Inigo

I love you guys

Well Sau, I know what ya mean. I recall before the xbox release and that "big update" that coincided around the same time, the NA PVP server was peaking out at about 150 players across the entire grid. NA PVE was peaking out around 200, EU servers were about 200-250 respectively the rest of the players were on private, which were still abysmally low numbers. And the true irony here is even when ATLAS was dipping into all time lows of below 1000 and around 1500 players daily(most being in private servers), there were people still on the forums even then claiming the game was healthy in it's playerbase. And it's a mind blowing statement to see people say that, when it is incredibly easy to pull up things like steams own player tracker, or steamcharts or steamspy, or any of the other trackers that show approx. units sold based on user accounts that publically own the game. Then folks like Ol boy pegleg up there, "Dont listen to forum chuds the game is super healthy" but then they chud it up and say things like "U mad bruh" when you point out that having 0.5-1% of players playing isnt healthy, nor does it fit the definition of thriving. I was honestly hoping for more man. Like an actual discussion on the real health of the game, not imaginary perceptions. We all had big hopes for this genre of game, both survival and pirate theme. Pretending the game is healthy or isn't severely flawed in a lot of regards or mismanaged/neglected in a lot of ways isn't going to help it get better.

Thought this was the general discussion board, thought we were having a discussion here. Should I have just flamed or something? You threw out some numbers, I threw out some numbers too

Well you took it like it was directed at you or something, so it must have resonated. The highest peak for the month was 11k according to steamstats, the peak today was 6k according to Steam itself. And it just got off of being on sale.... Soooo like temporary inflation from a $9 sale for an EA game doesnt amount to a game thriving as much as it points towards it general trend of 3-4k peaks being padded by a sudden influx of players. Using the word entitlement to describe people you disagree with is pretty dismissive of other people's general experience and opinion of the game that you obviously do not share. People dealing with probems you may not have encountered or had negative experiences you may not have had, and voice their opinion of the state of the game and the development team are not entitled. What they are; are customers who paid for a product, that is realistically under performing on both PC and XBOX. PC players who literally funded the games continued existence are also genuinely not happy that development of the game literally got put on the back burner so they could push out the shabbiest of all launches on xbox to abysmal performance issues if it was even playable. Just.... So they could get some money flowing again, because lets be honest PC interest had waned to an all time low at that point, as in it was fluctuating b 500 to 2k peaks(SUPER HEALTHY AND THRIVING! This was just before the xbox release). At the end of the day, over 1,000,000-2,000,000 PC users have bought ATLAS. At the end of the day if you want to talk about a game thriving, if it's averaging 5-6k players daily according to steamcharts, thats like 0.25-0.5% of the players that own the game. Lets just say its 11 or 12k peaking out like ya said, thats still only 0.5-1% of the PC playerbase. HashtagThriving.(Did I do that right?)

Oh goodness, been out a few months and man did I come back to same ol classic ATLAS/ARK Forums, the shameless Blind White Knights and the Angry Dev Haters. Upon reading up on the state of the game, it's good to know nothing has changed either.

Nah, his best bet is getting a refund.

Uhhhhhh sure??? Are you the kinda guy to use the same bad logic when a crew lands on an island to harvest resources and you sink their ship off shore? Thats not PVP! They attacked our undefended boat! Thats not fair! We need anchor protection! Historically speaking, attacking villages, settlements, etc when people are asleep or away is a tried and true tactic that has been used by just about every warring civilization since forever. It works. That is also untrue, our group had like 30-50 active players, and we had 1 ally that was about 15-20 active players, and our sector held off the entire player cap alliance and all their cronies throwing everything they had at us for 2 war Decs. It doesnt take a huge "mega corp" it takes a decent group of active players. On the flipside to that, we also attacked some french canadians in J5 and they had a small group, took us almost 16 hours to take their island and they had 8 active defenders those guys were fucking pimp on land with their guns and barrels. We lost so many bears and crabs, our riders would get sniped off, and before we could get someone to ride them to safety a guy on a glider and a barrel would wipe them out. It takes knowledge, it takes practice, it takes skill and good coordination, all the things most casuals lack. No one said they were, just that the Devs shouldnt be pandering to THEM because they CHOSE to play a PVP Server designed around large companies. Devs have even said you should probably form or join a large company, if that isnt a direct endorsement of the style of gameplay that's expected, then I dont know what is. The game was never designed or meant to be played solo or in small groups. Your woes are your own for choosing to do such.

