SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - Evil Twin Artworks Games Victory At Sea Atlantic

welk2 · 04-26-25, 04:34 PM

What Devs of Victory at sea have made in 10 years :

Very low bilan : low in term of success (except forVictory at sea, no any game longer supported and medium-low-poor steam evaluations, lot of desillusions in gamers public for Ironclad and Pacific opus)

WHAT DEVS COULD HAVE HAD :
All what they could have been able to make and to have with an intelligent and coherent politic of DLC ans extension, keeping and improving the excellent original concept they have ruined with Pacific, Ironclad (and will probably ruin also with Atlantic, that is not a pure naval game, despite the videos and screen they publish)

=> These images show what is evident... After the great success of Victory at sea 1 original, all the complete serie would have had the same success story if they had keep the same elegant, simple but very equilibrated and highly intelligent system of play. They had just to improve it with
complementary and interessant naval features (+ if needed - but not needed in my opinion, improved models ships graphs).

In place of that, they run forward to produce complicted (and less goods) games that have not the same success, that are no longer supported, and that cost for them a lot of hard debugging work for a low result (in terms of success, and in term of reputation : at this time, for 4 "navals" games, they have correctly supported no any of them by DLC and extensions and they have abandoned 2 of them (Pacific and Ironclad).

What will be the next ?

They seems think that beautifull videos on Facebook will attract players, but beautifull captures and videos do not make good games... I bought and tried Atlantic opusn, and I have to say that this game has a perhaps more realistic system, ok. But also largely less interessant to play for a pure naval player (a player who haS no any intention to build farms and industry on ground when he has bought a naval game^^)...

One years after the start of Atlantic, the steam forum is a desertic forum, with some courageous testors who have paid 33 euros to fight vs bugs, building industry and farms, without fighting ennemy fleets in a pure naval game (lot of the time, you donnnot see any ennemy fleet or ships : you see a sort of "movie", you see your beautifull ship firing to somewhere, but no any tactical gaming interest like in Victory at sea opus 1 : a game that is perhaps more "realistic". But also more (in my case highly^^) ennuyous.

And the road of debugging will be long with a so "complicated no pure naval game".
Sample of the most recent evaluation of the game on steam :

I founded it reading the "steam evaluation graphic", that gives the last recent evaluations
CITATION :
could be a good game but
BUGS, BUGS EVERYWHERE!
bugs in combat, bugs in menus, bugs even in tutorials on start of allied campaign
may be this is small indie team but at least tutorials they must polish to ideal state
also some aspects feels too arcadish
like ship damage model especially with torpedo attacks
so wait until they fix this game
END OF CITATION

Tha dete of this evaluation : yesterday, 27 avril 2025... And the game is on Steam from 2023...

It seems that after more one complete years in sell, the game is so complicated that it has still lot of bugs : and they have no finished with bugs and bugs, because the more a game is complicated with lot of details, the more it is difficult to debug it without a large public. But here, the public has to pay to participate to the debugging, and there are not lot of interrested players to pay 33 euros to suffer in debugging...

At the exact contrary, the original Victory at sea I worked (and works always) perfect, without any bug. It would have been more appropriated and coherent to use this perfect original engine and to improve it progressively with DLC and extensions

Is Atlantic a real pure naval game ? No, i think it's pure gestion/Management game

And when there are ships on screen, I have more the sensation to watch a movie in passive position than to play a tactical naval game... I watch one or two (never more...) beautifull ships that navigate, but I have nothing to do, no any tactic to conduct with large escadre or fleet, etc : very ennuyous and monotone, time game is long with Atlantic opus...

Devs have forgotten that a good game is a delicate equilibre between :

- Realism (ok, it's needed, but when realism become ennuyous, there is a problem in the game...)
- Passion : here, players have by definition passion of naval tactics, large fleets and ships. Is this passion satisfued ? No... Here, you manage in detail an empire wher ground GB is blue and sea green. Search the error...

