New article about SotA - objective and interesting, worth a read

I never stated anyone's head exploded. But I can imagine if someone's did it would be easy to know which one by their post history whenever a dissenting opinion is posted here. Which I am surprised this hasn't been moderated into oblivion already.

 

I prefer this World Map over a fully open world for the simple fact that a fully open world would be far smaller than a world of instances. For the open worlds that are considered large how much useless space between Point A and Point B is there? I also like the idea that new areas can be added to the map, possibly requiring to be discovered or opened via quest or key.

 

Its all fake news people hahaha

Understandable that the only people that defend that game are here in its forums.. And no one is trying to spoil your fun.

That is what you don't understand.

The game is not marketable and will not be successful unless those issues presented will be tackled. Like I said the people not wanting those backer's back are right in this forum and very successful and keeping it their own little club There is a course of game design in munich in which one guy put up SotA as example of how things can get wrong in PR.

But of course it's all fake news.. How are they allowed to write such nonsense!

 

meh.

echos a alot of my complaints.

but still not really a fair article and there are a few mistakes that makes me doubt the writer spent much time looking into the game but rather browsed reddit or the forums.

a lot of the tone and some of the mistakes could be because of the translation tho.

a meh article that focuses on the negative with the drama stir shot at devs and community at the end.

 

I think that is exactly what is SotAs problem. Facing reality and act accordingly.

 

And that is what is written in the article. There it says "The game was supposed to be a story-driven MULTIPLAYER RPG with Offline-Mode". So where is this wrong?

What you seem to block out is that Richard said "basically soloplayer with the option to play online". This implies that the game is a BASICALLY soloplayer game that you can also play online. NOT that it is a BASICALLY MMORPG that you can play offline. Those are two fundamentally different gamedesigns.
Also you always assume that we SP-fans thought that SotA would be a SP-game ONLY, which is completely wrong. We were fully aware of the online part from the very beginning. I even looked forward to play a great story together with friends. We just want the single-player part (the offline part) to be a real single-player experience and not a tacked-on offline MMO.

You are telling that there is a narrative of lies here because you think the SP fans want SotA to be an offline game ONLY? This is wrong. So I am wondering who is furthering a narrative of lies here.

Exactly what is written in the article.

Also this article is not a review of the game. It is not about what is good or what is bad about SotA. It is an article that asks the question "Why is there so much hatred surrounding SotA?" And it tries to explain why people are upset.

The question I ask myself is, if there is an article that asks this question and tries to provide an answer, then there must be some hatred surrounding the game. Otherwise the topic wouldn't exist.
So where is this hatred? Where can we read about it? My answer: basically everywhere except for here. There was this MassivleyOP article about SotA with very interesting comments. On MMORPG.com the comments always explode when there is something written about SotA. On the Kickstarter- and Steam-Forums or in the Steam reviews there is a lot of criticism. There are SO MANY places where SotA is heavly criticized. Are the people in all of those places wrong?

 

Well, after I finished laughing let me tell you what I think about the article.

In my opinion: partly correct but nothing new here.

What is more interesting than the article itself are the reactions to it. Isn't it beautiful to see this community split in half. Again. Like with almost.... Everything.
Can't we work together for a better game for each and every of us? Just because (random example) LDM wants phasing and lasting consequences doesn't mean he is taking something away from me because I want meaningful pvp.
Can't we respect each other's opinions if they aren't entirely stupid?

Sure we all get tired of the negative reviews (or whatever you want to call it).
I am pretty sure even the people that agree with this one are getting tired of negative reviews. So let's work together and change that.

 

You are right. A big gap has opened in this community.
And yes, just because I - and many others - want a great SP experience with choices, lasting consequences, deep quests, a great narrative etc. doesn't mean that other aspects have to suffer.
That is why I don't understand the accusation that SP fans spread lies that we want SotA to be a SP game only... This is wrong! But we don't want a subpar SP-mode.

 

I think its not about PVP vs PVE anymore. I think there is people missing gaming features in general, over POT decoration and dance parties instead of real RP events.

This game become more like Second Life, and some like that - others don't and just want it to be a game focusing on gameplay again.
One guy in the comments said it like this: Imagine you play cards with friends. It is nice if you can choose from many different decks, in different colors etc... But its more important that you have the friends to play with and of course that the game is fun.

Someone else posted, that this game is never going to be fun if you don't like it now. I think I agree to that to some degree.
However I think those people that just left because they got bored, could become players again if they start working on features.
As long as the list of added deco content is longer than features, it just sends a wrong signal to people out there.
But I guess the need for money is large, so they have to advertise this a lot now - even though it is perceived as desperate.

They should advertise with features and leave the deco adverts to the people already playing for a start.

 

As i said, a random example that came to my mind because LDM posted right before me.

