Arc Raiders

I found overrated but I only played the server slam. The combat wasn't fun, this could be due to under powered weapons or third person view?
I also wasn't excited when looting like I was when playing tarkov.
 
Tombstone said:
But I still dont get it, you doubt it will based upon what? As I say, Tarkov and Hunt Showdown have both been going for 7 years and in both of those you have imbalance and extraction point campers, so there is literally a precedence set that shows that despite those things a pvpve game is able to last many years, given that evidence why do you think that those games survive but Arc wont?

I would agree with you if Tarkov and Hunt had both been failures and closed down, as there would then be proof that imbalance and campers kills off a pvpve game but with both of them still running several years later , the evidence is to the contrary. All Arc really needs to do is do better than both of those and it ends up as the top pvpve game on the market, its very much attainable. They arent trying to post CoD/Counterstrike/BF sorts of numbers, they dont need as massive a userbase to be a success, they simply need to equal or outdo the current top dogs in the pvpve genre and given that any flaws that Arc has are also the same flaws that Hunt and Tarkov has, I cant see any reason why they wont do , at least, as well as those two titles.
Click to expand...
Those games were designed and marketed for that, Arc flipped late in its development after marketing a PvE trailer. Much of the hype is around the theme of Arc fighting bots, with PvP often thought as secondary and can be avoided when really it's not. You can see this schism in places like the steam forums very clearly. And this is only those people who know the design changed, and to what extent.

Untitled.png


Tarkov and games like that have a reputation of being brutal and some people thrive in that atmosphere which is fine, others know to avoid it. Arc switching fundamental game design in late development screams they don't have a vision of what they want. It's why there's no roadmap for those 10 years, they can't commit to anything right now because they risk alienating an already fractured player base. I mean it's just a prediction, I could be completely off base. We'll see what player numbers do on steam after launch.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
Those games were designed and marketed for that, Arc flipped late in its development after marketing a PvE trailer. Much of the hype is around the theme of Arc fighting bots, with PvP often thought as secondary and can be avoided when really it's not. You can see this schism in places like the steam forums very clearly. And this is only those people who know the design changed, and to what extent.

Untitled.png


Tarkov and games like that have a reputation of being brutal and some people thrive in that atmosphere which is fine, others know to avoid it. Arc switching fundamental game design in late development screams they don't have a vision of what they want. It's why there's no roadmap for those 10 years, they can't commit to anything right now because they risk alienating an already fractured player base. I mean it's just a prediction, I could be completely off base. We'll see what player numbers do on steam after launch.
Click to expand...
I tend to avoid the Steam forums when it comes to peoples opinions, there is always too much review bombing for ridiculous reasons on that forum, too many people clown farming and frankly it seems that a large number of the people who post on steam forums appear to hate gaming itself. I mean I actually saw one post in the Arc Raiders forum where a person was down rating Arc Raiders because you lose items when you die....hello? Ever played an extraction shooter?

I often see people on steam forums downrating games for stupid reasons like it doesnt run well on their potato pc or because the character creator contains Body Type A and B as options instead of Male/Female. Essentially the steam forums are full of whiners and trolls rather than valid concerns imo.

We will see how Arc Raiders goes, I'm still awaiting someone from the it will be dead within a year crowd to put their money where their mouthes are and take me up on the £100 bet that it wont :)
 
Tombstone said:
hello? Ever played an extraction shooter?
Click to expand...

Many of them may not have. That's why devs spend a huge amount of money on marketing. Steam adds no barrier to entry to go a games discussions page and post your thoughts, same with their reviews. So you need to be careful what you market about your game because managing expectations is critically important.

Dead is too vague, but to be clear when I say my guess is it'll lose a substantial number of its players within a month, I mean the best 24 hour peak concurrent a month after launch will be less than half of it's best ever 24 peak (probably launch day), by 1 year that'll be under 20%. The longer term outlook is way harder to gauge as they may go F2P or add PvE in by then.

But it's not something I'd bet on because we don't have access to the full game, and it's a live service which could change at literally any time. Anyone playing for any kind of PvE is gonna be gonzo.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
Many of them may not have. That's why devs spend a huge amount of money on marketing. Steam adds no barrier to entry to go a games discussions page and post your thoughts, same with their reviews. So you need to be careful what you market about your game because managing expectations is critically important.

