boomervoncannon

Given that the game provides handcuffs, gibbets, cages and hanging nooses, and given that it’s a game about piracy, a practice which has historically been linked to slavery, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say slavery is fine. My Ark tribe used to clothe me in Pink Chitin armor as a joke while logged out based on my well known disdain for the uselessness of it. It reached the point of hide and seek and we all had fun with it. I too, took it like a man.

Okay, but here’s my counterpoint. I agree that in pve especially, this an urgent game breaking exploit that interferes with players ability to experience the adventure the devs say they want us to have. Given that Jats comments in obliquely addressing it in his musings failed to convey seriousness or a sense of urgency about what is argueably one of the biggest player experience ruining aspects of the game in its current state, continuing to drive home the point that this isn’t something to just be laughed off and joked about while getting around to addressing it eventually by making new threads is imo perfectly fine under the circumstances. Under other circumstances I’d call it beating a dead horse, but atm the beating seems warranted. As always ymmv.

There is no way to remove a leader and it’s doubtful there ever will beyond inactivity. This is the standard in this genre and it’s for good reasons to prevent exploits the opposite way. With clan leaders the Latin “caveat emptor” let the buyer beware, should always apply. Don’t join someone’s clan on their words. Get to know them first sand judge them over time on their actions. Question, if the 20 players all quit and form their own company, where will this leave the leader?

I think the Op is making a point. I also appreciate that he’s making that point more elegantly than table flipping all caps rants, of which we see much and more here. It may indeed get fixed, but when you log into Atlas it doesn’t say say “Welcome to the adventure of a lifetime we hope to be able to provide you in 2 years. Please enjoy the music while you wait.” Maybe it should.

If they haven’t been fixed yet in Ark after that 3-5 year time frame, is it reasonable to assume they ever will be fixed here or there, or is the more reasonable assumption based on existing evidence that they are unlikely to be addressed at any point?

Removing a leader is a bit like getting in the car with a drunk driver. The only real way to deal with it is to exercise good judgement beforehand and not join someone you’re not sure of. You can always just leave the company and reform without him, but this is going to have costs and consequences, a bit like deciding once you realize the driver is drunk that it’s better to take your chances getting out of the car at a stoplight and finding another way home.

My narrow minded comment was meant in jest. Sorry if that didn’t convey.

I think what you’re saying here and your use of the terms beta and EA interchangeably brings up an important but mostly overlooked point. I don’t think these terms should be used interchangeably because there is a qualitative difference. Traditionally, people did not pay to participate in betas. They were free. The thing that troubles me about the use of EA as a catchall explanation or answer to every complaint is the implication that in EA players have no right or reason to much of anything beyond a minimally playable game. Not to pick on Percival, but I have seen him make the direct statement in answer to complaints about internal testing that the devs have four test servers, and then list the officials. What I find troubling about this position is the idea we should only view ourselves as beta testers. I’m sorry, but the minute I pay for something my expectation is going to be that the thing I paid for is in a developed state beyond that seen in previous games during free beta testing phases. I don’t think this is an unreasonable expectation on my part and in Atlas’s case I think it would be hard for a reasonable person to argue with a straight face that this what I have been provided in exchange for my $25. Dont misunderstand me, I am perfectly fine with EA as a tool for small indie studios because I think it provides them an avenue to offer innovative design to the gaming public without having to make so many compromises to secure funding otherwise. Given the pile of cash Atlas’s developers are sitting on from the success of Ark, I do question whether EA is an appropriate avenue for them to be utilizing at all. Im also fine with paying a discounted price early with the trade off being the game is unfinished. However to me a line should be drawn somewhere between unfinished and a state comparable to free betas of the past. It seems that this the crux of a difference in perspective between groups of players that derisively label each other “kids” “millennials” “fanboys” “white knights” “haters” etc etc. These labels do little except allow these groups to dismiss each other without having to confront legitimate points on both sides. I think a far more productive use of EVERYONES time would be engaging in a fair minded discussion of where that line should be and what we as gamers should reasonably expect from gaming studios when they release an EA product. We could do that, or we could all just sit here and call each other names. Unlike kindergarten, I don’t think we’re going to get snack time later if we do, but the Mods will definitely hand out Time Outs.

So wrong and yet so hilarious. Assuming he isn’t a masochist who enjoys playing games he hates is very narrow minded of you. #masochistgamersmatter

I tend to agree. I would have liked to see them pursue something more like Ark’s immersive taming mod. I’d even say the zoology mod, but I think that would be too in depth for a game where the developers have stated tames aren’t the intended focus. Regardless the existing mechanic doesn’t impress me much.

No it’s not. buchenwald was also a well known concentration camp. Just ask yourself what’s the likelihood that the company in question named the boat after the German word for beech tree vs naming it after the far more widely known and provactive use of that word as the name of a place where people were systematically butchered becasuse of their heritage. Insisting we pretend it might be the former when we all know based on common knowledge it’s the latter is the part that’s silly. Fortunately, this whole arguement is moot. I for one am entirely comfortable letting the Op report this under the code of conduct and leaving it to the GM’s to sort out, which is as it should be. As a side note would anyone care to wager dubloons with me as to whether the GM’s will rule the name is just the German word for beech tree and therefore not offensive? No?

Again, no one is saying your arguements about the mechanic are bad, just that what the Op is arguing is about their morality, while your stated arguement seems to be about whether they are good or bad from a gameplay perspective. Your reply broadens the argument to include things no one commented on like rain or immersion. If you want to discuss those specific aspects of the game feel free to join or create threads doing so, but that is clearly not what this thread is about. Also please don’t strawman me by implying I’m defending things I haven’t commented on.

