Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'matthew scott'.
Found 2 results
-
development The state of the game in 2021
LoWERcAsELeTTerS posted a topic in General Discussion Archive
So, after looking at the number of players over the last three years there has been a steady decline. We're getting just over 200 players now every month where there used to be 2000+ in the early days of APB. There was a nice jump up to 1000+ when Little Orbit took over development it seems, but since then a steady decline. Apart from the maintenance patches and holiday events, what is Little Orbit going to do to change the state of the game? Myself, and I'm sure the entire APB community, would like to know what the future of APB will be. Will any new mechanics be implemented? i.e., new objectives in missions? New zones? New contacts? As a player that played back in CBT, I appreciated seeing the 2021 Roadmap. It was a nice and seemingly fresh engagement with the community. I think we need more of that from Matthew Scott and other developers at Little Orbit in regards to what the future plans for APB are. I think there should be more of a dialogue between the devs and players in regards to these future plans as well. I would love to see a revival of this game because the game and gameplay have always been great. I would hate to see another team mismanage this game and let it die....again. Here is the population of players through Steam across APB's lifetime. https://steamcharts.com/app/113400- 31 replies
-
- 2
-
- gameplay
- developers
-
(and 4 more)
Tagged with:
-
Matt Scott, and his company Little Orbit, have allowed the game to get to an almost unplayable state, so much is common talk amongst the frustrated playerbase of APB. Moreover he is placing so much of his attention on trying to deliver even a slither of that promise to "upgrade" APB, which has been almost comical in the way the promise keeps getting downsized. All this is part of his failure to do his due diligence before acquiring APB: Reloaded, he failed not only to know the game and its deep rooted issues, but he also failed in knowing his team and their capabilities. Currently a new player entering the game will be faced with players who — as they gained experience in APB over the course of thousands upon thousands of hours — also lost their basic decency and sportsmanship in the process. That is what APB does; it is a toxic wasteland, it grinds down a person's humanity if they aren't careful to preserve it. The new player will get stomped out by pre-made teams of highly experienced veterans of APB, and if they should be so lucky that a highly skilled veteran should end up on their side, that veteran is likely to refuse to play in a team with a newbie, will not make an effort, in order to preserve their ego, or outright restart the game to get out of the team of the new or low-skilled player. You should be aware how highly developed the sense of fairness is in human beings, and none of this feels fair. No technological breakthrough will make this better, LO could figure out how to make APB run on a quantum computer for all I care, and still the community would be defeating any possibility of the game's recovery. If Matt Scott wishes, I can outline for him all of the toxic behaviours that I see in the game, I'll be a wasteland tour-guide if he needs me to, just so that he gets a grasp on the reality. If you can not make the game feel fair, perhaps you should give players an escape. Those players who would outright quit APB because of how unfair PvP feels, might be kept in by further PvE options, if PvE were viable to avoid PvP, and to progress contacts. I do not know what percentage of the APB community would be "pacifists" just looking to customise their characters and vehicles and do co-op activities, but I would say that already at least 10% of a district will have these wallflowers hanging out, who only occasionally will play missions, and not for long, as they are not able to be competitive. These wallflowers could be another source of cash-flow for this cash-starved game, perhaps a PvE district is in order, wherein you would flesh out these cooperative rather than competitive activities. This would not negatively impact the players available to missions, since these "wallflowers" rarely actually participate in missions, and take up district slots. You could incentivise them to spend time, and money, and clear them out of mission districts with a PvE district. I just can not stand the sense that so much hope is placed on a performance upgrade. Then again, perhaps Matt Scott knows these deep-rooted issues, and he doesn't actually think he can get this game up to a viable orbit again, he just keeps it around as a training environment for his devs, as he claimed that R.I.O.T mode was, in the end.
- 27 replies
-
- 5
-
- community
- future of apb
- (and 10 more)