Game Length

[EsteBeatDown]

I know this has probrably been said before, but the game REALLY does need to be adjusted in regards to game length. I know the endgame variable is set randomly, but the first day in which the game can end is set too early. Case in point, one of my games (in which I was just getting into a very interesting part of the game) ended at day 25.

DAY 25.

Come on now. How can you expect anyone to really get the most out of a session in that amount of time? Most people aren't even set by day 25 and they want to keep going. And don't bring in that, "But in real war, you would be excited for it to end that quickly!" This is not a real war. It's a game. Get out of here with that argument.

If anything, the endgame variable should not be set to end any earlier than day 40. The way it seems to be set now, it looks like the game can end anywhere between day 20 and 50. That's just way too early. There is no way I am going to enjoy a game if it ends right when things are starting to get really interesting.

And for anyone doubting my claim that I actually had a game end at day 25....

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=352288161

EsteBeatDown

[Sparky/Salty]

The lowest is 23.. So, someone already beat you. :)

[EsteBeatDown]

Originally posted by BOT NOOB WATEREMLON:

The lowest is 23.. So, someone already beat you. :)

Wow. 23 huh? Is that the lowest confirmed day that the war can end on, or is it just the lowest one recorded so far? I have a feeling that the war can end even earlier than that.

[Lil Cub]

pff, they don't need to make the war longer. the only thing they need to add is a endless mode :D

[Borg Cube]

Once you're set up, the game loses most of its difficulty, which would make endless mode pretty boring.

[Lil Cub]

hmm, i didn't know that since i don't have the game :P but maybe they should make the days harder and harder or something

[Sparky/Salty]

Originally posted by EsteBeatDown:

Originally posted by BOT NOOB WATEREMLON:

The lowest is 23.. So, someone already beat you. :)

Wow. 23 huh? Is that the lowest confirmed day that the war can end on, or is it just the lowest one recorded so far? I have a feeling that the war can end even earlier than that.

The lowest recored day. It could go lower. :)

[Metal Izanagi]

Originally posted by EsteBeatDown:

And don't bring in that, "But in real war, you would be excited for it to end that quickly!" This is not a real war. It's a game. Get out of here with that argument.

No. This game is meant to tell the story of a war. The fact that it ends faster than a player might want is intended. See, the game isn't your story; it's the story of the people that make up the group.THEY want the war to end as quickly as possible. Your wishes are irrelevant.

[Grammy Casserole]

perhaps adding user generated difficulty settings would be a good idea, i know it detracts from the randomness, but allowing people to specify whether they want to start in winter or summer, or allow them to specify whether they want a fast or slow burning war, would fix your complaint.

[EsteBeatDown]

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

Originally posted by EsteBeatDown:

And don't bring in that, "But in real war, you would be excited for it to end that quickly!" This is not a real war. It's a game. Get out of here with that argument.

No. This game is meant to tell the story of a war. The fact that it ends faster than a player might want is intended. See, the game isn't your story; it's the story of the people that make up the group.THEY want the war to end as quickly as possible. Your wishes are irrelevant.

Before I tear down your narrow sighted counter point, I'm going to preference this by saying that you are obviously not the kind of gamer that my complaint is referring to.

So the game obviously wants to tell you the story of war. That's fine. But the thing is, the story never changes. Only the cast does. Once you finish the game a few times, the story becomes irrelevant. Most people don't care about the story after finishing the game a few times. They want to get better at surviving. "How fast can I loot every building?" "How fast can I upgrade everything to it's top tier?" "Can I survive without having to steal?" Things like that.

However, the one thing that most players want is the ability to see how long they can go before eventually being overcome by the war. In the current games state, the fact that the game ends way too early and that there is no difficulty spike at the later stages of the game is what gives the game no replayability past the first few playthroughs. Adding a survival mode with increasing difficulty or a custom mode where you can adjust the terms of the game (loot amount, bandit numbers, etc.) would do wonders for this issue.

I have played through all of the games starting scenarios. I, along with many others who have done the same, could care less about the story at this point. We want replayability (which speaks volumes of how great this game is) and the game does not offer much of that right now.

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

Your wishes are irrelevant.

You should consider a career with EA or Ubisoft. Saying that the consumer's wishes are irrelevant is the fastest way to drive them away. If DLC was released for this game, but it only added a few more survivors and locations (with no survival or custom mode), I would not buy it. Sure, they've already got my original $20, but not catering to the majority of the players wishes would guarentee that they would not make anymore money from that point on.

[Metal Izanagi]

Originally posted by EsteBeatDown:

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

No. This game is meant to tell the story of a war. The fact that it ends faster than a player might want is intended. See, the game isn't your story; it's the story of the people that make up the group.THEY want the war to end as quickly as possible. Your wishes are irrelevant.

Before I tear down your narrow sighted counter point, I'm going to preference this by saying that you are obviously not the kind of gamer that my complaint is referring to.

So the game obviously wants to tell you the story of war. That's fine. But the thing is, the story never changes. Only the cast does. Once you finish the game a few times, the story becomes irrelevant. Most people don't care about the story after finishing the game a few times. They want to get better at surviving. "How fast can I loot every building?" "How fast can I upgrade everything to it's top tier?" "Can I survive without having to steal?" Things like that.

However, the one thing that most players want is the ability to see how long they can go before eventually being overcome by the war. In the current games state, the fact that the game ends way too early and that there is no difficulty spike at the later stages of the game is what gives the game no replayability past the first few playthroughs. Adding a survival mode with increasing difficulty or a custom mode where you can adjust the terms of the game (loot amount, bandit numbers, etc.) would do wonders for this issue.

