Jump to content

Wiping Officials: The big Reddit discussion


JetJaguar

Recommended Posts

If they wipe all the servers, I fell that they will lose a huge player base.

if they wipe all official servers, hundreds, thousands, maybe even tens of thousands of hours of combined tribe time will be reset and would have all been for nothing.

maybe they should monitor servers and reset all the servers that have below a certain number of players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 335
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 minutes ago, vanyelxp5 said:

Hypothetically, lets say that people are right, that not everyone who says they'd quit if WC wipes the servers did so. They would be angry, yes? We've seen the things people will do without that anger. So let me ask you this... How exactly is having all of that anger in the game, possessed by the people who know how to advance quickly, and the best ways to make things rough on new players, good for those new players?

 

Fresh servers restricted to newer players only for at least a month, and in an isolated cluster for at least three times that keeps the current people happy, while still providing a fresh environment for the new players.

I gotta disagree on both counts. If they did not make new servers then yes a wipe would have to happen to be good for new players.

and to your other statement if they make new servers they should ALWAYS be separate and the old servers should NEVER have the chance to transfer over. If they want to go there then they can start at lvl 1 just like everyone else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Volcano637 said:

I gotta disagree on both counts. If they did not make new servers then yes a wipe would have to happen to be good for new players.

and to your other statement if they make new servers they should ALWAYS be separate and the old servers should NEVER have the chance to transfer over. If they want to go there then they can start at lvl 1 just like everyone else

Now this is the only thing I would agree with.

They *should* add new servers at launch (PVE and PVP) for NEW players and they should NOT allow transfers INTO those servers from current ones. they should be clean and clear of players save for new ones or those wishing to start over from scratch at level 1. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JetJaguar said:

Now this is the only thing I would agree with.

They *should* add new servers at launch (PVE and PVP) for NEW players and they should NOT allow transfers INTO those servers from current ones. they should be clean and clear of players save for new ones or those wishing to start over from scratch at level 1. Period.

Perfect. And I am completely fine wil that as well. The thing that bothers me about the old players is they still aren't happy with that. A lot of them still want to be able to transfer over in a month and that would be ridiculous. Even 6 months would be unacceptable, especially since they will have had a 2 year head start by that time. They would need to never be able to transfer and that is the only thing besides a wipe.

EDIT: just because I am totally for a wipe doesn't mean I can't agree on anything else. But if it is something else like new servers it has to be separate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Volcano637 said:

Perfect. And I am completely fine wil that as well. The thing that bothers me about the old players is they still aren't happy with that. A lot of them still want to be able to transfer over in a month and that would be ridiculous. Even 6 months would be unacceptable, especially since they will have had a 2 year head start by that time. They would need to never be able to transfer and that is the only thing besides a wipe.

If they create fresh new servers, no one should be allowed to transfer over. id go so far as to say only transfer OFF the server but once you're off, you're off. Keeping those servers fresh and clean should be a priority. No one "established" should be able to go over there unless they want to start over from scratch at level 1. And that means no transferring items via the obelisk period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JetJaguar said:

If they create fresh new servers, no one should be allowed to transfer over. id go so far as to say only transfer OFF the server but once you're off, you're off. Keeping those servers fresh and clean should be a priority. No one "established" should be able to go over there unless they want to start over from scratch at level 1. And that means no transferring items via the obelisk period.

Well this is the first time we 100% agreed on something. Congrats to both of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Volcano637 said:

I gotta disagree on both counts. If they did not make new servers then yes a wipe would have to happen to be good for new players.

and to your other statement if they make new servers they should ALWAYS be separate and the old servers should NEVER have the chance to transfer over. If they want to go there then they can start at lvl 1 just like everyone else

They've already said that the plan is to make new servers.

 

As for the second. You're always talking about wanting an even playing field (which is impossible with how much of an advantage knowledge of the game gives you) Well, it doesn't get much more even than allowing the new players to trade for the things that people have worked so hard to create once they have the resources to trade like everyone else does.

