WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS GAME❓

[Cup of Joe ☕]

With more than 75,000 units sold, and a +83% STEAM Customer Review rating, Survival: Fountain of Youth seems to be both popular & successful, yet just 4.1% of Players have finished the game - WHY?

——

If you look at STEAM Global Gameplay Stats | Survival: Fountain of Youth (link below), you will find that only 58.3% of Players have discovered an Obsidian Shard, and it gets worse from there:

• Only 31.9% of Players have discovered Copper

• Only 17.7% of Players have discovered Iron

• Only 10.6% of Players have discovered Silver

• Only 7.2% of Players have crafted a Flintlock Gun

• And again, only 4.1% of Players have actually finished the game

• etc.., etc..

(Gameplay Stats link) https://steamcommunity.com/stats/1967630/achievements

——

According to VG Insights Data Services (link below), Survival: Fountain of Youth game-play has plummeted by -80% from more than 1,600 Daily Concurrent Players on May 26, 2024 to just 289 Daily Concurrent Players on July 10, 2024.

(VG Insights link) https://vginsights.com/game/1967630

——

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS GAME❓

• Is it too Difficult?
• Is it Illogical Game Progression?
• Are the Game Mechanics too complicated?
• Etc..

[Cup of Joe ☕]

The game takes place in a tropical paradise, the Caribbean Islands..

I don't understand why the Developer created multiple 'depressing' biomes in the Caribbean — Illogical Game Progression!!!

There's only (1) biome in the Caribbean, and again its called Tropical Paradise!

The Developer needs to make the biomes even more tropical than they already are, (more plants, animals, and raw materials) — And if there are animals on those islands, there needs to also be a continuous Fresh Water Source (e.g., water-fall, water-well, pond, creek, etc..), that's logical game progression..

——

The game (on the Island of Hope), seems to be a solid, very immersive, well written, Highly Linear RPG (perhaps too linear and too restrictive) — The Open World & Sandbox features of the game are hurriedly truncated & lacking..

Example #1: In game, If you choose to Skip Intro And Tutorial, and choose Alternative Spawn Point, the game still requires you to gather & craft the same items, ostensibly in the same order, as if you were following the Tutorial, in order to unlock certain Blueprints — Within minutes of Alternative Spawning, I discovered a Stone Structure, a Wooden Plank Storage Crate, an Obsidian Saw, a Wooden Hammer, and several Builder Tool-kits, yet only a handful of Blueprints became available — Most of the Blueprints associated with, and precedent to those discoveries, remained invisible — And I don't understand why I can't build a Stone Structure, Dock, etc.., considering they're all over the maps — Illogical Game Progression!!!

Example #2: In game, the very first time that the Player uses a Hammer, a graphical pop-up appears describing the uses for the Hammer — One of the uses for the Hammer is Upgrading your build, of which the graphical pop-up clearly shows an Improved Wall being Upgraded to a Brick Wall — Where's The Brick Upgrade???

Example #3: In game, a Small Stick weighs (0.2) and provides 90-minutes of fire — A Half Log weighs (4) which is 20-times heavier than a Small Stick, yet only provides 180-minutes of fire — Illogical Game Progression!!!

Example #4: In game, Durability of crafted items (e.g., tools, weapons, etc..), is just unbelievable, and severely unbalanced — Where's a Sharpening Stone/Wheel, etc.. — Game Immersion Killer & Illogical Game Progression!!!

Example #5: In game, Apples come in the Bag of Provisions , and Oranges are readily available on the Island of Hope, but neither fruit has any Blueprints, and neither fruit has the ability to be Farmed — Illogical Game Progression!!!

etc..

——

The game needs more Build Materials & Shapes!

Materials: Bricks, Concrete, Glass, and Stone were common build materials of Renaissance Architecture, during the 15th & 16th century (Juan Ponce de León time-frame) — Bricks were invented in 7,000BC. Concrete was invented in 6,500BC. The first ever Glass Greenhouse was created in Rome in 30AD. And Stone Build Materials date back to the Neolithic Period, roughly beginning around 9000 years ago.

Shapes: Curved foundations & walls with Arched ceilings, and Round towers were common place designs during the Renaissance Period — Simply look at The School of Athens, The Temple of Vesta, or The Tempietto del Bramante.

——

Additionally..

• The game needs Potted Plants not only for outdoor farming, but also for indoor decoration.

• The game needs Direct In-Ground Field Farming — The Player should be allowed to plant trees, bushes, etc.., directly into the soil, to maintain island resource propagation.

