Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Talono

More love for casual players/small tribes

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, sgzeroone said:

Why would anyone want to play a solo if the game they want to play is a multiplayer game???  and then complain cause it don't have solo content???   Is this some kinda mental illness.  

I love grape cool-aid, but every time I drink water it doesn't taste like grape cool-aid and I get mad and start complaining!

Expecting solo content in a multiplayer game is like expecting tap water to taste like grape cool-aid!!!  STOP THE INSANITY!

I just read this article earlier. It had a quote from a guy that works in the gaming industry that talks about how dealing with the communities is like having a group of people that are all like King Joffrey from Game of Thrones. I kinda want to just start posting pictures of Joffrey now when people want stuff handed to them.

~Lotus

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you all bring arguments to "counter" something that have nothing to do with the actuall text? Where did I as example say anything about content being not achievable for small groups? But still nrly every response is a bashing that everyone that does not want to play with 74 other person wants everything on a silver platter served. NOBODY ASKED FOR THAT. Just stop bringing the same arguments all over again.

Grapeshot promissed for weeks a server for small companies. Again and again. I know many people that only started with Season 2 because of this promisse - and they are gone for good now. If you all don't care at all about the "few" people that despice being forced in huge groups, why do you bother reply? Let us all leave and be happy we are gone - since apperantly we are completly wrong and only people that want to play with 74 other people have to right to enjoy this game.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2019 at 6:12 AM, Talono said:

Guys

i really enjoy my pirate life inside your persistant Atlas world. I just dont like how you absolutely focus on mega patches only for mega tribes.

I am quite sure that the majority of your players are solos/small tribes/casuals. Why lock them out from fun stuff like subs and torpedoes ? One of the big advantages in Conan Exiles is the ability for everybody to gain anything solo. Not easily, but with the correct preparation and planning.

Please consider a similar strategy and i am quite sure that the 50.000 players from game launch in december will be back here soon.

Dont let the Atlas galleon crush into the next iceberg.

@Sinappia You talked about how Talono has a valid point. I will show you what I read from this and we can see where our opinions differ 😄

Guys (Greeting)

i really enjoy my pirate life inside your persistant Atlas world (I like this game) . I just dont like how you absolutely focus on mega patches only for mega tribes. (Belief that the patches are only for large companies, This is not true BTW)

I am quite sure that the majority of your players are solos/small tribes/casuals. (State opinion with no basis) Why lock them out from fun stuff like subs and torpedoes ? (False statement) One of the big advantages in Conan Exiles is the ability for everybody to gain anything solo. (Atlas is easier than Conan) Not easily, but with the correct preparation and planning. (Conan would be a like 4/10 for difficulty as a solo, Atlas as a solo a 2/10?)

Please consider a similar strategy and i am quite sure that the 50.000 players from game launch in december will be back here soon. (Wild optimism, the game being too easy is actually costing a lot of players on the top end for PvE)

Dont let the Atlas galleon crush into the next iceberg. (? Atlas is more like a schooner with 3 small sails, 1 left, 1 right, 1 is on backwards, with 2.5 steering wheels)

 

So now after reading this I get the message that Talono believes Atlas is too hard for the average player.

So your first post says that people are not understanding the original poster's message. Your second post says it is possible for smaller groups to do the content which is saying the original post is wrong but your first post says it is right. I'm trying to understand what you are trying to say there.

 

As for Grapeshot, what exactly was promised? The problem is what the definition for Grapeshot and what the definition for each player is different.

 

~Lotus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2019 at 12:12 AM, Lotus said:

1) Ok so now I just surround by island with invulnerable ships.

2) Colonies is for smaller companies compared to what it was. Dynasty had around 500 active members inside of it before wipe was announced.

3) When we were new to PvP's politics we found a smaller guy that was probably a tribe of about 10. We hit his base smashed his defenses, killed his animals, took what we could, popcorned the rest. This guy was  a tax tribe for a beta tribe for Dynasty. We were a Tax tribe for HSBB at the time. Dynasty and HSBB were super close (like a week before the merger). We basically hit an ally's ally because we didn't know they were allies and that guy lost all his stuff. This is when the setups was Alliance 1 the mega with it's betas. Alliance 2 is the Beta with allied megas. Alliance 3+ is the Beta with it's tax tribes. Who do you think will be getting left out with less alliances? The new mentality would be ok you want to live here join this tribe so you can be allied. If you arn't allied then run the risk of getting hit. DNG/DNH lists are always in place but sometimes stuff happens and basically we were taught to sink first sort out the politics later.

4) It's on the front page of the website and somebody was bragging about it to me a few days ago. The game is about purpose and for some that ladder means a lot.

5a) Maybe they should use actual tax information bigger company = less risk to a loan so they should have to spend less. Altering prices based on company size is dumb.

5b) How many people do you think each boat needs in PvP?

 

~Lotus

1. Ok, if you like. There is a ship limit, and they do not make a very good blockade. You can easily get around over or under them.

2. So your logic, anything less than a 500 member company is by default catering to smaller companies? Remember the point, stay on topic. The topic is still, lets get some changes that would balance out the large vs the small. I realize your agenda is to only get favorable treatment for mega companies.

