Gerbilest 님이 최근에 작성한 평가

This is a great game that's a mix between immersive sim and portal/halflife that allows quite a bit of creativitiy.

It's great for early access with a lot of content to explore already and the base building and exploring can easily extend your time beyond progression based goals.

A true roguelike and one of the best in the genre.

Disagree with the recent direction towards idle style/mobile style time based mechanics in their asynchronous multiplayer.

EDIT 2:
In response to the developer's edit:

A few things:

I feel you are NOT working on the core of X4 (or this expansion) to the extent you should because resources are being spent on asynchronous multiplayer idle/mobile game mechanics. That's the point. I am not resting assured that you are utilizing the resources you have effectively to improve the expansion... I don't believe you or see that in the current game or at the very least I strongly disagree with your assessment from a consumer standpoint.

I feel that where I posted the review is fine, your personal opinion on where it belongs isn't relevant and I'm not sure why it's included except as an attempt to devalue my opinion in this forum. I don't care if you personally agree it's the right spot for it, this isn't your corporate forum. My views on this are directly relevant to this particular expansion cycle.

You want to know what your real concern is? That the review is somewhere that can potentially affect your sales instead of in the tens of thousands of base game reviews. Also that this expansion has "mostly negative" recent reviews. Please stop asking people to change their reviews or telling them they're putting them in the wrong place and think about why you're receiving this feedback. It's not because of the Russian language stuff either.

Your forum is not welcoming and my opinion of your moderators is that they are often rude or culturally insensitive so I'm no longer interested in engaging with it or them. Past experiences there have been fruitless for me and many others (check the sentiment in your discord beta channel on providing you feedback), you just want to move to a domain you have complete control over just like you're trying to control the narrative here.

This is the most current release and the one which I find underdeveloped because of the above mentioned features which are going into this particular expansion release cycle. I shouldn't have to "provide additional points" until your sense of whether my review is applicable or fair is satisfied either. It's not your call to question what I find fair personally or to suggest I didn't consider my review.

I was trying to be polite and strained to maintain that tone in this but my patience with the responses and insincere corporate approach here is wearing thin.

EDIT:
To the developer:

I don't agree with your statement and believe it's in bad faith to say that the beta and future development of the concept aren't part of the game or expansion.

Please try to keep an open mind and understand people can have different cultures, value sets, and opinions that may not satisfy what you think is fair in your set of values or culture. For example, I personally find your approach a little rude and borderline disingenuous but many people may not. This isn't the space for it but if you want to discuss feel free to message me personally.

The beta content is content that was available to all to play in the game, it was developed alongside this expansion, and it was rolled out during the first months of the expansion. Officially the studio has said they will develop it further and integrate it into the game/expansion and that it is part of their future direction. This is listed in the very article the developer linked.

I don't agree that the team multiverse beta has nothing to do with the state of the expansion and stating that as a fact is why I think the statement is slightly disingenuous. It's development time that could have been spent better improving the state of this expansion in my opinion, I believe it to be absolutely relevant personally. They are, by the developer's own admission, features the studio intends to continue to develop. I believe the state of Kingdom End suffered for it and continues to suffer for it.

However, I've included some additional issues below to hopefully provide a sense of fairness that satisfies your values.

In my opinion here are other reasons to rate this as I did including:
- continued issues with poor AI
- UI/UX issues
- extensive fleet behavior issues beyond individual AI
- amount of bugs present in the base game and in the beta (though I do applaud your commitment to fixing bugs in your games)
- lack of developer responsiveness to player feedback
- more I won't get into because this shouldn't be overly negative or an attack.

Belgoray, I hope I wasn't rude here and I tried not to make a long list of negative things, hopefully this helps you respect my opinion instead of just dismiss it (and ask me to change it!!!!) due to not feeling that my opinion is fair.

Truly awesome.

