Is era progress forced?

[Legata Flavia]

Or we can stay in roman era forever? :o

[Private117]

as far as i read its forced, you either go early into a new era with more cycles added or when the game tells you to.

Which is absolutely awful IMO. I hate forced Timelimits. just lemme build man, this game looks so great and then to not give the player any freedom. :(

[Nemesys9999]

That's only for the demo. In the real game, there's kind of a "sandbox" mode in which you can stay in a period if you like it.

[5PM_JBR]

Originally posted by Private117:

as far as i read its forced, you either go early into a new era with more cycles added or when the game tells you to.

Which is absolutely awful IMO. I hate forced Timelimits. just lemme build man, this game looks so great and then to not give the player any freedom. :(

I completely understand your point of view.

This subject has given rise to many discussions within the GD team.
However, we wanted to confront players with the questions raised by the passage of time, and the fact that they had to move their city from one age to another, or risk disappearing.

Leaving the player free to choose the duration of an era seemed to us not only implausible, but above all, time was no longer an issue.

Mémoriapolis was not designed as a sandbox game. Players have objectives and a certain number of cycles (time in the game) to achieve them.

You may not like these choices, but you can't blame the game for not being what it isn't.

[5PM_JBR]

Originally posted by Nemesys9999:

That's only for the demo. In the real game, there's kind of a "sandbox" mode in which you can stay in a period if you like it.

More to the point, there will be no sandbox version during the early access period.
We're working on a sandbox version for version 1 of the game.

[Legata Flavia]

Me would love to stick with roman era, if me cant, then I would avoid the game most likely p.p

[5PM - Aurélien]

Originally posted by Legata Flavia:

Me would love to stick with roman era, if me cant, then I would avoid the game most likely p.p

In the sandbox mode you will be able to stay at any era :)

[Genk Rasuke]

How many more eras will there be? More or less?
Because I found out about this game the day before yesterday and it got me excited.

[5PM - Aurélien]

Originally posted by Genk Rasuke:

How many more eras will there be? More or less?
Because I found out about this game the day before yesterday and it got me excited.

There will be 4 eras (2 available during Early Access, 2 more on the release): Antiquity, Middle ages, Renaissance, Age of Enlightenment

[Korben]

I didn't realise this game was all about time limits. I love city builders and progressing through the ages like this, but I hate feeling rushed and stressed to achieve goals or else you fail, in any type of game. Most of us like to play at our own pace. It removes any kind of replay-ability as well, as it seems it will be a 'do X to get to Y' game and with a time limit no less. I was really excited about this game, but the more I came here to read about the game the more I lost interest to the point I have now removed it from my wish list.

Thank you OP for the heads-up here.

[Dragonbane]

My understanding is sandbox will be time limit free. I hope so. I personally don't think there should be time limits at all.

[5PM_JBR]

As I wrote above, I completely understand your point of view.
When we decided to structure the game around a limited number of cycles per age, we knew that some players wouldn't like this system. We decided to take this risk because we thought it would be interesting to offer a challenge linked to the passage of time.

If it's the player who decides to change age, then time isn't a game mechanic. That certainly doesn't make it a bad game, but it does suggest a sandbox-type system that we didn't want at first.

As for whether this creates stress or the need to rush to achieve a particular goal, I don't think that's the case in the current state of the game. We've balanced the game so that time is important but not central. Our aim is not to make a puzzle game, but on the contrary a game with a high degree of replayability based on the different choices you have to make from one game to the next.
We don't want time to give players the impression that they have to hurry, but rather that their city belongs to a world in motion. And if it proves necessary to revise the balancing to achieve these effects, we'll do so.

[Legata Flavia]

Das fine, I will wait until sandbox mode is introduced then q.q

[5PM - Aurélien]

Originally posted by Korben:

I didn't realise this game was all about time limits. I love city builders and progressing through the ages like this, but I hate feeling rushed and stressed to achieve goals or else you fail, in any type of game. Most of us like to play at our own pace. It removes any kind of replay-ability as well, as it seems it will be a 'do X to get to Y' game and with a time limit no less. I was really excited about this game, but the more I came here to read about the game the more I lost interest to the point I have now removed it from my wish list.

Thank you OP for the heads-up here.

Despite there is a limit, there is no rush nor stress :)

[BetonToni]

so no buy till 1.0 and u release the game with the promised sandbox?

Gotcha

[Delirium_Sidhe]

If there will be only 2 eras during EA, how it will differ from demo? Was really hoping for all for eras.