Front Page Steam Reviews (A wake up call to the Devs)

[Zeonx]

Review 1: "I have played over 1300+ hours on Ark Survival Evolved.
After experiencing in full what the game has to offer.
I am very happy to see that the VAST MAJORITY who's played Ark are united on the same page and feel the same way about this game.
That general consensus being that this game had great potential but the developers has done nothing to help it's community in achieving what it's player base wanted."

Review 2: "The game is quite fun and for big parts well made, sad is though that the developers are doing their best to ruin it; especially since the official launch."

Review 3: "Glitches can set you back days, unstable, unreliable servers are constantly DDossed by rival tribes trying to raid you, or some other large tribe on your server, and possibly the "Killing Blow" for me is the lying from the devs."

 

Start responding to what the players want, and stop sucking so much at your job. MAKE TEST SERVERS FOR PATCHES. Test servers will prevent the need for so many little patches that cause players so many problems. @Jatheish

[Ganelon]

I consider any negative review that starts with hours played over 1000 to be the product of over inflated entitlement and consumer narcissism. It is not possible to play a bad game over 1000 hours, unless you are threatened to do so over pain of death. To not recommend the game is the expression of personal and irrational spite, using the only avenue of 'power' you have.

And in doing so... you devalue your opinion and the legitimacy of these reviews.

Now... I expect this thread to be deleted. I've noticed of late all negative threads of THIS kind... specifically, those that use ad hominum attacks against the devs and WC... get deleted. I support this, because it makes these forums toxic and distracts from the actual enjoyment a player who plays more than 1000 hours clearly would have if he/she was not caught up in the unending poo fling. The lack of crap rants makes this place more enjoyable.

But I wanted to get my 2 cents in.

[KimoBitz]

37 minutes ago, Zeonx said:

Start responding to what the players want, and stop sucking so much at your job. MAKE TEST SERVERS FOR PATCHES. Test servers will prevent the need for so many little patches that cause players so many problems. @Jatheish

I agree, almost every successful video game company has a PTS for it's dedicated community to jump in and test the new additions. The devs are shoving new content constantly into our throat and forgot the main things that made people quit the game for good.

[Zeonx]

5 minutes ago, Ganelon said:

I consider any negative review that starts with hours played over 1000 to be the product of over inflated entitlement and consumer narcissism. It is not possible to play a bad game over 1000 hours, unless you are threatened to do so over pain of death. To not recommend the game is the expression of personal and irrational spite, using the only avenue of 'power' you have.

And in doing so... you devalue your opinion and the legitimacy of these reviews.

Now... I expect this thread to be deleted. I've noticed of late all negative threads of THIS kind... specifically, those that use ad hominum attacks against the devs and WC... get deleted. I support this, because it makes these forums toxic and distracts from the actual enjoyment a player who plays more than 1000 hours clearly would have if he/she was not caught up in the unending poo fling. The lack of crap rants makes this place more enjoyable.

But I wanted to get my 2 cents in.

First, these are not my reviews. Second, your entire argument is based on the assumption that one cannot play something for more than 1000 hours and not like it (this is an absurd concept btw). Third, if the Devs wish to have every post that is adverse to them deleted it will be there own downfall. People learn from mistakes and failures, people who choose to hide from their mistakes and failures remain failures themselves.

[Dracul]

Posting negative stuff on the official ark forums is kind of like writing a last will and testament then burning it and snorting the ashes.

[LordVargar]

