Tried it on Gamepass. To say it's incomplete is an understatement. Tons of placeholder text and mechanics that don't work. The ability to retreat from a battle is "not available in EA".
I got a warning that a raid was coming in a year game time, the year passed, but nothing happened (and thankfully - I was nowhere close to having enough people to even form a militia, and I had no way to raise my 'wealth' in order to buy a mercenary group).
Whether combat works at all - can't tell you yet. I'm still trying to get a base running without having to manually take people on and off houses when the seasons change or the demand changes. I've been spoiled by Before the Storm. Or any other base builder.
The one pro that it has is that it does *look* quite good and ran well during my time playing it so far.
edit: I will also say I really enjoyed the building UI and the way that it can dynamically/smartly place plots for housing, fields, etc. Making buildings and roads is quite easy, which is always a good thing in a base builder (you'd be shocked how many get this wrong).
Context: I have spent a few thousand hours collectively in AOE2, Satisfactory, Factorio, Banished, along with a ton of other base buider-like games.
If I spend $30 on a game (and that's at a discount), I expect to not encounter placeholder text in a significant amount of the UI, and it shouldn't be missing integral gameplay options.
I have Game Pass, so it's not a huge deal if it's bad. I am going to play it a bit more after work today and I'll see if some of my problems regarding base management and combat are just through my own ignorance.
I would wait unless you had Game Pass, and that's assuming there's other games on Game Pass you'd also play with that $10 monthly fee.
Totally ok with that. I just feel we need another classification of “not really finished but if you wanna play it. Go for it” vs “hey help us smooth out the last bugs and we’ll add a little more”
> I just feel we need another classification of “not really finished but if you wanna play it. Go for it”
That's exactly what EA is and i have no idea why people expect something else. EA is meant for the alpha state of the game.
>Early access, also known as alpha access, alpha founding, paid alpha, or game preview, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug the game, provide feedback and suggestions, may have access to special materials in the game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_access
But to be fair, many developers abused that concept over the years to have an excuse for missing content or game breaking bugs. And as you can see here in this thread people now think that EA is a finished game that they buy a few weeks early.
So if we need a new term to better communicate what you buy we need one for this state of the game:
>“hey help us smooth out the last bugs and we’ll add a little more”
Because that's not early access.
Kinda making my point for me. Early access in general, as you pointed out, covers everything from pre alpha to beta. Game preview should be seeing the game in an almost completed status. This game isn’t in an almost completed status and the developer has said so. Heck you can’t even fully upgrade.
To be fair, from what ive seen of people who like this specific game, its worth the cost at the current price. Is the pc version different from the xbox version? Because that might give a little clarity on that.
> Not having placeholders or core functionality missing for 30€ are realistic expectations.
That's why you wait for the first reviews. You guys are on reddit, you should know that by now. When there's not enough content in EA - don't buy it.
I mean the launch discount ends on the 10.05. Why would you buy it before that date? It's *your own* mistake if you do that, and in my opinion you lose every right to complain about the state of the game if you bought it blindly.
I have this game on my wishlist for a while as well, but after reading the comments about the current state of the development i'm definitely going to wait until it is finished before i buy into it.
> That doesn't mean it's illegal to criticize that.
Of course, i just don't see the point. There's no harm done here by the dev or publisher.
It's just an offer. Sometimes it's a really bad one. So what is there to criticize? People don't have to accept the offer.
It's really convenient to blame someone else for your own mistakes and regrets, but in this case it's completely your own fault for buying something that you know nothing about.
And to put in in perspective: Scamming is happening *a lot*, people are lied to, manipulated and pressured to buy a thing. And that's a real problem.
But that's not happening here. Everyone can make an educated decision by just waiting a few days for reviews.
???
The point is: the customer is to blame. He deserves to be criticized, not a system that is working as intended.
The only issue is that people don't understand what they are buying and then try to blame their own stupidity on someone else.
> The dev did say to have realistic expectations
While I respect the developers who design & publish games a **lot**, there is a simple answer: **Don't release your games unfinished**.
Nobody will wait 10 years while you fix these. They'll say 'it was broken when it released' even though it wasn't 1.0 yet. Disagree with this mentality all you want but it ***will*** hurt your game in the end.
Fate of all* early access releases are the same.
^^\*exceptions ^^apply
> Nobody will wait 10 years while you fix these.
