Chill out on the negative reviews on steam

[Helios1]

Why? the server is a hot mess, even for a EA.

Servers couldnt run to save their lives and they got what? 150 servers running? 70x150 so just over 10k ppl can play? when ASE have had 40k consistently  playing for a long time? so 30k players are sitting spamming "join"

im leaving a negative rew all day long until they get this thing to a lvl where i can recommend it to ppl.

[St1ckyBandit]

15 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. 

Hi Cedric 

[Corn1189]

1 hour ago, Pipinghot said:

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.

I've read a few dozen of your recent posts, and my first question is: Why tf are you playing Ark, or even on the forum? You seem to despise the game and the companies who make it (I'm not a fan of Snail, but I'm not going to vent about them in the Ark forums).

If you hold such a strong opinion that people shouldn't support WC by buying A:SA, then 1.) Stop rage posting about how poorly you're keeping up with ASA info, 2.) Try to take an economics course, just so you understand that people have jobs and game developers and are paid currency for it, so even if it is a "naked cash grab," things still cost money, and you can pay or not, but don't go saying things as if you know the inner workings of the company.

It's a safe assumption to say that you aren't on WC or Snail's financial teams, so how do you claim to hold any standing in your argument that WC changing their launch and pricing plans was just to scam people? If a film studio was pushing the release of a movie, would you be shouting from the rooftops that everyone should boycott it and watch something else? 

Calm down, take a break from posting (I'm assuming your blood pressure must be through the roof), and just watch the damn game launch progress, same as I will do.

[Pipinghot]

1 hour ago, Corn1189 said:

I've read a few dozen of your recent posts

Dear Sock Puppet account that was just created today, feel free to have an honest discussion on your real account if you want anyone to respect your posts.

[Corn1189]

Quote

Dear Sock Puppet account that was just created today, feel free to have an honest discussion on your real account if you want anyone to respect your posts.

I do agree that there are issues with the launch of ASA. I agree that it should have been, regretfully and met with backlash, pushed until the game was finished, instead of being in EA. I personally haven't had the need for a personal server, so while the Nitrado ASA server monopoly doesn't affect me, I understand that it affects others. I agree that people should be able to host their own servers on their personal equipment rather than pay for it. 

I'm not watering down the arguments that people are making, but I am saying that people need to realize that nothing will come out of hate posting on the forums. Opinions are being expressed, but they're not constructive. And while that may offer a place for others to show their agreement, it does nothing. There is very little we can do to sway WC, Nitrado, or Snail, but that doesn't mean just completely bash every party involved and slam on a game that people are interested in playing. 

I understand that you're not a fan of how things are right now, but there's better things to do than regurgitate the same "vote with your dollars."

 

(Sidenote: Not an alternate account or a "Sock Puppet" account. I just finally made an account after a few years of lurking  |  I will say, I do enjoy the thought that you felt so slighted by my comments, that the thought of someone finally making an account to respond to your posts was entirely unfathomable, and that the only possibility was that I had to be using an alternate ,'D)

Edited October 27, 2023 by Corn1189
Forgot quote

[Olivar]

Man,

I haven't played Ark in a long time, or even visited these forums, but I am slowly catching up the news surrounding the Ark Ascended release and all the shenanigans that this company is doing. Like seriously, what the hell is even going on?

How can you ruin such an amazing game?
Charging for the remake?
A monopoly on private servers by a company that charges more than my bank for my mortgage?
The sorry state that the remake is in?

Does this company even want to make a game?

[Pizzalicious]

no, all the complaints are warranted

[Hodir]

4 hours ago, Corn1189 said:

I do agree that there are issues with the launch of ASA. I agree that it should have been, regretfully and met with backlash, pushed until the game was finished, instead of being in EA. I personally haven't had the need for a personal server, so while the Nitrado ASA server monopoly doesn't affect me, I understand that it affects others. I agree that people should be able to host their own servers on their personal equipment rather than pay for it. 

I'm not watering down the arguments that people are making, but I am saying that people need to realize that nothing will come out of hate posting on the forums. Opinions are being expressed, but they're not constructive. And while that may offer a place for others to show their agreement, it does nothing. There is very little we can do to sway WC, Nitrado, or Snail, but that doesn't mean just completely bash every party involved and slam on a game that people are interested in playing. 

I understand that you're not a fan of how things are right now, but there's better things to do than regurgitate the same "vote with your dollars."