The fact is the Devs do care. If they suck so bad at making the game than Make a better one and quit being so toxic and bringing the community down.If you Rally Want to be heard  Don't support the game anymor Stop talking about it stop whining and speak from your wallet. You hate what ARK has become? then STOP poisioning the others aginst it and let your wallet do the talking! making threads of "THE DEVS DONT CARE OR LISTEN" is NOT going to change anything except Tick off thiose that Like the game and have taken time to understand its development I love Ark I know what kind of BS people have put up with behind the making of this game because i care about the people who made this game not the game itself! Threads like this is nothing more than toxic whining to say how they want their ideas in the game and are mad that. a bug was found. you know what? I want a Viking long house in the game because I think it would be awsome but then again im a 40 year old youtuber that plays with puppets as my critics are quick to point out. So want to make the game Better ? Than i sincerely suggest yo all start making helpful criticisim. like Telling Jesse or Jat the sheep seem to be acting like they have mad cow desease and give them time to go thru the Trillions of lines of cade to fix it and refrain from crying on social media and stalking them on their private accounts to get your oppinions to them. Honestly this post was the straw that broke the Titans back for me personally. We all have right to our oppinion but we need to ask ourselves what does it accomplish? At the end of the day in the "real world" Any game devs are just like you and I, and they may have a Dying Mother or a sick child at home or somones getting forclosed on wich most 18 and younger gamers dont understand. Wild Card, 505, Mojang, and EA All know there are critical problems with their games and they ARE listening. That is why ark has come so far what we Really need is a less toxic community of self entitlement. 

[Zeonx]

3 minutes ago, LordVargar said:

The fact is the Devs do care. If they suck so bad at making the game than Make a better one and quit being so toxic and bringing the community down.If you Rally Want to be heard  Don't support the game anymor Stop talking about it stop whining and speak from your wallet. You hate what ARK has become? then STOP poisioning the others aginst it and let your wallet do the talking! making threads of "THE DEVS DONT CARE OR LISTEN" is NOT going to change anything except Tick off thiose that Like the game and have taken time to understand its development I love Ark I know what kind of BS people have put up with behind the making of this game because i care about the people who made this game not the game itself! Threads like this is nothing more than toxic whining to say how they want their ideas in the game and are mad that. a bug was found. you know what? I want a Viking long house in the game because I think it would be awsome but then again im a 40 year old youtuber that plays with puppets as my critics are quick to point out. So want to make the game Better ? Than i sincerely suggest yo all start making helpful criticisim. like Telling Jesse or Jat the sheep seem to be acting like they have mad cow desease and give them time to go thru the Trillions of lines of cade to fix it and refrain from crying on social media and stalking them on their private accounts to get your oppinions to them. Honestly this post was the straw that broke the Titans back for me personally. We all have right to our oppinion but we need to ask ourselves what does it accomplish? At the end of the day in the "real world" Any game devs are just like you and I, and they may have a Dying Mother or a sick child at home or somones getting forclosed on wich most 18 and younger gamers dont understand. Wild Card, 505, Mojang, and EA All know there are critical problems with their games and they ARE listening. That is why ark has come so far what we Really need is a less toxic community of self entitlement. 

First, learn to write in paragraphs. Second, we cannot give helpful feedback when the Devs do not listen. After that nothing you said makes any sense. So you are refuted sir, please move on to the next thread. Thank you.

 

For everyone else, I DID NOT WRITE THOSE REVIEWS. THEY CAME FROM OTHER PLAYERS. 

[Zergling963]

Sigh here we go again ............................................................

[GP]

Although a lot of reviews have fair and valid points, I tend to find those that tell people to stay away from the game are usually profiles that are private. Take the first review you listed for example, that is a private profile. They have stated they have quit the game and do not recommend anyone plays it, however, there is no evidence whatsoever that the person has actually stopped. I see so many people tell others to stay away from ARK and that they themselves have quit but either have private profiles which block access to see if they've quit or they are still actually playing because their review was just blowing off steam.

Private profiles I take with a pinch of salt tbh, many of them have unlikely quit even if they say they have.

[LordVargar]

17 minutes ago, Zeonx said:

First, learn to write in paragraphs. Second, we cannot give helpful feedback when the Devs do not listen. After that nothing you said makes any sense. So you are refuted sir, please move on to the next thread. Thank you.

 

No tank you Zenox. Good day

 

[Olivar]

Thank god I'm not part of the "majority"

[PuffyPony]

Like an earlier guy said,

1- Reviews from players with hundreds of hours really strike me as entitled and whiny. If you can get 200+ hours from a game (especially an early-access game), then your "negative" review means nothing to me because your gameplay shows me that the game has a lot to offer! Never mind the reviews from people with 1000+ hours... That's Skyrim-level time investment, and we all know how popular Skyrim was/is. If you can get that much time before submitting a negative review, maybe it's not that bad

2- When the bulk of negative reviews appear to stem largely from people playing on Official servers, it's hard to take it as reflective of the game. Seriously, the vast bulk of "issues" with the game can be very simply solved by playing Unofficial servers. If anything, the majority of reviews should be considered commentaries on the Official servers, and I do think it's fair to say that Wildcard needs to make sure that they're making an effort for that part of the game, but Official servers are far from the totality of ARK.

