scorched earth Wildcard, you have one chance to salvage the community.

[Jerryn]

1 minute ago, AaBb said:

As I think this might have been a response to what I said I would like to clarify what I meant.  The review scores on Steam are labeled "Early Access Review" and most of them give a pass to performance and bugs that they would not in a released game.  I have no problem with that, I buy some Early Access games including ARK.  Subscriptions and Downloadable Content are post-release business strategies to continue making money from an already successful project.  I have no problem with that either, I have bought plenty of DLC for games that I like.  The problem is the combination.  ARK expects to get the Early Access Review pass while behaving like the game has already been released.  That is an exploitation of the system.  As with all exploits the problem lies both with the exploiter and with the system.

Nearly all of the recent negative reviews included the DLC as a reason that the reviewer did not recommend the game.  That is not useless, misleading, or vindictive, it is the reviewer's opinion and their recommendation.  The falling review score on Steam reflects in part the customer's revocation of the Early Access Review pass.  People are being far more critical of performance issues and bugs in their more recent reviews.  If the company believes that the game is finished enough to release paid content then it is finished enough to be reviewed like a finished game.

But, I don't see them asking for a pass, so I see it as a straw man.  You are drawing your own conclusions.  In order to get the expansion, you have to get the game.  In order to get the game, you will see it is Early Access; a savvy consumer can do the research and make their own decisions.

And, sorry, but rating the game because you are upset about the expansion, is, in my opinion, intellectual dishonest.  And, I find it useless.  And, by your own admission, the 'customers' are trying to change the terms of the contract through aggressive methods, which also indicates to me the reviews are not honest.  Sorry, but I am not buying that argument.

And, they have explained the rationale, you just choose not accept it and use it as a justification to vilify them.  I chose not to.  And there, we will have to part, sorry.

[AaBb]

2 minutes ago, Jerryn said:

But, I don't see them asking for a pass, so I see it as a straw man.  You are drawing your own conclusions.  In order to get the expansion, you have to get the game.  In order to get the game, you will see it is Early Access; a savvy consumer can do the research and make their own decisions.

And, sorry, but rating the game because you are upset about the expansion, is, in my opinion, intellectual dishonest.  And, I find it useless.  And, by your own admission, the 'customers' are trying to change the terms of the contract through aggressive methods, which also indicates to me the reviews are not honest.  Sorry, but I am not buying that argument.

And, they have explained the rationale, you just choose not accept it and use it as a justification to vilify them.  I chose not to.  And there, we will have to part, sorry.

We disagree, people often do that.  I don't have a personal problem with you or anyone else.  I am not vilifying anyone.  All I have done is state my opinion and my rationale for that opinion.

[Jerryn]

Just now, AaBb said:

We disagree, people often do that.  I don't have a personal problem with you or anyone else.  I am not vilifying anyone.  All I have done is state my opinion and my rationale for that opinion.

My apologies if I have misapplied some of what I have seen to you (and that is strictly my fault).

And, that is why I didn't quote you originally, as I was only replying to them being given a pass on technical issues, which I don't think they are or should be; personally seen it more as a timing thing (based on how I see some users act on the forums).  That then flowed into the rest, which was not directed at you, but just general thought stream.

[MrDynamicMan]

On 06/09/2016 at 9:19 AM, Jtmorris said:

^misquote

11 hours ago, OnePotatoChip said:

It's weird. Wildcard promised people that there would be a Desert biome, that we'd be able to tame and ride dragons, that we'd have fire arrows and environmental storms and active hazards. They delivered this and more in Scorched Earth, and, apparently, this means that they misappropriated resources? How can you misappropriate resources on content that you promised the users? Does Scorched Earth resemble a half-hearted cash grab to folks? Was the effort put into this content not worth twenty dollars? Is Wildcard being prosecuted because of other EA titles' errors? I'm not the sort of person who defends someone in the wrong blindly, but this is sounding more and more like a witch hunt. 