1. If you’re viewing the upcoming mechanics as your character dying and losing them forever, then based on the description provided I would say you’re being intentionally excessively literal. Yes your character technically dies, but everything about that character which matters gameplay wise will be transferred into another another character and indications imply that the only changes to the new character will be given name and appearance, and doubtless appearance you will be able to set like a new character, so keeping it the same if you wish. 2. Across the gaming industry the degree of control a player has over their characters appearance varies greatly. Some games offer no appearance customization whatsoever, others offer breathing taking levels of appearance customization (my first MMO City of Heroes comes to mind). Some are in a middle ground where appearance is based on gear and therefore while a player technically has control, the practical reality is that exercising that control can come at the expense of gameplay effectiveness. This leads me to the following point: yes, all other things being equal most players want as much control over their characters appearance as possible, but having that control isn’t paramount to most players as your statement implies. The proof of this is the many people willing to play games that grant low levels of appearance control. Many players would prioritize interesting new mechanics like the aging/breeding/legacy system that will be implemented here over complete character appearance control. I would be one of them. Regardless, the as yet implemented mechanics will be part of the game by all indications and I don’t believe that temper tantrums thrown on the forums by players who demand complete and utter control over appearance aspects are likely to change that.

Sorry, but I have zero concern over pixel abuse in an online game. If you’re going to sit here and claim it’s animal abuse and not pixel abuse, then that would call into question your ability to distinguish reality from gaming. That would make the more pertinent issue your mental health. Assuming that’s not the case, the only possibly valid point you might have would be the message sent to impressionable children. I agree completely withTobias that it is a parents responsibility to choose appropriate content for their children to be exposed to and then educate them properly on the difference between fantasy and reality. It is not the gaming industries job to pre sanitize everything they produce for the sake of child exposure and I resent any implication as an adult that all of my entertainment should be pre emptively censored (and make no mistake this is what the Op is arguing for) to make parental abdication of responsibility acceptable. @Scorpionshawn insulting people is unnecessary just because you disagree. Imo it is you who are missing the point. The Op is not commenting on the quality of the mechanic, but how he/she finds it morally objectionable. Whether the mechanic is a good one or not from a gameplay perspective is a separate issue.

You're either right or they completely overlooked an extremely simple to spot problem with a skill. I don't know for sure either way, but I'd be slightly more inclined to think you're right and when the tool tip text says only counts if a player hits you, what it really means is doesn't reduce torpor inflicted for non combat reasons like fatigue, dehydration etc.

That’s a rather disturbing report because with storms it’s often not possible to avoid them as cyclones continually reform.we’ve encountered them in the past and as you said it was mostly damage to players. I’d be inclined to take your approach in the future of just pulling in sails and repairing til it’s over. But this also raises the problem of anchored ships close to shore being hit while players are offline.

We put ours on a schooner and sloop but my partner did it so I wouldn’t want to tell you something and be wrong. Guessing anything besides raft and dinghy.

You buy them for gold from an npc vendor in Freeports.

Love it. Great twist on something unique to maritime life. Love that it’s rare but in the game. More stuff like this please. Dorothy Parker

I initially based in an eastern temperate lawless zone with snakes everywhere. I had piles of the stuff lying around.

Jat posts his own blog that he just started, and has already replied to comments on it. However, beyond that, two things imo: At this point in the development cycle you should not really want to see actual developers posting here. The first month of EA launch is an intense period of development and I suspect a lot of devs have mostly lived at their desks excepting Xmas and New Years since launch. They only have the same 24 hours in a day that we have, so time spent posting here is time not spent working on the game. Secondly, devs are devs because they have skill at coding. Many technically minded people are brilliant at it, but not brilliant at communication skills. They also have no professional background or training in communicating with and to a large diverse playerbase who all want different things. (I want Olivia Munn and Cheetos for example, why aren’t these things in the game yet?). I’d respectfully suggest that what would be better for all concerned would be an actual trained PR professional acting as liaison between the devs and the community. You know, the sort of thing smart game development teams have.

I’m in agreement that this would be a nice option to have as said sounds can be distracting and even annoying. Some may feel it adds to realism, but if I want the realism of listening to snoring I’ll just play video of Uncle Bob sawing logs in the recliner after Thanksgiving dinner, with the Dallas Cowgirls @#$&ing it up yet again blaring on the tv in the background. There’s some realism for ya. Obviously providing such an option could be low priority at this point in development, but something to put on a list.

Actually my advice would be go anywhere that has giant snakes in abundance, which would be anywhere that has giant snakes. You should shortly have it coming out your ears. Also the wiki specifically lists lions and tigers and wolves (oh my) as proficient farmers of keratanoid, while not listing elephants as such, so perhaps they are a bit better at it.

The dev kit was just released like...* looks at watch* ....ten minutes ago. So give the modders at least ten more minutes to get modding off the ground. *taps his foot impatiently waiting for his aircraft carrier mod*

Fiddled. Nero fiddled while Rome burned. The singing was done by Mick Jagger. I think. At least he’s the only singer I know of old enough to have been there. *hums a tune which might be Sympathy for the Devil, by the Rolling @#$&ing Stones. Then again it might be The Devil went down to Georgia, by Charlie @#$&ing Daniels. With Boomer it could be hard to tell.*