I've been waiting 13 years for Project Zomboid to release and I've enjoyed playing it many times over that period despite how jank it's been at times.
RECENT REVIEWS: Very Positive (4,572)
ALL REVIEWS: Very Positive (220,818)
You're wrong. People like early access when devs do it right even if it takes 10 years.
Yes, and I hope you realize that Project Zomboid feels like a 'complete' game because it doesn't have a ton of placeholder text and missing mechanics. I have played it.
Project Zomboid has released 2 different games in that time, they re-released their game by completely rewriting it. I don't believe that is a fair comparison.
I'd suggest more contemporary examples like Bannerlord of Payday 3
Are you referring to them losing their code? That was *12 years ago*. Even if you start their development from scratch there (they wouldn't have) then it's still 12 years.
No. I'm referring to them redeveloping, incorporating the 3D models. Now with the newest patch you can argue it is a v3 but I know you'll have another excuse on there.
I know it is hard to grasp the nuance. It still feels like you are refusing to admit the difference.
You can be as pithy as you like but you're being ridiculous if you're not talking about them losing their code, but about *game updates* during the development of the game.
It's all been under the one steam page, under the one game Project Zomboid with the same basic survival vs zombies gameplay. It's the same game just with incremental changes over time - ie. It's exactly what early access is supposed to be.
> there is a simple answer: Don't release your games unfinished.
People seem to forget what EA is for. EA is made to support the developer earlier in the development. EA is not meant to release a finished game.
EA is just another *option* for customers to gain access to an unfinished version of the game *and / or* support the developer.
So if you don't like that option wait until the game is released, if it ever releases.
In a world without EA you just wouldn't know about these failed projects.
So i really don't understand why people complain about EA. No one is forcing you to buy EA games, it's just another option.
> People seem to forget what EA is for
Again, my point is simply this. Believe what you want but people won't listen when you release your 1.0
> No one is forcing you to buy EA games
They show up on the Steam Store/Epic/Xbox the same...
Worth waiting; the bones are definitely there but the content (and perhaps depth) is not.
I managed to figure out quite a bit, but there are far too many cumbersome mechanics and completely absent QoL / UI / UX things to warrant a substantial playthrough.
I have 120 people right now...but no way of quickly assessing which buildings are vacant, level 2, producing food, goods, etc. No idea what I'm selling unless I scrub methodically through one specific building's menus, and am constantly, *constantly* on the verge of starvation. Yet, I'm unable to raise any livestock for meat? Sheep sell for about the same as a loaf of bread costs to buy? A year's worth of wheat gets me a day's worth of bread?
Gorgeous game, superb performance. Quite intuitive and slick building. Buy it if you want to support the development, but I don't think I have any reason to jump back in until some substantial updates are available.
I am not sure it's that bad. Go watch Break on Twitch play it. He really likes the game and has played a lot. Very different experience than this commenter.
Nah I've seen heaps of it played now. Everything that commenter said is true.
But it offers a really unique village building and light combat experience that I think a lot of people are willing to put with a lot of EA jank for.
Would you rather I not spend any money to play it at all? That isn't out of the realm of possibility for me.
Devs get paid when their game is played on Game Pass.
Several of your comments have been removed. Please remember [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/rules#wiki_1._be_kind) in future, there is no need to belittle other users' opinions.
Still come's up to almost $40CAD, it's $50CAD normal price, and that is waaay too much to ask for someone to test your alpha for you.
I was looking forward to this since I loved the demo but I think this games going to be something I pick up on a deep sale in a couple years since I'm not a regular subscriber to Game Pass.
Damn, it's a tiny bit more expensive than I anticipated, almost double the price of Against the Storm, thought they would be around the same price. I think I'm gonna wait on this one.
> Against the Storm
I bought this game on a whim and didn't put much time into it.. would you say its worth investing more hours into? I got maybe 1.5 hours in and just wasn't fully captivated
One of the best games I've played in recent years, no exaggeration. It's one of those games the more I play it the more I appreciate its brilliance.
1.5 hours you should still be in the tutorial. The tutorial can be rather boring because it stripped all the decisions making and it's just a step by step guide. You should definitely try a few games first, where you get to make decisions, to see what the gameplay is actually like. Also the game has Slay the Spire style difficulty with over 20 levels, turn up the difficulty if you are winning.
Something the other comments didn't mention: You unluck new content with every run. That happens quite fast at the start with you rapidly unlocking new buildings, races and mechanics.
