|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 26, 2014 21:18:27 GMT
To me, Reprisal just feels like you're stamping out villagers and sending them to either reproduce or fight the enemy.
I don't see anything godly about that. Sure you're raising and lowering land... But give me a shovel and I can raise/lower land aswell - nothing godly about that.
And while B&W had its flaws. The ability to directly interact with the world - and the variety of tools at your disposal - they are what made me feel like a god.
"My people" would build stuff for me, would dance around rocks and make idol stones for me - while I could use rocks, fireballs or even burning idol stones to wreak havoc on my enemies. Meanwhile I could "teach" my creature to do things for me, and to assist me in my endeavours.
I guess you could say I prefer to be a bit more of a hands-on god in that approach. I never really found myself doing massive amounts of resource manipulation in B&W aside from the initial setting up period to rush along some construction.
Meanwhile looking at Reprisal. All you do the entire game is focused around a single element. Make your followers expand.
And from what I understand the original populous was much the same (I can't say off of memory cause I haven't played that game in AGES).
Now if all those dudes are doing is self-replicating and then once they reach critical mass suicide charging onto the enemy? Meh, I'll pass.
I truely do not care about my followers if all they do is self-replicate and attack. (Much like I do not care about my followers in Godus right now.)
They become a means to an end - a cog in the machine.
To me, the idea of having to balance your society. Providing your followers with enough food to grow, enough materials to build and balancing their needs and desires. Then have that serve as a means to obtain greater godly powers. Not get powers from a rock you found buried - get it from your people!
You seem to focus heavily on the collection of resources itself. That wouldn't be what you were doing. You would be focusing on the world, manipulating it so that your followers could interact with it. Much like you manipulate the world in Populous and Reprisal - only with a much wider purpose and usage.
Right now in Godus you're sculpting - but what are you sculpting for? The only reason to sculpt is to create flattened land.
And you create flattened land because thats the most effective way to play.
Now what if instead of "just" flattened land, you had multiple directions you could sculpt into?
(And the wayworld irrigation system does start off in that direction with the water providing fertile soil.)
Then suddenly, rather than just flattening land, your sculpting would get a much wider range of options.
You'd sculpt to supply your followers with land to build on, but also land to farm and a variety of other purposes later on.
And thats the thing, the key focus in Godus right now is sculpting - because sculpting is pretty much the only thing we can consistently do.
Thats also something to keep in mind - the game isn't finished yet. A resource-based progression for our followers would be the basis of future expansion.
Expansion that could go in many different directions - but expansion that is directly driven by our choices.
Not by what rocks we encountered in the lands. Once you have a solid base to build up from. You get to a point where both you as a god, aswell as your followers, come into a position where you CAN face off against other tribes/civilizations and deities.
You seem to be skipping a few steps ahead. Subjugate other civilizations? How? We can barely dig a hole.
I wouldn't say that at the "end-point" of the current game, we're particularly powerful gods.
Yea sure we got meteor, but I suspect that that particular toy will be moved further down the timeline later on in development.
Much like dig has been moved into Wayworld.
Subjugate other deities? What are we gonna make them die of laughter as we sculpt dinosaurs in the land?
I hope you see where I'm going with this? Right now, we're far from powerful gods.
We just haven't gotten to that point yet.
And our followers are even more useless, they can't even build their own huts without our assistance.
To build a grand structure, you need a solid foundation. And as it stands right now, Godus doesn't have a solid foundation.
Godus has the disposition to become more than just a 'simple puzzle game' such as Reprisal or From Dust.
It just needs time to get there...
And its all going to depend on how this entire box of tricks gets painted from the outside.
Aswell as how the pieces are going to function when put into collective use.
You say timeline progression would be linear aswell? That entirely depends on how its put together and what choices we are offered.
But I'm damned sure that it would feel more gratifying than finding chests and rocks buried in the land, or having my followers patch up some crumbly ruins they happened to have dug out of the hillside.
