Good reviews

[Njord]

I would like to request that you guys to upvote this review for NA or better yet leave a positive one that explains the game aswell as this yourself as I think it very well explains NA and why it has so many negative reviews that it does partly simply not deserve and encourages people to try out the game.

Thank you for taking the time to help increase and improve the playerbase.

[Salty Sails]

My very negative review will stay after more then 4600 hours playtime till release, then i will think about it.

But atm, i would every player tell, dont buy it...

 

[Corona Lisa]

59 minutes ago, Sovereign said:

I would like to request that you guys to upvote this review for NA or better yet leave a positive one it has so many negative reviews that it does partly simply not deserve

Its your opinion that the game dont deserve these negative reviews, but the good thing about steam reviews is that everyone can share their own opinion and its hard to buy good reviews in contrast to reviews from IGN or similar.

It would have been better if you just ask about a honest review of the game.

 

(mine is positive btw, but I also understand a lot of the negative ones)

[victor]

People write good reviews if they like the game they find, bad reviews if they don't.

Every review is deserved, since every player has it's own taste and the success of any product is determined by the fact that a lot of consumers like it.

TBH - even if I like the game, have been playing a lot of hours and still play - I would not recommend this game to an average steam customer for the price it's sold now, since it's too hardcore, has a difficult learing curve and it's quite time demanding (and also rather pricey for the actual content it provides, at least in this stage of development).

My suggestion is therefore to keep the "good" reviews for the launch, since - to a certain extent - they would be much more effective in getting in new players that are not likely get along within a week.

Edited April 14, 2018 by victor

[Liq]

The conclusion of having a 2+ years early access alpha

Lots of changes bring lots of negative reviews

Example:

No safezones at all: Big wave of casuals dropping a negative review; most likely won't come back

Safe zones added: "Hunters" are mad and drop a negative review, likely won't come back (meanwhile old reviews complaining about capital camping are still up)

Thus the huge amount of negative reviews has to be judged carefully.

Game needs to settle its final rules and get to a release state, else the review stats will look even worse

[Njord]

1 hour ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

Its your opinion that the game dont deserve these negative reviews

 

2 hours ago, Sovereign said:

negative reviews that it does partly simply not deserve

I said partly and by that I am referring to the reviews that people make without even having enough knowledge of the game and mechanics. If you extensively played the game and are actually in a position to be able to not recommend it then it is something else. Also of course you can leave a negative review, if you feel the need but I am not asking people to do so, because all it does is decrease player numbers even further. The review I was referring to is hands down the best I have read so far. No useless whining and complaining, no sugarcoating - just the truth.

 

1 hour ago, victor said:

Every review is deserved

I disagree.

An example would be a user calling the very common stern raking maneuver "cheap and dirty tricks, that make you lose your ship without a chance" ( yes, this negative review actually does exist ). He isn't rating or not recommending the game based on facts that would help normal people to decide whether to buy the game or not, he is rating the game for retards that are unwilling or unable to learn the game mechanics. The problem is that normal people read this review and maybe take what he says as a fact. If you are rating the game, it is your responsibility and only fair to the devs, if you fully understand the mechanics.

I even read in some reviews that the combat mechanics are bad. How is this a valid and useful review? It's an untruthful opinion and nothing more, that doesn't help me decide whether to buy the game or not.

 

 

Edited April 14, 2018 by Sovereign

[Jean Ribault]

The steam reviews aren't negative or positive, they are a recommendation to buy the game or not.  Many with thumbs down have very positive comments in them about the game.  Bottom line is, given the experience of the player whether they would recommend someone else buy the game.  In the extreme the game could be awesome but if it was $200 I wouldn't recommend it, it isn't a negative review.

You should be encouraging people to be honest, not make blind statements because you recommend the game.  Frankly when I read the comments on Steam, looks to me like the developers of this game cause a large portion of the thumbs down to begin with.  Maybe send them a private note encouraging them to change their ways and provide some good PR.

[Macjimm]

Reviews do not determine if a game is good,  content does.  Likewise a few negative votes won't sway most intelligent people, especially if the reasons for the vote  are not important.

Be careful what you wish for,  wiping the reviews on release may not be favorable, the recent reviews are not.

I would focus on the big picture. Overall most reviews for this game are positive  ...  65%.

 

Edited April 15, 2018 by Macjimm

[Christendom]

if you're going to charge for early access....you open yourself up for reviews.  

