Fate of the World

Fate of the World

View Stats:
Bought this several years ago
I bought this directly from the company, and saw they were offering steam keys when this was first released on steam.
The company's website and the game website are both down now, however. Any clue what happened to them?
< >
Showing 1-7 of 7 comments
fox Mar 19, 2014 @ 3:47am 
o/ One of their translator here: I was in direct contact with them until September-October 2012, then both the server tools and comms went down. Looking around on the web it seems like most of the people who worked at Red Redemption Ltd now have different jobs, even the official company site is now down: http://red-redemption.com/ . So I can say with some certainty that they have closed down |:
Very sad to hear that. ):
Fugitive Unknown Mar 22, 2014 @ 4:02pm 
I'd like to here more about what went wrong. This was an ambitious first game.
Delnar_Ersike Mar 26, 2014 @ 4:02pm 
Originally posted by Fugitive Unknown:
I'd like to here more about what went wrong. This was an ambitious first game.
Take a look at the game's credits and you'll see the main problem: Red Redemption had more people working as "directors" of some sort than actual programmers. In addition, Ian Roberts, the game's Creative Director and main designer, had very little design experience outside of his BBC Climate Challenge game (which, to be frank, had a lot of gaping design flaws; you can still play it BTW, it's a browser game, just run a Google search and you'll be set), contributing to the game's design flaws. While BBC Climate Challenge was made by a handful of people, there were a lot more salaries riding on the success of Fate of the World, so coupled with the game's underwhelming programming, poor design decisions, and blatant green propaganda, and the fact that the studio had nothing else in the works after the game came out, it's sadly not surprising that the developer went under.
BlueNovember Apr 21, 2014 @ 4:35am 
Does it really have that much of a green agenda? They had a science-advisor in house. The emissions engine at least was definitely sound. Possibly the cards were a bit extreme in some ways (e.g the 4th gen nuclear efficiency you mentioned). Do remember that the game started development in ~2008/9 so some inaccuracies could have been more reasonable at the time.

What did you mean by "underwhelming programming"? The performance of the game isn't great, but this is typical of an idie studio without the resources of a publisher to optimise graphics or use a tailored redering engine.
Tomochi May 2, 2014 @ 9:58am 
I have the same issue. I brought this game long time ago from the original company website. Any idea if is it possible to activate the game in Steam?
MeltedPriest May 2, 2014 @ 9:23pm 

Originally posted by Delnar_Ersike:
blatant green propaganda

Actually, the issues the game raises--species die-off's; migrations; etc: are all in tune with what 99% of the science says will happen at the current rate. Although a good chunk of the more recent studies suggest that the worst predictions are off--by like, 60years (as too optimistic).

If anything, the game puts too much stock in nuclear power as an "interim" energy source, and is over-optimistic in general.
< >
Showing 1-7 of 7 comments
Per page: 15 30 50