want to buy but

[tookie]

it looks good and the devs dont seem to be slacking but... early access for 6 years is..... yeah not sure im willing to trust that it will come out. so i thought id ask the comunity that seems active

[ripmm1234]

honestly same

[Seddrick]

honestly, id say they are fine compared to other EA devs. Fun pimps had 7 days to die in EA for about 10 years or so. Doesn't excuse the game for being in EA for that long but i digress. I honestly think that once the faction update comes out, we are gonna start seeing the game start wrapping this up and head towards 1.0.

[Bryan]

What i will say is:

It's a very small team not even 5 people are working on this game.
They have updates / hotfixes all the damn time which mean they are always working on the game!!!

They listen to the people and even the YouTuber The Spiffing Brit played it and loved it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y07pKw_ufuQ

It'll be hard learning the game and how to play it, i'm still learning how to play but i have a big back log of games rn so it's low on my to play list.

[WotterBytes]

It's an active little community.

The dev is responsive to community feedback and the game as it stands now is more than sufficient to play and enjoy, and will only get better as time continues.

I've got over a thousand hours in this game at this point, and I don't think I regret a single minute of it lol

[DakotaFred]

NO ALL UDATES ARE JUST NEW BUILDINGS AND DECORATIONS

[snaketeeth01]

Spiffing Brit loves any game that content can be made out of.
No special affinity toward this game or genre by any means.

As unfinished as this is. Isn't there prison architect 2 that you can do a heck of alot with?
Dude, rimworld with mods will let you do just about anything.
Those are 2 large sandbox games to play in.

This sandbox is unfinished and only has so many things in it to play with.

The only 2 responses yet from actualy players of this game both have under 3 hours on record.
That's interesting. I sit and play stardew valley for 3 hours at a time.
So how many sessions have you really sat and played?
1?
2?

It takes me 2 hours to find and watch a movie that I don't have to pay for.
Is that all that is here so far?
World poker tours plays on TV for free. I can spend hours watching that.
How many hours will I get out of my 35 dollar purchase?
3 hours
Maybe I'll play for 7 and it'll only cost me 5 bucks an hour.

TCG Card shop sim. Owned this game for nearly a year now. I've got 70 hours in at a content wall. Waiting for updates.
Right now, 6 years in and patching every 2 weeks all of a sudden?
Slow is an understatement.
By the time I hit my content wall at 50 hours played I will be stuck waiting 1 month at a time to get a content update for this game.
So I can load my existing game and add 1 more feature to my world.
Yay.
Then wait a month.

Meanwhile if I want a world builder I own cities skylines 2.
Also getting updates and DLC so.
There's that.
Also Rimworld exists.
And stardew valley.
And Planet coaster.

I'll be watching to see if this game gets steady and worthy updates. But looking from the outside in so far this looks like it would just be disapointing. Expecially at that price point.
I'd pay 12 bucks for what I see now, not 3 times that.
Guess I'll wait another 18 years and see if it's worth 30 bucks.
See ya later.

[Spooky Witch ~]

yeah when I saw the release date I was a bit uh, suspicious

[Spooky Witch ~]

Originally posted by snaketeeth01:

Spiffing Brit loves any game that content can be made out of.
No special affinity toward this game or genre by any means.

Yeah he's basically your typical slop tuber. Cash in on that sponsor money (and propably dont even play it yourself) and spit out some unfunny nothing comments and then forget about it forever.
I started to notice a pattern that the games they "cover" tend to be abandonware most of the time.

[snaketeeth01]

Originally posted by Cyber Witch ~:

Originally posted by snaketeeth01:

Spiffing Brit loves any game that content can be made out of.
No special affinity toward this game or genre by any means.

Yeah he's basically your typical slop tuber. Cash in on that sponsor money (and propably dont even play it yourself) and spit out some unfunny nothing comments and then forget about it forever.
I started to notice a pattern that the games they "cover" tend to be abandonware most of the time.

