@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
I love this word 'fair' all of the safer seas enthusiasts keep throwing around. I don't find it very fair rare misled us for years, and decided to go against their vision with safer seas, but it is what it is.
You can still play High Seas and nothing on this mode has changed.
And?
@xxl3g1txcatxx said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@pithyrumble Are you in their forums arguing against it like here?
Reading is fundamental. I said I'm not on their forums demanding it be changed. I understand the concept of a developmental vision. I understand that not every game will appeal to every player too.
Arena was unnecessary. HG is unnecessary. Safer Seas is unnecessary.
But here we are. Play it and shut up. Or don't. I'm having fun either way and I'm pvp averse. Once the mode's been out a while and Rare can see some numbers, they'll make adjustments. Or not.
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
I love this word 'fair' all of the safer seas enthusiasts keep throwing around. I don't find it very fair rare misled us for years, and decided to go against their vision with safer seas, but it is what it is.
You can still play High Seas and nothing on this mode has changed.
And?
Safer seas takes nothing away from the high seas, yet safer seas is restricted and high seas is not. The elephant in the room is that perhaps Rare's vision for the game is not shared by the majority of their playerbase or potential playerbase. They are left with a choice: Stick to their guns and maybe sink their ship (puns work) or not and that may sink their ship.
At the end of the day players stay when they are having fun and if you want to make money on your game that counts on player count you must make sure your players on all sides are having fun, otherwise you are simply chasing your own tail.
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
The elephant in the room is that perhaps Rare's vision for the game is not shared by the majority of their playerbase or potential playerbase.
[Citation Needed]
@sairdontis Steam population isn't the full population by a long shot. Most of the game's population comes via Xbox and the community don't have access to numbers for that.
Additionally we've been in a pretty long content drought, skull of siren song not withstanding, so of course the population has dropped as players go to other games to find something to do. (Guilds and safer seas didn't add anything to do in the game per-se)
The queues for safer seas aren't meaningful imo.
On safer seas, the crew to server ratio is 1 to 1, or worse, if it's a solo sloop, the player to server ratio is 1 to 1. Of course they're going to fill up and hit whatever limit is in place quickly.
Higher seas servers need at least 5 times as much population (usually 6) to hit that same limit, and that assumes the limit on number of safer seas servers is identical to the limit of number of higher seas servers, which we have no knowledge of.
@phantaxus But why do people have to make their way to higher seas? I just don't get why there can't be high seas and safer seas. What does it take away from you if I develop a character in safer seas and stay there? I would be ok with never being allowed to transfer that character to high seas? I would love a safer seas area where all the ships on the server are people I know.
Yes, that is not what the game was originally developed for. But in the reality people make products for others depending on what is wanted. If people also want this option, why should it take away from your life?
@juniperty said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@phantaxus But why do people have to make their way to higher seas? I just don't get why there can't be high seas and safer seas. What does it take away from you if I develop a character in safer seas and stay there? I would be ok with never being allowed to transfer that character to high seas? I would love a safer seas area where all the ships on the server are people I know.
Yes, that is not what the game was originally developed for. But in the reality people make products for others depending on what is wanted. If people also want this option, why should it take away from your life?
And these are the questions that are never fully answered and I believe for a reason. You see this same question in most if not all games with pvp in them and players are reluctant to answer there was well.
@xxl3g1txcatxx It's Rare's game, not yours. Just becuase you like the way a certain mechanic that isn't replicated anywhere else doesn't mean they have to cater twoard your style. Be greatfull you get SS at all.
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
I love this word 'fair' all of the safer seas enthusiasts keep throwing around. I don't find it very fair rare misled us for years, and decided to go against their vision with safer seas, but it is what it is.
You can still play High Seas and nothing on this mode has changed.
And?
Safer seas takes nothing away from the high seas, yet safer seas is restricted and high seas is not.
Nope. Safer Seas does affect High Seas. SoT is about "cosmetic progression". When someone worked for cosmetics on "hard" mode and got the same reward as someone who did it on "easy", then the cosmetic has no meaning and removes that progression from said "hard" mode player.
@riptide3683 said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@danbeardluff said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
I love this word 'fair' all of the safer seas enthusiasts keep throwing around. I don't find it very fair rare misled us for years, and decided to go against their vision with safer seas, but it is what it is.
