What We Want Matters!

[Tiberius_theron 99]

When you develop a game it's not really about what the developers want in the end. It's about what's actually going to make a profit. Hence, what the majority of your customer base wants. So I can tell you first hand, we don't want more than 1 ghost ship per map, and it shouldn't come ANYWHERE near islands. I can also tell you first hand, we want the original Skill System back. All players should be limited to a single claim, per map, with a maximum of 3 total!

 If you want to see your game successful, then these changes need to happen today!

[Goldfish The Builder 105]

What you want may not be what others want...

Orig skill system was way WAY too easy to cap out at very low levels.

Claim limits are ok, but upkeep would be better

Ghost ships are broken right now and I expect to see a balance update for them soon, but they are supposed to be a BIG pve threat so... but do need work

We will have many many months of early access, they cant push EVERYTHING out at drop of a hat

As a whole game is getting better and better, some things will take time though!

[Hackjob 57]

6 hours ago, Tiberius_theron said:

When you develop a game it's not really about what the developers want in the end. It's about what's actually going to make a profit. Hence, what the majority of your customer base wants. So I can tell you first hand, we don't want more than 1 ghost ship per map, and it shouldn't come ANYWHERE near islands. I can also tell you first hand, we want the original Skill System back. All players should be limited to a single claim, per map, with a maximum of 3 total!

 If you want to see your game successful, then these changes need to happen today!

I disagree , even though changes do need to be made to the game, changing stuff just because some people scream on a forum is not necessarily a good route. Developers don't need to make games that fits everyone's playstyle

 In my opinion as soon as you makes changes to satisfy everyone no one's every happy.   

*This statement doesn't necessarily reflect the changes you want but changes in general.

 

Also I'm laughing that you demand changes now lol. This will be a 2 year EA development process. Changes will happen but it will take time

[Sulfurblade 194]

Speak for yourself I am fine with the number of ghost ships!!!  

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

The Op’s core point is that without customers, no game succeeds. That shouldn’t get lost in debate over the merits of particular suggested changes or what percentage of the playerbase may or may not want those changes, because it is both crucial and fundamentally true. Right now there is an awful lot of evidence that many people are enormously unhappy. As someone who has created a thread discussing the ever changing nature of Early Access and advising those who don’t care for it to wait for official release, I’m obviously someone who favors a degree of patience with EA games. No one however, is required to share my patience, and if people aren’t having fun they shouldn’t play, since fun is the whole point, right?

The problem is if the devs offer a game state as part of the EA process that a majority of the playerbase don’t find fun and quit playing, then everything else becomes a moot point. Everyone saying this is part of EA, calm down (myself included) should keep this point in mind. It is entirely reasonable to say “Hey these changes make the game not fun anymore.” Now there is a rational mature way to make that point, and there is an angry  ragequiiter  profanity laced all caps way to express that. Take a wild guess which the devs are more likely to listen to. For the record the Op seems to be doing a reasonably good job of keeping it the former rather than the latter.

[Sulfurblade 194]

2 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

The Op’s core point is that without customers, no game succeeds. That shouldn’t get lost in debate over the merits of particular suggested changes or what percentage of the playerbase may or may not want those changes, because it is both crucial and fundamentally true. Right now there is an awful lot of evidence that many people are enormously unhappy. As someone who has created a thread discussing the ever changing nature of Early Access and advising those who don’t care for it to wait for official release, I’m obviously someone who favors a degree of patience with EA games. No one however, is required to share my patience, and if people aren’t having fun they shouldn’t play, since fun is the whole point, right?

The problem is if the devs offer a game state as part of the EA process that a majority of the playerbase don’t find fun and quit playing, then everything else becomes a moot point. Everyone saying this is part of EA, calm down (myself included) should keep this point in mind. It is entirely reasonable to say “Hey these changes make the game not fun anymore.” Now there is a rational mature way to make that point, and there is an angry  ragequiiter  profanity laced all caps way to express that. Take a wild guess which the devs are more likely to listen to. For the record the Op seems to be doing a reasonably good job of keeping it the former rather than the latter.

I would rather the OP speak for himself then decide what the masses feel about the game I am quite happy that there are now ghost ships out on the water keeping the Large Ships of the Zergs in check and sending them to davy jones locker...  this is good for the community because if the zergs can happily sail where ever they want with Galleons of Massive firepower with lots of cannons guess what there going to want to use them....  Your raft, target practice... Your home on the beach, target practice...  Your sloop sitting out in the open target practice....

 

Most of the poeple complaining are people who parked there ships willy nilly like without thinking about how to defend them.... If it wasnt the ghost ships it would have been the chinese who sank your ships instead....

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

4 minutes ago, Sulfurblade said:

I would rather the OP speak for himself then decide what the masses feel about the game I am quite happy that there are now ghost ships out on the water keeping the Large Ships of the Zergs in check and sending them to davy jones locker...  this is good for the community because if the zergs can happily sail where ever they want with Galleons of Massive firepower with lots of cannons guess what there going to want to use them....  Your raft, target practice... Your home on the beach, target practice...  Your sloop sitting out in the open target practice....