3. Cool story bro? Yeah we know season 1 was fucked. Allies of allies hitting other allies of allies, kinda creates more friction and stratification. Kinda exactly what I want. The little companies are already at the worst disadvantage in every aspect as it is. It wont get worse to make it far more difficult to have 750 people in official alliances.

4. I still contend the ladder as it is, is a lame ass joke. I wasn't even aware it still existed. I have not heard a single person refer to it since season 1 ended.

5a. So you are flat out against fairness. Point blank. If it helps megas, lets do it. If its fair treatment, even a smidgen, then hell no. A 1st grader can look at that math and see the problem. This is the easiest and best first step that should be made to begin balancing companies. I can't possibly see how anyone could be against the overwhelming fairness of upkeep per person. 

5b. Personally I like 3. I said however, how many ships you COULD field, witch is currently 75. Although each company can make what, 300? You pick the number though, and run the math. It wont change the fact that even with 50, or hell 75 members, you wont get a bigger battles. The server will shut down. Keep in mind, I never wanted to ADD a penalty to being bigger. Just adjusting the numbers to balance being a small company with the large companies. 

 

Are you able to look at a situation and identify its flaws and inconsistencies? Or are you only able to view your own situation and how you can be bettered by it, reguardless of the cost to others?

-CS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

CS has clearly stated he does not want real life "fairness".  He wants his brand of "fairness" forced upon all.  Man that sounds like real life politics these days. 

Edited by DocHolliday

Share this post


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

1. Ok, if you like. There is a ship limit, and they do not make a very good blockade. You can easily get around over or under them.

2. So your logic, anything less than a 500 member company is by default catering to smaller companies? Remember the point, stay on topic. The topic is still, lets get some changes that would balance out the large vs the small. I realize your agenda is to only get favorable treatment for mega companies.

3. Cool story bro? Yeah we know season 1 was fucked. Allies of allies hitting other allies of allies, kinda creates more friction and stratification. Kinda exactly what I want. The little companies are already at the worst disadvantage in every aspect as it is. It wont get worse to make it far more difficult to have 750 people in official alliances.

4. I still contend the ladder as it is, is a lame ass joke. I wasn't even aware it still existed. I have not heard a single person refer to it since season 1 ended.

5a. So you are flat out against fairness. Point blank. If it helps megas, lets do it. If its fair treatment, even a smidgen, then hell no. A 1st grader can look at that math and see the problem. This is the easiest and best first step that should be made to begin balancing companies. I can't possibly see how anyone could be against the overwhelming fairness of upkeep per person. 

5b. Personally I like 3. I said however, how many ships you COULD field, witch is currently 75. Although each company can make what, 300? You pick the number though, and run the math. It wont change the fact that even with 50, or hell 75 members, you wont get a bigger battles. The server will shut down. Keep in mind, I never wanted to ADD a penalty to being bigger. Just adjusting the numbers to balance being a small company with the large companies. 

 

Are you able to look at a situation and identify its flaws and inconsistencies? Or are you only able to view your own situation and how you can be bettered by it, reguardless of the cost to others?

-CS

1) 300 ships is more than enough to block out enemy boats, then you put pillars around the island so they can't get tames in and now you have tames and they don't.

2) My agenda is to make the game fair. Yours is to make decisions then want a handicap for them or a penalty for people that made good ones.

3) Actually the smaller companies have less stress if they play their cards right. If you are small and diplomatic it's pretty nice.

4) I think the ladder should count up enemy boats sunk, players killed, flags held, and flags taken. That is how I would quantify strength in PvP.

5a) The upkeep is maintaining all those boats, NPCs, Land, etc. More money more problems type things. Fair would be if every company was treated equal. This system would cause exclusion of casuals from companies if they arn't active daily. Which would hurt the playerbase. You are choosing to not have more people and believe the ones that do it should have a penalty...

5b) The server optimization is something that is being talked about in another thread. Basically too many things in a small area just ruins the user experience. There's a couple possible culprits but the bottom line big battles are not playable imo. As a group of 15 we did not want to field a galley because we could not man the support ships and the galley at the same time to use it effectively. The development team is either winging it or just takes steps towards an ultimate goal.

 

I see tons of flaws in the game. The main flaw I believe is lack of extreme consequences to cheaters. My situation is actually EU-PvE though I jump in and out of different situations in this game to see other ways to play 😄

~Lotus

Share this post


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

CS has clearly stated he does not want real life "fairness".  He wants his brand of "fairness" forced upon all.  Man that sounds like real life politics these days. 

king-joffrey.jpg.560x0_q71_crop-smart.jp

Fairness!

 

~Lotus

Share this post


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

I just read this article earlier. It had a quote from a guy that works in the gaming industry that talks about how dealing with the communities is like having a group of people that are all like King Joffrey from Game of Thrones. I kinda want to just start posting pictures of Joffrey now when people want stuff handed to them.

