About The Game

[TheShadowHunter]

1-Well as I understand game repeating himself after some point like project zomboid
2-Weapon durability,survivors stamina and loot percent needs to be balanced (about the comments and feedbacks I read)
3-Zombies unbalanced (about the comments and feedbacks I read)
İn summaray Worth To Buy? And what kind of improvments needed? And all of this is my taughts and not give it a try so anywho played it can share it ideas

[Ordisoftware]

1 - On the contrary, it seems like the game doesn't repeat itself. Of course, there's the gameplay and the survival and combat mechanics, which, once you get the hang of it, can seem repetitive, but that's the nature of any game. On the other hand, each location is unique, designed with meticulous care and attention: so far, no two are alike, and each time, it's like a new game board. It's incredible.

2 - Some people appreciate it, some not. And since I wasn't able to test it in the demo, upgrading workbenches allows to improve weapons, making them more robust, from what I've read today (I just got lvl2). The question of a difficulty level, particularly its modification, is planned. I consider the demo, and the current EA, to be a "hard" mode. Regarding the balancing of the scattered resources, it's in progress, it seems, and it will take time to find a good balance, the hardest part, which should be found, as will the graphic design, which is of a rare quality in my opinion.

3 - I didn't understand the question. I think zombies are great, it's just a pretext, no need for bosses or bling-bling, the interest of the game lies elsewhere, and notably in the semiosis beyond the occasional but intense distraction.

In summaray, yes, it's worth if you like zombie games and old-school platformers from the 80s, and you enjoyed the demo: the EA is 100 times better and limitless.

[TheShadowHunter]

Originally posted by Ordisoftware:

1 - On the contrary, it seems like the game doesn't repeat itself. Of course, there's the gameplay and the survival and combat mechanics, which, once you get the hang of it, can seem repetitive, but that's the nature of any game. On the other hand, each location is unique, designed with meticulous care and attention: so far, no two are alike, and each time, it's like a new game board. It's incredible.

2 - Some people appreciate it, some not. And since I wasn't able to test it in the demo, upgrading workbenches allows to improve weapons, making them more robust, from what I've read today (I just got lvl2). The question of a difficulty level, particularly its modification, is planned. I consider the demo, and the current EA, to be a "hard" mode. Regarding the balancing of the scattered resources, it's in progress, it seems, and it will take time to find a good balance, the hardest part, which should be found, as will the graphic design, which is of a rare quality in my opinion.

3 - I didn't understand the question. I think zombies are great, it's just a pretext, no need for bosses or bling-bling, the interest of the game lies elsewhere, and notably in the semiosis beyond the occasional but intense distraction.

In summaray, yes, it's worth if you like zombie games and old-school platformers from the 80s, and you enjoyed the demo: the EA is 100 times better and limitless.

I doubt about "EA is 100 times better and limitless" and as for the 3rd I wrote about I ment to say zombie speed,horde population and random events etc....