DLC Criticism

[GP]

Just now, Askadiel said:

So would you say, P+ is longer developed ? Or its worked on ? No Onformation, unplayable and even more new Bugs and broken Function like fishing, with the Release of the DLC. Not even one Fix, since more then 4 Weeks, not really Efford put into, since the Release.....

Firstly Prim+ was never originally intended to be part of the core game and therefore the full release. However, yes Prim+ is continuing to be developed by Ced.

[panteni87]

1 minute ago, GamerPerfection said:

Firstly Prim+ was never originally intended to be part of the core game and therefore the full release. However, yes Prim+ is continuing to be developed by Ced.

It is incredible, in one thread you talk about prim+ as if it is DLC, and now you talk about it as if now it is part of the core game. So the center and prim+ are only an argument when it's in your favor?

[Askadiel]

1 minute ago, GamerPerfection said:

Firstly Prim+ was never originally intended to be part of the core game and therefore the full release. However, yes Prim+ is continuing to be developed by Ced.

I cant see, where i wrote that P+ was intendet as Part of the Core Game, i just say, there was only Promisses, from Ced too and really nothing happends, not even Information over couple Weeks and that isnt an assumption. It would be an assumption, to think there will be worked on........ in the Future.....

[Zahlea]

13 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

There wasn't a promise. Of course all games in Early Access intend to have the game finished at some point, that is no promise though. Even the original 2nd June 2016 release date was not a promise, it was a set target.

You write that sentence as if the game is no longer being developed period.

What do you think Early Access means? "Here, buy this unfinished game"? No, Early Access is definitely a promise of finishing the game. But, that does not also mean gamers don't have to accept that it might not be finished. The two are not mutually exclulsive. You defenders seem to mix that up a lot. Yes, buyers of Early Access must be aware of and accept that the game might not be finished, but make no mistake - the devs are promising to finish the game to the best of their ability!

Wow! Letting Early Access devs off with "you bought an unfinished game" is really setting the bar low. I can only hope that your judgement is clouded by your involvement with Wildcard (being Community Moderator and all) because if we stop expecting any more, stop asking the devs to stick by their promies to the best of their ability, then boy are all gamers screwed when the companies are let free to sell us just any crap and ask us to take it!

[GP]

3 minutes ago, Kimsie said:

What do you think Early Access means? "Here, buy this unfinished game"? No, Early Access is definitely a promise of finishing the game. But, that does not also mean gamers don't have to accept that it might not be finished. The two are not mutually exclulsive. You defenders seem to mix that up a lot. Yes, buyers of Early Access must be aware of and accept that the game might not be finished, but make no mistake - the devs are promising to finish the game to the best of their ability!

Wow! Letting Early Access devs off with "you bought an unfinished game" is really setting the bar low. I can only hope that your judgement is clouded by your involvement with Wildcard (being Community Moderator and all) because if we stop expecting any more, stop asking the devs to stick by their promies to the best of their ability, then boy are all gamers screwed when the companies are let free to sell us just any crap and ask us to take it!

Maybe you've misunderstood what I said, or maybe I didn't explain it well, I don't know. Or maybe my definition of a promise is different from yours. But in my eyes setting a target date of a release is not a promise to you that it will be released on that date, it is a target set from a business perspective. many things can affect a set target that can delay a target. This is not a promise, by my understanding of what a promise represents.

Ok maybe a game in Early Access can be seen as a promise that it will become a finished product. But they have not yet broken that promise have they, because it is still under development.

[fultron3030]

2 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

Maybe you've misunderstood what I said, or maybe I didn't explain it well, I don't know. Or maybe my definition of a promise is different from yours. But in my eyes setting a target date of a release is not a promise to you that it will be released on that date, it is a target set from a business perspective. many things can affect a set target that can delay a target. This is not a promise, by my understanding of what a promise represents.

Ok maybe a game in Early Access can be seen as a promise that it will become a finished product. But they have not yet broken that promise have they, because it is still under development.

When they put resources to releasing another game that isnt the one that I bought a year ago they broke that promise. It may be in production but they made their priorities clear to me. You keep defending them, I hope its because you are a mod here. I really hope that on some basic level you understand what is wrong with all of this. 

[GP]

2 minutes ago, fultron3030 said:

When they put resources to releasing another game that isnt the one that I bought a year ago they broke that promise. It may be in production but they made their priorities clear to me. You keep defending them, I hope its because you are a mod here. I really hope that on some basic level you understand what is wrong with all of this. 

Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I understand most peoples issues about the whole situation. But at the end of the day it's not an end of the world problem. And if they do fully release the game in December, I don't really see the problem of an Expansion being released 3 months earlier (I do understand the issue around that though), as opposed to holding the Expansion back another 6 months to wait until 3 months after the new intended full release.

[LurchUSA]

13 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

Maybe you've misunderstood what I said, or maybe I didn't explain it well, I don't know.

Or maybe it's the fact they you are a community moderator and thus have a vested interest in the game, so OF COURSE you are biasd FOR the DLC. No body is going to really believe what you say, since they see the strings of your Wildcard masters making you dance puppet... DANCE!

[Askadiel]

1 minute ago, GamerPerfection said:

Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I understand most peoples issues about the whole situation. But at the end of the day it's not an end of the world problem. And if they do fully release the game in December, I don't really see the problem of an Expansion being released 3 months earlier (I do understand the issue around that though), as opposed to holding the Expansion back another 6 months to wait until 3 months after the new intended full release.

The Problem is the Time they spend for the DLC, the Time Ced spend into the DLC as we have seen in the Stream on Twicth. And the Biggest Problem is, they spend Support in the Forum for this DLC, for the others, they remain silent. Another Problem is, they did A LOT of QA, was another thing they mentioned in the Stream, QA that was missing in the Patches of the Core Game, on P+ and as far as i know TheCenter too.

[LurchUSA]

8 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I understand most peoples issues about the whole situation. But at the end of the day it's not an end of the world problem.

For some people ARK IS their world. Don't underestimate the nature of addiction, it's a hell of a psychological affliction.

8 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

And if they do fully release the game in December, I don't really see the problem of an Expansion being released 3 months earlier (I do understand the issue around that though), as opposed to holding the Expansion back another 6 months to wait until 3 months after the new intended full release.

Well I see a problem, which is further emphasized when you said "I don't really see the problem of an Expansion being released 3 months earlier (I do understand the issue around that though)". So you don't have a problem but understand the issue... THE ISSUE WHICH IS THE DLC, IS THE PROBLEM! Ever considered a career in political speech writing?

However IF they do release the full game, I would be MORE than happy to pay the $20 DLC. Until then, I am ideologically opposed to this corrupt behavior.

[fultron3030]

Just now, GamerPerfection said:

Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I understand most peoples issues about the whole situation. But at the end of the day it's not an end of the world problem. And if they do fully release the game in December, I don't really see the problem of an Expansion being released 3 months earlier (I do understand the issue around that though), as opposed to holding the Expansion back another 6 months to wait until 3 months after the new intended full release.

The issue is that they relocated resources that we supplied for the original game so that they could make this expansion. If they had released the dlc on day one release of the game i wouldn't be happy but thats the standard so i also wouldn't be surprised. This sets a new low and now not only do they have the vanilla game to fix hundreds of bugs in they also get this expansion to fix. And the countless bugs that will arise from that and the bugs that will cross over. I wouldn't bet on that holiday release after this. Lets not forget that this is also very akin to a pay to win. I pay $20 so i get new creatures, new items, and a separate place to go if anyone ever wants to come after my tribe.

[Zahlea]

19 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

Maybe you've misunderstood what I said, or maybe I didn't explain it well, I don't know. Or maybe my definition of a promise is different from yours. But in my eyes setting a target date of a release is not a promise to you that it will be released on that date, it is a target set from a business perspective. many things can affect a set target that can delay a target. This is not a promise, by my understanding of what a promise represents.

Ok maybe a game in Early Access can be seen as a promise that it will become a finished product. But they have not yet broken that promise have they, because it is still under development.

Okay, this is what has happened:
 

55 minutes ago, fultron3030 said:

I'll tell you what is not an assumption. I bought a game on a promise that it would be finished and it isn't.

To which you replied:

  47 minutes ago, GamerPerfection said:

There wasn't a promise. Of course all games in Early Access intend to have the game finished at some point, that is no promise though. Even the original 2nd June 2016 release date was not a promise, it was a set target.

----

So, what I'm saying is that your reply there is bull, because Early Access is a promise of a finished product. But you seem to have agreed on me on that point so I suppose I won't have to explain it further.

Edit: Underlined the relevant parts.

[Zahlea]

The part I feel the worst about is how they have people with and without the DLC playing together. Just releasing paid DLC (although very unfortunate when they haven't even finished the game), I can get over, but having people play together - that stinks of trying to manipulate purchases!

