Yeah, I agree. A lot more thought has been put into this one. It may be negative, but if those are the experiences of the reviewer over the years as a summary for how the game is now, then it’s honest.
I always read both positive and negative reviews of games, as it helps to form a better understanding of how a game is. After that, it’s up to you to decide.
I changed my review to reflect my thoughts on this game. The combo of DLC spam, issues with bugs, and other things.
At this point they realy do not deserve any of our attention or money for packs until they can handle the game.
If they don’t deserve any of our attention, what’s the point of posting feedback?
Edit: put quote in.
The goal is to have as many people leave the game, or/and not playing, not buying. This is no honest feedback, because it has an alternative motive and that is to kill the game, not to make it better.
I disagree here I’m afraid, I think we’ve both been here long enough to know that @Indominus-J has been around a long time and was easily one of the most active / constructive forum members for a good while. (I don’t know if you use Reddit but they were a huge supporter and could frequently be found helping out over there, particularly to new players.) I felt that they, like yourself, were (& are) a real ambassador / example of the GZ community.
The way I read it, their feedback is nothing but honest, brutally so, but they provide evidence to support why they believe their criticism to be valid. This is the very definition of review / feedback.
It’s all subjective though, if you don’t agree with it (I’m not saying I agree or not) that’s fine, no-one is right or wrong here, but after 1,000s of hours in the game and supporting it as loudly as they have I can’t believe that this criticism comes from a position of wanting to do the game harm, more likely just the opposite.
@OBiW4NSHiNOBi, I wasn’t referring to Indominus-J, but to the poster where Zesiir was reacting on the poster who is actively trying to hurt the game studio by writing bad reviews and calling out for boycotts.
I know that Indominus-J was a great supporter, but he too is now giving negative reviews for a game that he loved, supposedly to get the devs to get back in the game. But he made a 180, from supporting the game to hating it.
However, I believe that threats, bad reviews, or boycotts will only lead to demotivation of the dev team. I don’t know what is going on there, but I believe that the devs are very unlucky with getting the game right, using the Apex engine, and that they deserve a supportive community, not vile attacks.
Imagine you were to treat your kid like this when they tried their best with a task, but it still went wrong. Would you send a bad review to all his friends, shaming him, and tell them they shouldn’t want to know him, to force him to do better. Or would you give him ideas to improve, and build up his confidence that he can do it?
Not talking about Indominus-J’s review here… but about the other posts where people were asked not to buy the new DLC, like this one and this one
IMO, It is never OK to resort to bullying tactics to get what they want. If I don’t like a game, I never would write a bad review out of spite, because I think it’s a pretty weak and lame-ass thing to do, especially when you do it to a game you always loved.
I am really sorry you can not understand how this works but I’ll explain it for you. If you cannot understand after reading this, then it really is not my problem.
This was a quote of the post you linked. This is a simple phrase.
Less people buying DLC = less profit = management takes notices = management realizes people actually want stuff fixed and not more DLC piled onto a half broken game.
This line of thinking also works with our attention on the game. If they wanted to do this through just pure feedback and not in this money driven way, they would have made different decisions. We have given them countless ideas and chances to improve, they took some, left a lot. It is nobody’s job to financially (or otherwise), support a game that makes releases like this month after month.
Keep coping with that idea.
I understand it all to well. These bullying tactics are only going to create resentment towards the ones who are doing it, and in the worst case the game is going to end, because there is no budget, no player base and no motivation to keep going.
You hate the game, stop stalking!
What is my blud waffling about.
look liked I said, not my problem you do not understand how the free market works.
If they run out of budget because people do not buy into their dlc spam, then they made poor decisions.
I will not debate someone who cannot understand how this works, or who devedefends on every aspect.
If I made a game I would certainly not let my decisions be influenced by a person whose only debate skill is bullying and doing the studio harm.
Bugs and other things going wrong is never something that is intended, so bullying or boycotting won’t help there in any way. Good feedback with a positive attitude can help the devs fix things, and keeping their spirits up.
This new DLC is great fun the best so far. People who like the game will want to experience this, for the price of a cup of coffee with piece of pie. 
Me telling other that not buying the DLC is a way to strongly encourage the change they want see is NOT bullying. In what way is me choosing to not give them my money a form of bullying? In what way is me telling others what will happen if they do the same a form of bullying?
I am sorry to tell you this, but boycotting is not some evil thing. It is just the act of not particpating in something. Anybody who think such action makes you a bad person holds an opinion so horrendeously bad, they do not deserve any consideration. It is not anybody’s job to give them any of their own money.
Did that for years, did not work.
If boycotting does not work then that is the fault of Systemic Reaction and not those refusing to buy their DLC. If they decide they’d rather lose money than fix their QA, that is their own fault. If the only way to fix the game is to give them even more money, than their system is broken.
I get how you guys think. Any form of negativity = attacking the devs.
Come back with something useful to say instead of
“not giving money = bullying”
You’re not sorry.
This a game, a trivial thing in our lives. There is no need for bullying tactics for trivial matters, just give up on the game and move on. Or if you personally want to boycott, because you think that will guarantee change, go ahead. I believe that positive attitude and feedback also can bring change, so I follow that path, thank you.
