553 reviews on Steam and 154 Negative

I would definitely say it is an intended effect yes. Bandits and Skeletons swarming sound reasonable. Not sure about Spiders, I never really considered them to be social creatures, personally.

Though I know for certain it occurs regardless of player level, as I have it occur at Level 45 while hunting in the Celestis Swamps.

 

I consider the packs of wolves attacking to be a feature, not a problem.
I used to hate it back in the release when the aggro was broken and foes would just stand there while you slaughtered their kin.
But I'd like it to be based on a NPC action which could be interrupted.
Take wolves for instance, if I attack one and it is really hurt then it should try to howl for help. If that howl is not interrupted the aggro of all wolves within a radius should go up.

Same thing with bandits or such.
Just think of a scene where you notice a bandit with a horn on his belt. If he manages to sound the alarm lots of bandits from everywhere will come running. (Not all, but the patrols and the reserve, not the guards).

This now gives me positive and negative options.

I could turn and avoid the encounter knowing that I might not handle the events unraveling if the alarm horn sounds.

I could try to evade that one and attack others without such a horn to sound the alarm, hopefully picking them off enough so that when eventually the horn calls not enough bandits remain.

I could provoke the bandit to sound the horn and then draw the reaction away from a POI while my party tries to raid it before they get back.

I could have a possy lying in wait draw their attention and have a mass battle, just because me and my friends would love the challenge.

Etc.

 

It's because the spiders were getting comfortable in their homes (taking off their carapaces and stuff) and here comes those pesky humans again. Just jaunting in, disturbing the peace, and you home from a long day at work. So the neighborhood associations got together and formed a welcome committee so the humans get the message - YOU ARE NOT WELCOME IN MY HOME. SO GET OUT. It seems to have worked in some cases, though there are some who just refuse to get the message. They're still being worked on.

It's also why sometimes you find the carpaces (spelling?) in the bushes, I figure?

 

That in itself isn't the issue, the issue is that the game doesn't convey to new players where he/she should play in the early levels (1-9) and "this feature" does impact the difficulty of a particular area... at the same time, the game doesn't provide adequate starting equipment making it even harder for someone to find a place to level up.

This "feature" was brought up in the discussion because someone argued that he/she had no issues fighting A monster when, in fact, most encounters I've experienced happen in packs.

So to sum it up:
People are leaving negative reviews because:

• you start off with a broken quest
• without knowing whenever or not you're doing the right thing
• where monsters in the surrounding areas will annihilate you
• using a tired/outdated combat system
• where your skills cost way too much focus and have cooldowns
• without explaining to you that there's an alternative to the static actionbar
• where the most obvious activity are the hat quests sending you to even harder areas.
• And being able to explore this empty game requires you to grind a bunch of levels
• so you spend your time looking for monsters to kill
• but you can't kill anything because you have no money and are wearing light armour
• and the game won't give you a clue
• you're level one
• you log off

"But they've only played less than 2 hours!" one might think... and some people here think the ones leaving bad comments want instant-gratification with quest markers.

That's the issue.

 

Oh I agree that the start has some issues. I personally think that to continue selling the game on steam they need to have a good start. Much better than the one they currently have. This since most people don't care about it being pre-alpha they still want to see something of the potential early on.
We don't want Eve levels of threshold here.
So a rethink/redesign of the beginners experience is fundamental to a game in alpha.

Had it been me I'd get a dozen gamer students who'd be willing to try a game for free pizza and a free adventurer account / extra credits. Give them a form of 20 loves and 20 hates to fill in during the test. Then divide them into two groups/rooms one where they are encouraged to talk to each other while playing/learning, the other which are told not to talk to eachother but instead only write down questions and experiences.
Then put two devs behind them just making notes of their experience.
Run such a thing one session every two months.

But that would be me. (I do such things in my line of work every now and then).

So while I agree completely in principle about the beginners experience not being on par, I disagree with a lot of your points. This since they assume other solutions than what I'd prefer to see implemented. So a different PoV is all.

