Tree of Savior Forum

I am gonna be the unpopular guy and say it

General Discussion
#1

This is what you get for forcing them to change their EA plan.

They had the EA phase spread over 3 months for a reason. They do not have the staff nor the resources to handle all those players right away (many might not be aware, but it can take up to 3 months until the money from steam actually arrives at their account).

So all the problems you see now, you should have expected when you voted for the new EA plan.
3 months would have given them more time to provide new servers for each batch of players and it also would have allowed them to slowly work out connection problems and get more staff in time.

so all the crybabies back then, who now even cry louder about bugs and problems: you brought this upon yourself.

39 Likes
#2

Let’s say the original plan did come in effect. Then what happens at the f2p launch then?

2 Likes
#3

Or they could have simply not done early access since it’s a bull ■■■■ approach to opening a game and simply done a free open beta, give feedback and then wipe the game and release it to the public. But hey, what do I know? I can’t even load properly.

17 Likes
#4

they would have had 3 months of time to slowly build up money, staff and servers to cope with it. now they face a much bigger group of players right away, which the cannot handle and barely stand a chance to fix the bugs until f2p launch.

3 Likes
#5

I just hope one EA is over they will not launch the game but take their time for 1 or 2 months to fix the gamebreaking bugs. Right now it’s not a product you should release to the F2P market…well, actually right now it’s not a product you should sell either.

2 Likes
#6

I think the actual situation is better/more efficient. Yes it runs horrible but a big batch is out and they have got 3 weeks to prepare for the next one.

#7

They shouldn’t make the suggestion if they are not capable. Period.

10 Likes
#8

sorry to say this but yeah, what do you know honestly.

they need money and staff. a closed beta does not give them that.

1 Like
#9

So what does that say to the people who are suffering and voted yes?
Not every single person who is complaining voted no, nor is every person complaining at fault for the vote.

Just food for thought, I actually wasn’t involved. I would have been fine with 3 months, I didn’t even think I’d play this game until 3 days ago when I decided to give it a go rather then judge off impression.

2 Likes
#10

Just imagine they went with the 7 day EA :V

#11

no chance they can handle the f2p flood in 3 weeks. NO CHANCE. the need MUCH more time.

2 Likes
#12

Man you aren’t really smart are you. You realize thay a lot of games go the route of closed beta -> closed beta -> open beta -> release right?

Alas I paid 10 dollars for this so I’m not complaining, but the fact still stands that an incomplete game was released and people paid well over 50 dollars for. It’s looking like Tortanic and asscreed at this point.

#13

my post is direct at the people who cried back then and would not understand the reasons for the 3 month plan.

#14

The fact that there was already 2 Closed betas and they still hadn’t expect the server loaded in such a way… Would the 3 months would actually be worthwhile? Yeah paying them for the 50$ have their sound reasoning especially that they’re developers they do need the resources and money.
Aside from the fact trying to combat bots and RMT.
The issue is that we’re still seeing some of the bugs that still existed since beta and of course same problems with IMC.

With that 3 months we can say the servers aren’t loaded and they have moderate amount of people. but alas how would they actually expect the load for the f2p release then? We can expect that the same problems that are occurring right now would be in a bigger scale than what we are currently facing.

#15

The issue here isn’t how long the EA last, it’s why didn’t IMC fix the bug issues. They had numerous months during CBT to consolidate the bugs and fix them but they didn’t.

As people always say “Why panic and rush on your deadline when you could just start early”

#16

Nobody told them they had to do the 1 month EA by March. They were free to delay it till May if they wanted to. In fact, they specifically said that the release date will be the same regardless. So they chose to release it early and that’s their decision.

4 Likes
#17

So true. Orginal plan was great. But i think IMC did good job. EU server is performing ok looking that game was released less than week ago.

#18

The numbers of player is not why the server is fked. The main problem here is the gold seller and their spaghetti code.

2 Likes
#19

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

1 Like
#20

Sadly the game need more work and f2p eill not help it

1 Like