What's new
Embers Adrift

Register a free account today to Ignite your Adventure! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate with the Embers Adrift community. Your active account will also be the same account used to purchase, download, and login to the game.

Higher Population Needed

Blyte Plays

Well-Known Member
It would be nice to have a multi group in the same dungeons/high value area experience.

We aren't getting a feel for how this game will play with a higher competitive population present.

My static group is pushing the low 20 content now, but we often cant even fill our group. We would love to have another group or two,three,four... pushing in the same zones.

You could give current subscribers a few buddy passes perhaps?

Give out a few level 20 potions?

Have a Dev group come in at 20 and show us how it's done?

Guys please tell your friends to come play the game!
 

/dev/pie

Member
I played during closed and open beta. During that time imo I knew this game was not ready for release. The optimization was not there. The lack of mob variety made the game feel the same no matter what lvl you were.

I can go on about all the other things that I thought should have been improved or added however that would be pages and pages. So with all that said I would never recommend a game that is unfinished imo to a friend or family member.
 

saviaar

New Member
I pop in and play around here and there but honestly the game running at a choppy 40fps and knowing that if I run a dungeon or group for exp it’s gonna cost more to repair my armor as a tank than I will make in return is too off putting to overcome right now. Hopefully these issues are fixed before a monthly sub kicks in or I’ll just go back to waiting for another upcoming mmo. I’d imagine more than a few other players feel the same.
 

csthao

New Member
This is a really good game with its concepts and ideas. I'm enjoying it really much. During the boom of release people were all over the place, grouping was easy to get into. As we roll around week 2 and week 3, I've noticed a decline in population.

A good indicator for me was the amount of people offline in the guild. There's a good 20-25 players online but over 70+ offline. Yes you can have alts etc. But majority were new players from week 1. You'll see the same 10 or so players spamming trade channel compared to week 1 when everyone was trying to sell stuff.

You can literally say in guild lfg and get no response. People tend to have their own static groups even within the guilds and get the cold shoulder. Often times your levels don't match up and can't group. You can have lfg tag up for hours. Groups break up because they can't fill up.

Imagine when the first month is over with and many of the players have moved on from the beginning areas, being a group oriented game, and new players not having anyone to group with. They stress group play, but with no one to group with people will quit. The beginning areas should be more solo friendly.

This game is catered to the old school style players, but they forget that those types of players are middled age and older now. Not many of us have time to play 8+ hours anymore. Then you'll have "those players" if you don't like it, go back and play X game then.

Well my friend with that kind of attitude, when the game shuts down you can go back and play... that's right your game shut down. People can deny that the game hasn't lost many players, but its not gaining many new players as well.

I truly want this game to last, and I hope I can play it for years. But something has to be done to maintain and bring in new players.
 

Blyte Plays

Well-Known Member
I wrote this post back in July, while beta testing. Today the population is just fine. Sometime a little crowded actually
 

crunchyblack21

New Member
The game was designed by choice to appeal to an extremely narrow group from an already small niche of mmorpgs.

Like a huge chunk of players who are super into this game are passing on it due to a few "interesting" design choices.

As far as appeal to the normal crowd of gamers, that appeal is close to 0% just based on the dated look and "unity asset store" look of the game. The rest will nope out looking at the combat.

There is nothing wrong with any of this, however, the strangest thing about this whole game isnt the narrow range of appeal, its that the game is built for group play and only group play. Its like they didnt connect the dots on appealing to a super tiny group of people and also making a game that needs a lot of players to be viable to enjoy. Usually a game like this will be designed for low population and solo play.

Even if they added a compass, and magic classes, and better combat, likely there would be a low enough pop to complain about difficulty finding groups....especially for any new player that might jump in and would likely have to solo grind to get up to the level where parties are actually happening.

IMO if they want to retain the hard stance on features, they should add more features that deal with the reality of how people will likely play this game, I was here for launch week and even during that time when everyone was about the same level, very few dungeon parties seemed to happen. Even towards last week, people preferred to farm bunnies than a dungeon due to how much of a pain it is to replace someone who needs to leave.

I think the one saving grace of this game right now is that its so under the radar that it can afford to get better and appeal to a larger crowd. Some of these indy games get a lot of attention at the start and the start of the game is underdeveloped and it sort of ruins its chances.

My only advice would be: If you intend to make a game that appeals to Everquest players, try to make one that will appeal to ALL the everquest players, not just a tiny group of people who thought P1999 was too soft...or even just the people who enjoy P1999, thats a tiny crowd. Youll need better party dynamics, more interesting races and classes, more varied biomes and locations with more varied and actually interesting to fight enemies (wildlife is so boring) ...and more progression systems to make just grinding interesting. Oh and if you want to not do raids, which was the source for a lot of motives to level a new character up, we need to think of some other "end goal" that would make someone with a max level character want to maybe roll a new character.
 

Riddlemyst

New Member
The game was designed by choice to appeal to an extremely narrow group from an already small niche of mmorpgs.

Like a huge chunk of players who are super into this game are passing on it due to a few "interesting" design choices.

As far as appeal to the normal crowd of gamers, that appeal is close to 0% just based on the dated look and "unity asset store" look of the game. The rest will nope out looking at the combat.

There is nothing wrong with any of this, however, the strangest thing about this whole game isnt the narrow range of appeal, its that the game is built for group play and only group play. Its like they didnt connect the dots on appealing to a super tiny group of people and also making a game that needs a lot of players to be viable to enjoy. Usually a game like this will be designed for low population and solo play.

Even if they added a compass, and magic classes, and better combat, likely there would be a low enough pop to complain about difficulty finding groups....especially for any new player that might jump in and would likely have to solo grind to get up to the level where parties are actually happening.

IMO if they want to retain the hard stance on features, they should add more features that deal with the reality of how people will likely play this game, I was here for launch week and even during that time when everyone was about the same level, very few dungeon parties seemed to happen. Even towards last week, people preferred to farm bunnies than a dungeon due to how much of a pain it is to replace someone who needs to leave.

I think the one saving grace of this game right now is that its so under the radar that it can afford to get better and appeal to a larger crowd. Some of these indy games get a lot of attention at the start and the start of the game is underdeveloped and it sort of ruins its chances.

My only advice would be: If you intend to make a game that appeals to Everquest players, try to make one that will appeal to ALL the everquest players, not just a tiny group of people who thought P1999 was too soft...or even just the people who enjoy P1999, thats a tiny crowd. Youll need better party dynamics, more interesting races and classes, more varied biomes and locations with more varied and actually interesting to fight enemies (wildlife is so boring) ...and more progression systems to make just grinding interesting. Oh and if you want to not do raids, which was the source for a lot of motives to level a new character up, we need to think of some other "end goal" that would make someone with a max level character want to maybe roll a new character.
Your primary point about the necessity of grouping in the game is probably my biggest concern. If folks haven't noticed, it's already happening. People are joining the game now, 3rd week in, and CANNOT complete the quests or see the content because there simply isn't enough of a playerbase. I helped a person out yesterday with a Valley group quest b/c they had been LFG for it for HOURS and had no luck. The best content in the game (and really the only content outside of grinding 1^s alone) requires grouping, but if there isn't enough of a population to support it, what's the answer?

I can only imagine this is going to hit harder after the first subscription charge hits and the population stabilizes at whatever group continues to pay and play. I can tell you, without any reservation at all, but little data other than my own experiences and conversations with folks, that the number of folks playing after that first sub charge hits will be MUCH smaller than it is right now...and we're already dealing with group/population/economy issues.