sgzeroone

When I gave up on official, I came across these guys and wouldn't play Atlas on any other server.  The map is actually the perfect size for casual player or solo players.  Although the game is always better with a group.  If your looking for a new server or just looking to try the game again.  Try this server out.  I'm not easily impressed with most things, but these guys do a great job.  Check it out!

PS:  I was not payed for this endorsement on this server, although I can be bought.  

Perhaps try the command

cheat givetome  while looking at the structure or tame?

Seriously?   Nobody has had any problems with this?

Has anyone else running private servers with custom maps had problems with the seamonster versions of the whales just not spawning at all?   If so perhaps you know a fix?   

I'm just mad they don't have a button I can craft to just win at anything I want! 

Great thread,  Kinda reminds me of playing the game. 

Thanks for the laughs.

My most memorable part of Atlas was the day I uninstalled it.  It was a sad day, but the good thing is their are plenty of other games out there from more competent developers. 

On 9/3/2019 at 7:36 AM, boomervoncannon said:

The recent dev livestream made it fairly apparent that despite this lack of content, the devs have not been working on new content for some time and instead are focused on the game's XBox release. Putting aside the questionable decision to launch a game on Xbox which failed hard on PC and that you haven't altered meaningfully since it's flop, ask yourself this as a player: Would I want to come back and invest my time in a game that has not measurably improved itself or added to it's extremely barebones (some have argued barely a game) release state in a year? Because by the time XBox is released, Atlas will very likely be a year out from it's initial EA launch or close enough that it makes no matter. 

WOW,  there truly is no hope for this game.  The dev's have gone full retard if they think this hot mess is good enough for console.  Although they thought it was ok for PC also.  But to waste months porting to console is the stupidest thing I have heard them do to date.  Clearly a money grab, or just incompetent development. 

On 9/4/2019 at 3:21 AM, Realist said:

Don’t worry once the wipe happens and the waves of Xbox players come in to save the day there will be plenty of people on all servers.

well on the off chance(won’t happen) that there isn’t a wipe you will see the numbers drop faster than ever and as you said there “will be so little players”. The ball is in their court and every minute they waste with silence just makes it worse

Till the Xbox players realize the game is shit like the rest of us PC players. 

I would offer my single player experience here, but I uninstalled the game.

Still waiting for "Atlas to be great again"......

6 hours ago, boomervoncannon said:

I've pointed to No Man's Sky in the past as the ultimate example in the gaming world of "The opera ain't over til the fat lady sings", but until this past weekend, I'd never actually played it. My boss (who incidently is one of those mythical grown adults who plays both console and PC games and makes distinguishing between the two as somehow separate and distinct groups somewhat silly) has been campaigning for me to try it for at least half a year, and has kept me abreast of Beyond, it's free update released last Wednesday.  It is currently on sale at half price for another couple of days and so after giving it til friday for my boss to verify the new update was as promised, I finally took the plunge over the weekend.

I didn't write this to hype a different game on Atlas's boards, but in the sincere belief that all concerned can take something instructive away from No Man's Sky. If you've been living under a rock for the past 3 years, then NMS's launch might be the only one to rate as a bigger charlie foxtrot than Atlas's. When you have legal and regulatory agencies of multiple governments publicly declaring their intent to investigate your game based on allegations of outright fraud, it's safe to say something has gone horribly wrong. Yet Hello games, in the face of massive bad publicity and widespread public rebuke, declared their intention to simply put their head down and go about making NMS into the best possible game they could.  If ever a developer had every reason to just walk away, this was it, but they didn't.

Fast forward 3 years. The game I played over the weekend was engaging, it felt fully developed and fun. If I had been unaware of NMS's disastrous launch I would never have known from playing it. I believe NMS is an instructive example for 2 parties in 2 ways. The first will not be what you expect.

For Jeremy and Snail Games, and all other decision makers in the gaming industry, look closely at No Man's Sky and think hard about whether you really want to release your game long before it's anywhere close to a finished product and charge people money for it, whether you call it Early Access or not.  Because the damage to your game's reputation if you do so and it goes poorly cannot be undone. No Man's Sky took 3 years to dig itself out of that hole, and what it has arguably lost in the process is the chance to ever be a big hit. It's clawed itself into being a solid game because Hello games put blood sweat and tears into making it that way without ever asking for a penny more from the people who bought their product. But if they had waited until now to release, who knows what it might have been. Certainly more than the 10k average activity steam charts even over the past weekend with a major new content release AND the game at half price. "Long is the road and hard is the way that out of hell leads up to heaven." Indeed. It would seem wiser never to put yourself in hell in the first place, wouldn't it?

Secondly, for everyone who bought Atlas and now despairs of the game's prospects as hopeless and beyond repair: go and have a look. I'm not saying what will be, merely what is possible.  If GrapeCard™ were merely shysters looking to make a fast buck, I sincerely believe that they would never have chosen an MMO to do it with, and more importantly, they would probably already have walked away. Atlas is making almost no revenue at this point. Do you see many new players trying the game out? The fact they continue to press forward should be evidence of a significant commitment to produce a viable game. It is entirely possible that the game could still fail, that it's myraid issues may never be satisfactorily resolved enough to attract a meaningful and viable playerbase, but that is only a possibility, not a certainty.

