Towns - my review (also on Towns metacritic)

[JAGIELSKI]

While I didn't know that game has some minor issues when I bought it on Steam, after playing it for some while, I must say it IS indeed playable in the current state. You just need to get used to its gameplay elements.

Where "get used to" means same as "getting used to" RTS, FPS, RPG or any other genre or subgenre (like JRPG or CRPG). What is genre of this game? I'd like to call it "Sandbox town-building game with RPG and RTS elements". While I would never, ever touch Dwarf Fortress because of its graphics or lack thereof (seriously, ASCII? Are we in 80s? Even Nethack, rogue-like with originally ASCII graphics has graphical clients such as Falcon's Eye or Vulture's Claw), Towns are pretty fun to play with.

Those who say interface is non-intuitive, probably never played game such as Age of Empires 2 or other old RTS games like first editions of The Settlers or Civilization. In case of the latter THAT'S confusing and non-intuitive interface.

For me it is pretty simple after few (2) hours spend with it. At left you have production automation tools which let you make food, produce items, etc. At right - town building tools (setting up walls and placing utilities/furniture/decorations, etc.). And finally at bottom - order menu - here you can give massive orders, e.g. mining/chopping down trees/gathering wheat/apples/pears/bananas/etc. and set up stockpiles (magazines) for each type of resource, and zones (if you ever played Evil Genius zones are roughly equal to room types).

Now, final words.

While that game isn't completed yet, I'd say it's pretty close. If I would need to compare it to level of polish of some version of Minecraft, I'd say SMP is at level of Minecraft Beta 1.6. AI is a bit wonky, but it'll work in time (heard on official forums that AI will be main focus in Towns v9, a.k.a. 0.90)

[Fizban Frobozz]

With all due respect, 2 hours played isn't very much for a game like this. I would suggest any potential buyers look for more in depth review or videos before purchasing. There really are a lot of them out there as well as at least one guide on this hub. Above all, try the demo. It is the same as the game just an in-game 20 day limit.

This one may be helpful:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/221020/discussions/0/882965737302281468/

[Mmmmmister Crow!]

I think you misunderstood... I think he was saying he achieved a good feel for the game and the UI after only 2 hours, not that he had only spent 2 hours all together.

[Fizban Frobozz]

Originally posted by Mmmmmister Crow!:

I think you misunderstood... I think he was saying he achieved a good feel for the game and the UI after only 2 hours, not that he had only spent 2 hours all together.

Reading again, you are probably right. My mistake. Still, not much to this review and I definitely encourage buyers to investigate further.

[Cyborgt]

Originally posted by Darkhog:

...I must say it IS indeed playable in the current state. You just need to get used to its gameplay elements.

Where "get used to" means same as "getting used to" RTS, FPS, RPG or any other genre or subgenre (like JRPG or CRPG). ...

Those who say interface is non-intuitive, probably never played game such as Age of Empires 2 or other old RTS games like first editions of The Settlers or Civilization. In case of the latter THAT'S confusing and non-intuitive interface.

For me it is pretty simple after few (2) hours spend with it. At left you have production automation tools .... At right - town building tools ... And finally at bottom - order menu ...

Now, final words.

While that game isn't completed yet, I'd say it's pretty close. ...

I wonder why I always end up feeling that these "positive reviews" are a poorly veiled attempt to attack the views of their dissenters? Maybe it's because very little is actually said about the game itself and they're filled with references to what people have said about it? Maybe it's because games released over a decade ago are being referenced to imply that there's nothing wrong with the game? Could it be the underhanded mini-tutorial on the interface included in the review as if to imply that if you don't like the interface it must be because you're too stupid to know where everything is? Maybe...

Anyway, i'd say Evecque's comments are overall more useful than this review has been. It doesn't really say much of anything that would actually be of use to someone intending to buy the game.

[JAGIELSKI]

As for now I've spend with game 16+ hours (according to Steam - was out of internet for a few hours due to mainteance so played in offline mode so probably it is even more). So I pretty much know what I'm saying. I can agree that AI isn't yet refined, but it'll be - do you think writing good AI is so easy?

I, as a programmer, lnow how it works from the other side of fence and you have to believe me that writing good AI, especially for the game where player has so much freedom in how world will eventually look like - hell, I've leveled whole mountains here, is NOT easy task. Frankly I am surprised they got so much of it done in so little time since initial Towns announcement (few months).

//edit: @Cyborgt: Frankly, I didn't do any of the tutorials, except part with soldiers. After playing so many RTS games in life, all things seemed obvious to me.

[Fizban Frobozz]

Originally posted by Darkhog:

As for now I've spend with game 16+ hours (according to Steam - was out of internet for a few hours due to mainteance so played in offline mode so probably it is even more). So I pretty much know what I'm saying. I can agree that AI isn't yet refined, but it'll be - do you think writing good AI is so easy?

I, as a programmer, lnow how it works from the other side of fence and you have to believe me that writing good AI, especially for the game where player has so much freedom in how world will eventually look like - hell, I've leveled whole mountains here, is NOT easy task. Frankly I am surprised they got so much of it done in so little time since initial Towns announcement (few months).

First off, it doesn't matter if it was hard. They are selling the game as a fully released product. It should be compared with all the other fully released products at the same price or lower.

Also, what initial announcement are you referring to? The Greenlight listing? This has been around as "playable" for quite some time and many people have purchased it well before the Steam release and more than a few months ago, too.

[changtau2005]

@Darkhog
Don't run Dwarf Fortress just by itself unless you are an old-school veteran and/or you like its ASCII grid. It has its own set of enhancements just like Nethack does.

1. Grab a tileset from the wiki or the forums. I use Phoebus - they make the game much more approachable knowing what most things are - much better than seeing the letter "D" and thinking it's a dwarf or dog, while it really stands for "Dragon".
http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2012:Graphics_set_repository
2. Run Dwarf Therapist to make managing the population easier
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=66525.0

I picked up Towns because of its similarity to Dwarf Fortress. If you like this game, you'll probably love the latter as well, if not more.

Ta-ta

[mr bigdad]

The game is broken in the core. Lag in high populated towns, meaning prob a leak in the coding that makes memory leaks, etc. This game needs total overhaul! Who even makes games in java? Man!

[Fizban Frobozz]

Originally posted by mr bigdad:

Who even makes games in java? Man!

Notch?

[bidithal]

personaly i like this game it is very enjoyable and my comp has no issues with high pop or lag issues think your system might be outdated mr bigdad lol

[JAGIELSKI]

Originally posted by mr bigdad:

The game is broken in the core. Lag in high populated towns, meaning prob a leak in the coding that makes memory leaks, etc. This game needs total overhaul! Who even makes games in java? Man!

Lag isn't invoked by population. You must have too much items laying around. Use containers instead of stockpiles.

Also:

Originally posted by Nalidus:

That's wishful thinking on your part. You have no clue that the AI will be recovered from its attrocious state. Recent history has shown that the committment of the devs to this game is questionable.

No, devs has told me that major focus in v9 will be AI overhaul in private conversation (via Private Messaging system)

//edit: Also I wonder if you would want to code if one of your loved ones would die.

[Retrox]

I can get behind that review. That said...

Do be careful in your public observations of why people write the game off because it's difficult to get into. You'll find that most of the guys on Steam who have issues with the game (well, the few who are worth listening to), take things like that as in insult to their gaming prowess or even their intelligence, and most of the people like us who enjoy the game would do the exact same if our roles were reversed. Rather than claiming they don't like the game because they don't have the chops to play it, it's far more accurate to say that Towns requires a greater expenditure of effort on the part of the player to really enjoy; and I feel like a good amount of that effort consists of navigating the game's idiosyncrasies and finding effective solutions to counteract its weaknesses.

The Steam release has shown that some gamers don't like that in their games, and it's important that those of us who don't mind contending with the UI/AI/gameplay peculiarities of Towns empathize with their position while continuing to put forth our own. We all have different thresholds of tolerance for things that annoy us. You'll notice that the only people "flaming" on the Steam forums are the people at the extreme opposite ends of that tolerance spectrum, and their opinions of the game (both good and bad) are best ignored.