~Lotus

I read that article too.  They did it to themselves, most of them.    Game development used to be funded with the expectation that player sales would give a return on investment,  By the time a game is presented to paying players, it should have a business plan, a project plan, a defined theme and some structure in place for support and communications.  Many of them don't.   In an attempt to get as many bucks as possible, they've made the players the investors and pitch the game to as wide a market as possible to get the dollars flowing in.

When you charge people for a game, you can scream EA all you want, but if you haven't even defined your genre fully, have little to no support, and show no signs of any real plan to develop the game, then sure players are going to jump into that arguing for what's most important to them to try to influence direction and get attention to bugs and cheats.  Hell, sometimes we know so little about how elements in this game are actually supposed to work we can't tell if it's bad code or bad design we want to complain about.  There's no spec.  But we do complain and push our ideas about how the game should be.  I do it.  You do it too.  We're all Joffrey.  So if you're tempted to put his picture up, be sure to apply that to yourself as well.

Some companies don't do this.  If you buy Resident Evil, Civilization, or Grand Theft Auto, you know what those games are about and what the major features will be.  OTOH, if some company bills a game as

 The ultimate survival MMO of unprecedented scale with 40,000+ simultaneous players in the same world. Join an endless adventure of piracy & sailing, exploration & combat, roleplaying & progression, settlement & civilization-building, in one of the largest game worlds ever

So that's going to mean 100 different things to 100 different players.  And when some of them come in here wondering why the hell there's no piracy or roleplaying, or civilization building in the game,  and why people keep saying that  statement means the game is built specifically for mega guilds,  it's pretty unfair in that context to say the players are acting like King Joffrey.  The problem is that the development is acting like they're flying by the seat of their pants, and it's pretty clear by now that there is not some grand design that handles all this, because nobody has ever said so in any coherent and formal way to the playerbase.      Gaming communities are normally pretty rambunctious, but when you try to pull something like this on them they get crazed.  They don't have to give every individual person exactly what they want, but they DO have to spell out what it is they are going to give and how they expect it to work.

If you don't want to deal with King Joffrey,  a dev team acting like responsible professional adults who communicate fully with the players goes a long way toward preventing that.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I read that article too.  They did it to themselves, most of them.    Game development used to be funded with the expectation that player sales would give a return on investment,  By the time a game is presented to paying players, it should have a business plan, a project plan, a defined theme and some structure in place for support and communications.  Many of them don't.   In an attempt to get as many bucks as possible, they've made the players the investors and pitch the game to as wide a market as possible to get the dollars flowing in.

When you charge people for a game, you can scream EA all you want, but if you haven't even defined your genre fully, have little to no support, and show no signs of any real plan to develop the game, then sure players are going to jump into that arguing for what's most important to them to try to influence direction and get attention to bugs and cheats.  Hell, sometimes we know so little about how elements in this game are actually supposed to work we can't tell if it's bad code or bad design we want to complain about.  There's no spec.  But we do complain and push our ideas about how the game should be.  I do it.  You do it too.  We're all Joffrey.  So if you're tempted to put his picture up, be sure to apply that to yourself as well.

Some companies don't do this.  If you buy Resident Evil, Civilization, or Grand Theft Auto, you know what those games are about and what the major features will be.  OTOH, if some company bills a game as

 The ultimate survival MMO of unprecedented scale with 40,000+ simultaneous players in the same world. Join an endless adventure of piracy & sailing, exploration & combat, roleplaying & progression, settlement & civilization-building, in one of the largest game worlds ever

So that's going to mean 100 different things to 100 different players.  And when some of them come in here wondering why the hell there's no piracy or roleplaying, or civilization building in the game,  and why people keep saying that  statement means the game is built specifically for mega guilds,  it's pretty unfair in that context to say the players are acting like King Joffrey.  The problem is that the development is acting like they're flying by the seat of their pants, and it's pretty clear by now that there is not some grand design that handles all this, because nobody has ever said so in any coherent and formal way to the playerbase.      Gaming communities are normally pretty rambunctious, but when you try to pull something like this on them they get crazed.  They don't have to give every individual person exactly what they want, but they DO have to spell out what it is they are going to give and how they expect it to work.

If you don't want to deal with King Joffrey,  a dev team acting like responsible professional adults who communicate fully with the players goes a long way toward preventing that.

We still meme about the Polar Dungeon being released in the February update, that was named the March Megaupdate, that was released in April, that didn't have the Polar Dungeon. That was May... The Kraken 2.0 was lackluster it looked cool but was trivial. Polar Dungeon looked awesome but was really underwhelming. We did Polar with 12-15 people on our first kill.

When the announce anything they get criticized by the community. So if they announce something then they change their mind they get criticized for no reason. I would release information as little as possible. June update for instance... people are like yay cat or oh stupid cat... so lets say they don't release the cat because people thought it was stupid. Now the people that were excited are mad. I don't forsee them not putting the cat in but they had that bank flag repairhouse that was going to replace claims at one point which some people still think is the best idea ever but because they didn't put it in the people are now like...

tmg-article_default_mobile.jpg

 

~Lotus

Share this post


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

We still meme about the Polar Dungeon being released in the February update, that was named the March Megaupdate, that was released in April, that didn't have the Polar Dungeon. That was May... The Kraken 2.0 was lackluster it looked cool but was trivial. Polar Dungeon looked awesome but was really underwhelming. We did Polar with 12-15 people on our first kill.

