Chill out on the negative reviews on steam

[DeweyDogTV]

There are many things that are not working as planned or hoped for with ASA but the game is still early access on steam so the people that are getting it should be ready for this because its new and still in early release. Early release players should be ready for bugs and problems and be there to to report them and help the game not expect it to be perfect and review it poorly. Just wait for 2024 when it comes out fully and then review it based on how it plays. There are a few things that they seem like they wont fix one of those things being server hosting being only by nitrado, but other than that we should just wait until it fully releases. 

[DirkInSA]

9 minutes ago, DeweyDogTV said:

There are a few things that they seem like they wont fix one of those things being server hosting being only by nitrado

That right there compared to FREE hosting of private servers is the killer!

If you have bought the game and can comment on steam (which I ain't been suckered into the money grab - so I can't) PLEASE go post that it is a FAIL 

[Insaniac2k]

17 minutes ago, DeweyDogTV said:

the game is still early access on steam

Who's gonna tell him

[maxplanck58]

Before paying for a new version of the same game that I have already bought twice before, I want to make sure that the new version doesn't have the same problems that the first one had: dismal performace issues and exploits.  How is it doing?

[UnethicalOctopus]

Yeah honestly the whole 30$ a month to host a server thing is a bot of a deal breaker for a lot of people right at the moment.

[wildbill]

21 minutes ago, DeweyDogTV said:

There are many things that are not working as planned or hoped for with ASA but the game is still early access on steam so the people that are getting it should be ready for this because its new and still in early release. Early release players should be ready for bugs and problems and be there to to report them and help the game not expect it to be perfect and review it poorly. Just wait for 2024 when it comes out fully and then review it based on how it plays. There are a few things that they seem like they wont fix one of those things being server hosting being only by nitrado, but other than that we should just wait until it fully releases. 

Yes. Would be nice if there was an actual forum where we could ask questions and get helpful advice and not just see posts by a bunch of haters. Got to wonder if they hate themselves and blame the whole world for their problems. There really is no excuse for hating a game that is in Early Access. It is clearly labeled that it is not finished and will have bugs and if you don't like games like that, well just don't play them until you see that they are in better condition.

I suspect the ARK discord is a bit friendlier than this forum or the steam forums. I'd ask my questions there, but it is way too busy at the moment.

I was just wanting to know where is the mini map. Never got an answer to that, but instead got triggered reading some really hateful posts.

[Joebl0w13]

1 minute ago, wildbill said:

I suspect the ARK discord is a bit friendlier than this forum or the steam forums

You would be very, very, very wrong. 

[Nashiq]

Nitrado is the only reason i need to make a negative review.   I want to use my current setup.  until that's possible they get a negative review and i refund my game. 

[darkradeon]

no free hosting, no reason to give a positive review.

1 think is exclusivity to nitrado for paid hosting, another is putting nitrado DRM to kill free hosting. also the no reverse engineering clause for dedicated server is another reason to not give a positive review, since server api was a reverse engineering software, free and open source, endorsed by devs in past and core of many mods on dedicated servers and clusters.

Edited October 26, 2023 by darkradeon

[Cowgirl]

1 hour ago, Joebl0w13 said:

You would be very, very, very wrong. 

omg, this literally made me laugh out loud. The discord was toxic enough yesterday before it even came out, I cant even imagine. I literally told people to avoid that place for now cause of how bad it was.

[Kaprosuchus]

I understand where you coming from OP but i have a community of about 12 people and I invested hardware because a community crunch or two ago they said we would be able to run our own servers as long as we weren't doing so commercially. the exclusivity was to hedge out competing server companies.

[zero064]

2 hours ago, DeweyDogTV said:

There are many things that are not working as planned or hoped for with ASA but the game is still early access on steam so the people that are getting it should be ready for this because its new and still in early release. Early release players should be ready for bugs and problems and be there to to report them and help the game not expect it to be perfect and review it poorly. Just wait for 2024 when it comes out fully and then review it based on how it plays. There are a few things that they seem like they wont fix one of those things being server hosting being only by nitrado, but other than that we should just wait until it fully releases. 

