Bad reviewers on Steam with 1,000+ hours: You are an absolute disgrace

[Hethwill]

Just now, Bearwall said:

 Not every suggestion needs to be taken as is..

That's the entire point in open development and that's what we see in NA, unless the "burning out" is hazing our collective memories.

Backtrack and go through all the suggestions threads. You will find that since Land Ho ! upgrade ( april ? ) most of the stuff introduced was our ideas patched together.

 

[TemplarCrusader]

Что-то слишком много негатива.   Развею немного эту смуту. Naval на данном этапе одна из лучших игр про парусники да и вообще про корабли и битвы. На рынке на данном этапе конкурентов с этой концепцией нет, чем я считаю можно и нужно пользоваться. Много работы проделано, были откровенно плохие нововведения, но были и хорошие - это все акций труд независимо плохой или хороший вышел результат и просто хочется поддержать и сказать: Спасибо за эту игру! Даже если я и многие другие критикуют, иногда эмоции захлестывают, но это не значит что мы не ценим ваши старания, многим хочется заходить и получать удовольствие от игры, а не рутинную обыденность.  Игра близится к релизу, теперь главное сделать правильные выводы из тестов и допилить недоделки. По вопросу с финансами. Игроки не против поддержать проект, мы не один раз обсуждали этот вопрос в клановой ТС если это ускорит процес разработки и качества игры. Мы не против платной подписки, а еще лучше ввести за донат ту же окраску кораблей, разнообразить стили кормы и носа корабля и разных других мелочей, чтобы корабли были действительно по своему виду уникальными, но в пределах классики, ни каких аниме и котиков. Я думаю многим бы понравилось и с финансами на дальнейшее развитие не было бы трудностей. 

[LuxAeterna]

+100% with the initial post.

This is a fine exemple of the human condition... people prefer to shoot themself in the foot rather than think and find mature solutions... shame on them.

 

 

 

[The Spud]

56 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

Perhaps you will write the review for everyone? - I don't agree.. I accept, and respect your right to have an opinion, I'll even defend your right to have one that differs from mine.. but I cannot recommend this game to just everyone. I believe it cater to a very specific audience and that specific audience will find that the game has a lot of potential - I find the game has a huge potential, I find the game developers do not take that potential seriously and I do no believe this game is atm worth around 37€..

I clearly said "I think" and am only saying some people write from the wrong point of view, and it is giving this game a wrong image.

Basicaly the core of the game, the battles, the ships details, the atmosphere (the sounds, the nighttime lights, the crew rumouring about). To me those make up 70% of this games value. This week I heard a guy say, they should ditch the OW and go back to seatrails, and multiple people agreed. Basicaly saying that 70% of this game is good enough to be a game on its own. I don't think anyone will disagree me with me when I say the battle mechanics are great, and good battles will stick in your mind. I bet people can still tell you in detail some of the battles they did 6 months ago. They are epic!

Sadly reviews are like this: Battles are awesome, ships are very detailed, graphics are great. <= Thats most reviews on 70% of the games biggest asset, the thing they got spot on. One or two sentences max. And then they'll write half an essay on stuff that is not good or only half good, and that is going to be changed anyways.

Its like someone asking, how did your food taste, and you'll say "Well, it tasted perfect, but the way they put the meat on the plate was just unheard of, I expected to have a little more sauce with that. And to my likings there might have been a tad less onions in there. etc." Its not logical in my opinon?

You can write whatever you want but write about the stuff that matters to potential players, they don't care about fine woods or hostility bombs. Those are not going to stay.

[jodgi]

43 minutes ago, TemplarCrusader said:

Что-то слишком много негатива.   Развею немного эту смуту. Naval на данном этапе одна из лучших игр про парусники да и вообще про корабли и битвы. На рынке на данном этапе конкурентов с этой концепцией нет, чем я считаю можно и нужно пользоваться. Много работы проделано, были откровенно плохие нововведения, но были и хорошие - это все акций труд независимо плохой или хороший вышел результат и просто хочется поддержать и сказать: Спасибо за эту игру! Даже если я и многие другие критикуют, иногда эмоции захлестывают, но это не значит что мы не ценим ваши старания, многим хочется заходить и получать удовольствие от игры, а не рутинную обыденность.  Игра близится к релизу, теперь главное сделать правильные выводы из тестов и допилить недоделки. По вопросу с финансами. Игроки не против поддержать проект, мы не один раз обсуждали этот вопрос в клановой ТС если это ускорит процес разработки и качества игры. Мы не против платной подписки, а еще лучше ввести за донат ту же окраску кораблей, разнообразить стили кормы и носа корабля и разных других мелочей, чтобы корабли были действительно по своему виду уникальными, но в пределах классики, ни каких аниме и котиков. Я думаю многим бы понравилось и с финансами на дальнейшее развитие не было бы трудностей. 

