Paladynne 님이 최근에 작성한 평가

Mixed.

No mouse support is pretty ridiculous, especially since it runs on Unity. Mouse does not work anywhere, not even the main menu. A lot of the complaints with the clunky UI wouldn't matter to me if I could click through all the menus.

Otherwise, a unique and well-made restaurant/management sim. Unfortunately, it's far too fast paced for me. You have to juggle a lot of mechanics. In comparison, the "Overcooked" games are far simpler and easier. I refunded simple because it's too stressful trying to juggle it all for me personally.

Those looking for a challenging restaurant sim with unique mechanics should love this title, if you don't mind having to use a controller.

Ports like these are a dream come true for me.

Growing up on consoles and switching to PC in adulthood, I've found it hard to go back to childhood classics mostly due to the controllers being really bad for aiming. Full mouse and keyboard support is awesome, I don't use a controller much these days especially not in shooters or 3D platformers.

A fairly faithful remake, making some QOL changes. Only thing I personally dislike a bit is the change to more stylized and cartoony graphics. Otherwise, a great port and hope these continue to release.

The main premise of the game is timed horde nights, using crafting resources to build over-the-top traps to defend yourself. Melee combat is simple, but varied.

I would say the game is a mixture of 7 Days to Die and Orcs Must Die. Open world, zombies and tower defense. Food is hardly a worry, it's more about building zany traps to fend off a horde.

It's not a perfect game. For example, the buildings are quite empty. Exploring a two story house has a chest or two, then nothing (very sparse furniture). There's a giant warehouse in the city, but it's one big open space with a few item chests. This makes the world feel, well, empty but not in a good apocalyptic way.

Contrast that to 7 Days to Die, where even a normal house has hidden rooms and every piece of furniture is lootable.

But, unlike 7 Days to Die or other competitors, Night of the Dead's developers have very clear goals and they complete them in a very timely manner.

You can go back and view their 2021 roadmap (posted December 2020), which lays out what they plan to add each month, and compare all major updates in 2021: every single goal was completed.

Compared to 7 Days to Die, which released in 2013 and 9 years later barely plays any differently from then. Not to mention the weird priorities. 7 Days to Die decided remodeling their NPCs and some zombies was better than just focusing that development money on gameplay.

For example, earlier I mentioned simple but varied melee combat in Night of the Dead. You can swing a simple sword in a few different animations. While this is limited, it at least adds some variety. Unlike 7 Days to Die, which has two melee animations per weapon: a light attack and a strong attack. It makes melee combat so incredibly unsatisfying (in addition to awful hitboxes). And they've had 9 years to remedy that and still haven't done anything about it.

Or Valheim, whose developers outlined a 2021 roadmap (posted February 2021) with four major updates. They were only able to deliver one of those updates, which was mostly furniture and a reworked food system.

Overall, while Night of the Dead is a very much early access game that hasn't realized its full potential; however, the development team has proven to meet their major update goals in a reliable, timely manner. Which is very promising.

Although I play rarely, I absolutely love seeing the game pop into my news feed and look in awe as they continue to improve the game where so many others lose sight and squander their time. For that, I must recommend the game to help them get more visibility and ideally more customers to fund this absolute gem of a development team.

If you like zombies and tower defense in a 3D world, absolutely give this a try.

Every other online Yu-Gi-Oh! client has had really awful mechanics for acquiring cards. Most commonly, requiring the purchase of booster packs with no way to dust cards and craft your own.

Of course, old unofficial clients like Dev/Ignis/YGO Pro and Dueling Network/Book are still available that give access to all cards at once. But their player bases are low and Master Duel is cross-platform so you'll have a much easier time finding duels.

This client finally adds that feature. I'm not familiar with Hearthstone, but an annoying feature of dusting is that there are a few tiers of dust. Cards are split up into rarities, each rarity requiring the corresponding dust color to craft.

An ideal system would be similar to the now defunct Artifact, which utilized the Steam Market and trading system. After all, Yu-Gi-Oh! did start as a Trading Card Game unlike the newer Gwent and Hearthstone clones.

