|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
Desktop Dungeons "Full Version" Preorder
June 3rd, 2011, 17:19
Coffee break games? What happened to watercoolers?
I have to get out and away from my desk at breaktimes. Sometimes I just go outside to completely clear my head. I can't play games it work, just can't.
I have to get out and away from my desk at breaktimes. Sometimes I just go outside to completely clear my head. I can't play games it work, just can't.
--
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The Second Coming- William Butler Yeats
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The Second Coming- William Butler Yeats
June 3rd, 2011, 17:27
Originally Posted by DArtagnanI don't get it, either. I was 13 when Space Invaders came out which was the first actual video game I ever saw in the Arcades (not counting pong) and I put more hours and more quarters into that than I like to think about. But that was then, and this is now. For the life of me I can't understand the appeal of playing games that come across as throwbacks to a different era. Some of my favorite games were made 20+ years ago and I'd love it of somebody reworked them to state of the art, but I find the idea of playing third party clones of old games that still play as if they were old games kinda depressing.
I just don't get it.
Just wanted to say you aren't the only one who doesn't get it.
Sentinel
June 3rd, 2011, 18:26
Originally Posted by DArtagnanThat's one more recommendation for these games. Witcher 2 is already on my list (waiting until I replay the first part), but Fallout 3 was probably the most disappointing game I have ever played, so I hadn't find the courage to try NV yet.
The best recent example would be The Witcher 2 on hard. Not a math-test, but it took quite a bit of effort to get comfortable with combat and master the system.
Other games… Hmmm… Fallout: NV is a strong title. I wouldn't call it challenging in a simplistic sense. But it's full of interesting mechanics and fantastic exploration.
June 3rd, 2011, 18:28
Originally Posted by CraigCWBAbstracting from low-budget graphics, these games are by no means throwback to the past. As mentioned by someone else before, Desktop Dungeons are more complex (gameplay-wise) than Mass Effect 2, for example.
For the life of me I can't understand the appeal of playing games that come across as throwbacks to a different era. Some of my favorite games were made 20+ years ago and I'd love it of somebody reworked them to state of the art, but I find the idea of playing third party clones of old games that still play as if they were old games kinda depressing.
June 3rd, 2011, 19:24
Guest
June 3rd, 2011, 19:24
Originally Posted by Daddy32I should probably add that I played both FO:NV and FO3 heavily modded. Mods are vital in terms of game mechanics and balance, especially for FO3.
That's one more recommendation for these games. Witcher 2 is already on my list (waiting until I replay the first part), but Fallout 3 was probably the most disappointing game I have ever played, so I hadn't find the courage to try NV yet.
Guest
June 3rd, 2011, 20:56
The genius in desktop dungeon is in it's metagame. Sure you can play through a dungeon and beat (or fail to beat) the boss in 15 minutes. But you haven't won the game when you've done that. You've just unlocked some new stuff that will lead you a step closer to beating the final level. Every time you beat a new dungeon wing with a new class you unlock something, either a new option or a tiny (but necesary) advantage in future dungeons. The result is that you aren't playing a bunch of little unrelated games, your playing a giant campaign. It also strongly encourages you to give every class a try even if they are weaker.
I'm really looking forward to the new game, although now that I've mastered the free version I do worry that the paid one won't be quite as exciting.
I'm really looking forward to the new game, although now that I've mastered the free version I do worry that the paid one won't be quite as exciting.
SasqWatch
June 3rd, 2011, 21:06
I've spent more hours playing DD than any other free game. Is $20 too much? Hardly. I feel like I've gotten $20 worth already and haven't paid a dime, but their latest blog update shows they're going much farther with it, into campaigns, inventories, potions, guilds, yada yada. For anyone who wants to know if it's their kind of game, play the free version!
Short answer for D'Artagnan: it's a strategy game.
Short answer for D'Artagnan: it's a strategy game.
--
--| sometimes game writer |--
--| sometimes game writer |--
June 3rd, 2011, 22:32
I know the DD dev's - local SAfrican lads, for a change :-) The guy who originated the DD concept won the Game Jam that we hosted in cape town in Jauary (part of the Global Game Jam, a huge 48hr game dev event) with another little "addictive" number (involving cheese and spaceships ;0). I'm not at all into 'casual games' - but I do appreciate the creative process and I have seen how they've had to struggle to get to this point - kudos to them!
June 4th, 2011, 00:14
My only issue with the price tag is that there is a $10 normal version and a $20 version that gives you extra advantages as well as an extra dungeon. I hate the idea of paying for extra power, but I also don't want to miss out on extra content. I'd be much happier if there was just a $20 version with all the content but no reduction in challenge.
SasqWatch
June 4th, 2011, 02:48
Originally Posted by fadedcThe devs on the forum have said that the $20 version only has fluff extras in it.
My only issue with the price tag is that there is a $10 normal version and a $20 version that gives you extra advantages as well as an extra dungeon. I hate the idea of paying for extra power, but I also don't want to miss out on extra content. I'd be much happier if there was just a $20 version with all the content but no reduction in challenge.
|
|
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:32.
