Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
I haven't even logged in for nearly 2 days and i'm at home and able to, I just haven't wanted to.
I'm only interested in poker really and there aren't enough players in the VIP room, where the only game of poker with any value is held (still a terrible format). They lost many players at the turn of the month who were just short of reaching VIP, probably quite a few from 888gate.
People are getting censored for having immoral obscenities like 'nipple' in their username. While others openly hold multiple accounts. It's becoming a shambles.
I just wish I could cash out. I'd be up enough for a pint and a pasty.
GTAV cost me more than I spent on this game for xbox and I spent fewer hours on that so I'm not too disgruntled. Just disappointed that they have no interest in proper ring games which would attract a liquid player base, able to sit and stand up with their holdings at any point.
5% rake taken from every pot, no time constraints for casual players.
Ok, I went into some of the specifics. Let's see if they get acknowledged and/or understood.
tl;dr DL needs to improve their poker game
The economics are obvious; they want their minimum 12-13% rake every 15 minutes so that it can be paid again. If the poker tables are idle, as they are more often than not in the VIP room, players will be on the slots which pay the house more anyway.
That is the concrete that supports the refrain of "we're afraid of games taking too long". The cheaters in the game seem to ground their social life around it; so I can assume they're paying more than I ever would were I the most satisfied customer online.
The fact that they would have a larger, more enthusiastic player base if they implemented REAL poker either hasn't been considered, or it has, and they've concluded that their model has a greater RIO than the alternatives.
It's not my company, and they don't owe me anything. I may even play Wheel of Poker again, because it's there, and costs nothing. As I said, I make no demands or ultimatums. I'm only writing this because it's information that would have saved me a lot of time and energy had I known all along.
[edit: for the record, the devs have always been quite nice. If they get obscuratist when discussing the whens and whys of poker, well, not many companies will blithely lay open their business plan on request. Yesterday morning aside, they've never been anything but gracious and helpful. That alone is what got them their initial positive review, and the small amount of money I spent.]
I'd love to hear input from any perspective.
Second, I'm sorry you are not happy with the way the poker games play out. As stated multiple times now, we are reviewing your comments and will decide on what changes - if any - will be made. We're happy to have a constructive discussion, but please understand that new versions of games or changes to the current ones take time. We launched a month ago and there were already other games in the pipeline.
If players are colluding, please email us with the usernames and will will review the play. But yes, as you mention this behavior is more difficult to prove. However, if it happens constantly between two people - then they will be suspended. We do not allow those with the same IP address to play together in a game and we certainly do not want folks colluding.
As for a wider timed discussion - this is the first time I have heard this and we could certainly make that happen.
Clearly we have a difference of opinion on how things have been handled, but I'm not sure how to be more clear on the current state of things. I agree that a sustainable poker room has everyone happy and continually playing - so let's have a thoughtful discussion and see what can be agreed upon for future updates.
Thanks!
Second, I made one comment in a thread started by someone with a constructive suggestion for poker. After the question was answered with the "we're not planning on it but we're always open to suggestions' response that we're very familiar with, you replied to the content of my remark, and then locked the thread. I did not know that questions that have been asked and answered are customarily locked, but I only look at a small fraction of the posts here. In any event I thought a redundant comment required an explanation, so I gave one.
As for a wider timed discussion on ring games, it was only hinted at, as an impromptu one broke out Monday night, when a DL visited the VIP room while we were playing poker, and said that DL_Miguel was the person to talk to. But my conversation with Miguel only went as far as asking if he would be available, and that alone was brushed off.
I actually don't think we have a difference of opinion at all; just a difference in priorities. We both know what virtually all of the poker players here want, and we both know that businesses exist to generate a profit. I don't know what else there is to understand.
Barring some unforeseen ephiphany, the stack-off-and-pray form of poker is baked in. Were you planning to offer games that aren't structurally designed to end within 15 minutes, you would have done so by now; as all it would require would be a doubling or quadrupling of the starting stacks. Yet it hasn't happened. And yet the company has always rhetorically left the door open: "Please understand that changes take time, and we only launched a mont ago", possibly out of fear that shutting it would make players lose interest.
Poker is a prestige game. It exists to attract customers to games that offer the casino greater revenue. This is why I bought the game in early access, and this is what attracted every player I know who's joined since. People will forgive hiccups and occasional bugs - particularly in light of the customer service you have. But if you don't get the poker part right, no one will bother to test the slots. This is the last, best argument I can offer.