You can still play High Seas and nothing on this mode has changed.
And?
Safer seas takes nothing away from the high seas, yet safer seas is restricted and high seas is not.
Nope. Safer Seas does affect High Seas. SoT is about "cosmetic progression". When someone worked for cosmetics on "hard" mode and got the same reward as someone who did it on "easy", then the cosmetic has no meaning and removes that progression from said "hard" mode player.
That is an opinion only though. There is no proof that the "hard" mode player valued a cosmetic more than one that played on "easy" mode. Earned is purchased no matter the mode.
A trend in these PvE post is making assumptions based on very little info. That, and stories about PvP encounters that involved slurs, toxicity (which to many seems to mean that they were simply attacked), loud music over mic’s and every other terrible thing imaginable; and of course they happen all of the time. I’ve experienced these things as well —in every online game I’ve ever played, PvP or not— those behaviors are not unique to SoT or PvP. Also, it’s strange to me that I hardly ever have bad experiences in SoT, and actually, as an hourglass player I find that those participating in the mode are generally less toxic than players in the open world. I’ve also been called all the names by players who were upset that I attacked them at an event… which are meant to be fought over. Everything I just shared is anecdotal of course, but so are all of these stories which seem exaggerated regarding both the severity and frequency of these encounters. But I can’t know what you’ve experienced, that’s just my perception. I play primarily US west solo, but I occasionally play with friends on East, EU, and AUS. Somehow I’m not running into these constant PvP monsters I keep hearing about. Maybe I’m just lucky? Again, I have had toxic experiences in SoT, also again, they were not limited to PvP encounters, not in this game or any. I’ve been doing tall tales lately for the gold curse and I very rarely have any encounters at all, let alone toxic encounters. Most players don’t seem to care about a ship parked at a random island in the distance, but I’m not denying that swabbies looking for easy targets exist. They’re out there, they’re also usually bad… so sink them :)
Like many of these PvE posts, you take the position that “I’m the majority therefore catering to me means more money for rare”. Are you, though? I’d love to see the data that suggest that. Considering that Rare has kept full open PvP in the game for 5 years, while maintaining hundreds of thousands of players online daily, I’d guess that they don’t agree with you, but that’s just a guess based on what we have to look at. Safer seas having queues early in the launch does not logically = you are in the majority. High Seas has queues sometimes when new content rolls out as well. Also, consider that maybe managing one ship per server was complicated. Servers cost money, games are notorious for long queues at launch, or with DLC’s, I think that they prefer to have too few initially than too many. My brother used to work for Amazon cloud services and his job was predicting how many servers Amazon should buy. They host a lot of games on their servers, and from what my brother told me, it’s complicated. Some games end up having way more players than anticipated, some way less. Point is, we don’t know how the servers were managed for safer seas, but I imagine they’re increasing capacity to accommodate, but that doesn’t mean there was a huge amount of players on safer seas. Maybe there were/are, I’m just saying that queues absolutely does not logically mean that you’re in the majority. For all we know it was 10 people queuing for one server, I’m exaggerating of course, I’m sure it was more than 10 people.
Lastly, you made assumptions about what older players want. Well, I’m 41, and in gamer years that makes me pretty old. I absolutely do not want what you want, and being the old man that I am, I have old gamer friends who also absolutely do not want what you want.
Many assumptions, little substance to back them up. You don’t know if you’re in the majority, you don’t know if catering to you is a good business decision, you don’t represent old people (I lol’d while typing that), and just because you saw some queues doesn’t mean that Rare saw dollar signs. Maybe they did, but we don’t know.
If you want (insert PvE server related thing), just say that, don’t assume that Rare giving it to you = all the money for them. Similarly, if you don’t like PvP, just say that, not every “I don’t like PvP” post needs to be accompanied by terror stories of the dreaded racist/loud mic/whatever else pirate. I can’t even count the amount of times I’ve been indirectly called various names on these forums simply because I participate in the PvP element of the PvPvE game. One guy went as far as saying he officially has zero respect for any PvPers now, and that was of course accompanied by what he presented to be the worst gaming experience of his life. I’m not saying you’re like that guy, I don’t think that you are, it’s just an observation of trends and assumptions in these PvE topic post.
With all of that rant aside, I don’t necessarily disagree with captaincy on safer seas, but I do think that many are missing the point of safer seas.