How are you gonna pack 15 cannons on one side of a Brig with gun points!?!?!?!

but.... that doesnt make them money right now...

Mostly Likely the answer is.... NO.

Crews consume whatever the baseline % of resources for a particular plank is. It doesnt scale the resources for the damage, Each repair consumes a certain amount of mats regardless of the damage to the plank(s). So for example, lets say each repair uses 1/10 or 1/100 of the resources cost of the plank, it's going to consume whatever that amount is regardless of whether its missing a proportional amount of HP or not. So lets just say it takes 1/10, you have a plank that has 5000hp, 1 repair does 500hp worth and costs 10 wood 10 thatch 10 fiber 1 metal. If it's missing just 25hp, it's gonna consume 10 wood, 10 thatch, 10 fiber, 1 metal every time they repair that plank from decay. NPC Crew waste resources on ships like no other.

Hold the phone, Indie studio? See they aint Indie if they're owned by Snail Games. Wildcard aint Indie. Grapeshot aint Indie, theyre owned by Snail Games, they're offices are literally down the hall from each other(their own words), that is literally the opposite of Indie. I'm bashing a studio that has a long track record of bad decisions. Like you know Diverting staff and assets away from your flagship game you promised to fix and pouring it into an offshoot studio and "new game" that's even worse than the first one it was made from. Hahahaha the best part was when you said Indie Studio... lol

This thread....

L.A Noire was a stand alone built on it's own engine that's only connection to GTA anything was the Publisher. The rest of those games were on the Render Engine or the RAGE engine(Rockstars own engine), using an engine doesnt constitute it being a mod in any way, an engine is a compiler for your models, assets, scrips, etc that operate within the engines physics. That's still a grasping at straw level reach there though. You're talking about a high level publisher funding decent sized game studios, or multiple studios to work on a single game, these games that were also put out pretty far apart with newer engines and better builds, graphics, etc... Which lets be honest, we're all pretty damn good. Keep in mind, you're not talking about a Dev/Publisher that got their pants sued off for breach of contract for developing a competing game in secret while working for another company, poaching employees, etc. for 40m and had sell out to a chinese company to say afloat while pushing out paid DLC during Early Access, you're also not talking about a Dev team that started work on a promised dlc, that somehow morphed into its own standalone using entirely reused assets, core programming, etc. that incorporated all the bugs, exploits and poorly built foundation while slapping on some plaster and paint to make it look different. You're talking about Mother----ing Rockstar games and all the studios they employ my dude. They are not even remotely comparable.

I do play it, it's still a dumpster fire. All you are doing is displaying fanaticism.

Yeah, I get the feeling that you don't understand how business and consumerism works. The reviews for this game are working as intended. They released a MOD for ARK as a full fledged game, which was broken upon release, and further remained broken for months. And even when it became mostly stable, it was and still is full of many issues that involve crashing, bugs/glitches that involve losing massive amounts of progress, duping, massive lag, etc. So when people Pay Money for an Early Access game that should reasonably be in a BETA level state, and are met with an Alpha Level game that can barely run, it is going to be reviewed appropriately. And it has. That is the double-edged sword of Early Access, they want to fund their development by releasing into Early Access, the caveat to this is, it has to be in a good enough state in order to sufficiently sustain itself, if it is not good, then what is happening to ATLAS, happens... That is how it works my dude. You can champion and white knight all you want my dude. Wasted effort unless you are being paid to market for them. Steam Spy, a website designed to catalog steam user profiles that are set to public. So it has recorded between 1-2mil copies of ATLAS in player libraries on the steam platform. It does not include how many were refunded, only how many were recorded in unique user libraries.

That is like your opinion man Seeing as how the game sold between 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 units on PC, and approximately 0.2% and 0.5% of those individuals still play, I'm gonna Err on the side of, the other 99.5% to 99.8% and say; "No my dude.... It's not good, I can tell because some of the numbers and because I've seen a lot of bad games in my time".

I dont know what you expected my dude, like you literally lurked on these forums for ages before the XBOX release, and you knew the dire straights the game was in, and you bought it anyway. Shame on you for buying poo and being disappointed it doesnt do any tricks.