• The game needs Animal Domestication Farming — The Player should be allowed to trap Chickens and other animals, then raise those animals for breeding & additional resources.

• The game needs adjustable Stairs & Ladders — Given the game's island terrain, Foundations often encounter 'Unstable Surfaces' in large base building scenarios — An adjustable, varying height, Staircase and Ladder is needed.

• The game needs Candles of different sizes, shapes, and light intensities.

• The game needs 3rd Party Modding, and STEAM Workshop Support — Game modding can benefit both Players and Developers by extending a game's replay value — Mods can add depth to a game, making it more interesting and extending its lifespan — For example, mods can add new areas, game-play systems, animations, a video game economy, and improved graphics — Mods can help players debug, manage, and run games more smoothly — Mods can also fix critical errors in a game's code, etc.., etc..

——

Juan Ponce de León circumnavigated the globe, and brought with him the "Best Scientists & Sailors" (excerpt of game's prologue), but for unknown reasons, a considerable amount of that Time Period's fundamental knowledge & understanding seems to have disappeared — WHY?

Good Luck & Regards

[Ramstar]

Some people just don’t complete games, I know I don’t. There’s a LOT of good indie games out there this one included. People move on to other games likely every week.

Maybe start with why you are having trouble getting on with the game? I’m not convinced there’s any correlation to say it’s got good reviews (fact) then quoting metrics about progression which you seem to think is ‘bad’ (claim).

[Cup of Joe ☕]

Originally posted by Ramstar:

Some people just don’t complete games, I know I don’t. There’s a LOT of good indie games out there this one included. People move on to other games likely every week.

Maybe start with why you are having trouble getting on with the game? I’m not convinced there’s any correlation to say it’s got good reviews (fact) then quoting metrics about progression which you seem to think is ‘bad’ (claim).

Hello 'Ramstar' ,

All three metrics (above) were supplied by STEAM — VG Insights Data Services is a licensed republisher of said data.

(1) Customer Review ratings tend to be an emotional metric

(2) STEAM Global Gameplay Stats is an analytical metric

(3) Daily Concurrent Players is an analytical metric

All things being equal, one metric should compliment the other metric, but that is not what's happening here — WHY?

Based on the Global Gameplay Stats, and the Daily Concurrent Players, STEAM is telling us that upwards of 70% of those Players don't even travel to another island, before quiting the game — WHY?

——

NOTE: Odinsoft Inc. (Developer of Survival: Fountain of Youth), is NOT an 'indie' game developer — Odinsoft is headquartered in Los Angeles, USA, with a development office in Antalya, Turkey — See Odinsoft Press photo with at least (18) employees in the background.

——

Good Luck & Regards

[Ramstar]

You’re missing the point. The fact is the game has very positive reviews right? That is a fact. I can see it on the store page.

I know you got your progression stats from steam but progression and whether people like it are not necessarily correlated. There is no fact there it is your claim.

If you don’t like the game then ok but why write saying something is wrong with the game when the majority are literally saying very positive. Doesn’t make sense. What you meant to say was you don’t like it and here is some constructive feedback for why …then list what you’d improve.

Throw all that other ‘stats’ stuff away there’s no correlation.

[Cup of Joe ☕]

Originally posted by Ramstar:

I know you got your progression stats from steam but progression and whether people like it are not necessarily correlated.

Hello 'Ramstar' ,

Swing and a miss, again — Strike Two!

As I stated above, Customer Review ratings tend to be an emotional metric, an opinion, as you have just demonstrated.

Global Gameplay Stats, and Daily Concurrent Players are analytical Facts!

Opinion vs. Fact ... do you understand the difference..?

Opinions (e.g., Customer Review ratings), are subjective statements that cannot be proven to be true or false — Facts, on the other hand (e.g., Global Gameplay Stats, and Daily Concurrent Players), can be proven true or false and are objective statements.

——

The 'Fact' remains, based on above referenced STEAM data, that upwards of 70% of the game's Players, do not even travel to another island, before quitting the game — WHY?

The 'Fact' remains, based on above referenced STEAM data, Survival: Fountain of Youth game-play has plummeted by -80% from more than 1,600 Daily Concurrent Players on May 26, 2024 to just 289 Daily Concurrent Players on July 10, 2024 — WHY?