This is a game where everything already takes forever to do, gatekeeping QoL features such as sovereigns truly feels like a slap to the face. I understand there isn't any risk involved in taking longer to sell while playing on Safer Seas, but in my opinion it feels really disrespectful of the player's time to have them run around for 20 minutes selling one piece of loot worth 20 gold at a time. People are mad if they think this is an "easy mode" to farm for cosmetics, lol.
@linowx said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
This is a game where everything already takes forever to do, gatekeeping QoL features such as sovereigns truly feels like a slap to the face. I understand there isn't any risk involved in taking longer to sell while playing on Safer Seas, but in my opinion it feels really disrespectful of the player's time to have them run around for 20 minutes selling one piece of loot worth 20 gold at a time. People are mad if they think this is an "easy mode" to farm for cosmetics, lol.
I think many people are just misunderstanding the intent of safer seas. Rare has stated its purpose very clearly, and many times. I won’t spend time talking about it because before long this post will probably have a mod pasting the exact statement I’m referring to.
@capt-greldik "I think many people are just misunderstanding the intent of safer seas." Again, the intent is obviously to recover players lost and an attempt to gain more players repelled by the learning curve of the pvp mechanics of the game (mainly cannon aiming and 1st person fighting aspects especially as a group).
It can not be ignored (though many, again, try to) that many players do not enjoy having their progress erased (treasure gathered) no matter how many other players feel it justified. Maybe a score could be applied for treasure gathered though not turned it, though not the same as the actually treasure turned it so that players have something to show for their time applied to this point.
Time will tell if safer seas in its current form will be enough.
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@capt-greldik "I think many people are just misunderstanding the intent of safer seas." Again, the intent is obviously to recover players lost and an attempt to gain more players repelled by the learning curve of the pvp mechanics of the game (mainly cannon aiming and 1st person fighting aspects especially as a group).
It can not be ignored (though many, again, try to) that many players do not enjoy having their progress erased (treasure gathered) no matter how many other players feel it justified. Maybe a score could be applied for treasure gathered though not turned it, though not the same as the actually treasure turned it so that players have something to show for their time applied to this point.
Time will tell if safer seas in its current form will be enough.
You still get 100% of renown related activities, Safer or High seas though.
That was one of the reasons for such as system, no matter if you sank or not you still had insured progress no matter what.
@bloodybil Fair enough, though will the wall installed rep will become meaningless and I for one see this as a future sticking point with players. Simply digging feet in the ground will not be enough at that point however long that will take though who knows?
It's obvious by design that 'Safer Seas' is nothing more than a player funnel to 'High Seas'.
As a returning player I left BECAUSE I was sick of the constant PVP nonsense and harassment, and the inability to introduce friends to the game.
This game has always had an incredibly high skill ceiling in PVP, so the more you engage that aspect, the better you get. New players will never catch you or contest you if you're good enough.
This skill ceiling disparity has made High Seas a nightmare to play for any casual. But the incentive to stay in Safer Seas is non-existent. After a four year hiatus from myself and a handful of play sessions this weekend, I can confidently state there's no shot I remain in this franchise without severe buffs to Safer Seas.
Their goal was stimulate the playerbase. They can check that off. Now they're gonna be mad when folks vacuum out. I don't know any new players trying the franchise. 'Safer Seas' was targeted to try and regain interaction from former players. I've seen that sentiment shared by ex-players across Twitter, Reddit and here.
Well they got engagement, but all of us can see the sham-funnel it really is. No incentive to stay without buffs. I guess Rare has some serious decisions to make if they want to keep this spike or financially benefit from it.
@sombermako said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
It's obvious by design that 'Safer Seas' is nothing more than a player funnel to 'High Seas'.
As a returning player I left BECAUSE I was sick of the constant PVP nonsense and harassment, and the inability to introduce friends to the game.
This game has always had an incredibly high skill ceiling in PVP, so the more you engage that aspect, the better you get. New players will never catch you or contest you if you're good enough.
This skill ceiling disparity has made High Seas a nightmare to play for any casual. But the incentive to stay in Safer Seas is non-existent. After a four year hiatus from myself and a handful of play sessions this weekend, I can confidently state there's no shot I remain in this franchise without severe buffs to Safer Seas.
Their goal was stimulate the playerbase. They can check that off. Now they're gonna be mad when folks vacuum out. I don't know any new players trying the franchise. 'Safer Seas' was targeted to try and regain interaction from former players. I've seen that sentiment shared by ex-players across Twitter, Reddit and here.
Well they got engagement, but all of us can see the sham-funnel it really is. No incentive to stay without buffs. I guess Rare has some serious decisions to make if they want to keep this spike or financially benefit from it.
Risk vs reward, simple as that.
People who don't want to take the same risk won't get the same rates of loot and rep.
As a returning player I left BECAUSE I was sick of the constant PVP nonsense and harassment, and the inability to introduce friends to the game.
Well there ya go, this has been fixed. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
@sombermako said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
This skill ceiling disparity has made High Seas a nightmare to play for any casual.
How do people know? People always talk about how they left months or years ago and then have these takes about the environment. Pvpers do it regularly as well.
The environment changes regularly. The experience for people pveing is constantly changing because of that.
I know what it's like because I've played consistently and in consistent ways for years, through the highs and lows of activity and pvp pressure, changes, bugs, metas, all of it. It regularly changes.
How do people know that when they don't actually consistently play it but instead are giving defeatist commentary about it?
I've met thousands of random players in this game, a majority of them were casual players that loved the game while they were here, some are still here.
It's not a game where pvp skill is required, it's an option in a risk/reward scenario.
The high seas casuals/pvers shouldn't be lumped in with calls for increasing rewards in safer seas, just like people in safer seas shouldn't be given a tough time for playing safer seas when they are accepting that the restrictions are a part of their risk/reward participation.
@wolfmanbush Agreed, there seems to be an "us versus them" mentality when this stance is meaningless as both sides are not making any of the decisions. I am not saying bow down to the casual players, though I do think some would like them to be ignored. I personally think this would be bad for the game.
It is a thorny subject as pvp always is in most games. I do wonder if there could be a system in place to allow for the high skill ceiling not ruin the fun and chances to fight back for the average player(s) ?
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@wolfmanbush Agreed, there seems to be an "us versus them" mentality when this stance is meaningless as both sides are not making any of the decisions. I am not saying bow down to the casual players, though I do think some would like them to be ignored. I personally think this would be bad for the game.
It is a thorny subject as pvp always is in most games. I do wonder if there could be a system in place to allow for the high skill ceiling not ruin the fun and chances to fight back for the average player(s) ?
I have more hours than anyone I fight and I lose fights/get draws more often than I did a year ago but I get my win conditions more often as a solo.
That's the reality of this game. Sinks are a daily part of life but they don't need to be overall losses, it's just a sink. People can adapt, strategize, rely on everything outside of pvp skill.
It's adventure not the thunderdome, there are gonna be skilled fighters and bigger crews but the environment has more opportunity now, more ways to make more, to play differently, to earn differently.
It's all about learning how to accept the sink and then working around it to where sinking no longer matters.
Sinking doesn't have to be losing, over time people can use all their strengths and gained experience to where sinking doesn't matter at all.
That's what I did, it's what I do every day, it's what everyone without high pvp skill and/or interest in pvp does.
High seas isn't what it was a year ago or two+ years ago. It's a new experience, one where people have a much better shot at doing well, no matter their skill or experience stage at the moment.
@wolfmanbush I think the issue is a sink always involves loss of treasure which while not as important to some (some ignore treasure) maybe to others it represents time lost that they can't get back unless they can sink the other ship(s). That is where the casual frustration seems to stem from, time wasted.
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@wolfmanbush I think the issue is a sink always involves loss of treasure which while not as important to some (some ignore treasure) maybe to others it represents time lost that they can't get back unless they can sink the other ship(s). That is where the casual frustration seems to stem from, time wasted.
Isn't that partially a result of coming into the the game with a PvE mindset? i.e. if people come in and expect the game to be about going to dig up treasure, and then returning and selling it, then of course they'll get frustrated at that loss.
On the other hand, if you come in with a PvPvE mindset, and expect the possibility of having to defend that loot against other players, then it all becomes just part of the ever changing adventure.
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@wolfmanbush I think the issue is a sink always involves loss of treasure which while not as important to some (some ignore treasure) maybe to others it represents time lost that they can't get back unless they can sink the other ship(s). That is where the casual frustration seems to stem from, time wasted.
For a while, I rarely lose treasure because I put effort into everything outside of relying on winning fights as a way to make progress.
By time skilled players attack me I've already done much of what I wanted to do and the sink becomes just a sink.
Everyone has a skill ceiling for pvp, everyone gets sunk by skilled larger crews, everyone randomly takes Ls
but efficiency and consistency and refusing to make excuses will get everyone in a more comfortable spot in the environment.
"Anyone can sink me but nobody will ever rob me perseverance or my preference" That's how I view everything that happens in SoT. I will try again, I will make necessary changes to improve my chances. Nobody gets to rob me of my style. It works out. It will work out for others.
@knurd9369 As long as the player is able to defend the treasure sometimes (not always of course). The issue is that some players are so good that they will always sink other more casual players. Again, this is not a new issue with pvp games and is the bane of player retention would tire of being dominated and simply leave the game.
@sairdontis Part of the trouble is that in order to be able to defend one's loot is that people need to be willing to go out and engage in PvP outside of trying to defend.
I've said this a bunch on the subreddit, but it's downright impossible to learn those PvP skills on the defensive. You're too busy panicking and reacting to the other crew's actions.
If you go out on the offensive, you gain those precious moments where they are reacting to you, and it makes a world of difference in your ability to learn (and in the long run, this improves your defense skills automatically).
Unfortunately a subset of players are unwilling to try this. And I get that, it's a personal journey that one has to be willing to take the first step in.
It took me a while to get the courage up to go out and attack people (maybe a couple months of playing, and being sunk a lot), but once I did, my experience in the game did a full 180.
It's not Risk vs Reward if there's no reward.
This is a pathetic attempt to stir player engagement. Any seasoned player can see the nerfs are there solely to funnel folks into High Seas.
2 Skullforts and 4 GH Voyages netted less than 40k for myself and a friend today.
It's PVE lite that will boast ZERO player retention. Really feels like they're trying to kill this on arrival. Just another developer who wants to force the playerbase to play the game "their way".
Plenty of franchises to choose from that reward PVE and respect your time and effort. It's why I left the first time and I'll leave again. It's unfortunate this game holds a monopoly on this niche. Maybe in another 4 years they'll actually get the PVE right. 🤷♂️
@sombermako said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
It's not Risk vs Reward if there's no reward.
The gold and rep gain is 30%, not 0. Renown gains are 100%, not 0. Most achievements not pvp-related are still achievable. The biggest reward is the total safety and 0% loss possibility while playing.
This is a pathetic attempt to stir player engagement. Any seasoned player can see the nerfs are there solely to funnel folks into High Seas.
Rare never hid the fact that Safer seas is a stepping stone to HS, while also being a friendly and chill space for all who want to play in a more tranquil way.
2 Skullforts and 4 GH Voyages netted less than 40k for myself and a friend today.
So what, you had 0% of losing it to other players. Again, you can't ask for an easy mode and expect the same % gains as people who accept to take on more risks. You still get loot in the end, just a bit more slowly, there is no tragedy here.
It's PVE lite that will boast ZERO player retention. Really feels like they're trying to kill this on arrival. Just another developer who wants to force the playerbase to play the game "their way".
Plenty of franchises to choose from that reward PVE and respect your time and effort. It's why I left the first time and I'll leave again. It's unfortunate this game holds a monopoly on this niche. Maybe in another 4 years they'll actually get the PVE right. 🤷♂️
How many times do people need to be told this is a PVEVP game? Rare made a compromise, if you guys aren't happy with it, tough.
As a pirate legend since year one with all companies capped beside Reapers, I have no issue whatsoever enjoying both modes with their parameters. If you don't like playing the game and only care about the grind, by all means go look for these other PVE franchises.
I am disappointed that captain ships aren’t allowed in safer seas but I understand why. Rare doesn’t want captaincy milestones to track.
My solution would be simple. Allow captaincy ships but lock progression. If you ever play in a captaincy ship you have trinkets. Once the captain leaves, the trinkets become frozen. Trinkets become unable to change or become adjusted. Let us use a captain ship but trinkets should become frozen and unable to be placed or removed until you take the ship into High Seas.
@sombermako as has already been said risk vs reward
Also not all servers are the same, just because one server is full on PvP does not mean the next one will be. They game is designed so that you will feel like you are alone on the seas but not be sure. Stay away from highly contested events, keep your eyes on the horizon and don't stack more loot than you can afford to loose.
My early days at launch initially involved turning in after every island.
@sairdontis said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@capt-greldik "I think many people are just misunderstanding the intent of safer seas." Again, the intent is obviously to recover players lost and an attempt to gain more players repelled by the learning curve of the pvp mechanics of the game (mainly cannon aiming and 1st person fighting aspects especially as a group).
It can not be ignored (though many, again, try to) that many players do not enjoy having their progress erased (treasure gathered) no matter how many other players feel it justified. Maybe a score could be applied for treasure gathered though not turned it, though not the same as the actually treasure turned it so that players have something to show for their time applied to this point.
Time will tell if safer seas in its current form will be enough.
To be fair, just about any update to any game could be considered an effort to retain and/or get back players. I’m sure that Rare took that into consideration when they created the extended tutorial. I do think it’s a bit presumptuous to say flatly that they made a decision based on X, though. But yea, people don’t like losing. That’s been demonstrated in every online game ever, it’s why we have endless WoW clones where nobody loses anything ever, there’s no struggle, just sword collecting in a theme park environment. So I’m not the least bit surprised that people want to change the game into an everyone gets a trophy type game. It’s standard procedure at this point, par for the course. Game developers typically don’t even try to address that, they just take the cop-out of a PvP switch, or erase PvP entirely. Well, SoT has hundreds of thousands of players daily, for 5 years. It’s been a success I’d say. They’ve shown that giving everyone a trophy isn’t necessary for a game to be successful.
If Rare decides to cater to this crowd and starts allocating more time and effort towards making a PvE server work, I’d be extremely disappointed. I don’t know if that would mean I’d stop playing, but if I’m affected by a fractured community, then that’s probably how it would end for me. A constant in games that include PvP is the majority mindset which leads people to believe that since they are the many that all things should be given to them, otherwise their money goes away. True to some extent, and in some games very true, but I’m not convinced that’s the case for SoT, but none of us really have any way of knowing that for sure.
I find it cringy when people say “cater to me because my money” (not suggesting you’re saying that), but what about me? I’m a relatively new player having started around March. I’ve purchased some cosmetics and even bought the game for a friend. A 5 year old game getting a new player who’s totally obsessed seems pretty significant. I also am not advocating to —completely change— the game. Many of the people on these forums vehemently asking to fundamentally change this game don’t even play it currently, so says them. Who should be catered to in this scenario? Any game company wants new players, to retain current players, and to bring back players who’ve left, and I’m sure Rare is constantly considering that. Maybe they’ll decide that buffing safer seas is a good idea. None of us know if that would be a good business decision for them.
@juniperty said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
@phantaxus But why do people have to make their way to higher seas?
Safer Seas is the extended tutorial mode intended to teach you about all the extra game mechanics that have been added in the last 5 years without you having to worry about other players.
If you choose to stay in Safer Seas then that is your decision but you are missing out on a lot that the game has to offer.
I would love a safer seas area where all the ships on the server are people I know.
That is not Safer Seas that is a PvE server
Yes, that is not what the game was originally developed for. But in the reality people make products for others depending on what is wanted.
The core of the game is PvEvP. If it had been PvE only, it probably would not have got to five years.
Rare makes the product they wanted based on the proposed design specification. Taking suggestions from players and implementing them if it fits that design specification. If you watch the Sea of Thieves: Voyage of a Lifetime documentary it is apparent that PvEvP has always been the intention.
@Sairdontis I am attempting to answer the questions you never see answered. Hope this helps.
@wayward-koyote I don’t think that is a don’t play this thing. I do think that there are 3 camps on this….
The PVE player saw an end to pvp and a rise to PVE servers where they can solo they game all day, but then they are very upset that X,Y,Z isn’t featured or allowed in the content
The pvp player who thinks it shouldn’t have happened pretty much at all.
The avg player probably sees what I see. An expansion on a maiden voyage, a safer place to show friends HOW to play the game prior to the possibility of pvp shenanigans. I also look forward to just putting around and seeing a few thing I haven’t seen. I fully intend on looking in LFG to help newer players learn. At the end of the day though it was always said that High Seas IS the game experience the way it was meant.