I want to also say a word about the continuing criticism of Atlas's concept as not just pirate themed, but pirate/fantasy. If you don't like the concept, by all means say so, that's useful and legitimate feedback. But at the same time, try to give them credit for trying something new and different. The gaming industry has too little innovation and experimentation at the top these days, as the bigger companies just regurgitate mostly bad sequels to already proven franchises. If Jeremy et al had truly wanted to just create Ark II, they could have done it without taking the chances they have with Atlas. Beyond this, for those that just want to stand on the sidelines, throw stones and jeer instead of offering useful and constructive feedback, I offer the words of Teddy Roosevelt:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

I played NMS at launch and it was still more stable than Atlas.  It reminded me more of the state that Satisfactory was in about a month ago as far as that goes.  The biggest problem with NMS was that they promoted it as having multiplayer when that feature had not even been implemented yet.  So when I look at the overall general bugs and lack of features implemented, I really can't compare the two.  NMS was 10 times better at launch than Atlas is even now 6 months later.  Hello Games perhaps launched their game a little early before all the main features were implemented, But Grapecard launched their game in a state of like pre-alpha ( they didn't even have a stable core of a game).  They also lack a roadmap or any sort of direction it seems.  I don't think comparing Hello Games to Grapecard is fair to Hello Games.  Yes both companies have mislead the public about what their game is or has.  I would like to see Atlas survive and become a better game. 

But even now with NMS the damage is done to the credibility of Hello Games and all that Grapecard is doing is following in their footsteps, unfortunately.

Dear Grapeshot,

I wanted to like your game, but unfortunately in it's current state I simply can't.  Every reason I came to play this game has evaporated either because of bad game mechanics, incomplete feature implementation, or just game breaking bugs.  I know it's EA, but I have played a tremendous amount of early access games over the years and this particular game is on my top 10 of worst EA games I have played.

I truly hope that you guys figure out how to fix this game (or at least have a plan) and make it into what was originally advertised or at least make it into something worth the time spent playing it.  Perhaps get in touch with Hello Games (No Man Sky) and ask them how they managed to save a great game from being abandoned. 

I wish you guys the best and I will be following the forums and watching the patch notes in hopes that things will turn around.

Good Luck

Sincerely,

A hopeful Atlas player who wants to return

I think the problem with Atlas when it comes to deciding if its alpha or beta is because it keeps shifting between each the two.  Personally, after the original release failed they should have just went back to pre-alpha stage because most of the features on the game were broken and just terrible at launch.  The band-aid fixes they have been doing since launch are pretty much terrible. 

I personally think that no game should go on Steam EA without being at least a beta state.   Unless your goal is to get terrible reviews on steam...

Atlas is still in a early alpha state at best, they don't have all the features of the game completed from what I can tell.  And if all the main features of the game are implemented then I understand why it's failing.  It's just not good....

If they are planning to push the current state of the game into console, I'm sure the response from the console community will be almost as bad as the launch on pc, maybe a little bit better.  But it's unlikely due to the fact of all the problems with pvp.  I really hope that's not their plan.

17 hours ago, boomervoncannon said:

I really don’t know how I can say this any more clearly to you, but since you continue to put forward an argument after having clearly had it explained to you that the foundation of the argument is based on a flawed premise, I will explain as I would a child, with repetition.

PVE PLAYERS DONT COMPETE FOR RESOURCES.

IN PVE THERE IS NO COMPETITION FOR RESOURCES.

PVE RESOURCES ARE NOT GUARDED HOARDED OR OTHERWISE KEPT FRIM OTHER PLAYERS. 

PVE PLAYERS ACTUALLY BUILD STRUCTURES AND ERECT SIGNS TO DIRECT VISITING PLAYERS TO THEIR RESOURCES.

IN PVE THE INCENTIVES MAKE SHARING NODES ADVANTAGOUS, HENCE NO COMPETITION.

PVE PLAYERS HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO COMPETE FOR RESOURCES.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND YET THAT YOUR PREMISE OF I HAVE THE RESOURCE AND DONT WANT YOU TO USE IT IS COMPLETELY WRONG IN PVE?

PLEASE STOP REGURGITATING A FLAWED PREMISE AND LISTEN TO WHAT YOU ARE BEING TOLD ABOUT THE GAME YOU’VE NEVER PLAYED BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE.

IS ANY OF THIS GETTING THROUGH YET?

 

Honestly, I have exhausted my last bit of patience with you on this subject. You have been told clearly and repeatedly what you need to know to understand why the need for a pve wipe is nonexistent except from an extremely selfish point of view. The things you are saying are now coming from an arrogance of attempting to say you know better how things in the game work than those who actually play. When you have gone down this path, you have always been wrong. I am done discussing this. 