[LurchUSA]

1 minute ago, Kimsie said:

The part I feel the worst about is how they have people with and without the DLC playing together. Just releasing paid DLC (although very unfortunate when they haven't even finished the game), I can get over, but having people play together - that stinks of trying to manipulate purchases!

...and do you know the WORST part? Every wondered why the last patch was 8 GB... as in Gigabytes?

Well now you know. You get the DLC download whether you want it or not, but if you want to USE the code, that's another $20... CHA'CHING!

[MisterNeedles]

For a guy named Lurch you should have long enough arms for them deep pockets

http://imgur.com/a/l3d8M

[LurchUSA]

Long arms, yes. Deep pockets... um, no.

[waterKeeper]

55 minutes ago, Kimsie said:

So, what I'm saying is that your reply there is bull, because Early Access is a promise of a finished product. 

The disclosure when you purchase tells you it might not get finished and could stay as is.

1 hour ago, fultron3030 said:

When they put resources to releasing another game that isnt the one that I bought a year ago..

It's the same game. Analogy: each ark is like a planet in a galaxy. Ark Survival Evolved is the galaxy. The various arks are each their own planet to explore. You payed early access for the the big picture to be seen through. Not a small piece of the puzzle. Give them time to complete what they've invisioned.

[fultron3030]

2 minutes ago, waterKeeper said:

The disclosure when you purchase tells you it might not get finished and could stay as is.

It's the same game. Analogy: each ark is like a planet in a galaxy. Ark Survival Evolved is the galaxy. The various arks are each their own planet to explore. You payed early access for the the big picture to be seen through. Not a small piece of the puzzle. Give them time to complete what they've invisioned.

I gave them a lot of time more time than they asked for and they released an expansion instead of what we were waiting for.

[LokiTDD]

3 hours ago, GamerPerfection said:

It's actually been said that the development of the Expansion Pack has actually been beneficial as it has identified a lot that can be implemented on Survival Evolved to improve the core game. It is my opinion that without the work done on the Expansion Pack these improvements may not have come to light so early on. I'm not saying that's a defence for the Expansion being released, but the development of it is essentially going go benefit Survival Evolved core game.

So people shouldn't be annoyed that development on the Expansion was happening during the development of the core game because it is going to help the core game development. Whether it was right to release the Expansion is another matter, but at the end of the day Scorched Earth is going to assist in the further development of Survival Evolved.

ends justify the means?

[waterKeeper]

19 minutes ago, fultron3030 said:

I gave them a lot of time more time than they asked for and they released an expansion instead of what we were waiting for.

Games change in the development process. You payed to experience this. 

[fultron3030]

Just now, waterKeeper said:

Games change in the development process. You payed to experience this. 

i did then they made a new game....

[waterKeeper]

1 minute ago, fultron3030 said:

i did then they made a new game....

End loop

Return to

29 minutes ago, waterKeeper said:

It's the same game. Analogy: each ark is like a planet in a galaxy. Ark Survival Evolved is the galaxy. The various arks are each their own planet to explore. You payed early access for the the big picture to be seen through. Not a small piece of the puzzle. Give them time to complete what they've invisioned.

 

[fultron3030]

well poop if its the same game then i shouldn't have to buy it right.... oh wait no its not the same game its a new game something separate from what i paid for. A separate thing from the thing that i gave them money to make. Something they finished before the core was finished. You all want to defend this for some reason. Wait till the bugs roll out. Wait till all the problems that come with this start to surface. They just slowed their progress on the core game even more than it was before.

[Sphere]

I personally think of the new map as a new game. You don't need to buy it to enjoy what you love already. In fact personally I have not even bought it because I'm still busy with the existing content. I can always buy it later down the road, thinking of it as a new game.

[Zahlea]

39 minutes ago, waterKeeper said:

The disclosure when you purchase tells you it might not get finished and could stay as is.

It's the same game. Analogy: each ark is like a planet in a galaxy. Ark Survival Evolved is the galaxy. The various arks are each their own planet to explore. You payed early access for the the big picture to be seen through. Not a small piece of the puzzle. Give them time to complete what they've invisioned.

You must have missed my previous post, here I'll even copy paste the text for you:

"No, Early Access is definitely a promise of finishing the game. But, that doesnot also mean gamers don't have to accept that it might not be finished. The two are not mutually exclulsive. You defenders seem to mix that up a lot. Yes, buyers of Early Access must be aware of and accept that the game might not be finished, but make no mistake - the devs are promising to finish the game to the best of their ability! "