Weedzy wrote:People have every right to complain, they invested in something that was supposedly treated for those massive issues it currently has as an 'open beta'. .
Yoshihito wrote:Entitled kids these days...
I'm just as upset as you at these issues since I've had my fair share. But I also understand what goes in to making a game like this. Single player games are hard, but MMO's are a whole other thing. The point of a beta is to help test systems. If you can't see past that then I have no idea why you would back anything in beta.
I for one will be helping with whatever reports I can make.
Yoshihito wrote:Entitled kids these days...
I'm just as upset as you at these issues since I've had my fair share. But I also understand what goes in to making a game like this. Single player games are hard, but MMO's are a whole other thing. The point of a beta is to help test systems. If you can't see past that then I have no idea why you would back anything in beta.
I for one will be helping with whatever reports I can make.
Weedzy wrote:People have every right to complain, they invested in something that was supposedly treated for those massive issues it currently has as an 'open beta'. People paid money to gain access to the game, while also keeping in mind the term 'beta': you'd expect massive drops in performance, small-medium bugs, a couple of crashes here and there. But you cannot longer put in the argument "it's a beta", since what is happening right now is early-alpha errors coming from the developer such as:
-The website/steam connection for accessing the MMO.
-The constant downtime of the servers.
-The connection errors it gives to players when they try to join in.
-The trouble with the premium stuff/tickets not being available to some.
-No steam library
-
The long waves which passed should have given the developers the time they needed to prepare. You cannot argue that they didn't have time, since they did, and some of the playerbase invested into those packages, expecting at least a SLUGGISH performance, since it is a beta.
It doesn't have SLUGGISH performance, you simply cannot get in the game and that pulls out a question mark for everybody. As a player here on the forum said, when you invest real money into something, you expect at least a tiny bit of profit. Well, here you didn't obtain anything. Not that tiny bit of satisfaction you were supposed to receive.
Greasegunner wrote:
The big issue with what you're saying is that even though it's in beta real estate is a big deal in this game and there are lots of people who paid for and are LITERALLY entitled to what they paid for and are unable to get into the game whilst almost 700 people are on the EU server getting almost an entire day head start while people who paid for a head start can't even get on the game.
Velius wrote:Greasegunner wrote:
The big issue with what you're saying is that even though it's in beta real estate is a big deal in this game and there are lots of people who paid for and are LITERALLY entitled to what they paid for and are unable to get into the game whilst almost 700 people are on the EU server getting almost an entire day head start while people who paid for a head start can't even get on the game.
This pretty much sums it up. I'm guessing that a good deal of people didn't buy packs for a fancy title, or even premium status or currency. They bought it so they could be able to lay down claims to land before it was taken. LiF has always been about speed. If you can't get established fast enough in a good location you are likely going to get obliterated. While I was unable to purchase a pack due to financial reasons, prior to the beta I sorely wish I had because I realize what a game-changer 24 hours can be in this game.
Lazzie_Puca wrote:
It would make a difference, but in what way. One could theorize that getting a claim on a 'hot' spot would be worse than settling out in the boonies. I personally think the meat and potatoes of the game is faction interaction and politics, highly contested land will likely just get you bullied away if you don't have the manpower while meaningful diplomacy and conflict could be had elsewhere.
Greasegunner wrote:Lazzie_Puca wrote:
It would make a difference, but in what way. One could theorize that getting a claim on a 'hot' spot would be worse than settling out in the boonies. I personally think the meat and potatoes of the game is faction interaction and politics, highly contested land will likely just get you bullied away if you don't have the manpower while meaningful diplomacy and conflict could be had elsewhere.
In the way that a large group of players now have an unfair advantage not only in real estate but in development, knowing full well this makes it more likely they will simply use this to lord over and take advantage of newer players. But of course the biggest and most glaring issue is that people who, again, LITERALLY paid for a head start not only did not get a head start but are now way behind in development.
Greasegunner wrote:But of course the biggest and most glaring issue is that people who, again, LITERALLY paid for a head start not only did not get a head start but are now way behind in development.
Lazzie_Puca wrote:I get it, but there is a cost to contest such lands. Whose to say you'll team will end up the victor, and may perhaps such time for the guild would be better invested in securing safe lands and making favorable alliances. Consolidating power rather than just fighting a war of attrition? The game is what you make it though, I won't say you should play this way or that if your mind is set.
Lynchje wrote:This launch should have been better. Half the players cant even log in.
Its really bad.
Zathurus wrote:Although my 90 day subscription is ticking down since I enabled it to install a couple days ago.
Velius wrote:Incidentally Zath, I can't tell since you have the Alpha Tester forum title whether you bout in at Zealot or not, but if so don't forget you now have a 120-day sub.
AlexTaldren wrote: When you buy something and want it in exchange for your money, that means you are entitled to it.
Zathurus wrote:AlexTaldren wrote: When you buy something and want it in exchange for your money, that means you are entitled to it.
"You are entitled to have what I say you have" - Monarchy system
You presume the current state of existence has a rule set and a legal systems. (For instance in the USA the law system currently is not in effect)
Most systems are actually closer to monarchy and only talk about laws to keep the peasants in line, although no need to give examples, the idea that some law entitles you to something, only matters if the systems in place enforce those agreements.
Feudal systems, and unfortunately most current systems only recognize what you can take as rule of law (because I can rule set).
Although I am entitled to be paid, but that is not about this game, but since you are delving into meaning of words, you need to also think about the systems those words operate in.
Or...
Look at the title.
And
You are overruled!