The way I see it, the gradual growth makes sense. Because of the intent that Peter has of making the game last.
I get the idea that you want the game to progress faster, because you're comparing it to a much faster paced game that is based off of short missions rather than a lengthy "campaign".
And as such, both you and me, but also Peter and the community, are standing at very differing perspectives of what we would want from Godus and where we would like to see Godus go.
The way I see it, if we reach a point further on in development. At a later timeline.
For example something similar to an exploration age or imperialistic age. The era in which "our followers" want to make a name for themselves in the world.
Thats the time you would go out on voyages of conquest and you would have your fast-paced combat missions.
Where you would have your followers, after training and equipping them with weapons face off against other tribes and obstacles.
Thats when you test your mettle against other, by pitting your divine might against eachother to prove who is the dominant deity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Sept 26, 2014 22:20:27 GMT
Well the reason I encourage a faster pace, I imagine, is because we're so stuck in an ugly rut in terms of balance right now. I'm not interested in the idea of gradual progression if it comes in the form of stilted, poorly balanced, sequential design. The reason on top of all that, is that if the worlds are only going to be ditched, I'd rather it be streamlined than feel like a convoluted tutorial. I'm not interested in a civilization that resets each world, it's the reason you rarely see people in RTS games go after anything close to an appealing looking base. It's expendable, you know?
It's the difference between 4x and RTS. In 4x games, you don't care about the look either, but you're more careful with what improvements you make to your surroundings, because those are more integrated into your base than in a RTS. Godus, and most god games, are neither 4x nor RTS, so trying to encourage the player to tend to their land to expand their civilization really doesn't make a lot of sense to me, especially if you're going to make it a drawn out process.
What you describe to me sounds a lot less like Reprisal, Populous, and Black & White and more like Reus. You don't gather their resources for them, you merely make the lands needed for certain nodes then you seed them in whichever way is beneficial to the developing civilization. That's fun, to a degree, but it's still not what I'd want to see in another god game even if it is done in 3D. Or if it were done, you'd really have to automate more in the game, unlock powers faster, and create some degree of conflict, whether it's providing for your civilization or managing their greed for the other civilizations' resources.
Nevertheless you're relatively right, what would we fight with at this point? But you seem to forget that much of the progression is arbitrary to begin with; Voyages prove that they're willing to toss the abilities our way that are necessary to enact our will in the way the game mode/situation demands. Don't have a shrine of speed yet? Don't worry about it. Flaming forest and don't have Rain of Purity? Don't worry about it.
You make a game last not through arbitrarily lengthening the developmental progression of your civilization, as far as I'm concerned. You do it by making a damn good game, and sure, the game's in development, but I don't think any of us would argue that that justifies its existing state. Sure, foundations and the like, but the conceptual foundations are relatively obvious.
A god progressively grows in power alongside a civilization's development through the ages.
The god encounters other civilizations along the way that must be countered through existing abilities.
Rinse, repeat the second throughout the lands while continuing the first throughout.
If you ask me, the basic foundations are already there for the game, and the reason it's uninteresting is because there's a bad mixture of broken and missing challenge and depth. You seem to be interested in seeing the depth improved so the challenge will be more interesting, but I think you need challenge sprinkled throughout that isn't just learning the ropes, otherwise any good hooks you have will be dulled by not exposing their point soon enough. That's why I'm jumping ahead, I want to get hooked, which means getting hooked on every step of the way, but because the game seems so intent on this gradual progression it seems afraid to reveal its points in any form and it really gets on my nerves.*
Godus sells you on the idea of being a powerful god, then makes you an orbital bulldozer for hours before you even come close to anything resembling godly power.
Civilization 5 sells you on the idea of developing a civilization, and gets you rolling along your way right from the start.
Endless Space sells you on the idea of developing a galactic/multigalactic civilization, and gets you rolling right along.
Even games that by their design are drawn out get you to their points faster than Godus. I don't need all or even many of the diplomatic, covert, or technological options Civ or Endless Space provides eventually to enjoy it along the way, though those do make it more entertaining, I just need a few of them at any given time to mess around with.