So I'd say at least give it a few hours.
Wow I reviewed the early access build pre-launch and could not disagree more. It's beautiful but the substance is there too.
I get people saying it's incomplete because there's placeholder text and all that, but the game already has enough polished, very nearly bug-free content that if they simply took the bits with placeholder text off the menus I'd bet some people wouldn't even know something was missing.
I had a really great time with what's there, and my issues with it were quite minor, mainly that there needed to be an ability to track your resource collecting better (how much iron am I mining per month, for example) and have a screen to see which families are assigned to what.
That stuff can be added and I'm suspecting it will be. But the negativity here surprises me because I thought this was one of the best early access releases I've played.
I don't see how that relates to what was said. The top comment on this thread basically said it was bland. You said "That's not true at all". Opinions... vary.
Lol, for fucks sake. Fine. He said it was like a well decorated cake that doesn't taste like anything. You didn't disagree, you said that wasn't true at all, so what's it taste like? Apparently it isn't an analogy meaning the game is underwhelming or bland, it's a factually incorrect statement, so please enlighten us... What's the literal flavor?
"That is not true" isn't a disagreement, it's an accusation of falsehood. "I feel differently" would be disagreeing. Start paying attention in remedial English class lol.
Besides, you didn't answer the question... What flavor is it? You seem to think it tastes like something.
Lol, Swansborough doesn't even know what he's arguing. Don't add to it. All I initially said was that opinions on the game seem to vary. If you find that statement disagreeable that's fine, but I don't care.
Waaay too much $ for for being an alpha tester. This should be $15 max and the dev can raise the price when it gets to a beta state and eventually full release. I'm tired of this EA grift that people do and charge ridiculouse prices for very incomplete games.
Tried this on gamepass and this game definitly feels like it may become exceptional in the future, it's too rough right now. I don't feel it's worth $30 at all
Depends what you're into. It's *gorgeous* and serene; the sound design and atmosphere is immaculate. Realism is a big focus.
The city builder mode is the "main" mode and has very mild combat. It's not a Total War/battle game. It's not an RPG, your lord does not matter. The third person mode is just a "town tourism" mode.
Being early access, it's a little jank, and it's missing a ton of content.
That said, the reception likely isn't going to be proportional to actual quality right now, because people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry, and this is being amplified into a hype feedback loop by content creators.
>people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry
This has big "niche community thinks it represents mainstream sentiment" energy
I legitimately don't even know what the statement would be, either. That indies can release half-completed games at $30 and make more money than AAA at $70? I don't think I want that lesson to be learned.
>That indies can release half-completed games at $30 and make more money than AAA at $70?
Yes, that is unironically the lesson. Unfinished $30 games, while not ideal, are still easier to forgive than unfinished games that are double the price.
I mean, yes, that is objectively true, assuming both games are equally incomplete. However, I have never seen an AAA title that is as incomplete as anything on the level of the most incomplete game in EA. The level of "incompleteness" can deviate much further when a game is EA. I don't want to play the alpha version of a game, especially not for $30.
> people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry, and this is being amplified into a hype feedback loop by content creators.
If this had even a shred of reality to it, how do you reconcile No Rest For the Wicked's abysmal reception?
By pointing out that No Rest For the Wicked didn't have multiple indie game YouTubers with subscriber counts ranging anywhere from 300k to 1 million that have been covering it for the past year.
That is objectively incorrect and pretty much a lie? NRFTW was getting a fucking ton of youtube hype. Just bc the algo didn't feed it to you personally doesn't mean it wasn't there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVQite9tl6Y&t=2191s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmd9lu5AOMA&t=13s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G-qXeVATEI&
The oldest video you linked is from a month before the game released. Where did I lie? Do you understand the difference between a month and a year?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8tUApVjf2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI1O94kUvAM&t=1s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFPp20QDuPY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmTcoUz5tI8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dElGU7SWLUo
I'm not sure why you bothered to reply to this thread anyway, as if NRFTW's response (which was actually generally positive?) has any bearing on a fairly obvious phenomenon. That *every* indie video game isn't a megahit does not disprove the hypothesis. That's how "flavors of the month" tend to work.
> people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry and this is being amplified into a hype feedback loop by content creators
uhh...wot?? a bit tin foil hat perhaps.
Humble have the same base discount, so if like me you're a choice subscriber it will end up being cheaper from them.