When the announce anything they get criticized by the community. So if they announce something then they change their mind they get criticized for no reason. I would release information as little as possible. June update for instance... people are like yay cat or oh stupid cat... so lets say they don't release the cat because people thought it was stupid. Now the people that were excited are mad. I don't forsee them not putting the cat in but they had that bank flag repairhouse that was going to replace claims at one point which some people still think is the best idea ever but because they didn't put it in the people are now like...

tmg-article_default_mobile.jpg

 

~Lotus

I'm talking about bigger picture stuff than whether there's a cat in the June update.  Some details about what elements of mmorpgs they want to include and what aspects of survival they want to include.  Crafting -  important and a big deal or no?  Taming important and a big deal or no?   Their sales pitch didn't include any mention of it being a territorial conquering game, and yet that was their first real emphasis.  If I know a game doesn't contain the elements I like, I don't play it, and vice versa.  I bought this game because it looked like it might contain some of the elements I like.  It's been out 6 months and I STILL don't know if those are supposed to be in the game or not.  Would be nice if someone provided some direction, but I suspect they can't because they are making it up as they go along.

You don't see people jumping on the Civ forums complaining that there are no dungeons, because they know it's not part of that game.  This game?  From the description and some of the things that have implemented/unimplemented we have no idea what it's intended to be, so everyone complains about everything they don't like.  Direction and information dials down the noise.  Cats?  Not so much.

Share this post


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

I'm talking about bigger picture stuff than whether there's a cat in the June update.  Some details about what elements of mmorpgs they want to include and what aspects of survival they want to include.  Crafting -  important and a big deal or no?  Taming important and a big deal or no?   Their sales pitch didn't include any mention of it being a territorial conquering game, and yet that was their first real emphasis.  If I know a game doesn't contain the elements I like, I don't play it, and vice versa.  I bought this game because it looked like it might contain some of the elements I like.  It's been out 6 months and I STILL don't know if those are supposed to be in the game or not.  Would be nice if someone provided some direction, but I suspect they can't because they are making it up as they go along.

You don't see people jumping on the Civ forums complaining that there are no dungeons, because they know it's not part of that game.  This game?  From the description and some of the things that have implemented/unimplemented we have no idea what it's intended to be, so everyone complains about everything they don't like.  Direction and information dials down the noise.  Cats?  Not so much.

The game is marketed as a sandbox where you claim land and then work to keep it. Which removes Ark's crap pillar spam system. The claims are a stepping stone for the other content.

 

So from what I read this game is basically going to be build a colony. They want you to essentially team up with people and work on making a sandbox colony with pirate themes. If you can't maintain it then your colony dies. Your colony will be part of a civilization. Your colony has a government with it's own set of rules people that break the rules get exiled 😄

We will have raid content to go farm for loot. We will have exploration treasure types as well as extremely rare resources. We can go get all kinds of special tames. The game also has survival aspects you have to respect while you are doing all this. Major sea encounters that they will set grids under special rules while this massive event happens (I imagined for PvE and PvP). We will get dailies that we can do for some lucrative rewards.

That is what I can think of off the top of my head that I heard of from what I consider a reliable source.

 

So when I see some of the changes I look at what was promised and then look how it would play out. I will use the claim system as an example. If you tried to have a city set up on the old claim system you would run into problems of people taking a piece of the island then it just gets complex on how to sort things out especially if you want events to happen in the city. So with the whole island claim you now have a governed island that you can binary say this is where this island sits as far as a colony that you can then have it be part of a more major form of government system. Not well half the island wants this the other wants it this way. This leads to each island having laws made by players which could add a cool dynamic to the game.

Also is that a no on cats? 😛

~Lotus

 

Share this post


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

The game is marketed as a sandbox where you claim land and then work to keep it. Which removes Ark's crap pillar spam system. The claims are a stepping stone for the other content.

 

So from what I read this game is basically going to be build a colony. They want you to essentially team up with people and work on making a sandbox colony with pirate themes. If you can't maintain it then your colony dies. Your colony will be part of a civilization. Your colony has a government with it's own set of rules people that break the rules get exiled 😄

We will have raid content to go farm for loot. We will have exploration treasure types as well as extremely rare resources. We can go get all kinds of special tames. The game also has survival aspects you have to respect while you are doing all this. Major sea encounters that they will set grids under special rules while this massive event happens (I imagined for PvE and PvP). We will get dailies that we can do for some lucrative rewards.

That is what I can think of off the top of my head that I heard of from what I consider a reliable source.

 

So when I see some of the changes I look at what was promised and then look how it would play out. I will use the claim system as an example. If you tried to have a city set up on the old claim system you would run into problems of people taking a piece of the island then it just gets complex on how to sort things out especially if you want events to happen in the city. So with the whole island claim you now have a governed island that you can binary say this is where this island sits as far as a colony that you can then have it be part of a more major form of government system. Not well half the island wants this the other wants it this way. This leads to each island having laws made by players which could add a cool dynamic to the game.