TL;DR: I think the game needs depth too, but I think the game needs to be less restrained in providing interesting challenges along the way that are not intertwined with learning how to accommodate your civilization in different environments. I think it needs this to make the gradual progression even somewhat tolerable, because otherwise it's like playing a 4x game where they hold off on most of the buildings/environment improvements till like turn 300.
*I hope this is more a result of being in development than actual design intent, because if it's design intent, it's absolutely dreadful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 26, 2014 22:43:25 GMT
I see what you're getting at - I just don't think that progressing the times, jumping the clock if you will.
Is the solution to the problem you're describing.
At the current pace, if they would do as you describe, we'd be in space a year from now and every intermediate step will consist of bandaids and quick fixes.
Relying on minigames for the solid content while having your homeworld be a half-assed grindpit.
I think its possible to provide the player with challenges to overcome without relying on a rain of fireballs as your main godly arsenal.
I also think that if the current content was better developed. And not as stretched out with timers and roadblocks.
If Peter/22cans would take the player serious rather than treating them like 5-year-olds that have never seen or used a computer before.
That we would blaze through the early "tutorial" style worlds quickly.
And thats the thing, we're still getting a LOT of the mechanics build in step by step.
Many of them aren't implemented in their "final place" - just look at the various mechanics that have been tested, only to be removed and placed back at later points.
I completely agree that the current pacing of the game is slow. But its made artificially slow.
I'm trying to look at Godus as how you look at a house you want to buy.
You ignore the furniture and you look at the potential of the rooms themselves.
And if you remove the timers from Godus, there's darn little left to do.
You'd finish off homeworld in a day, maybe two.
Now I don't know if the persistant world that Peter originally pitched will come to be at a later date.
Or whether we'll be left with a chain of worlds we can revisit.
But I do know that at the current pace, I'm not going to be revisiting the older worlds.
There just isn't any reason to do so.
And if Godus is going to be a clainlink of minigames in which you play against pointless opponents. Then I'm not gonna bother.
I just don't give a damn about rankwhoring - and thats what it'd become. Trying to get the highest score to brag to your facebook friends.
Right now, our followers are pointless. They may aswell not be there for all they bring to the game.
May aswell just act like they're not there for all the good they do. Our belief pools up because we collect it.
Anything that happens, happens because *we* do it. Right now, we're about as godly as Link is in The Legend of Zelda.
With belief being our rupees collected through smashing pots and grass and the various unlocks being our power bracers, boomerang, bow, sword and shield.
Instead, how I see the game get somewhere. Is build the mechanics and get them to work.
Then overhaul the content and streamline it. Without mechanics, you can streamline all you want - but it'll be a darned empty shell you're gonna blaze through.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 26, 2014 22:51:34 GMT
And thats why I said, we're both standing at different perspectives.
I'd say you see the games main problem as being its slow pace. And you want to pick up the pace to make it more interesting.
Speed up the pace and provide new tools as you go along. Provide new challenges as you go along.
I see the main problem as being that there is nothing to do. So I want to provide "more to do" that isn't just pointless chores.
Give some solid mechanics and reasons to do stuff, provide the player with relevant choices.
Then work on obstacles and challenges from there. Sprinkle them throughout the game, after you have settled on some basic concepts of balance and the toolset available to the player.
Now I don't see 22cans working at the pace you're describing here. They're a hell of a lot slower than that.
And while I could see the "end-goal" being more as you describe. I also see that the road to get there will be a long and arduous one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Sept 26, 2014 22:57:34 GMT
Well I'm not insisting on mini-games alone, but something more in the main worlds to spice things up, the only reason I throw around the mini-game model is because that seems like the only way they're willing to/comfortable with approaching it. I think the whole Wayworld move is a really terrible step, not because I dislike some of the mechanical ideas, but because it feels like it's sloppily throwing about the mechanics wherever and whenever, instead of treating us seriously, as you say. Do we really need Homeworld to run us through the basics of sculpting, settlements, and happiness?
