Adawon

Let's continue on the suggestions forum. I can send you a compilation video of bugs and glitches I've recorded though

https://steamcharts.com/app/113400 Take a look Average players in July 2012 ~ 2,482 Average players in the last 30 days ~ 603 In case if you don't know, 2,482 > 603, which means 603 is a minority. The majority who left the game didn't leave because the game needs polishing, but because the game needs a lot of change. That's the point of the whole topic. Now I think you had had enough of my time. Nice mimicking, funny guy.

Then we would be drunk. 1. Can you rephrase that, please? 2. My bad. I meant "Yes, they will support the player" but derp, that wasn't an appropriate answer either, sorry. So I think Ammo Box should support all players. Mobile spawners should only support the owner team. 3. Yes. 4. Okay. 5. I guess we reached a dead end disagreeing. 6. I think so. 7. I guess so. 8. I think so. 9. Nice.

What if I even suggested to remove Valzipram tablet? You can agree or disagree and leave the rest for the developers. See the point already? Yes, that's what I am suggesting and think it's fine. Now we're talking, we should've done this in the suggestion threads. I am interested in your opinion on the meaning of polishing. Please, define it for me. Contradiction with what exactly? I cared about your comment and replied. I didn't believe that arguing about your points will lead to nothing, unlike you, so you stopped commenting. Haha.. oh wait, that's not funny

Making the suggestion more clear after @BXNNXD asked some questions about it on another thread.

I've read all your comment and all the other comments. The part I responded to just rang some bells on me. I don't respond to some parts because I believe that arguing about them will lead to nothing.

How would it affect the existence of the modification? It will stay there and change the kill speed to even faster. Simple as that that it should go without saying. You can disagree or agree but you shouldn't doubt the viability of the suggestion or my right to suggest. Yes, No, Yes, Yes, Respawn their car (yes, they should make it able to be respawned if enemies are inside), Yes (I suggested car jacking), Yes, No, Yes, they should be able to respawn it. Wasn't that hard was it? You could just ask these questions on the suggestion thread instead of going "the other party has no idea what's going on so I will stop replying" You got me there with that comparison. You know that "polishing a game" isn't like physically "polishing" a diamond right? Polishing a game may mean fixing bugs and glitches, adding time intervals for certain actions, changing some animations and nerfing weapons. A game with bugs and glitches is not a perfect game. A game that needs polishing isn't a perfect game. Polarbear himself admitted that there are few legit reviews, which supports my point. So stop using that for your argument because it doesn't support your argument by any means. Anyway, I appreciate that you actually spent time arguing with me in this thread and I hope you always share your thoughts and not go "this guy has no idea" again. I've gone through this in the replies, please read them.

° You were saying that it can't be implenented, so I had to get other games that implemented it as proof. That's totally viable because you had no idea that it could be implemented in an online game and just kept saying it's so demanding and hard to do (which is also developers' business, not yours). ° What don't you understand in "killing speed of cars is too slow"? All the people who read it understood it but you failed. ° "Entirely fail to... etc" makes no sense without defining how it failed.. Then you've literally cut my words out of context about veterans. I said: "game veterans who like the game as it is (((((and only think it needs polishing and more content)))))" So you either did that intentionally or you did not even read my paragraph carefully, just like how you appear to read suggestions

Oh hey, little Einestien, what are the core differences between the console version (Unreal 3.5) and the PC version (Unreal 3.0)? How do you agree with me and at the same time tell that opposers had valid reasoning?

When did I say "a veteran who thinks the game is perfect?" And what does it even mean to label someone disagreeing with you as incorrect? Because disagreement is when someone thinks something is correct and the other person does not, it's subjective. Your comment is poorly thought out. Anyway, I remember replying to all your comments on my suggestions and you are the one who stops replying. It's not something someone who has an argument would do.

Yes, tell that to yourself.

I already stated it's not about veterans specifically. And you're the one who marked about 40 reviews as non-legit. But I see you like to keep talking.

Just observe how much bombing core change suggestions get and you'll know why they don't use their voices. Take this creature for an example, he preserves other people's suggestions as "shit" then he talks about handling negative criticism. Ofcourse, but there's no point in suggesting them unless I know developers would care to listen.

Thanks for supporting my point. I never said that all the reviews are legit, so, sorry to tell you that you wasted a lot of your time.

What makes them in the upper peak that they're, unlike APB, not repulsive to players. Players who play them love them and advertise them, making the player bases grow even more. Shame on APB that it did not capture a place in the peak of the category with so small competition and so much potential.

No, games should not fade away like that. Especially a game like APB with such a unique customization system. Look at games released about the same time and even before it. A game like Terraria (started around 2009) sold millions of copies and is still very active, older games like WoW and runescape are still very active, even MTA San Andreas has tens of thousands of cocurrent players, Starcraft 1, Warcraft 3, and the list goes on. Good games should not fade.

It's okay if you consider than 500 hours of gameplay don't make a veteran, but the point is is not about them listening to veterans, but about listening only to people who like the game how it is (a small player base compared to the thousands who left), which the veterans I mentioned are a part of and happen to have a louder voice in the forums and better reach to developers, while ignoring those thousands who don't like the game and who left, which some of them made video reviews, wrote low score reviews or wrote suggestions.

Look up youtube reviews of the game, non-reccomending reviews on steam and suggestions forum. I have made suggestions in the past, check my profile to get to them. The only core changing suggestion of these is the first one, the rest are clearly polishing and overhauling. If you are looking to other core change suggestions from me, there's the one about car glass, the one about car tires and the one about throwing grenades on drive-by.

This is not the forum for suggestions. The thread is targeting Little Orbit's developers to make them address things that made thousands of players leave the game.

Well, you what? You got to work on focusing on the point of the topic instead of going like "huh, what?, duh".

Little Orbit's CEO always talks about listening to the players and improving connection between players and developers in almost every occasion, which is very good, but at the same time, Little Orbit is ignoring the much larger audience, which is the players who left. Being one of them to leave in 2015 (came back last year hoping little orbit will bring change), I was, and still, getting bugged by game mechanics that I think need to change, and would argue that most of the players who quit are just like me. What I've seen from Little Orbit so far is just the will to polish the game and add more content, not change mechanics, which is very disappointing. Little Orbit is only listening to the game veterans who like the game as it is and only think it needs polishing and more content, these people dominate the forums and are there to oppose any topics on the Suggestions Forum that suggest changing game-play mechanics, making it appear that everyone oppose those changes, while a greater number of people are to support changes (including almost all my game friends, whether the ones who quit or the ones who are still playing), but most of them have already left the game, while the portion of players who are still playing don't have the courage to suggest something that forums veterans will dislike and oppose. In conclusion, I don't think sticking to the current small player base and only polishing the game is going to increase the number of players, but changing game-play mechanics will. So please, Little Orbit, consider checking mechanics-changing suggestions (which are bombed with dislikes and opposing replies, like the ones I've written) and address the reviews who concluded low ratings for the game, whether written or in videos.

The installer is also used to repair the game and I have done and fixed problems with it before. I have no problems with the launcher. I just want the installer to recognize the game files. It used to recognize them before I moved the game when I set the download path to the game's folder, then it only checks for the game files and asks me if I want to repair or uninstall.

The problem isn't with the launcher, but with the downloader (the installer).

I hadn't had bought the drive (which is an SSD) before moving it. So, yeah.

The downloader doesn't recognize the game after I changed its directory to another drive. It wants to download the whole game again even when I address the game's location. I edited the game's folder name in the registry but the problem still exists.