We where promised those in the base game. If they'd said "Look at all these amazing new 70 dinos we're adding to the game!" in August (last year), then in January said "HERE THEY Are! For 20 dollars." people would be just as pissed. It's because everyone was under the impression these would be part of the vanilla game, then gets dropped behind a paywall. Not to mention a lot of these features were long awaited like weather. 

[SumNubX]

Its seems im unlike the majority of gamers but when i review games i do take into account the company behind the game, why? Because it matters to me how the company im giving my money to treats their customers (me).

There are a ton of amazing game devs out there that really respect and care about their customers and actually show it. This is still the first (and will be the only cuz i will never buy ea thats a companys first title ever again) early access game that hasn't given me as a early access customer at least a discount on paid content released before actual release. theres been ones before that charged non previous customers for dlc, but never customers that had already bought into early access. 

You can name all the ftp games you want that have premium content, but they run off an entirely different business model from a ptp game. I no longer like wildcard as a company, and while i still enjoy the game they made a ton, i personally will never purchase another product from wildcard.

Not only that but this move has now also hurt other starting companies in ea because now im weary of how they may go about ea, its also obvious by the very loud voices against such a move that at least a decent sized minority of other gamers feel as i do.

I hope the industry as a whole sees this as a bad move but i honestly have my doubts that gamers are actually educated consumers at all anymore. I dont mean that as offensive to those that arent mad at this move, its just extremely obvious that people are willing to look past a companies shady moves as long as a game is fun, which i personally believe we as consumers should not do.

Again my opinion, i respect those who feel the opposite, but to me this is a poopty move that could have huge repercussions down the road for both early access in general and wildcard.

[Ranger1]

24 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

^misquote

We where promised those in the base game. If they'd said "Look at all these amazing new 70 dinos we're adding to the game!" in August (last year), then in January said "HERE THEY Are! For 20 dollars." people would be just as pissed. It's because everyone was under the impression these would be part of the vanilla game, then gets dropped behind a paywall. Not to mention a lot of these features were long awaited like weather. 

Actually, they were pretty clear that the desert biome was going to be handled differently in their Q&A over a year ago, which also was the same Q&A where they confirmed there would be paid DLC expansion packs.

We are also very likely to see the mechanics developed for SE incorporated in some way on the Island (weather, finding fertilized eggs, etc.).

[OnePotatoChip]

15 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

^misquote

We where promised those in the base game. If they'd said "Look at all these amazing new 70 dinos we're adding to the game!" in August (last year), then in January said "HERE THEY Are! For 20 dollars." people would be just as pissed. It's because everyone was under the impression these would be part of the vanilla game, then gets dropped behind a paywall. Not to mention a lot of these features were long awaited like weather. 

Here's my thing, though. WC explicitly told us time and time again that The Island was as large as it was going to be; they couldn't add any more, let alone a 'massive desert' like they said. It was obvious that they needed a new map. And adding the new items and animals was a bonus that's not even restricted to Scorched Earth given that they can be spawned in. That's not even a workaround, either; WC gives the players this much control for a reason. See, at first people were saying that they were upset because resources were misappropriated. Now it's the price tag, something producing an entirely new map as large as Scorched Earth warrants. If you're worried that those systems are going to be stuck to Scorched Earth, don't be; things like storms and stealing eggs to raise them will be coming to The Island. 

[Ranger1]

29 minutes ago, SumNubX said:

Its seems im unlike the majority of gamers but when i review games i do take into account the company behind the game, why? Because it matters to me how the company im giving my money to treats their customers (me).

There are a ton of amazing game devs out there that really respect and care about their customers and actually show it. This is still the first (and will be the only cuz i will never buy ea thats a companys first title ever again) early access game that hasn't given me as a early access customer at least a discount on paid content released before actual release. theres been ones before that charged non previous customers for dlc, but never customers that had already bought into early access. 

You can name all the ftp games you want that have premium content, but they run off an entirely different business model from a ptp game. I no longer like wildcard as a company, and while i still enjoy the game they made a ton, i personally will never purchase another product from wildcard.

