Jump to content

JohnM81

Pathfinder
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JohnM81


  1. 34 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

    Well aware of that. That's the contrast. Ark was by any reasonable measure a hit, and while it's common for games to see a decline after launch as the initial burst of interest fades when some folks move on, with Ark it grew, while with Atlas it plummeted. What did I say in my previous post that gave you the impression I thought or was asserting otherwise?

     

    Ark is an example that there is no such rule that EA games decline right release. What is a game similar to atlas that did? I ask because if the only data we have of similar games NOT declining after release shouldn't we all be running around saying normally they don't instead of that they do???


  2. 6 hours ago, boomervoncannon said:

    Nearly all games decline after initial launch but there is a meaningful difference in the percentages that are normal and what Atlas is experiencing. Whether you like the game or not, the OP’s point about the dearth of players being problematic for an MMO to give the intended experience is dead on. From day one I never understood why they were allowing private servers for Atlas as it serves to drain players from one of four primary player bases into diffused sidepools of small groups. 

    Don’t get me wrong I ran a multi server cluster for Ark, but that game wasn’t intended to be a single massive world of interconnected server grids all with a single combined economy. The game that Atlas is supposed to be patterned upon is Eve. Ever heard of an Eve private server? Allowing private servers was a troubling sign that perhaps the devs didn’t really grasp the fundamental mechanics of what makes large scale MMO’s work.

    Unlike the OP I’m not pronouncing the game dead. The example of No Man’s Sky (man that is a weird steam player count history) really does mean the opera ain’t over til the fat lady sings, but I do firmly believe that Atlas’s disastrous first 60 days has probably lost it any chance of it ever being a hit with a robust playerbase like Ark.  This has implications for how well some of its core MMO mechanics like economy are ever going to be able to function. Like it or not, Atlas faces an uphill battle to even obtain stability and respectability at this point. The good news is that with Ark’s success backing it, Wildshot has deeper pockets than most indie studios, so if they believe in Atlas they have the ability to keep the doors open longer than most could.

    Ark didnt decline right after launch. It actually grew. 

    • Thanks 1

  3. In a continuation to last months post "Well, January numbers are in..." 

    Lets see how Atlas is doing in the month of February. But before we do lets recap the theme of the Jan post. The main subject was a warning that the devs are going in a direction that the players don't like. And as a method of communicating that they are leaving. In summation the first month of January saw a drop of aprox 1/3 of the entire player base (12,673 average players). Now lets see if the devs have noticed this and decided to adjust course to correct the hemorrhaging of players. 

    Method: https://steamcharts.com/app/834910

    Last 30 Days 11,847.4 -14,794.4 -55.53%

    25,026

     

    So it looks like course adjustments in game philosophy has not taken place or has been ineffective. As a result The game has in fact increased the rate of losing players. Of the remaining players after the January loss, more than half of the average player base has stopped playing. That is an astonishing number. The first month saw a loss of 12k players this month has seen almost 15k leave. 

    Now just like the first January post many might believe this is normal or even to be expected for EA games. This is flatly not true. Ark not only didn't lose any players in the first it gained. The second month it head steady with a small increase in players as well. The following months it did decrease in small percentages going up some months and down in others. But not in the magnitude of Atlas.

    Again I will warn the devs this ship is about to sink. Or has already. Can you readjust your game design philosophy and save it or is this the next DnL?

     

    What do you think? 


  4. On 2/5/2019 at 2:13 PM, Pallist said:

    Even 30% retention until it becomes stable is still a workable number.

    People still trickle in and trickle out. Does steam count unique logins? People also just play less hours or come on to check out a patch.

     

    The should consider putting out a more defined road map though. The stirring talk of they don't know what they're doing and winging it (like ark) is starting to gain momentum. That will certainly hurt pop.

     

    I assume the game will eventually get mmo features. Pvp hotspots. Tame reworks. The game mechanics need to encourage activity outside of raiding bases. Move away from ark and more into mmo sandbox with fluff and features. Hopefully dailies add some hotspots for conflict.

    What is the benchmark that you can make such a claim?  Because even a little bit a thought reveals that its clear you really have no idea if that is true unless you have access to Grape Shot's financial information. Do you? How many players retained from EA to full release that creates a workable cash flow depends on pricing of the product (that we know), monitization model (DLCs or cash shop) and company expenses (that we don't know). So please explain how you know 30% is enough to not only pay the bills for GS but also generate enough marketing via word of mouth to counter act the terrible review metrics on steam? 

    Again, with all that said. Ark has and still continues to have its own issues. Sometimes its numbers dip and sometimes rise. And all of this is with it starting out MUCH stronger than Atlas IE growing and not having population drops.