 

Most of the poeple complaining are people who parked there ships willy nilly like without thinking about how to defend them.... If it wasnt the ghost ships it would have been the chinese who sank your ships instead....

Okay but my point was don’t let debate over the merits of the Op’s complaints and suggestions obscure the core point about playerbase dissatisfaction. You proceeded to debate the merits of the OP’s complaints and ignore the core point. So let’s take a moment and examine how the Op’s core point applies to what you’ve said. I’ll even set aside obvious flaw in the logic of your point created when someone asks who is better equipped to handle the ghost ships and still go wherever they please, the Zerg or the small group?

So you like the ghost ships. Fine. Has it escaped your notice that many do not? atlas is already carrying a 29% review rating on steam over the launch debacle. Wildly unpopular skill system changes, ghost ships making the waters untraversable to all but a few, creature overspawns making inland exploration exasperating. It’s not exactly alarmist to ask how many more unpopular events will it take before the game hits a critical mass of players bailing and then who cares about ghost ships because almost no one is playing?

[Liljagare 2]

Well, what they did in DnL and PixArk killed the game and stopped future sales, making them no money. 

Where on earth is that a wise business idea? They literarly refused to listen to the point of killing the source of their income. 

 

That should worry customers, buyers and employees. It literarly makes no sense. 

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

Just now, Liljagare said:

Well, what they did in DnL and PixArk killed the game and stopped future sales, making them no money. 

Where on earth is that a wise business idea? They literarly refused to listen to the point of killing the source of their income. 

 

That should worry customers, buyers and employees. It literarly makes no sense. 

DNL and PixArk are Snail games but not Wildcard. The people who developed those games have nothing to do with Atlas.

[Sulfurblade 194]

2 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

Okay but my point was don’t let debate over the merits of the Op’s complaints and suggestions obscure the core point about playerbase dissatisfaction. You proceeded to debate the merits of the OP’s complaints and ignore the core point. So let’s take a moment and examine how the Op’s core point applies to what you’ve said. I’ll even set aside obvious flaw in the logic of your point created when someone asks who is better equipped to handle the ghost ships and still go wherever they please, the Zerg or the small group?

So you like the ghost ships. Fine. Has it escaped your notice that many do not? atlas is already carrying a 29% review rating on steam over the launch debacle. Wildly unpopular skill system changes, ghost ships making the waters untraversable to all but a few, creature overspawns making inland exploration exasperating. It’s not exactly alarmist to ask how many more unpopular events will it take before the game hits a critical mass of players bailing and then who cares about ghost ships because almost no one is playing?

 

The negative review's have nothing to do with the game play and everything to do with the technical issue's...  

They can't log in....

They get stuck on a server line...

There character got deleted....

I could go on and on here and most of these things have nothing to do with the gameplay itself.

The water is not untraversable rafts do not take aggro from ghost ships at all.  The issue here is the cool kids who didnt want to sail a raft and skipped to a sloop because in there mind its such an amazing upgrade over the raft is actually not...  They feel some sense of entitlement because they spent X hours, but they don't feel a thing when they wreck someone else's X hours!  Lets steal a Raft Instantly great idea they say!!!  But there sloop being blown up instantly gives them a sad face!!!  

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

Whether the reviews are about gameplay or not continues to miss the most fundamental point, which is that regardless of why, if people stop playing in large enough numbers the game dies and it’s all moot, and between all of the previously listed factors, that’s a nonzero risk right now. I’m not really sure how much more plainly I can state it. The cool kids in that context are not remotely the issue.

Edited December 27, 2018 by boomervoncannon

[Sulfurblade 194]

2 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

Whether the reviews are about gameplay or not continues to miss the most fundamental point, which is that regardless of why, if people stop playing in large enough numbers the game dies and it’s all moot, and between all of the previously listed factors, that’s a nonzero risk right now. I’m not really sure how much more plainly I can state it.

At this point if a bunch of people quite playing then the server will stabilize and likely the right people will stay you know the people that are willing to sail for hours, and appreciate added difficulty, etc...  Its not like the servers are a ghost town they are over populated and if we shed some dead weight that don't match up with the dev's vision of the game, who cares!

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

6 minutes ago, Sulfurblade said:

At this point if a bunch of people quite playing then the server will stabilize and likely the right people will stay you know the people that are willing to sail for hours, and appreciate added difficulty, etc...  Its not like the servers are a ghost town they are over populated and if we shed some dead weight that don't match up with the dev's vision of the game, who cares!

If that’s all that happens, I’m perfectly fine with it. All I’m saying is that there is a real risk that won’t be all that happens. I would love for this game to succeed, because I think it has enormous potential, but these developers have a track record of having great ideas and then executing those ideas poorly. I sincerely hope that doesn’t lead to failure with Atlas. Just because something is popular at the moment doesn’t mean it can’t die fast.  Also the devs vision at the end of the day has to be compatible with what enough people want to keep the game afloat. Me and you by ourselves can’t do it.

Edited December 27, 2018 by boomervoncannon