 

Much of the negativity has to do with being moderated, banned or having bought pledges and or add-ons plus being moderated and/or banned. (I've read almost all of them on Steam anyway) While some of the negativity is founded, (and I could or have refuted some of it there) most is more of the same we see here. The game is not where it 'should' be or where 'I' think it should be. 'My' needs or wants aren't being met. 'I'm' not getting the attention I deserve for backing.

Gix, how many different ways of 'in development' do people have to say it? Quests, Combat, Crafting, GFX and Performance are 'In development with everything else. Nothing is complete or finished or polished. I like the Hat quests myself and I don't really like being led by the nose anyways. Adventuring is a risky business. probably why not many people did it back then. heck we're changing up skills etc. soon. I've played games that did that months or even years after release. The $45 now is to help test and improve the game and include features people are asking for. A pretty good deal if you ask me. Considering I've paid that and more for released games I shelved after a week.

 

I'm more along the lines of saying:
Why are people surprised at the negativity?
Don't brush these reviews as ignorant and take it as feedback.
People are more willing to try it again if they hear good things about it later on.

 

I will answer this.

Why? Because the game is 'In Development" and the game is being judged as a finished product. People are going onto Steam and pointing out elements that are not complete like they are set features that they do not like about the game. Steam is an easy forum to judge games as there is the cloak of anonymity there. Repopulation, DayZ SA and a host of other newer games also in development have a minimum amount of money you have to pay to try it and you get nothing in game for it other than to be able to play it. Alot of people pay it, try them and speak up about their experiences. The Repopulation 73% positive, DayZ 77%, SotA 72%. Elite: Dangerous now released 75%. Other than E all these games have detractors and in SotA you get in game items for your purchase. Access to the forums and the ability to get your 2c in about what you like and don't like. I do not brush off the negativity as ignorant, save for how they are often being presented. I certainly can get in the game, travel, talk to people and NPCs, fight, kill, die, forage for crafting components, craft and build. None of this is polished yet and saying so is not ignorant. Nor is saying "If you are looking for a completed, polished game perhaps wait to make your purchase. But, most of these negative reviews are not just saying that. They are 'bashing' and 'lashing' out. More and more I am getting the sense that if people like these can't ruin someone else's day they will not be happy. 'Since they don't really like it, no one else should' mentality.

 

Yet you're surprised because somehow the "in development" label excuses it.

If it's in a store, you're selling a product. Kickstarter was one thing but now it's on Steam. The fact that it's being sold in it's incomplete state and receiving negative comments is on the developers. They chose to do it so that we could give them feedback and they're getting it all; the good, the bad and the ugly. Tough cookies.

I mean, you might as well remove all positive comments as well because, sometimes, I really question if we're playing the same game (or if people are on meds). So, at the end of the day, who cares?

They're going to get my vote once the game is good (even if it's incomplete). Until then, I'm telling everyone I know to stay as far away as possible... if I was writing a review, I'd be bashing and lashing at it too.

 

Interesting point of view. What you are paying for is a sneak peak and donation into a products development. This is where alot of people seem to get lost in the shuffle. Buying pledges does not give one more authority or more respect by themselves. Attitude, respect, time and personal effort does though. I've seen the devs and how they react to such. Very cool, very cool indeed.

Steam has been selling games in development for what, years now? Offering this sneak peak is a necessary evil to gain funds to further the project along. For the consumer, as any other game offered on Steam (not just the ones in development) you either like what you see or you do not. If you like it you play it, if not, you shelve it. Some people will go back on Steam and layout out the whats and the whys to a positive or negative opinion of their puschase.