Also is that a no on cats? 😛

~Lotus

 

That's a great example of how the game marketing means something different to everyone and is not specific enough for players to know if it has the elements they want to see in a game.  Everyone who buys it has an expectation colored by their own background and what they'd like to see.

 The ultimate survival MMO of unprecedented scale with 40,000+ simultaneous players in the same world. Join an endless adventure of piracy & sailing, exploration & combat, roleplaying & progression, settlement & civilization-building, in one of the largest game worlds ever

There's nothing in there about claims or Ark or pillar spam or raids or tames.  These are the things YOU expect because your frame of reference includes Ark and "reliable sources". Your average player cruising Steam for something interesting to play won't assume the same things about the game.  If their background is ESO and LiF, they're going to assume something different.   You've taken your assumptions about the game and driven them pretty far down the road, imagining exactly how claims need to work and colonies need to work, and everyone one else does that too, all in their own directions, leading to people stating with an air of authority that "this game is not for you" or that this game "is meant to have something or other" and if someone else doesn't like it, they should just leave.  But none of that is true, really.  

So they cast a wide net and scoop up all these different people for EA with different expectations, and they never really tell any of them what the grand design is and what it's not, and we find out a few bits of things along the way, some of which are true and some that aren't.

Jat says tames aren't going to be important in the game.  The game makes tames a feature of mega releases and they become the meta for maps and mats.

Sailing and ships, which were one of the more reasonable expectations, don't get a lot of focus.

A mega update is billed as having a focus on small groups and solos, but it doesn't.

These are the things that confuse the community and convince them that the devs are leaving the design up to the players and the squeaky wheels are getting the grease.    (Along with constant hints from some players of having secret personal meetings with the developers that no one else is privy to)  Everyone either leaves or becomes a squeaky wheel.    And the community gets blamed for squeaking.

It's not a good environment.  There's always going to be discussion and disagreement over game features, but the more specific that gets, the more productive it gets.  If the devs had provided a basic framework for the design saying that there would eventually be cities with governments, the whole claim discussion would have been different...and better, knowing it needed to fit into that.  But still...until the whole government design comes out in a Captain's log, it's just something some player is saying, no matter how much authority they project in saying it.    They need to tell everyone where the game is going and get our feedback on the details of how that gets accomplished, rather than letting us continue to squabble over what kind of game it's supposed to be.

 

I like cats.  I don't like cats whose only function is to allow plague rats for pvp servers because it's just another example of expectations being unmet.  (If you put up pve servers, pve players expect to be better than 2nd class citizens)  How many mega updates have to go by before a casual small group pve player gets something interesting in one?  The cargo racks were exciting until we found out how they worked.  😁

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

That's a great example of how the game marketing means something different to everyone and is not specific enough for players to know if it has the elements they want to see in a game.  Everyone who buys it has an expectation colored by their own background and what they'd like to see.

 The ultimate survival MMO of unprecedented scale with 40,000+ simultaneous players in the same world. Join an endless adventure of piracy & sailing, exploration & combat, roleplaying & progression, settlement & civilization-building, in one of the largest game worlds ever

There's nothing in there about claims or Ark or pillar spam or raids or tames.  These are the things YOU expect because your frame of reference includes Ark and "reliable sources". Your average player cruising Steam for something interesting to play won't assume the same things about the game.  If their background is ESO and LiF, they're going to assume something different.   You've taken your assumptions about the game and driven them pretty far down the road, imagining exactly how claims need to work and colonies need to work, and everyone one else does that too, all in their own directions, leading to people stating with an air of authority that "this game is not for you" or that this game "is meant to have something or other" and if someone else doesn't like it, they should just leave.  But none of that is true, really.  

So they cast a wide net and scoop up all these different people for EA with different expectations, and they never really tell any of them what the grand design is and what it's not, and we find out a few bits of things along the way, some of which are true and some that aren't.

Jat says tames aren't going to be important in the game.  The game makes tames a feature of mega releases and they become the meta for maps and mats.

Sailing and ships, which were one of the more reasonable expectations, don't get a lot of focus.

A mega update is billed as having a focus on small groups and solos, but it doesn't.

These are the things that confuse the community and convince them that the devs are leaving the design up to the players and the squeaky wheels are getting the grease.    (Along with constant hints from some players of having secret personal meetings with the developers that no one else is privy to)  Everyone either leaves or becomes a squeaky wheel.    And the community gets blamed for squeaking.

It's not a good environment.  There's always going to be discussion and disagreement over game features, but the more specific that gets, the more productive it gets.  If the devs had provided a basic framework for the design saying that there would eventually be cities with governments, the whole claim discussion would have been different...and better, knowing it needed to fit into that.  But still...until the whole government design comes out in a Captain's log, it's just something some player is saying, no matter how much authority they project in saying it.    They need to tell everyone where the game is going and get our feedback on the details of how that gets accomplished, rather than letting us continue to squabble over what kind of game it's supposed to be.