Think of it this way.

His whole shtick is about covering an exploit or bug, to achieve an end-goal in the most efficient route possible. Usually by means that are not intended, or imbalance in such a way where it is so much more effective than anything else so why play any other way?
It is comedic how easy this 1 method is, let me show you this 1 method overlooked by the game developers.

He doesn't expoit finished and balanced games.
He exploits unfinished imbalanced and bugged games.
It isn't a shining endoresment let's play video.
It's a hey look what you can do with this sandbox game.
When considering that plus release date.

30 bucks for a game that is 300 MB and looks like a kongregate unity game from 2015.
It's tough when I am willing to pay for what a game is, not what it will someday possibly may become after a year.
If sales are what is driving the studio being open long enough to make a game people are willing to pay for. That seems like a bit of a house of cards for a game that will not build any hype. You've had more than half a decade at this and have under 2000 reviews.

This also tells me alot.
544
players right now
617
24-hour peak
792
all-time peak 5.3 years ago
https://steamdb.info/app/486860/charts/#6y

You can see the game has peaked exactly 1 time 5 years ago. And been idle under 100 daily for the entire time, save for a few periods of bouncinf over a hundred. The only recent spike is directly attributed to the spiffing brit video which released mid day yesterday. You can see the exactly hourly difference from early and mid day which was entirely normal. To the afternoon and evening after the video had dropped where the playerbase had suddenly spiked.
Another day of the video circulating, more players became aware and impulse purchased based on the limited gameplay from the video. The rest is individual imagination of what the game could be, but likely isn't.
When ever do early release games surpass expectations? Let alone meet them.

There will be a short growth period as player purchase or investigate feedback of new players. Where will it cap? How many hours is there? What will the concurrent players be at a week from now? Steady and growing, or already dropping?
If things drop off a week after the first spike in 5 years that tells you it's a 1 week game. Players bought, it, finished it and moved it.
If the number sticks and grows, and patches keep rolling, then there could be seomthing here worth playing.
Til then I'll keep working on my stardew valley farm.
See what becomes of this blip on the radar.

As soon as he covers another interesting game the impulse buyers will go move onto that anyway. These shorts blips are not really indicitive. It's whether or not players stick that tells you anything.

Hey didya know.
For 0 dollars you can emulate FFX on PS2.
That's a pretty good dollar to hours played ratio.
Pokemon on GBA is also good.

[NuisanceDM]

I've put in 85 hours with this game (to put snaketeeth01's assessment to shame). It's amazing but definitely not for everyone. The early access bit does not scare me at all, as the developer updates ~every 2 weeks or so, and is VERY responsive to the community. I've not only gotten my money's worth, but had an incredible time playing with my best friend and my partner. There is no co-op or multiplayer- we just share our worlds with eachother on discord. The level of FREEDOM and control in this game is unmatched, and I could literally NOT DISAGREE MORE with the people who say there's "not much to do." Like I actually think they have to be trolling, or simply weren't smart enough to figure out how to play... and it's not a difficult premise. There are few tricky setup bits, but google has the answers.

I like cute stuff. I made an MMO with animal character classes. Otters with wands, bears with axes, etc. My partner likes eldritch horrors, so his players are all creepy and gross, and his monster NPC's are cute heroes. My best friend did something traditional, very Guild Wars, for his MMO aesthetic.

They've added dungeons in the last year or so, which are a lot of fun to design and balance too. The game is a huge amount of balancing and going "okay I made the mages too strong, let me nerf" while you free-build new zones and cities, etc. It is time consuming, SLOW, and a labor of love in sandbox or career mode.

Also the menu and UI are some of the best in any game I've played (you'll see, if you get it.) Don't let people who've NEVER PLAYED THE GAME sway your opinion with their negativity. It definitely may not be the game for you! But it's also definitely not what others are making it out to be. I really wasn't going to say anything but seeing someone be so overwhelmingly negative and condescending about a game they admit they've never even touched... Especially a GOOD one... Was annoying.