Not only that but this move has now also hurt other starting companies in ea because now im weary of how they may go about ea, its also obvious by the very loud voices against such a move that at least a decent sized minority of other gamers feel as i do.

I hope the industry as a whole sees this as a bad move but i honestly have my doubts that gamers are actually educated consumers at all anymore. I dont mean that as offensive to those that arent mad at this move, its just extremely obvious that people are willing to look past a companies shady moves as long as a game is fun, which i personally believe we as consumers should not do.

Again my opinion, i respect those who feel the opposite, but to me this is a poopty move that could have huge repercussions down the road for both early access in general and wildcard.

I won't start up the old debate of what qualifies as DLC, as that tends to end in a circular argument.

Instead just consider the fact that charging for extra content (call it DLC, microtransactions, founders packs, consumables, camo, skins, whatever) is common throughout the gaming industry for games in EA or Beta phases.  You can split hairs about what to call that content purchase, but the bottom line is that these games are still pre-release and yet are also charging their customers for additional content.

I spent well over $100 on Armored Warfare while it was in Early Access, a similar amount on various "World of" titles by Wargaming during various beta stages, and I'm a little embarrassed to admit I spent far more than that in total on War Thunder while in closed and open beta.

If I pay my way into the Star Citizen development phase, I'll also very likely voluntarily purchase additional content from them as well prior to its release.  There is certainly plenty of it available.

Games in development, charging for additional content while still in development.  This has been commonly done in one form or another for years in the gaming industry at large, so respectfully, predictions of "huge repercussions" are pretty unfounded.

[MrDynamicMan]

19 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

Actually, they were pretty clear that the desert biome was going to be handled differently in their Q&A over a year ago, which also was the same Q&A where they confirmed there would be paid DLC expansion packs.

We are also very likely to see the mechanics developed for SE incorporated in some way on the Island (weather, finding fertilized eggs, etc.).

It was far from clear. It was literally "in a sense". Clear is "We're working on a separate desert themed DLC for $20"

They probably will be, but it hurts to see so many things that everyone was looking so forward to in a DLC without any new mechanics in the base game for months. 

 

[MrDynamicMan]

18 minutes ago, OnePotatoChip said:

Here's my thing, though. WC explicitly told us time and time again that The Island was as large as it was going to be; they couldn't add any more, let alone a 'massive desert' like they said. It was obvious that they needed a new map. And adding the new items and animals was a bonus that's not even restricted to Scorched Earth given that they can be spawned in. That's not even a workaround, either; WC gives the players this much control for a reason. See, at first people were saying that they were upset because resources were misappropriated. Now it's the price tag, something producing an entirely new map as large as Scorched Earth warrants. If you're worried that those systems are going to be stuck to Scorched Earth, don't be; things like storms and stealing eggs to raise them will be coming to The Island. 

Above post. 

[Ranger1]

2 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

It was far from clear. It was literally "in a sense". Clear is "We're working on a separate desert themed DLC for $20"

They probably will be, but it hurts to see so many things that everyone was looking so forward to in a DLC without any new mechanics in the base game for months. 

 

True, they did everything BUT spell it out in those words.  Just keep in mind that the gaming industry is very cutthroat, and game companies by necessity keep many future marketing and development plans under their hat.

We really aren't privy to all the details of those plans, nor should be we be.  A game company that shows everything in their hand WILL go out of business, as they can't stay competitive.

[OnePotatoChip]

7 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

It was far from clear. It was literally "in a sense". Clear is "We're working on a separate desert themed DLC for $20"

They probably will be, but it hurts to see so many things that everyone was looking so forward to in a DLC without any new mechanics in the base game for months. 

 

But it's not like you're not getting them. Having to wait for iterations of a patch that's balanced is true to WC form, it's nothing new. Let it be refined on Scorched Earth, away from everyone's thousands of hours of progress. Because, honestly, if they had released electrical storms on The Island, and tribes took the chance to raid while turrets and guns were down, the forums would've lost their minds and there'd be significantly more pitchforks. 

