Sea of theives


#1

Like the look of this. Looks fun. Arrr.


#2

That looks superb.

ZiiP Seadogs!


#3

I’m still waiting for that pirate game by Ubisoft to be announced…

This does look awesome… well up for a pirate game!


#4

Oh yeah, Skull and Bones. Signed up for the beta aaaages ago.

This looks more silly pirate fun though


#5

I just want to play a sea shanty with you guys…


#6

hell yeah. Must drink rum whilst playing.


#7

Have watched a few videos of this over the last few weeks. It does seen interesting and different me hearties


#8

50 quid on pc is the cheapest I’ve seen this which is a joking joke.


#9

isn’t the only way to buy it through windows store, or buy the download code for xbox one/windows 10? Console games have typically been higher cost as the hardware is sold at a loss; will they give me a rebate for my PC if i buy it? fuck cross platform if that’s the price. And this is from someone who impulsively spends far too much on games.


#10

Just checked Sea of Thieves on CDkeys

Yep - you’re not wrong, both of you - price is insane… and according to the boxart you get a copy for the PC and the XBOX (although I’m only going off initial impressions, that isn’t confirmed)

If that is the case, then I’m with adrock. bad enough that it isn’t on a usual platform like Steam or Origin… Worst that they’ve inflated the price to match console. Whoever thought that one up can walk the plank…


#11

i was having a look last night and became unjustifiably outraged about it. now i’m just annoyed because i want to play pirates. physical xbox copy is £42 on amazon, but i don’t think you can register it and play it on windows, you need the download code for that.


#12

Your correct, you need the xbox/windows 10 download for pc.

The other pirates game mentioned in here, skull and bones is due for release Q3/Q4 this, so as its ubisoft, expect late 2019


#13

Seems like people aren’t keeping to the ‘Pirate Code’ and are instead just opting for all out PvP deathmatch… missing the point of the game.

As the saying goes, “you can lead a gamer to water, but can’t make them not be ***ts.”


#14

Well I suppose you can never trust a pirate! Black Sails.

Always been the challenge to get people to be play nice. I remember the great experiment known as Dayz. Always a rarity but a pleasure to meet someone who didnt just want to shoot you.


#15

I remember not popping plenty of people in DayZ, I don’t remember plenty of people not immediately popping me though. I’m getting progressively more checked out of PvP games as the time goes on.

Couple of other pirate games knocking around like Blacksails, the warhammer one and Ubisoft’s offer. This ticks more ‘no’ boxes for me than anything else (scumbag players, Windows 10, Windows 10 store, price, etc).

We always have Windward!


#16

Doesn’t really go into much detail in the article below - but apparently the devs of SoT wanted to make a toxic free environment from day one.

The things they mention are ensuring that there is only co-operative actions available between your crew - but don’t mention actions that occur between crew (you know, the PvP part guys…)

The trouble I have with developers tackling ‘toxic’ play (I prefer the term ‘cuntish’ personally) in a manner where they treat everyone like the lowest common denominator and enforce restrictions and minimize freedoms on those that can play nice just to stop ‘the cuntish’ from ruining the game for everyone else.

It is a difficult dilemma to solve.


#17

Games like Dayz will never work as intended as the majority of people just KoS as its all about KDR, even in games where thats not what the game is about.


#18

people are cunts; this isn’t exclusive to gaming.

does anyone ever wonder if back in ‘the good old days of gaming’, the same cunts were finding they’d been kicked and banned from all the servers and no one would play with them, so they’ve whinged enough that the devs have taken their side rather than risk reduced profit by not pandering to the cuntiest and whiniest demographics.

I think survival games need to be in a closed environment, without public exposure, for them to work. you could probably do similar with other genres, except the amount of money from the number of these cunts means we’re more likely to see the current system of matchmaking remain so that we can be offered to hackers as chum.

I predict we’ll end up having the same conversation about EVERY game from this point on, at least for any games that hold up long enough we’d want to keep playing them, with the exception of the things we’re able to play by ourselves, as no one complains about toxic players when you escape tanoa, or when we played windward that weekend that one time :wink: For anything we don’t have a large enough community of just ourselves, we’re probably stuck trying to find a similar minded community.


#19

Totally agree.

I think there were less ‘cunts’ in older games. This was down to less people playing MP games and - more importantly - servers or gaming arenas were smaller and controlled by game admins (namely, folk like me and others of you who have helped me).

Battlefield 2 was the start of the end where they had ‘official’ server that restricted what a game admin could do.

Survival games become almost impossible to admin because of their nature. Games were you don’t know who you were shot by or who you’ve shot. games were remaining hidden for long periods of time mean that servers are open to admin abuse etc etc etc.

Add consoles and matchmaking into the mix…yeah - This is the future. Boo. Game developers see pound notes and don’t care about much else. Similar problems did exist in the past (I know it wasn’t all rosey) - Things like DMW and Punkbuster were hobby projects and not officially implemented by developers because they were a cost that didn’t generate a revenue.

It’s all pretty sad really. My dream was always to have a community big enough to playing internally - knowing it was clean and fair.


#20

so…blame space then? I’d play more blame space.