 

(Sidenote: Not an alternate account or a "Sock Puppet" account. I just finally made an account after a few years of lurking  |  I will say, I do enjoy the thought that you felt so slighted by my comments, that the thought of someone finally making an account to respond to your posts was entirely unfathomable, and that the only possibility was that I had to be using an alternate ,'D)

Complaining about how the negative reviews and feedback left by justifiably angry customers because it's not "constructive" enough for your exacting standards is attempting to water them down. You don't get to set the bar for what is or isn't considered "constructive feedback".

We were promised a free remaster of ARK:SE to UE5. Then Wildcard did a classic rug pull and said they'd charge for it, but that we'd get a hefty discount on ARK 2. Then they did a rug pull on that. Now we have ARK:SA at over $40 with JUST The Island, with all the other ARK:SE expansions likely $20-$30. You are buying the exact same game you already own if you have the complete ARK:SE package and will be paying darn near full price all over again. 

Then, to add insult to injury, Wildcard goes out and finds the single worst game server provider (Nitrasho) on the planet and gives them a monopoly on server hosting for ARK:SA, refusing to release binaries so we can host it ourselves. 

When a company makes promises that it doesn't keep and releases a sub-standard, overpriced copy of a product that you already own, tied to an even worse third party service that the customer is forced to use if they want to host it themselves, all while ignoring the playerbase that actually buys their products then the correct response is to vote with your dollars and not buy the game, or refund it if you already have. It is also the correct response to leave negative reviews on Steam and leave negative commentary on the forums. Every negative comment comment and negative review and every refund is not only justifiable but also richly deserved by WIldcard/Snail Games. 

You don't reward dishonesty and negligence with your dollars. Unless you hate money and love dishonesty and negligence, of course.

 

 

 

 

[Joebl0w13]

26 minutes ago, Hodir said:

ARK:SA at over $40 with JUST The Island, with all the other ARK:SE expansions likely $20-$30

Ark: SA price includes all of the previously released cannon DLC maps. You don't have to pay for them extra. 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Joebl0w13

[Hodir]

38 minutes ago, Joebl0w13 said:

Ark: SA price includes all of the previously released cannon DLC maps. You don't have to pay for them extra. 

Given Wildcard's failure to keep any of its previously stated promises around ARK:SA and ARK 2, I think it would be better to take the "wait and see" approach. Anything that comes out of the studio cannot be taken at face value at this point.  Those massive checks to Vinnie D for his mug and voice in Ark 2 don't write themselves, you know.

[Joebl0w13]

3 minutes ago, Hodir said:

I think it would be better to take the "wait and see" approach.

Can't argue with that. 

[DemonicRuins]

On 10/26/2023 at 3:20 PM, 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. 

You made your account yesterday.....  Why are you talking like you have any idea what's going on?

Edited October 27, 2023 by DemonicRuins

[UnethicalOctopus]

10 hours ago, Joebl0w13 said:

Ark: SA price includes all of the previously released cannon DLC maps. You don't have to pay for them extra. 

For now...

But let's face it, way things have been since announcing ASA is a clear slippery slope.

I'm not complaining myself, just going to keep plugging away on the island in ASE until scprtched earth drops. Then I will see what I see.

[Corn1189]

17 hours ago, DemonicRuins said:

You made your account yesterday.....  Why are you talking like you have any idea what's going on?

I’ve been playing Ark since 2019. I’ve followed Ark news since Gen 1 was released. I’ve never felt the need to comment or interact with anything until recently. I really just like to read what the community has to say. I can’t say for certain that everyone is in the same position, but lurking isn’t uncommon.

 

The age of an account has literally zero correlation with someone’s awareness of what is going on.

Edited October 28, 2023 by Corn1189

[wildbill]

23 hours ago, Pizzalicious said:

no, all the complaints are warranted

All of them? Even the ones complaining about the complaints?

You see, the OP has a point. The complaints are often vague ones, not constructive, and seldom of any use. Mainly people just want to express how they hate the game or its developers.

For those of us trying to find useful information, this is just so much noise that gets in the way of playing the game. 

Today I was able to figure out why my frame rate would sometimes be as low as 5 FPS. I changed it to use DX12, now I'm getting 40 FPS and the game is quite playable on my system that is a bit too close to the minimum system requirements.

Now if there weren't so many trolls and complainers, I might have been able to find that information a lot quicker. So yes, I think it is reasonable to be annoyed by all the complaints with no solutions. What usually simply be called whining (or childish) if done in person instead of on the internet. And yes, very annoying to read or hear.

Edited October 28, 2023 by wildbill

[maxplanck58]

In a way I appreciate all of the negative feedback: I am looking for as many reasons as possible to resist buying the game (since it would require buying a new computer that can run it).  Stay strong....stay strong....