[MrDynamicMan]

8 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

True, they did everything BUT spell it out in those words.  Just keep in mind that the gaming industry is very cutthroat, and game companies by necessity keep many future marketing and development plans under their hat.

We really aren't privy to all the details of those plans, nor should be we be.  A game company that shows everything in their hand WILL go out of business, as they can't stay competitive.

No. This isn't the car industry or price competition between consumption goods. The only thing 'tipping your hat' will do in the game industry is create/kill hype from the customers. It's not like if they'd announced a desert DLC earlier rust would be like "poop we gotta make a desert Dlc quick to put them out of business." 

[MrDynamicMan]

2 minutes ago, OnePotatoChip said:

But it's not like you're not getting them. Having to wait for iterations of a patch that's balanced is true to WC form, it's nothing new. Let it be refined on Scorched Earth, away from everyone's thousands of hours of progress. Because, honestly, if they had released electrical storms on The Island, and tribes took the chance to raid while turrets and guns were down, the forums would've lost their minds and there'd be significantly more pitchforks. 

I agree completely. Scorched earth functions as a testing ground for new mechanics. I'm basically just playing Devils advocate at this point. 

[Ranger1]

1 minute ago, MrDynamicMan said:

No. This isn't the car industry or price competition between consumption goods. The only thing 'tipping your hat' will do in the game industry is create/kill hype from the customers. It's not like if they'd announced a desert DLC earlier rust would be like "poop we gotta make a desert Dlc quick to put them out of business." 

A game company lives or dies by it's "hype".

And yes, if they had spelled all of this out a year ago there is a strong chance that other survival games would have used the time to try and steal their thunder with similar desert themed content.  There are plenty of survival games out there competing with ARK, and even a few dino based games.

Those games don't necessarily need to put ARK out of business, but they'd love to steal a larger share of their player base.

[MrDynamicMan]

7 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

A game company lives or dies by it's "hype".

And yes, if they had spelled all of this out a year ago there is a strong chance that other survival games would have used the time to try and steal their thunder with similar desert themed content.  There are plenty of survival games out there competing with ARK, and even a few dino based games.

Those games don't necessarily need to put ARK out of business, but they'd love to steal a larger share of their player base.

They really wouldn't. It's Extremely unlikely that a knock-off game will steal any of the games player base without being significantly different or cheaper to warrant it. I can think of one or two pitiful mobile games. And larger games like Rust are so fundamentally different that it's unlikely to stop customer from buying one and not the other. 

[Ranger1]

4 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

They really wouldn't. It's Extremely unlikely that a knock-off game will steal any of the games player base without being significantly different or cheaper to warrant it. I can think of one or two pitiful mobile games. And larger games like Rust are so fundamentally different that it's unlikely to stop customer from buying one and not the other. 

Respectfully, that's not remotely true.

We have a large body of players that have come over from games like RUST (among others), so there is a common market share that is at stake.

Not to mention dino games like The ISLE, which costs $20 and is being released in December.

If you want to believe that ARK isn't in competition with other games for a market share, that's up to you... but (and I know this sounds snarky) you're living in a fantasy land all your own that has nothing to do with the realities of the game development industry.

[Rintrahhh]

I looked up the word snarky, and yes that definitely sounded snarky. It also means crotchety. I'm not sure if something can sound crotchety though, except gas maybe.

[CyberAngel67]

5 hours ago, Divine said:

The Devs has put endless hours into this game. There blood, sweat and tears! they have not released this game yet because its not a finished product and they don't want to release something that they don't think is complete, which is fair enough, and a good decision. Scorched earth has been in development for a very long time, for games to survive and grown DLC cant always be free and if you have played scorched earth it is def worth its money. You got The center for free, you got SOTF for free, You have 100s of mods for free thats way more than many games out there give you. How many Games can you say listen to there players, get there players involved in the development process? in the testing, ideas, mods, community forums... ark have been soooo involved with there players! be more grateful, think of things that you have, and think this is another way to support the game you love and to think if you support this DLC maybe more will come in the future. and this game can go on for years and years.

