Sea of Thieves abandons its planned death tax, focuses on griefing

    
66

Don’t worry, death-prone pirates: You won’t have to pay the piper more than once when you go down to Davy Jones’ locker.

Some players raised concerns over the recent announcement that Rare was planning to institute a death tax in Sea of Thieves for each time someone kicked the bucket. The concern here was that in addition to being a gold sink, this piled on the pain for losers in PvP situations who may already be ganked or griefed.

Happily, this won’t be the case. A spokesperson for Rare said that it won’t be going forward with a harsher death penalty: “We’ve heard the sentiment there, so I can confirm that death cost is, well, dead. Thanks for the feedback here. We’re listening.”

The devs are also paying attention to the griefing problem (yes, the one everyone was pointing out a month ago).

“Internally we are tracking sentiment and the top feedback issues on the game experience itself, and we are very aware of the topic of persistent player griefing (repeatedly being attacked by the same ships or players). We are discussing what short-term fixes we can make, and what slightly more involved fixes we will prioritise. We will share an update on this and the other top feedback points and our thoughts on them later this week.”

Source: Official site. Cheers, DK!
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Johnnyt305

The problem with any game right now is that people want to play SOLO and get through all content with no problem. Many games including this one are made to play with friends, ones you have already or ones you can make in game forums,. chatrooms etc. BE SOCIAL, you will enjoy the games more. They are not meant to be played solo…

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
ilikain

Haven’t purchased the game, since I read reviews first and saw the lack of depth… Really really want more meat in the game and hope they get there…

Thinking about the griefing and looking at the ghost picture in the article I think I have a fun solution.

If you were killed by the same person (group? not sure if you group up in SoT) a couple times in a row (in fights that you didn’t start), they should just let you turn into an angry spectre that allows you to completely wreck shop on them and their ship. Gives the people being griefed an outlet and you don’t have to put in a specific “punishment” mechanic.

K38FishTacos
Reader
K38FishTacos

It’s a game aimed at 12-year-olds. Of course they will accept anyone’s money, but you have to consider the target audience. It’s okay for kids to have games too.

Reader
Eamil

When I was 12, I enjoyed Animal Crossing, but Animal Crossing also had more depth than this.

Reader
Johnnyt305

NOt at all, its a great game for adults to use teamwork to accomplish stuff, “kids” cannot take PVP and cry when they get killed in games, so IDK how anybody thinks this is aimed at 12 year olds.

Sandbox games like this are for adults that can make their own story and forge their own path without have a game guide you with ! everywhere telling you where to go kill 5 chickens to get the quest done.

PurpleCopper
Reader
PurpleCopper

There is literally no reason to be friendly to other people that aren’t in your crew.

This game is 100% about looting stuff to get to legend status and buy cosmetics.
Fort raids are easy to do, so there’s no reason to be friendly to other player crews.
Allying with other crews mean splitting loot, so there’s even more reasons to kill on sight other player crews.

How the heck did Rare not foresee this situation?

Reader
Dug From The Earth

actually… its not even about looting stuff

The way My crew and I play, is to JUST attack other players. We dont care about their loot (loot is pointless). We just want to sink their ship, and be the last pirate standing. (its why we got the game, to do pvp as pirates.). Half the time we just leave the chests in the water.

Taking chests means that if someone beats us, there might actually be a reward (loot chests) for the victor. Why would we want to reward someone who managed to do that?

We arent the only ones who play with this motivation either.

Reader
Sorenthaz

Yeah and the game fully lets you just ignore the rest of its content and the world around you in favor of just hunting other ships down and treating it like a Battle Royale game. 0 penalties, risks, or really any downsides. It’s pretty stupid and I don’t know how the devs didn’t think PvP would run over the rest of the game.

Reader
Johnnyt305

SEA OF THIEVES!!! The name of the game is PVP, THIEVES!!! Means go rob other players of their loot. Its the main point of the game.

Reader
Sorenthaz

*eyeroll* Grow up and come up with a better argument that isn’t using the semantics of the game’s name. That’s a bad meme at this point.

Reader
Johnnyt305

Game is great. You are expecting an MMORPG that you can solo or something, wrong genre, wrong game, that is my point.

Reader
Sorenthaz

It’s quite the head-scratcher, isn’t it?

My guess is either they somehow thought people wouldn’t act this way or because Microsoft was shoving a deadline on them they didn’t have enough time to really develop systems around it and decided “fuck it we’ll see how this goes”.