Even so, this is the least money-grubbing online Yu-Gi-Oh! client we've had thus far so... recommended, I guess.

Hopefully they add some QoL features, like more than ten (not sure, but it's low) custom decks.

A deranged Dungeon Master keeps you hostage in his cabin and forces you to play his deck builder campaign while he narrates.

Takes elements from Slay the Spire (deck building, choosing a path, items, etc.) while also adding a meta point-and-click-adventure whose choices affect your future runs in a story-driven format.

Instantly my favorite roguelite because of the story-driven nature. Other roguelite deck builders can have great card mechanics, but typically have little to no story progression.

It is worth mentioning that the card mechanics in this game are more like a puzzle game. Like most deck builders, you can see your opponent's upcoming moves and plan around it. But due to the health system, each card battle is typically over in less than ten turns, rarely going over five turns.

The health system is a breath of fresh air: it's a weight scale. Each time you deal or receive damage, a weight is placed on that player's side. When the scale is tipped over (requiring five damage from a neutral position), the player who tipped it wins. This system can lead to back-and-forth turns. You can calculate the incoming damage and output enough damage to keep yourself alive for the next turn.

If you like story-driven roguelites this is a great game to pick up. Due to the short battle length, it also plays more like a math puzzle game than a traditional TCG.

TL:DR; questionable business model at best, pay-to-win at worst.

Old review will be covered in the spoiler tags, as it is mostly no longer relevant.

Really fun game played in two stages: shopping/teambuilding and the auto-batter. There's a ton of strategy that gives you permanent stats for your run during the shopping phase. There's a lot to delve into and I recommend it.

Before, there was a free pack of animals and a $5 pack. While more experienced players told me the free pack was the current meta, that may not always be true.

The developers have addressed this system by matchmaking players by the pack they use. Free pack players will currently only match against other free pack players, etc.


Great game potentially ruined by pay-to-win shenanigans.

Free players have access to the Standard Pack, paying $5 gives you access to the Expansion Pack #1. In my opinion, the early game for the DLC has a better advantage. I'll try to explain my thought process below.

The game works in two phases:

1. Turn begins in the shop, where you can buy/sell animals and food.
   You start with 10 gold, animals and food cost 3 gold each. After leaving the shopping phase, you lose all gold you didn't spend (it doesn't carry over).
   You start with access to Tier 1 animals. As your turn timer increases, higher tier animals appear in the shop.
   
2. The auto-battle phase against an opponent is next.
   Animals don't perma-die. Winning gives you 1/10 trophies needed to win. You have 4 lives per run.
   
3. Repeat both phases until you win 10 trophies or lose 4 lives.

The early game is really important, as buffs earned during the shopping phase carry through your entire run. This is where I feel the game can run into pay-to-win shenanigans.

A free player has some decent Turn 1 options. Horse first into Otter next give each other a buff. And the Horse will buff the last purchase. The Turn 1 plays are pretty limiting, basically forcing players to avoid Turn 1 food.

A paid player's best Tier 1 buys on Turn 1 are the Beetle, Bluebird and Ladybug. Feeding these animals food buffs other animals, giving you more buffs-per-gold than free players.

Losing a heart on Turn 1 obviously sucks, as it'll make the mid game harder. This is where more experienced players differ with my pay-to-win statements and admittedly I am not very experienced with the game.

So I'll leave it at this: the business model is shakey at best.

The current meta, according to others, is reliant on the free animals pack. While this may be true now, metas change over time as players discover new strategies or developers make changes. Anyone familiar with the Super Smash Bro.s Melee (a game before online updates were common place) hasn't changed since release yet the meta continues to change differ.

Will the Super Auto Pets meta always lean towards the free animal set? Most likely not. And if it really does never favor the other DLC animals, then players who spent money on an inferior product will feel burned.

Again, either way the business model has its drawbacks.

At the end of the day, players having access to different units depending on if they paid or not isn't a good approach in my opinion and I thought I'd share that.