That's the whole point.
And instead that we all focus on getting more game features we tear each other appart because we think the "other one" is taking away something from "us" if his/her feature is added. It has almost become and obsession for a lot of us here.
If i can't get what i want they won't get what they want either!!!111 It's insane.
We would all have a better game if we support a good idea and it get's implimented instead of burning it down because *gasp* another idea is implimented before MY idea! THIS CAN'T HAPPEN!!!111111
All i am trying to say is: get a grip folks. Yesy maybe your idea will be the last in line but that's the way it is. Every feature added, be it your priority or not, is good for the game. So support if ffs.[/QUOTE]

 

On point. Is there any positive articles from gaming sites out there?

 

while I do find the article one sided, I also find a lot of the points very valid.

 

Did you just use your own article to validate your point?

Apart from that, I hope there is still work to be done with the story.
I agree that it's a bit vague in areas and while I wouldn't want to be forced into a linear story I'd also like some visual/behavioral consequences to my actions so that I feel the impact of my choices and thereby reveal the story behind it all.
I understand how this would be difficult to do in an online scenario where people around you, may not be on the same "page", and I can see how it makes no sense that single player should adhere to these online dogmas.
But there is no easy fix or silver bullet to this (from a technical point of view), this probably have to be solved on a case by case basis, with the help and feedback from the community.

 

The article is the same old Steam review crap warmed over, nothing new or interesting.

The instances are an important part of scalability, so that we aren't broken up into dozens of shard worlds, unable able to ever meet 95%+ of the rest of the player base. That is constantly ignored, since we haven't had enough player base yet to notice it, and is one of the biggest reasons I stay around. Having been in one of the less popular world shards of FFXI, I know what it's like to be in the "wrong" one.

 

Many, because the article is a summary of the points brought up in major debates in the forum. I recognize most of them either due to the phrasing or context in which these were made.

The author of the article basically went through all the relevant threads and made a skillful compilation and narrative out of all of it.

Whether he/she actually played the game to confirm or verify these points is another matter.

 

I think in normal game development at some point the e.g. graphic designers are fired or move to a new project but the SotA team stays as it is.
Maybe someone that is an exceptional 3D designer is also a not all that bad programmer but I think continue to use their extraordinary abilities still make more sense.
No offense to the designers but I think most of their mechanics seems to be already completed…they “just” have to use the tools they got and some creative inspiration to create something new and i would guess creating e.g. deco items does not impair the work on e.g. completing the crafting mechanics simply because there are working different people on these sections.
The problem or misunderstanding is that the one takes maybe some days to be created and the other months. That way it is simply less frequently that you can show something like e.g. the new agriculture mechanics even if the workload is comparable with perhaps creating 100 deco items.

 

Yes but still they should advertise features more. At least I would advise them that.

 

People were being picky about what KS said, or videos said, I figured I'd be picky with what I said too.

I am not accusing everyone of smashing down dissenters, I am just stating that it does indeed happen. Even in the Hospitaller meetings between Hospitallers. By everyone to everyone? Of course not.

And I certainly cannot engage in an ongoing thread the is critical about the game or the company after it has been locked or deleted, or myself banned from the forums. I really hope you are just trying to egg me on instead of being truly ignorant that it does happen. Too critical, too many pages, too off topic, some other reason. Something is used to shut it down.

 

"It has no actionable items!" "Post has gone on long enough, closing!" "this isnt constructive!" "No negativity!" "Hasnt posted for months, therefore this is bad!"

I can understand that you want constructive feedback and all. But when someone says: I love that game... it is as unconstructive as someone saying I hate it.
Both are valuable feedback for a developer though. If too many people are not happy I have to try to understand why.
What is done here though is combating Angst the bad mood spreads, which it did despita all that... Deleting or closing threads is not how to deal with stuff like that.

I am really curious if there will be an official response to that article. Because it is long overdue that Portalarium tries to fight to get old backers back on board.

This game is more present and has more eyes on itself than they might think.. It is still one of the most successful Kickstarted and Crowdfunded projects.

 

"Der Fokus wird zu sehr auf den Item-Shop gelegt, in dem Häuser, Spielerstädte und Deko zum Teil für sehr viel Geld angeboten werden."

Da liegt meiner Meinung nach der Hund begraben!
SotA ist voll von unfertigen und halbgaren features, unzählige Bugs und Platzhalter (Animationen, Grafik & Sound), jedoch wird der Add-On Store jeden Monat mit Items regelrecht geflutet.
Dabei könnte man die Ressourcen doch viel geschickter einsetzten um das Spiel fertig zu stellen und sich danach um den Shop kümmern.
Aber Hauptsache wir bekommen nächsten Monat eine "Kobold Indoor Toilet"...