I took the liberty:

Quote

Something too many negatives. Is this a bit of confusion. Naval at this stage is one of the best games of sailboats and in general about the ships and battle. On the market at this stage of the competition with this concept is not what I believe can and should be used. A lot of work done, innovations were frankly bad, but there were also good - it's all shares work independently good or bad results came out and just want to support and to say: Thank you for this game! Even though I and many others have criticized, sometimes emotions overflow, but this does not mean that we do not appreciate your efforts, many people want to come and enjoy the game, not the mundane routine. The game is nearing release, the main thing now draw the right conclusions from the tests and finished deficiencies. With regard to finances. Players do not mind to support the project, we have not once discussed this issue in the TC clan if it will speed up the processes of development and quality of the game. We are not against paid subscription, and even better for Donat enter the same color of ships, a variety of styles and the stern of the ship nose and various other little things that ships were indeed unique in its form, but within the classics, nor any anime and seals. I think many would also like to finance the further development would not be a hardship.

Согласен.

I simply think this game is great in it's current unfinished form even with known problems and features that I don't like. It's easy to imagine how great it will be if we support the development in any way we can. This is what I try to do.

[Snoopy]

I never understood the reluctance to do skins + subscriptions/expansions or dare I say premium ships.
There is only so much interest in toon sailing boats and after that initial batch of sales.. how else will this game survive?

My wallet is ready.

[The Spud]

3 minutes ago, Borch said:

Yeah, only the ship paints themselves will bump the reviews up (and im serious here). Not even mentioning the rest of the content

I remember the fishing bringing back allot of players, like in June or something. Just to sit outside and AFK fish, cause they could get bottles, and bottles would get you gold upgrades. The patch might fix all that is broken in my opinion. I predict the same effect from the admiralty shop (whenver it comes).

[Hethwill]

3 minutes ago, Borch said:

Yeah, only the ship paints themselves will bump the reviews up (and im serious here).

Not trolling but that simple fact, which I won't disagree, is really something that makes a gamer like myself really ... *shake head in disbelief*

[elite92]

6 minutes ago, Snoopy said:

I never understood the reluctance to do skins + subscriptions/expansions or dare I say premium ships.
There is only so much interest in toon sailing boats and after that initial batch of sales.. how else will this game survive?

My wallet is ready.

in my stupid mind , this game is meant to be F2P with huge player base and great servers with premium subscriptions and buyable skins and stuff related to estetics, i mean NO pay to win. something like 1,99 to buy black flags or 6,99 to have x2 money or exp for 1 month ... it will perfect for game labs and players... because it will be free so tons of players will join and it will be no pay to win... tell me where im wrong pls

[elite92]

3 minutes ago, rediii said:

black flags and shippaint for 1,99€. Both lost when last Dura is lost. You get rich with shit like that  

x2 exp is a good idea too. ^^

yeah something like that xD maybe u cant lose ur paints and colors i mean who wont buy colored sails for his ship? i hate white one xD

ps: u can go Free 2 Play right now, instant, just give to us who paid 37€ stuffs and premium shits worth 37€ and im happy with that, make a little investiment in servers, buy a 10k players server . little advertising on steam and facebook, and BUM : Naval Action tons of players and fun.... again where im wrong?

Edited December 2, 2016 by elite92

[jodgi]

1 minute ago, Snoopy said:

dare I say premium ships.

It's a red flag for many. It is probably smart of the devs to stay away from this for the time being (even if I actually want prems). Even if NA prems were no better than normal ships people would say NA has pay to win, facts be damned!

Just look at WoT. The first true equal or better than normal premiums were introduced only a few months ago, but the white noise from the opposition against pay-to-win has been constant through four years of it being a non-issue (if you care for facts rather than the ghost or myth of pay-to-win prems)

 

10 minutes ago, Snoopy said:

My wallet is ready.

I've spent so little on NA compared to the other games I almost feel guilty  

[Hethwill]

So...

... eye candy is more positive than a solid wargame built over a age of sail sandbox openworld game !?

Am I Reading this correctly ?

[Powderhorn]

Many players pretend that they are pure as the driven snow in many, many regards.  The fact of the matter is, as one person pointed out, this game tends to bring very, very vindictive people into its midst.  Features are requested, implemented with a warning, and then the developers are lambasted for it.  It is no wonder, to me, that they will not be exploring Early Access in later titles.

That said, many of you have said:  "You don't communicate with us enough."  When admin does communicate, you 1.  Accuse him of being petty and threatening, or 2.  Say he needs to spend more time working on the game.  You very much want to have your cake and eat it too.

Let me say this:  They have been working on it.  They continue to work on it.  The biggest complaint I hear is that they do monthly patches instead of incremental, weekly patches.  But if they do incremental patches, the development slows down, and people are unhappy.  Admin has been relatively silent on the forums over the past couple weeks, largely, I expect, because they are in crunch mode for the patch.  They wanted it out sooner, it didn't quite happen (due to technical issues, I'm gathering, as the land in port battles may still be an issue), so now they focus exclusively on it.

Meanwhile, the players have torches and pitchforks.  When admin does come back in, and explains why bad reviews hurt us more than help us (we are all in this together, right?) you accuse him of being overexcited ("calm down") or threatening.  Listen, I've been working with admin for a while now, both in public and behind closed doors.  I assure you, these are some of the most rational, reasonable, calmest-put thoughts he's ever put up; especially in this sea of mob-mentality.

Players have gotten comfortable with the idea of "everything I want can be in the game" because they are so used to open development - something unheard of in other games.  But you fail to consider many other players have different perspectives, needs, or wants.  As an example - many complain about the fine wood.  Would you believe that a fair number of people are still a big fan of it?

To change track, many have suggested to start doing micro-transactions now.  Yet, we know there is a wipe coming.  How can you justify having people buy things, but then take them away?  Certainly, you could code it as a redeemable, but then, more time spent on more false features.  Monetization in early-access brings a slew of problems that are best avoided until after launch.

Many players have weaponized their reviews in order to attack the developers personally.  "I don't like you, therefore I'm going to try to kill the thing that you love."  These are people that I personally wish weren't attracted to PvP-style games in the first place, yet we cannot avoid them.  I would suggest that those who use their reviews merely as a way to try to "force" communication with the developers send them a PM instead, or send one of the moderators a PM instead.  We'd happily rationalize with you why things are the way they are, and tell you whatever we can about what is being done to address it.

At the end of the day, positive reviews generate cashflow.  Cashflow allows for content.  We all want this game to be as awesome as possible.

[Hethwill]

I am not dismissing any eye candy, I'm just impressed at the degree if importance and proposition of priorities being shared.

You know what would be awful interesting ? And looking back to Sea Trials and OW iterations.

Close the access for a time, due to implementations, reopen when things are done. Test them. Close again, open when implemented.

ad aeternum until release.

 

[Vernon Merrill]

See, this is a perfect example of the division of the player base....  There was a thread a few months ago about "premium" and "special" ships/loot for small fees...   Half the people wanted it and half the people immediately went into their "I'm quitting the second it becomes Pay to Play"...  You could tell them until you're blue in the face that it would be stuff like skins/paints/small ships that are trophies, etc., but they would still lose their shit.  You can even see it in some of the comments above about the past "events".  Some people demand equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity.  "If he got the Heavy Rattler BP, then goddammit, I deserve it too!!!"...  Its kinda crazy.

 

And in my opinion, the OW is the best part of this game...  once you get sick of pew pew, you realize that 75% of the battle is won or lost with the tag...  If having a lobby-based arena game was really the draw like some people say it is, then I think the evidence would point to the small/large battles tabs being far more popular.  And that is NOT the case.

 

[Hethwill]

Sure thing  As I said in the post before, it is the order of importance of things.

Giving life to OW is dreadful importante to many of us but is not prioritary to setting up the wargame IMO.

Mind you one of the things I consider prioritary is having PvE specific content that is not the "mission grinding" or simply roving about.

Ship paints can be kept as a sideshow for later.

[elite92]

9 minutes ago, rediii said:

fact:

make the game hardcore = low playerbase

make the game easy to access, hard to master with some eye candy = bigger playerbase

bigger playerbase = more money to develop = more fun even for the hardcore guys because they have something to shoot at

this. i want naval action free to play with some candy, not pay to win. i am sure we can solve problems in this last patches before release, then we need the Free to play to bring more players and populate this huge map! high player base it self will solve problems. positive reviews will come with new players also because the game is free and they will not give a fu. about absence of UI and bad ROE, cause they will have a GREAT game with great combat mechanics for free and many of us and of them will use microtransations(obviusly if u purchase a paint for a ship then u wont lose it with the last dura, u can reuse it on another same ship)

Edited December 2, 2016 by elite92

[Snoopy]

22 minutes ago, jodgi said:

It's a red flag for many. It is probably smart of the devs to stay away from this for the time being (even if I actually want prems). Even if NA prems were no better than normal ships people would say NA has pay to win, facts be damned![..]

Yes, that is a danger. However, instead of WoT a better example would be WoWs where the community knew they would get premium ships from the get go, and, in contrast to WoT where prem tanks tend to be worse, are balanced on par with the regular boats (mostly). There is much less resistance to wallet warriors, so it can be done. Not having premium ammo helps

But I rather have a few people whining about premiums and a healthy game developer, than no paid content and tapering development after release. The majority of games that have paid stuff are still successful if the game itself is fun, moaning or not.

