Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Gathering Thatch

About hawkeye00021

  • Rank
    Cloth Armor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That's because everything is seriously scaled down for you, if he mimicked your "settings" that rig would run the game several times over on one box without any effort. Happy trolling.
  2. Wow, ok. I'm just going to say in a very black and white manner that under no circumstances can something of greatness be accomplished without good and bad feedback unless you want slaves in which case you could build a pyramid or great wall no problem. I will try not to overreach with examples because people will call them too dramatic. The lack of the communities input would be devastating unless WC wanted to create and release a game like this without income generated by the early access risk takers. We have all invested time and money into the creation of this thing now and are very m
  3. Do you know how many bugs I've found? You support the game how you want, but if you seriously cannot grasp bad feedback as a positive thing on the road to developing a product you don't understand how this works. Submit your review, and carry on.
  4. I think if they answer these questions and publish those answers, we would have a big win. I would certainly change my review based on ETAs that are never hit anyways and I know that sounds like sarcasm but it really isn't.
  5. There are various server rating sites though I'm not sure the rules on posting them here. This is probably off topic as well, if you PM me I'd be happy to send you at least one decent one I know of. I host a server and I'm pretty sure I cannot delete comments.
  6. As long as you are ok with a carefully worded negative review, either way I am happy to see that feedback no matter how it reaches the devs and I hope they are too. I work for a company that releases software and there are 6k of us supporting our products. I'll be the first to say that while negative feedback can be personal it's also the most useful way to influence change when you are vested in something. Walking on eggshells will not do any good and while these people that say "blah blah I don't want to pay for DLC" could have left that part out and just said, "I think we missed out on some
  7. No, I reviewed the product based on what I read and expected from launch to now. The company makes games, if you are referring to the law suit or people being upset about getting charged for the DLC perhaps I could agree with you on those reviews. I don't care about monetizing the DLC but I do care that it's 1 year later and much of what I was excited about is super delayed and the DLC has been quoted as being more polished than what I'm currently playing. I'm afraid steam doesn't allow you to review a business practice just the product released on their platform. I think the DLC has positive
  8. It's a review of a product based on opinion, I'm really not sure where you are going with this. People were happy and then a company did something to upset them so the once positive review they had of the company (reflected on the game as their creation) turns negative because that's now how the person feels about the game and somehow that's on the reviewer?
  9. They could have done in-game items, it's not hard to monetize a game without diverting so many dev cycles. I know they said they did not know much about game economies and didn't want to go that route but I do not see the hard at all. If this was really about testing the addition of new ARKs perhaps there is something there but that of course raises the question as to how many ARKs will there be? Will we end up paying several hundred to have them all? You said the didn't charge for The Center and well that's one way to look at it or you could remember that it was free and by most accounts less
  10. You... the worst kind of consumer. Yes you could vote with your wallet as I am doing but on top of that you could provide feedback and yeah sometimes you have to get pretty negative when you try to be diplomatic and get the company line. I'll be honest, I like what a certain someone had to say to the community because I felt like I moment of realism was reached no matter who was right or who was wrong. Are you suggesting that if I pay for something like internet and it doesn't work so I take to social media to complain it paints me as the end user in a negative light? You might understand some
  11. What is it about you people? Money has very little to do with this. Perhaps ARK would like to move to a monthly sub, I would be fine with that. Use my sub cash to FINISH the game and not add so much content that even those of you without lives can keep up with it all. I'm not saying that it's bad to have a ton of content either, but I think most of us would like to see more than a freaking dino added into The Island. We were told about these cool things like weather effects and WC delivered... just not really on the map a lot of us started on and don't want to leave. I'll pay xx money to have
  12. Pfft, bring it on bro. I have disposable income... you want to stop at 100?? Weak man. Why can't there just be a game for the 1%?! Kidding, I'm stuck at 5-7% depending on what you read that day. You want a less crowded server base? Stop being such a broke pansy and host a VPS around 250.00 a month and do some advertising. You don't have to depend on WC servers, I don't.
  • Create New...