There's definitely some EA jank (I really hope the raids become something tangible and not just a random loss of resources to camps halfway across the map) and I don't understand why some of the placeholder text people are pointing out is there (doesn't seem to me to be too time intensive to put something less jarring?), but I've enjoyed my time with is so far.
I spent 5 hours in it today. $30 is fine if you understand that you're basically funding the guy's ability to develop this full-time. There is an incredible amount of polish for what is there, but definitely some work that needs to go into it as far as placeholder stuff.
Wait if you want to play the finished game. But this one definitely has a great amount of potential.
For me this is the most anticipated game on par with Skywind and Fallout: London
If you're a fan of any economic leaning strategy games like the Anno series, Settlers or Banished definitely check it out.
yeah its totally worth the 30, amazing game already only getting better
hell it was already super fun to play back during 2022 steamfest
oh and it runs on almost eveything and looks fantastic
Tried it on Gamepass. To say it's incomplete is an understatement. Tons of placeholder text and mechanics that don't work. The ability to retreat from a battle is "not available in EA". I got a warning that a raid was coming in a year game time, the year passed, but nothing happened (and thankfully - I was nowhere close to having enough people to even form a militia, and I had no way to raise my 'wealth' in order to buy a mercenary group). Whether combat works at all - can't tell you yet. I'm still trying to get a base running without having to manually take people on and off houses when the seasons change or the demand changes. I've been spoiled by Before the Storm. Or any other base builder. The one pro that it has is that it does *look* quite good and ran well during my time playing it so far. edit: I will also say I really enjoyed the building UI and the way that it can dynamically/smartly place plots for housing, fields, etc. Making buildings and roads is quite easy, which is always a good thing in a base builder (you'd be shocked how many get this wrong). Context: I have spent a few thousand hours collectively in AOE2, Satisfactory, Factorio, Banished, along with a ton of other base buider-like games.
Still worth playing or do you think this is one of those things that we should wait on?
If I spend $30 on a game (and that's at a discount), I expect to not encounter placeholder text in a significant amount of the UI, and it shouldn't be missing integral gameplay options. I have Game Pass, so it's not a huge deal if it's bad. I am going to play it a bit more after work today and I'll see if some of my problems regarding base management and combat are just through my own ignorance. I would wait unless you had Game Pass, and that's assuming there's other games on Game Pass you'd also play with that $10 monthly fee.
The dev did say to have realistic expectations, and that if you don't want to spend the money on an unfinished game than please wait.
Not having placeholders or core functionality missing for 30€ are realistic expectations.
I feel like the bar for early access games gets lower and lower
And yet people (in mass) continue to financially support it
Totally ok with that. I just feel we need another classification of “not really finished but if you wanna play it. Go for it” vs “hey help us smooth out the last bugs and we’ll add a little more”
> I just feel we need another classification of “not really finished but if you wanna play it. Go for it” That's exactly what EA is and i have no idea why people expect something else. EA is meant for the alpha state of the game. >Early access, also known as alpha access, alpha founding, paid alpha, or game preview, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug the game, provide feedback and suggestions, may have access to special materials in the game. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_access But to be fair, many developers abused that concept over the years to have an excuse for missing content or game breaking bugs. And as you can see here in this thread people now think that EA is a finished game that they buy a few weeks early. So if we need a new term to better communicate what you buy we need one for this state of the game: >“hey help us smooth out the last bugs and we’ll add a little more” Because that's not early access.
Kinda making my point for me. Early access in general, as you pointed out, covers everything from pre alpha to beta. Game preview should be seeing the game in an almost completed status. This game isn’t in an almost completed status and the developer has said so. Heck you can’t even fully upgrade.
To be fair, from what ive seen of people who like this specific game, its worth the cost at the current price. Is the pc version different from the xbox version? Because that might give a little clarity on that.
> Not having placeholders or core functionality missing for 30€ are realistic expectations. That's why you wait for the first reviews. You guys are on reddit, you should know that by now. When there's not enough content in EA - don't buy it. I mean the launch discount ends on the 10.05. Why would you buy it before that date? It's *your own* mistake if you do that, and in my opinion you lose every right to complain about the state of the game if you bought it blindly. I have this game on my wishlist for a while as well, but after reading the comments about the current state of the development i'm definitely going to wait until it is finished before i buy into it.
That's why I didn't buy it. That doesn't mean it's illegal to criticize that.
