Ellentro

Not really. Wildcard isn't like a typical company. 5+ hour unannounced, unaddressed server downtimes are fairly rare (Believe it or not) in games not ran by Wildcard. It's pretty normal to assume that there's an explanation aside from staggering and glaring incompetence.

I mean, the game could be great if they did half a dozen fairly obvious things. The same was true in Ark. Yet here we are, like 5 years later where they have not only ceased to get better, but have actually regressed to become worse then when they first started.

They have been doing this for literal years. As in closer to half a decade. Anyone who would leave just cuz they don't know how to do their jobs would have left by now.

It wont. They will notice when they get back from brunch and see the dozens of messages and @s in discord. Nothing anyone outside of the Wildcard company does will ever "Help" them because for the most part they ignore us.

probably

It probably isn't garbage. It really doesn't exist. "Community outreach" in Wildcard terms means that an unpaid intern that, when possible, handles it. It's been like this for *literally years*

They probably have no idea the servers are down. As for being angry, to be honest any realistic person with experience in Wildcard games, be it Ark or Atlas should be deadened to this. They do it all the time and have zero sense of shame towards it. They are a company comprised of 99% Art related employees, and 1% coding/network employees. They have no idea how to make a game work in a cohesive and functional way. THey are simply one out of the millions of indie companies with no idea of what they're doing that inevitably stumbled onto a treasure through sheer blind luck then proceeded to just try to milk as much money from the existing success as they could.

You think it's intentional? It's Wildcard. They mostly have no idea what they're doing, how to do it or why. It's what happens when you make a game studio of 45 people devoted to Art assets, and 3 devoted to every other thing in the game combined. They probably don't even know the NA PvP grid is offline yet.

*Him but no. The only reason I say that is it was what you were spamming on the forums like day 3 of the game release before it got deleted.

Pointing out the gaping holes in your logic doesn't hurt me at all.

Not to mention the sea battles when there's more then 4 ships sailing in your tile :rofl: Nothing like making a 5 mythical sail galleon, sailing it into a big fight, then watching your tribe mates jumping off the boat and out-swimming her at 45% load.

I'm not really surprised to hear that you gave up on PvP. To be quite honest, I'm surprised that you play the game at all

I only really see Scorpion as a troll because of how he acts, thinks and speaks. For instance, the reason he thinks the game is broken is because some chinese group sunk his schooner and sent him back to freeport. He fundamentally thinks that he should have been able to outplay them, and blames the game for enabling groups over solo players, and has put forward a variety of silly suggestions (Like making people take 3x damage if there's more then 4 people in a tribe together). He also frequently cites sources and events that are objectively wrong (IE citing Ark Small Tribes as a "Success" despite the fact that it had less people playing it within a week then Legacy did, this latest statistics citation). He does share some views of the game that I agree with, however I don't necessarily agree with the process that lead him to think that way, because half of his logic doesn't exist and the other half is fatally flawed. As for them appealing to Megas. Yes, I can see both sides. Personally, as a person in a Mega, I believe that it can be successful. Niche, but I enjoy being a part of a large group accomplishing large goals. Business wise? Perhaps it isn't the best choice, however that doesn't mean it's inherently a bad one. A good choice is starting a BR clone and milking that genre. You can enjoy a fair amount of success by making games for a niche, it's simply risky. Most games are left with "Angry players" in the end because those angry players are usually the most passionate part of the community. It takes a fair amount of emotional investment in a game (Which is mirrored by time investment) to generate anger in a group. Arguments and debates are always the best part of discussions because it's usually the only way to change entrenched beliefs and to explore your own. I find myself agreeing with you on more then a lot, and most of what you say is, overall, sound. I simply disagree that the premise that the reason this game is diving in numbers is because of the game catering to large tribes, rather it's simply because Wildcard does not possess the talent to make a successful game out of this niche genre.

Denial about what? The only thing I reject is your opinion that the game is dying because you got wiped and lost your schooner and that the only way to save it is to make it so solo players can beat mega-tribes. I think the game is dying because Wildcard is incompetent. Not because you got wiped.