  5. On 2/5/2019 at 1:47 PM, Pallist said:

    60% retention on a hyped early access game is pretty damn good. You guys are cherry picking statistics to make this look like something to worry about.

    We are the alpha/beta testers. Our feedback shapes the game. Seems some people came into the game not understanding that.

    60% retention is good?!? No offense but are you daft? ARK in its first month had a net GAIN. Keep telling yourself that its normal to lose players in the first month but it is not true. Keep telling yourself that its okay to lose 1/3 of your player base because its EA. But its not true. Ark was EA. Ark had a net GAIN. You sir are the one cherry picking. We are looking at numbers that speak for themselves. And you are holding on to tired old phrases that others have made up but keep repeating over and over in a vain hope it becomes truth.

    On 2/5/2019 at 1:50 PM, [GP] Guybrush Threepwood said:

    I'm not one of those cherry picking anything here, but I do understand where people are coming from.

    You yourself state 60% retention is good for an early access game, but it's currently at 55% retention now. There is no doubt the drop is moving fast. It is rather concerning, however, i'm in it for the long run as I am interested to see how things pan out, I don't jump at the first signs of trouble.

    I don't think 'jump ship' because they think the game is going down hill. I think they leave because they aren't having fun and have legit complaints. Am I wrong here?


  6. 1 hour ago, dramba said:

    I left Ark because of two things: massive aimboting and item dupe. I really expected devs will fix this in Atlas… so naïve. Technically you have a choice either accept reality and play with cheats or leave the game. I’m choosing the second, again.

    You know, while ark official servers are rife with cheating. Ark official conquest servers with active enforcement gms has very very little cheating in it. A huge improvement.


  7. In my opinion its all about the cost of defense vs the cost of offense. If it is more expensive to attack than defend then players tend to be more peaceful as unless they are genuinely mad at another player they don't want to attack them because they do so at a loss. 

    Toxicity is created  when the cost of attacking is less than the cost of defense. Because being an Ahole comes at a huge profit.  So the stone mats change was the exact worst thing to do. The claim system was a moronic feature and needs to be redone. What could they have been thinking when a single company can claim so much land. However allowing us to place beds in lawless lands helped with this. 

    These are just my 0.02. But what is fact is that atlas population is plummeting and when 1/3 of your players leave in one month huge changes in the game and/or the game development team needs to be made

    • Like 3

  8. Method: http://steamcharts.com

    Results: 

    January 2019 26,641.8 -12,673.8 -32.24%

    In the month following its launch month of December where the game peaked the game has lost just shy 1/3 of its entire player base.

     

    Conclusion:

    Hard to say if it is any one thing thing that has caused players to flee from this game. The truth it is more than likely many different reasons. But the results are conclusive thus far the game is not doing well. Now it is true that many will bring up that the game is in EA and losing players is common. This is an overly repeated and flatly wrong statement. Let us compare Ark a game that this was has had a HUGE amount of copy/paste from:

    July 2015 46,764.8 +3,893.3

    +9.08%

    In the month following its launch month of June Ark actually didn't lose players but gained them despite being an EA game just like Atlas. This shows a significantly different outcome in the opinions of players as to their approval of Atlas' current design and future directions.  Thus WC/GS/SnailGames need to take a hard look at what they are doing and where they are going, elicit feedback from its player base and make large overarching design and philosophy changes. Else they might have an outcome similar to another WC game:

    https://steamcharts.com/app/529180#All

     

    • Thanks 1

  9. On 1/10/2019 at 12:37 PM, MightySheep said:

    I had a good boat fight with BLDX once, they were the first enemy ship I saw that actually knew how to repair planks and use NPC crew to fire cannons properly. Bit pointless to make a thread calling someone a hacker without video proof.

    LOLOL good one... You must be new to bldx.

    bldx has worked hard on ark official servers and ark conquest servers to be know for cheating. Their rep is garbage because they are garbage.

    • Like 1

  10. EA Ark In one month started at 80k and held it for 3 months.

    EA Atlas In one month started at 50k and DROPPED to 25K.

    You better get over this resistance to admitting when you are wrong and messed up and start 'walking things back'. Your pirate game is sinking and going the way of DnL. Start listening WC erm GS or this will be your biggest failure yet.


  11. I really wish people would stop with the "its EA" bs. Look at Ark during its first month per steam charts. Ark launched in may of 2015 and rose to roughly 80k in its first month and kept those numbers for 3 months! Its ONLY been 1 month for Atlas and there has been a DECREASE by 50%! 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  12. Don't think that Atlas isn't frustrating for us Ark players as well. You might find a lot leave it and go back to Ark... I did. And that metal+cp ingredients in stone structures change ..... omg... im happy I left. And I have 8k+ hours in ark all pvp official servers.