Most of us were expecting some bugs. What we weren't expecting was uncertainty around what we get to do with private servers. WC previously left us with the impression we'd get to run our servers as we have for years, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Until we get some clarity on the issue, the only vote we have is with our dollars or our reviews.

[Cailean556]

As long as it's constructively negative, providing actual feedback that is useful to both prospective buyers and Wildcard (if they even bothered to read them), and it's their legitimate feeling on the game - what's the issue with writing a negative review? You can always change it later, if the game improves. Much like I will do eventually, probably.

I've bought ASA, I've gone over my 2 hour refund window. To be honest, I'm not happy with the performance. Especially when my PC meets the "RECOMMENDED" specs.

To me, if those are the Recommended specs, you're telling anyone buying the game that if you have that hardware then the game will run smoothly with a high level of graphical fidelity, at an industry standard speed (say for arguments sake, in ASA, High settings with 60fps, as that's pretty much the universal minimum expectation these days).

At the moment, on Medium settings with my PC that has an RTX 3080, 32GB DDR4 RAM and an SSD (which basically only has ASE and now ASA on it) and an i7-10700F, I'm getting around 40-50fps depending on what I'm doing. I'm averaging about 20-30 or so, on High settings. On Medium settings, I'm not seeing much of a difference in visual clarity, especially on the dinos. The terrain and trees, definitely (over ASE). On High, I'm not seeing much of a difference - especially on the dinos.

I can appreciate that ASA is not even 24 hours old, but Wildcard talked up ASA like it was so much more performant than ASE. Currently, on my set up which meets or exceeds the Recommended specs (for both ASE and ASA), I'm not seeing it. That is a negative. Plus there's a bunch of other, minor stuff I'm not liking right now... Performance, right now, is the massive detractor. ASE runs way, way better (consistently exceeding 70fps even in high-traffic areas).

Hence a negative review.

[UnethicalOctopus]

30 minutes ago, Cailean556 said:

As long as it's constructively negative, providing actual feedback that is useful to both prospective buyers and Wildcard (if they even bothered to read them), and it's their legitimate feeling on the game - what's the issue with writing a negative review? You can always change it later, if the game improves. Much like I will do eventually, probably.

I've bought ASA, I've gone over my 2 hour refund window. To be honest, I'm not happy with the performance. Especially when my PC meets the "RECOMMENDED" specs.

To me, if those are the Recommended specs, you're telling anyone buying the game that if you have that hardware then the game will run smoothly with a high level of graphical fidelity, at an industry standard speed (say for arguments sake, in ASA, High settings with 60fps, as that's pretty much the universal minimum expectation these days).

At the moment, on Medium settings with my PC that has an RTX 3080, 32GB DDR4 RAM and an SSD (which basically only has ASE and now ASA on it) and an i7-10700F, I'm getting around 40-50fps depending on what I'm doing. I'm averaging about 20-30 or so, on High settings. On Medium settings, I'm not seeing much of a difference in visual clarity, especially on the dinos. The terrain and trees, definitely (over ASE). On High, I'm not seeing much of a difference - especially on the dinos.

I can appreciate that ASA is not even 24 hours old, but Wildcard talked up ASA like it was so much more performant than ASE. Currently, on my set up which meets or exceeds the Recommended specs (for both ASE and ASA), I'm not seeing it. That is a negative. Plus there's a bunch of other, minor stuff I'm not liking right now... Performance, right now, is the massive detractor. ASE runs way, way better (consistently exceeding 70fps even in high-traffic areas).

Hence a negative review.

You basically answered the question I framed in another thread. Thank you...

[Hypetrain]

have you attempted to play the game? I'm shocked they have any positive reviews...

[Ctug]

only letting nitrado be the only server hoster is the dumbest thing they have done period

[AndrewLB]

3 hours ago, DeweyDogTV said:

There are many things that are not working as planned or hoped for with ASA but the game is still early access on steam so the people that are getting it should be ready for this because its new and still in early release. Early release players should be ready for bugs and problems and be there to to report them and help the game not expect it to be perfect and review it poorly. Just wait for 2024 when it comes out fully and then review it based on how it plays. There are a few things that they seem like they wont fix one of those things being server hosting being only by nitrado, but other than that we should just wait until it fully releases. 