——

Good Luck & Regards

[emitfudd]

It's very simple why player base dropped off. First, most people, not all, but most, want to rush the game and get to the end. This game does not allow that. It takes a long time to progress through all the stages of crafting. You can't progress without meeting certain requirements. This causes a lot of people to stop playing the game. Second, the whole EULA disaster caused a bunch of people to stop playing. I would imagine those huge posts are preventing new players from buying the game. The developers aren't going to improve the game any further. It has already been stated. I am close to heading to Bimini Island and finishing the game. Once I do I am not sticking around to improve my base or anything else because the performance of the game is horrible. I will finish it and move on.

[Ramstar]

Originally posted by Cup of Joe ☕:

Originally posted by Ramstar:

I know you got your progression stats from steam but progression and whether people like it are not necessarily correlated.

Hello 'Ramstar' ,

Swing and a miss, again — Strike Two!

As I stated above, Customer Review ratings tend to be an emotional metric, an opinion, as you have just demonstrated.

Global Gameplay Stats, and Daily Concurrent Players are analytical Facts!

Opinion vs. Fact ... do you understand the difference..?

Opinions (e.g., Customer Review ratings), are subjective statements that cannot be proven to be true or false — Facts, on the other hand (e.g., Global Gameplay Stats, and Daily Concurrent Players), can be proven true or false and are objective statements.

——

The 'Fact' remains, based on above referenced STEAM data, that upwards of 70% of the game's Players, do not even travel to another island, before quitting the game — WHY?

The 'Fact' remains, based on above referenced STEAM data, Survival: Fountain of Youth game-play has plummeted by -80% from more than 1,600 Daily Concurrent Players on May 26, 2024 to just 289 Daily Concurrent Players on July 10, 2024 — WHY?

——

Good Luck & Regards

I’ve already explained this but you’re not willing to accept. Not everyone is interested in completing games. You can try to get away from and make excuses for why the reviews are very positive but you’re not making sense.

There will be a couple of people that share this distortion but you need to understand you’re the minority. See the store page reviews for the majority.

[johnisaroundhere]

Originally posted by Ramstar:

You’re missing the point. The fact is the game has very positive reviews right? That is a fact. I can see it on the store page.

I know you got your progression stats from steam but progression and whether people like it are not necessarily correlated. There is no fact there it is your claim.

If you don’t like the game then ok but why write saying something is wrong with the game when the majority are literally saying very positive. Doesn’t make sense. What you meant to say was you don’t like it and here is some constructive feedback for why …then list what you’d improve.

Throw all that other ‘stats’ stuff away there’s no correlation.

I would argue you are completely backwards in your argument.

Reviews are not necessarily a "factual" way of measuring customer satisfaction. Reviews only show the attitude of those willing to post a review.

Statistics from Steam regarding game usage is factual.

As Emitfudd correctly pointed out, the EULA disaster had an impact that is hard to measure. For example, I was greatly enjoying the game, posted a comment to the Dev encouraging expansion, and was progressing nicely through the game. EULA came, I refused to sign. I haven't gotten around to posting a review... So the STEAM metrics capturing my "progress" and stopping play is an example of measurable metric being more accurate than reviews.

[Ramstar]

Originally posted by johnisaroundhere:

Originally posted by Ramstar:

You’re missing the point. The fact is the game has very positive reviews right? That is a fact. I can see it on the store page.

I know you got your progression stats from steam but progression and whether people like it are not necessarily correlated. There is no fact there it is your claim.

If you don’t like the game then ok but why write saying something is wrong with the game when the majority are literally saying very positive. Doesn’t make sense. What you meant to say was you don’t like it and here is some constructive feedback for why …then list what you’d improve.

Throw all that other ‘stats’ stuff away there’s no correlation.

I would argue you are completely backwards in your argument.

Reviews are not necessarily a "factual" way of measuring customer satisfaction. Reviews only show the attitude of those willing to post a review.

Statistics from Steam regarding game usage is factual.

As Emitfudd correctly pointed out, the EULA disaster had an impact that is hard to measure. For example, I was greatly enjoying the game, posted a comment to the Dev encouraging expansion, and was progressing nicely through the game. EULA came, I refused to sign. I haven't gotten around to posting a review... So the STEAM metrics capturing my "progress" and stopping play is an example of measurable metric being more accurate than reviews.

I think you guys are clutching..

Those who don’t post reviews we should consider? Please explain how we measure invisible facts.

Just because you don’t agree with the very positive reviews you can’t ignore them and move onto metrics that suit your narrative. I can prob find a metric that suggests im spider man doesn’t mean im eyeing up side of that building.

