Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...

  • People that arent getting the game because they were talked trash to, mean things where said to them ingame. And they wanted the indivudals punished. "My feelings, MY FEELINGS!!!"
    Its just sad and funny at the same time. Like where is your skin!?
    Im glad they chose not get the game though, if im in danger of making you cry like little baby ingame with words i really dont want to see you ingame. Whoever you are.
    Shivers

  • @f0rg0ttenknight said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    I think the people are going to make this game worth playing over and over again. From unexpected battles, surprising team ups, or several crews playing music together the most exciting moments in this game have been from interaction with other players. The mechanics seem simple enough but I can't tell you how often I ran into people who could not hit anything at point blank or operate a ship in combat. Anyone who says there's nothing to do in this game clearly has never been in a multiship pursuit across the map for a Skeleton Fort Chest.

    Fun for a month max. The problem with the pvp is what is the reward? Some npc turnins? Chests, chickens, etc? If the players get smart, they wont carry anything and pvp empty. Then whats the reward? No stats, no tracking, no penalties, no hardship. Its honestly carebear island pvp. Is it fun? Sure thing. But i don’t see my competitive side feeling engaged much past a month of ainking ships...to watch them sink and know the whole crew respawned with a new ship, safely on some island.

  • @uberkull Why would you bother dressing up your pirate when some skivvies would do?

  • @aprovoked-mango

    Exactly my point. Underwear and a dream of progression.

  • @uberkull said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @hk6719 said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    I honestly see this game as a potential years long game. Really. We are at the beginning of our journey and who knows what else is planned. It's already an open world allowing us to live it however we wish. With whomever we wish. Yar, I can't wait!

    And we'll drink to good companions and Irish whiskey neat. We'll drink to wiv and lovers and we hope they never meet.

    No troll, really trying to see what other ppl are seeing. Can I ask what your rationale is with the potential ‘years’ of longevity this game will have?

    I am playing the game at launch, but am really trying to see how I play this much longer after I get to Pirate Legend. So I see this...

    • horizontal progression provides no lomgterm goals or statistical builds to strive for
    • after the initial honeymoon phase of fun, how often can you do the same sailing voyages over and over just to recieve more gold? The ocean will be the same again and again, its not chaning much. Even with special event content, you still are just receiving a cosmetic or gold
    • once you have the look you are after, why grind for more cosmetic items? Unless this is a RP thing, you normally build your hero to look a certain way...or two...and thats it. Is there a acievement for largest closet of clothes? And with the preorder clothes, what if thats your look you are after? You replacing it with a admirals hat, or outfit?
    • the competitive drive. PvP, sink one boat, sink 10, sink 100. After awhile..do you start to ask why bother? Where is the reward for sinking your boat? More gold?

    What i am asking here is what goals are you planning for that could make a game with no statistical progression system last for years?

    No vertical progression means that both personal skill, and crew synergy win the day, not some stat value winning the game for you. This means reputation will be a real "thing".

    If the next year of Sea of Thieves is anything like the last year then there are good things coming. Some of us have been testing Sea of Thieves for over a year, and I can tell you firsthand that the game I started testing in early 2017 isnt even a shadow of what we all tested a week or so ago. I am genuinely excited to see what comes in the future updates.

  • @lumpaywk

    Yes I do feel that the map is kind of small. After 4 weekends of betas and tests, I feel like I (kind of) know most of it already.

    @Uberkull I feel you, to some extent ^^, I also think that pvp rewards are a major let down and will not incite hardcore gamers to stick around for long.

    I don't think that it would be that hard to add some sort of ranking system/ladder to the game (bounties also), and it would be easy to make it fair to new players and the non-pvp crowd by nullifying benefits when sinking more casual players, or even penalise hostile actions towards 'meaningless' targets, as seen in many ladder systems.
    Mind you, this can all be easily facilitated through ship customisation, and the flag alignment concept for instance. I read about it somewhere else on this forum: pvp players can raise a black flag, pve players: a white flag. Something along these lines...

    It would be so interesting to see these features in game, it would boost S.O.T's playerbase way beyond current predictions. That being said, I really don't think this is going to happen.

    But anyway, see you in-game!!

  • People arguing about vertical progression being necessary and not necessarily the community are rather shallow...

    Every raid team I hear talking on WoW aren't just talking about randoms. They're talking about their guilds, their community, a literal almost family they became part of or created in that game. Remove that sense of community and it would not be the same game.