3- Generic criticisms like "the devs are ruining the game" mean nothing. That tells me that they made one change that you're butthurt about. It could even be an exploit that they patched that you were abusing! Who knows? If you can't be specific, then what are you even saying? Even something as "Official servers suck!" is better than "muh awful devs."

4- While the community certainly has input, people who say stuff like "the devs ignore what the community wants!" strike me as blowing a lot of hot air. Again, it's non-specific, and because it's non-specific, it's whiny and pretentious because it doesn't seem that this guy can actually tell us what the community wants. Double down with the consideration that what the community wants isn't always best for the game (i.e. I'm not sure of the popularity of the Rocket Launcher nerf, but it sure gave defense a leg up in a meta that overwhelmingly favors offense), and it's really hard to take statements like that seriously

5- See @GP's point about the private profiles. It's not an automatic disqualifier, but when someone comes and says, "ARK sucks! I'm never playing again! blah blah blah!" on their private profile, I can't really take them seriously. I just get this feeling that they don't really mean it

6- Single-item reviews tend not to be very meaningful. All the one-star reviews over the flyer nerf were a big joke to me because it was literally just butthurt over one change. A major change, to be sure, but it's only one aspect of a far larger game. And it happens for all sorts of nonsense. "muh giga nerfz," "no auto turrets on platforms? THE DEVS SUCK!" "mindwipe nerf? BROKEN GAME!" Stuff like that, you know? It honestly makes me chuckle a little that people get so up in arms over a single change, and it's also related to my earlier point that what the "community" (read: the angry reviewer) wants isn't always good for the game.

There are people who submit totally legit reviews that criticize the game. These tend to be comprehensive, specific, and, most importantly, a fair assessment of both the positive and negative elements of the game. Unfortunately, it seems that for every one of those you get, you find at least three times as many that are just "muh devs" or "muh lagz"

[Zeonx]

6 minutes ago, PuffyPony said:

Like an earlier guy said,

1- Reviews from players with hundreds of hours really strike me as entitled and whiny. If you can get 200+ hours from a game (especially an early-access game), then your "negative" review means nothing to me because your gameplay shows me that the game has a lot to offer! Never mind the reviews from people with 1000+ hours... That's Skyrim-level time investment, and we all know how popular Skyrim was/is. If you can get that much time before submitting a negative review, maybe it's not that bad

2- When the bulk of negative reviews appear to stem largely from people playing on Official servers, it's hard to take it as reflective of the game. Seriously, the vast bulk of "issues" with the game can be very simply solved by playing Unofficial servers. If anything, the majority of reviews should be considered commentaries on the Official servers, and I do think it's fair to say that Wildcard needs to make sure that they're making an effort for that part of the game, but Official servers are far from the totality of ARK.

3- Generic criticisms like "the devs are ruining the game" mean nothing. That tells me that they made one change that you're butthurt about. It could even be an exploit that they patched that you were abusing! Who knows? If you can't be specific, then what are you even saying? Even something as "Official servers suck!" is better than "muh awful devs."

4- While the community certainly has input, people who say stuff like "the devs ignore what the community wants!" strike me as blowing a lot of hot air. Again, it's non-specific, and because it's non-specific, it's whiny and pretentious because it doesn't seem that this guy can actually tell us what the community wants. Double down with the consideration that what the community wants isn't always best for the game (i.e. I'm not sure of the popularity of the Rocket Launcher nerf, but it sure gave defense a leg up in a meta that overwhelmingly favors offense), and it's really hard to take statements like that seriously

5- See @GP's point about the private profiles. It's not an automatic disqualifier, but when someone comes says, "ARK sucks! I'm never playing again! blah blah blah!" I can't really take them seriously. I just get this feeling that they don't really mean it