It seems like utter naivety, hubris, or just straight-up negligence. It’s not like you have to go far back in history to see how open PvP has fared in other games that are sandboxy in nature, and what’s even worse is that SoT’s PvP has 0 risk, 0 penalties for losing, and you can quickly jump right back to where you sunk/died..

It’s pretty damn messy at the moment and the worst part is it brought in a flood of Fortnite/PUBG/PvP sandbox folks who keep shooting down the idea for PvE servers or what-have-you. Even though each “server” in this game (which are more like instanced sessions) only have up to 6 ships at a time which is an absolute maximum of 24 players per session. So it’s not like PvP is going to suffer when thousands are playing. The only thing that would change is that folks on PvP servers would then be more likely to fight back and not just run away or keel over easily.

Reader
Danny Smith

I saw Angry Joes review where he showed the ‘kraken’ that roams the world and you fight is actually just tentacles and below the pretty waves theres nothing else to it. That seems to be describing the whole game and its design ethos.

Reader
Sorenthaz

The Kraken was a super last minute addition. From what I heard it got only like a couple of hours of testing for a single day on the Pioneer server and that was it. It seems like a teaser for something more to come but who knows.

Angry Joe kind of felt like he was echoing too many sentiments from top complaints, and he did focus a little too hard on the progression of the game. Progression honestly wouldn’t be that big of an issue if the game had enough stuff to do in it. But right now you only feel rewarded for exploring if you get lucky or find a shipwreck.

Most things feel unfinished, and Skeleton Forts are a massive hassle to try and accomplish because too many people would rather just fight over it and PvP deaths have 0 punishment and ‘winners’ lose by the war of attrition as ships respawn only 1-2 islands away from where they sunk and get restocked on cannonballs/planks/bananas each time…

It sucks because the premise of the game and the foundation are really really good. But there’s nothing beyond the foundation, really. It’s a lot of bones with some pretty looking skin but no real meat. Hopefully Rare can deliver but that remains to be seen.

Reader
Eamil

I both agree and disagree. It’s important to highlight the lack of progression as AJ did because an engaging progression curve can sometimes make up for lack of substantial content. MMOs make progression a grind or time-gated for that exact reason, because if there were no rewards to keep people engaged most people would do the new content from each patch once or twice and then stop playing until the next update.

If Sea of Thieves had progression, that would at least be something. It doesn’t have progression, it doesn’t have content variety, it doesn’t have exploration in any meaningful form. Angry Joe listed off quite a few things they could have put into the game to keep people hooked. Heck, a story mode would’ve been something.

Reader
Sorenthaz

True, and in the case of horizontal progression you do need a LOT to make up for the lack of engaging progression.

Sea of Thieves does have progression in the form of raising reputation levels to try and reach Pirate Legend, but ultimately all of it is for cosmetics and such.

Reader
Dug From The Earth

– No restrictions at all
– Everyone is 100% equal in power from the very start (no grind needed)
– No downside to being the bad guy
– No upside for being the good guy

What the hell did they expect was going to happen with this game? This game was hyped as the exploring pirate adventure game. The reality is, its the hunt down other players and kill them like a pirate game. (which is fine for people looking for that sorta gameplay. The problem is, the game hype and marketing led many to believe it was something else… which its not)

Reader
Sorenthaz

Yep and there is ZERO REASON to develop a sense of trust for other players. The chances of you running into them again anyway is low since all of this is instanced random matchmaking with up to 23 other players at max (if everyone is in a Galleon, since the game only does 6 ships per session – one per outpost available).

It just creates this hostile atmosphere where you can’t bother interacting with others unless you’re bored, have nothing to lose, and don’t worry about potentially being shot in the face over and over again for trying to be friendly.

https://youtu.be/r5JIBaasuE8 like you’ll pretty much rarely if ever see the beginning pieces of this game’s video where it shows people sailing together and partying at an Outpost.

Reader
David Blair

I’m going to throw this idea out, but feel free to shoot holes through it. What if they created two mirrored instances. When you die in A, you resurrect in B, and vice-versa. Would that kill the griefing problem? You’d have to jump through a double death to get back to the original battle and by that time it should be over and everyone’s moved on…

And if you’re playing with friends, they all have to sing a summoning sea-chanty to bring you to them if you’re on the other instance.

