Little Orbit does not listen to players who quit

[Adawon 28]

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.

Edited May 2, 2019 by Adawon

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

8 minutes ago, Adawon said:

 What I've seen from Little Orbit so far is just the will to polish the game and add more content, not change core 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,

Well duh. Yeah? What?

 

What core mechanics would you change then?

 

Also you gotta work on your formatting.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by NotZombieBiscuit

[Adawon 28]

3 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Well duh. Yeah? What?

 

Also you gotta work on your formatting.

 

 

Well, you what?

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

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

6 minutes ago, Adawon said:

Well, you what?

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

 

13 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

 

What core mechanics would you change then?

 

 

 

[Adawon 28]

11 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

What core mechanics would you change then?

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.

[AsgerLund 1271]

1 minute ago, Adawon said:

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.

Try to give an example of what made people leave, that LO is ignoring or refusing to change.

[CookiePuss 5378]

20 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

22 minutes ago, Adawon said:

like the ones I've written

What core mechanics would you change then?

Im guessing these suggestions...

 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

4 minutes ago, Adawon said:

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.

We are having a discussion on the greater topic of listening to other players that are not just vets. As you are a non vet I would like to know what feedback and changes LO may be missing out on that they could look at changing. This could be convincing enough to me and other vets to agree with your view and maybe even support it.

 

Or you can just use an excuse.

[Adawon 28]

8 minutes ago, AsgerLund said:

Try to give an example of what made people leave, that LO is ignoring or refusing to change.

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.

6 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

Im guessing these suggestions...

 

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.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Adawon

[Adawon 28]

7 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

We are having a discussion on the greater topic of listening to other players that are not just vets. As you are a non vet I would like to know what feedback and changes LO may be missing out on that they could look at changing. This could be convincing enough to me and other vets to agree with your view and maybe even support it.

 

Or you can just use an excuse.

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.

[Glubbable 41]

Lack of a direct response from the developers does not mean that they have ignored your posts. Lurking is a thing.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Glubbable

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

Just now, Adawon said:

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.

500 hours is pretty low in my opinion when compared to other players that are considered veterans. The thousands who left are the same people that still remain. They did not leave because of not liking the game. They left because games fade away with time. It is quite normal. Heck even I myself love APB with how it currently is but have played less and less as time goes on. Even the last few months I have played almost none.

[Adawon 28]

3 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

500 hours is pretty low in my opinion when compared to other players that are considered veterans. The thousands who left are the same people that still remain. They did not leave because of not liking the game. They left because games fade away with time. It is quite normal. Heck even I myself love APB with how it currently is but have played less and less as time goes on. Even the last few months I have played almost none.

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.

[RCooper 182]

There are way more big reasons that make apb lose players that the one u post maybe lo should consider but rn there are other many things that need to be fix that are way more important than those

 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

Just now, Adawon said:

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.

You are comparing games that are at the upper peak within their categories; These are 0.1% games you are comparing to APB which never really had much of a large following or peak playerbase to begin with. If anything it is quite impressive that APB has maintained and decent ratio of players for this many years when compared to its peak. And even when compared to other games of similar peaks, variable, etc it has done far better than its relevant competition.  

 

Sure it sucks that games fade away with time, but that is just life and the digital culture in general. The same happens for movies, music, shows, almost everything.

[Weeb TheEpicGuyV2 269]

make Adawon ceo. they have a vision

[Adawon 28]

26 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

You are comparing games that are at the upper peak within their categories; These are 0.1% games you are comparing to APB which never really had much of a large following or peak playerbase to begin with. If anything it is quite impressive that APB has maintained and decent ratio of players for this many years when compared to its peak. And even when compared to other games of similar peaks, variable, etc it has done far better than its relevant competition.  

 

Sure it sucks that games fade away with time, but that is just life and the digital culture in general. The same happens for movies, music, shows, almost everything.

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.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Adawon

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

1 minute ago, Adawon said:

What makes them in the upper peak that they're, unlike APB, 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.

Upper peak as in they are the highest of the highest populations in game. I am not talking about anything to do with them other than purely their populations peaks and population maintaining. It is already rare for a game to reach a sizable population, even more rare for it to reach huge peaks as did games like WoW. On top of that it is also rare to maintain populations regardless of what peak they hit for extended periods of time. The majority of the market moves quickly.