Uh...No. Pretty sure if they did a better job of explaining unlocking construction on higher layers, we'd be able to easily learn certain structures/nodes are better on certain layers there. We shouldn't even have these distinct worlds to begin with yet, we should have a world that contains a compressed model of the overall design ideas (even if in rough shapes) that allows us to explore and experiment with the different ideas and provide better feedback, and when needed, it's rapidly revised to introduce new ideas or changes to existing ideas.
From the mobile perspective, the existing approach makes sense, but for us? It's nonsense. Early Access is all about running into the bizarre, rough ideas of a game's design through development, right? So the game should be rolled back to a single world that contains samples of the various mechanics to mess around with, whether finished or not, that way we could provide proper feedback.
It's not about pacing alone for me. It's a mixture of the pacing and the absence of anything to do. The hooks aren't even introduced yet, which are part of what you suggest, and the point, the challenge, is also missing. We're looking from different heights/elevations from the same perspective, more than differing perspectives, you're looking at the lower level/inside stuff, I'm looking at the higher level/what's the inside stuff moving towards. You can't have relevant choice without a point, and you can't have a point without relevant choices, if that makes any sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 26, 2014 23:03:10 GMT
Agreed, from a PC perspective, this split worlds thing is silly.
But I don't see us getting around that for now.
Ideally I'd see them work through the iOS content, then at the end of all of that create a bit of a procedural terrain generator and throw that to the PC players.
Or get a larger stitched together map for PC where your civilization becomes persistant.
But I don't know whether that is even possible with the engine they are using.
The current implementation IS sloppy. Because half the mechanics are bandaids in response to problems.
They create their game untill they reach a problem, they implement a quick fix and they continue on their merry way.
There's no cohesive undertone to tie it all together. There's no overarching goal or red-line that the player follows along.
Its all step by step guidance as they are creating it.
And once they created it they don't look back. Thats what you're seeing, thats what we've all been seeing.
So thats two things we have against us. The development method as used by 22cans. And the limitations of the iOS platform.
Its atleast interesting to see how we both have different methods to reach a solution.
And differing priorities in getting there.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Sept 26, 2014 23:12:19 GMT
Well I'm not insisting on mini-games alone, but something more in the main worlds to spice things up, the only reason I throw around the mini-game model is because that seems like the only way they're willing to/comfortable with approaching it. I think the whole Wayworld move is a really terrible step, not because I dislike some of the mechanical ideas, but because it feels like it's sloppily throwing about the mechanics wherever and whenever, instead of treating us seriously, as you say. Do we really need Homeworld to run us through the basics of sculpting, settlements, and happiness? Uh...No. Pretty sure if they did a better job of explaining unlocking construction on higher layers, we'd be able to easily learn certain structures/nodes are better on certain layers there. We shouldn't even have these distinct worlds to begin with yet, we should have a world that contains a compressed model of the overall design ideas (even if in rough shapes) that allows us to explore and experiment with the different ideas and provide better feedback, and when needed, it's rapidly revised to introduce new ideas or changes to existing ideas. From the mobile perspective, the existing approach makes sense, but for us? It's nonsense. Early Access is all about running into the bizarre, rough ideas of a game's design through development, right? So the game should be rolled back to a single world that contains samples of the various mechanics to mess around with, whether finished or not, that way we could provide proper feedback. It's not about pacing alone for me. It's a mixture of the pacing and the absence of anything to do. The hooks aren't even introduced yet, which are part of what you suggest, and the point, the challenge, is also missing. We're looking from different heights/elevations from the same perspective, more than differing perspectives, you're looking at the lower level/inside stuff, I'm looking at the higher level/what's the inside stuff moving towards. You can't have relevant choice without a point, and you can't have a point without relevant choices, if that makes any sense.
