

That's the gamble. Sometimes it's not even worth $10 but then others you are getting a whole lot of bang for you buck. Only time will tell and it's way too early to say what this game is worth. I have over 500 hours in Atlas so far and for $25.00 I've already gotten a lot of enjoyment from the game. 

 

I get what you are trying to say but saying it is too early is a different discussion. Whether it is good or not later on doesn’t matter because my opinion was based on the present not 2 years from now.

so sure, two years from now it might be worth a lot more. As far as right now goes you would be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, and you paid a discount to get in early. When (if) the game comes out of EA and goes on release, it will go up in price. So hopefully it improves to the point that YOU enjoy it and if not, then you lost your gamble.

I've already gotten my $25 of enjoyment out of it and most of that has been playing with a fun company I just happened to bump into because we were in the same grid at the right time. I've had some hilarious times killing whales, SoTD, running the fountain gauntlet, etc with them. We (mostly Miekka our leader) even got an award for the castle and town we built on the old build. Tonight we are going whale hunting for the first time since the new patch and I'm sure it'll be a blast. I've learned in my long tenure of gaming that you get out of the game what you make of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious when someone posts about how crap a game is, because they own a potatoe of a computer that can't run it.

And I remember when playing in a Beta.. was free.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2019 at 12:39 AM, boomervoncannon said:

 MMO’s have been in existence for over 20 years now and somehow for years and years companies managed to cover the cost of those servers without doing so at the expense of the development process by either producing an unfinished, unpolished game or charging players for “Early Access” as a revenue generating and shoddy replacement for actual legitimate beta testing of their game behind closed doors. Therefore, your point about server costs is clearly an irrelevant red herring. The cost of servers is just one of numerous development costs when producing a game and clearly cannot justify the consumer unfriendly change in industry practice.

 

Game developers used to have to get financial backing to develop a game through to release.  The backers would need them to prove their idea was good and thought through completely, that it was marketable, they had the skills to do the work, and that they were reasonably controlled by business, marketing, and project plans.   In other words, they had to prove they were grownups who knew their business.   Now, any group of wild-eyed goobers can get together, decide something's a cool idea,  scratch out a few graphics , and throw the whole thing up as a crowd funded EA.    And people pay them money without knowing if they are 3 guys hitting the bong in the garage, or some unknown genius about to produce the new greatest thing.  

If there are no finance guys willing to plop down some cash based on a real assessment, you're taking your chances just as much as playing roulette in Vegas.  Doesn't mean you can't complain if you don't like it, just the same as those finance guys could.  But it does mean there's no standard and not even a guarantee you haven't just bought a pig in a poke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just standard industry practice now when it comes to players testing.  This isn't how it used to be they used to hire folks to test which ended up costing small companies quite a bit of money.  Like Winter Thorne covered when you have backers of the game they like shareholders have demands and high expectations off the bat.  This could be good but imo kills off way to many companies who if and when given a chance can develop quite a good game they just need the time to get it going.  

A lot has changed but the one good thing that remains is small companies still have a fighting chance against some of the big companies.  Which is good for gamers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2019 at 8:13 PM, boomervoncannon said:

I want also add that I recently purchased Satisfactory, by Swedish developers Coffee Stain, the guys who did Goat simulator. Interestingly at $30, it’s at the exact same price point as Atlas, just released as an EA title expected to be in EA for at least a year,  and it’s developers are neither struggling broke nor industry behemoths. In short it is an excellent candidate for comparison to Atlas. Sadly this is where the similarities end, as Satisfactory plays and feels like a fully developed and polished game out of the gate, with non of Atlas’s issues. If Coffe Stain had declared it a finished product, I would never have known the difference.

I generally find Satisfactory to be a great example of EA done right.  They've still got a lot of content they want to add in, but the content that they have in is Well done, tested, and polished.  I've been through several EA's where the focus was on showcasing everybody the best example of a small part of the finished product, so that a player can easily say to themselves "I want more of exactly this".  

There's also a big difference that many of those games go through proper Alpha tests, and sometimes even Beta tests, before EA.  As others in the thread have stated, where the EA point is can change drastically from game to game.  The best are those where it's truly EA, after a proper Alpha test, and not using EA as a replacement for a Proper QA team and internal testing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×