 

I like cats.  I don't like cats whose only function is to allow plague rats for pvp servers because it's just another example of expectations being unmet.  (If you put up pve servers, pve players expect to be better than 2nd class citizens)  How many mega updates have to go by before a casual small group pve player gets something interesting in one?  The cargo racks were exciting until we found out how they worked.  😁

@Winter Thorne

The government system has been declared in 2 instances. The first time I encountered it was with an interview of the lead game designer or something like that can't remember his title basically he explained how you get land and write laws or you build on land and follow them, I especially liked the part if you don't follow the laws you become an outlaw and then live in lawless (Which at that time was an actual penalty). The second time I encountered it is when I read the WHOLE steam page. Basically it's saying you get to build a city and be governor of your territory eventually it evolves into being part of a player ran civilization or they will have some NPC crap we have to follow it's open ended at that point. I am going to trust both those documents as what is officially planned.

(Here is some opinion) Tames are something that Wildcard/Grapeshot teams understand more than programming water. They are the safety zone for content when they can't push meaningful content out. Why can't they do that? I believe the unreal engine is not able to handle what they want to do. This puts a huge problem on the table for grapeshot because changing the game from unreal could fix a lot of problems but at that point they are basically scrapping all the work they have done. How do they announce that to the players/employees/shareholders without causing everybody to just bail? Here's content it's a turtle that doubles as a submarine! I mean if the camelphant could bail water out of your boat it would be useful like a super bucket, but then we are focusing on tames which was not supposed to be the point. -_-

(Here is more opinion) Grapeshot does infact listen to ideas from it's playerbase (They just don't respond to everything). Listening and doing something is entirely different. There was a guy that wanted us to be able to tame whales... They could do that easily. That does not line up with the vision or does it?

(Opinion again) The cats also catch mice that will protect you and I believe animals from the plague. I hate using Ark as a reference but it's basically going to be a machops getting you leeches to prevent swamp fever.

~Lotus

Share this post


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

(Here is some opinion) Tames are something that Wildcard/Grapeshot teams understand more than programming water. They are the safety zone for content when they can't push meaningful content out. Why can't they do that? I believe the unreal engine is not able to handle what they want to do.

So. Tames are the only thing they know how to do, and so we have no choice but to deal with this shit?

Get rid of the fkin tames altogether already.

Also, i think they might be taking the wrong approach to handle UE4 (to say something other than that they're too stupid to do it right).

Why do you think the game runs like shit on a high end modern gaming PC?

Is it because some brilliant genius started meddling with the shaders instead of using UE4's material approach (like the UE4 creators intended)?

I say yes, yes it is.

Are the players running away in droves because nobody on the team has any idea on how to do proper game design and balance?

That's a strong possibility right there.

Are tames and NPC disappearing from ships because they are using the physics engine to do things that physics engines were never meant to do?

Probably.

 

So, to sum it up, it is not the UE4 that is incapable of doing what the devs want.

It is the devs lacking the required competence to do the things they want in UE4.

Or just the devs outright wanting all the wrong things to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, user1 said:

So. Tames are the only thing they know how to do, and so we have no choice but to deal with this shit?

Get rid of the fkin tames altogether already.

Also, i think they might be taking the wrong approach to handle UE4 (to say something other than that they're too stupid to do it right).

Why do you think the game runs like shit on a high end modern gaming PC?

Is it because some brilliant genius started meddling with the shaders instead of using UE4's material approach (like the UE4 creators intended)?

I say yes, yes it is.

Are the players running away in droves because nobody on the team has any idea on how to do proper game design and balance?

That's a strong possibility right there.

Are tames and NPC disappearing from ships because they are using the physics engine to do things that physics engines were never meant to do?

Probably.

 

So, to sum it up, it is not the UE4 that is incapable of doing what the devs want.

It is the devs lacking the required competence to do the things they want in UE4.

Or just the devs outright wanting all the wrong things to begin with.

The game is still early access so where should they learn to play with the different settings?

 

Also players are leaving for different reasons. We currently have no content so we are doing different games again.

~Lotus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, user1 said:

So. Tames are the only thing they know how to do, and so we have no choice but to deal with this shit?

Get rid of the fkin tames altogether already.

 

Please name the game you've played where the development team removed a major component of the game, one representing significant investment of development resources, from the game altogether at a minority of it's playerbases behest? 

You don't like tames, we get it. Plenty of folks here do.

Demanding they remove them is neither realistic nor considerate of your fellow players, many of whom enjoy this aspect of the game.

Should tames be the focus of Atlas?  The answer is subjective, but I would tend to argue they should not.

But there is a big difference between making something not the focus and removing it completely.

Stop table flipping like a child and be realistic.

Share this post


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

Please name the game you've played where the development team removed a major component of the game, one representing significant investment of development resources, from the game altogether at a minority of it's playerbases behest? 

You don't like tames, we get it. Plenty of folks here do.

Demanding they remove them is neither realistic nor considerate of your fellow players, many of whom enjoy this aspect of the game.

Should tames be the focus of Atlas?  The answer is subjective, but I would tend to argue they should not.

But there is a big difference between making something not the focus and removing it completely.

Stop table flipping like a child and be realistic.