[wildbill]

40 minutes ago, maxplanck58 said:

In a way I appreciate all of the negative feedback: I am looking for as many reasons as possible to resist buying the game (since it would require buying a new computer that can run it).  Stay strong....stay strong....

LOL, I told myself the same thing, but then I saw the minimum and recommended system requirements. Mine seemed to be somewhere in the middle, so I thought what the heck. Seems like it might run OK, but I've had no end of problems so far. Hope that helps you stay strong 

[Thekuervito]

On 10/27/2023 at 6:25 PM, Joebl0w13 said:

Ark: SA price includes all of the previously released cannon DLC maps. You don't have to pay for them extra. 

So,maybe the new 2  maps are another pack like genesis? mmmmm

[Joebl0w13]

23 minutes ago, Thekuervito said:

So,maybe the new 2  maps are another pack like genesis? mmmmm

According to them, one more new paid DLC map sometime down the road.  

[Kalee]

On 10/26/2023 at 11:20 PM, 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. 

I mean if we look at their previous game ASE, that still ha some pretty funny and annoying bugs been fully released now as well. so the Track record is already not too great based on previous experiences.

also you answered the question yourself, why all the negative reviews "There are many things that are not working as planned or hoped for with ASA" I mean if you buy a toaster and it doesn't toast the bread properly... you going to tell them good try worth the money? Early access is just a way to Devs to put out a game and not be held responsible for it if it fails or does poorly.

[wallaby]

a release is a release, its not a free beta test, this is what you get for your money and people should review it accordingly for all its pro's and con's, most the returning players know to expect it to be rough as guts but an unsuspecting new player would purchase this and be fairly frustrated and probably mad, lets be honest the game is ROUGH but appeals to a niche crowd (myself included) who are willing to slog through the bad to find the gem buried DEEEEeeeep in the soul of this game,

in other words... negative reviews are justified, saying 'it will get better'... even tho im sure it will is a pretty poor practice.

[Moonie1]

On 10/26/2023 at 1:20 PM, 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. 

I finally voted it down because Ascended has so much potential to be a great game but that is marred by their horrible customer service. This was a blight all through Evolved and now its plaguing Ascended. Communication and help are non existent as players are left in the dark and forced to remain there. What a pity.

[Pipinghot]

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

I do agree that there are issues with the launch of ASA. I agree that it should have been, regretfully and met with backlash, pushed until the game was finished, instead of being in EA.

There's a lot to unpack here, but this is a good place to start. It's always nice to be able to start on a point of agreement, and we agree on this.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

I personally haven't had the need for a personal server, so while the Nitrado ASA server monopoly doesn't affect me, I understand that it affects others. I agree that people should be able to host their own servers on their personal equipment rather than pay for it.

And that, alone, would be a good enough reason to negative review-bomb the game. It doesn't affect me either, but no matter who it affects it was a scumbag move and everyone should be at least a little irritated with a publisher that would try to pull garbage like that. Calling out scumbaggery shouldn't depend on who is being affected and who is not. There's a lot of wiggle room for discussing how happy or unhappy people should be about normal things, like a reasonable amount of bugs in a release, but when a publisher deliberately screws a portion of their player base that's the kind of thing that should raise red flags for everyone, not just the people who are affected by it.

I'm not saying that everyone on these forums needs to post criticisms of WC because of malfeasance like this, but I am saying anyone who doesn't understand (and tries to criticize) and outpouring of anger when things like this are being done is complaining about the wrong thing. Complaining about people complaining, especially when the complaints are super legitimate is, to put it kindly, a bit silly.

It's worth remembering that the entire point of this thread was complaining about people complaining even through their reasons for complaining were completely legit. It's pretty amusing when people who complain about complaining fail to see the irony in their own complaints.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

I'm not watering down the arguments that people are making, but I am saying that people need to realize that nothing will come out of hate posting on the forums.

Yeah, you are watering them down. To criticize people's complaints, is by definition, attempting to minimize their concerns. Whether anything will come of it or not is immaterial, it still comes down to criticizing people's right to express valid criticisms that are being expressed. If you truly didn't want to water down their concerns then you'd just let them talk, be silent about it, and move on to some other discussion.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

Opinions are being expressed, but they're not constructive.

WC & Nitrado reversed their attempt to deliberately screw people over with their server shenanigans. So yeah, constructive.

