Return to “Games”

Post

Re: Dawn of Andromeda

#7
"Turn-based" is a little tricky, but close enough.

Mostly, I still aver that there are fundamental psychological differences between:
  • quick thinking (tactics / action)
  • detailed thinking (operations / logistics)
  • deep thinking (strategy / planning)
  • holistic thinking (grand strategy / vision)
This is what drives my opinion that, if your goal as a game developer is to make a game that people who like strategic play can enjoy, you are undermining that goal if you impose a real-time constraint on players. Real-time fun is tactical fun. But requiring tactical thinking makes deep thinking -- gathering data, analyzing intel, perceiving patterns, conceiving plans -- harder, perhaps even impossible. Meaning, less fun.

What I hope comes through in this re-explanation is that I'm not arguing in any way that there's anything inherently bad or wrong about a real-time mechanic. There's not. The only question is whether that mechanic makes your intended gameplay experience more fun or not.

My argument is that if the intended experience is strategic fun, then preventing players from having the unrestricted time necessary to do deep thinking -- as a real-time mechanic does -- is a wrong choice because it undercuts the intended play experience. It encourages and rewards something other than deep thinking.

This is not to say that any game that says it's "strategy" but imposes a real-time mechanic must be a bad game. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying it won't be as much strategic fun as it could be, and that's a shame.

I wish the best to Dawn of Andromeda's developers, as I do anyone who works to bring a game into the world.
Post

Re: Dawn of Andromeda

#8
Dinosawer wrote: (Dunno, I've never played a 4X)
You sure you never did? :think:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4X


But for the game: It looks interesting and the visuals are nice. But the reviews speak for themselves I think. I'll wait till they put some more work into it.
Automation engineer, lateral thinker, soldier, addicted to music, books and gaming.
Nothing to see here
Flatfingers wrote: 23.01.2017: "Show me the smoldering corpse of Perfectionist Josh"
Post

Re: Dawn of Andromeda

#9
its a solid foundation.

it has a research system thats pretty linear (thing, thing +1, thing +2), ship design, station design, a basic diplomacy system which is about as pointless as it is in MoO2 (trade tech, monies, planets) but has a few niceties i dont remember from other games (agreements not to settle in each others space for example). it also has trading of strategic resources using freighters you have to build and send between planets, which is nice.

all in all its "okay", but in its current state it wont become a "ohmygod i love to play this all the time" game
Post

Re: Dawn of Andromeda

#11
Dinosawer wrote:
JanB1 wrote:
Dinosawer wrote: (Dunno, I've never played a 4X)
You sure you never did? :think:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4X
Yes, I am. :P
Given the current humble monthly that will probably change soonish, though
Good to hear. You're really missing out on something here. ;)
Automation engineer, lateral thinker, soldier, addicted to music, books and gaming.
Nothing to see here
Flatfingers wrote: 23.01.2017: "Show me the smoldering corpse of Perfectionist Josh"

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron