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
Thanks.
I have read that.
Just hoping for a new planet.
Good idea.
Well, DLC may be a dirty word, but its still in their road map (see top pinned topic):
- Features I'd like to add, but only be able to do if the game is well received on release. No guarantee
....Vehicules
....Small and peacefull wildlife (fauna)
....NEW PLANETS TO TERRAFORM WITH DIFFERENT VARIABLES / CONDITIONS
.... Port on consoles (Xbox, Playstation, Switch)
(I might hope that a million downloads so far might have reached the point of "well-received upon release")
Agree.
But, if they add all that as a free update I promise to buy 2 copies and gift them to my friends
I'd be perfectly happy to pay a sensible fee for a significant DLC which adds a lot to the game such as, another planet or the inside of an asteroid (like Rama).
Yes, it's nice to receive enormous ongoing patches for a game, but that rather requires that the audience continues to increase - more people buy the game each month because there's regular patches and it's bigger.
Different settings would certainly be nice, but if the gameplay doesn't change or changes very little I don't see the point personally.
I think the game lacks depth to be interesting in the long term. And having a new planet wouldn't change the problem.
But if the devs add new game mechanics then why not.
Otherwise, having a new planet to spend hours grinding and building the same things again, meh...
They would need to design a very big planet(could be done)
But combat and car ect! hmmm nope
I've played it through 4 times and I'm not even close to what others have done. I don't know how many people that is out of the player base though. Three quarters? Half? Ten per cent?
As for a new planet I'd say that the mere fact of having a completely different map, where we don't know where everything is, resources are laid out differently, the biomes are different and any prior builders bases are different, is more than enough to make it interesting.
But as I've said somewhere, I'd like to see something unusual - like the tubular asteroid in Rendezvous with Rama. You'd look up and see the other side of the 'planet' above you. A bit like Babylon 5 only much larger.
A new world could open up some new mechanics as well. What if it's not an icy world? What if there are other challenges like acidic atmosphere? Or ferocious wind?
But I find fault with the idea that people don't want more of the same. Yes, we do. That's why Eden Crafters and Astrometica are coming along, that's why Command and Conquer came out after Dune 2. That's why there's a new police procedural TV series every month.
We don't need all that much to differentiate two games, but we appreciate slightly better versions of the same thing. And what we want the absolute least, is worse versions - for instance, the recent Settlers 'game' went down like a lead balloon because instead of iterating on minor improvements giving us more of the same, they gutted everything that was good about it.