Iterations are not innovation imo. I look at the titles mentioned and see intense pressure to play it safe. That's unfortunate but understandable.
Imo survival shouldn't be written off so easily as I believe that is where some of the most room for innovation exists currently.
I don't want to live in a world where our choices are The Division 5, Far Cry 10, the latest Diablo clone etc. I also don't want Ark 3, 4 or 5. I just want someone to take a chance in ANY genre and killing off survival isn't going to help.
Welcome to 2019 the rock you were under has been removed.
There are now ways to fully see a game without playing it..>>>Twitch tv..>>>You Tube. IDK what i said about it but it's a survival game,you should have a 80% idea right away what it is without looking at ANYTHING. So then like MANY people,if you have already played 1/2 a few you have something to draw comparisons with and decide if the game is "good enough".
What i have witnessed in gaming says a lot,i see people playing IDENTICAL,like games doing the exact same thing but claim one is better than the other.Perfect example Fortnite>>Apex,if anything Fortnite does MORE but many disgruntled FN players left and claimed Apex was better ..lmao,whatever i'm not listening to nonsense.
With survival games there are very subtle differences and within about 5-10 minutes you have more than enough to size up comparisons.Right out of the gate Rend's water is just not as good as Atlas then again Atlas has the best water in gaming along with physx. harvesting is basically identical in all these games,some are a tad worse as in atlas or Rend you get different mats from different clicks.
Building is very similar but again subtle differences ,in Atlas the game and building is just way more wide open than any other survival game.The only restrictions are where you can pvp and how far you can build outside your ship boundaries.IMO Atlas is the flagship survival game,some became more comfortable with Ark but imo Atlas is slightly better.
Point is that Atlas is just a better overall game.Atlas looks VERY realistic,so i feel immersed,Rend leans a tad bit towards cartoony. Rend is simply not bad but not that great either,i would as of right now,always choose Atlas over Rend and with little time to decide.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The gaming market SHOULD be a competition for our money,the better game should garner more attention however this has NOT been happening.Constant support of inferior games just because they are new allows so many bad developers to keep showing up with subpar games because they can still make money doing less.
In the real world,pricing is often a major factor,people buy what they can afford and not always the best product so that is understandable.However in gaming,pricing is very close and another reason why i feel Atlas is the best option,it is also very cheap at $30.I know why it is is only $30 but that doesn't matter if you are comparing survival game to survival game and if your decision is really tough then maybe the price leans you more to one than the other. Rend is only $11 bucks so again if you feel Rend is very comparable in overall package,that price might be your best option.
I know some of these games are charging ridiculous prices,way more than the game is worth. AOC exiles is a rip off at $50 and $90 if you want their add on package lol.No way is that total package worth 90 bucks.There is that Pirate game that is half the game Atlas is yet sold for $80 right out of the gate,a massive ripoff ,imo was influenced by the publisher microsoft for charging way too much.The players are playing that pirate game like a battle Royale which makes it all the more pathetic,why would you pay 80 bucks for a genre that is normally FREE.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
So we see a survival game, struggling to survive. I don't need any more survival games. And this one even looks like games build a dozen years ago. Even GW2 and ESO look way better, being years out now.
Still looking for a new great AAA MMO. We have more than enough mediocre survival games. Time for a new bigseller in the MMO market!
Wow its reviews like this that make us all believe game sites are corrupted and are paid for falsely hype steaming piles of crap. This game is DOA as is the entire genre.
We need a governing body that oversees these EARLY access claims and if they abandon the game they are fined a lot of money.They would likely declare bankruptcy anyhow but still.
This is because there seems to be a common theme happening with EA games,a fast cash grab then disappear or PRETEND to be doing some work but in reality a few bug fixes and not much more.
It is not all that hard to create content,if there are actually teams working on these EA games,we should be seeing a LOT of new work every month.
What is appears like is the developers feel the EARLY tag simply means.."expect bugs"however this is the game ALL of it.
These EA games are rushed out VERY quickly,so there is a chance something they were working on b4 release gets finished but i have yet to see anything NEW come about in EA games.
Imagine if a governing body stepped in and said,give them 50% o their money back or fines them enough to put them out of business,that might keep the deceptive developers out of the game.
I think the $11 price tag reaffirms what one poster said,the developer has abandoned the game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I guess the real question is if this game is like Conan Exiles / Rust where the game data is saved per server or is it an actual MMORPG where data isn't lost and everything?
Comments
You could scroll up to where I said I played 130+ hours of it.
There are now ways to fully see a game without playing it..>>>Twitch tv..>>>You Tube.
IDK what i said about it but it's a survival game,you should have a 80% idea right away what it is without looking at ANYTHING.
So then like MANY people,if you have already played 1/2 a few you have something to draw comparisons with and decide if the game is "good enough".
What i have witnessed in gaming says a lot,i see people playing IDENTICAL,like games doing the exact same thing but claim one is better than the other.Perfect example Fortnite>>Apex,if anything Fortnite does MORE but many disgruntled FN players left and claimed Apex was better ..lmao,whatever i'm not listening to nonsense.
With survival games there are very subtle differences and within about 5-10 minutes you have more than enough to size up comparisons.Right out of the gate Rend's water is just not as good as Atlas then again Atlas has the best water in gaming along with physx.
harvesting is basically identical in all these games,some are a tad worse as in atlas or Rend you get different mats from different clicks.
Building is very similar but again subtle differences ,in Atlas the game and building is just way more wide open than any other survival game.The only restrictions are where you can pvp and how far you can build outside your ship boundaries.IMO Atlas is the flagship survival game,some became more comfortable with Ark but imo Atlas is slightly better.
Point is that Atlas is just a better overall game.Atlas looks VERY realistic,so i feel immersed,Rend leans a tad bit towards cartoony.
Rend is simply not bad but not that great either,i would as of right now,always choose Atlas over Rend and with little time to decide.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
In the real world,pricing is often a major factor,people buy what they can afford and not always the best product so that is understandable.However in gaming,pricing is very close and another reason why i feel Atlas is the best option,it is also very cheap at $30.I know why it is is only $30 but that doesn't matter if you are comparing survival game to survival game and if your decision is really tough then maybe the price leans you more to one than the other.
Rend is only $11 bucks so again if you feel Rend is very comparable in overall package,that price might be your best option.
I know some of these games are charging ridiculous prices,way more than the game is worth.
AOC exiles is a rip off at $50 and $90 if you want their add on package lol.No way is that total package worth 90 bucks.There is that Pirate game that is half the game Atlas is yet sold for $80 right out of the gate,a massive ripoff ,imo was influenced by the publisher microsoft for charging way too much.The players are playing that pirate game like a battle Royale which makes it all the more pathetic,why would you pay 80 bucks for a genre that is normally FREE.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Still looking for a new great AAA MMO. We have more than enough mediocre survival games. Time for a new bigseller in the MMO market!
This is because there seems to be a common theme happening with EA games,a fast cash grab then disappear or PRETEND to be doing some work but in reality a few bug fixes and not much more.
It is not all that hard to create content,if there are actually teams working on these EA games,we should be seeing a LOT of new work every month.
What is appears like is the developers feel the EARLY tag simply means.."expect bugs"however this is the game ALL of it.
These EA games are rushed out VERY quickly,so there is a chance something they were working on b4 release gets finished but i have yet to see anything NEW come about in EA games.
Imagine if a governing body stepped in and said,give them 50% o their money back or fines them enough to put them out of business,that might keep the deceptive developers out of the game.
I think the $11 price tag reaffirms what one poster said,the developer has abandoned the game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.