Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About mrfoxtrot

  • Rank
  1. No question there, but more to do with Wildcard/Grapeshots mere reliability on ETA. I can't recall a single deadline they've met in all the years of development of this engine. Literally, not one. I can't even think of a revised ETA they've ever met. So bad, that it's a joke among players of all kinds. You would think they would take their ETA's and multiply them by 300% by now, but then again, when have they ever learned from their own mistakes, this patch (end of February) included. Hell, they usually can't even hit a restart ETA with 30 minutes notice. So the player count will drop to near zero in the 2-3 month interim period now, and all the hopeful PVE saps will probably move on to other games after the end of March comes and goes without a wipe. Both the existing players are hosed, as well as those that are looking forward to "softcore" PVEvp.
  2. mrfoxtrot

    Waiting a month to wipe will kill this game

    Who is anyone kidding? It'll at least be two, or three months before they wipe. It's wildcard/grapeshot we're talking about here. This patch is already delayed by over a month. Does anyone think they can actually hit a target date even after all the years they've been in development? That's adorable. If they wanted to provide a months notice, they should have done so on the day of the (new) ETA.
  3. The facts presented in the responses are embodied with such a level of intelligence that I am unable to respond with any counterpoints of equal standing. Indeed, there is an adage that applies. The players that have been crying on the forums to incite these changes, who will start playing the game again for a moment; who could not tolerate the hardcore survival MMO that was advertised are clearly of such impressive regard, prowess, and intelligence that PvP'ers like myself cannot compete with their skill in defense or offense in an invulnerable "softcore" environment where nobody stands to lose anything. They are freed from their fears and can finally pvp within the confines of the chatbox of the game, to find the king of shit-talk. They can pillar spam and troll to show their superior skills in exploitation. Indeed, I am uninterested entirely in such a form of "pee ve ehhh" and would offer no competition to their skill in these regards. Fear not, anyone who is disagreement with their brilliance is clearly only in disagreement because they offline raid. As with any entitled citizen; there can exist no valid opinion besides their own. Anything disagreeable is either racist, sexist, a griefer or an offline raider. For each narcissist is the celebrity gamer whose skill is beyond comprehension, I cannot refute their proclaimed "ability", as much as they cannot refute logic. And it is this user that the game is now molded to. The irony of their own arguments are clearly lost on these intellectuals. I capitulate, the time lost in discussion with these clear, upstanding users would rival the time lost in the game. The saving grace is this will help improve the demographic of other hardcore survival games that are, actually survival games as advertised. At least the whining won't be complaining in other venues about their losses from PvP inside a persistent PvP hardcore survival world. https://steamcharts.com/top/p.3 GG.
  4. Nowhere have I stated I am entitled to a refund or that EA entitles me to a refund. I have suggested that the company, at their option, should make it available with the drastic nature of these changes. It's also amusing that people believe the title of "EA" means anything goes, the developer has your money, they could even make you download Pokemon Go at their discretion and you have no place to be offended. Whether in development or not, you are being sold on an advertised product, you are simply not guaranteed of it's completion. Changing an EA entirely into something it was never advertised to be is not part of the package. Does that entitle a refund? No, you're not entitled to anything in life. Would a company that gives a rip about CS offer a refund to depart on good terms? There's your question. Funny thing is, many companies in the past have made refunds available when drastic changes isolate much of their paying player base. Take World of Warships for instance, as they integrate submarines and massive changes to aviation. For most players, they will be positive changes in that game, but they still offer refunds to those people who bought content (battleships/carriers) while in development that is now radically changed via the new environment into something they were not originally advertised to be. That development studio recognizes the losses they suffer from refunding many of those $60 battleships pales in comparison to the sales they can still recover from those same people in the coming decades. It's called customer service, and recognizes that unsatisfied customers can still become future customers of other titles. If, however, it's (wildcard v2's) discretion to tell everyone to go "f themselves", posters are certainly correct that is their right. That doesn't mean it's not bad business practice in relation to an already poor development reputation between Ark/Atlas, which has become the joke of the gaming world, for instance, for their promised ETA's among other issues - I don't know any other studio that is so mocked in that regard. I guess the question is a mathematical one, how much revenue do they stand to lose by offering refunds to a percentage of customers they are alienating, vs. how much they stand to lose in continued reputational harm in their development cycle(s) and in respect to recapturing old