Reader
Dug From The Earth

how would 1 player get back to the instance with the other 3 members of their crew, if they were the only one that got killed?

Reader
David Blair

They would have to sing the summoning sea-chanty together to summon the person to them.

Reader
Targeter

I’d kill for a single-player version of this populated with AI and quests. Looks like a lot of fun, but I’m not signing up for a two-hour griefing session to get my pirate fix. Too bad, really … I even get it for free* with my Xbox GamePass.

*Yes, GamePass costs $10/month, I know.

Reader
Dug From The Earth

Due the the intentional No Mans Sky level of marketing vagueness, I think a LOT of players thought they were getting a pve game populated with lots of AI and quests with just occasional pvp encounters.

Im willing to bet that nearly all of the gameplay complaints are from these people who bought the game despite the fog of ignorance that existed, and those delusional enough to think that the game was going to massively change between the open beta and release.

Those who got it just to sail around as a pirate, shooting cannons at other people sailing around as pirates, seem to be enjoying the game for the most part.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Armsbend

I never saw rare being vague. I saw a bunch of players here typing out rhetorical questions though.

No Man’s Sky said the game was going to one thing – but then made it something else. Rare never did that.

Reader
Dug From The Earth

Really?

Go check out Angry Joes video review. He has clips from several of their videos, and their own people talking at conventions… and a lot of what they “market” is extremely vague:

“The most ambitious game we have ever made”
“You can do anything”
“You dont know what to expect, because it could be anything!”

That is the very example of vague marketing. And No Mans Sky did the same thing, in ADDITION to promising things that never happened.

Letting your audience believe that something might be possible, by not stating “Nope, thats not part of the game” when they speculate, is almost as bad as saying something will be there, and not putting it in the game. Many of the upset customers believed that the game would be more than it ended up being. The devs COULD have set things straight.. they saw the hype, and the posts, but remained silent. Just like the devs from No Mans Sky.

Hell, the biggest question on nearly everyone’s mind about SoT’s up until release was “What do you actually DO in the game?” It was literally the number 1 question being asked super loud by everyone… and the devs couldnt clearly answer this? They could have, but instead they intentionally were vague, because sales would have sucked bad for the game if they were up front about things.

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

I believe Rare mishandled the messaging, perhaps even accidentally; the info is all out there, usually provided by Rare itself, it’s just that they seem to consider either unimportant or universally known certain bits of information that should have been more prominent in their messaging and marketing.

Reader
Sorenthaz

Rare was quite vague at first. There wasn’t much substance to what the game had to offer until December’s progression video?

Hard not to get Peter Molyneux vibes from listening to this tbh. It was fluffed up like all hell and it did require cutting away at the fluff to understand what would actually be in the game at launch.

Reader
Sorenthaz

For the record it wasn’t going to apply to PvP deaths anyway.

But it was going to make Skeleton Forts punishing as hell and solo play that much more painful.

Reader
Dug From The Earth

Im sure players would find ways to get people killed in pve situations.

IE: sinking their ship so they get eaten by sharks, or training a bunch of skeletons to them, are just 2 examples.

Never under estimate the creative ways people find to ruin make other people unhappy.

Reader
Sorenthaz

Yeah pretty much.

Reader
Chris Moss

Devs: Create game where part of actual gameplay is attacking other pirates.

Devs: Punish players for doing so.

deekay_000
Reader
Patreon Donor
deekay_000

so dayz and other games similar at all to this?

Reader
Nathan Aldana

Or more accurately. Devs design game believing it will actually play out like those videos you see at conferences of 4 players politely speaking in voicechat to teamwork, then discover the people who actually play open world games with pvp options are psychopaths who feed on inflicting misery on other players.

Reader
Chris Moss

Don’t get me wrong, the concept was really good, but whenever there is any chance for PVP/griefing in a game you will always have those that live to torment others come in and ruin it.

Reader
Johnnyt305

You need friends… make a crew with them and enojoy the game, solo players find friends then play.. its not meant to be a game to walk around a world to find them, bring your friends with you. Thats why many complain, they lack social skills and thus have no friends to play with and want every game to be a solo player game.

Reader
Utakata

How about they remove the competition… >.>

Reader
Chris Moss

I sometime wonder if you are obsessed with me. You seem to follow me, and always comment on my post.

Reader
Utakata

No. And really, I am not your biggest fan…

…though if you keep that up, one day you might find me in your frig eating you ice cream. /wiggles pigtails