- Intelligent modelization : to do a modelization, not needed to zoom in on each detail, to have to do essential choices is largely suffisant for the player (micro management of an empire has no any sens or interest in a naval game)

- Esthetic : same, it's interessant to have little beautifull models ships (those of originam opus were very correct, they could have been a little improved and it would have been largely suffisant to keep the same scale). To manage large fleet does not need to "obsessionnally ultra zoom" on beautifull details of empry ships that navigate on the sea during long minute without no any other tactical actions to have to do; no any interest to waatch in passive position a movie, we
buy games to play... In Atlantic, the most game time is for "empire gestion" and for watching "movie of ships" in passive position. Beautifull images of ships and sea, ok. But what else in termes of large battles with large fleets ?

- Support : DLC and extension, etc

One of devs said to me that they have get more money with opus Pacific than with Victory at sea original opus 1, and that they did not (at this time) consider to improve original opus 1 by DLC and extensions. But the reason of this money given by players is that when devs have produced Pacific in 2018, they surfed on the high and excellent reputation of Victory at sea opus 1 and players were absolutly confiants. Now, there is defiance after bad experience (Pacific no longer supported, Ironcald abandoned...) and naval players do not come ! (the forum is a desertic place)

Devs have nothing to surf on... except the low reputation of Pacific opus and Ironclad opus (they never communicate about these 2 abandoned games, it's a real sign of fail). Too bad to see that sort or disaster for a dev studio.

Why some talentuous devs commit this kind of "gaming suicide ?". They are talentuous, its evidence because before themn nobody had produced a soo good and excellent neval game like Victory at sea opus 1.

Highly talentuous but not very efficient in games producing... They could have get lot of money with DLC and extensions of the original improved opus, without any effort. But they prefer run forward in complicated and bugged games, that cost to them lot energy in debugging (and also low evaluation reputation for their games on steam, except for the opus 1 original, that is a gemm, the best naval game I nerver played. This afternoom, I played a fascinating large battle in my Pre-dreadnought mode, 20 ships vs 20 ships, it was crazy and interessant as I never seen in any other naval game, very high naval pleasure !).

That's the eternal question... If they had some rest of lucidity, they would finish Atlantic to rentabilize their debugging work and after that, they would begin a coherent and intelligent politic of DLC + extensions for Victory at sea original concept, and they will get more and more money without heavy efforts.

Our bank credits cards would take fire, but we would have higher naval game pleasure !^^

