Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Chiefwaffles]

I don't really count Apocalypse in that category. Kind of, maybe. But I thought all it did was scale the difficulty based on your performance. So if you're doing really well they'll get better stuff faster. That kind of stuff. Nothing really meriting changes in response to specific strategies.

[zaimoni]

Hmmm... supposedly xcom apoc did it, but the claim was likely untrue

XCOM Apocalypse made the claim for alien tactics, not the aliens themselves.  It's noticeable if you savescum a lot in the early game or otherwise replay the same battle multiple times (the aliens do tend to alter their routing to die more slowly), but not noticeable to the casual player.

[Retropunch]

In terms of AI tactics, a while back I had an interesting conversation with a dev who worked on Crysis. They were trying to create the most awesome enemy AI, which could hunt in a pack and constantly react to the player's tactics.

Apparently the problem wasn't that it was too hard to do that, but more that it just felt like the AI was cheating to the player and it wasn't any fun. A single combatant couldn't possibly outflank 5+ enemies, even with a super suit.  Even when their QA testers could see the AI reacting in a cool way, they still said it felt rubbish. It's similar like when you get one shot sniped in *insert FPS* - it just feels unfair even if it is realistic/not cheating.

Therefore I think it's a really, really tricky line to walk unless you can demonstrate really obviously (like mutations) what's happening. I've high hopes, but I don't imagine that it'll allow for a sort of endless tactical challenge.

[ZeroGravitas]

It is a shame likewise that the shady funding system behind Phoenix Point (which includes those disreputable Double Fine guys) prevents me from buying this, no matter how good the game ends up being.

this is the dumbest of all possible positions to take

[Egan_BW]

...No, there is no theoretical limit to how dumb a position can be. It's turtles all the way down, so to speak.

[Mephansteras]

It is a shame likewise that the shady funding system behind Phoenix Point (which includes those disreputable Double Fine guys) prevents me from buying this, no matter how good the game ends up being.

this is the dumbest of all possible positions to take

I get not backing a game for that, but seems odd not to purchase a finished game because of their original funding platform.

[Majestic7]

It is a shame likewise that the shady funding system behind Phoenix Point (which includes those disreputable Double Fine guys) prevents me from buying this, no matter how good the game ends up being.

this is the dumbest of all possible positions to take

I get not backing a game for that, but seems odd not to purchase a finished game because of their original funding platform.

As described in previous posts in this very thread, the platform is not just funding platform. It continues to operate when the game starts selling and a big chunk of the money will go to Double Fine guys.

[ChairmanPoo]

It is a shame likewise that the shady funding system behind Phoenix Point (which includes those disreputable Double Fine guys) prevents me from buying this, no matter how good the game ends up being.

this is the dumbest of all possible positions to take

I get not backing a game for that, but seems odd not to purchase a finished game because of their original funding platform.

What if the original funding platform  was blood diamonds and slave children?

[Mephansteras]

What if the original funding platform  was blood diamonds and slave children?

Sure, anything can be taken to a truly horrible level. But while DoubleFine might be shady, they're not that bad.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I still don't even know what happened with Double Fine. I completely missed out on whatever The Controversy is. They made Rocket Age and it sucked, or something? Money was used in some manner that was not considered appropriate by the providers of that money? Tim Schafer was discovered to have received the reincarnated soul of Hitler?


Anyway, I don't think it's unreasonable for the platform that was used to market to small investors getting a cut of the ROI. Or are Double Fine's sins just that bad? Are there blood diamonds?

[Criptfeind]

From what I understand Broken age was seemingly hilariously mismanaged, despite getting roughly all the money in the world it still was super delayed and they needed to release it in two parts. But more egregiously is space base DF9, which sits in the pile of tons of shitty early access games that never got anywhere and were abandoned by their dev. After selling it to their fans for a year in early access they decided it wasn't selling well enough so they canned the team working on it, released it as a "complete" game out of early access and told the community to finish it if they want.

I dunno if there's any other controvery, but space base df9 seems enough to blacklist them to me if that's the sorta thing one does.

[nenjin]

If you want to know what the BFD is, you can literally read up the thread.

[ZeroGravitas]

It is a shame likewise that the shady funding system behind Phoenix Point (which includes those disreputable Double Fine guys) prevents me from buying this, no matter how good the game ends up being.

this is the dumbest of all possible positions to take

I get not backing a game for that, but seems odd not to purchase a finished game because of their original funding platform.

As described in previous posts in this very thread, the platform is not just funding platform. It continues to operate when the game starts selling and a big chunk of the money will go to Double Fine guys.

because they are publishing the game

it is literally how all publishers work

(nobody tell him how steam works)

[ZeroGravitas]

...No, there is no theoretical limit to how dumb a position can be. It's turtles all the way down, so to speak.

true

[Majestic7]

....yes, so what is exactly dumb about boycotting an unethical publisher? Same logic applies to any purchase decisions where the reputation of the company is tarnished. It is exactly the same as avoiding Nestle or Comcast or any other company with soiled reputation. That is how consumers are supposed to have an effect on the free market, duh.