As I say I still don’t think progression is indicative of anything so these metrics are worthless. I do think progression metrics can be used for other things like a games longevity maybe but not satisfaction - that is literally what a review is. If you don’t review that’s on you. Like voting.

It’s like eating too many bananas- might get a bit sick of it after a while but doesn’t mean you didn’t enjoy them. You put it down, come back for another banana when you get the taste for it again. If you measure that over a month you’d think OMGS what’s wrong with bananas!!!11one.


No..I just don’t want a banana right now..


Banana 🍌

[johnisaroundhere]

Originally posted by Ramstar:

...
I think you guys are clutching..

Those who don’t post reviews we should consider? Please explain how we measure invisible facts.

Just because you don’t agree with the very positive reviews you can’t ignore them and move onto metrics that suit your narrative. I can prob find a metric that suggests im spider man doesn’t mean im eyeing up side of that building.

As I say I still don’t think progression is indicative of anything so these metrics are worthless. I do think progression metrics can be used for other things like a games longevity maybe but not satisfaction - that is literally what a review is. If you don’t review that’s on you. Like voting.

..

Clutching? Did you mean grasping? Either way, you'd be incorrect to lump me into the same boat as Cup of Joe. He's asking what is wrong with the game, I'm pointing out your argument is backwards. You reinforced my opinion in this latest post, btw.

We cannot consider the opinion of people who don't post. THAT is exactly why reviews are SUBJECTIVE.

What we do have is the gameplay metrics. Those are factual. Feel free to find STEAM metrics suggesting you are Spiderman. I'll wait.....

Originally posted by Ramstar:

As I say I still don’t think progression is indicative of anything so these metrics are worthless...

This is where your argument goes off the rails. You choose to place total value on the subjective reviews while ignoring the factual metric data.

I agree with your premise that many players do not complete games. I reject the idea, however, that metrics showing less than 1/3 of players make it 1/3 of the way into the game means is not a significant indicator that there is an issue.

Now, that said- I was enjoying the game. I was stockpiling obsidian and copper getting ready for the next island. I think many of the ideas in the game were fresh and well done. So don't read my posts as being against the game (I've said my piece regarding the EULA on those threads); I just think your logic is flawed.

[Cup of Joe ☕]

Originally posted by Ramstar:

I’ve already explained this but you’re not willing to accept. Not everyone is interested in completing games. You can try to get away from and make excuses for why the reviews are very positive but you’re not making sense.

There will be a couple of people that share this distortion but you need to understand you’re the minority. See the store page reviews for the majority.

Hello 'Ramstar' ,

You offer no facts to support your opinion.!?

——

Opinion vs. Fact:

• Opinions (e.g., 2,000 Customer Review ratings), are subjective statements that cannot be proven to be true or false.

• Facts, on the other hand (e.g., Global Gameplay Stats of 76,000 Players, and Daily Concurrent Players), can be proven true or false and are objective statements.

Hence the actions of 76,000 Players as a whole, is far-more important than just 2,000 opinions!

"Action speaks louder than words.." - Mark Twain

——

The 'Facts' remain, based on above referenced STEAM data, that only 4.1% of Players have actually finished the game — WHY?

The 'Facts' remain, based on above referenced STEAM data, that upwards of 70% of the game's Players, do not even travel to another island, before quitting the game — WHY?

The 'Facts' remain, based on above referenced STEAM data, Survival: Fountain of Youth game-play has plummeted by -80% from more than 1,600 Daily Concurrent Players on May 26, 2024 to just 289 Daily Concurrent Players on July 10, 2024 — WHY?

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS GAME❓

——

Why did you quit the game?

Good Luck & Regards

[Cup of Joe ☕]

Originally posted by emitfudd:

It's very simple why player base dropped off. First, most people, not all, but most, want to rush the game and get to the end. This game does not allow that. It takes a long time to progress through all the stages of crafting. You can't progress without meeting certain requirements. This causes a lot of people to stop playing the game. Second, the whole EULA disaster caused a bunch of people to stop playing. I would imagine those huge posts are preventing new players from buying the game. The developers aren't going to improve the game any further. It has already been stated. I am close to heading to Bimini Island and finishing the game. Once I do I am not sticking around to improve my base or anything else because the performance of the game is horrible. I will finish it and move on.