Ok sorry about the Rant. but very passionate about the game and the people in it <3

Not one person has said it is not worth the money.

[CyberAngel67]

23 hours ago, ciabattaroll said:

You're off by a month. The thorny dragon and the behind the scenes video of Ark (which teased developing the thorny dragon as well as the desert environment) was revealed to the public in March of 2016. Factoring in time required for shooting the video would imply that the work could easily have started in February. That's a full 2 months ahead of time from the press release regarding the delay of live deployment.

Maybe, I was going from what I thought I had read.

The sad thing is things like this is all over social media, this is where the real damage is going to come from, especially for Console players who don't like what has happened.

http://fraghero.com/ark-survival-evolved-sparks-major-controversy-over-first-paid-dlc/

 

[Jerryn]

8 minutes ago, CyberAngel67 said:

Maybe, I was going from what I thought I had read.

The sad thing is things like this is all over social media, this is where the real damage is going to come from, especially for Console players who don't like what has happened.

http://fraghero.com/ark-survival-evolved-sparks-major-controversy-over-first-paid-dlc/

 

What is amazing is anyone can take a few quotes/ideas, spam in a few pictures, and they have news site. No real research.  No due diligence.  Just the online version of Time or People magazine.

[chaosguy67]

I love how everyone thinks its because we dont wanna pay $20 lol

[Nowtarfu]

Wild Card does not owe anyone an explanation on how they run their company or choose to expand their line of products. People bought a game in Early access, not rights to dictate how the company runs. If someone does not like it, then they can always take their money (business) elsewhere. There are plenty of people that will still buy and enjoy the game including the DLC.

Funny how Ark Survival Evolved is still in the number 2 spot on Steam Store's Top Sellers Early Access board.

People are so ignorant with their reviews on Steam and other places. Just seen a review on the Scorched Earth DLC with a thumbs down; yet there was high praise for the DLC but complained about the company. The review section is for the game (or DLC) and not ones opinion of the companies business decisions. This is a perfect example of misleading others in the gaming community and invalidates the significance of the review process.. So who is worse for the community? The company who delivers great content or the community deceiving the community? 

Enough said; now time to go play some Ark Scorched Earth. 

[FaneBlackwing]

On 9/2/2016 at 3:34 AM, MrDynamicMan said:

Yes. It would've been part of the main game if it wasn't behind A pay wall. 

No, it wouldn't have. Just because it's free doesn't equate to it being part of the main game. That's just silly to think. Many games have free DLC that have nothing to do with the main game. Destiny for example, has a couple expansions that really don't have anything to do with the main story, and they came out with some free DLC this year that had 'story' that had nothing to do with the main story itself.(If you played the game you'd understand what I mean)

On 9/2/2016 at 3:52 AM, MrDynamicMan said:

Except two of the three DLC are just mods that were community made and already available, and the last is far from a massive effort. Congratulations, you gave us something someone else made and we could already get!  Whoop-di-bloody-doo. 

Congratulations, you completely overlooked the fact that console doesn't have access to mods! That's the main reason they made official mods, so that the players on Xbox and(Eventually) PS4 are able to enjoy some of the most popular mods out there. The world doesn't revolve around PC. It takes a lot of time and effort to convert them over to console too, as it's a totally different system than PC.

[CyberAngel67]

4 hours ago, Jerryn said:

What is amazing is anyone can take a few quotes/ideas, spam in a few pictures, and they have news site. No real research.  No due diligence.  Just the online version of Time or People magazine.

Maybe, maybe not.

One thing for sure is that Facebook, where the majority of people read stuff like this is full of how disatisfied people are, whether you like to hear it or not. Don't under estimate the power of Social Media like Facebook, where people are always asking for peoples opinion on whether they should buy something or not. Wildcard is not immune to the hate going on over there either.