Anno isn't an RTS, its a city building game
way2funny's forum posts
So i'm downloading some mods for the game, but whats the difference with the texture pack and the enhancement pack? What other mods should I download?
Eh, if you don't mind lower res textures, I think the GOG version of the game works really well. It has the FOV and Resolution fix which imo is the most important part. But then again I don't mind the older visuals, some how it even added to the atmosphere almost. The one thing I would say is, explore a lot, and if you get stuck don't be afraid to look things up. The game can be punishing, but that is part of the experience and enjoyment.
Getting it for free from an old GPU, looks pretty good I never played the older games so I don't care about people whining for nostalgia's sake. Looks a lot like Dishonored which I don't mind at all.
Dishonored was heavily influenced by the original Thief, even in terms of the story arch (especially following Daud's story)
It still shouldn't be on the front page. And anyway, 'early access' is a vague term. A lot of people don't fully understand the concept.
It should be a totally separate section just like Steam Green-light is. I shouldn't need to shift through all the early access crap to find new games and top sellers.
My problem with this argument is that on the store page for each game, in nice big font, are messages like
"WARNING: THIS GAME IS EARLY ACCESS ALPHA. PLEASE DO NOT PURCHASE IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACTIVELY SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAME AND ARE PREPARED TO HANDLE WITH SERIOUS ISSUES AND POSSIBLE INTERRUPTIONS OF GAME FUNCTIONING."
"“We are in very early development. Some things work, some things don't. We haven't totally decided where the game is headed - so things will change. Things will change a lot. We might even make changes that you think are wrong. But we have a plan. It's in our interest to make the game awesome - so please trust us.”"
There's absolutely no way to even purchase these games, without knowing what you're getting yourself into. And these games are the top-sellers, why don't they deserve to be on the top page? If more people are enjoying their time playing an unfinished game than finished ones, I don't see the big deal with these games being given visibility. Obviously tons of people are having fun with them, so it's not like a minority is enforcing their opinions on the majority. Steam should give an option to filter out unfinished games for those who desire, but filtering it out for everyone seems extreme.
I understand that that. However, look at the quote "Please trust us". Why should people trust them with an unfinished product that may NEVER be finished?
So don't then. The fact that it's available isn't making anyone buy anything against their will. It's a complete non-issue. I don't understand how anyone can possibly think there's anything wrong with that. I guess I was just raised to believe that people make their own decisions. Call me old fashioned.
I don't, that doesn't mean I agree or will be passive about a companies business decisions.
I prefer playing non lethally, but who are you to tell people they are playing a video game wrong? I went through the game a second time sneaking around but playing lethally, and I was just as immersed as playing non lethally. Sure, higher difficulties required non lethal approaches, but not everyone plays them at the higher difficulties. You can still be lethal in Thief and be quiet. I don't understand what you are getting at. You have a very binary view of thief. You think you can only play it as a complete ghost, or blast your way through it, when there are many shades in between. You can be lethal, quiet, and stealthy. And some people prefer that over nonlethal, quiet and stealthy. There is no denying you needed to be generally quiet, stealthy and stick to the shadows in thief. Though your belief that you must be non lethal is absurd. Looking Glass Studios always valued emergent gameplay and player choice, so if the player chooses to kill people, as long as it doesn't lower the quality of the stealth, I don't see an issue.
I'm telling you because I look at how the game is designed and how the mechanics are balanced. You keep talking about this "emergent" thing and choice.
Even on normal, the game does everything to sway you from making that lethal choice (killing, not knocking out). Its a final resort.
Attacking guards with swords, using mines and fire arrows all create noise and guards also run off and call out for help.
You are vastly out numbered. You are the hunted, not the hunter. You only take a few hits before you die. There are few health replenishments. Your sword is purposely clunky and awkward.
Doesn't that tell you something about how they want you to play? Even though they might not out-rightly say: "You attacked! Mission failed"
Read between the lines.
And for all this talk about choices and such, aren't you concerned then that this new game doesn't seem to give you any choice at all about its bombastic set pieces when you're escaping from guards?
The sword is clunky because they failed at making a sword fighting simulator. Read about the development of thief. Arrows and sword attacks from behind, stealthily, does not make noise, just like a blackjack. I do not talk about this 'emergent' thing, Looking Glass Studios, the guys who made Thief 1 and 2, System Shock, and Ultima Underworld keep talking about this 'emergent' thing. What don't you get about, a sneaky sword attack is a kill just like a sneaky blackjack attack is a knock out. Also, knocking someone out is functionally identical to killing someone. They fall, you hide them, and you never have to worry about them anymore.
I am worried about this new thief, but stop changing the subject. I am going to try the game and make my assessment after I play it, like most normal people.
I understand that that. However, look at the quote "Please trust us". Why should people trust them with an unfinished product that may NEVER be finished? This big font and warning was added not too long ago, but its not that obvious at a glance on the front page. My issue is they are unfinished products on the front page. These are bad habits that will eventually burn consumers. Do any retail stores sell you unfinished products? More importantly, do any retail stores place unfinished products on display and advertisement? Early access should be a niche in the PC market for people with expendable income that are okay with potentially losing that money. Because Rust and DayZ may never be finished. And then what? What happened to Towns? Another 'beta' 'early access' style game, sold unfinished, with promises, and became vaporware. All those people lost their money because of promises. It is the principle of all this I have an issue with.
Why should you trust buying from any developer when buying any product? I get sold tons of unfinished games by retail stores all the time.. Recently? Battlefield 4. Does that mean I stopped trusting all developers from completing their games? No...
Big Rigs was made by traditional publishing. And it was the worst game ever made. Does that mean everyone should cease trusting traditionally published games? I mean, these are supposed to be complete, working games right? If anything, I propose the system that you trust so much to be equally as untrustworthy - if not moreso.
At least with Early Access, you know what exactly you're going to get : an unfinished game. When I bought Battlefield 4, I wasn't expecting a game that would be unplayable for a month. So if anything, I trust the people who aren't trying to scam me.
I mean, no offense, but you'd have to be extremely dumb to think a game with 1.3 million sales isn't going to be finished. It's like...common sense for 10 years olds. :\ Bohemia Interactive has made tons of games in the past. With the funding, on what grounds do you think the project would fail? Sounds like you think all early access games are likely to fail because a bunch of idiots invested in another idiot's project and it never finished. Because some random project that nobody has heard of failed doesn't necessarily mean crowd funding is bad. It would be the exact same thing as being too afraid of buying retail games because they might turn out to be Battlefield 4 or Big Rigs.
Ever consider that games are better developed when going through Early Access? Look at Minecraft - this project was more successful than any traditionally published game made recently. It's obvious what game projects are safe investments. If you feel it isn't obvious, then I feel you're pretending to be an idiot just for the sake of arguing. If you need help, just ask. Nobody here would ever tell you to buy a game that would obviously fail.
It just requires the consumer to not be a lazy fuckwad, and do a little research before spending their money. The result? Thousands of amazing games are being made that couldn't have been made otherwise. And these games are so good - that they top sales charts with out even having to be finished.
Yes, I do consider games that got better, and worse through early access. That doesn't change my view that early access should only be a niche in the PC market for people that have expendable income.
I am not saying I need to be protected, in the end its up to the consumer. However, if I was a retailer, I would completely separate them out from the front page; just like Steam Greenlight is. To me, it is more consumer friendly because it is not being advertised. Steam front page is essentially advertisement. And 'finished' games deserve that more than 'unfinished' games. Whatever the definition of 'finished' is (in the case of BF4), its clear that early access is an unfinished product.