Let me introduce you to the concept that you picked the wrong genre of games to play. ARK, Rust, 7 Days to Die, Conan Exiles, Etc. If you want to play on an Official Server, well that's your decision, it's also your decision to deal with whatever elements are present. Including being raided when you arent on, griefers, etc. Now despite my ire for the Devs and their bad decisions, they did in fact put a reasonable raid timer in. That you can personally set to your preference for Start and End times. IF STILL that is not good enough for you, let me remind you, there are PVE, private servers, with additional raid protections available if you just want to get on and play Pokemon without getting your shit shoved in. Alternatively there is also Singleplayer where you can Catch Em All without any risk to your little RP base at all. I've got no sympathy for any of your problems. I've dealt with my fair share of griefers, proper raiders, even being attacked by the Player Cap Alliance, which prided themselves on their namesake for player capping entire sectors they were attacking(They were still bad at fighting, so it's w/e). I've done my fair share of griefing and proper raiding, and it's quite fun. It would be a darn shame if they nerf any of that to pander to Casual solo players or 1-4 man companies.

Also i can personally attest that even with 9 hour raid time, you still may not have enough time to attack. Even if you get all your war prep done ahead of time and have people ready to go the second the raid time hits, we've fought over an island for the full 9 hours one day, and another 5 hours the following day until we finally took it and they ceded defeat. They sure put up one hell of a fight. We lost a lot of bears and crabs..... Alternatively, we also fought off PCA and their war decs which were 24 hour war timers. Soooo depends on your company size, 9 hours might be too much if you're a small crew. That's small crew problems... Even with a solid 24 hour raid time from a multiple War Decs, we've successfully defended multiple islands from start to finish. So it wasnt nearly long enough for the attackers.

Yeah... We had this problem too.... That's why we had 3-4 islands at all times, and we staggered all the raid times, so we at least always had 2 in peace time while the other two were in raid time. and we would just float our entire fleet to the nearest peace time island... As for the bases, oh well, all those islands were super turtled up, they can waste their explosives, no big deal. Must be hard being Island poor.....

I might be totally wrong, but I noticed that I stopped seeing map bottles spawn on islands that had lots of structures on them as well as light houses, we had an island that would get a fair amount of bottles spawning full circle, after turtling up the whole island and plenty of foundation spam to prevent FOBs, with 4 light houses on the cardinal points, almost never saw any bottles spawn even on locations furthest from the structures.

^ Hey bro, FYI ARK has plenty of Ship and sailing mods, etc. plus you get your halloween event. a TON of people could quite literally be like 10 two-hundred pound people, so w/e. More tames in this game would just be pure cancer. Most of the tames in the game are useless anyway. These are your most commonly used critters for SUCCESS! Official PVP PVP Ground Combat: Crabs Bears + Bear carts Monkey Harvesting: Bears Elephant Giraffe Rhino Other: Crows Just about 1/4 of the critters are actually useful, the rest are completely MEH. Like the only reason you would have them is Just Because Why Not, or because you're a roleplayer and wanna have everything and a nice farm and house, and if you're on a PVP server, lets be honest... They're all gonna get viciously slaughtered.... Game needs more boats, game needs more weapon types, game needs more structure types. like CATAMARANS

Swam into someones Harbor, one of their ships was auto firing at me, baited its fire at all their other ship until they lost planks and sunk. Dumped everything I couldnt carry, grappled onto the angry ship and killed all the crew with grenades I salvaged from the sunken ships, chopped all the masts off, blew into the deck below and dumped all their stuff. RIP 2 brigs 3 schoons 1 sloop.

Ahhhh yes, the good ol Shark mechanic. Thanks WildCard/Grapeshot for this poorly thought out feature. That's right kids, Swimming Speed, Oxygen boosts, etc will allow you to swim to the bottom of the ocean and salvage entire ships that have sunk with ease! BUT WAIT! We can't have that can we???? Lets add 2-3 sharks spawns per sunken SoTD or Player Ship! Gotta make things unnecessarily exciting! Did you just sink a whole fleet of SoTDs? Congrats you just summoned like 10+ sharks! Good on you mate. Did you know we have a handy dandy diving attachment that sharks wont attack for some reason? Well good news! If you are trying to save poor swimming crew members, well too bad!