Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I actually went ahead and completed The Codex, and I definitely see what you mean by it being far more restrictive than Opus Magnum. It was pretty tricky (but not too frustrating) dealing with the limited amount of functions per arm, limited workspace, and lack of an easy way to move/adjuct arm functions/cycles. That being said, it was pretty rewarding to see my system successfully run after spending a considerable amount of time completing and optimizing it. Definitely not going to do a full complete of The Magnum Opus Challenge after seeing how complex some of those final levels are, but I'll probably give the first few levels a try.
Going into Opus Magnum, I'm very curious to make the transition from working on a traditional square grid onto a hexagonal one. I wonder how that will effect how the puzzles/mechanics work. Having a shared timeline for the arms will definitely make it easier to maintain synchronization between their cycles, especially with the quality-of-life features that weren't in The Codex. The addition of tracks and the ability to place reagents/products wherever you want will increase the freedom for puzzle solutions. I know that there's at least one thing I need to unlearn when playing Opus Magnum; that arm bases now have collision, where they did not in The Codex.