I think the primary purpose of wayworld is rebalancing. From what I've read from mobile and PC players it seems some people have been able to exploit homeworld and have huge stores of belief and gems which undermines 22Cans revenue model. If they reset everyone back to square one in wayworld resource wise then they can rebalance the game without offending mobile players. Plus the arc is a massive time sink that will absorb gems and time keeping the money coming in and the mobile players happy. Its all very cynical.
I completely acknowledge your point about Wayworld getting around technical limitations but I think in their mind they are killing three birds with one stone:
- They get a clean slate for world design which is so much easier than expanding the original homeworld
- They cut people off from their belief engines forcing mobile players to "invest to play" more than they would have had they been able to use homeworld belief in wayworld
- They avoid the resource demands that would have come with having both worlds active at the same time.
The whole situation is just further dumbing down of PC GODUS to fit mobile constraints. Oh and as Danjal says this is a work around for bad planning (really no planning), it lets them continue on their ad-hoc way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 26, 2014 23:16:43 GMT
I think the primary purpose of wayworld is rebalancing. From what I've read from mobile and PC players it seems some people have been able to exploit homeworld and have huge stores of belief and gems which undermines 22Cans revenue model. If they reset everyone back to square one in wayworld resource wise then they can rebalance the game without offending mobile players. Plus the arc is a massive time sink that will absorb gems and time keeping the money coming in and the mobile players happy. Its all very cynical.
I completely acknowledge your point about Wayworld getting around technical limitations but I think in their mind they are killing three birds with one stone:
- They get a clean slate for world design which is so much easier than expanding the original homeworld
- They cut people off from their belief engines forcing mobile players to "invest to play" more than they would have had they been able to use homeworld belief in wayworld
- They avoid the resource demands that would have come with having both worlds active at the same time.
The whole situation is just further dumbing down of PC GODUS to fit mobile constraints. Oh and as Danjal says this is a work around for bad planning (really no planning), it lets them continue on their ad-hoc way.
Pretty much this, I suspect that had they not been tied to the iOS release. They may well have gone for a full clean slate outright. Simply provide us with a "fresh world" entirely and start from there. Right now they have homeworld as their half-assed basis. They can't really go and scrap homeworld now that they have iOS players invested in it. But what they CAN do is implement a "new world" and start over. Implementing new restraints and valves they can tweak to further drive up the gem-exchange. I'm trying to ignore it as much as possible and look exclusively at the PC side of fixing things. But its damned hard with all those freemium toll booths all over the place. |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Sept 26, 2014 23:23:26 GMT
What you both cover is why the only positive I can see coming from Wayworld is a better gameplay loop that batters players' resources (followers/belief/wheat/ore/gems/etc.) for a long enough time to get back to the PC sprint and get around to doing approximately what we've all been saying to some extent or another. Give us the tools to make our worlds a hybrid of Home and Way, if procedural generation proves too problematic, the balance tools to smooth out the pacing to an acceptable degree, and then we can maybe, hopefully, coordinate with the devs more.
I think probably the most honest thing Peter's ever insinuated is that he makes something of a terrible business leader, which is probably what's led to this trainwreck of design smashing against business concerns. I'm still not totally sure whether this also extends to him as a designer or not, since I think he's been terribly caught up in business affairs, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Sept 26, 2014 23:32:41 GMT
It will be interesting to see what the response is from mobile players because for all intents and purposes they are resetting their homeworld. You start in a new place and you don't have access to any of your old resources - that is a reset. The fact that your old world still exists is irrelevant since it can no longer influence your future play.
I don't object to the whole wayworld idea but I do recognise what it is - a big cynical bandaid.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Sept 26, 2014 23:34:56 GMT
The question that isn't being answered is where is hubworld in relation to all this? When was it Peter talked in the video about hubworld pushing the game over 50%? Something has obviously gone badly wrong with that. Will wayworld lead to hubworld? The name suggests so but there could be further wayworlds on the way. I just hope they've fixed the astari and dynamic water because if they are implemented as they are wayworld is going to suck.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 26, 2014 23:48:09 GMT
My money is still on connectivity issues. They can't get it to work properly.