    Destiny 1 as my personal example. I stumbled upon a streamer who was doing a raid. I needed to finish it and they needed another person so I asked and she allowed me in. Now I'm pretty damn good at games in general, not the best by any means but more than capable of doing some good work and as such she asked me to join and be with her party consistently.. In normal raids, I did them once or twice. With this group, I played this raid dozens of times for hours on end every day for weeks. I had all the stuff, I was max level. I couldn't get better stats.

    Why did I play this raid so many times despite not gaining anything from it? It wasn't for progression. I couldn't progress anymore. So what was my driving force to dedicate hundreds of hours to a single raid?

    That's right. The community and fun of it all. We had so many good times and laughs that it was a means to come together and not a job to be done.

    You DON'T NEED vertical progression as a driving force, if anything id say it's a false high. You got the doodad+1 with increased knockback. Cool. Now there's nothing above that, so what do?

    No. Bring friends with you or make them or join a communitg and you'll see vast improvement in the life of any game you play.

  • All the fools asking for vertical progression while explaining why their idea isn't vertical progression.

  • @uberkull said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @blam320 said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @sneakler said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @blam320 said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @sneakler said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @blam320 said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    People complaining about "lack of content" or "lack of progression" have fallen into the trap of thinking that a game needs an ultimate end goal to work towards. It's perfectly reasonable to create a game where the reward is the experience itself, and not the shiny new item or stat you unlocked.

    I play a lot of PlanetSide2, a game with both horizontal and vertical progression, but it's not leveling up or unlocking better gear that gets people to keep coming back, but the experience of being in really the world's only MMOFPS.

    Lol, seriously?

    Planetside2. Go take a look at that games population. I will not say what it is to save you the embarrassment of you saying that the game "keeps people coming back" and wanting Sea of Thieves to turn out that way.

    Classic phrasing in your first sentence which basically says people who disagree with you are "FALLING INTO A TRAP"

    Nobody is saying Sea of Thieves is UNREASONABLE by the way. They just want more. Is that okay with you? Do we have your permission to want more? Just because you are okay with the base game being a rewarding experience and that's all does that mean we should all just shutup and go away and not hope for more? Trying to diminish peoples hopes by saying all they want is something "SHINY AND NEW" is just a sad attempt at simplifying what people want.

    Content DOES NOT and NEVER WILL equal something SHINY AND NEW. This is why people defending a games fantastic potential are referred to as FANBOYS. We are treating a AAA pricetag with AAA criticism. If any other AAA game launched with this small amount of things to do they would be crucified.

    I did look at the PlanetSide2 population. In fact, I played it just yesterday. There were plenty of massive battles to chose from, nearly all of them either veterans who have been around since launch, or brand-new players who have just discovered what a great game it is.

    You're also criticizing this game and it's supposed "lack of content" for a AAA pricetag, when people are perfectly willing to buy Call of Duty XXX for the same price every year or so, when it offers absolutely nothing new in terms of content.

    If people like me are "fanboys," clearly you're a hater, by your logic.

    If SoT reaches Planetside 2 population levels within 6 months or a year the game will be regarded as an ultimate failure. I am not saying the game is trash just that it is an awful example.

    I never defended CoD and these types of shooter games should not be compared content-wise to SoT. I am not here to explain or defend why people continually buy CoD. What is a shooter based game supposed to do anyways other then make new maps and change/tweak some stuff. Of course it stays relatively the same other then the era and time frame the games weapons are from.

    All I did was explain why you people are called fanboys I did not call you one. You are a defender. Which is fine, I attacked the way you defend. Using catchphrases like "FALLING INTO A TRAP" and "SHINY AND NEW" which are old and tired. If you disagree with me you are "falling into a trap" and any suggestions your make and ideas you have are because you need something "shiny and new" and these ideas are rooted in changing the game so that it "appeals to you"

    These are weak tactics that simplify anyone's wish for more to do in a game that they see massive potential in.

    There is no way I could be a hater because I not only love the base game for SoT but I also want and see the this game having the ability to grow its population by adding more quests/modes etc.

    Do you have any idea how many people play PlanetSide2? At all? Because it's still going strong, and still profitable. Plus, it's taken years for it's population to decline. Ergo, if Sea of Thieves reaches its population level in a few years, it'll still be a success.