Early access is simply weasel words for "The game isn't ready yet, so don't complain about the bugs even though we sold it to you for $40".

 

If the Unreal Engine 5 upgrade was Free to season pass holders like it was originally intended, or if the price for those people was reduced to say... $20, then perhaps i'd agree with you. But the fact is promises were made but not kept, and it's annoying as heck to pay $40 to be someone's beta tester.

[AndrewLB]

3 hours ago, wildbill said:

Yes. Would be nice if there was an actual forum where we could ask questions and get helpful advice and not just see posts by a bunch of haters. Got to wonder if they hate themselves and blame the whole world for their problems. There really is no excuse for hating a game that is in Early Access. It is clearly labeled that it is not finished and will have bugs and if you don't like games like that, well just don't play them until you see that they are in better condition.

I suspect the ARK discord is a bit friendlier than this forum or the steam forums. I'd ask my questions there, but it is way too busy at the moment.

I was just wanting to know where is the mini map. Never got an answer to that, but instead got triggered reading some really hateful posts.

Then maybe they shouldn't be charging $40 for us to beta test for them. They had originally announced this was going to be a free upgrade as seen here where they backtracked:

 

[wildbill]

56 minutes ago, AndrewLB said:

Then maybe they shouldn't be charging $40 for us to beta test for them. They had originally announced this was going to be a free upgrade as seen here where they backtracked:

 

Not like you are telling me anything I don't know. Yes, some games charge you to be beta testers (Early Access). Nothing new here, I paid for ARK 8 years ago and found plenty of bugs in it then too.

No one is actually forcing you to buy ASA. You can wait for when it comes out of Early Access and buy it then. It will likely be about $20 more then, but that is about 4 lattes for me, no big deal for most people. If you hate beta testing that much, just wait.

[Pipinghot]

11 hours ago, DeweyDogTV said:

There are many things that are not working as planned or hoped for with ASA but the game is still early access on steam so the people that are getting it should be ready for this because its new and still in early release. Early release players should be ready for bugs and problems and be there to to report them and help the game not expect it to be perfect and review it poorly. Just wait for 2024 when it comes out fully and then review it based on how it plays. There are a few things that they seem like they wont fix one of those things being server hosting being only by nitrado, but other than that we should just wait until it fully releases. 

This argument is hilarious.

If you think that all of the negative votes are only because of one or two days worth of gameplay then you haven't been paying attention for pretty much the entire year. We've known since March that ASA is nothing more than a naked cash grab by a company that's desperate for players to rescue them from their financial malfeasanse.

In addition to all that, there's no excuse for the level of failure that has accompanied this rollout, it's only going this badly because they had to rush it out the door to meet their debt obligations to Nitrado because, again, they've badly mismanaged the company and are deeply in debt.

This is a game that should never have been in EA, there's no excuse for using EA after porting the code from UE4 to UE5. If they had done things right (like many other game companies are capable of doing) they would have made ASA a full release and it would have worked much better on Day 1.

People are not downvoting ARK, they're downvoting WildCard & Snail, that's not going to change not matter what you think.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Pipinghot

[Pipinghot]

5 hours ago, wildbill said:

Yes. Would be nice if there was an actual forum where we could ask questions and get helpful advice and not just see posts by a bunch of haters. Got to wonder if they hate themselves and blame the whole world for their problems. There really is no excuse for hating a game that is in Early Access. It is clearly labeled that it is not finished and will have bugs and if you don't like games like that, well just don't play them until you see that they are in better condition.

I suspect the ARK discord is a bit friendlier than this forum or the steam forums. I'd ask my questions there, but it is way too busy at the moment.

I was just wanting to know where is the mini map. Never got an answer to that, but instead got triggered reading some really hateful posts.

Leveling valid criticisms is not being "a bunch of haters".

