@Stratcat51
First, let me apologize for what might seem like a novel of a reply. I thought that since you had multiple issues that you felt strong enough to bring to light, I would be remiss if I didn't give a detailed response to each part. I know, I'm not employed by Rare but, I'm not what anyone should call a "fanboy" either. I'll try to stay as neutral as possible.
I'm glad you feel comfortable enough to share your unedited opinion of the game (and the development team). That being said, I'm not going to attempt to dissuade you from that opinion because that wouldn't be fair to either of us, would it?
Instead, I'd like to point out a few discrepancies from your original post and (hopefully) give "another side" to look at, if possible.
We're 3 months in after a premature launch of an improperly tested and bug ridden mess called Sea Of Thieves.
The game was released four months ago (23 March - 20 July). Its various features were tested for over a year, in multiple combinations to make sure there would be the least amount of issues at launch. However, when new features (no matter how small) are implemented, there are going to be bugs; especially when players are constantly demanding new content and features and the teams have a limited timeframe to concept - design - art - render - test - bugfix - repeat as needed.
After all that, then they can then finally present to live players which gives them even more testers who find bugs that weren't noticed in the initial in-house testing. This part isn't new. Nowadays, it happens with every game released. I could ask about other studios and their bug fixing (Bethesda's Skyrim, for example) but, we're discussing Rare, aren't we?
Servers that didn't serve
Ok, not many can disagree with you on this point. There were (and continue to be) server issues. Hopefully, these can be fixed sooner rather than later.
download after download of so called patches that have at times been virtually impossible to download. 9 GB on day one, what did you bother selling the disc for? Oh, yes that would be to fool people that they had bought a quality game.
Each patch has not only been for fixing in-game issues but, most has included new content, as well. I mean, if players keep asking for new content, how should they get them in a timely manner if they can't download them often?
As for the initial download of 9GB, that's actually rather small considering most games now run 40+GB fully stocked. If it helps, consider it like games where you install the base game on your console (if that's what you play on) and use the disk for booting up the game. Similar concept, really.
You tell us you want to create an open world adventure game where players come together and have fun. ' Become the salty pirate they want to be' That, is a seriously bad joke when you have seriously little to do which as result leaves less than pleasant people to go into PvP so much so it becomes anything but a sociable fun game for Pegi 12 level and families to play.
There are plenty of people who have mentioned they truly enjoy the game. There are several more who want a lot more to be added, myself included. The game isn't perfect. That point has been made abundantly clear by many players but, this was marketed as a "game as a service" which means content coming out regularly based on the feedback of the players.
Not everyone will like every new feature or change, though. Some won't even like the base game for their own various reasons. It seems Rare has been listening to players enough to even recant their stance on at least one of the original game's major points; NPC ships. They are doing that to give the community what it wants, even if Rare originally chose (and fought so hard) to design the game differently.
As for the PvP aspect, with the cheap monthly "GamePass" and the game being "new" (released 4 months ago), the game's player base will be in flux for awhile as players come and go. The whole time, Rare will have to see where the game's telemetry seems to be pointing and how player's seem to be evolving in order to continue designing the game's features to help shape its future.
Why bother with Solo player modes and simply do half a job, and fob it off as 'hard mode' because you and the dev team are so inept that you can't balance play.
I play solo pretty much all the time. The exceptions are during events and I'm forced to play with others for completing tasks or I want to hang with friends and be social. Solo vs group play is more than balanced in my opinion. Going solo is "supposed to be hard" for similar reasons as being a lone wolf in real life isn't as easy as having others to share the work.
Most that seem to say they enjoy the game, don't use the game voice but go via some other mode of comms isolating them into some deliberately hostile and nasty mode of play.
I can't speak for anyone else but, I stay strictly in game (aka: proximity) chat. Others can choose for themselves which is the preferred chat method but, I know I hear a lot of chatter on the digital seas so I know I'm not alone in the use of game chat.
Well, you and your team have had 3 months to address the issues and to speak to players who purchased the game and registered feedback on the balance and you have not said a word.
It seems Rare has been making, at the very least, a half-hearted attempt to keep players in the loop through their "Developer videos" on YouTube and other social media sites. Would you prefer the various teams take time away from working on the game to chat with players or would you rather they work on fixing the issues players have given feedback about? Personally, getting snippets of info about upcoming changes and more updates would be my choice.
The major update we get is a forums bodge up.
Again, quite a few players have been rather vocal about their dislike of the newest forum UI / design changes. Not sure how much of a waste of time and money it was since there's a dedicated team (who doesn't work on the game) to handle forum layout and design... basically doing what they're already getting paid to do; which is try to make the forums as useful as possible.
Can they make a mistake? Of course. Only time will tell if it was a complete "oops" or if parts of it actually work better in the long run.