    I never said you defended CoD. I was pointing out that criticizing the "lack of content" in a AAA game is a moot point when new content is very, very sparse in most "new" AAA games nowadays. Not to mention Sea of Thieves will be receiving regular content updates every few months.p

    Also, adding brand new gamemodes is literally the second-worst possible option for Sea of Thieves. It's garnered so much hype and such a loyal following because it dared to break the mold used by "flagship" games. I don't want to see it become homogenized, because RARE sold out in favor of trying to make a quick buck off of the success of other games, like PUBG.

    Isn’t Planetside 2 a MMO shooter? How are you comparing a MMO to SoT?

    SoT has a very small number of players per server instance, not 100s, not even 50. Far from MMO numbers.

    SoT isnt a persistent world, its a ‘create a game, matchmake, join a server instance, and play’. You leave the game, you lose everything other than what your character has in their inventory.

    And many games have been hyped before, and players are much smarter now. No one should fall for the Destiny trap ever again, players should ask ‘what are we getting long term’ so they can make a good decision on how to spend their time and money.

    I'm comparing the reasons people play. People play Sea of Thieves for the same reason they play PlanetSide: the experience of the game itself, not progression.

  • @crash4654 said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    People arguing about vertical progression being necessary and not necessarily the community are rather shallow...

    My favorite is when they say you just need something "SHINY and NEW" to simplify what you are saying.

    Also "CARROT on a STICK" is another classic way to belittle your suggestions.

    Another classic is that "NEW THINGS TO DO WILL SPLIT THE PLAYERBASE"

    Because people just outright quitting the game due to repetitiveness and boredom is a better option lol.

    You are either growing or shrinking in population people. Simple math. Add stuff to grow and it needs to be good stuff, entertaining stuff, replayable stuff.

    Wanting progression and end game types of things are not "SHINY/NEW/CARROT ON A STICK" type things. They are CONTENT.

    Stop with the silly catch phrases to try and make people asking for more out to be people in need of something to chase. They want something to do. Something more then there is currently. Why is more bad? Please tell me someone.

  • @sneakler Simply adding stuff to grow a playerbase is kinda simplistic and it takes much more than math.

    Strictly speaking, you can throw all you want on a garden to get it to grow. And I mean anything. Organic waste, toxic waste, kitchen sinks, you name it. Of course it is easy to see now that of course toxic waste and kitchen sinks can't a garden grow. So you can't just add any old piece of content and call it good.

    Now what you add to a garden depends on what you are trying to grow. Some varieties of plants prefer fertilizers in specific quantities and ratios. Others won't like that same mix. So you tailor your fertilizer to what you want to grow to maximize yields. Again, you can't just add content and call it good if you want to grow a playerbase.

    So how I see it is that Rare has a community they want to grow with some characteristics. To develop those characteristics, you need specific game mechanics and content (fertilizer) to grow it. Some content will attract individuals that don't quite mesh with what Rare wants from a community. That happens no matter what you do. But the trick is to minimize the influence from those who would detract from their vision of the game.

    So no, more is not always good. Carefully calculated 'more' is good to foster characteristics of a playerbase. Those characteristics are what Rare baked into the game with words like "accessible", "welcoming", and so on. So that means no stat progression, less carrots, and so on. Their entire design ethos centers around this.

    And before you spout out the nonsense of "businesses NEED to make money", yes they do need to make money but the motive for developing a product is not always the monetary return. Rare wanted to make a game so they could provide a service to others for them to enjoy. Monetary recompense is secondary. People can do things without dwelling on profit margins you know.

  • SoT could easily be a successful mobile game with the conten and objectives it has. You oickup your phone, pkay for an hour or two, and finally catch your flight. It literally works perfect for a mobile type game.

    For a sit in your pc chair/sofa game where you want to sit and focus on personal goals during a long play session, SoT feels like 50% sailing sim, 40% quest4gold treadmill, 10% pvp. 10% pvp you say? Yes, you have to really try hard to find ships during the 50% sailing sim mode.

    This is why it fits for mobile...don’t be surprised...well...Fortnite made it work...

  • @sneakler kinda skimmed over that whole community and camaraderie bit there didn't you...

  • @capt-baguette Hi there Capt. There is no doubt I will be in game, but given my experience in gaming...like yours, like many others here...I think it’s best to give feedback and concern over the game we have now. The one we played, the one we watch in all the dev vlogs, read all the dev roadmap discussions(limited), basically we did our homework and compared what we see with what we played before.

