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
That being said, it is unfortunate that characters are stored in the host's save. My online group absolutely cannot stop playing a game or making progress while others are offline, which means that invariably someone (or multiple someones) are going to be at different levels and beholden to others for the opportunity to play their characters.
I hope this is changed eventually to utilize a system similar to Heroes of Hammerwatch where your characters are portable, but time will tell.
That "you don't have to buy it if you have anything negative to say" is such a stupid statement that at this point there probably is not even any need to address it. Besides, where in the post do you see me saying I don't like the game, moreover, how can I not like a game when it's not even out yet?
Where did you see me "whine" about saves? Also what does BG3 have to do with anything?
Oh and by the way, you said you don't like how hammerwatch handles their saves, well if you don't like it dont buy it, nobody is forcing you to buy a game which saving system you don't like. Stop whining about it ok?
Excellent post, thank you. I personally don't see the not being able to play the same character the biggest problem though most definitely the game would benefit greatly from it. But I doubt it will change looking at the responses coming from the developers, which was exactly the point of this post. If they can't make the fix, it's sad but somewhat understandable, I don't assume every indie developer knows how to perfectly make a game, but I really wish they didn't pretend like it's not a problem when it clearly is to most people.
Tommy Wiseau tried to back down and say The Room was meant to be a dark comedy, I don't need Crackshell to do the same thing with saying that this game was meant to be a single player.
I just wish the game can become the best game it can.
Games like Deep Rock Galactic, Subnautica, and Baldur's Gate 3, all embraced early access and community input precisely because they understood that growth stems from acknowledging imperfections. Dismissing criticisms as 'whining' does a disservice to both the game and its community. So, it's not about being negative for the sake of it, but about being invested enough to push the devs towards making something outstanding. In the end, offering criticisms and feedback show's a true fans commitment to the game's potential and long-term success, and those "fans" defending the game are doing more harm then they realise.
Edit: Look at the game now; numerous changes have already been implemented or are on the way. The criticisms have resulted in a better product that everyone can enjoy more.