Hi 'emitfudd' ,

I've got more than 50-hours in-game with many Settings reconfiguration and Re-Starts — The biggest First Impression or Feeling that I get about this game, is that it seems quickly put together, and massively unfinished in so many areas, not to mention the many imbalances!

Either the game's Testers failed, or the game's Testers were not listened to ... or both.!?

——

As I've said before in another thread, the game is almost 23GB in size, I can't imagine the Developer just walking away from such a substantial investment.!?

The best & easiest way for developers to write a Period 'survival game', is to simply go to a Library's Historical Department, and educate themselves!

From their they will find the Logical Progression of Man — the ultimate-grind, survival game!

From Stone Tools to Flying Machines, and every Logical, Necessary, Progressional-Step, and Tragedy, in between!

Survival: Fountain of Youth states that it is "based on actual historic events", but for unknown reasons, a considerable amount of that Time Period's fundamental knowledge & understanding seems to have disappeared (e.g, missing brick, concrete, glass, and stone build materials ... missing animal farming, etc.., etc..)!

——

I would hope that the developer finishes the game — In the event that never happens, I would hope that the Developer allows for 3rd Party Modding, and STEAM Workshop Support!

The game desperately needs 3rd Party Modding, and STEAM Workshop Support!

Game modding can benefit both Players and Developers by extending a game's replay value — Mods can add depth to a game, making it more interesting and extending its lifespan — For example, mods can add new areas, game-play systems, animations, a video game economy, and improved graphics — Mods can help players debug, manage, and run games more smoothly — Mods can also fix critical errors in a game's code, etc.., etc..

——

Good Luck & Regards

[Ramstar]

Originally posted by johnisaroundhere:

Originally posted by Ramstar:

...
I think you guys are clutching..

Those who don’t post reviews we should consider? Please explain how we measure invisible facts.

Just because you don’t agree with the very positive reviews you can’t ignore them and move onto metrics that suit your narrative. I can prob find a metric that suggests im spider man doesn’t mean im eyeing up side of that building.

As I say I still don’t think progression is indicative of anything so these metrics are worthless. I do think progression metrics can be used for other things like a games longevity maybe but not satisfaction - that is literally what a review is. If you don’t review that’s on you. Like voting.

..

Clutching? Did you mean grasping? Either way, you'd be incorrect to lump me into the same boat as Cup of Joe. He's asking what is wrong with the game, I'm pointing out your argument is backwards. You reinforced my opinion in this latest post, btw.

We cannot consider the opinion of people who don't post. THAT is exactly why reviews are SUBJECTIVE.

What we do have is the gameplay metrics. Those are factual. Feel free to find STEAM metrics suggesting you are Spiderman. I'll wait.....

Originally posted by Ramstar:

As I say I still don’t think progression is indicative of anything so these metrics are worthless...

This is where your argument goes off the rails. You choose to place total value on the subjective reviews while ignoring the factual metric data.

I agree with your premise that many players do not complete games. I reject the idea, however, that metrics showing less than 1/3 of players make it 1/3 of the way into the game means is not a significant indicator that there is an issue.

Now, that said- I was enjoying the game. I was stockpiling obsidian and copper getting ready for the next island. I think many of the ideas in the game were fresh and well done. So don't read my posts as being against the game (I've said my piece regarding the EULA on those threads); I just think your logic is flawed.

Clutching at straws..

[mskitty]

I would have liked to finish the game but I couldn't get through the final battle, and I reloaded and tried several times. I'm not very skilled at fighting and I don't like it to begin with, I don't why the game needs boss battles in the first place, the animal attacks are enough to deal with. It was a big disappointment as I had really enjoyed the game up to that point.

One of these days I hope to find a survival game that is monster free and is actually about realistic survival, and subsistence living.

[emitfudd]

Originally posted by mskitty:

I would have liked to finish the game but I couldn't get through the final battle, and I reloaded and tried several times. I'm not very skilled at fighting and I don't like it to begin with, I don't why the game needs boss battles in the first place, the animal attacks are enough to deal with. It was a big disappointment as I had really enjoyed the game up to that point.

One of these days I hope to find a survival game that is monster free and is actually about realistic survival, and subsistence living.

I was shocked at how hard it was to defeat the final boss considering all the others were pretty easy. You didn't miss much. Just watch it on Youtube. Once the battle is over there is a cut scene. You can collect some living water which is useless at this point in the game.

Trying to block the boss from hitting me didn't seem to work. I just kept whacking at him with the sword. I used the pistol for the statues. The stupid spike floor was a PIA.