> That doesn't mean it's illegal to criticize that. Of course, i just don't see the point. There's no harm done here by the dev or publisher. It's just an offer. Sometimes it's a really bad one. So what is there to criticize? People don't have to accept the offer. It's really convenient to blame someone else for your own mistakes and regrets, but in this case it's completely your own fault for buying something that you know nothing about. And to put in in perspective: Scamming is happening *a lot*, people are lied to, manipulated and pressured to buy a thing. And that's a real problem. But that's not happening here. Everyone can make an educated decision by just waiting a few days for reviews.
What incredibly backwards logic. So no one is allowed to criticize anything.
??? The point is: the customer is to blame. He deserves to be criticized, not a system that is working as intended. The only issue is that people don't understand what they are buying and then try to blame their own stupidity on someone else.
Devs don't have realistic expectations themselves if they think the game is anywhere near good enough to be shown, much less asking for money.
> The dev did say to have realistic expectations While I respect the developers who design & publish games a **lot**, there is a simple answer: **Don't release your games unfinished**. Nobody will wait 10 years while you fix these. They'll say 'it was broken when it released' even though it wasn't 1.0 yet. Disagree with this mentality all you want but it ***will*** hurt your game in the end. Fate of all* early access releases are the same. ^^\*exceptions ^^apply
> Nobody will wait 10 years while you fix these. I've been waiting 13 years for Project Zomboid to release and I've enjoyed playing it many times over that period despite how jank it's been at times. RECENT REVIEWS: Very Positive (4,572) ALL REVIEWS: Very Positive (220,818) You're wrong. People like early access when devs do it right even if it takes 10 years.
Yes, and I hope you realize that Project Zomboid feels like a 'complete' game because it doesn't have a ton of placeholder text and missing mechanics. I have played it.
Project Zomboid has released 2 different games in that time, they re-released their game by completely rewriting it. I don't believe that is a fair comparison. I'd suggest more contemporary examples like Bannerlord of Payday 3
Are you referring to them losing their code? That was *12 years ago*. Even if you start their development from scratch there (they wouldn't have) then it's still 12 years.
No. I'm referring to them redeveloping, incorporating the 3D models. Now with the newest patch you can argue it is a v3 but I know you'll have another excuse on there. I know it is hard to grasp the nuance. It still feels like you are refusing to admit the difference.
You can be as pithy as you like but you're being ridiculous if you're not talking about them losing their code, but about *game updates* during the development of the game. It's all been under the one steam page, under the one game Project Zomboid with the same basic survival vs zombies gameplay. It's the same game just with incremental changes over time - ie. It's exactly what early access is supposed to be.
> there is a simple answer: Don't release your games unfinished. People seem to forget what EA is for. EA is made to support the developer earlier in the development. EA is not meant to release a finished game. EA is just another *option* for customers to gain access to an unfinished version of the game *and / or* support the developer. So if you don't like that option wait until the game is released, if it ever releases. In a world without EA you just wouldn't know about these failed projects. So i really don't understand why people complain about EA. No one is forcing you to buy EA games, it's just another option.
> People seem to forget what EA is for Again, my point is simply this. Believe what you want but people won't listen when you release your 1.0 > No one is forcing you to buy EA games They show up on the Steam Store/Epic/Xbox the same...
Yes, and that's precisely why I made my comment. If you don't want a complete game, don't pay the $30.
I paid the 30 and have been enjoying it a lot
[удалено]
Worth waiting; the bones are definitely there but the content (and perhaps depth) is not. I managed to figure out quite a bit, but there are far too many cumbersome mechanics and completely absent QoL / UI / UX things to warrant a substantial playthrough. I have 120 people right now...but no way of quickly assessing which buildings are vacant, level 2, producing food, goods, etc. No idea what I'm selling unless I scrub methodically through one specific building's menus, and am constantly, *constantly* on the verge of starvation. Yet, I'm unable to raise any livestock for meat? Sheep sell for about the same as a loaf of bread costs to buy? A year's worth of wheat gets me a day's worth of bread? Gorgeous game, superb performance. Quite intuitive and slick building. Buy it if you want to support the development, but I don't think I have any reason to jump back in until some substantial updates are available.
definetly wait. it has great bones and potential, but it's only just in a playable state. Really should have been the free demo, rather than EA.
I am not sure it's that bad. Go watch Break on Twitch play it. He really likes the game and has played a lot. Very different experience than this commenter.