So they decided to go with base mechanics to carry them over and to make development look like its still moving rather than being at a complete standstill.
That'd also explain why the sudden additions in content are so haphazard and unorganized/uncoordinated.
Because they were implemented as a "plan B", a quick and dirty backup plan.
Because be fair - how are they going to get people from around the world to "play together", randomly putting them in hubs and somehow finding the correct matchups of people that have similar schedules.
Its a complete recipe for disaster, one thats based off of an ideological concept of people cooperating towards a common goal.
Bringing the entire world together in a game (and creating world peace while he's at it...)
Agreed, if the Astari and dynamic water aren't adjusted, then wayworld is going to be a disaster.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Sept 27, 2014 0:07:35 GMT
My money is still on connectivity issues. They can't get it to work properly. So they decided to go with base mechanics to carry them over and to make development look like its still moving rather than being at a complete standstill. That'd also explain why the sudden additions in content are so haphazard and unorganized/uncoordinated. Because they were implemented as a "plan B", a quick and dirty backup plan. Because be fair - how are they going to get people from around the world to "play together", randomly putting them in hubs and somehow finding the correct matchups of people that have similar schedules. Its a complete recipe for disaster, one thats based off of an ideological concept of people cooperating towards a common goal. Bringing the entire world together in a game (and creating world peace while he's at it...) Agreed, if the Astari and dynamic water aren't adjusted, then wayworld is going to be a disaster. I think hubworld is a big lift for 22Cans. As the game stands it is a very offline game. The iOS8 update ordeal and our questions about analytics (which BTW have still not been answered) reveal that this is very much an offline game atm. Yes mobile has to connect but it appears to only need to connect so you can buy stuff. To move to move to online they will have to create the instances that can host joint gameplay. Plus all the issues you mention which are very real. I suspect most hubworlds will have one - two active people (out of the mentioned four) and that either means an easy progression or getting stuck because you have nobody to work with. I once played Sim City5 with two people in the UK and it just didn't work, partly because SimCity was broken at launch but also because as you say our schedules were so far off that we were only ever online at the same time for about an hour per weekend. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 27, 2014 0:12:29 GMT
Pretty much... I find that even if I'm playing with people I can directly communicate with.
Arranging times to play together (raids in MMO's, PvP/PvE events, scheduled multiplayer sessions etc) often is a complete and utter pain.
Now imagine doing that with people you can't communicate with, have never met and are likely on a completely different schedule.
And thats ignoring the whole "1 person will advance" deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Sept 27, 2014 0:19:18 GMT
Given that we see the big problems with Hubworld, do you think maybe it's not even a matter of connectivity or balancing? Maybe they just decided they have to do what this thread is about, bring it down to bare mechanics/components/concepts and rebuild it from the ground up? If so, I have to wonder where they aim to go with it.
The easy solution is the tried and tested solution of lobby system, host game, etc. which I just don't see Peter or the rest of the 22cans wanting to do, considering what they've described as their aims.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Sept 27, 2014 0:27:12 GMT
What, 22cans making logical decisions rather than responding to problems they encounter as they encounter them? Given what we've seen so far, I think it unlikely that they would've postponed Hubworld if they could've implemented it already. Which makes me believe they didn't implement it because they couldn't implement it. And since balance or mechanical problems haven't stopped them before now - it almost have to be technical problems. To cap that all off - hubworld has been played "in office", notice the technicality that they haven't ever mentioned it being played *online*. Only that the base functionality has been working and playable within the office.  |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Sept 27, 2014 0:37:10 GMT
Given that we see the big problems with Hubworld, do you think maybe it's not even a matter of connectivity or balancing? Maybe they just decided they have to do what this thread is about, bring it down to bare mechanics/components/concepts and rebuild it from the ground up? If so, I have to wonder where they aim to go with it. The easy solution is the tried and tested solution of lobby system, host game, etc. which I just don't see Peter or the rest of the 22cans wanting to do, considering what they've described as their aims. The lobby would work if you could complete hub world in a session. The problem is the whole design of GODUS is based around playing at a glacial pace. Even if you matched people in a lobby they'd probably play for 20 mins, run out of things to do, and never come back.
