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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
-cheers
As I have tried to explain more times to more people then Port Royale 2 is *NOT* the best because it breaks with the concept that Port Royale first and foremost is a game for people (core player group) that likes *leisure like' strategy element (and perhaps to some degree RPG ?) and not those that likes action games. So the introduction of the captains fencing in the Port Royale 2 were a mistake. I clearly remember having a CD (or DVD ?) with Port Royale that had copy protection and the disc cracked and I wrote the company that were on the label (British company at that time) and they sent me a Port Royale 2 disc as substitution because they thought that I ought to be happy with that , and I wrote back and politely declined and asked for a copy of the original Port Royale.
I mean , I am just informing you.....
And while I am at it then , while I know that Steam play time statistics can be seriously mis-leading because my own playtime of original PR and Pat 2/3 is in the more hundreds on disc and GOG versions, then I must confess that I find it almost laughable when another Steam user in another thread than this profess to like battle system in all three first Port Royale games since the user only got 32 hours of Steam play-time on Port Royale 3 on record where as I that only like the battle system in the original PR and Pat 2/3 still got 57 hours of playtime in PR3 on Steam - I mean I basically don't even like the game that much because I do not like the ships battle system and yet I have 57 hours of play time in it...
So we are back to the old discussion that I had over at the Kalypso Media forums several years ago, Kalypso Media and Gaming Minds back then only *really* listened to their resident fan-boys which were very loud (and did arguably actually play the games) but not so much to those strategy game players (such as myself) that in my opinion ought to be seen as part of the bulk/main part of the target group...
Also I generally always were mostly positive towards changes to the games in both the PR and the Pat. series as long as it did not take away the *leisure time like* strategy battles of original PR and Pat 2/3 and turned them into something that they ought not be (like the action game like fencing in PR2)(or the - clearly made for the *anal* - sea battles in Pat4 and PR3)(Ref : vocabulary.com definition of 'anal').
Anyway , I have used (and wasted) far too much of my life on this discussion - as well as wasted too much of my life playing computer games so I really feel like I do not want to keep on wasting my time on these discussions anymore. But elsewhere you were both kind as well as you proclaimed a 'general interest in feedback' so I will be so kind myself as to one more time tell Gaming Minds and Kalypso Media that i think that the core player target group for the Port Royale and the Patrician game series ought to be seen as those that likes *leisure like* strategy game play with trading elements and any game-play elements that does not 'cater' to that group (or put off group) ought not be put in the games (not even if company forum fan-boys says OK)...
Thank you for your time and attention ! - have a nice time at Steam !
thank you once again for your time, passion and dedication to write this up and in general fpr our game/s.
I cannot add up as to say, we really appreciate all contributions, suggestions and feedback and we are really looking forward to more such feedback, as well as closer to release.
Keep it up everybody.
-cheers
Thank you for the very kind response
There will always be an overlapping with respect to which kind of games that people like and some people likes and appreciates more genres than others.
Also I am sure that a developer would like to appeal to as widely a selection of player groups as possible...
However you write as if everybody always likes everything or that a developer / publisher can just slap on a sticker on a game and label it something that it is not and that people then would still be happy - but that is simply not how things work...
I completely recognize that there are people like the OP - and you - that would like Port Royale to be an action game because you appreciate action elements over strategy. But your liking of a action element doesn't mean that a lot of other people won't be put off by the same , so IMO then the developer has to decide which player group that they want to target when making the game (who that they first and foremost want to cater to).
I , personally , doesn't go to the Patrician series or the Port Royale series to play action game I go to play strategy games with trade elements. Within that frame city builder elements for me is just fine and I wouldn't mind a whole city builder within these games. But any action elements, if any, ought always be purely optional without of any dis-advantages what so ever for opting out of the action parts (which also means that those opting in playing action shouldn't get any advantages or winnings extra for doing it )..
Anyway , I wanted to make a point , not hi-jack this thread - my apologies for extending the discussion.
I only wanted to make a point and the point has clearly been made :