Any plans for an expansion, DLC or a sequel?

[Periphery]

I have really enjoyed my time with this game and was wondering if DF is planning to further develop this title in any way.

[Dorok]

As far I know, nope. And it seems from some posts I read the dev isn't used to do DLC so it's double nope.

[GeezerCake]

Which is a shame, since the game is not without issues - issues which could easily be resolved with some DLCs or content updates.

There's a similar thread somewhere else on these forums where one of the Dev people said that the game was "full featured" and that "there (was) no plan for (DLC)". I was about to buy the game, knowing of its issues but believing that my money could help further development. With that official statement, I have no interest in buying the game unless there are further development. Ironic.

(For the record, I have already played the game, just not on Steam).

[////]

nope? hard to believe... this game still has so much potential...

but why? because this game was consoles-oriented?

[GeezerCake]

Originally posted by ////:

nope? hard to believe... this game still has so much potential...

but why? because this game was consoles-oriented?

Don't know. PC gaming is an odd beast and the PC crowd want different things than the console crowd.

Plus, emulating XCOM is a rabbit hole nowadays. The Long War mod changed the rules, even Firaxis Games acknowledge that fact.

I hope that Double Fine decides to invest more into Massive Chalice. They have a good thing here and for once, it would be nice for them to do things differently that their usual "Fire and Forget" development/launch politics.

[DigitalImpostor]

Originally posted by ////:

nope? hard to believe... this game still has so much potential...

but why? because this game was consoles-oriented?

Console controls was one of the last things that was added. For the game to be console-oriented it'd have to be in from the start.

[Dorok]

Myself I don't really care, beside some great points the dev use many design orientation I don't like at all, DLC won't change that. In fact I preferred much more the game before release and I mean before mixed classes that I didn't played much before release.

I mean the dev has some designs orientations for this game that I don't like and DLC won't change it.

I don't say it's clearly bad designs at least not all points I don't like, it's design choices I don't like. The more important points that are negative for me:
- High Negativity, I think they thought it as Roguelike design and Roguelike are "pretty" popular. But only classic Roguelike use such approach and myself I'd never buy any like that.
- Unclear rules or more exactly hidden rules. Again I think it's a bad borrow of a bad design of classic Roguelike but that's obsolete design, it was just artificial attempt to increase game duration.
- Pure random. Again I feel they thought it was making the game Roguelike but it's just bad Roguelike, good Roguelike always had sophisticated procedural generation not just pure random.
- The garbage generated by mixed class mechanism destroy the ability to play chosen team builds, not good for me.
- The events was a good base idea to build the feeling of a "story" background. But how they used it, berk.

There's great points too, mainly the combats, the classes design, a touch of light humor not bad at all, graphics working rather well, the relics, some more points.

But beside too many design choices I don't like at all.

[////]

Originally posted by DigitalImpostor:

Originally posted by ////:

nope? hard to believe... this game still has so much potential...

but why? because this game was consoles-oriented?

Console controls was one of the last things that was added. For the game to be console-oriented it'd have to be in from the start.

thanks, this answers my question.

Originally posted by Dorok:

Myself I don't really care, beside some great points the dev use many design orientation I don't like at all, DLC won't change that. In fact I preferred much more the game before release and I mean before mixed classes that I didn't played much before release.

I mean the dev has some designs orientations for this game that I don't like and DLC won't change it.

but that's why i picked this game and why i like it. because of all these differences. have you checked screenshots/videos/reviews before buying? :P

[Dorok]

Why what? Your quote includes NOTHING significant.

I have one more points the UI is pretty bad, it looks cool but with usage it's pretty bad and they improved almost nothing for release version.