04-26-25, 04:34 PM	#12
welk2 Seaman Join Date: Apr 2022 Posts: 32 Downloads: 45 Uploads: 5	The bilan... What Devs of Victory at sea have made in 10 years : Very low bilan : low in term of success (except forVictory at sea, no any game longer supported and medium-low-poor steam evaluations, lot of desillusions in gamers public for Ironclad and Pacific opus) WHAT DEVS COULD HAVE HAD : All what they could have been able to make and to have with an intelligent and coherent politic of DLC ans extension, keeping and improving the excellent original concept they have ruined with Pacific, Ironclad (and will probably ruin also with Atlantic, that is not a pure naval game, despite the videos and screen they publish) => These images show what is evident... After the great success of Victory at sea 1 original, all the complete serie would have had the same success story if they had keep the same elegant, simple but very equilibrated and highly intelligent system of play. They had just to improve it with complementary and interessant naval features (+ if needed - but not needed in my opinion, improved models ships graphs). In place of that, they run forward to produce complicted (and less goods) games that have not the same success, that are no longer supported, and that cost for them a lot of hard debugging work for a low result (in terms of success, and in term of reputation : at this time, for 4 "navals" games, they have correctly supported no any of them by DLC and extensions and they have abandoned 2 of them (Pacific and Ironclad). What will be the next ? They seems think that beautifull videos on Facebook will attract players, but beautifull captures and videos do not make good games... I bought and tried Atlantic opusn, and I have to say that this game has a perhaps more realistic system, ok. But also largely less interessant to play for a pure naval player (a player who haS no any intention to build farms and industry on ground when he has bought a naval game^^)... One years after the start of Atlantic, the steam forum is a desertic forum, with some courageous testors who have paid 33 euros to fight vs bugs, building industry and farms, without fighting ennemy fleets in a pure naval game (lot of the time, you donnnot see any ennemy fleet or ships : you see a sort of "movie", you see your beautifull ship firing to somewhere, but no any tactical gaming interest like in Victory at sea opus 1 : a game that is perhaps more "realistic". But also more (in my case highly^^) ennuyous. And the road of debugging will be long with a so "complicated no pure naval game". Sample of the most recent evaluation of the game on steam : I founded it reading the "steam evaluation graphic", that gives the last recent evaluations CITATION : could be a good game but BUGS, BUGS EVERYWHERE! bugs in combat, bugs in menus, bugs even in tutorials on start of allied campaign may be this is small indie team but at least tutorials they must polish to ideal state also some aspects feels too arcadish like ship damage model especially with torpedo attacks so wait until they fix this game END OF CITATION Tha dete of this evaluation : yesterday, 27 avril 2025... And the game is on Steam from 2023... It seems that after more one complete years in sell, the game is so complicated that it has still lot of bugs : and they have no finished with bugs and bugs, because the more a game is complicated with lot of details, the more it is difficult to debug it without a large public. But here, the public has to pay to participate to the debugging, and there are not lot of interrested players to pay 33 euros to suffer in debugging... At the exact contrary, the original Victory at sea I worked (and works always) perfect, without any bug. It would have been more appropriated and coherent to use this perfect original engine and to improve it progressively with DLC and extensions Is Atlantic a real pure naval game ? No, i think it's pure gestion/Management game And when there are ships on screen, I have more the sensation to watch a movie in passive position than to play a tactical naval game... I watch one or two (never more...) beautifull ships that navigate, but I have nothing to do, no any tactic to conduct with large escadre or fleet, etc : very ennuyous and monotone, time game is long with Atlantic opus... Devs have forgotten that a good game is a delicate equilibre between : - Realism (ok, it's needed, but when realism become ennuyous, there is a problem in the game...) - Passion : here, players have by definition passion of naval tactics, large fleets and ships. Is this passion satisfued ? No... Here, you manage in detail an empire wher ground GB is blue and sea green. Search the error... - Intelligent modelization : to do a modelization, not needed to zoom in on each detail, to have to do essential choices is largely suffisant for the player (micro management of an empire has no any sens or interest in a naval game) - Esthetic : same, it's interessant to have little beautifull models ships (those of originam opus were very correct, they could have been a little improved and it would have been largely suffisant to keep the same scale). To manage large fleet does not need to "obsessionnally ultra zoom" on beautifull details of empry ships that navigate on the sea during long minute without no any other tactical actions to have to do; no any interest to waatch in passive position a movie, we buy games to play... In Atlantic, the most game time is for "empire gestion" and for watching "movie of ships" in passive position. Beautifull images of ships and sea, ok. But what else in termes of large battles with large fleets ? - Support : DLC and extension, etc One of devs said to me that they have get more money with opus Pacific than with Victory at sea original opus 1, and that they did not (at this time) consider to improve original opus 1 by DLC and extensions. But the reason of this money given by players is that when devs have produced Pacific in 2018, they surfed on the high and excellent reputation of Victory at sea opus 1 and players were absolutly confiants. Now, there is defiance after bad experience (Pacific no longer supported, Ironcald abandoned...) and naval players do not come ! (the forum is a desertic place) Devs have nothing to surf on... except the low reputation of Pacific opus and Ironclad opus (they never communicate about these 2 abandoned games, it's a real sign of fail). Too bad to see that sort or disaster for a dev studio. Why some talentuous devs commit this kind of "gaming suicide ?". They are talentuous, its evidence because before themn nobody had produced a soo good and excellent neval game like Victory at sea opus 1. Highly talentuous but not very efficient in games producing... They could have get lot of money with DLC and extensions of the original improved opus, without any effort. But they prefer run forward in complicated and bugged games, that cost to them lot energy in debugging (and also low evaluation reputation for their games on steam, except for the opus 1 original, that is a gemm, the best naval game I nerver played. This afternoom, I played a fascinating large battle in my Pre-dreadnought mode, 20 ships vs 20 ships, it was crazy and interessant as I never seen in any other naval game, very high naval pleasure !). That's the eternal question... If they had some rest of lucidity, they would finish Atlantic to rentabilize their debugging work and after that, they would begin a coherent and intelligent politic of DLC + extensions for Victory at sea original concept, and they will get more and more money without heavy efforts. Our bank credits cards would take fire, but we would have higher naval game pleasure !^^ Last edited by welk2; 04-27-25 at 07:14 PM. Reason: Corrections