Should never been released to steam in this state. Most of your early adopters will reject it and probably never go back to it. Dumb move by Snail.
56% of the reviews from english speaking players are positive on Steam, which isn't disastrous for a game that just launched in early access.
Any time you see a "mixed" reaction on steam is a warning flag. The game is basically single player right now, the multiplayer aspects are flat out broken. So I stand by what I said, they are killing their game releasing it in this state!
I agree with you that it's a warning flag. I think that the context of the "mixed" score is important too. The first wave of reviews was overwhelmingly negative (80% "not recommended"), while now, not even 48 hours later, the reviews are generally positive (about 66% "recommended").
This game still has a long way to go and the developers seem to acknowledge it. They have made the decision to release it in early access before it's finished, whether it's a good move or not idk, but even if they had waited a bit longer, it would likely not have changed much in terms of content and optimization: it takes weeks or months to implement new systems and improve performances in a game like D&L.
friendly headfs up about misinformation going around. snail games does not OWN ark, they are in a liscencing deal with them to publish a vr game based on ark. the game runs on ue4, and the reason why some of the files in the game bear ark ids, is they are default to the dev kit, it has nothing to do with ark and it is not even the same dev team
friendly headfs up about misinformation going around. snail games does not OWN ark, they are in a liscencing deal with them to publish a vr game based on ark. the game runs on ue4, and the reason why some of the files in the game bear ark ids, is they are default to the dev kit, it has nothing to do with ark and it is not even the same dev team
In today's world, it seems the truth is whatever fits your bias best. Mind you, that's always been the case in human history. We just have a much wider selection of bias-confirmations available these days...
I've seen worse launches. ESO was unplayable at launch even though they had alpha and beta testing, major problems with the launcher, crash to desktop every 10 to 15 mins like clockwork, server shutdown and rollback because of dupping. Strange payment method of taking money from your account that wasn't the norm and cause a lot of bank accounts to become overdrawn. I played it for the free 30 days that came with the package I bought, or at least tried to, then left it alone for nearly a year until they got their act together.
Same with Watchdogs. Not optamised for most PCs. Wouldn't play at all on my gaming desktop but managed to get it to play on my gaming laptop. Took about a year for patches and updates to make it play close to the way it should have played at launch. Won't buy WD2 until it's dirt cheap because of this.
So at least for this game I can play it as a single player until the bugs get worked out which take awhile. There will always be games with bad launches and maybe they will work through it and maybe they won't but if I like it I will give it a try or come back from time to time to see if they got it together.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I saw an elf building a house (im a dwarf) I asked can I join?! Suree and I joined now we are building a house, another player joined. Making an altar, doing group stuff together. It got a lot of flaws that need to be fixed. But im having fun. Tamed a sheep for fur, it can produce alot I will sell it for gold to ohter players etc. Small garden.
This should've been an MMO and it needs more time in the oven. I'd still probably buy it when it's more fleshed out but, i'm still disappointed in their decision to make it a survival game.
Well, it is early access. I'm not sure why this still surprises people? On steam there is also a disclaimer saying as much.
I swear, once again, gamerz make their own hells.
I'm sure if people go into it expecting an "early in development" game/experience they will have a more tempered opinion.
Its example #5683958746350 in this industry of companies trying to make money on something that shouldnt see the light of day for another 2 years, if then even.
That's great and if you see a game or anything that is being released before it should be and you are not inclined to some kind of patronage, don't buy into it.
For me and my life patronage is a very big thing. People are always backing the arts because "the arts". So if I give money to an organization (or accept donations for a concert I was involved in) it's part of the process.
As for this game, it's fine given what it is. I actually enjoyed figuring out what I needed to do though in truth there is some tutorial text to guide you (but not much).
The graphics are decent and this is absolutely no better or worse than Conan exiles when it was offered.
I have not had the issues that others have listed, no crashes yet, the loading screen isn't any slower than a regular game so was that fixed might depend on the computer.
I only have 81 minutes into the game but have made a full french press of coffee and am diving back in again after I press "post comment".