Okay this is just stupid. You have yet to explain how me not giving them money is “bullying”
I guess just insulting others with differing opinions is easier than coming up with an intelligent sentence.
You are right on one thing. This is a waste of my time. I have better things to do than to talk to people who hide in their echo chambers and insult others when they do not buy a DLC pack for a game.
Nonsense, I never said that I want you to buy the dlc, in fact I rather you do not.
Forcing a company to do your will, by rallying others to also boycott the DLC, is a bullying tactic.
That you feel that this is an insulting statement means you know it’s wrong thing to do.
And please don’t whimper over presumed insults, while you constantly do it yourself to me.
Alright, time out guys. Let’s stop the flaming and agree to disagree.
@MarkNcheese42 You’ve every right to dislike and disapprove of the game’s current development,
but don’t hammer it in so hard you break the nail in the process. It just gets tiresome.
And it’s a grand waste of my time. So unless you’ve got anything constructive to say in the future, I’d suggest moving on to other pastures.
//Mod
Reason 6 - The way Micro DLC has been handled for newer players. Rather than unlocking all the Micro DLC contents after a specific point in the game, newer players are just allowed to have them the moment they reach the very first Storage box making the game a quick breeze through on top of the already terrible AI.
Why do you care how others want to play… As a new player i would have uninstalled if it wasn’t for these dlcs… The game is super hard for me even on Adventure so these dlcs actually helped me from the start to progress… and survive.
Please do not speak for others about what you consider added or not. I have no interest in coop gameplay i enjoy my gaming solo.
The whole reason its there is because its an opinion, the exact reason Reviews get wrote. Its because its the players opinion, and its my opinion that DLC stuff should get handled differently than the current way theyve implemented them.
The devs would be crazy to scare away solo players, if they change, who and when a dlc can be used. Because, like you said, some of the DLCs makes surviving for Solo players less hard.
I really feel like rambling tonight, so forgive my ramblings, this might not all be directly related to the OP.
First off, I do agree with some of your points, I would like control points to be more precious, I do not like the current AI because it is exploitable and I also dropped some neg reviews on DLC packs because their contents weren’t great, especially how bad the flamethrower and bow are, zog the resistance pack, and zog DMRs.
Half of this review laments the fact how DLC exists or is implemented, but the truth is that of course they will make weapon everyone wants a DLC because it came together in live development and the base game is in a playable and finished state. Not every game booms as much as e.g. Deep Rock and devs can live off supporter cosmetic packs. Making “I don’t get what I want for free” a negative point is a bit preposterous and also a bit parodic of what most gamers think they are entitled to. DLC implementation is another story: It’s fine to not agree with DLC items being available off the bat, but believe me you’d see more negative reviews of people who buy the packs and seeing them not available the moment they bought them. 5* Weapons and attachments still have to be farmed for.
About multiplayer progression, I haven’t personally experienced this bug, but bugs in general need to be fixed, that absolutely needs to be said. Desyncs or disappearing enemies did sometimes plague this game but you also need to understand that you cannot fix bugs instead of making DLC because what the heck can an artist or a sound designer do about AI issues. The team has a certain amount of programmers, designers, producers to manage them all etc. and all always will need to be busy at the same time, so the dev schedule needs to account for that. Without the DLC they so far released the game would have very likely been shut down already and the live team assigned to other resources.
With 1,5k hours in a game that is designed to maybe be played for 200, maybe the game is not the problem? All the gamedevs I know always joke about these reviews with hundreds of hours and a negative score, because on the one hand you handed the game your two most valuable commodities, time and money, and on the other you are trying to tell people to not do that because you must have had a terrible time if you spent 1,5k hours in it. Most of your reasons seem to be purely political rather than problems with the actual game, no roadmap? So you don’t know what content will get thrown our way and that makes you enjoy the current product less? You’re not a cultist, you don’t need to pledge your life and honour to GenZ or defend it.
It’s a product, use it like one.
… Assuming every new player starts playing solo with all or some of the DLCs.
I don’t think that’s the case.
Usually you would start a new game vanilla and buy DLCs if you like the game. Excluded from this rule are those who bought whole packages because of a discount… Or those who got a steam key for a DLC for free.
No, I think it just has to be communicated in a sensible way… And the system behind the DLC weapons would have to be water proof.
Finally I think the child already fell into the well.
It’s probably too late to change the existing system, unless the devs find a good way to manage the existing customers. Changing something that might affect them and their bought products in a “negative” way always isn’t a good idea, so there would have to be a counter weight. Maybe a switch to select whether to start with the classic way of DLC provisioning or a new way with a better integration.
New customers aren’t such a big problem, I think. It just have to be communicated clear and honest how they get their DLC guns. (By buying this weapon pack you become able to find a greater arsenal of weapons while fighting your way through the mysteries of Östertörn, as simple example)
Although it probably is too late to change it, I’ll stay at my opinion about the weapon packs and I’ll always keep on advertising my ideas.
P. S.: this opinion refers to every DLC pack that adds something that has an endouring/unlimited effect. (don’t find better words)
The tactical equipment packs and the basebuilding packs are excluded as these items are available later (unlocking base building, unlocking crafting, unlocking schematics) in the game. The initially provided amount really is just like a preview: once depleted, you have to wait until you become able to craft and use more of them. (not in loot tables included)