[Zoky]

1. Be very careful with asking people for positive reviews. Steam will remove game from sale and ban developer from steam if they think you are dev and/or dev alt asking people for positive reviews. It happened not long ago with some other indie game and I would hate for you to ruin fun for people who still play NA

2. Positive reviews have to be earned. In my opinion this game in its current state doesn't deserve positive review, simple as that

 

EDIT: 1. I'm not accusing you of being dev alt. But like you said there is lot of negativity around this game and some shifty and buthurt people might report this to steam

2. I just read your review for dayZ from back in 2014 and you felt same as I feel now for NA. Its not worth it in its current state (and in case of dayz it will never be worth it coz is dead)

Edited April 15, 2018 by Zoky

[victor]

25 minutes ago, springby said:

in reality they know jack shit.

While - of course - you know it all, right?

 

[BallsOfSteel]

14 hours ago, Salty Sails said:

My very negative review will stay after more then 4600 hours playtime till release, then i will think about it.

But atm, i would every player tell, dont buy it...

 

Spending 4600 hours on something you dont like sounds like a marriage......

[Njord]

I really can not fathom how some of you guys are so negative about the game but are still active on the forums or even playing. Just move on.

 

5 hours ago, Zoky said:

being dev alt

 

5 hours ago, Zoky said:

I just read your review for dayZ

This wasn't my review or steam account. I just found the NA review of this user more helpful than any other I have seen. I also don't think the devs need higher ratings on steam looking at how many copies they have sold already. I would just enjoy not being alone in the OW for once.

 

[Rebrall]

@Sovereign

good reviews will not help this game at all it may bring some fresh blood but the ui is not ready they have a tutorial being made. The best thing they can do is get there heads down finish both the ui and tutorials then push for new players both of those items will improve the retention of players, then they have to push content into the game and get there final end game rules set in stone,

so pushing for new players now with good reviews will just get players in who get fed up not knowing what to do or where to begin will create more negative reviews it’s a patience thing now 

[fox2run]

UI and tutorials doesn't add to gameplay at all.

Gameplay is lacking depth and easier access to PvP. 

PvP is somewhat broken. To fix this require new ways of thinking. Which seems hard at the moment.

 

[Guest]

It can have the best reviews, but still wont retain new players. Bottom line, the game is too complicated and has too big a learning curve for new players. The tutorial will not be enough - not nearly enough to solve this. 

[Nelsons Barrel]

Dont forget that this is not a game you can just play for 2 hours and then leave it besides. I had occassions where i got revengefleeted that often that I played for over 6 hours unwillingly just to save my ship. It is not aiming for the casual player, its only dedicated for the hardcore player that likes to suffer and has many hours spare.

Back when I bought the game, the game was not advertised as 'hardcore'. That tag came later on the shoppage.

[Christendom]

I think the biggest issue currently is that after playing for almost 2 years, the game has pretty much the exact same level of content as the day I started playing.  New ships is not new content.  Missions are exactly the same, crafting is the same and trading is the same.  The rules and ROE for PVP and RVR keep changing, but they're fundamentally the same thing.  The dev team just keeps waffling back and forth on the same old issues, but nothing new seems to be created.  

PVP keeps getting tweaked to cater more and more to the "hardcore" type of player, but meanwhile the casual player has been sorely neglected and unfortunately seems to have given up on the game.  I'm not sure what the percentage of players who ACTIVELY engage in PVP and RVR are, but lets say it's 20% (prolly lower).  So that means at least 80% of the game's population has been ignored for the better part of a couple years and hasn't really had any new content.  It's no wonder they stop playing. 

The majority of these reviews aren't from hardcore vets that are disgruntled.  They're from your average casual gamer who played the game for a week and got bored.  After about 2-3 days of solid gaming your average player has experienced the highest level of content this game has to offer.  That's not good.  Other than the size of the ship in missions they do not really get harder or more challenging, the loot does not scale and what is perhaps the biggest crime....there is zero variety.  Just go out, sink, return.  LAZY game design.

The primary reason why I continue to play this game is because I enjoy the group of people I play with.  If they're not on, usually I'm not.  If they were to go to another game...I'd follow.  I suspect most folks are in the same boat as me.  

So yea if you're charging $40 for an early access game and after 2 years the game doesn't really feel like it's anywhere close to being out of early access.....I think some negative reviews are warranted.  

Edited April 15, 2018 by Christendom

[victor]

3 hours ago, Sovereign said:

I really can not fathom how some of you guys are so negative about the game but are still active on the forums or even playing. Just move on.