(As for the issue of collusion, as I understand it, what you suggest was done, and the proof was in the chat window. The complainant never received any acknowledgment. If I'm misinformed on the paper trail then I apologize. I have seen them do it myself, however.)
At any rate, I appreciate all of your help with the small and not-so-small bugs and disconnections that I've lost chips over - especially one where it was clear the disconnection was at my end.
Thanks!
I'd like to keep the thread open to hear from other poker players about their thoughts about the game as it is, and their ideas.
Whether you agree with Plastic, or me or both, or none, it is a good idea to post your opinions here.
Let's keep it about poker, as I know almost everyone can think of issues with other games. We can have a seperate thread if needed for them.
If you like poker and have an opinion, express it here. DL has suggested that they will listen, but we can't just accept the usual platitudes.
The community has to be seen to be vocal and the developers have to be seen to be listening.
If DL said it will take 6 weeks to rid the game of the useless rooms and implement a few different types of poker, I'd probably stick around to see it happen. As it is, it's all copy paste standard customer services bollocks. 'we appreciate your input and are working hard to implement changes suggested by our most valuable asset, the community', except they don't even say that. They don't even understand what we're asking for. That's the thing that makes me sad.
I'm not saying we disagree with anything mentioned. I'm just saying I don't know how fast a cash game or other variant can be added. It is simply in the design phase and then requires live testing and then we can roll it out.
We're listening, there really isn't much more I can do to convince you. You've clearly made up your mind. I look forward to reading other posts from a variety of users in game.
All I want is for the community to voice their opinions.
Since the blind change, the game has improved a bit. I will still play there as I have nothing better to do. But next time I run out of chips, i won't be buying any more.
I understand your point of view, being a small team and from a business perspective, but it is a short term view. People will bu ychips and waste them on slots or roulette or whatever and will reach a tipping point where it's not fun anymore. You will have a steady stream of people buying chips a few times before they get bored and play something else.
Poker is the one game that people can really get into and feel like they aren't playing against the house.
I've said before and I'll say again, I love your game, it is the only virtual casino for play money out there. I'm sure I could find versions every game elsewhere, but you have a unique opportunity here to gather all gamblers under one roof. But if you only concentrate on the slots etc, you'll lose the community that makes this game any better than spending £10 on a real casino and playing at micro stakes.
I am but one man, a drunken one at that. I appreciate your responses and I will keep playing til I run out of chips. All I'm saying is, if you had better poker, I'd play until it got quiet, blow my chips on a stupid game like slots or roulette and possibly buy some more to play poker and build it up.
If people are spending money and spending many hours on a game, they should be considered the core players.
Why don't you give us some numbers? Are the slots players buying more chips? At least be honest about why you won't make the simple changes that many people have suggested.
hell, the initial decision to go with SNGs over ring games alone shows the general lack of poker experience. people who dont play a lot of poker (or any poker) are usually under the impression that tournament play IS "poker" thanks to the TV exposure that tournaments have received... when the fact is its the exception, its probably fair to say that fewer than 1% of the poker hands dealt worldwide annually are dealt in tournament-format games.
so given that, its no surprise the poker is in such a ridiculous state... what IS surprising is that someone would make a game that HAS poker and NOT get the experience and do the research necessary to see how ridiculous it is...
as to why they dont change it or put more time into fixing it, i think its probably driven by the same economic factors that exist in B&M casinos: poker simply doesnt make the kind of money that house games and machines do. as an example, ive played off one single $25 deposit at bodog (now bovada) for almost TEN YEARS, and cashed out around $40k over that period... and i will likewise probably never need to buy chips for four kings either... even with the sad state of poker in the game and the absurd vig on the games, and only playing maybe 2-4 games a week, im net positive, and have no reason to believe that wont continue if i should continue to play... although i guess you could make the argument that for every winning player there are lots of losing players that DID buy chips, so maybe it all evens out, i dont know... but i suspect not.
poker players also tend to be ♥♥♥♥♥ (im no exception) and are generally higher maintenance players (harder to keep happy) than slot monkeys or table gamers... which combined with their lower profit potential usually puts them at the very bottom in terms of casinos giving a hot ♥♥♥♥ about them.
IF they introduce ring games with reasonable rakes, id probably play a lot more often... but as it stands, i doubt ill play more than a few times a week while im waiting for some other game to download...