customers. It could even be profitable if people re-purchased the completed game at full-price. Many people here don't have an open mind or business experience. If you think it's in Grapeshot's best interest to cut and run when they can show a profit, and alienate more of the limited market they serve; by all means hire onto management there, you might fit in. Alas, those satisfied with the patch are probably correct, it seems apparent they don't care about the retention of customers in the long run. Enjoy the boost in players after the wipe, it likely won't last very long once the side-effects are realized. PS: Griefing is abusing game mechanics to deny playability to others. It is not whining about pvp losses whether you are offline or online. The new patch enables griefing to new extremes. You'll find the invulnerable trolls and building spam to be a significant improvement to your enjoyment over complaining about pvp losses. Maybe you also have the free time to do the same-old-shit two, three, four times over, which has already had to happen due to significant glitches (discovery points reset anyone). Maybe staring at rockwall for the fifth and sixth time is "fun" to you. Maybe you all think the new scheduled PVP system will really work, in a MMO that crashes with 200 players on a server. Maybe you're right though, and there won't be enough players at an hour to reach 200 even with three days notice so it'll work. GL with your optimism, experience beyond hedonism saves some of us from the loss of more time in frustration. At least other studios can learn from these shining examples. Peace out, Wildcard/Grapeshot and future iterations.
  5. RE: Labatts. Funny, I don't recall buying two copies of an advertised PVE game. Because I wouldn't have. EA or not, you are sold on an advertised product, and as an ARK EA, the reason we keep playing through the frustrating glitches and bugs is not because it's enjoyable, but because the game is expected to be completed as advertised. You clearly like the changes that will be implemented. I'm not here to change your mind, nor change the game. This is not what was sold, and if I could get those hours back in my life, trust me, I would. There is no claim for compensation for that, nor am I asking for it.
  6. Background: I bought both the early access game about three weeks after launch, and after playing, a second copy for an alternate account for skill/crafting access. Between the two, I have over 500 hours of playtime on Atlas, and around 3,300 on Ark. Ark and Atlas are games that require a commitment, and a certain level of trust towards the server operators that effort will be relatively persistent. Some servers advertise high gather rates and scheduled wipes, for instance, to cater to that kind of player. It is assumed that official servers are (relatively) persistent by a playerbase. If the changes incorporated in the March update was in any way known at the time of purchase, making the game effectively PVE(VP), I would never have purchased the game, much less a second copy of it, and never burned those hours of my life soldering through all the glitches and bugs that this game so frustratingly offers. I bought what was advertised and sold as a PVP game. Period. I've solo farmed several ships all the way including a mystic galleon, and I've lost most of those ships to griefing, so no, I'm not a "free looter". That is precisely why I play, as I take losses I've progressed, and the risk is what keeps me coming back. That's how mature gamers stay with a PVP mmo, and I bought the game knowing I would take those losses. So did everyone else, only some people think it just "wouldn't happen to them" much like they think they will never die. This update is being forced upon, and at the cost of, the people who (were) committed to playing, in deference to those who never did. The game is radically being redesigned in a way that was never advertised, and to which I would never have purchased. It is becoming two game modes, PVE and PVE(vp). In fairness, you need to make refunds an option so that your existing player-base can freely and peacefully exit on good terms, and you can continue going down whatever radically new development path you choose to satisfy all your non-players. I find this necessary to post on your forums as apparently the game is modeled entirely around complaints made on your forums. I was sold two copies of a game you are no longer developing, and to which you will be wiping all content. Please make this an option to be fair to your existing, dedicated player base. Either way, I'm out effective today, the difference is in the perception your company retains moving forward, hopefully we can depart on good terms. Sincerely, Foxtrot
  7. mrfoxtrot

    New pvp changes are trash.

    I bought a PVP game. I also paid for a second alt account. I'll be going out of my way to try to get it refunded. There are players that clearly should have been playing on PVE or unofficial servers, which cater to their needs. Rewrapping the entire game according to the 10% of players whining on the forum is akin, and as brilliant, as a restaurant changing their menu ONLY pursuant to the negative reviews they get on yelp. While certainly, there are people who can start all over and enjoy it, and a few more who will hop in and start out fresh; most don't have the luxury of sinking the time in all over, and doing the SOS all over again. Like anything, 10% of your players are probably 90% of your steam chart player count; and most of those are the ones that you're going to drive off. Changing the game entirely from PvP to forced solo-bob PVE is not what I paid for, and not what was ever advertised or demonstrated.