    This game is not ground breaking, its not doing something new. We’ve had pirate games, we’ve had rpg games, we’ve had do quest-get gold games at nauseam. So, we can react and potentially forsee a outcome given the last decade of games.

    Yes, see you in game...maybe...if we ever see more then 5 other ships in a session. :)

  • @captain-surgee said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @lumpaywk said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @captain-surgee said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    As for the $60 price tag, I think you can't compare it to a single player game where the budget just for the voice acting and mocap could be higher than the entire SoT budget. It should be a $30 game. Game Pass is saving it IMO. Sea of thieves is a very fun game but I just don't see the justification for such a high price.
    2 things. you have no idea what the budget of this game is esp over the life of the game. server maintenance updates expansions etc.
    second, why is the dev cost anything to do with the price? this is a aaa game from a aaa studio. the price is the same as all other aaa games. if some want to blow budget on actor's thats up to them but its nothing to do with the price.

    What does the budget have to do with the price of the game? You gotta be kidding me :). It has everything to do with the price. True, we don't know what's the budget of SoT, but it's easy to compare what SoT is offering to other games in terms of content, quality execution and development time vs actual results. I won't really argue anymore about it. I'm just sharing my opinion on why I think the SoT is a bit overpriced. Thankfully Game Pass is here.

    it has no relevance at all in the fact that game prices are set by what other games sell for in each territory. the same way cinema prices don't vary based on the budget of the movie. do you think all games at a price point have the same budget? your argument make no sense.

  • @Uberkull

    I don't think that it's about creating a new genre though is it? How do you even do that?
    In my opinion Rare definitely tried something fresh, I mean Wow was a mere copy of other games (but...). Mixing up genre is the thing here and the last 15 years tell us it looks like an impossible feat.

    But I get your point, and I'm not expecting to sink in several hundred hours into this game 'in one go', but I must admit that I thought it would be possible at first. It doesn't mean the game's bad though... far from it.

    I find the water groundbreaking for sure! I will expect water to look that good in games from now on. I'm sure they will expand numbers and that eventually there will be a larger number of ships per server, or some sort of hub/port.

    All that being said, the game's great, can't wait to play again and discover what we haven't seen yet.

    Cheers mate,

  • @uberkull a dit dans Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net... :

    @a13xa4d3r said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @uberkull The devs said they have a rough road map for the next 10 years, they plan on releasing new content for as long as people play it.

    Right man. I know and get that. Why would you come back to play content that just rewards you with a brief jolt of fun in the same world, and zero progressive reward? Shiny new hat? I guess.

    For some people who are tired of "progression" "unlocks" and other pavlovian BS like that, it's just a breeze of fresh air.

    I'm not one of them, I'm not "tired" of it, I just never liked it to begin with.

  • alt text

    1. Why is it only on Xbox? Why not PS4? That's stupid.

    Agreed, no need to explain the Microsoft paid for the game.

    1. 60 dollars? It'll get boring in a month. Not worth 60!

    This argument is the stupidest one I've seen. I have a feeling the same people complaining are the same people buying c**p like CoD that has like an 8 hour storyline for the same price.

    1. What do you do in this game? They haven't shown any gameplay.

    One word. YouTube.

  • @lumpaywk where did I say all games of same price point have same budget? Please read with understanding and use some common sense. Obviously games like Ori or PUBG didn't require huge amount of money to create in comparison to let's say Witcher 3 that's why devs opt for a more fair price. There's also lot's of $60 titles that are complete garbage and can't even compete with some better indie stuff. Look at State of Decay 2. It's MS flagship title as well, it uses the same engine, it looks just as AAA as SoT and it's gonna come out at $30 (and it even has some voice acting!). I love Sea of Thieves but I dont understand the defense force that was formed on these forums in last couple of weeks. Can't criticise anything without getting attacked with pitchforms. I miss the smaller community we had here right at the start.

