|
|
Post by Danjal on Nov 13, 2014 19:19:58 GMT
See for yourself!Just a snippet though: Weather Weather is another major aspect of any planet that is under construction by a dedicated developer. Right now, Prometheus can handle basic weather such as wind, clouds, and rain. We plan on making this system dynamic to allow us to create different types of weather (acid rain, anyone?) that spawn based on conditions such as temperature and biome composition. This means that you might find a few surprises when you first step onto the surface of a new planet … you better be prepared! I know we keep saying that, but darnit virtual people’s lives are at stake here! You can read the rest about planet generation, engine, gameplay and more on the page.
|
|
Lord Ba'al
Supreme Deity
Posts: 6,260
Pledge level: Half a Partner
I like: Cats; single malt Scotch; Stargate; Amiga; fried potatoes; retro gaming; cheese; snickers; sticky tape.
I don't like: Dimples in the bottom of scotch bottles; Facebook games masquerading as godgames.
Steam: stonelesscutter
GOG: stonelesscutter
|
Post by Lord Ba'al on Nov 14, 2014 0:01:48 GMT
It makes me sad when I look at what Universim has achieved and think of what Godus has become.
|
|
|
|
Post by morsealworth on Nov 14, 2014 8:19:15 GMT
One consolation - I backed both.
|
|
|
|
Post by engarde on Nov 14, 2014 9:49:55 GMT
As did I.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Nov 14, 2014 17:36:36 GMT
One of the main things I worry about with Universim is it lacking personality. I've not seen much to make it feel very distinct yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Nov 14, 2014 17:53:12 GMT
I noted how similar both the ideas were, and backed both; hoping at least one would get it right. That still remains to be seen, but Universim certainly seems to be much more ambitious and closely aligned with the original pitch than Godus. One of the main things I worry about with Universim is it lacking personality. I've not seen much to make it feel very distinct yet. I actually worry about that too, fearing that thier over-ambitiousness may cause it to be brilliantly done graphically and mechanically but lack any real passion in the theme. It certainly looks more like 'Populous: The Beginning', but may suffer from trying to do "too much" like Planetary Annihilation. |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Nov 14, 2014 18:52:05 GMT
One of the main things I worry about with Universim is it lacking personality. I've not seen much to make it feel very distinct yet. I actually worry about that too, fearing that thier over-ambitiousness may cause it to be brilliantly done graphically and mechanically but lack any real passion in the theme. It certainly looks more like 'Populous: The Beginning', but may suffer from trying to do "too much" like Planetary Annihilation. Exactly. I can tolerate a rough around the edges game with soul more than I can a great game without it. Part of why I still enjoy older games despite being clearly inconsistent and clumsy at times. |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Dec 10, 2014 8:28:09 GMT
It looks awesome based on what they have written. I have to say though I'm wary of these guys. After Godus I'm am sceptical of any kickstarters. These guys didn't raise much money if I remember but they seem to have fancy offices and all sorts. Are their parents Russian billionaires or something? We shouldn't have to worry about this stuff but Im so gun shy now I assume everyone is a crook.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Dec 10, 2014 12:11:27 GMT
To anyone being wary of kickstarter I'll just point towards traditionally developed titles such as Battlefield 4 - bad games don't come from bad business models - but rather from developers trying to cut corners and making bad decisions.
And they exist in every model.
By that reasoning (and justly so) you shouldn't buy ANY game without quadruple-checking that what you're getting for your money is guaranteed to be worth it.
Because the games industry has gone the way of the consumable, just flood the market with gunk and advertise it so people buy.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Dec 11, 2014 9:15:32 GMT
To anyone being wary of kickstarter I'll just point towards traditionally developed titles such as Battlefield 4 - bad games don't come from bad business models - but rather from developers trying to cut corners and making bad decisions. And they exist in every model. By that reasoning (and justly so) you shouldn't buy ANY game without quadruple-checking that what you're getting for your money is guaranteed to be worth it. Because the games industry has gone the way of the consumable, just flood the market with gunk and advertise it so people buy. Indeed. The quality of games would be much higher if we only bought post review. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Dec 11, 2014 14:05:26 GMT
Not entirely true - there is an aspect of risk and innovation.
If everyone only bought post-review and we combine that with the capitalistic mindset of maximizing profits (the development method we're seeing in traditional publisher/developer deals).
We will see a lot of generic duplicates with very few trying for innovation because its not worth the risk.
While you would be less likely to buy a complete garbage title, I suspect that without anyone taking risks we'll see quality of games overall dropping and flattening out. Resulting in a very dull scene which is ruled by annual CoD's, Fifa's, Assassin's Creed's and other titles being pressed out on a yearly basis.
As much as crowdfunding and early access have their drawbacks, from a purely objective standpoint most of the drawbacks aren't unique to crowdfunding or early access as a model - but rather the unique drawbacks come from lack of polish.
Like any technology or method in its early years - there are flaws in the system. Given time we can remove those flaws and improve the system.
Allowing for a higher guarantee of delivery.