[Fortune Runner 796]

1 hour ago, Adawon said:

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 core 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 core gameplay or 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 listening to people who want change and who left the game 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 only thing I am reading here is salty slander , rather than facts that quite a few suggestions by us community members of  different threats ,  have been acknowledged and listened to as well.

 

I've noticed you and mostly did not post on your threads because you really did not have good ideas that would fix the main core problems of APB  , and only want superficial fixes (at best) that do not fix the highly major problems with APB.

 

Also your particular suggestions only annoy people.

At no time did most of us players want someone on our team driving our cars much less enemy players  GET YOUR OWN

 

 

[Vexxous 18]

I read your suggestion about the ability of getting into enemy's cars but i really don't see the point of it.

Sure it would make more sense to be able to do so and maybe it might be fun or whatever but I don't think thats what LO should focus on especially right now.

I think it's fine the way it is imo.

Looking at a bigger picture, a better issue to fix is how when u enter a car u are basically invincible unless the whole car is destroyed. (like how people just enter cars just to prevent themselves from getting killed)

 

Your suggestions are probably not taken in because ;

a) they are not that important right now, and not necessary

b) people don't like it because the suggestion only suits you not others

 

 

[TzickyT 212]

So they don't listen to u. have u asked every single other person who played this game and left the question why they left. theres probebly 1000ts of people who left becous of reasons that are already clarified. let them work on the system and the new things coming. and argue after that what u think is necessary to change

 

for me an enjin upgrade is top priority.

and everything that was said i think is the best possible way that LO could take this game. ( toxic communty is a big word, but this community is a verry loyal one)

they promissed new content in march. and  a price drop.

 

i can't be happyer with that.

[TheOppositePolarBear 93]

3 hours ago, Adawon said:

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 core 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 core gameplay or 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 listening to people who want change and who left the game 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.

ITT: "LO didnt apply the changes I, me, the greatest videogame designer ever existed, -suggested- (aka: i ORDER them to do), thus, they are not listening to US! the MAYORITY! THE 99%!"

 

and remember kiddos that play apb: I AM NEVER - EVER WRONG, how could i be? nah, its ALL OF YOU the ones on the wrong.

 

 

3 hours ago, Adawon said:

Look up youtube reviews of the game, non-reccomending reviews on steam and suggestions forum

 

ok, lets do it

 

-choose english, order by helpfulness, checks only negative reviews

 

here we go:

 

1st negative review:  complains about no servers in south america;

-meh- complain, considering I play from south america without problems, but i can see how some people can feel bad playing with 180ms latency. still, its not so much of a game design choise but a financial choise, if south american servers are not viable, they are simply not viable

 

2nd review: complains about repetitiveness in missions, low threats facing golds with "better gear".

another -meh- complain. i would totally accept it, if it werent because games like CSGO are always the same in competitive, and its pretty darn alive and well. competitive games dont really need to be that varied. low threats facing golds is something LO said they are going to adress with distirct fasing after the engine upgrade, and golds with "better gear"... we have already talking a lot about it, but in short: any good player can perform really good with any free gun with no mods, even a STAR.  i can understand where he is comming from tho.

 

3rd review: just not helpful at all. no real reason given for a bad review.

 

4th review: complains about P2W, lag, trolling players, "meat shields" (lol), low map variety and  ARMAs pricing

lag, trolls, map variety and ARMAs pricing are problems LO already said they are working on. we have already discussed a lot in this forums about the P2W aspect of the game, but tl;dr: its not as pay to win as most people think, and no, the paid guns are not an advantage when you get the NTEC,OCA and NHVR for free.

the meatshield... lol, in more than 5 years playing this game i have never seen that.

 

5th reviews: complains about cheaters and ARMAs pricing

LO already said they are working on that.

 

6th review: complains about dated graphics and matchmaking.

LO already said they are working on matchmaking and dated graphics... well, guess what? apb is not a 2019 game.

 

7th review: complains about P2W.

.... do i really need to say anything about it? git gud.

 

8th review: complains about P2W and the toxic community (and highlights Spanked 2 ez and their chat messenges)

P2W, already addressed it, toxic community, welcome to the internet.

 

9th review: complains about the tutorial

FINALLY! a legit review. i hope LO does something about it, not sure if they said anything about it.

