Deceptive Pastry
New member
Certain aspects are in a worse state than the first experimental release, stamina and hunger especially which are pretty big. I thought base stam usage + sex trex perks were balanced pretty well the first release or two.
PC How to avoid bad reviews ?
- Thread starter Hek Harris
- Start date
Exxodous
Active member
Entirely possible I suppose, unlikely however since that is twice the average players playing before A17 exp dropped. I doubt an additional 10k players just decided to start playing the "old" version 30 days ago. But isn't that a great thing, you still have a choice and can enjoy the game by playing an older version?
Poojam
New member
Interesting that the tan bar on the Steam Store page that previously said "High Volume of Negative Reviews Detected" is now silver and says "High Volume of Reviews Detected".
The only thing that seems to have changed is that it is now Dec 26th, and the 30th day as of yesterday, had a high positive review count. Once it ticked over to Dec 26th, the proportion of negative reviews went up for the default time period of 30 days and yet the description is more generic. Is that a disclaimer setting that TFP can control?
- - - Updated - - -
The only thing that seems to have changed is that it is now Dec 26th, and the 30th day as of yesterday, had a high positive review count. Once it ticked over to Dec 26th, the proportion of negative reviews went up for the default time period of 30 days and yet the description is more generic. Is that a disclaimer setting that TFP can control?
- - - Updated - - -
They didn't rush it out before Christmas just to prove a point to Bloom_meister did they?Provided they know HOW to opt in to A16.4.
I think all the recent negative reviews is proof that most people now are playing what was automatically updated for them. We’ll see how things go into January.
JoelleEmmily
New member
If you look, some old power players have deleted their old comments and wrote new ones to offset the bombing.
Roland
Moderator
1) Developers cannot control stats or graphics generated by Steam. That is Valve. But they are running a store so may not be above such marketing shenanigans themselves.
2) TFP planned for it to be released before Christmas before it even went experimental. Since the game was running adequately for the majority of participants they released it on schedule—which IS an uncommon result but not beyond what is possible in the multiverse.
Roland
Moderator
I update my review every major Alpha release. I haven’t done it yet but will when we get to the final .x update of A17. It actually is responsible and ethical reviewing to update impressions as the game changes. Some will do so negatively and some to be positive.
Unless someone admits to doing as you say you can’t assume their motivation is to shill.
JoelleEmmily
New member
Not that I disagree... but why?
I could easily delete then re-post in attempt to affect the score... NOT assume a small percentage is doing so is... short sighted. Statistically speaking, chances are VERY good at least one person is doing so. And there is just as much evidence either way... that is to say, none... However, there is currently a controversy, and the only time such tactics would be viable and useful, would be such as now. If you extend that logic, if at any time, anyone would have the inclining to do as suggested, it would be now, therefore, there is a higher than zero chance that it is occurring... so why would one assume it is not occurring at all unless someone admits it? Should we also then assume everyone who does not declaring their review is completely unbiased is participating in the gaming of such statistics? And as a forum moderator, someone who is extended authority and power over a group of people, by the individuals producing said product being reviewed, should you not remain impartial, and hold back such reviews so as not to appear to be attempting to "pay back a favor?"
Also, in this case, wouldn't assuming a positive or negative, good a bad intentions, without evidence, be as foolish as assuming Steam would not give a developer a way to manipulate their review score? Or do so on their behalf? If we only discuss what we know certain, and have evidence for... there would be very little discussion... Supposition is the beginning of investigation... "Benefit of doubt," is the deepest end of stagnation.
And in any event, consumers are just as invested in a product as a store front or producer, and may not be above such marketing shenanigans themselves...
Sellsents
New member
Sorry to tell you MM: but 17 is nothing like a plague and bad decissions all over the place. Your so called "interesting perks and attributes system" is bs. Turning every house into a dungeon is bs. Filling every house to the brim with zombies and the roofs with vultures that respawn quiker as you can kill them is bs. Taking items like the spikes, fertilizer or the prisondoor out of the game is bs. Finding more guns than food is bs. Zombies destroying concrete like paper or digging down in seconds is bs. Binding food on stamina is bs. Only allowing people to have one active claimblock is bs.
You simply took peoples fun away with Alpha 17 turning this awesome game into a zombie shooter, because you didn´t get what goldmine you actually had with A16. And the sadest part is, that you still don´t get it.
I feel pretty assured that such tampering is'nt so easily done, I mean Steam makes their money off sales after all, it's in their interest to sell games. If it were so easy to manipulate the review score I'm sure it'd be no problem to whip up some automation to do so and we would see very few games with any negative scoring, bringing them even more sweet sweet sales. I can't say for sure though I have no idea how these metrics of theirs are calculated, I have to assume though that your opinion only counts once no matter how many times you post it or flip flop.
Because the game has been reduced to a boring as ♥♥♥♥ level grind.
New content is great but not at the expense of the game being actually enjoyable to play, a17 isnt enjoyable for at least a portion of the players.
The perks and attributes are NOT intresting in the slightest, perks that turn off and break basic game balance are not intresting or an improvement over the previous system.
Nothing added in a17 is an improvement. Mods? Ehh, not such a great addition, i actualy preferred the game without them.
New vehicles? The minibike was fine, adding
More variety is okay i guess, still 0 excitement from me though, i just dont care about new vehicles.
POIs? These are lame as hell, one or two large POIs with traps is cool, 90% of POIs being cheap traps that spawn way too many zombies is lame.
Perks? These are also lame as hell. We went from a caharacter representing a ♥♥♥♥ ton of individually leveled skills to just ''level". Going from a bunch of exponential skill curves to a single one is crap.
4x the content my ass, whered you pull that from? Wait there are 5 veichels instead of one... please tell me that isnt where you pulled that BS statement from.
On another note: since the devs cant or wont come forward with actual player numbers (16.4, 17, vanilla, modded) I have to assume there is no analytics or anythig similar in the game client... but no, sepnd a year and half to give us a lackluster skill system insteas of analysis tools that would actually provide he developers with vital information. (Getting bug reporting in client would also be huge)
Usually that's a pretty good indicator of a miss.
When I first played 7dtd I hated it, all I could do was pick up flowers, there was no information on how to do anything. I didn't think to punch a bush or grass or anything because... why would you?
I quit, played a different game. Then it got boring and I just wanted a good zombie survival. So I tried 7dtd again because of the reviews. This time I went and looked up info on how to do basic things on the net.
From there it spiraled into being one of the best games I've ever played.
I didn't much like a lot of changes in 13, 14, and 15 and 16 was too easy and circle AI made the combat far to easy.
Then A17. FINALLY it drops, and I was appalled by the stamina and level gates, first things I removed.
and the horrible melee combat which was always the thing I enjoyed most in this game because guns should bring more zombies as it creates so much noise.
I play occasionally, just to see if I can get used to the things I don't like, but I don't play for long, I get bored fast. Or I get so frustrated with the melee combat I can only put up with it for so long.
I have all these good memories with this game, that I'm still hoping to have more, but I play for less and less because it really isn't as much fun as it used to be.
Player fatigue from so many hours? Or unenjoyable mechanics? Could be a bit of both, but I don't care for the stamina, lost wellness mechanic, skill system, level gates and terrible melee mechanic.
I can deal with the skill system, I can mod the stam and wellness system, remove level gates, but the horrid melee, that's an internal mechanic.
Regardless, of the things I didn't like in 13, 14, 15, 16, I still enjoyed them immensely. A17, I force myself to play hoping it gets better. So far it really hasn't been as much fun.
I agree with poojam, that smaller incremental systems should be introduced so it's not such a shock. I realize much had to be overhauled with the newer Unity engine. But so many drastic changes and some not even close to being finished (weapon and armor mods) cause much frustration.
I got bored of fallout 4 crazy fast. And sad that so much of that game seems to have influenced this one.
But that's the life of a game right. You enjoy it, play it, tire of it, then play something else. Maybe come back and revisit it to see if what you loved about it is still there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sadly for me they borked A17 not even close to where I wanted the game to go! Wack a mole kill zombies and I'm sweet I can now make a chain saw is pure dumb! They changed the game completely. I spent 60 hours in A17 beta trying to find a way to like the game and couldn't, not from lack of trying. It just become unfun and boring. Sadly even the mods wont be able to change the damage they have done to the game in my eyes. I have seen this before with other games and in the end a % of people walked away. What most people don't understand is the people will get bored of killed zombies or the next best fad zombie game will come out and those that just want to kill wont be around anymore. I have read a lot of posts saying its the casual player that just wants it easy. That might be correct for some but for me its not even close . Im a hard core player with over 3 decades of MMO HC game play that can grind most games out but I have no interest in playing a fallout style game. I have had my monies worth in the game its just disappointing to see them go down this path.
HerrKingsley
New member
If you would have added mods new armor, vehicles, pois and the new(balancing) AI to a16 and just balanced and patched the broken areas like augers sand, jumping on bar wire and hell maybe given a buff of no Xp for one day as death buff. I would have been a happy camper.
But I truly feel that you failed to make a17 more difficult or complex just more tedious and dull.
Poojam
New member
Data analytics are extremely valuable for generating factual feedback. These tools should be a functionality that was added a long time ago. Since I've explicitly started a thread, bumped it, and asked this question in no less than 3 "A17 sucks threads" where Madmole has been posting, I'm just going to go ahead and assume they don't have this ability. Seems they just make the game they want, and don't even really understand who is playing what version of it. That leaves them unable to understand how people even enjoy playing the game.