As I've said before, I'm a big believer in knowing what one is getting into. In everything in life. So once again, I dive in and find "an early access game" with all the issues one would suspect so there are no "bad surprises".
Players need to stop rushing to these things, backing early games, doing kickstarters, if they have anything other than than the expectation that these things have risk, they may pan out and there will be issues.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
This is another lying sack of shit showing videos and trailers and hyping a game that does NOT exist for nothing but the hype cash grab this is the same thing they did before back in 2004 they thought it has been long enough we can scam another quick million and run away. Screw these criminals devs like this need to be locked up and sued into non existence.
Since they're cranking them out, now that I have a dino world and a medieval world survival game, can the next one be a supernatural world? Thanks in advance. :-)
Oh my god... A supernatural thriller survival game akin to Outlast or something? That actually has a lot of potential in an Until Dawn, small team coop kinda way.
Yep, can you imagine a Vampire: Bloodlines type of game in a survival sandbox theme? Would make my year!
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I bought the game yesterday, played for 20 minutes where I beat a sheep and was getting blueberries from it? Exited and requested refund. This was after 10 attempts to get into a server which lagged like hell. The opening splash says they're 30% into development on the game and that is a huge embellishment as this shouldn't even be released yet in its current state. I will support it without a doubt and give it a fair shake down the road but definitely not worth my money where it is at currently.
Why do people like you and all the other people in here crying invest in early access to begin with?
(sigh) I would like to play a true mmog.THIS ISN'T.
True. Though these survival games feel more like what I thought mmo's would be at the start. You drop into the world and you make your way.
In any case, I have over two hours in and will probably put in another hour or two. I'm having fun. Oh sure, I can point out things that need work or that I don't agree with, but so far so good.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
They are supposedly going to have straight up PvE servers(they created 12) because of the overwhelming demand for PvE servers. When are these game companies going to realize that a majority of MMORPG players are PvE gamers and don't give a rats arse about PvP.
Is not a MMORPG, not even a MMO really, it is your standard survival game, as one poster put it, ARK with a high fantasy skin.
One overarching theme I've observed in this genre is almost every one launched so far (Rust, 7DtD, ARK, CE, etc) has been full loot, FFA PVP. (With PVE being largely a private server concern)
I've read posts by several on these forums such as @DMKano that these titles lack long term gameplay without open PVP and even regular server wipes to keep them fresh.
Basically they are games, not virtual worlds and long term progression is not a primary design, rather they all seem to be more complex versions of "king of the hill" which are restarted once a winner has been decided.
I see several posters on here who played Conan Exiles just a few months ago and now are trying D&L and I have to wonder why.
I'm sure most will be at the Citadel launch as well.
Yeah, from what I have read and seen the game is not really an MMO, and you're right it is like Conan Exiles or ARK and I just don't see a game like this surviving long without persistent game world and constant updates. Which begs to ask the question, why make such a closed end game to begin with?
They are supposedly going to have straight up PvE servers(they created 12) because of the overwhelming demand for PvE servers. When are these game companies going to realize that a majority of MMORPG players are PvE gamers and don't give a rats arse about PvP.
Is not a MMORPG, not even a MMO really, it is your standard survival game, as one poster put it, ARK with a high fantasy skin.
One overarching theme I've observed in this genre is almost every one launched so far (Rust, 7DtD, ARK, CE, etc) has been full loot, FFA PVP. (With PVE being largely a private server concern)
I've read posts by several on these forums such as @DMKano that these titles lack long term gameplay without open PVP and even regular server wipes to keep them fresh.
Basically they are games, not virtual worlds and long term progression is not a primary design, rather they all seem to be more complex versions of "king of the hill" which are restarted once a winner has been decided.
I see several posters on here who played Conan Exiles just a few months ago and now are trying D&L and I have to wonder why.
I'm sure most will be at the Citadel launch as well.
... Which begs to ask the question, why make such a closed end game to begin with?