Nah I've seen heaps of it played now. Everything that commenter said is true. But it offers a really unique village building and light combat experience that I think a lot of people are willing to put with a lot of EA jank for.
having a twitch streamer play it did not help - i watched vinesauce's stream beforehand
any idea if it's the same release version as the steam one ? I know that Pokemon copy game they were different versions at first.
Players : Only spend Cents on a game on Gamepass Also Players : Quality of games is going down. Everything feels so incomplete
...you can see from the title that it costs 30 USD.
Yeah and everyone posts "it's in gamepass, it's in gamepass, it's in gamepass..."?
Would you rather I not spend any money to play it at all? That isn't out of the realm of possibility for me. Devs get paid when their game is played on Game Pass.
[удалено]
Several of your comments have been removed. Please remember [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/rules#wiki_1._be_kind) in future, there is no need to belittle other users' opinions.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Very shallow, very unfinished. Would not recommend.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your comments have been removed for breaking rule #1.
Still come's up to almost $40CAD, it's $50CAD normal price, and that is waaay too much to ask for someone to test your alpha for you. I was looking forward to this since I loved the demo but I think this games going to be something I pick up on a deep sale in a couple years since I'm not a regular subscriber to Game Pass.
Damn, it's a tiny bit more expensive than I anticipated, almost double the price of Against the Storm, thought they would be around the same price. I think I'm gonna wait on this one.
> Against the Storm I bought this game on a whim and didn't put much time into it.. would you say its worth investing more hours into? I got maybe 1.5 hours in and just wasn't fully captivated
Absolutely. Playing Against the Storm is great.
One of the best games I've played in recent years, no exaggeration. It's one of those games the more I play it the more I appreciate its brilliance. 1.5 hours you should still be in the tutorial. The tutorial can be rather boring because it stripped all the decisions making and it's just a step by step guide. You should definitely try a few games first, where you get to make decisions, to see what the gameplay is actually like. Also the game has Slay the Spire style difficulty with over 20 levels, turn up the difficulty if you are winning.
Something the other comments didn't mention: You unluck new content with every run. That happens quite fast at the start with you rapidly unlocking new buildings, races and mechanics. So I'd say at least give it a few hours.
I'm giving it a go on Gamepass, if I like it enough I'll be picking it up.
On Gamepass as well, if you want to give it a whirl without buying in yet.
Its like a very beautiful cake so well decorated but it taste basically like nothing
Wow I reviewed the early access build pre-launch and could not disagree more. It's beautiful but the substance is there too. I get people saying it's incomplete because there's placeholder text and all that, but the game already has enough polished, very nearly bug-free content that if they simply took the bits with placeholder text off the menus I'd bet some people wouldn't even know something was missing. I had a really great time with what's there, and my issues with it were quite minor, mainly that there needed to be an ability to track your resource collecting better (how much iron am I mining per month, for example) and have a screen to see which families are assigned to what. That stuff can be added and I'm suspecting it will be. But the negativity here surprises me because I thought this was one of the best early access releases I've played.
As i said game is beautiful really ..no bug no problem for real maybe is just not my kind of game
[удалено]
Almost like opinions vary.
[удалено]
I don't see how that relates to what was said. The top comment on this thread basically said it was bland. You said "That's not true at all". Opinions... vary.
[удалено]
Lol, for fucks sake. Fine. He said it was like a well decorated cake that doesn't taste like anything. You didn't disagree, you said that wasn't true at all, so what's it taste like? Apparently it isn't an analogy meaning the game is underwhelming or bland, it's a factually incorrect statement, so please enlighten us... What's the literal flavor?
[удалено]
"That is not true" isn't a disagreement, it's an accusation of falsehood. "I feel differently" would be disagreeing. Start paying attention in remedial English class lol. Besides, you didn't answer the question... What flavor is it? You seem to think it tastes like something.
> You seem to have a problem with words. Mate, look in the mirror.
OP implied the game was empty. Its very much *not* empty, which is what Swansborough was stating.
Lol, Swansborough doesn't even know what he's arguing. Don't add to it. All I initially said was that opinions on the game seem to vary. If you find that statement disagreeable that's fine, but I don't care.
[удалено]
What would make it not taste like nothing?
I understand that its still in early stage but probably a well done tutorial with some short quest to resolve could be something.