[NuisanceDM]

Also the guy who said "NO ALL UPDATES ARE JUST THEMES AND BUILDINGS" is lying cause they JUST did a huge update reworking the AI and tactics... like... lie better if you're gonna lie but what do y'all have against this game? Lmao

[snaketeeth01]

Originally posted by NuisanceDM:

I've put in 85 hours with this game (to put snaketeeth01's assessment to shame). I really wasn't going to say anything but seeing someone be so overwhelmingly negative and condescending about a game they admit they've never even touched... Especially a GOOD one... Was annoying.

My problem with people is they don't think. They react.
You are welcome to point out any facts I got wrong. Any mistakes I made.

But when I say the charts from release have only spiked when this game got coverage by spiffing brit.
I show you the steamDSB to backup my claim. Which you cannot say is false regardless of how it makes you feel.

Your hours played also doesn't mean much. I have over 160 hours in DRG survivor and that game sucks.

Did I misread the file size? Because again. Facts are not negative, they are just facts.
Also I've played on kongregate for years. Many years. More than a decade even. Like, lots of years.
I've played flash games as a kid. I've seen the evolution of flash graphics. And I've see the introduction of unity engine games on kongregate.
This my friend. Looks exactly like one of those games and has a similar file size.

Want to take a guess why it looks like a game from the 2000's?

"Well, no. It’s built in a custom engine, one that I’ve been using for more than a decade. That engine is called VectorStorm, and is open source (You can find it on Github) It’s a classic, old-school style of game engine, written in plain C++. The kind of thing that I used at multiple companies in the game industry in the 90s and 2000s."
- https://blog.mmorpgtycoon.com/post/vectorstorm/

Because it is built on an engine from that era. Just another fact you can throw your feelings at.
I am not positive OR negative about stating facts. It is what it is.

It's not even like the game looks bad or anything. It just is.

I'm allowed to observe this games growth without purchasing.
My opinion is no less just because I hadn't yet made a purchase. And so far my opinions are merely pointing out the things I see.
It is also my opinion that standout games stand out on their own. Not only get attention after being given a showcase by a popular game content creator.
How else do you think I even noticed this game.
It wasn't from some advertising campaign or highlight. A YT video got me here.
Some people get excited and buy right away. Some people take that excitement and do some research first.
I'm waiting and watching.

Is this negativeity, or observation. You tell me.
Here is a 1 week snapshot of concurrent players.
https://steamdb.info/app/486860/charts/#1w
Any objective person can see it is trending downward.
Not up. Down.
What conclusion do we draw from this?
If it were an upward trend that means more sales. More players sticking to it.
The opposite means the inverse. No influx of sales but stagnation.
Less players each daily logging in to this game they bought and deciding to play anything else.

Now. Take that chart, find you median line. Extend time out 2 weeks further, extend that line. And you will find your projected player count at that date.
Grade 9 math.
What makes the line go up? Content patches. Right?
If true we would see a spike every 2 weeks on a patch release no? Something indicating a growing playerbase.
And yet. Objective observer can see.
126
players right now
198
24-hour peak
Not being positive or negative. Just pointing that out.

If I were to believe "it's good for the price".
I feel like myself and 999 other players would agree, and concurrent would be 1126.
But it's not.
It's more people saying "not for that price" than people saying "yes for that price".

Business is business. It's a cool game but I can watch videos about it or play another cool game. I don't need to part with near 35 bucks to experience it first hand. I can do something else and be happy.
For half the price, sure. And 999 other people would also snap buy it for $15.
And again, you'd have 10X players.
But if's and but's don't mean much. :)

+1 observer. Hey they got me to wishlist it.