Dead is too vague, but to be clear when I say my guess is it'll lose a substantial number of its players within a month, I mean the best 24 hour peak concurrent a month after launch will be less than half of it's best ever 24 peak (probably launch day), by 1 year that'll be under 20%. The longer term outlook is way harder to gauge as they may go F2P or add PvE in by then.

But it's not something I'd bet on because we don't have access to the full game, and it's a live service which could change at literally any time. Anyone playing for any kind of PvE is gonna be gonzo.
Click to expand...
I think thats part of the issue, there are some on the forums who are basically just throwing their toys out of the pram and stamping their feet because there isnt any PvE only mode, instead of just accepting that as it stands its not a title for them and moving on, theres a big difference between a bad game being a bad game and a bad game being a bad game just because it doesnt play in the way the player wants. More recently we've seen precisely this with Bloodlines 2, lots of people getting a tizzy on and saying its a bad game because its not what they want, when in fact its actually a pretty decent game, but I guess its human nature to get that way when something isnt what they want.

Could well be that theres a lot of people who arent familiar with extraction shooters or didnt realise its pvpve, but to be perfectly honest thats not the fault of the game, thats the fault of the player for not doing their research (they've made it quite clear for a while now that it would be a pvpve extraction game), caveat emptor plain and simple. I never buy any game without researching into it first.

I would agree, it will lose a large number of its userbase in the first month, pvp games almost always do, often because theres a lot of FOMO out there and a lot of people who are not really into pvp or prepared for pvp or who cant tolerate losing in pvp, who regardless of that still jump into pvp games at release (the FOMO) and then leave comparatively quickly, not because its a bad game necessarily, but because it was never the right game for them in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I'm late this party. For me if the PvP has meaning, ie you can actually tell who it is that you're fighting and not no name person you can't seek vengeance on, then it not worth it.

Dune suffered this (and tbh lots of other issues that prevented it being PvP in anyway). I'm hoping the Arc Dev team knows what they want to do with this (partly because I've pre-ordered it) because if they don't, it will last as long as Dune has.
 
LOAM said:
Sorry I'm late this party. For me if the PvP has meaning, ie you can actually tell who it is that you're fighting and not no name person you can't seek vengeance on, then it not worth it.

Dune suffered this (and tbh lots of other issues that prevented it being PvP in anyway). I'm hoping the Arc Dev team knows what they want to do with this (partly because I've pre-ordered it) because if they don't, it will last as long as Dune has.
Click to expand...
It does tell you the name of the person who killed you
 
SonicSW20 said:
Neuter or remove either element, the high risk part of high risk high reward (which is what drives an extraction shooter) is greatly diminished.
Click to expand...
the problem i personally had, at least with the server slam test, was that there was no 'reward' - there was no buzz when looting or fighting because it was for the most part just rubbish i was collecting. as mentioned at the time, maybe that was because i knew it was only a test so not like i was risking my actual gear - but even taking that into account the game felt quite 'meh' to me. looks good and sounds good for sure, but it just didn't hit the spot for me to make it a definite buy, yet - i know some are of the opinion it's a better game than Tarkov but i'd disagree strongly with that.

one thing that really did gall me was that the copy/paste buildings became very samey very quickly - i know that's a thing with other games re-using available assets but i thought it was quite jarring in this. for example. the apartment buildings were literally identical to each other, bar the odd different piece of furnishing. having 3 or 4 of those grouped together in the one area to loot is just stupid and a very poor design choice.

that being said, there was still enough potential in the game that i'll not write it off just yet, will definitely be keeping an eye on the twitch streams come friday to see what the craic is.
 
Thekwango said:
the problem i personally had, at least with the server slam test, was that there was no 'reward' - there was no buzz when looting or fighting because it was for the most part just rubbish i was collecting. as mentioned at the time, maybe that was because i knew it was only a test so not like i was risking my actual gear - but even taking that into account the game felt quite 'meh' to me. looks good and sounds good for sure, but it just didn't hit the spot for me to make it a definite buy, yet - i know some are of the opinion it's a better game than Tarkov but i'd disagree strongly with that.

one thing that really did gall me was that the copy/paste buildings became very samey very quickly - i know that's a thing with other games re-using available assets but i thought it was quite jarring in this. for example. the apartment buildings were literally identical to each other, bar the odd different piece of furnishing. having 3 or 4 of those grouped together in the one area to loot is just stupid and a very poor design choice.

that being said, there was still enough potential in the game that i'll not write it off just yet, will definitely be keeping an eye on the twitch streams come friday to see what the craic is.
Click to expand...