You're not even making coherent sense anymore. Like, you didn't make much sense to start, but at this point you've just devolved into ????

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

Yeah, to be frank, the numbers aren't really what I'd consider even remotely debatable. The entire issue has so much nuance to it that we could debate the merits of various parts of them to death and both be almost entirely correct. I'm simply disagreeing with the OP because he fundamentally misconstrues and cherrypicks statistics to show that his "DOOMSDAY" threads are right. He doesn't actually care about the game, he simply wants to bash it because he got wiped and wants to be able to win official PvP while being a solo player.

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

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

Its not something you can really predict. There's a variety of ways to make the game better, and to draw bigger crowds. Ark showed that pretty well, it took that game well over a year to develop into itself really and that's for a game with a huge amount of appeal for a variety of communities (PvE/RP/PvP/Unofficial/Modding). This game will, likely, never be as universally successful as Ark. It simply doesn't try to appeal to the sheer amount of players that Ark tried, and to some degree, succeeded in doing. This game can, and likely will, attempt to primarily appeal to the "Mega-tribe" groups and form a stable playerbase from them, as opposed to Ark, which attempted to appeal to everyone. Just because the population is lower then Ark, doesn't mean it isn't successful. It just means it's a niche game. There are many successful games out there that don't have 100k people playing them everyday. I flame Wildcard plenty on just about everything. Including for/in this game. However, I do believe that they are more competent then a troll (Scorpianshawn) who posts threads every 3 hours about how the game sucks because he got wiped/lost everything. I also don't particularly subscribe to the belief that the games overall direction is a bad one (Appealing to mega-tribes and groups larger then 15). ATLAS/ARK/Wildcard/Grapeshot are notorious and well known for being so horrifically bad at executing upon a concept that, despite how good the original concept is, it's ruined by that execution.

At the same time, it's still pretty predicable that it would happpen. The same thing happened in Ark at first release. The initial wave of hypers left, and since there's no PvE to do in this game, so did the PvErs. You haven't cited any facts what so ever though. You cherry picked statistics, failed to present them in an objective way, and then claimed them as fact. Ark experienced a very similar shortfall of users, it simply took longer for it to happen because Ark released with far more content then Atlas did. In reality, you have no idea how statistics work, nor how to even interpret them as they relate to populations and how they shift in relation. I wouldn't claim that it's "Facts" when you're fundamentally unable to conclude what a fact is from a given data set. I have literally never seen anyone claim that. Every game has a wave of hype, then a population dip when those groups leave. It's natural, and normal. For any game. EA or not. That is what you're looking at and fatally misinterpreting. See, here's the problem. You fundamentally don't know what you're talking about, so when people talk to you about it, you call them liars and say they don't fact check. It also doesn't help that you're trying to tell people not to listen to them despite being objectively wrong about almost everything about the issue at hand.

He really isn't worth ignoring is the problem. It's debatable. The player base they are trying to cater to within the Ark community is not the entire Ark community. Atlas was created for the mega-tribe PvP groups that comprise the vast majority of the PvP player base. This game completely forfeits any major PvE aspects, has limited modability, and is not unofficial friendly. Expecting Atlas to compete with Ark is idiotic to an extreme. It never will be able to compete with Ark. One of Ark's greatest failings in the end, was the fact that it tried to appeal to far too many audiences. Atlas shouldn't have this problem as it is a game primarily focused on PvP without the myriad of issues that made PvP in Ark so lackluster (Breeding and Dinos in general). That being said, regardless of where/whether Atlas had a better start then Ark, or vice versa, it still remains a fairly successful game that routinely exists in the Steam top 20 and has a fairly large and stable playerbase.

I could handle the metal cost. The paste cost is simply not something that should be there. Increase the stone cost or something, but the sap is kind of useless and weird. I can't figure out why it's in there. The bigger issue is that now stone still costs quite a bit, but is completely inadequate for dealing with explosives and raiding IMO.

Its Wildcard. Nothing they do ever quite hits the mark for the first 6-8 months.

I dont think the devs intend for tames to be overly useful.