There are just too many new games coming out every single day. Too many games for under 20 that also "look good". If I can buy 2 games for the price of this one. What am I gonna do? That's not negative. That's prioritizing consumer value.

[NuisanceDM]

Originally posted by snaketeeth01:

Originally posted by NuisanceDM:

I've put in 85 hours with this game (to put snaketeeth01's assessment to shame). I really wasn't going to say anything but seeing someone be so overwhelmingly negative and condescending about a game they admit they've never even touched... Especially a GOOD one... Was annoying.

My problem with people is they don't think. They react.
You are welcome to point out any facts I got wrong. Any mistakes I made.

But when I say the charts from release have only spiked when this game got coverage by spiffing brit.
I show you the steamDSB to backup my claim. Which you cannot say is false regardless of how it makes you feel.

Your hours played also doesn't mean much. I have over 160 hours in DRG survivor and that game sucks.

Did I misread the file size? Because again. Facts are not negative, they are just facts.
Also I've played on kongregate for years. Many years. More than a decade even. Like, lots of years.
I've played flash games as a kid. I've seen the evolution of flash graphics. And I've see the introduction of unity engine games on kongregate.
This my friend. Looks exactly like one of those games and has a similar file size.

Want to take a guess why it looks like a game from the 2000's?

"Well, no. It’s built in a custom engine, one that I’ve been using for more than a decade. That engine is called VectorStorm, and is open source (You can find it on Github) It’s a classic, old-school style of game engine, written in plain C++. The kind of thing that I used at multiple companies in the game industry in the 90s and 2000s."
- https://blog.mmorpgtycoon.com/post/vectorstorm/

Because it is built on an engine from that era. Just another fact you can throw your feelings at.
I am not positive OR negative about stating facts. It is what it is.

It's not even like the game looks bad or anything. It just is.

I'm allowed to observe this games growth without purchasing.
My opinion is no less just because I hadn't yet made a purchase. And so far my opinions are merely pointing out the things I see.
It is also my opinion that standout games stand out on their own. Not only get attention after being given a showcase by a popular game content creator.
How else do you think I even noticed this game.
It wasn't from some advertising campaign or highlight. A YT video got me here.
Some people get excited and buy right away. Some people take that excitement and do some research first.
I'm waiting and watching.

Is this negativeity, or observation. You tell me.
Here is a 1 week snapshot of concurrent players.
https://steamdb.info/app/486860/charts/#1w
Any objective person can see it is trending downward.
Not up. Down.
What conclusion do we draw from this?
If it were an upward trend that means more sales. More players sticking to it.
The opposite means the inverse. No influx of sales but stagnation.
Less players each daily logging in to this game they bought and deciding to play anything else.

Now. Take that chart, find you median line. Extend time out 2 weeks further, extend that line. And you will find your projected player count at that date.
Grade 9 math.
What makes the line go up? Content patches. Right?
If true we would see a spike every 2 weeks on a patch release no? Something indicating a growing playerbase.
And yet. Objective observer can see.
126
players right now
198
24-hour peak
Not being positive or negative. Just pointing that out.

If I were to believe "it's good for the price".
I feel like myself and 999 other players would agree, and concurrent would be 1126.
But it's not.
It's more people saying "not for that price" than people saying "yes for that price".

Business is business. It's a cool game but I can watch videos about it or play another cool game. I don't need to part with near 35 bucks to experience it first hand. I can do something else and be happy.
For half the price, sure. And 999 other people would also snap buy it for $15.
And again, you'd have 10X players.
But if's and but's don't mean much. :)

+1 observer. Hey they got me to wishlist it.

There are just too many new games coming out every single day. Too many games for under 20 that also "look good". If I can buy 2 games for the price of this one. What am I gonna do? That's not negative. That's prioritizing consumer value.