While I personally think that some of the criticisms leveled against Towns are overly harsh for an indie title, they do serve a useful purpose when they're communicated maturely. Like Nalidus said, and as I've said before, there weren't enough critics on the Towns forum back in the early days. Although, Nalidus: You're sensationalizing a bit when you say "constant praise by the fanbots." When something came out that people weren't happy with, there were most certainly discussions about it, and changes to the game were often made accordingly. I think our worst offense was conditioning Xavi to receive gentle encouragement, but not harsh criticism. Both have their place in a community-sponsored game.

Still, in these Steam post-release days of the game, I'm hoping we can all find a productive middle-ground somewhere between harsh criticism and gentle encouragement that will keep SMP hammering away at this cool little game. I don't want them to give up. I want them to do the best they can with Towns, and I want more developers making more games like it.

[Retrox]

Originally posted by Nalidus:

Originally posted by retrox:

I can get behind that review. That said...

Do be careful in your public observations of why people write the game off because it's difficult to get into. You'll find that most of the guys on Steam who have issues with the game (well, the few who are worth listening to), take things like that as in insult to their gaming prowess or even their intelligence, and most of the people like us who enjoy the game would do the exact same if our roles were reversed. Rather than claiming they don't like the game because they don't have the chops to play it, it's far more accurate to say that Towns requires a greater expenditure of effort on the part of the player to really enjoy; and I feel like a good amount of that effort consists of navigating the game's idiosyncrasies and finding effective solutions to counteract its weaknesses.

You really should have taken your own advice and just not stated anything after "our roles were reversed." The only issue on difficulty in this game is the fact that the Townie AI is atrocious. People have to literally find workarounds for the completely suicidal behavior of the Townie AI.

Ya lost me. You admonished me for not taking my own advice, and then proceeded to reinforce the point I was trying to make. If we can both agree that the AI is in need of an overhaul (which we clearly can), then surely we can both agree that this is a fundamental weakness in the game's design. Finding effective solutions to counteract this weakness requires additional effort on the part of the player; effort that some players would rather expend on actually playing the game instead of having to find workarounds for faulty mechanics. How am I even remotely wrong on that point?

Originally posted by Nalidus:

As to your statement about players needing to provide extra effort to enjoy the game, that is completely false. I have put at least 100 hours into this game as I purchased it in July. I have provided a ton of effort into the game. However, at times this game provides absolutely no enjoyment for me. That is because of the atrocious Townie AI.

As clarified above, effort ≠ investment of time necessarily. And of course you know that the more time you put into any game, the more glaring its flaws become. I was nearly 50 hours into Dead Island before I came to the realization that it made me want to smash my keyboard into my monitor. But I still finished it, and had a blast, because overall it was a pretty cool game at the end of the day.

Originally posted by Nalidus:

Originally posted by retrox:

The Steam release has shown that some gamers don't like that in their games, and it's important that those of us who don't mind contending with the UI/AI/gameplay peculiarities of Towns empathize with their position while continuing to put forth our own. We all have different thresholds of tolerance for things that annoy us. You'll notice that the only people "flaming" on the Steam forums are the people at the extreme opposite ends of that tolerance spectrum, and their opinions of the game (both good and bad) are best ignored.

No. The Steam release has shown that potential customers do not like being lied to by developers. The same with WarZ.

Honestly, I think SMP barely squeaked by. There was nothing on the store page as dramatically misleading as War Z's, but the launch definitely could've benefited from a lot more thought and preparation. I attribute it to SMP treating Steam as just another channel of distribution instead of the demanding service that it is. Gamers here have high expectations for stuff they buy, and they damn well should. At any rate, I hope Towns will provide a valuable lesson for other indie developers looking to expand into the marketplace in the future.

Originally posted by Nalidus:

Originally posted by retrox:

While I personally think that some of the criticisms leveled against Towns are overly harsh for an indie title, they do serve a useful purpose when they're communicated maturely. Like Nalidus said, and as I've said before, there weren't enough critics on the Towns forum back in the early days. Although, Nalidus: You're sensationalizing a bit when you say "constant praise by the fanbots." When something came out that people weren't happy with, there were most certainly discussions about it, and changes to the game were often made accordingly. I think our worst offense was conditioning Xavi to receive gentle encouragement, but not harsh criticism. Both have their place in a community-sponsored game.