Most probably because it's super cheap and quick to make, as opposed to a full-fledged MMORPG with a persistent game world, quests, storyline, etc.
(sigh) I would like to play a true mmog.THIS ISN'T.
True. Though these survival games feel more like what I thought mmo's would be at the start. You drop into the world and you make your way.
In any case, I have over two hours in and will probably put in another hour or two. I'm having fun. Oh sure, I can point out things that need work or that I don't agree with, but so far so good.
That's honestly how games used to be which I honestly miss. FFXI didn't hold your hand the first decade it was out. Had to either do trial and error, research, and/or make friends to progress efficiently. Progress was also more rewarding that way imo as well. Money being sparse to the point where you couldn't always afford to buy upgraded gear so every bit counted and upgrades required thought otherwise you'd be broke and could barely kill things your own level. So I am with you to a degree that some of these survival games have the potential to bring that nostalgia back but unfortunately, this game is tied to Snail games and Snail has a poor track record in the western market. It wouldn't surprise me if this title goes f2p and ends up forgotten by next year.
Should never been released to steam in this state. Most of your early adopters will reject it and probably never go back to it. Dumb move by Snail.
56% of the reviews from english speaking players are positive on Steam, which isn't disastrous for a game that just launched in early access.
Any time you see a "mixed" reaction on steam is a warning flag. The game is basically single player right now, the multiplayer aspects are flat out broken. So I stand by what I said, they are killing their game releasing it in this state!
I agree with you that it's a warning flag. I think that the context of the "mixed" score is important too. The first wave of reviews was overwhelmingly negative (80% "not recommended"), while now, not even 48 hours later, the reviews are generally positive (about 66% "recommended").
This game still has a long way to go and the developers seem to acknowledge it. They have made the decision to release it in early access before it's finished, whether it's a good move or not idk, but even if they had waited a bit longer, it would likely not have changed much in terms of content and optimization: it takes weeks or months to implement new systems and improve performances in a game like D&L.
Odds are many of the positive reviews are coming from people who are playing it as a single player game.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
They are supposedly going to have straight up PvE servers(they created 12) because of the overwhelming demand for PvE servers. When are these game companies going to realize that a majority of MMORPG players are PvE gamers and don't give a rats arse about PvP.
Is not a MMORPG, not even a MMO really, it is your standard survival game, as one poster put it, ARK with a high fantasy skin.
One overarching theme I've observed in this genre is almost every one launched so far (Rust, 7DtD, ARK, CE, etc) has been full loot, FFA PVP. (With PVE being largely a private server concern)
I've read posts by several on these forums such as @DMKano that these titles lack long term gameplay without open PVP and even regular server wipes to keep them fresh.
Basically they are games, not virtual worlds and long term progression is not a primary design, rather they all seem to be more complex versions of "king of the hill" which are restarted once a winner has been decided.
I see several posters on here who played Conan Exiles just a few months ago and now are trying D&L and I have to wonder why.
I'm sure most will be at the Citadel launch as well.
... Which begs to ask the question, why make such a closed end game to begin with?
Most probably because it's super cheap and quick to make, as opposed to a full-fledged MMORPG with a persistent game world, quests, storyline, etc.
Yeah, my thought too, cheap and easy to make and the market is surprisingly forgiving if it's called early access and sold for discount.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
(sigh) I would like to play a true mmog.THIS ISN'T.
True. Though these survival games feel more like what I thought mmo's would be at the start. You drop into the world and you make your way.
In any case, I have over two hours in and will probably put in another hour or two. I'm having fun. Oh sure, I can point out things that need work or that I don't agree with, but so far so good.
Hmm, fours hours of total play time doesn't seem like a great value.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Should never been released to steam in this state. Most of your early adopters will reject it and probably never go back to it. Dumb move by Snail.
56% of the reviews from english speaking players are positive on Steam, which isn't disastrous for a game that just launched in early access.
Any time you see a "mixed" reaction on steam is a warning flag. The game is basically single player right now, the multiplayer aspects are flat out broken. So I stand by what I said, they are killing their game releasing it in this state!