The lashing and bashing has alot to do with ego I think (from what I was reading anyways) and very little to do with the game itself. Issues with the devs themselves. issues with getting the ban hammer, issues with moderation or not enough PVP to suit them. (thank god)

You can buy tickets to a boxing match or a movie in an online store but what you buy may not even be a good or pleasant experience. If I go and pay for a terrible movie, I've burned that money. However what I've bought is a finished product good or bad and I could list the reason i liked or disliked what I saw. What we are seeing on Steam is going far beyond that and it's pretty clear as to why. Color it however you want but at the end of the day, just give your opinion of what you liked and disliked positive or negative. It's all useful feedback, not this other stuff. Why burn more Emotion, time and effort on something you feel negatively about? And my last statement is really what baffles me the most. (Well, just kidding, we all know why)

 

I just want to point out that on Steam its being sold as "Early Access", and not as a complete product, so purchasers should know what they're getting.

 

So, you want the game to be good. . .but you're going to advise people not to play it, therefore denying the developers of potential testers who could give feedback that may lead to the game becoming good. . . now that's logic.

 

I believe some people are just wanting to spread ill will instead of positive or negative feedback. I believe the best way to deal with these people is the "ignore feature" because if you keep responding or "feeding them" they will never stop.

 

I'm totally amazed this thread has not died out yet, I mean what is there to discuss/debate?

Ah well ravicus beat me to my point

 

Exactly, the thing about feeding trolls, is that they never stop being hungry.

 

I think it is a dangerous philosophy to label those you don't agree with as trolls.

If that was the case, if they didn't agree with what you thought was good would you be a labeled a troll?

 

Its not what people say, its how they say it. Words have meaning. Adjectives describe. Toxic is a term that I would use because it does not either promote either positive or negative feedback. It promotes dissension and flaming.

 

It's been my experience that not everyone realizes how their written words come off. Not everyone accused of being negative or who engage in 'forceful' dissent are trolling or flaming on purpose. If the conversation that is happening does not appeal to you or interest you, you can choose to just stay away from it I think. Choose to not be offended by the more colorful terms that are making you upset. Adding in a post about 'not feeding' a troll is likely only going to exacerbate the situation or make someone already defensive even more so. This tactic is one fo the reasons people are going to Steam and other places enraged. Gix has a right like everyone else to have an opinion. I'd prefer to keep them here, discussing than to have them go elsewhere, bashing.

 

I am sorry if you think I am bashing. I am not. I am merely stating the obvious and that words are important at conveying a message. Inciting :

in·cite
inˈsīt/
verb
gerund or present participle: inciting

1. encourage or stir up (violent or unlawful behavior).
   "the offense of inciting racial hatred"
   synonyms: stir up, whip up, encourage, fan the flames of, stoke up, fuel, kindle, ignite, inflame, stimulate, instigate, provoke, excite, arouse, awaken, inspire, engender, trigger, spark off, ferment, foment;More
   literaryenkindle
   "we're hoping that last night's incident will not incite altercations in the stadium today"
   egg on, encourage, urge, goad, provoke, spur on, drive, stimulate, push, prod, prompt, induce, impel;
   arouse, rouse, excite, inflame, sting, prick;
   informalput up to
   "she incited him to commit murder"
   antonyms: suppress, discourage, deter
   • urge or persuade (someone) to act in a violent or unlawful way.
     "he incited loyal subjects to rebellion"

 

woot?

1. No its not.
2. We are nearly 7 mill so no!
3. Aem ... so Sota has a cash flow problem, and a problem of it is that for 1.5 Million they wanted for kickstarter they reached now nearly 7M after kickstarter and thats a problem wy?
(psst by the way dont tell anybody this game has now more featurs and stuff than it was planned from the beginnig wich means they need more money so they can give what we all want port and the community but dont tell any body!)
4. I realy hurted my self with a megadeath facepalm can some one call the ambulance?
Back to your point: Nop it doesnt, that is my oppinion or in fact ...realty. But since realty is objectiv and viewen by each observer different (thats physic) i must say fine its your oppinion/viewing point but trust me when i say a big NO its not!
5. Since its in development i hope so, a lot of questions a lot of answers and i hope in the end we get a very interessting system looking good so far