Still, in these Steam post-release days of the game, I'm hoping we can all find a productive middle-ground somewhere between harsh criticism and gentle encouragement that will keep SMP hammering away at this cool little game. I don't want them to give up. I want them to do the best they can with Towns, and I want more developers making more games like it.

I am providing information about the game that the developers felt was not necessary when they released to Steam. I am providing potential customers to make smarter decisions with their money.

Keep on keeping on, brother. I won't try to stop you. As long as both sides of the debate remain out there and vocal, everyone wins. I'm sure the last thing anyone wants is for people who aren't going to like the game to spend their money on it. SMP most of all.

[Retrox]

Yeah, you're still continuing to miss my point, Nalidus. Put the claws away for a sec, I'm not your enemy.

I'm not blaming anyone. I'm saying that some players complain because the game doesn't always behave as they expect, and those complaints are entirely justified because players should not be expected to find workarounds in a game just to be able to derive enjoyment from it. I'm saying that if I didn't personally enjoy the other aspects of the game enough to be able to overlook the squirrely AI, I would be right here with you complaining just as loudly. I'm saying that when I have those inevitable "WTF are you idiot townies DOING?!" moments myself, it sometimes requires a conscious effort on my part to not just ragequit and go find some place to vent about it. I don't expect others to feel the same way, and I refuse to criticize them if they don't. From the start, I have been urging the OP to give my view some consideration before charging in with the "you just don't know what you're doing!" argument.

Do I want the AI to see some improvement? Hell yes I do. Is it a deal-breaker for me if it doesn't? No. Is the game totally busted in it's current state? Far from it, IMO.

I'm trying real, real hard to not argue with you, man, but you're just refusing to meet me even 1/4 of the way. It makes me LOL.

[Fulcrum]

I think, retrox, that your initial post was spot on and delivered maturely and cogently. I'd agree you and Naildus are essentially in agreement.

There is something going on in the gaming community right now which I feel to be negative for all of us. Fanboys drawing their lines in the sand and opposing them, the critics, some but not all of whom have very specific demands or unrealistic expectations and a very loud voice.

When it comes to Towns, I'm a critic, but I like to think a constructive one. Its fine to not like something, but to mercilessly bash it does not help anyone. It was my understanding that forums such as these were to let us all look out for each other and keep the industry healthy. If we warn each other off genuinely bad titles, constructively, then bad games adapt or die and more money is chanelled to tiels which deserve it. These days that seems to be the case less and less as the bizarre unfolding of the fiasco regarding The War Z stands as shameful proof of.

But I digress. First up, glad you're enjoying the game. I bought it initially because it looked promising and I reckon that should be rewarded. However, I did find the game disappointing and frustrating at times.

I won't contradict those who say they found it easy to pick up but my honest opinion couldnt be further away from theirs. I found it counter intuitive and laboursome to use. I like a challenge in a game, but that challenge shouldn't be the menu system.

I understand that those who do get it, find a rewarding experience underneath but in my book, nothing wrong with saying if this sounds like a frustration for you, look elsewhere for a game and save your cash.

The graphics work for me, not the prettiest game on the market of course, but its not an unpleasant aesthetic. Tutorials need a serious look at, because many detractors might be turned into fans if they had a little helping hand to pick things up. Funny how tutorials, a frustration for a number of gamers are actually becoming a bigger and bigger issue as devs neglect them, Planetside 2 being the most poignant example I can think of right now.

Finally, the AI. We're all in agreement I think that the AI is awful. I couldn't make better AI, I couldnt even program one as good as the current AI. However, as AI is such an integral part of single player gameplay it should have been looked at seriously before it got here.

Ultimately, the blame rests with steam though. They have to start taking responsibility for what shows up on the client. We all bash apple, but their strict vetting of all apps and games maintains quality. Naturally, indie games can't be held to the same level as AAA titles but you need to maintain custoemr confidence at that means quality control.

When a game gets greenlit by the community, of course it should end up in the store. But only when its found to be ready. Towns should have been checked, then Steam should have provided meaningful feedback to the dev. Explaining they wouldnt take the game live until the listed issues are addressed. In the end, it'd help them and the developer and I can only hope they take things more seriously in the future.