6- Single-item reviews tend not to be very meaningful. All the one-star reviews over the flyer nerf were a big joke to me because it was literally just butthurt over one change. A major change, to be sure, but it's only one aspect of a far larger game. And it happens for all sorts of nonsense. "muh giga nerfz," "no auto turrets on platforms? THE DEVS SUCK!" "mindwipe nerf? BROKEN GAME!" Stuff like that, you know? It honestly makes me chuckle a little that people get so up in arms over a single change, and it's also related to my earlier point that what the "community" (read: the angry reviewer) wants isn't always good for the game.

There are people who submit totally legit reviews that criticize the game. These tend to be comprehensive, specific, and, most importantly, a fair assessment of both the positive and negative elements of the game. Unfortunately, it seems that for every one of those you get, you find at least three times as many that are just "muh devs" or "muh lagz"

 

Why is it so hard for you people to understand that bad reviews are just that. Regardless of whether or not you see value in them, people looking to buy the game WILL read reviews and when the ENTIRE front page is red with bad reviews IT IS BAD FOR THE GAME.

So to you and everyone else who wants to defend WC against what I am saying, you are fools. Before you begin to counter with, "they cannot stop haters" or something akin to that, they can greatly diminish it or maybe even earn a good review or two if they made some basic changes to how they operate such as COMMUNICATING WITH THE PLAYERS and TEST SERVERS for patches. @Jatheish

[LordVargar]

3 minutes ago, PuffyPony said:

Like an earlier guy said,

1- Reviews from players with hundreds of hours really strike me as entitled and whiny. If you can get 200+ hours from a game (especially an early-access game), then your "negative" review means nothing to me because your gameplay shows me that the game has a lot to offer! Never mind the reviews from people with 1000+ hours... That's Skyrim-level time investment, and we all know how popular Skyrim was/is. If you can get that much time before submitting a negative review, maybe it's not that bad

2- When the bulk of negative reviews appear to stem largely from people playing on Official servers, it's hard to take it as reflective of the game. Seriously, the vast bulk of "issues" with the game can be very simply solved by playing Unofficial servers. If anything, the majority of reviews should be considered commentaries on the Official servers, and I do think it's fair to say that Wildcard needs to make sure that they're making an effort for that part of the game, but Official servers are far from the totality of ARK.

3- Generic criticisms like "the devs are ruining the game" mean nothing. That tells me that they made one change that you're butthurt about. It could even be an exploit that they patched that you were abusing! Who knows? If you can't be specific, then what are you even saying? Even something as "Official servers suck!" is better than "muh awful devs."

4- While the community certainly has input, people who say stuff like "the devs ignore what the community wants!" strike me as blowing a lot of hot air. Again, it's non-specific, and because it's non-specific, it's whiny and pretentious because it doesn't seem that this guy can actually tell us what the community wants. Double down with the consideration that what the community wants isn't always best for the game (i.e. I'm not sure of the popularity of the Rocket Launcher nerf, but it sure gave defense a leg up in a meta that overwhelmingly favors offense), and it's really hard to take statements like that seriously

5- See @GP's point about the private profiles. It's not an automatic disqualifier, but when someone comes and says, "ARK sucks! I'm never playing again! blah blah blah!" on their private profile, I can't really take them seriously. I just get this feeling that they don't really mean it

6- Single-item reviews tend not to be very meaningful. All the one-star reviews over the flyer nerf were a big joke to me because it was literally just butthurt over one change. A major change, to be sure, but it's only one aspect of a far larger game. And it happens for all sorts of nonsense. "muh giga nerfz," "no auto turrets on platforms? THE DEVS SUCK!" "mindwipe nerf? BROKEN GAME!" Stuff like that, you know? It honestly makes me chuckle a little that people get so up in arms over a single change, and it's also related to my earlier point that what the "community" (read: the angry reviewer) wants isn't always good for the game.