I agree with you that it's a warning flag. I think that the context of the "mixed" score is important too. The first wave of reviews was overwhelmingly negative (80% "not recommended"), while now, not even 48 hours later, the reviews are generally positive (about 66% "recommended").
This game still has a long way to go and the developers seem to acknowledge it. They have made the decision to release it in early access before it's finished, whether it's a good move or not idk, but even if they had waited a bit longer, it would likely not have changed much in terms of content and optimization: it takes weeks or months to implement new systems and improve performances in a game like D&L.
Odds are many of the positive reviews are coming from people who are playing it as a single player game.
(sigh) I would like to play a true mmog.THIS ISN'T.
True. Though these survival games feel more like what I thought mmo's would be at the start. You drop into the world and you make your way.
In any case, I have over two hours in and will probably put in another hour or two. I'm having fun. Oh sure, I can point out things that need work or that I don't agree with, but so far so good.
Hmm, fours hours of total play time doesn't seem like a great value.
You're looking at an early access game. If it was going to qualify as great value in comparison to full games then something would be off. I can only imagine that while this guy is planning for no more than 4 hours at the start... He probably bought it knowing that ahead of time. This is indeed one of the many faults of playing an Early Access game.
It's up to you whether you buy into a unfinished game - or wait it out. This person probably bought it and wanted to see how it feels like and maybe likes the concept and gameplay so far. But might be waiting for more progress and polished experience overall.
Finish games before releasing them please !! Early Access should mean, game is ready to play without so many dam bugs.
No it doesn't. Early Access means you are most definitely about to play a buggy version, filled with unfinished business. This is just a normal (nowadays) business practice to allow income while they work on the game. So basically, you pay for an unfinished game and that's on you lol.
Blame the consumers for this mate because free money is free money
they releases them in production cycle more early each times... im fine with early acess for a ''beta game'' or close to releases... but what we got nowaday are game the basic are not even done... they would not be ready for test or anything others that their intern tester team... but they releases them and charge full price...
also we would need some law they need finish these games... because curently they just releases them and drop the production cycle and make another one... many game in early access are still in early acess after 1-2 year or are just droped... or are not updated anymore...
Finish games before releasing them please !! Early Access should mean, game is ready to play without so many dam bugs.
No it doesn't. Early Access means you are most definitely about to play a buggy version, filled with unfinished business. This is just a normal (nowadays) business practice to allow income while they work on the game. So basically, you pay for an unfinished game and that's on you lol.
Blame the consumers for this mate because free money is free money
they releases them in production cycle more early each times... im fine with early acess for a ''beta game'' or close to releases... but what we got nowaday are game the basic are not even done... they would not be ready for test or anything others that their intern tester team... but they releases them and charge full price...
also we would need some law they need finish these games... because curently they just releases them and drop the production cycle and make another one... many game in early access are still in early acess after 1-2 year or are just droped... or are not updated anymore...
it sound more like a legal scam....
Agreed, DayZ has been in EA since December 2013 according to steam.
And according to its EA page:
Approximately how long will this game be in Early Access?
“At the current time the core development of the base DayZ game is projected to run between 2.5 to 3.5 years. (Putting the departure from Early Access at approximately mid 2017)”
Should never been released to steam in this state. Most of your early adopters will reject it and probably never go back to it. Dumb move by Snail.
56% of the reviews from english speaking players are positive on Steam, which isn't disastrous for a game that just launched in early access.
Any time you see a "mixed" reaction on steam is a warning flag. The game is basically single player right now, the multiplayer aspects are flat out broken. So I stand by what I said, they are killing their game releasing it in this state!
I agree with you that it's a warning flag. I think that the context of the "mixed" score is important too. The first wave of reviews was overwhelmingly negative (80% "not recommended"), while now, not even 48 hours later, the reviews are generally positive (about 66% "recommended").