The server slam was very limited in terms of progression, most of what you were picking up was useless as most of the crafting, weapon progression etc was not available. There were keys in the loot pools for maps that weren't available. Currency wasn't really needed. Everything has some value, but for some stuff unless you need it for a specific quest or craft, its value may be in salvage.

Various videos went up today showing a previously unseen map which includes an expansive underground tunnel system with access shafts etc. Looks great.
 
Tombstone said:
It does tell you the name of the person who killed you
Click to expand...
I know, sorry I should have said I played the open beta and weekend. PvP for me in a "PVE" game needs to have purpose, Arcs does so I'm not concerned about it at all. Dunes in comparison was chucked in as end game content with no thought as to what it was actually meant to be.

I guess the point I'm probably badly trying to make is that the Devs need to know where they are taking it, especially if they've changed tac through the development process. In general the PvP and PvE crowd don't mix that well in games where both exist. There's loads of examples of this, just look at Elite Dangerous.

The only game that really nailed it was Dayz because there was just a general acceptance from the community that at some point you were going to lose everything. That's the mentality I've taken into these kind of games ever since the pitch black, scrabbling around in a wood times of Dayz. It's left me not precious about in game loot.
 
Tombstone said:
I think thats part of the issue, there are some on the forums who are basically just throwing their toys out of the pram and stamping their feet because there isnt any PvE only mode, instead of just accepting that as it stands its not a title for them and moving on, theres a big difference between a bad game being a bad game and a bad game being a bad game just because it doesnt play in the way the player wants. More recently we've seen precisely this with Bloodlines 2, lots of people getting a tizzy on and saying its a bad game because its not what they want, when in fact its actually a pretty decent game, but I guess its human nature to get that way when something isnt what they want.

Could well be that theres a lot of people who arent familiar with extraction shooters or didnt realise its pvpve, but to be perfectly honest thats not the fault of the game, thats the fault of the player for not doing their research (they've made it quite clear for a while now that it would be a pvpve extraction game), caveat emptor plain and simple. I never buy any game without researching into it first.

I would agree, it will lose a large number of its userbase in the first month, pvp games almost always do, often because theres a lot of FOMO out there and a lot of people who are not really into pvp or prepared for pvp or who cant tolerate losing in pvp, who regardless of that still jump into pvp games at release (the FOMO) and then leave comparatively quickly, not because its a bad game necessarily, but because it was never the right game for them in the first place.
Click to expand...

Or they were promised one thing and another thing was delivered. Which is unquestionably what happened in this case. The other thing is that a lot of people vibe with the games aesthetics and PvE elements but just want a more controlled experience, if those people went to another game in your suggestion, it would be no different than if they bought the game and just queued for a PvE only game mode, it wouldn't affect the PvP base at all. Dark and Darker got this added on, and from what I've read so has Tarkov.

The kicker is that I don't even think these people would even necessarily enjoy it that much, I think they'd play zero risk for a bit, get bored and leave. The more I've thought about the fundamentals of PvPvE the more I think its generally a terrible idea and that it should really just read as PvP not to confuse anyone. If you don't like PvP then don't play the game. It's why I personally wouldn't play PvE only even if they did add it later. I do however think it can be done like Dark and Darker where 0 development is needed to support it, just disable player vs player damage and allow people to queue for either, you can develop that in a single day. The PvE players would bring in sales revenue and shop purchases, the PvP crowd would be stupid to take problem with that.

FWIW I think PvE only mode is a eventuality but I also don't think it will not fix things. After playing the Sand Playtest for a few days, I realized that fundamentally the only good fix is to make the PvP experience better, chances to recover and keep going, not just knocked in a short burst of gunfire and it's all over. Sand is technically extraction but it's amazing fun to battle, even if you lose. For Arc I have no idea how you fix this, way more secret pockets ~50% inventory space. Or ability to call in drones to haul out your current stuff so even if you die it's not a wash.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom