victor

Before raising any "money" argument, I would make some math on the numbers of copies sold (130.000) and the price of the game (40 USD) - plus the 20 USD forged papers eventually sold lately - to have a rough idea of the total income of the project in these two years and half, then you could have a rough idea of how many resources (detracted a fair margin for the developers and the so called "fix" expenses) could be - or have been - invested in the development of the project.

Switzerland does not count, it's a (good) world apart 😁 (BTW I'm also swiss citizen and I vote in the referendum from abroad)

And that's part of the problem: to develop a game that sold 130.000 copies you NEED a game designer.

No, but look at this thread. In another thread the admin asked for cooperation of the community with the thing of the representative and so on. Redii - which is a very active poster - opened a thread to gather suggestions ... some people put their idea in that thread. In this thread Gregory raised the problem of feedback. The Admin could have told something like "some of the ideas of the community are good ... in example [choose the ones you prefer in the other thread] but we would like also some more details on the possible implementation, can you add some more detail about how you would implement the solution" And now - please - read the post of the Admin, fcusing on the tone and the words used. I have learned a long ago that the way you say something is very important to understand what you are saying. And for me the post of the admins just confirms that the attitude of the writer could be summarized in the sentence "no matter what, you are wrong we are right". That's why I wrote it.

I don't take any answer as a good answer if I have no reasons for doing it. And I explained quite clearly the reasons why the answer of the devs - for me - was not a good answer.

I - as some other players - have put in this thread a list of possible new game contents and suggestions, just to hear that they are likely to be ignored just because I should have made the game design work instead of the developers, and you come here (whithout providing any suggestion, but) complaining about my disappointment? Nice one ... indeed. And BTW - as far as you last sentence is concerned - open your eyes: they decided put the game in early access on steam to fund the development, otherwise there would be no beta phase at all.

It's not true. Since Game labs is the developer of the game, also the game design (and not only the algorithm definition/implementation and the encoding) it's up to Game Labs. This means that it's up to Game Labs taking a potentially good game idea and develop into an actual game content. What it seems from the last post of the admin is that he wants that players make (an important part of) the game design work instead of the developer.

As usual. You are right we are wrong.

yes yes ... of course. So basically you agree about the fact that this is a complete game? So why Devs themselves tell it's still beta?

And that's exactly the very point. Think about the fact that Game labs have sold 130.000 copies of the game for about 40 bucks each .... make some math and then you will realize why someone could feel upset.

Well, a lot of people thinks that HERE it is a waste of time. And BTW that's NOT how "IT goes" at all, but just how YOU think it should go.

How do you magically enter in the cargo (full of water) of a sinking wood vessel? Realism card is just a cheap card here: Devs play this card when they need to defend some of their choices and do not play it (while playing the "it's a game" card) when they need to defend their other choices. Point is that they have their tabu and, no matter what, they will keep some mechanics ingame even if a lot of people dislike it. This forum is full of smart proposals that have been totally ignored and the game is full of changes that no one asked for. So basically I have reached the conclusion that there is no actual point in proposing and debating too much about features or game mechanics: just put there your two cents and that's it. Steam reviews and the number of players are just there to show us and them the plain truth about how good are game mechanics. Time and numbers are the best (and merciless) judges. There is no argument against them.

In fact they have to propose and suggest, not to decide. Devs shall just have a clear and most complete picture of different views. It's up to the devs to decide the path of the game.

Objectivity is simply impossible: good solutions often come from a compromise which can be reached through the confrontation of opposite views and intererests. That's the reason why there should be one representative for each "kind" of play style and players (casual, hardcore, PVP, RVR, craft, trade, PVE OS stuff) And each of them shall have not only a lot of hours ingame, but quite an "old" account, since only these are aware of past changes of game mechanics and about what happened after each of them.

Appointment I think they should be chosen by devs. Actually players on forum are just a few and elections will bring ahead just big clan representatives. Requisite - being active in game since a long ago (a lot of hours ingame) - being active in forum - each of them having a good experience about at least one aspect of the game (one for trade, one for craft, one for OS PVP, one for RVR, one for generic OS PVE and missions) function - gather feedback and propose solutions Right persons? - there is no a right person for a new role, trial and error is best way to handle it - but try to avoid the leaders of RVR conquest involved clans (or the shitstorm about the conflict of interest will never end)

According to me a good compromise could be that a part of the loot remains in floating crates that stay there for some time after ship is no longer lootable because it sunk.

Yes ... pro players (whatever this may mean) will use their tricks even more against other pro players. And yes .... a lot of pro players will stop logging if they do not have easy PVP mark farming. But when the few left pro players will have finally realized that - thanks to their wise suggestions - Naval actiont has become a desert, it will be too late. The only way to make this game regain players is giving both pro players and casuals enough content, but creating such content needs money and resources that I doubt Game Labs is willing to put in this game now ... so bascially .... nothing much to do about it.

Of course the fault is in a development that listens to such minority. But I made up my mind quite some time ago about the actual reasons why Devs are going this path. So basically I'm angry about the players that do not realize what's going on. But hey ... who cares. It's just a wasted occasion. Not the first not the last in gaming industry.

Yet it was an attack to the attitude of a certain category of players that is destroying this game. I'm fed up about people saying "carebear" "go to PVE server" and then population is sinking once more. They are free to shittalk about casual players - with direct attacks - so why should they be immune?

oh no, I did not tell anything ... it's you that are imaginging something bad. Besides I was anwering to someone else (look the quote), but that's a detail.

Want sincerity? Ok, so let's be sincere, mate ... Your attitude is killing this game. So for me you can take your inflated little ego and ... well ... make and educated guess about the possible uses that I am thinking about

After nerfing reinfocements (aka small safezones) for preys, creating anti revenge fleet mechanics (aka inmense safezones) for hunters.

Seal clubbers and gankers whinig for being counterganked outside capitals by revenge fleets does not deserve any comment. But ... let's just wait and see if, after reinfocement have been nerfed to almost a joke, the crying gankers will be allowed to farm easy marks even without the only actual factor of risk of loosing their ship (which are revenge fleets).

Just one word (or two): "EVE online". Nuff i said. And ... yes ... I have become as here below

My last two cents: "force" is the wrong word here .... you have to "lure" them out. If you try to force them, they will quit the game. You have to give them better rewards for going out, not taking away the rewards they have for staying in. The "stick" policy led us to a deserted server, the carrot one could revert the tide.