  13. 29 minutes ago, Dorf said:

    I have 1500 hours into ark between my xbox and pc.  I was playing since week 1 on xbox and I felt the pain then too.  HOWEVER, I knew what I was in for.  And they redeemed themselves in my eyes.  Are they a perfect company?  No, but they work hard and fix mistakes. And make one heck of a fun game.  1500 hours of entertainment for a total of $60 I gave them... I think I made out pretty good.  

    With that said, I have total faith that grapeshot will deliver just as well as they did as wildcard.  There will be growing pains(aka early access) but it will all be worth it.

    In other words, stop being so sensitive when we all knew it was EA.

    only 1500?

    Then you probably weren't around for the "Great Migration" for the first shutting down of legacy servers. You might have a VERY DIFFERENT view of WC if you were around then. Ark still isn't where it should be for a full release and still has wacky bugs and devastating character losses.


  14. 2 hours ago, Dorf said:

    EA EA EA EA EA EA .... sing it with me now!  This game is early access!  Rollbacks, bugs and crashing happen!  It's what we signed up for!  EARLY ACCESS is the name of this song kids!  Sing along now... EA EA EA EA EA EA!

    Oh come on... ARK isn't in EA and they are still screwing around with their customer base. Yes atlas is in EA, but the company still cares not for its customers. Both can be true at the same time.


  15. I wonder if all of your guys are not from Ark where wildcard has been making a habit of abusing its customers with bs like this. I wonder if this is the rest of gaming community finding out what us arkers always knew. 

    SnailGames - Wildcard - Grapeshot = a horrible company filled with horrible people that somehow come up with incredible awesome concepts that they suck at putting into place....

    strange paradox....

    • Thanks 1

  16. 11 minutes ago, Not Happy said:

     

    Contemplates wether poster now understands that I understand trolling very well and have no problems with a bit of banter of even quite harsh nature, wonders if he is starting to get the difference between that and repeatedly spamming N word in global chat. Wonders if poster understands what a line is and what is way over it.

    Shame that you are letting your bruised ego, of being trolled, getting in the way of realizing that what you posted was the very issue that I addressed in a previous reply. Maybe ol' Bill has a sign for you as well.


  17. 1 hour ago, Not Happy said:

     

    Contemplates how, even if that were the case, how now is far better than always and how self reflection is one of the particular weak points of a dull mind.

    Okay, so now that I have trolled you and baited you out where a larger point can be made we can move on to address it. I have offended you with insults and slander from the beginning and now you are responding with the same and rightfully so as I 'started it'. Your verbally derogatory remarks, which are justified, are only justified as a manner of opinion. So others might have the opinion that you consistently using derogatory remarks to reference my mental aptitude is uncalled, or even hateful, if they also were ignorant of my goading you.  

    So the larger question is, for those who don't know I have been antagonizing you, should you be censored for your derogatory remarks? Now all of this isn't to say that racist words on boats, names, ect is ever justified, but our response to it very much must be tempered with the knowledge that the slipper slope applies here. Once we classify words as 'offensive' and such a label removing all protections of free expression of ideas, then that power can be misused and abused. 

    Should we ask big brother to come in and censor the freedom of vile persons who wish to use derogatory comments? Or should we 'educate' them that being vile has a cost in a virtual community as it does in a reality community? I would suggest that education from the destruction of in game items via player justice would be far more educational and even might prompt better behavior in reality communities.

    You should not be censored for deriding my mental aptitude as I started it. But even if I didn't prompt it from you, we as a society must not instill in ourselves the idea that words we don't like are not fit to be used. It is no secret that this game isn't a protected free speech venue. But we must resist training our minds with the censorship knee jerk response. Because only a fool would think that if it is the first thought here... It wouldn't be more tempting to be our first thought in other venues, perhaps even free speech venues.

    • Thanks 1

  18. 3 minutes ago, Not Happy said:

     

     Contemplates how accuracy is further proved by subject missing that reference point was intended and required. Laughs wrly to himself and at him.

    OMG a single post where poster isn't ripping off a Bill Engvall joke...

    Actually, your posts are now kinda dull. Lets bring Ol'Bill back. He is still the life of your dull and boring party.


  19. 3 minutes ago, Not Happy said:

     

    Contemplates how he can dare do whatever he wants, sign merely reminds why he does.

    I understand how coming up with your own jokes are hard being >4 words and you end up contradicting yourself. But alas Bill Engvall can't save you here. 


  20. 19 minutes ago, Not Happy said:

    Checks sign, moves on.

     

    5 minutes ago, Not Happy said:

    Sign confirmed as 100% accurate.

    And here I thought you moved on... Dare I say you did it again... And you did so well with the four word posts. I think you should stick with that!

×
×
  • Create New...