 

10th review: complains about matchmaking, P2W, bad tutorial.

no need to say anything about this.

 

11th,12th,13th, review: complains about P2W

 

14th review: no real reason given for bad review

 

15th review: complains about not being able to jump snipe

 

16th review: complains about cheaters/hackers

 

17th review: complains about high system requirements.

already addressed by LO with the 32 to 64b engine upgrade, i think

 

18th review: complains about devs being rude (im going to guess its about G1), systems stuff, and P2W.

 

 

19th review:complains about P2W

 

20th,21th,22th review: no real reason given for bad review

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> yo OP, at this point im starting to wonder where are all these un-addressed complains and suggestions to change on game mechanics that you were talking about, but lets continue

 

23th review: complains about P2W, devs "not caring",  no new content, no balance and bugs.

i think i dont need to say anything about the devs "not caring";  if anything, LO havent showed us yet that they -dont care- at all. all the other stuff has been already said to be being work on, by the devs that "dont care".

 

24th review: no real reason given for the bad review

 

25th review: complains about P2W

 

26th review: complains about bugs

 

27th review: complains about P2W

 

28th review: complains about... being less than gta?

 

29th review: complains about the community

 

30th review:no real reason given for bad review

 

31th review: complains about bugs and errors

 

32th review: no real reason given for bad reveiw

 

33th review: complains about performance and being dated

 

34th review: complains about player movement and dated graphics.

as a note, no suggestions about how to improve the player's movement was given.

 

35th review: complains about the threat system, cardet, bugs, "RNG based mechanics" (lol?), the old G1, DDoS, balance.

1, 3,7: being addressed, 6:i hope it can be addressed at all, 2:you can argue that its a bad game mechanic, or not, its not hard to scape from a cardet if you're ready for it (should be), 5: is not any more, 4: not even i know what he was talking about.

 

36th reivew: complains about low player count, dethreating, the forum community.

well, its not like LO enjoys having a low populated game, all they are doing are  a big address to the low population. dethreating, LO already said they will address it with fasing, the forum community, is NOT a game mechanic and its not for dicuss on this thread.

 

37th review: complains about matchmaking and dethreating

 

38th review: complains about the community, low player count, matchmaking, learning curve, contacts being in empty districts.

the contacts being in an empty district and learning curve can be discussed, but no suggestion was given.

 

39th review: complains about matchmaking, lag, bugs, car handling

once again, no suggestion about better car handling given. cars doesnt feel good in apb because of server sided driving, wich was found to be the best option for a game like this, probably.

 

40 review: complains about P2W.

 

 

oh man, look at ALL THAT STUFF that people is complaining about and LO is not addressing... oh wait, there was like... only 2 or 3 reviews complaining about legit stuff thats not being addressed.

 

like, really, op, how many more steam reviews are you going to make me read?

 

 

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by TheOppositePolarBear

[Adawon 28]

29 minutes ago, TheOppositePolarBear said:

 

 

oh man, look at ALL THAT STUFF that people is complaining about and LO is not addressing... oh wait, there was like... only 2 or 3 reviews complaining about legit stuff thats not being addressed.

 

 

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.

[VickyFox 353]

33 minutes ago, Adawon said:

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.

I'm sorry to say that the silent majority has been quite quiet, and as such players that left may not be making their voices heard.

 

My friends that used to play APB and left all said that they would reconsider rejoining for the following reasons: Engine Upgrade, New anti-cheat implementation, New content for max rank players and server stability.

The 1 friends that said they'd rather not rejoin, they expressed that it's because they've moved on in life.

 

You don't need to be active in game to be active in forum.

If these people don't use their voice then their opinions won't be heard.

 

But in my honest opinion these car mechanics are superficial and not a high priority at this time, It doesn't seem quite the normal reaction to quit a game because car interaction mechanics.

I will agree that vehicles should deal damage relative to speed and not just instantly kill at 5 mph. Without a doubt the car mechanics are dated and need to be reworked to make them more reasonable in gameplay.

 

Was there anything else you feel should be addressed?

[TheJellyGoo 343]

Maybe go back to your own suggestions and carefully read the explanations of experienced community members as to why they are shit?

Or continue whining to LO that you can't handle the negative critic on your ideas and demand their implementation nonetheless!