I have played through all of the games starting scenarios. I, along with many others who have done the same, could care less about the story at this point. We want replayability (which speaks volumes of how great this game is) and the game does not offer much of that right now.

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

Your wishes are irrelevant.

You should consider a career with EA or Ubisoft. Saying that the consumer's wishes are irrelevant is the fastest way to drive them away. If DLC was released for this game, but it only added a few more survivors and locations (with no survival or custom mode), I would not buy it. Sure, they've already got my original $20, but not catering to the majority of the players wishes would guarentee that they would not make anymore money from that point on.

So now we're going to go with the majority argument? Rig up a poll, by all means. If that many people, and I don't mean just a few scattered posts in one or two threads, but a large number of people, ask for it, I don't see why they wouldn't consider it, at least. Prove me wrong, please. I'd gladly welcome /any/ new content for this game. I was just trying to explain to you the reason /why/ the game ends when it does, sometimes. It seems like the devs had a specific idea in mind when they decided the length of the war, so who are we to judge them for making the game the way they wanted to?

[EsteBeatDown]

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

Originally posted by EsteBeatDown:

Before I tear down your narrow sighted counter point, I'm going to preference this by saying that you are obviously not the kind of gamer that my complaint is referring to.

So the game obviously wants to tell you the story of war. That's fine. But the thing is, the story never changes. Only the cast does. Once you finish the game a few times, the story becomes irrelevant. Most people don't care about the story after finishing the game a few times. They want to get better at surviving. "How fast can I loot every building?" "How fast can I upgrade everything to it's top tier?" "Can I survive without having to steal?" Things like that.

However, the one thing that most players want is the ability to see how long they can go before eventually being overcome by the war. In the current games state, the fact that the game ends way too early and that there is no difficulty spike at the later stages of the game is what gives the game no replayability past the first few playthroughs. Adding a survival mode with increasing difficulty or a custom mode where you can adjust the terms of the game (loot amount, bandit numbers, etc.) would do wonders for this issue.

I have played through all of the games starting scenarios. I, along with many others who have done the same, could care less about the story at this point. We want replayability (which speaks volumes of how great this game is) and the game does not offer much of that right now.



You should consider a career with EA or Ubisoft. Saying that the consumer's wishes are irrelevant is the fastest way to drive them away. If DLC was released for this game, but it only added a few more survivors and locations (with no survival or custom mode), I would not buy it. Sure, they've already got my original $20, but not catering to the majority of the players wishes would guarentee that they would not make anymore money from that point on.

So now we're going to go with the majority argument? Rig up a poll, by all means. If that many people, and I don't mean just a few scattered posts in one or two threads, but a large number of people, ask for it, I don't see why they wouldn't consider it, at least. Prove me wrong, please. I'd gladly welcome /any/ new content for this game. I was just trying to explain to you the reason /why/ the game ends when it does, sometimes. It seems like the devs had a specific idea in mind when they decided the length of the war, so who are we to judge them for making the game the way they wanted to?

They already made the game that they wanted. I'm judging them for not looking BEYOND the game. Namely, after their story is told.

I'll clarify so you can understand, since you can't seem to grasp the concept that I am trying to convey here. Most developers get to tell the story they want to tell over the course of their game. That's great. However, many of those same dev's realize that there has to be more AFTER the story for replayability. So they include other things, such as multiplayer, challenges, survival modes, etc etc.

The War of Mine devs however, outside of offering differing starting scenarios, did not do that.

"They wanted to tell a story. This is how real war is. Blah blah blah." Take your emotions out of this argument. This is a game. From a purely business standpoint, not offering more replayability at launch was a bad move.

[Timlugia]

It's somewhat random, my record are 42, 42, and 36.

[Doakes]

Yeah I agree with this. I have only finished one time (at day 40) and it was very easy once I had learned the game mechanics. It's a good game, but I have no reason to play again. I actually felt disappointment rather than relieved/achievement when the war ended, because there was a number of challenges I never needed to face. The war needs to last longer and the difficulty should be higher at the later stages.

I noticed someone mentioning that some of the scenarios are harder, but I'm not going to start a game for a random difficulty chance. Even then the possibility of the war ending even earlier is discouraging.

Not that I expected more. I knew this would happen the moment I saw the game had no difficulty level. It was fun while it lasted though.

[Kettlehead]

I was raving about how good this game is to a few friends down the pub last night, encouraging them to give it a go. Then that inevitable question all gamers must ask came up, is their much replayability, because for £15 a game needs it. And through gritted teeth I had to tell the truth, no.

Yes, there is replayability in that chances are your going to play this game through a couple of times to try different characters and visit new locations. But thats only going to take you a couple of sessions, as the game is just too short. I feel the developers need to either focus on extending the playtime through maybe introducing a survival mode or perhaps open the game up to modders.

[ChubbyNinja]

Originally posted by Shipers:

I was raving about how good this game is to a few friends down the pub last night, encouraging them to give it a go. Then that inevitable question all gamers must ask came up, is their much replayability, because for £15 a game needs it. And through gritted teeth I had to tell the truth, no.

Yes, there is replayability in that chances are your going to play this game through a couple of times to try different characters and visit new locations. But thats only going to take you a couple of sessions, as the game is just too short. I feel the developers need to either focus on extending the playtime through maybe introducing a survival mode or perhaps open the game up to modders.

this is the only reason i am hesistant about buying this game. Story is king in A game to me, but after I experience all the story i could i would love to see how long i can survive.

If the devs do not lwant to do it then let the modding community do it, that to me is a smart move on any developer to allow and support modding. Just look at bethesda and games like skyrim, it really adds to replayibility in my opinion. But i am sure this has been brought up before.