Yeah, that just made it easier to get the money where it needs to be, haha! And my daughter got a few games, so it's win/win!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: EhvisI think the problem is that this is not a reasonable sum. That amount of money funds at most a single person for one year.

It completely depends on the life situation, really. If these people have to pay rent and support a family, it won't last them long, at least not if they live in any developed country. If they are not primary bread earners and can actually invest the entire sum in the game, 50k is a LOT, particularly considering that they had coding and art covered. Their art doesn't look overly complex, so one should think even commissioning some parts wouldn't break the bank.

I have seen people starting Indie projects blowing a lot of money on expensive software licenses when decent OSS alternatives are available, though. Particularly when the project head is an artist (they often seem to be conditioned to the idea that software cannot be good unless it's expensive.) So who knows, really.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPCan't blame them for shifting focus away from a game that just doesn't perform well.

That's not really what's written in the article. More like the opposite of what you said...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It's kinda funny they're asking, because we all know that most AAA publishers out there won't consider letting Feral port their stuff anyway. But ok, they asked and I shall answer:

1. The Sims 4.
2. Cyberpunk 2077
3. Fallen Jedi.

Ok, that was for giggles, because we all know that chances of any of these games making it to Linux are lower than sanity returning to world politics. But they asked! :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Arehandoro

Quoting: KimyrielleI'd be curious what the "alternate" history is and how it ties into the storyline, but couldn't find anything about it on their website or on Steam.

I imagine the ability to make choices to change endings it's what they mean by alternate.

By that logic every single strategy game ever made is "alternate history".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Whitewolfe80

Quoting: KimyrielleI'd be curious what the "alternate" history is and how it ties into the storyline, but couldn't find anything about it on their website or on Steam.

I am guessing its like panzer general where it is possible to win in europe and start a mainland invasion of the USA i did that it took nearly six months, what helped was signing a truce then eventual alliance with the British Empire which gave me canada to launch attacks from as well as a bump in avilable personel if its something like that i am down.

That a strategy game is winnable even by the side that historically did not, is not alternate history, it's the nature of a strategy game. Alternate history would be e.g. if WWII was started by the British Empire invading the Soviet Union with the help of the Japanese navy.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

No game in the official series ever got combat right. Death-Stacking was just as ridiculous as what a poster farther up called "parking lot logistics", when a unit cannot even pass through an occupied hex.

The one game that got it right was Call to Power. You could build armies up to a limit of 12. There were significant ranged options. And no, you didn't lose the -entire- stack when one unit got defeated (which is also beyond silly). They'd actually fight at once vs the other enemy stack of 12.

I have NO idea why Sid Meier didn't lift the idea for the official franchise. It's clearly superior to anything they ever did. Call to Power 2 would be the civ game I play, would there be a modernized version of it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'd be curious what the "alternate" history is and how it ties into the storyline, but couldn't find anything about it on their website or on Steam.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

VR will be here to stay, but I really don't think it will ever become anything but a niche product. There are too many unsolved problems. I for one don't need a device that is guaranteed to make me barf after a few minutes of wearing it. Not that these things are comfortable to wear in the first place. And it's usable only for a small subset of games, anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I mean, it's not that Civilization couldn't be salvaged. My biggest gripes with Civ VI are the god-awful visuals that just don't fit the genre of the game and can be explained only with the developers having played too much World of Warcraft in their spare time. And the resource micro-management. I don't want to have to deal with that kind of stuff. I want to build nations and cities, not managing trade routes because I lack a lump of charcoal to build a unit. And finally the stupid AI. But since they didn't manage for the past 30 years to implement a AI that doesn't act like a forensic psychiatry patient, my hopes are kinda limited.

Other than that I still consider Civ kind of the mother of all strategy games, which it arguably is.

The problem is (getting back on topic) that Civ V isn't necessarily better than Civ VI. Both games have things going for them, and things that made one cringe. Not sure if there ever will be THE PERFECT Civ. But if I'd implement a Civ game one day, I'd probably not clone a specific game of the series. It would be my own take.

View this comment - View article - View full comments