They already have a cosmetic system in place. My suggestion would be to make alternate artwork the form of monetization. Making the existing Horse look like a different breed, or the existing Dragon look like other cultural depictions (traditional Chinese, Welsh or Wyvern depictions)

Fun game heavily focused on movement.

After you beat the game there's a "Marathon" mode, where after you beat a level it instantly loads the next one. Normally, there's an level end screen that shows your time and you have to click "Next Level" to proceed. Marathon would be great for replaying chapters (sets of "main story" levels), but right now Marathon is only available for a monthly set of levels and the full game.

Speaking of the story, it's incredibly pointless. There's a teaser of a boss character, but you never fight. I believe there is a single level that features enemy type characters that shoot at you and that's it. Not that it really matters, but all the cutscenes were annoying to get through. Thankfully, they don't replay when you're redoing old levels.

Has a free level editor with Steam Workshop support, so that's a plus for replayability.

Good game.

A Primitive+ version of ARK with a focus on the sea? Count me in!

Only, it plays horribly. Despite its issues, ARK runs well these days and always had respsonsive controls. ATLAS feels like a huge step backwards, it's like the devs intentionally made it clunkly and unresponsive.

Also, the game somehow looks worse than ARK across the board. The icons are an eyesore, imagine a poorly done HD Minecraft texture pack.

ARK has a good core with sloppy polish. ATLAS has a sloppy core with sloppy polish. Can't recommend, I'm refunding.

Know that you're buying "Kino der Toten" more than you are "Zombies Chronicles," if you plan to play online. Since the hype has died down, the majority of players are in the default map and "Kino der Toten."

So, how's it fare?


It runs great on Ultra (or whatever the max is called in this one) settings on my i5-6600 (non-K) GTX 1060 6GB rig. Stable 110 FPS. Doesn't dip below 60 FPS even in the following scenarios:

• When looking at a large hoard of zombies.
  
• When looking at large amounts of ragdolls (i.e., using Thunder Gun).
  
• When using high particle effect weapons, like Pack-a-Punched guns.

There's also a miriad of options. And unlike the first Black Ops, you can disable mouse acceleration in the menus rather than digging through .INI files.

Solid perfomance.


As is tradition with Call of Duty titles, Black Ops III uses peer-to-peer to connect players in the Zombies mode, which is awful.

This becomes worse since the host player is picked seemingly randomly. There have been many games where the host player was in a different country then the rest of us, resulting in three players having 150+ ping instead of just the one.

Awful choice. Least they could do was have dedicated servers in the higher populated regions and peer-to-peer in the lower populated regions.


This is the biggest con of Black Ops III - Zombies.

The folder for the base game and Zombies Chronicles is 108GB. That's without ever joining a community server or having ever used mods.

The reason it's so big is because the Campaign, Multiplayer and Zombies are bundled into one Steam launcher. To get around this, while it's downloading:

• Go to Library.
  
• Click on Black Ops III.
  
• Find the DLC box on the right side.
  
• Untick what you don't want to download.

For users with smaller SSDs, I recommend using the program "TreeSize" to find out what's taking up most of your SSD space. Otherwise, you'll have to install Black Ops III onto your HDD.


All of the above aside, how is the gameplay?

Pretty great. Zombies Chronicles adds a new twist on old maps.

Just about every wall and Mystery Box weapon has been replaced with a Black Ops III equivalent, except for the Wonder Weapons.

Most weapons can also be leveled up, with kills of course. This unlocks attachments (anything from Multiplayer: Quick Draw, Fast Mags, etc.) for those weapons.

I think the attachment system is great. It lets you work towards another goal, while also making your weapons more powerful. It's also optional, so if you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

For the purists who hate all the changes, you still have the original World At War and Black Ops Zombies to play.


If you're a fan of the classic maps included in this DLC, and also have 108GB to spare, it's a nice refresh of those classic maps.

Just keep in mind that online is peer-to-peer and some maps, like "Shino Numa," are pretty dead.