Diablo 3... and look at how amazing that game is now... and it's release... .... I made myself sad 😞

Tames should be a feature that people can pursue if they want. That is the point of a sandbox game to do things they want with no THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY!!!

 

2 hours ago, user1 said:

So. Tames are the only thing they know how to do, and so we have no choice but to deal with this shit?

Get rid of the fkin tames altogether already.

Also, i think they might be taking the wrong approach to handle UE4 (to say something other than that they're too stupid to do it right).

Why do you think the game runs like shit on a high end modern gaming PC?

Is it because some brilliant genius started meddling with the shaders instead of using UE4's material approach (like the UE4 creators intended)?

I say yes, yes it is.

Are the players running away in droves because nobody on the team has any idea on how to do proper game design and balance?

That's a strong possibility right there.

Are tames and NPC disappearing from ships because they are using the physics engine to do things that physics engines were never meant to do?

Probably.

 

So, to sum it up, it is not the UE4 that is incapable of doing what the devs want.

It is the devs lacking the required competence to do the things they want in UE4.

Or just the devs outright wanting all the wrong things to begin with.

I also forgot to add this earlier.

Joffrey---we-will-never-s-010.jpg?width=

~Lotus

Share this post


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

Diablo 3... and look at how amazing that game is now... and it's release... .... I made myself sad 😞

Tames should be a feature that people can pursue if they want. That is the point of a sandbox game to do things they want with no THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY!!!

 

I also forgot to add this earlier.

Joffrey---we-will-never-s-010.jpg?width=

~Lotus

Didn't play Diablo 3 so I couldn't comment, but the obvious point would be that such a thing would be a rare exception indeed, rather than the rule. I agree that tames should not be incorporated into the game in such a way that declining to use them is an extreme hinderance, however, there is a difference between pointing this out reasonably and table flipping early in the development process and demanding ones wishes be accomodated NAO!

Something there seems to be quite a bit of around here.

Share this post


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

@Winter Thorne

The government system has been declared in 2 instances. The first time I encountered it was with an interview ....

You keep talking about what you know about the game while I'm talking about what our average new player encountering the game on Steam knows about the game.  This is not about you.   Statements that a dev throws out during an interview are not communications to the community or potential buyers and they're not design specs.

The stuff about civilizations, etc. on the steam page is very general but it sounds great.  So a new player sees that, expects that, gets in the game and where is it?  It's all full island claims and mega companies.  Maybe they wait through 3 Mega Updates for news on it and nope...taming and end game bosses.  Where's the communication on the design direction for what should be a major feature?  My **opinion** is that they consider they've already given us this with companies and claims, and if they do expand it, it'll all be based on companies anyway so it won't be much different.  Still..who knows?  They say nothing about it.

 

5 hours ago, Lotus said:

(Here is more opinion) Grapeshot does infact listen to ideas from it's playerbase (They just don't respond to everything). Listening and doing something is entirely different. There was a guy that wanted us to be able to tame whales... They could do that easily. That does not line up with the vision or does it?

(Opinion again) The cats also catch mice that will protect you and I believe animals from the plague. I hate using Ark as a reference but it's basically going to be a machops getting you leeches to prevent swamp fever.

That's exactly my point.  If they communicated their vision, people wouldn't be wasting time and having arguments over things that aren't in it.  The noise level would go way down, which would help everyone.  Until they do that, people are going to complain and suggest all kinds of things.  (Also, taming whales isn't really part of some "vision". It's a tid bit detail in a game. Vision is an overall plan for a game..taming is part of the vision.  Taming ants is a detail.)

Oh, so the cats may apply to pve then.  In a terrible way.  Great.  If what you say is true, for people who don't like taming it's another mandatory taming task and another addition that's all stick and no carrot.  Cripes.  Note to devs:  If everything added to the game is going to be endgame bosses and taming, please let us know right now.  Some of us had hopes of other stuff.

 

Share this post


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

You keep talking about what you know about the game while I'm talking about what our average new player encountering the game on Steam knows about the game.  This is not about you.   Statements that a dev throws out during an interview are not communications to the community or potential buyers and they're not design specs.

The stuff about civilizations, etc. on the steam page is very general but it sounds great.  So a new player sees that, expects that, gets in the game and where is it?  It's all full island claims and mega companies.  Maybe they wait through 3 Mega Updates for news on it and nope...taming and end game bosses.  Where's the communication on the design direction for what should be a major feature?  My **opinion** is that they consider they've already given us this with companies and claims, and if they do expand it, it'll all be based on companies anyway so it won't be much different.  Still..who knows?  They say nothing about it.

 

That's exactly my point.  If they communicated their vision, people wouldn't be wasting time and having arguments over things that aren't in it.  The noise level would go way down, which would help everyone.  Until they do that, people are going to complain and suggest all kinds of things.  (Also, taming whales isn't really part of some "vision". It's a tid bit detail in a game. Vision is an overall plan for a game..taming is part of the vision.  Taming ants is a detail.)

Oh, so the cats may apply to pve then.  In a terrible way.  Great.  If what you say is true, for people who don't like taming it's another mandatory taming task and another addition that's all stick and no carrot.  Cripes.  Note to devs:  If everything added to the game is going to be endgame bosses and taming, please let us know right now.  Some of us had hopes of other stuff.