I am absolutely not reading all that, stay mad and die negative if you like lol. i've actually played the game, unlike you, and it's good

[mineral_county]

Originally posted by snaketeeth01:

Originally posted by NuisanceDM:

I've put in 85 hours with this game (to put snaketeeth01's assessment to shame). I really wasn't going to say anything but seeing someone be so overwhelmingly negative and condescending about a game they admit they've never even touched... Especially a GOOD one... Was annoying.

My problem with people is they don't think. They react.
You are welcome to point out any facts I got wrong. Any mistakes I made.

But when I say the charts from release have only spiked when this game got coverage by spiffing brit.
I show you the steamDSB to backup my claim. Which you cannot say is false regardless of how it makes you feel.

Your hours played also doesn't mean much. I have over 160 hours in DRG survivor and that game sucks.

Did I misread the file size? Because again. Facts are not negative, they are just facts.
Also I've played on kongregate for years. Many years. More than a decade even. Like, lots of years.
I've played flash games as a kid. I've seen the evolution of flash graphics. And I've see the introduction of unity engine games on kongregate.
This my friend. Looks exactly like one of those games and has a similar file size.

Want to take a guess why it looks like a game from the 2000's?

"Well, no. It’s built in a custom engine, one that I’ve been using for more than a decade. That engine is called VectorStorm, and is open source (You can find it on Github) It’s a classic, old-school style of game engine, written in plain C++. The kind of thing that I used at multiple companies in the game industry in the 90s and 2000s."
- https://blog.mmorpgtycoon.com/post/vectorstorm/

Because it is built on an engine from that era. Just another fact you can throw your feelings at.
I am not positive OR negative about stating facts. It is what it is.

It's not even like the game looks bad or anything. It just is.

I'm allowed to observe this games growth without purchasing.
My opinion is no less just because I hadn't yet made a purchase. And so far my opinions are merely pointing out the things I see.
It is also my opinion that standout games stand out on their own. Not only get attention after being given a showcase by a popular game content creator.
How else do you think I even noticed this game.
It wasn't from some advertising campaign or highlight. A YT video got me here.
Some people get excited and buy right away. Some people take that excitement and do some research first.
I'm waiting and watching.

Is this negativeity, or observation. You tell me.
Here is a 1 week snapshot of concurrent players.
https://steamdb.info/app/486860/charts/#1w
Any objective person can see it is trending downward.
Not up. Down.
What conclusion do we draw from this?
If it were an upward trend that means more sales. More players sticking to it.
The opposite means the inverse. No influx of sales but stagnation.
Less players each daily logging in to this game they bought and deciding to play anything else.

Now. Take that chart, find you median line. Extend time out 2 weeks further, extend that line. And you will find your projected player count at that date.
Grade 9 math.
What makes the line go up? Content patches. Right?
If true we would see a spike every 2 weeks on a patch release no? Something indicating a growing playerbase.
And yet. Objective observer can see.
126
players right now
198
24-hour peak
Not being positive or negative. Just pointing that out.

If I were to believe "it's good for the price".
I feel like myself and 999 other players would agree, and concurrent would be 1126.
But it's not.
It's more people saying "not for that price" than people saying "yes for that price".

Business is business. It's a cool game but I can watch videos about it or play another cool game. I don't need to part with near 35 bucks to experience it first hand. I can do something else and be happy.
For half the price, sure. And 999 other people would also snap buy it for $15.
And again, you'd have 10X players.
But if's and but's don't mean much. :)

+1 observer. Hey they got me to wishlist it.

There are just too many new games coming out every single day. Too many games for under 20 that also "look good". If I can buy 2 games for the price of this one. What am I gonna do? That's not negative. That's prioritizing consumer value.

Writing this much back to someone because they enjoyed a game you didn't actually try is being negative. I'm not sure you can put this energy toward any number of games you don't dislike, it seems like you want spend your time writing rambling complaints

[snaketeeth01]

didjya know.
researching a vehicle before buying it is negative.
Getting a home inspection before buying it. Also negative.
:)

The very last thing you want is information.