I'm not suggesting that was only because of these forums, it was a combination of forums, Twitter, Discord, content providers and people voting with their dollars by getting refunds. It was the collective voices of their customers that forced WC/Nitrado's hand and convinced them that their attempt to screw people was bad business. By any reasonable definition that's constructive.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

There is very little we can do to sway WC, Nitrado, or Snail

That's true. There's very little that any individual can do, it's only through the collective force of customer's voices and actions that messages get through to them, and therefore it's important that as many people as possible express their complaints. One person complaining doesn't accomplish anything, but thousands of people complaining does, which is all the more reason that anyone who wants to see the company's respond to player needs shouldn't waste their own time by complaining about complaining. WC, Nitrado and Snail are not kind, gentle companies, they do not have a history of good customer service and a bad history of making anti-customer decisions. And that's not even talking about outright scumbaggery like banning players who attack Snail's employee tribe in PvP, even if we just limit this discussion to their company treatment of customers it should be clear that they don't react unless there is strong push back from as many people as possible.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

but that doesn't mean just completely bash every party involved and slam on a game that people are interested in playing.

Which is fine, because that's not what's happening. If you're interpreting people complaining about WC, Snail & Nitrado as slamming on the game, then you're badly misinterpreting the criticisms being made. People complain the most when they care about something, the vast majority complaints are because people really like ARK, they want the implementation of the game to be as good as the idea of the game, and they're tired and frustrated that the owners of the game don't do a better job. People are not bashing "every party involved", they're bashing the people who are responsible for these bad, often neglecent, and sometimes even malicious, decisions.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

I understand that you're not a fan of how things are right now

Oh not just right now. If you really had read "dozens" of my posts as you claimed you did, then you'd know that I'm not a fan of a whole lot more than just "right now".

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

but there's better things to do than regurgitate the same "vote with your dollars."

No, there's not. I'm not a content provider with lots of watchers/listeners, so instead I remind people that their true power as consumers is to withhold their money from a company that is neglectful and deceitful is a darned good thing to do. Reminding people of how to exercise their power as consumers and customers isn't "regurgitating" anything, it's just good advice.

On 10/27/2023 at 11:35 AM, Corn1189 said:

(Sidenote: Not an alternate account or a "Sock Puppet" account. I just finally made an account after a few years of lurking  |  I will say, I do enjoy the thought that you felt so slighted by my comments, that the thought of someone finally making an account to respond to your posts was entirely unfathomable, and that the only possibility was that I had to be using an alternate ,'D)

Wow, that's a fascinatingly twisted-logic version of what happened.

No, your false dichotomy is obviously wrong. The idea that you are a sock puppet account was not the "only possibility", it was just the possibility that made the most sense at the time. The first thing you did after creating your account was to repeat arguments that were suspiciously similar to argument that had just been made by a different account. That's a big red flag for a sock puppet account.

But hey, if you want to tell the world that after "years of lurking" I was the one person who was so important you just had to create an account to respond to me, who am I to turn down that kind of adulation from a fan. Apparently I'm the person who inspired your personal passion to stop being passive and take action. You're welcome.

[Pipinghot]

19 hours ago, wildbill said:

All of them? Even the ones complaining about the complaints?

LoL, that was a funny bit of irony, well played.

19 hours ago, wildbill said:

You see, the OP has a point. The complaints are often vague ones, not constructive, and seldom of any use. Mainly people just want to express how they hate the game or its developers.

No, he really doesn't. He's talking about reviews, not bug reports. Complaining about complaining has no point other than to try to silence people from registering their dissatisfaction.

Bug reports need to include more technical detail, but reviews don't. A review only needs to contain the opinion of the reviewer with whatever reasons they believe are good enough to support that complaint.

19 hours ago, wildbill said:

For those of us trying to find useful information, this is just so much noise that gets in the way of playing the game. 

Today I was able to figure out why my frame rate would sometimes be as low as 5 FPS. I changed it to use DX12, now I'm getting 40 FPS and the game is quite playable on my system that is a bit too close to the minimum system requirements.

Now if there weren't so many trolls and complainers, I might have been able to find that information a lot quicker. So yes, I think it is reasonable to be annoyed by all the complaints with no solutions. What usually simply be called whining (or childish) if done in person instead of on the internet. And yes, very annoying to read or hear.

The OP was talking about Steam reviews, you're talking about finding troubleshooting on the forums, two completely different things. A cynical person would suggest that you're trying to use someone else's thread to make this about you and use it as an opportunity for your own axe grinding. You know, like a forum troll does. Good thing I'm not a cynical person.

[OutlawFirebird]

Reviews should reflect how one feels about the game.  Doesn't matter if it's a full release or early access.  If there are issues it needs to be stated.  From what I am seeing ASA is suffering from the same old ark issues. I think it's the frustration of them not learning from there past issues.  The whole sever monopoly is not helping with reviews either.