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
Yet you get pulled down.
Its a platform in open space. You dont fall down in open space and the platform isnt big enough to have its own gravity field pulling you downwards (towards it).
OP has a point, the physical system is stupid and doesnt make sense.
But honestly, the game made a bad impression overall no matter where i looked at it.
Sounds, translations, controls, UI design, game design, control scheme, physics and so on.
Its just not good enough to bother further, the unauthentic physics are just the nail in the coffin to me.
I think it wasn't too shabby and still can be improved, but the whole concept needs to make sense first. You should be able to gain momentum by jumping and bumping into asteroid should change your course. The jetpack should only be used to stabilize your position and burn fuel when used to stop and accelerate. Just like real space.
Guys, seriously. You need to make a game believable. And falling down in space with no force acting upong the player is something I cannot ignore and the reason I've turned off the movie Gravity after roughly 20 minutes when Matt died in the most hilarious and physically impossible way.
See, to some it seems to be a nuissance, but a game generally should be believable in context of what it wants to achieve.
Even totally chaotic and bonkers fungames have believable environments, where the player understands the concepts of general rules as a logical law.
Like Mario Kart is no realistic driving simulation, but it still follows an understandable and transparent ruleset that are the general laws of physics. You turn right or left and there are centrifugal forces.
You fall down when you have no ground.
Jumping pulls you back down on ground (gravity laws), you move forward when your wheels turn in the respective direction or backwards when they turn the opposite direction.
Obviously you arent directly noticing these things, but if these laws wouldnt be there, the game would appear as weird and possibly worse to the player.
And then people WILL notice the lack of these rules or the inaccuracy by using them.
Rules and Laws of physics in games ever have to be believable and understandable.
At the very least understandable, which comes with the precondition of explaining why its different here.
Gravity in this game is none of both. Its neither believable, nor understandable.
There was nothing telling me why there would be gravity on that platform or why am i now falling down while im floating in open space?
And this oversight is a detail that should actually have been paid attention to.
The fact that no one in the dev team thought that details matter, means they just did it and didnt care.
This gives an impression to me as a player, that they dont care a lot about actual polishing and quality.
This in return tells me as a player, that when they arent even paying attention to a standard concept like physics, how well will they treat the rest of their game and upcoming features?
Possibly they just slap them in and be done with it?
This impression now stands.
Thats the thing with a demo.
It can give a good impression, a neutral one or a bad one.
Sadly this one was the latter, not only but also because of that.
Sure this can be fixed later on, but because of the above arguments, it should already
have been different.
To me this game now is just one of those attempts of mimicing Automation Games and jumping on the "hypetrain" with lower quality, polish and skill.
Thus i rather take a look at all the other similar games and forget about this one.
Im sure it will catch a few people thirsting for new games of that type and i wish them fun with it.
As of now they lost my interest, maybe they will regain it later.
Yet maybe this feedback helps to give an insight as to how important some details can become.
Thanks @Scorcher24
When I'm playing a game set in space and I jump off a platform, I don't expect to fall downwards, because why would I? It's space.
If you want to use space as a setting you better make sure you get the absolute basics right.
We aren't even talking about how there's light although there's no sun or that you might freeze after some time or that your body needs to train in a station or your muscles severely degrade.
It's simply the way how gravity works and it's not even hard to fix that error. But before you release a game in space you make sure your gravity works in an authentic way.
You rate existence and substance, not potential.
Potential is a factor for making a decision, but its not a factor to evaluate quality.
Criticism is good, because it means someone cares to improve.
No criticism means people dont care enough to voice it, which would be bad.
So us here voicing criticism is a compliment.
I would like this game to be good. Pointing out inconsistent mechanics is important.