RE: Petition to remove "Structural Design" for unit models (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire



Message


SuperTris -> RE: Petition to remove "Structural Design" for unit models (12/15/2020 2:11:23 AM)

Locarnus

That's an interesting point in favour of the suggestion to add linear research fields mirroring those for aeroplane design, certainly - and I'd agree that would improve the current system. Still your casual one line dismissal of my paragraphs as saying the opposite of what I claim I like doesn't really give me the impression you're actually engaging with different views. I don't think ranting past each other without engaging is a good use of even the excess amount of time I have on my hands these days, so I'll leave you to it.




beyondwudge -> RE: Petition to remove "Structural Design" for unit models (12/22/2020 5:23:36 PM)

What it seems to be is this: there is a real world concept the developer is trying to model in a very broad but deep game.

The way the concept has been abstracted within the model design process is not perfect.

On the whole, the problem isn't game-breaking. You can still win. You have more than an even-chance of still winning.

However, it is irritating the person who started the topic. Irritating in the way that sand in your shoe can be on a walk, making it hard to relax and just enjoy strolling around. I think it is understandable how that sort of irritation can affect you.

It is most likely the case that more work is needed to fix the problem. It is also the case though that this isn't the sort of game where convenience is placed at a premium.

I've spent days trying to figure out how the game works, as much because the information isn't convenient to access. I have had to engage in a lot of trial and error, more than a few experimental starts and restarts and a lot of expectation resetting from "I'll just work out the build and win a game" to "print out the manual, get the PDF up for searching and go through each major concept one by one until I know how I get from the root game concepts all the way to final victory".

In doing this I have discovered that there is a lot about this game that is intentionally inconvenient. A theme that matches the subject matter of the game, attempting to unify a world after a most inconvenient apocalyptic event. I won't pretend that I haven't felt frustrated at times. However, I also won't pretend that this game isn't ambitious and that if I wanted an easy win that I would have purchased it in the first place.

Because the game is trying to achieve a lot, I am hesitant to just agree with seeing parts of it chopped out without there being some really clear thought as to what the impact of that chopping will be. Don't get me wrong, I couldn't stand the way the cult story worked so I turned that module off. The manual actually said that option was there by design. Following in that approach, I wouldn't have a problem with a simple toggle for the design rules at the start of the game to hotfix this issue. If it really bothers someone, its not unreasonable to let them opt-in a quick fix for it. However, I would have a problem seeing an extensive system of hotfixes and toggles just to please whatever the most vocal forum posters are annoyed about in a given month. How can the developer know when there is a problem with his game or whether a player is giving up too soon on a challenge if the forum poster's irritation level is all they are responding to?







Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125