EDIT: Bad UI detail:
- Combats zoom out too limited, it's a crap to quote enemies los.
- Combats enemies los is pretty badly done. The current system should be completed with a system like in Jagged Alliance Flashback, mouse over enemy show all his los, character movement position should show each enemy los relationship with triangle starting from the position.
- Can't check a lot of thing during an event.
- Can't check a lot of thing during an attack before enter in combat.
- The heroes list in palace is supposed to be a substitute for kingdom analyze during events and choice of combat, but it's a pretty bad tool for that.
- When you build the roster for combat, and check a hero, no way to switch to another hero of the combat roster, you close select another open again through multiple clicks.
- The special lists are an awful UI design, after hundred of hours spend with them they are still a boring crap.
- No way to switch between buildings, very tedious.
- Ton more, I'm tired to list all the crap.

[////]

let's not start arguing about what this game in not. or... what it is, but how it shouldn't be what it is. it's pointless... game is perfectly playable and well balanced. and pretty close to unique.

yet, it is very minimalistic (for a strategy game). i can't stop thinking about solid expansion or dlc while playing it.

more random encounters, tournaments for your heroes, diplomacy, unique artefacts for families... there's so much possibilities. :/

[Dorok]

Originally posted by ////:

let's not start arguing about what this game in not. or... what it is, but how it shouldn't be what it is. it's pointless...

It's not pointless it's rock solid information:
- Nice looking UI alas bad design of its ease of use, plenty flaws in that matter.
- The random is naive pure random very far from any good Roguelike using much more procedural generation or other similar methods.
- You'll have to pick randomly choices on events, zero logic so pure luck until you have learned all the answers. Dev should learn what is balanced choices and what's the purpose, but I bet they have zero clues on that sort of design finesse.
- The negativity spirit is pure old classic roguelike approach but very few players would buy any of them. It's so pointless design choice which means nothing apart to setup a negativity spirit which has no relationship with difficulty levels. In fact it even break the difficulty feeling building (read articles and studies about difficulty if you don't see what I mean).
- Unclear/hidden rules and stats effect that aren't intuitive at all.

So yeah a small niche of players can enjoy points 2 to 5. Now show me the reviews that pinpoint them clearly. Anyway it's not the point I bought it in last months of Early Access and I admit that anyway I'm ok with that buy and even continue play it for now (mainly to see if I can beat Hard with release version).

Originally posted by ////:

....
yet, it is very minimalistic (for a strategy game).
...

It's a tactical game, the "strategy" layer is too basic and simple to set the game in category of strategy game or almost any game are strategy game.

Originally posted by ////:

....
i can't stop thinking about solid expansion or dlc while playing it.

more random encounters, tournaments for your heroes, diplomacy, unique artefacts for families... there's so much possibilities. :/

Diplomacy with Cadence??? Either you didn't get the story/lore either you have something in mind that worth an explanation. For now it looks like an automatic feature list increase, pick a strategy game and put its features in another game. That's what lead games to look too much the same for too many.

Tournament heroes seems a good idea but it's totally unrealistic if you think of a real combat. The work to make the AI satisfying is too huge, it would be another game.

Unique artifacts for families with 1000 families available? You need explain more.

More random encounter, you probably mean more combats diversity, yeah that's possible and would fit a DLC.

[////]

it's not rock solid information, it's whining. so just ♥♥♥♥ off.

he's telling what strategy game is... pf... -_-

[Dorok]

Originally posted by ////:

it's not rock solid information, it's whining. so just ♥♥♥♥ off.

he's telling what strategy game is... pf... -_-

Cool down it's just posts and a game. :-)

If for you MC is a strategy game I think you need play it more.

[////]

sorry for that... *blush*

well, i finished it once. and my opinion stays the same. i still like this game, as a supermassive roguelike. and yes, it's a strategy game (with turn-based combat). my logic is simple... if you need to think strategically, it's a strategy game in general (duh?).

[CrumbleCat]

I feel like I should wait for some fancy edition that fixes most problems, or adds content. But doublefine apparently hates DLC or making fat changes to games after release.

[Neil Sorens]

If the game was a financial success, they'd make DLC for it. The lack of updates and content means they can't afford to sink more resources into it.