I had to look up "colluding" and after I did, I could see how that could be a problem. Matter f fact, I do remember playing a game recently where two players would go back and forth with their raises.
I also remember while playing Blackjack the other day, a player was asking another why they had their mic off.
Then after reading this thread, I thought of how badly things could turn out, considering voice-chat... or even telephone.
The only two things I can think of that would nip this in the bud would be the ring games, as mentioned before, or a randomized table selection.
I guess, in the meantime, the only real best advice for other players is learn from experience and try to play only with familiar players.
I personally don't like tournaments, but that's just my preference. Had they gotten tournaments right, I'd be suggesting they introduce ring games at some point rather than considering the whole enterprise a lost opportunity.
I want feedback, but I don't feel like pretending this conversation hasn't happened before, and at a much more auspicious time. Most of the hardcore poker players I used to know are gone, or at least so seldom online that we never cross paths. The game reviews are jokey one-liners. The players that are left are demoralized. The purpose of this thread, initially was to explain to people *why* DL is so committed to fast, low quality games (which is redundant). They have never explained it, despite repeated requests to do so.
At this point everything has degenerated: the players that used to populate the "Your game has potential, but what's up with the blinds?" threads are gone. The poker room is becoming a babble of racial slurs and "u suk" in the local chat, and the games are devolving into what the free poker areas of commercial poker sites invariably are, and what 4 Kings games used to not be, that is, people playing with fake money who are conscious at all times that it's fake money and don't take it seriously. They just want to see the next card.
We've been here before, with many more people making the same request. It was effectively denied. No reason has ever been given. And everytime I attempt to come up with a constructive suggestion, I return to this very point. If we weren't listened to before, what makes me think we'll be listened to now?
Have only tried VIP poker once since I got to VIP level--maybe I'll try there to see if the experience is better (suspect I'll get crushed since there are no fish at those games).
I think ONE very serious problem other than the collusion and cut throat in VIP poker is the fact that you are extremely stingy with the RPs and weekly 1000RPs on games that give very few RPs (WAR, SLOTS, BIG6, etc) are ridiculous and not helping people build up their RPs to advance, someone like myself for instance isn't going to sit at a WAR table or BIG6 and play for HOURS hoping I get 100 RPs, because I'm not playing to lose every chip on one or 2 games I don't like playing and that have next to no chance of walking away having won chips let alone RPs.
So, either you want VIPs taking advantage of the room or you don't and then what's the point in playing IF you can't advance on a regular basis because you make it impossible to?
Well.. that's something that I've wondered about.
I'm a fairly good fish fryer - possibly TOO good, since I rely on singling out players with obvious leaks and don't take opportunities to really stretch my game. But the point is that I won't play a cash game (I'm talking about real money now) unless I can see where my advantage is and where the money is going to come from. And I honestly can't tell you whether the VIP players are better than the Poker Room players. What is normally considered bad play is turned on its head.
I've won a lot of games in Poker Room simply because my opponent folded a bad hand at a stage in the game where to fold is to surrender half of your stack. The way people play in the main room more closely resembles what reasonable play looks like, but it loses when the pots are so bloated. But does folding a 4-2o mean you're a bad player? I don't know, but it means you're more likely to lose.
That doesn't happen as often in the VIP room, where the most common mistake is a failure to bet good hands. But due to the structure of the game, it's an error in theory only, because the blinds will bet the hand for you.
I remember recently a player became VIP, and said during a game "I used to bluff all the time in the poker room, but that doesn't work against you guys." To say someone can't be bluffed is an insult among poker players; its a not-so-veiled way of saying that they're too stupid to realize when they're behind. (I've also seen players bluff someone, show it, and then say in total sincerity "I only tried that because I know how good you are.")
Now, I have no idea whether it was intended as an insult, a compliment, or neither, or how many people at the table also saw the ambiguity in the remark. I don't know, because the only guide I have of a player's sophistication is what they say outside the game. There's a player who I run into in the VIP room every once in a while who was indistinguishable from most of the successful players there, but during post-mortems I realized that he literally cannot read boards - after a player wins a hand, this player will sadly tell us that if only he had stayed in, he would have had [a hand that would have lost, or isn't possible]. And he does fine.
I have a much easier time winning in the Poker Room. The players are more aggressive (generally good, but here it pot commits you), and tighter (generally good, but here you can't afford to fold when the pot odds dictate that you hang on unless you're drawing dead).
tl;dr In the VIP room, there are no experts and there are no fish.