What there is truly no excuse for is ASA being in Early Access to begin with, no excuse. This is a product that should have been a full production release on Day 1. The very idea that anyone accepted ASA as Early Access is absurd.

ASA has never been anything more than a naked cash grab, and WC screwed it up exactly as expected. What's astonishing is that there are still apologists trying to make excuses for WC/Snail after they've screwed their players this many times, got to wonder if they hate themselves and need to grovel for WC's approval.

[wildbill]

4 hours ago, Pipinghot said:

Leveling valid criticisms is not being "a bunch of haters".

What there is truly no excuse for is ASA being in Early Access to begin with, no excuse. This is a product that should have been a full production release on Day 1. The very idea that anyone accepted ASA as Early Access is absurd.

ASA has never been anything more than a naked cash grab, and WC screwed it up exactly as expected. What's astonishing is that there are still apologists trying to make excuses for WC/Snail after they've screwed their players this many times, got to wonder if they hate themselves and need to grovel for WC's approval.

You'll never see it, but you just proved my point by your last two posts. Nothing helpful, you just acting like you know everything and basically, feeling all great about yourself and how you've known about this all along. At least you are happy. That is all that counts apparently.

[Pipinghot]

4 hours ago, wildbill said:

You'll never see it, but you just proved my point by your last two posts. Nothing helpful, you just acting like you know everything and basically, feeling all great about yourself and how you've known about this all along. At least you are happy. That is all that counts apparently.

Again... leveling valid criticisms is not being "a bunch of haters". It's a pretty simple concept and yet you continue to not get it.

Speaking of not seeing it, you continue to conflate "haters" with honest criticism of a company that's doing a bad job. When you spout nonsense like, "Got to wonder if they hate themselves..." it becomes painfully clear that you're not attempting to make an honest argument, what you're really trying to do is find a way to silence people who you don't agree with. You didn't even understand the flaw in your post when I reflected it back at you, somehow you interpreted that as me not seeing it, which is pretty ironic since you had to be wearing blinders in order to fail to see it yourself. Showing how weak your argument was by directing it back at you still wasn't enough to get you to "see it". Maybe that's not so surprising considering you weren't really trying to argue in good faith, you were just trying to push people out of the conversation because you don't want to acknowledge that there's validity to the complaints and criticisms they're making.

You started that post with, "Yes. Would be nice if there was an actual forum where we could ask questions and get helpful advice and not just see posts by a bunch of haters." Well there is, right here on these forums. What a shock!

It's happening right now but you apparently aren't able to see it, there are plenty of threads that have been active this week, including right now, in which people are asking questions and getting helpful advice, but you want to pretend that it's not happening when it's going on right under your nose. Your false dichotomy illuminates the reality behind your post, you're not honestly hoping for people to get help from other players, because if you cared about that then those are the threads you'd be posting in. Instead you're posting in the threads with disagreements and arguments, making it clear that what you really want are for people who are unhappy with ARK, WC and Snail to just go away.

If you were sincere about a "forum where we could ask questions and get helpful advice" that's what you'd be doing, but you're not. If that's what you truly wanted you'd be focusing on those threads and helping the people who need help. But every time you post in these threads where people are complaining about ARK, WC and Snail you expose the truth, that really you just want to silence people who are complaining, and that's easy to see.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Pipinghot

[MissAscended]

I am sick of seeing the words ark and early access in the same sentence. That excuse has been beaten to death.

Why even release it? WHY!? Idgaf about some stupid contract. Don't agree to it if the game isn't ready.

Did the last release not teach them anything?  Jeez. 

I honestly would have waited another year for release if it meant I didn't have to listen to the words 'early access' ever again.

Dreading console release. It's just gonna be the same sheet all over again. *sigh*

 

[Pipinghot]

2 hours ago, MissAscended said:

Dreading console release. It's just gonna be the same sheet all over again. *sigh*

Vote with your dollars, that's the only power we have as consumers. There are a bunch of good survival games out there now, it's not like it was when ARK first started. If you give them your money then you are just supporting what they do. It's good to complain, but also give your money to someone else, that's the only thing they understand.