 

It's not so difficult to understand: some veteran players (like me) may like the game also as it is now, so they still play, yet they recognize that it's very hardcore and time demanding game and believe that this situation (in particular the lack of viable content for casual players) has been shrinking the player base over this two past years.

Some of us think that - in order to last on the market for some years and become a success product - Naval Action should have a higher population and - thus - it should have not only a very hardcore focused (and limited) content, but also some good content viable for causal players.

So we like the game and still play it, but this does not mean that we should not ask for improvements and - eventually - show our concerns about some changes.

Devs can decide to listen or not (I know that creating fresh new contents instead of tweaking existing things could imply much more money investment and programming effort, so pleasing just some players and not others means bearing different costs), but that's not a reason not to show our opinions.

 

 

Edited April 15, 2018 by victor

[Farrago]

It seems to me that there are sometimes differing definitions on these forums of casual and hardcore. And I'm not sure what the devs mean either.

To me:

Casual means a player who only has a few hours per week or an hour per day to play. Developing content for these players does not mean the game would be "easy". It should not be easy. I'd even suggest that the PVP zones are for this type of player. More varied mission options and a more vibrant economy that encourages crafted ship availability and affordability would help these players. Better availability of NPC ships and ROE that make them more viable in PVP missions would help as well 

Hard core are players with the time and desire to invest in getting the biggest and best. Again, efforts need to be made so that their hours in game can feel more goal oriented than grind.

The best game will attract and retain both types of players. Notice that neither of my descriptions have anything to do with a players desire to fight or being a carebear. 

[Rebrall]

12 hours ago, fox2run said:

UI and tutorials doesn't add to gameplay at all.

Gameplay is lacking depth and easier access to PvP. 

PvP is somewhat broken. To fix this require new ways of thinking. Which seems hard at the moment.

 

Right now that’s an issue from your point of view cause you have the skills to play the game, someone new wouldn’t the game has be created arse about face so right now they basically need to do the starter things that should of been done to start with, you think as a new player loggging into a blue on blue screen as the ui doesn’t really make you want to play does it then you log in and where do you start what do you do so tutorial is a must now, then I don’t care what anyone says they need to get the pve content into the game or something to actually do and achieve, 90% of people starting the game pve not pvp they then transition to pvp which really needs to have its rules delt with 

10 hours ago, Headless Parrot said:

It can have the best reviews, but still wont retain new players. Bottom line, the game is too complicated and has too big a learning curve for new players. The tutorial will not be enough - not nearly enough to solve this. 

Honestly it’s has a resonable learning curve but people having the basic skills and understanding angling shots and manual sailing puts them in a good position to being able to play and from the tutorials I tested it’s really a good start 

 

also @Christendom is right the game hasn’t changed for a while just same things different mechanics and honestly they need to add more I get they want to get the pvp right as that’s were they started I just feel that once they work on the pve the Pvp will have to be tweaked again cause what the pve content can bring to the table 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Rebrall

[Slim McSauce]

That's why UI and tutorial is absolutely 100% the best choice the devs have made in a year. FINALLY! Something completely new and unique to the game that we've never seen before. Devs taking a break from the backbreaking number tweak-coding and getting artsy on some UI probably has them thinking of many new ideas for the game.

[Rebrall]

1 hour ago, Intrepido said:

UI and localization wont make that old players come to the game.

PvP and RvR tweaks and fixes will stop, momentarily. the current bleeding of players.

 

New and fresh content that caters the casual playerbase, but specially the guys with only 2 hours a day, is my bet for the survival of this game.

I fully agree with you on the content,

but I know a lot of players that stop playing or will not play cause of the ui which is sad but when you get a game and the ui is just crap it isn’t exactly inviting all the same,

 

and a lot of the old players arnt coming back let’s be honest here they feel they got what they wanted out of the game or just plain got fed up it would also help if they knew what the changes are

Edited April 16, 2018 by Rebrall

[fox2run]

To be casual means not having too much time to play.  To have some rewarding xp out of this game is hard.

PvP is hard to get as too few are online. It takes too much time to figure out where to find the enemy.

I remember many hours of wasted time sailing around, moving outpost etc to no avail.

This is the key to a larger player base. Not some UI.

[victor]

10 hours ago, Rebrall said:

once they work on the pve

you are an optimist, I think that they will never add new PVE content (but maybe I am a pessimist)