 

(Joke) I want my laws! I will make a law that everybody must have a monkey with a hat or they will be hung by the neck until dead!

(Serious face, might also be a joke 🙂) The problem is the viewpoint. We are basically unpaid beta testers. ( @JatheishI wouldn't mind being a paid internal tester 😉 I am in Washington😛 ) I look at the game as being a few years for development and the Kraken is the boss for level 1 not some endgame stuff but currently because the game is like 10-20% done it is the endgame for now. Or they could just be the Leeroy Jenkins of gaming companies just like YOLO and see how things turn out 😄

(Real serious face) Games have stages and so one department might be ahead of another so they go work on another project. Stabilizing the server is not something a graphic artist would do so they have that guy work on something else. Which is why we can get tames but not boats because right now the boats have a lot of problems the problem isn't the boat itself it's the interaction with the foundation of the game. Which is the same guy that would fix the tiles deleting themselves I think.

~Lotus

Share this post


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

(Real serious face) Games have stages and so one department might be ahead of another so they go work on another project. Stabilizing the server is not something a graphic artist would do so they have that guy work on something else. Which is why we can get tames but not boats because right now the boats have a lot of problems the problem isn't the boat itself it's the interaction with the foundation of the game. Which is the same guy that would fix the tiles deleting themselves I think.

~Lotus

Gee, really?  Who would have thought that?  😛  

I've not been talking about what they release or the order things get worked on.  I'm talking about communicating the overall design to the community.  You know if they did that, and the players knew what was coming and liked the direction, nobody would be saying, "Oh, look a Mega Cat and the plague.  Thanks." because they'd be in it for the eventual goodies.

As far as we know, there aren't any eventual goodies, and this IS the design plan, and it's a cat, and new hats for penguins, and everybody has to tame a snail next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Devs listened to the wrong playerbase. Now they are stuck with a dead game. 

Or maybe they are stupid enough to believe the masses are waiting to play a game tailored for the Ark pve taming zerg.

Either way it's pretty much a done deal. IT is going nowhere at this point 

Edited by Back Stabbath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 11:32 AM, Harryplopper said:

Again this is Atlas not any of those other games is the same. This game was designed to be group against group action. You want solo go play fortnite with the other kiddies. 

really Shadowbane was design the same way but yet still managed to have enough content for those that didnt partake...

Mortal Online and Darkfall online were both RvR which are some pretty big group vs group, but yet they still figured out how to put in content that worked for the individual...

Pull the stick out of your arse!!!  Kiddo!!!  Sorry if the games I name are too old for you to have ever played.....

 

This game originally tried to market itself as an MMORPG!!!!  News flash Rust and Ark are Not MMORPG's they are Griefer games just like Atlas is currently.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/12/2019 at 11:56 AM, Lotus said:

 

As for Grapeshot, what exactly was promised? The problem is what the definition for Grapeshot and what the definition for each player is different.

 

~Lotus

I don't know maybe the Email I got saying 

Come back and Enjoy the new Mega Patch with a New Server Designed for Small groups and Cooperative game play!!!!  <----  Thats what the damned email said.

I came back and they did a freaking BAIT and SWITCH

 

Also right here in this Official New Update!

Colonies PvP: Freeform building, with more progress-protecting and time-enforced PvP rules creating a cooperative atmosphere, and limits to ensure the game is more oriented towards single players and small to mid-sized groups. We’ll have two official networks available for this mode, one in Europe and one in North America. 

Edited by Sulfurblade
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 3:41 AM, Willard said:

So basically you want endgame bosses and endgame content to be soloable right? 

You will NEVER do endgame content in any MMO solo, never. You will always need to interact with other players. Just like in Atlas. You either form a company or alliance, thats how it goes.

I don't want End game content at all "End Game Content" "Boss's" 

Are buzz words created bye World of Warcraft and the Generation of Gamers that have no idea what a game was before the:

Dungeon

End Game Content and Boss's and Dungeons is just more of the same WoW CRAP that has infested the MMORPG Genre for the last 15 years!!!

I don't want any of that shit....

I want an Economy that works!

I want a Vibrant Trading and Bartering System with Vendors that work!

I want an entertaining Crafting system with Professions that matter and players who are not a Jack of all trades!

NON Instanced Housing, where your home is your castle and your safe place!  If you can't be safe at your house where can you be safe!

I want Law and Order and Lawless zones not the current Chaos system we currently have!

 

Basically I want a Sandbox MMORPG akin to Ultima Online or SWG, for those of you old enough to have actually played them!  Its a far easier explanation!

I want to go back to a time BEFORE WOW screwed up the entire MMORPG Genre with its THEMEPARK crap!!!

A time when EVERYONE mattered inside of the Sandbox!

The PK who hunted the Crafters, The Crafters who created the Tools and Weapons, The Adventurers who explored, the Hero's who killed the PK's 

When your reputation in a game was everything!  And the Moment you killed someone everyone else knew about it and knew NOT TO TRUST YOU...

 

  • 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  

×