In terms of the whole redesign theory I am certain that 22Cans has no intention of making fundamental changes to this game for PC or Mobile. I think what you see is what you get. We'll get a balance tool and there will be new content but I'd be surprised if they even revisited settlements again let alone other core features. The only caveat to that is wayworld and hubworld could open the door to different mechanics that conflict with mechanics in the earlier world which would be an interesting way for them to redesign the game without actually doing it.
Sorry I just had to add this to my post because I've never added a song to a video and my glacial pace comment reminded me of this awful song.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Sept 27, 2014 1:01:55 GMT
What, 22cans making logical decisions rather than responding to problems they encounter as they encounter them? Given what we've seen so far, I think it unlikely that they would've postponed Hubworld if they could've implemented it already. Which makes me believe they didn't implement it because they couldn't implement it. And since balance or mechanical problems haven't stopped them before now - it almost have to be technical problems. To cap that all off - hubworld has been played "in office", notice the technicality that they haven't ever mentioned it being played *online*. Only that the base functionality has been working and playable within the office. I guess there is some basis for that. Although I'd point out that being able to play Hubworld in office doesn't mean they couldn't tear it down and rebuild it again. That's what they supposedly do throughout the sprints, rapidly prototype ideas and scrap those that don't work till they get to something they feel does work and then never really change it despite our complaints and criticisms. hardly: Stop reminding me. The only thing keeping me around here is the tiny hope that what we see isn't what we're getting. =| |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 7, 2014 15:38:50 GMT
Going off of your post on the Steam boards here Gmr Leon - because I feel that this is definitely worth discussing.
As I mentioned earlier, I can see this work, yes the initial focus is on followers - which detracts from the "god" perspective.
But I see this as laying a foundation. A foundation from which 'becoming a more powerful god' is build.
As you highlight, "The more followers that believe in you, the more powerful you will become." - to me, there should be a good reason they believe in you.
Do they believe in you because you will smite them down if they don't? Do they believe in you because you've cared for them for countless of generations?
Do they believe in you because you protected them from both natural and unnatural adversities?
Now to make the "belief" believable if you will, a certain focus on followers is needed at the start. And you can't just shake that out of thin air so a period of time the game will need to focus on 'the boring stuff' if you will.
So that once that foundation is laid out, they can focus on you as a god "being creative and terrifyingly powerful".
I don't think that if every follower being born is automatically devoted to you, that these followers are still relevant to the game.
If everyone by default is going to be devoted to you without you having to do something about that - then they may just aswell not be there and just be a timer ticking up whenever you use your godly powers.
To that regard I think its essential that the followers be expanded in Godus. That their growth be measurable rather than arbitrary and that your actions influence them.
So that they indeed will believe in you because you assisted or sheltered them.
Or that they will believe in you because if they don't they will be burned to a cinder as you unleash hell on "earth".
Ofcourse there are numerous ways to achieve this. Some better than others.
But I personally think that a healthy focus on followers as the basis of your power is the better way to go.
Contrary to a completely arbitrary set of numbers and miscellaneous items picked up off the floor.
Sometimes you need to go through the boring stuff, so that you can make the fun stuff better later on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Oct 7, 2014 17:44:53 GMT
I get where you're coming from Danjal, and with any other developer, I'd be down with something along the lines of what you describe, but 22cans have provided absolutely no reasons to trust that they can do this without making it excruciatingly uninteresting and tedious. For that matter, Peter's prior works haven't done anything to aid this perception either, given that Black & White 2 was such a weak attempt at mixing RTS and god game elements due to the miserable pacing. (Whose idea was it to limit your godly powers to changing the time of day, tossing rocks, speeding up construction, and dousing fields with globs of water for the first few hours of gameplay?)
|
|