 

Pvp servers, I'd say should be kept separate, but pve? There's no reason for it after a reasonable delay so that the new servers can be established, which would prevent the old players from coming in and taking over (which is what you're trying to prevent by suggesting that they be kept separate permanently.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, vanyelxp5 said:

They've already said that the plan is to make new servers.

 

As for the second. You're always talking about wanting an even playing field (which is impossible with how much of an advantage knowledge of the game gives you) Well, it doesn't get much more even than allowing the new players to trade for the things that people have worked so hard to create once they have the resources to trade like everyone else does.

 

Pvp servers, I'd say should be kept separate, but pve? There's no reason for it after a reasonable delay so that the new servers can be established, which would prevent the old players from coming in and taking over (which is what you're trying to prevent by suggesting that they be kept separate permanently.)

I a man on board with you as well. I never speak on the behalf of pve because I have not played it, so I shouldn't comment on it and I don't. And yes, if they go the new server route pvp would definitely need to be separated indefinitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Volcano637 said:

I a man on board with you as well. I never speak on the behalf of pve because I have not played it, so I shouldn't comment on it and I don't. And yes, if they go the new server route pvp would definitely need to be separated indefinitely.

I can't see anything wrong with that.  Maybe somewhere down the line they could open them for transfers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DeningWei said:

I can't see anything wrong with that.  Maybe somewhere down the line they could open them for transfers.

As far as pvp goes I just can't agree with transfers. I already agree with new servers. And let's just say I did finally get on board with transfers, it would be a year. That's a far as I can go against my own view 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still maintain that a full wipe doesn't make any sense from a business perspective. The potential losses outweigh the potential gains from such an action.

 

With as long as the game has been in EA, and with as many sales as they've had, the majority of the people who are going to play have most likely already purchased the game, even if they are not actively playing right now. The company can't afford to do anything to alienate the current population of the game, not with the future profitability of it on the line.

 

If they keep the current players happy, then there is a higher probability of more new people coming in because, as already explained, the more popular a game is, the higher the reviews, and the higher the concurrent player count is, the better spot if gets on the store page. Things that end up 4+ pages in don't get many views. Fewer views, fewer buys. Fewer buys, lower profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer Moderator
1 hour ago, Volcano637 said:

does wilcard want it: either a ✅ or a -(they will want the new start, that's why they aren't dead set against it)

I really don't think they want it. Like they said, they are proud of the community in-game creations, etc. I think there is a difference between "wanting to" and "having to" (due to dupers, etc.) and I think the later fit into the "beneficial for development" category, not the former.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, vanyelxp5 said:

I still maintain that a full wipe doesn't make any sense from a business perspective. The potential losses outweigh the potential gains from such an action.

 

With as long as the game has been in EA, and with as many sales as they've had, the majority of the people who are going to play have most likely already purchased the game, even if they are not actively playing right now. The company can't afford to do anything to alienate the current population of the game, not with the future profitability of it on the line.

 

If they keep the current players happy, then there is a higher probability of more new people coming in because, as already explained, the more popular a game is, the higher the reviews, and the higher the concurrent player count is, the better spot if gets on the store page. Things that end up 4+ pages in don't get many views. Fewer views, fewer buys. Fewer buys, lower profits.

And that if fine. Reviewers rather it is media or magazine will tear ark apart if they don't wipe and as far as reviews go player count isn't really going to be that big of a part in it. 

This isnt an endless game. After release there will be very few Dinos added and maybe a couple of maps. And I still say wiping is a good buisness decision. I would always take breaks from WoW and every time and expansion came out I would go back. Is this is bad example? Yes because if you leave you risk losing what you had. Either way people will still come back every time there is another dlc. 

People act like everyone is going to leave but it will be the minority that leaves. 