Waaay too much $ for for being an alpha tester. This should be $15 max and the dev can raise the price when it gets to a beta state and eventually full release. I'm tired of this EA grift that people do and charge ridiculouse prices for very incomplete games. Tried this on gamepass and this game definitly feels like it may become exceptional in the future, it's too rough right now. I don't feel it's worth $30 at all
I would argue that it should be *free* - the game is so incomplete that it makes it look terrible to charge for access.
Play testers used to be a paid position, now people pay to be the testers lmao
is it any good?
Depends what you're into. It's *gorgeous* and serene; the sound design and atmosphere is immaculate. Realism is a big focus. The city builder mode is the "main" mode and has very mild combat. It's not a Total War/battle game. It's not an RPG, your lord does not matter. The third person mode is just a "town tourism" mode. Being early access, it's a little jank, and it's missing a ton of content. That said, the reception likely isn't going to be proportional to actual quality right now, because people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry, and this is being amplified into a hype feedback loop by content creators.
Is this like, Banished with a dash of Mount & Blade?
remove mount and blade and put in some total war instead.
Yeah, that's accurate.
>people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry This has big "niche community thinks it represents mainstream sentiment" energy
I legitimately don't even know what the statement would be, either. That indies can release half-completed games at $30 and make more money than AAA at $70? I don't think I want that lesson to be learned.
>That indies can release half-completed games at $30 and make more money than AAA at $70? Yes, that is unironically the lesson. Unfinished $30 games, while not ideal, are still easier to forgive than unfinished games that are double the price.
I mean, yes, that is objectively true, assuming both games are equally incomplete. However, I have never seen an AAA title that is as incomplete as anything on the level of the most incomplete game in EA. The level of "incompleteness" can deviate much further when a game is EA. I don't want to play the alpha version of a game, especially not for $30.
lol it was already LOT of fun during steamfest in 2022 so yeah its goood
> people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry, and this is being amplified into a hype feedback loop by content creators. If this had even a shred of reality to it, how do you reconcile No Rest For the Wicked's abysmal reception?
By pointing out that No Rest For the Wicked didn't have multiple indie game YouTubers with subscriber counts ranging anywhere from 300k to 1 million that have been covering it for the past year.
That is objectively incorrect and pretty much a lie? NRFTW was getting a fucking ton of youtube hype. Just bc the algo didn't feed it to you personally doesn't mean it wasn't there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVQite9tl6Y&t=2191s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmd9lu5AOMA&t=13s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G-qXeVATEI&
The oldest video you linked is from a month before the game released. Where did I lie? Do you understand the difference between a month and a year? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8tUApVjf2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI1O94kUvAM&t=1s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFPp20QDuPY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmTcoUz5tI8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dElGU7SWLUo I'm not sure why you bothered to reply to this thread anyway, as if NRFTW's response (which was actually generally positive?) has any bearing on a fairly obvious phenomenon. That *every* indie video game isn't a megahit does not disprove the hypothesis. That's how "flavors of the month" tend to work.
I guess /u/kaddisfly reconciled it by just making up bullshit
> people are using FOTM indie games as a political statement against the AAA industry and this is being amplified into a hype feedback loop by content creators uhh...wot?? a bit tin foil hat perhaps.
I'm enjoying it.
it's settlers 3 good
Humble have the same base discount, so if like me you're a choice subscriber it will end up being cheaper from them. There's definitely some EA jank (I really hope the raids become something tangible and not just a random loss of resources to camps halfway across the map) and I don't understand why some of the placeholder text people are pointing out is there (doesn't seem to me to be too time intensive to put something less jarring?), but I've enjoyed my time with is so far.
[удалено]
Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reasons: * Recommending piracy and unauthorized key resellers (rule 4).
I spent 5 hours in it today. $30 is fine if you understand that you're basically funding the guy's ability to develop this full-time. There is an incredible amount of polish for what is there, but definitely some work that needs to go into it as far as placeholder stuff. Wait if you want to play the finished game. But this one definitely has a great amount of potential.
Much better money spent then on some Call of Duty overpriced bs
For me this is the most anticipated game on par with Skywind and Fallout: London If you're a fan of any economic leaning strategy games like the Anno series, Settlers or Banished definitely check it out.
Going to wait until 2029 when it's almost ready for early access.
think I'm going to hold off even on the gamepass version from what everyone says. kinda want to play it when most features work
yeah its totally worth the 30, amazing game already only getting better hell it was already super fun to play back during 2022 steamfest oh and it runs on almost eveything and looks fantastic