Yes, some games will still fail - but thats life, sometimes things don't go as planned.
Atleast it'll help filter out the developers that either are too stupid or are too greedy to develop their game properly.
If there is one thing I know for sure - its that the traditional development method has been strangling the games industry for decades now.
Turning it into a mass-production entity only interested in the big bucks - massive multi-million dollar projects with ever increasing budgets requiring ever increasing sales to recoup.
Thus widening target audience, lowering accessibility and overall dumbing down the game and taking fewer and fewer risks.
I for one don't mind taking a $20~40 risk if it means getting a game thats actually new or innovative - infact almost all of the great games I've played in the past decade ARE indie "risks" (Skyrim being the only non-indie).
So when I say double, triple and quadruple check - I don't necessarily mean wait for post-release reviews.
I mean do your homework. Check up on the developer (do they have a history).
Check their documentation (does this seem reasonable, or is this purely relying on hype/ a big name).
Consider waiting past the initial burst to see how they deal with development.
I'd also imagine we'll be seeing a lot less "blank" entries (I have this idea, pay me to make it) and more worked out entries (I've been working on this, this is what I have right now - if you pay me I can finish it faster and make it more awesome).
Similarly I suspect we'll be seeing better guidance from the industry as others pick up on this and provide cost-effective support and information.
Maybe I'm being biased here - but the fact that the best games I've played in the past decade come from indie and even early access/crowdfunding tells me its not all bad. People just like to exaggerate doom and gloom.
The fact that a single Kickstarter or Early Access title failing is a big new story, but the massively horrible launch of a big title such as Battlefield 4 barely warrents equal attention astounds me.
Its almost as if we're measuring by a double standard....
|
|
Lord Ba'al
Supreme Deity
Posts: 6,260
Pledge level: Half a Partner
I like: Cats; single malt Scotch; Stargate; Amiga; fried potatoes; retro gaming; cheese; snickers; sticky tape.
I don't like: Dimples in the bottom of scotch bottles; Facebook games masquerading as godgames.
Steam: stonelesscutter
GOG: stonelesscutter
|
Post by Lord Ba'al on Dec 11, 2014 14:21:46 GMT
While you would be less likely to buy a complete garbage title, I suspect that without anyone taking risks we'll see quality of games overall dropping and flattening out. Resulting in a very dull scene which is ruled by annual CoD's, Fifa's, Assassin's Creed's and other titles being pressed out on a yearly basis. This pretty much describes the games scene as I have viewed it for the past two decades. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Dec 11, 2014 15:15:38 GMT
While you would be less likely to buy a complete garbage title, I suspect that without anyone taking risks we'll see quality of games overall dropping and flattening out. Resulting in a very dull scene which is ruled by annual CoD's, Fifa's, Assassin's Creed's and other titles being pressed out on a yearly basis. This pretty much describes the games scene as I have viewed it for the past two decades. Which is what my observation is based upon. More and more mediocre titles, a flattening of innovation in favor of going the "safe route". While it is true that there are indie's and individuals out there trying to live the dream, often they lack the financial backing to pull through. And for me, risking some of my own money to see that 1~5% innovative titles grow to a larger percentage - knowing that once a studio kicks off they can often use continued revenue to generate more titles. (See inXile which is looking to expand, see Mojang which made a fortune etc.) Its a risk I'm willing to take. |
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Dec 11, 2014 20:46:52 GMT
It looks awesome based on what they have written. I have to say though I'm wary of these guys. After Godus I'm am sceptical of any kickstarters. These guys didn't raise much money if I remember but they seem to have fancy offices and all sorts. Are their parents Russian billionaires or something? We shouldn't have to worry about this stuff but Im so gun shy now I assume everyone is a crook. I've certainly become much more cautious, scrutinizing projects a deal more so than before - and I was pretty thorough in the past, but just a bit more trusting and easily swayed by an emotional (nostalgic) influence. I tend to look for things now that I feel are far more worthy of funding; if they benefit the world, like environmental or energy technologies, youth and communiy projects, etc.; though the occasional game is still on my list. As Danjal said, if the project is already at-least halfway complete, or is far more fleshed out plan-wise, and isn't just a fledgling idea, I'm far more likely to back it. |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Dec 12, 2014 5:19:04 GMT
Yeah I backed peter because I wanted him to take risks. I just didn't realise the risk he was intending to take was inflicting a crappy mobile game on pc gamers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Dec 23, 2014 2:21:52 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2014 5:51:39 GMT
You must be mistaken, Danjal. The technology to do what Universim is doing does not exist.  |
|
|
|
Post by engarde on Dec 23, 2014 8:52:02 GMT
You must be mistaken, Danjal. The technology to do what Universim is doing does not exist. So they created it... without a leg-end... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2014 9:38:59 GMT
You must be mistaken, Danjal. The technology to do what Universim is doing does not exist. So they created it... without a leg-end... That's the joke! |
|
|
|
Post by engarde on Dec 23, 2014 9:45:13 GMT
8DYou don't say...
|
|
