Shortly before I stumbled into Airships I was putting way too much time into playtesting what exists of All Guns On Deck.
I was hoping the devs were going to take it seriously and actually do something with it. HAH! They've effectively abandoned it with only about 1/6th of the core game in place.
My pages long, itemized suggestions/bugs thread from several months ago is still only on the 2nd page of discussions (it's that dead).
By extension, I wouldn't recommend anything from Decaying Logic (the developer). Not that they've put out anything other than obvious shovelware.
Nekro, It is the single worst case of bad development I have ever seen in my life (I mean this in a literal sense). It was shaping up to be a good game but the main developer took 100% of the revenue on the game instead of the agreed 50% with his artist developer. After the artist asked to be paid after two years of this the programmer threw a temper tantrum and put a lock down on development.
After about a month people on the steam forums started posting negative discussions for having the game abandoned. The programmer then tried to censor/close these posts and eventually closed the whole forum and took the game off Steam never to be seen again.
The artist then went to the internet to tell people what happened after being locked out of every single account the business had and to try and make some noise to maybe get the company back. It failed.
(This is all probably not 100% true, but it's what we know from the artist talking and the events leading up to it.)
Holy Hell I have not ever seen anything like this in the past nor do I ever want to see it happen again.
Can we make it a rule to elaborate on why something is bad instead of saying "UGH! Super Space Blaster Centi-Asteroid Invaderpedes 2 is such a bad game!! Avoid."
(SSBCAI2 is actually a good game, check it out the soundtrack is awesome.)
I think nobody should just blindly agree with a statement like that without actually doing any investigation, it lacks any description of why it's bad/anything and is nothing but throwing an opinion at someone else's first impression about a game they never heard of before. (no offense again)
Anyways, Cortex Command. It looks pretty good at first and I'm sure it is. If not for the clunky and slow controls and player movement. Everything from the menus to base building is harder than the game itself due to it likely being a port from an xbox/controller using version (I'm not sure on this, but that's the only conclusion I can draw for the awkward key placement and menus). The game also throws a lot of text walls your way from the beginning (which is not automatically bad, but this is mostly filler text), it lacks many details on how to actually play the game and it just leaves you sitting there wondering what is happening.
In truth, I really liked Cortex Commmand. For some reason the high fidelity physics simulation of a firefight was really satisfying, even if it made the player controlled characters a bit wobbly.
Reminds me of playing Dungeon Siege versus Dungeon Siege II. My biggest problem with the latter was that they didn't bother to keep the crudely parabolic arrow/bolt flight paths from the former. I just love the viscerally physical nature of the combat even if other stuff is lacking.
Air Admiral
A thread used to discuss games you seriously wish you didn't play. Step lightly, friends. It's a minefield out there.
Commander
Shortly before I stumbled into Airships I was putting way too much time into playtesting what exists of All Guns On Deck.
I was hoping the devs were going to take it seriously and actually do something with it. HAH! They've effectively abandoned it with only about 1/6th of the core game in place.
My pages long, itemized suggestions/bugs thread from several months ago is still only on the 2nd page of discussions (it's that dead).
By extension, I wouldn't recommend anything from Decaying Logic (the developer). Not that they've put out anything other than obvious shovelware.
Air Lord, Engineering Corps
Nekro, It is the single worst case of bad development I have ever seen in my life (I mean this in a literal sense). It was shaping up to be a good game but the main developer took 100% of the revenue on the game instead of the agreed 50% with his artist developer. After the artist asked to be paid after two years of this the programmer threw a temper tantrum and put a lock down on development.
After about a month people on the steam forums started posting negative discussions for having the game abandoned. The programmer then tried to censor/close these posts and eventually closed the whole forum and took the game off Steam never to be seen again.
The artist then went to the internet to tell people what happened after being locked out of every single account the business had and to try and make some noise to maybe get the company back. It failed.
(This is all probably not 100% true, but it's what we know from the artist talking and the events leading up to it.)
Holy Hell I have not ever seen anything like this in the past nor do I ever want to see it happen again.
Aerial Emperor
Master of Orion III. Its GUI is so terrible it gave me my first flare-up of RSI, an issue that's been plaguing my life ever since.
Commander
Really Stupid Interface?
I hope they make good drugs for that. ;)
Air Admiral
Spore ...This game is terrible. The concept is a good one, but the game itself is terrible.
Destiny ... Well, there goes $60 down the drain...
Planetoid Pioneers... Maybe if we stop giving Data Realms so much attention, the'll stop trying to take everyone's money...
Air Admiral
I don't understand, what's so bad about planetoid pioneers?
Air Admiral
I'm simply worried Data Realms... Is going to pull a Data Realms...
Commander
Oh, I see.
-Blind man
Air Lord, Engineering Corps
Can we make it a rule to elaborate on why something is bad instead of saying "UGH! Super Space Blaster Centi-Asteroid Invaderpedes 2 is such a bad game!! Avoid."
(SSBCAI2 is actually a good game, check it out the soundtrack is awesome.)
I think nobody should just blindly agree with a statement like that without actually doing any investigation, it lacks any description of why it's bad/anything and is nothing but throwing an opinion at someone else's first impression about a game they never heard of before. (no offense again)
Anyways, Cortex Command. It looks pretty good at first and I'm sure it is. If not for the clunky and slow controls and player movement. Everything from the menus to base building is harder than the game itself due to it likely being a port from an xbox/controller using version (I'm not sure on this, but that's the only conclusion I can draw for the awkward key placement and menus). The game also throws a lot of text walls your way from the beginning (which is not automatically bad, but this is mostly filler text), it lacks many details on how to actually play the game and it just leaves you sitting there wondering what is happening.
Commander
In truth, I really liked Cortex Commmand. For some reason the high fidelity physics simulation of a firefight was really satisfying, even if it made the player controlled characters a bit wobbly.
Reminds me of playing Dungeon Siege versus Dungeon Siege II. My biggest problem with the latter was that they didn't bother to keep the crudely parabolic arrow/bolt flight paths from the former. I just love the viscerally physical nature of the combat even if other stuff is lacking.
But we're getting off track...