This game still has a long way to go and the developers seem to acknowledge it. They have made the decision to release it in early access before it's finished, whether it's a good move or not idk, but even if they had waited a bit longer, it would likely not have changed much in terms of content and optimization: it takes weeks or months to implement new systems and improve performances in a game like D&L.
Odds are many of the positive reviews are coming from people who are playing it as a single player game.
How did you arrive at this conclusion?
or from friends and family of the devs that is the scam they used in 2004 to hype the game
Comments
This game still has a long way to go and the developers seem to acknowledge it. They have made the decision to release it in early access before it's finished, whether it's a good move or not idk, but even if they had waited a bit longer, it would likely not have changed much in terms of content and optimization: it takes weeks or months to implement new systems and improve performances in a game like D&L.
so say we all
https://www.reddit.com/r/dnl/comments/5r0ett/snailgames_usa_owns_studio_wildcard_source_in/
In today's world, it seems the truth is whatever fits your bias best. Mind you, that's always been the case in human history. We just have a much wider selection of bias-confirmations available these days...
Same with Watchdogs. Not optamised for most PCs. Wouldn't play at all on my gaming desktop but managed to get it to play on my gaming laptop. Took about a year for patches and updates to make it play close to the way it should have played at launch. Won't buy WD2 until it's dirt cheap because of this.
So at least for this game I can play it as a single player until the bugs get worked out which take awhile. There will always be games with bad launches and maybe they will work through it and maybe they won't but if I like it I will give it a try or come back from time to time to see if they got it together.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
That's great and if you see a game or anything that is being released before it should be and you are not inclined to some kind of patronage, don't buy into it.
For me and my life patronage is a very big thing. People are always backing the arts because "the arts". So if I give money to an organization (or accept donations for a concert I was involved in) it's part of the process.
As for this game, it's fine given what it is. I actually enjoyed figuring out what I needed to do though in truth there is some tutorial text to guide you (but not much).
The graphics are decent and this is absolutely no better or worse than Conan exiles when it was offered.
I have not had the issues that others have listed, no crashes yet, the loading screen isn't any slower than a regular game so was that fixed might depend on the computer.
I only have 81 minutes into the game but have made a full french press of coffee and am diving back in again after I press "post comment".
As I've said before, I'm a big believer in knowing what one is getting into. In everything in life. So once again, I dive in and find "an early access game" with all the issues one would suspect so there are no "bad surprises".
Players need to stop rushing to these things, backing early games, doing kickstarters, if they have anything other than than the expectation that these things have risk, they may pan out and there will be issues.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Yep, can you imagine a Vampire: Bloodlines type of game in a survival sandbox theme? Would make my year!
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Why do people like you and all the other people in here crying invest in early access to begin with?
In any case, I have over two hours in and will probably put in another hour or two. I'm having fun. Oh sure, I can point out things that need work or that I don't agree with, but so far so good.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You're looking at an early access game. If it was going to qualify as great value in comparison to full games then something would be off. I can only imagine that while this guy is planning for no more than 4 hours at the start... He probably bought it knowing that ahead of time. This is indeed one of the many faults of playing an Early Access game.
It's up to you whether you buy into a unfinished game - or wait it out. This person probably bought it and wanted to see how it feels like and maybe likes the concept and gameplay so far. But might be waiting for more progress and polished experience overall.
they releases them in production cycle more early each times... im fine with early acess for a ''beta game'' or close to releases... but what we got nowaday are game the basic are not even done... they would not be ready for test or anything others that their intern tester team... but they releases them and charge full price...
also we would need some law they need finish these games... because curently they just releases them and drop the production cycle and make another one... many game in early access are still in early acess after 1-2 year or are just droped... or are not updated anymore...
it sound more like a legal scam....
And according to its EA page:
Approximately how long will this game be in Early Access?
“At the current time the core development of the base DayZ game is projected to run between 2.5 to 3.5 years. (Putting the departure from Early Access at approximately mid 2017)”It's got Harry Potter style, aerial broomstick wand zapping combat?? SOLD!!!
10/10 would get zapped while riding my broomstick again!