There are people who submit totally legit reviews that criticize the game. These tend to be comprehensive, specific, and, most importantly, a fair assessment of both the positive and negative elements of the game. Unfortunately, it seems that for every one of those you get, you find at least three times as many that are just "muh devs" or "muh lagz"

While i agree 100% with you i feel the OP is just venting for "reason" as the responce he gave to me is "tell all"  My counter was that Toxic responce is not the answer to get the devs attention. That a more reasonable approach might be taken and implied to be taught to younger generations. We are talking to people with real lives after all. but my hatred for propper grammer and sentence structure forced his attention to me instead of what ever point he was making.

[PuffyPony]

1 minute ago, Zeonx said:

 

Why is it so hard for you people to understand that bad reviews are just that. Regardless of whether or not you see value in them, people looking to buy the game WILL read reviews and when the ENTIRE front page is red with bad reviews IT IS BAD FOR THE GAME.

So to you and everyone else who wants to defend WC against what I am saying, you are fools.

I mean, if you think that angry-posting about it on the forums is going to change anything, then I'm not sure what to tell you. People writing butthurt reviews doesn't impact the quality of the game, and if newcomers aren't going to critically consider that and explore the game for themselves (after all, Steam does have a return policy), then I can't say I really feel too bad about it. But bad reviews from players butthurt about "muh devs" does not necessarily reflect upon the quality of the game or the capability of the devs. Seriously every game has these problems. Dondi and the Isle straight up attacked their playerbase for it because it's so cancerous. Go on any major forum for any given big game, and it's seriously just a cluster of meaningless whining. ARK has been massively successful. It has pioneered Early Access to a degree with which few other games can think to compete. The bad reviews do not change that.

[Jrminot]

I honestly give steam reviews almost no consideration when purchasing a game. I've so often found them to be utterly untrue, unhelpful, or no longer relevant.

I'm pleased with the current state of the game and would highly recommend it to my friends if they didn't already own it.

[PuffyPony]

4 minutes ago, Zeonx said:

Read the last line I wrote on my last post (the one you quoted). Have a nice day sir.

That added commentary literally changes nothing about what I said. The exact same comments still apply

[Jerryn]

Only warning....leave out the name calling and insults.

People can discuss this topic without insults.

[Rintrahhh]

I think in today's gaming world, game reviews are less likely to sway a gamer to buy the game or not. With things like Twitch and YouTube, most serious gamers will look to those to actually see the game being played and decide if it looks like something they might want to play.

[Sphere]

I am doing something about getting what I wanted. Opening my own server. And I want the hardware to guarantee to players the server ain't going away. A whole dual cluster of pvp and pve. I even have staff now. Only a few hundred dollars away from buying hardware, almost there.

[LordVargar]

@PuffyPony has made a finer point (with better grammer) than i ever could.  well done. Every game has issues but ARK has made records with both PC and Console and has made its mark. no ammount of flamming or praise can change that. Well said Pony.  

[RaiderofthelostARK]

I hate that I love ARK. But really...if they fixed the game and put a stop to the dcing I honestly would gladly throw money at them for dlc. 

[Vrallox]

When I look at a game on Steam I go through what the developer supplied in order to entice me into buying the game. The videos, screenshots, and descriptions. Then I'll take a peek at the negative reviews since the developers already supplied what they thought was most important to know about their own game so going through positive reviews would be like listening to recordings from an echo chamber. I also like to know why I SHOULDN'T buy the game. Obviously while ignoring reviews like "This game is <expletive>."

I've yet to purchase a game I deeply regret when using that process. And I bought ARK way before the people of Wildcard showed their true colors and there were unfortunately no reviews from psychics available.

[Lickimus]

At alpha stage I played for 4.5k hours, since full release I have not played much. Maybe I had bad luck chosing servers but impossible to play on laggy servers. Miss target etc etc. First thought the problem was going to be fixed fast but develooers and server company dont fix it. Instead of fix game I read alot of future expansions. 

I used to love the game but even on PVE its hard to play with lag so as the game is right now there is no chance I would have bought it.

Really sad cause the game could be great with good servers.

[KurbbieStompp]

3 hours ago, Dracul said:

Posting negative stuff on the official ark forums is kind of like writing a last will and testament then burning it and snorting the ashes.

this isnt negativity, it is fact.