Circling back around to the PVE player. There is nothing wrong with PVE lords staying in safer seas, but I don’t think that they should be rewarded. Safer seas isn’t SOT it’s missing a giant element of their game design and one of the reasons they nerfed so much in safer seas. At the end of the day they want players interacting with other crews in the open world.
@capt-greldik said in Safer Seas and Silenced Shanties:
A trend in these PvE post is making assumptions based on very little info. That, and stories about PvP encounters that involved slurs, toxicity (which to many seems to mean that they were simply attacked), loud music over mic’s and every other terrible thing imaginable; and of course they happen all of the time. I’ve experienced these things as well —in every online game I’ve ever played, PvP or not— those behaviors are not unique to SoT or PvP. Also, it’s strange to me that I hardly ever have bad experiences in SoT, and actually, as an hourglass player I find that those participating in the mode are generally less toxic than players in the open world. I’ve also been called all the names by players who were upset that I attacked them at an event… which are meant to be fought over. Everything I just shared is anecdotal of course, but so are all of these stories which seem exaggerated regarding both the severity and frequency of these encounters. But I can’t know what you’ve experienced, that’s just my perception. I play primarily US west solo, but I occasionally play with friends on East, EU, and AUS. Somehow I’m not running into these constant PvP monsters I keep hearing about. Maybe I’m just lucky? Again, I have had toxic experiences in SoT, also again, they were not limited to PvP encounters, not in this game or any. I’ve been doing tall tales lately for the gold curse and I very rarely have any encounters at all, let alone toxic encounters. Most players don’t seem to care about a ship parked at a random island in the distance, but I’m not denying that swabbies looking for easy targets exist. They’re out there, they’re also usually bad… so sink them :)
Like many of these PvE posts, you take the position that “I’m the majority therefore catering to me means more money for rare”. Are you, though? I’d love to see the data that suggest that. Considering that Rare has kept full open PvP in the game for 5 years, while maintaining hundreds of thousands of players online daily, I’d guess that they don’t agree with you, but that’s just a guess based on what we have to look at. Safer seas having queues early in the launch does not logically = you are in the majority. High Seas has queues sometimes when new content rolls out as well. Also, consider that maybe managing one ship per server was complicated. Servers cost money, games are notorious for long queues at launch, or with DLC’s, I think that they prefer to have too few initially than too many. My brother used to work for Amazon cloud services and his job was predicting how many servers Amazon should buy. They host a lot of games on their servers, and from what my brother told me, it’s complicated. Some games end up having way more players than anticipated, some way less. Point is, we don’t know how the servers were managed for safer seas, but I imagine they’re increasing capacity to accommodate, but that doesn’t mean there was a huge amount of players on safer seas. Maybe there were/are, I’m just saying that queues absolutely does not logically mean that you’re in the majority. For all we know it was 10 people queuing for one server, I’m exaggerating of course, I’m sure it was more than 10 people.
Lastly, you made assumptions about what older players want. Well, I’m 41, and in gamer years that makes me pretty old. I absolutely do not want what you want, and being the old man that I am, I have old gamer friends who also absolutely do not want what you want.
Many assumptions, little substance to back them up. You don’t know if you’re in the majority, you don’t know if catering to you is a good business decision, you don’t represent old people (I lol’d while typing that), and just because you saw some queues doesn’t mean that Rare saw dollar signs. Maybe they did, but we don’t know.
If you want (insert PvE server related thing), just say that, don’t assume that Rare giving it to you = all the money for them. Similarly, if you don’t like PvP, just say that, not every “I don’t like PvP” post needs to be accompanied by terror stories of the dreaded racist/loud mic/whatever else pirate. I can’t even count the amount of times I’ve been indirectly called various names on these forums simply because I participate in the PvP element of the PvPvE game. One guy went as far as saying he officially has zero respect for any PvPers now, and that was of course accompanied by what he presented to be the worst gaming experience of his life. I’m not saying you’re like that guy, I don’t think that you are, it’s just an observation of trends and assumptions in these PvE topic post.
With all of that rant aside, I don’t necessarily disagree with captaincy on safer seas, but I do think that many are missing the point of safer seas.
Well said my friend, I’m 39 and have pretty much the same view as you. Imagine true MW2 lobbies from 2010 happening now?!?!?!