Also, bizarrely, premium stuff might even help PvPers in the long run: For people who haven't mastered the game yet it gives people an excuse why they have lost. It's the wrong reason but it puts people's self image at rest rather than having to face the actual consequence of having been beaten fairly.

This may sound silly, but the same happened in this forum a few weeks ago. I will point out the Santisima vs Ocean+regional bonus debate. The actual reason why people lost was because they sailed crap but self image made that reality impossible to contemplate so a straw man had to be punished. Ocean is the 'Wunderwaffe' of the Seven Seas when in reality it's only marginally better than the Santi (if at all).

 

[jodgi]

7 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

See, this is a perfect example of the division of the player base...

Indeed.

7 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

the OW is the best part of this game...  once you get sick of pew pew, you realize that 75% of the battle is won or lost with the tag...

I didn't know what to expect with an OW. It still seems like a fantastic idea, but I've been sick out of lack of fights. Now I view the OW as a terribly inefficient lobby that we've decided to have because other people love it dearly, somehow...

"Sick of pew pew." lel. I've done 16 years of pew pew in the best online flightsim, 35k battles in WoT and still doing it. I understand that as well as I understand "I'm sick of eating adequate amounts of nutritious, tasty and varied foods."  

18 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

the evidence would point to the small/large battles tabs being far more popular.  And that is NOT the case.

That feature is intentionally suffocated with loss. We don't want to divide the player base at this point (or earlier), small battles without loss has the potential of being so popular that it could hinder OW and overall development.

[BoomBox]

7 minutes ago, elite92 said:

this. i want naval action free to play with some candy, not pay to win. i am sure we can solve problems in this last patches before release, then we need the Free to play to bring more players and populate this huge map! high player base it self will solve problems

i don't want to get too much off topic but i'd like to reply to elite. now i don't have the mmo experience as most ppl do here , being that the only other mmo i played was potbs. But free 2 play didnt solve flying labs problems either and i dont think it solved portulus problems . Be it as it is , it is not my decision to make but i always think that , if you produce something ya need to earn cash with it , or at least it has to cost something. call me old fashioned , or maybe i just dont understand how the new net-economy works.

[elite92]

1 minute ago, jodgi said:

Indeed.

I didn't know what to expect with an OW. It still seems like a fantastic idea, but I've been sick out of lack of fights. Now I view the OW as a terribly inefficient lobby that we've decided to have because other people love it dearly, somehow...

"Sick of pew pew." lel. I've done 16 years of pew pew in the best online flightsim, 35k battles in WoT and still doing it. I understand that as well as I understand "I'm sick of eating adequate amounts of nutritious, tasty and varied foods."  

That feature is intentionally suffocated with loss. We don't want to divide the player base at this point (or earlier), small battles without loss has the potential of being so popular that it could hinder OW and overall development.

small battle are fun as hell, when at least 10 players are in , they outclass ow pvp by far. they are balanced , who join want to fight too so it's pure fun for at least 40 mins, no timesing in ow, no running or chasing noobs under towers and forts and santi fleet.. we make small battle everyday in 5th rate and it's the main reason i log in nowadays in NA

[jodgi]

12 minutes ago, Snoopy said:

This may sound silly

Oh, no. I could write a chapter in that book too:

[elite92]

2 minutes ago, BoomBox said:

i don't want to get too much off topic but i'd like to reply to elite. now i don't have the mmo experience as most ppl do here , being that the only other mmo i played was potbs. But free 2 play didnt solve flying labs problems either and i dont think it solved portulus problems . Be it as it is , it is not my decision to make but i always think that , if you produce something ya need to earn cash with it , or at least it has to cost something. call me old fashioned , or maybe i just dont understand how the new net-economy works.

bad reviews or not bad will not bring new players to this game if it cost 40$. this is a fact.

im here like many others because i love the Age of Sail. i play this type of games since windows millenium in a game called Corsairs (i was only a kid); not because i see in steam a video about losing 1-2 hours sailing in ow to get to some pvp or fight against tard and cheating bots

[Vernon Merrill]

5 minutes ago, elite92 said:

small battle are fun as hell, when at least 10 players are in , they outclass ow pvp by far. they are balanced , who join want to fight too so it's pure fun for at least 40 mins, no timesing in ow, no running or chasing noobs under towers and forts and santi fleet.. we make small battle everyday in 5th rate and it's the main reason i log in nowadays in NA

I can understand that point of view.  However, MY enjoyment comes from hunting trade routes on the OW and supplying my crafters with hard-to-find stuff so that I can be supplied with replacement ships/mods...  

 

Neither way is wrong, but it does show that there are multiple ways of enjoying this game.  Right?

[jodgi]

14 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

it does show that there are multiple ways of enjoying this game.  Right?

absolutely!

____________

@sruPL:

I'd much rather