 

Realist doesn't even play the game at all.  So why are you wasting your time trying to change his imagination.  Because the only thing hes doing is imagining how the game is played because he's not actually playing it.  This is so ridiculous....

2 minutes ago, lordkhan4444 said:

yes I don't think many people will join either with console release, most of the 58k that started here was from ark. console would probaly bring in 2500/5000 new players but they will quickly leave when they lose all there stuff. and if anyone thinks these console gamers are getting there on severs your dreaming they will get thrown in with the pc crowd in the form of crossplay.

I'll be really surprised if they do crossplay honestly.

20 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

The resources are there to be gathered whether players are already present or not. Resource nodes are not finite but renew therefore this argument is invalid. This would only matter if players blocked access to nodes which is extremely rare on pve and usually done inadvertently if at all. 

There is no competitive advantage to be gained in pve by being there first.

You need to understand that if I own an island I want you to come gather on my island because I get free bonus resources when you do that cost you nothing. It is completely win/win on pve. 

I don't know why you waste your time trying to educate Realist, he hasn't even played Atlas.  So anything he says is pretty much mute.

He also is clearly a console gamer who only cares about console games.  Probably due to his dependency on aim assist.

And as far as console numbers, I'll believe it when i see it.  I don't think there will be much of a influx of players and even if there is a slight bump it will fade fast.  The game simply isn't good enough yet.

I have heard there is a glitch with the submarine decay timer taking out the ship its attached to also.  Cause apparently raising and lower the ship anchor does not reset submarine timer.

Not sure if it was ever fixed.

Did the ships have subs attached that disappeared?

I haven't lost interest in Atlas.  Just this game.   I'm waiting for Atlas II : Return to Blackwood

What's all the brew-ha-ha about crossplay anyways.  I'd rather just have lag free PVP/PVE. 

Besides everyone knows that console gamer's are sub par with all their aim assist crap.  LOL

I want bug free stable gameplay not crossplay.

1 hour ago, boomervoncannon said:

I can’t recall if you’ve mentioned playing Ark in the past or not, so forgive me if this is redundant to something you already know. Ark started off being easily the most poorly optimized game I’ve ever played. Over the course of its lengthy EA, it got slowly, incrementally better to the point where those without top of the line hardware could hope to play the game at non minimal settings with decent performance. It came a long way from where it started, but to this day it requires better than average hardware to achieve average performance.

I expect Atlas to follow a similar path. If it is useful info for comparison sake I run a GTX1060 6gb at 1920x1080 res, 32 gigs of Ram and an 8700 series cpu and other than the ping 255 issue my performance is fine.

I remember when Ark suddenly came out of EA, sometime after the first DLC, lol...  I was actually shocked that it was coming out of EA because of all the bugs and poor optimization.  I assumed the dev team just said where done working on it and left it half-a$$ optimized.  To date, I think ARK is one of the worst games I have played when it comes to optimization during EA, besides all the abandoned ware in EA titles.  Considering its popularity I always thought it would get better, but it really didn't.

I really don't expect Atlas to get much better than it is right now tbh.

When you design/develope a game with pvp and pve elements combined, you have all kinds of unintended problems.  Best example is Eve online.  PVEer's, Industrialist and New players suffered at the hands of Wardecs in Eve online from greifer corps.  I mean come on hulk-a-geddon?  Yeah balanced pvp my ass?  The list goes on and on.  High sec suicide ganking?  Don't get me wrong the early days of Eve were great, but what it has evolved into is just terrible.

If the developers of Atlas are truly molding their design to something like Eve, I would probably not be as interested in this game as I am.   I'm just here to explore the world created by this team and build a nice little ship to sail the sea's.  If I truly wanted to pvp it would not be in this type of game.  Plenty of other games out there for my pvp fix.

11 minutes ago, Slash78 said:

And you still don't get how development works...

Pretty sure the thread was about the hat, not game development.  Not sure what the relevance on my knowledge of game development has to do with anything.  I also don't recall ever saying that I know how Grapeshot's dev team is setup, not do I know the size of their team.  So I don't know how many people they have working on the different aspects of the game.  I also don't know if they have certain team members working on the creative side or the bug fixing side of things, or both.   But hey if you have the breakdown on their team and who's doing what at Grapeshot, please share.  I would be semi-interested.

But you don't have the hat, so it's clear its not a priority for them.  Whoever is working on whatever.

18 minutes ago, Slash78 said:

Yeah...except that's not how development works.  The guys that make the hats aren't exactly going to be doing bug fixes, etc.  

Important things is only bugs?    

Let me rephrase my statement for those who count the words instead of reading them.  The hat is not a important thing hence, its on the back burner and that's a good thing.

1 hour ago, sgzeroone said:

when they have so many other more important things to get fixed, debugged and implemented.

Of all the things I could nitpick Grapeshot on it would not be the stinking hat.  Prioritize your disappointment, like me