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
If you want to innovate and improve on existing game styles.
The first thing 22cans has to do is let go of the antiquated and flawed corporate mentalities.
Nearly every other aspect of the game is hamstrung by this one design decision. It's why sticker requirements are in the double digits. It's why belief generation crawls. All of this is to slow down the pace to a game that lacks things to do between countdowns. Any changes to sticker generation, build times, or belief accumulation are restricted by this and it's hard to see it work on the long term without long stretches of "coffee-break play".
In my opinion if a certain part of the design proves to be a problem, you will have to change it.
The same will hold true for the idea that you can make a game that will "slowly develop over the course of years".
And they will need to be open about such developments plain and simple. ESPECIALLY if they want to continue development over the course of years to come.
Stretching out existing gameplay to fit a canvas that is several sizes too large will not only prevent people from enjoying the game. It will actively scare people away because your game is tedious and boring.
Which is exactly what has been happening so far.
George claims he will work to counteract that and 22cans claims they want to change that?
Well, their actions will speak for their words.
From 1 player to another thank you. This is what I like to see from a community, good thought out suggestions. Not only saying X is bad but X is bad and here is a suggestion to fix it.
When Matthew came on and 2.0 first came out, this was pretty much the norm for discussion. Most of us are more than happy to discuss problems and solutions, but it really needs input from the development team. Nothing discussed in this thread is new. We debated and discussed ad nauseum and it died. It's hard to keep up the motivation to throw out suggestions for fixes when there's no response to them.
He brings almost exactly to the point, what the key issues are and offers well thought suggestions.
And his proposals are matching with my personal imagination how to make Godus a good, challenging god game.
Again, Danjal, great work!
Same as ever.