  • @captain-surgee said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @lumpaywk where did I say all games of same price point have same budget? Please read with understanding and use some common sense. Obviously games like Ori or PUBG didn't require huge amount of money to create in comparison to let's say Witcher 3 that's why devs opt for a more fair price. There's also lot's of $60 titles that are complete garbage and can't even compete with some better indie stuff. Look at State of Decay 2. It's MS flagship title as well, it uses the same engine, it looks just as AAA as SoT and it's gonna come out at $30 (and it even has some voice acting!). I love Sea of Thieves but I dont understand the defense force that was formed on these forums in last couple of weeks. Can't criticise anything without getting attacked with pitchforms. I miss the smaller community we had here right at the start.

    not defensive of the price, i think all games are to expensive esp digital, that should be cheaper than physical (this is to do with trade deals in place with physical stores and a whole other p**p storm).
    That said you litterally said the game is to expensive because its cheap to make due to no voice acting.

    "What does the budget have to do with the price of the game? You gotta be kidding me :). It has everything to do with the price."

    did you just forget you said that?

    This is a crazy claim as you can't define a games budget on that! there are many things that cost money in games, voices are a part, but hardly the definitive cost.
    Then you come back saying you didnt say budget has anything to do with cost yet that was litterally your argument!
    its fine to think a game is to expensive, dont buy it till its cheaper. people complain but still buy it so why would they change it? having a hissy fit on forums about the price though just makes you look cheap esp when you do consider the costs of maintenance on a game with continual development. something that costs a ton more than hireing some voice actors for a few days.

  • @lumpaywk oh my...You clearly are missing the key words and context. Friend, please learn to read with understanding. I wont continue this, cheers.

  • @captain-surgee said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @lumpaywk oh my...You clearly are missing the key words and context. Friend, please learn to read with understanding. I wont continue this, cheers.

    lol i can see how i miss read "What does the budget have to do with the price of the game? You gotta be kidding me :). It has everything to do with the price." i see, i got all that mixed up? you are saying that budget is NOT to do with the price of the game? just leaves me confused what your point really was then as you said the game should be chealer because it didnt have to pay for expensive voice actors! shame you no longer going to continue, i would love to know what thr point is your actually trying to make.

  • @sneakler
    Rare doesn’t want vertical progression. They have explained their stance on it and a large portion of the player base backs them on this idea. We see this in most PVP games because when PVP is a larger portion of the game it should be fair. Look at WOWs PVP. They clearly have vertical progression but they’ve done a lot to fix the issues they’ve had in the past and now battlegrounds take a players stats and mash them together with the other players in the battleground. Ultimately you wind up with about a 2% difference in stats between the best geared player and the worst geared player. It makes PVP much more inviting because you don’t have to grind for decades to get gear to be good. Then we look back at some of the older versions of the game like vanilla. High warlords gear was absolutely insane and it took a ton of time to grind to be able to buy that gear and rightfully so, but once you got it you just destroyed everyone in PVP.

    A lot of people prefer the new system because it makes the game more skill based and those at the top deserve to be there not because they have more time to devote to grinding but because they are better at the game.

    I’m not saying we don’t want a goal to work for, but that’s what pirate legend and whatever cool cosmetics we want are. They are adding new weapons, instruments and tons of new cosmetics to the game after release as well as events and new enemies. Additionally they have already come out and said there will be additional titles at a later date to earn besides pirate legend.

    They have also tossed around the idea of challenges that give rewards. I wouldn’t mind seeing a sweet kraken tentacle figurehead for players who have defeated the kraken. Things like of that nature that reward players for doing the more difficult content of the game would be awesome. Wow released mounts as special rewards for doing the challenges in raids and dungeons and I feel like many of those came with a bit of respect. Something like that to work for would be awesome. I remember the mount from ulduar that requires a specific gear score or lower and has a bunch of one shot mechanics. The first guild who had that achievement was held with pretty great respect due to the challenge of the task.

  • @grumpie-bear29 said in Irrational criticisms of SOT around the net...:

    @sneakler
    Rare doesn’t want vertical progression.

    If you can find me at any point lobbying for vertical progression for this game I will send you the deed for my house today.

    I made a post about adding content and making fun of how anyone who suggests new things for the game are referred to as needing something "SHINY and NEW" or "CARROT on a STICK"

    Just because I quoted someone talking about it is meaningless.

    I have lobbied for additional game modes since they are going to horizontal progression route. My whole post was about any type of suggestion is met with silly catch phrases such as the tired old canard of "SPLITTING the PLAYERBASE" in a game that has small instances. This isn't an MMO it is a shared world game with small instances. If they had a racing NPC on an island that you sailed to and you could queue for a race those players would be thrown into a race instance but would it ruin the playerbase...no it wouldn't.

95
Posts
11.3k
Views
84 out of 95