And as far as not making money on dlc goes. Believe me if the wipe or new servers didn't happen, we wouldn't have to buy them anyway because of cross ark. I am not going to buy something I can just trade for later on. I mean if the map is really that awesome then I might get it, but  as far as Dino's go I'll just wait to be able to trade them. There are plenty of financial reasons for the wipe. Yes some players are worried about their stuff but that is one category out of a lot of others that wildcard has to consider. They can't just say well people don't want it so we won't do it. It just doesn't happen that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, invincibleqc said:

I really don't think they want it. Like they said, they are proud of the community in-game creations, etc. I think there is a difference between "wanting to" and "having to" (due to dupers, etc.) and I think the later fit into the "beneficial for development" category, not the former.

That is why I put an X in beneficial for. Development. Even if you change the ✅ in does wailcard want it to a - which no matter what it is atleast there the score would still be in favor of it. 

At the same time if we make that argument I would say that does the community want it should be a - instead of an x because there is a clear divide between the two which would raise the score back up. Even with bit of those still being x's the score would still be in the positive on point count though. Not saying you are wrong, just having a debate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Volcano637 said:

That is why I put an X in beneficial for. Development. Even if you change the ✅ in does wailcard want it to a - which no matter what it is atleast there the score would still be in favor of it. 

At the same time if we make that argument I would say that does the community want it should be a - instead of an x because there is a clear divide between the two which would raise the score back up. Even with bit of those still being x's the score would still be in the positive on point count though. Not saying you are wrong, just having a debate 

Actually, if you put a neutral response in "Does Wildcard want it" while leaving everything else the same, the net result (as you laid it out) is 0. Meaning it would be a No, if you went purely by the score card.

 

And again, it's only good for new players if you don't consider the anger of the older players/testers as a factor, which you should, so that should be a neutral as well (opening space for new players and making it so everyone can tame, even on the overpopulated servers is a good thing, but having angry people who know how to advance quickly and will make it their mission to ruin the experience of those new players.... Which already happens and would only be made worse by an unannounced wipe... Well, it's pretty obvious that no matter how much space those new players can get... They won't have a good experience, which means they will quit and demand a refund... Which, needless to say, is bad for business.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, vanyelxp5 said:

Actually, if you put a neutral response in "Does Wildcard want it" while leaving everything else the same, the net result (as you laid it out) is 0. Meaning it would be a No, if you went purely by the score card.

 

And again, it's only good for new players if you don't consider the anger of the older players/testers as a factor, which you should, so that should be a neutral as well (opening space for new players and making it so everyone can tame, even on the overpopulated servers is a good thing, but having angry people who know how to advance quickly and will make it their mission to ruin the experience of those new players.... Which already happens and would only be made worse by an unannounced wipe... Well, it's pretty obvious that no matter how much space those new players can get... They won't have a good experience, which means they will quit and demand a refund... Which, needless to say, is bad for business.)

 

 

All I was doing was defending the score card that most would say would be fair. Keep in mind I didn't agree with it. I believe there would be almost all check marks. Still an x for controversy. And I'll even keep a - for community. All others would be ✅ in my actual opinion. With the other score card I believe that one to be fair and accurate, even going against my opinion 

EDIT: and still no because two of the categories were X or - so if all them the opinions were X then yes it would be but I would have to be leaning on the anti wipe side to go that far. Once again I was trying to be fair not be a turn coat.

even with my bias opinion I still wouldn't put all ✅'s but it would be a go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way new server's will help is if Wild Card makes them none transferable from legacy servers. If they do go the route of new servers I think they are heading their bet. They do not feel once fully released there is a large enough influx of new people to buy it. The game is a weird mixture of MMO and survival. I'm all for the wipe as I don't see playing it as work. Also I started playing this game with the realization that a wipe is more than likely going to happen. Yes the grind is real at first. So I would suggest this as a fix and would be with in keeping how Ark land/politics works. Wild Card should give player base a month notice before it happens.  They should set aside a determined amount of legacy servers (15 Island, 15 TheCenter, and 15 Scorched Earth) People will have a month to transfer their dino's and rebuild bases. These servers will only transfer between each other. The rest of the servers will be wiped and retooled for launch. It would be a land grab that doesn't affect release. It would also be the best of both worlds on a divided community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kaoslion said:

The only way new server's will help is if Wild Card makes them none transferable from legacy servers. If they do go the route of new servers I think they are heading their bet. They do not feel once fully released there is a large enough influx of new people to buy it. The game is a weird mixture of MMO and survival. I'm all for the wipe as I don't see playing it as work. Also I started playing this game with the realization that a wipe is more than likely going to happen. Yes the grind is real at first. So I would suggest this as a fix and would be with in keeping how Ark land/politics works. Wild Card should give player base a month notice before it happens.  They should set aside a determined amount of legacy servers (15 Island, 15 TheCenter, and 15 Scorched Earth) People will have a month to transfer their dino's and rebuild bases. These servers will only transfer between each other. The rest of the servers will be wiped and retooled for launch. It would be a land grab that doesn't affect release. It would also be the best of both worlds on a divided community. 

Honestly between the very inactive Primitive servers and Hardcore servers which go weeks with out people logging in to them on on purpose, They could quiet easially obtain this keeping just 1 of each type of island for the hardcore players and primitive players.

 

To me they said they would be using inactive servers for re-purpose however some servers do not have people logging in to them for weeks and their unique active users who join are less then 5 on battle metrics. Yes i know people can log in with same name and random Q names and stuff that do not register.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel that when we bought a game in development, we should have acknowledged the fact that we will lose progress beforehand. Wipe away. If the devs are too afraid to wipe servers to forward the progress of development (such as a biome update)then the game's final production could be worse than it could have been, or at least delayed even more than it already is. I don't want the game to wipe often though, but I definitely feel right now would be a good time to wipe, and then when the game fully releases, wipe for a final time to give the game a fresh start, allowing new people to play free of bugs on new servers as a blank slate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bo0MXxXsplatter said:

I feel that when we bought a game in development, we should have acknowledged the fact that we will lose progress beforehand. Wipe away. If the devs are too afraid to wipe servers to forward the progress of development (such as a biome update)then the game's final production could be worse than it could have been, or at least delayed even more than it already is. I don't want the game to wipe often though, but I definitely feel right now would be a good time to wipe, and then when the game fully releases, wipe for a final time to give the game a fresh start, allowing new people to play free of bugs on new servers as a blank slate.

So you let new players join but the majority of people who brought up the games reputation and have played it since it had come out leaves? No you make new servers for them and keep the old for the people who want to carry on, that way people get to chose rather than a force wipe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/03/2017 at 6:27 AM, JetJaguar said:

Now this is the only thing I would agree with.

They *should* add new servers at launch (PVE and PVP) for NEW players and they should NOT allow transfers INTO those servers from current ones. they should be clean and clear of players save for new ones or those wishing to start over from scratch at level 1. Period.

This 100%.  It also fits perfectly for Wildcard medium term strategy.  They don't really want to keep old servers around but also don't want to annoy people too much, so by doing this they condemn all old servers to a slow (or fast death) and once few enough people use a server they can shut it down and re purpose the hardware.

Current servers stay alive by a constant flow of new people, if all new people get pointed towards the new servers then the old servers will die.  Rename all the current servers as Early Access and filter them out of the server list and what new person is going to join them?  Even people who don't really want to start again will see the writing on the wall and jump ship to new servers, and there is unlikely to be enough people refusing to leave for the server to stay off death row.  Sure they will stay around for a few months, but the old servers are DEAD, kind of surprised this isn't more obvious to people.  If they really want more incentive then just release new DLC but only on new servers.  

That they will keep the old servers around is just to keep people playing now and avoid forum rage, but existing servers are going the way of the dodo, sooner rather than later.  Arguing about a wipe or not is a waste of time.  They ARE being wiped, the only unknown is how long after release before they die and get re purposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...