Changing my review from positive to negative. Seems like the same problem from the prequel game (The Red Solstice). Extremely low player count, intentional teamkills even though the people teamkilling you are the ones doing poorly, and no response or report functions from the developers (including messaging on reddit, discord, official report on the website, etc.) They literally couldn't care less and this game will suffer the same fate as the previous one and it's not even close to polished or entertaining enough to overlook this. The community will end up the same way the first one apparently did if I read the reviews correctly... a small group of smug self satisfied jerks.

Not worth the time or effort.

Just in case you're wondering about 50% of my game time was just having the title screen open while I was doing other things. I'm one of the higher ranked players in the game at the moment and there's no way I can tolerate this kind of community. Should have refunded.

Not sure what these positive reviews are saying... there's comparisons to dungeon crawl stone soup, caves of qud, cogmind, etc. The above mentioned games are deep, can be replayed many times in many different ways, and generally have great depth. This game does not.

I don't mean to be really critical but this isn't even close to any of the pillars of the genre and I have the very strong impression that a lot of these reviews are bought. There's nowhere near the depth of ♥♥♥, DCSS, CDDA, TOME, ADOM, etc. It's really not even close at all.

All of the positive reviews have the same suspicious format... I would be very wary of buying this and expecting a fully functioning roguelike experience. It's just not there.

This is a very simple game with very simple progression and there's a very large lack of meaningful choices or things to learn.

I didn't expect such a good ARPG from what I saw on the store page but this game really delivers. It's got a bit of an old school vibe and it does have game maker style sprite graphics but you shouldn't let that dissuade you from giving this a shot. It really is reminiscent of the older school classic ARPGs if you were playing solo. Loot scaling is good, enchanting/item mod mechanics are fair and balanced, difficulty can be tuned (with increasing rewards with increasing difficulty), and it really encourages a wide variety of builds and approaches. I can see almost every option on the skill trees being viable if you build for it, it's deeper and more flexible than it might first look like.

I would say this is a great game if it was made by a whole team of people... the fact that it's basically a one man shop doing this is astounding. It deserves more attention than it gets.

Went into this pretty excited, played an hour and then refunded. The tutorial isn't worth the time if you're going for the "2 hour try out." There's a learning curve of maybe 2-3 games. After that you can see that it's the same tile sets squared up against each other in very similar ways... it's not quite as "procedural" as it seems to be. It is interesting that it changes weekly so I can't talk too much junk, it's still very cool that they are going down that avenue.

I didn't like the gunplay, the "time crisis" big yellow stars when you shoot someone makes it hard to see where they are and where they are moving. Weapons also shoot through solid multi-layer metal objects like freezer sides and other large industrial equipment. I understand penetration is a thing but it's not logical or predictable here (at least to me) and that means you have to learn what penetrates what. With procedural maps that's a real problem until you learn every tile of every set with the weapons. Not something I'm willing to do with the state this game is in and something that takes away from the ability to truly create procedural battlegrounds... penetrations should be based on caliber and material/thickness. If it is based on that it doesn't do a good job of making it clear to the player what materials a certain caliber can penetrate or how the ballistics behave. Any type of after action report or "bullet tracing" would help here and that data would certainly be useful for balancing, anti-cheat, and tile creation efforts. Personally I would also compress the damage range to create a lower ttk, though that is entirely my personal preference and may cause weapon balancing issues beyond the balancing issues the weapons currently have.

In terms of what's positive, I really like the pre-battle planning you can do on the map, I like the resource/economy model, and I think that it has some potential in terms of tactical play. Unfortunately the arcade-like aspects take away from that a bit, but I think that's probably part of EA/balance. If they can manage the balancing better this game will be in a really good spot, but I think that will be difficult with constantly evolving maps. If I were the devs (and I'm not, props to them) I'd focus on simulated weapon matchups and some mathematical balancing methods to make sure that weapons shine in actual gameplay environments and behave like they should in regards to the cover materials the player perceives. I didn't once see long range weapons in play and I don't see why they ever would be, the map algorithms just don't support it (tiles are too small for dmrs, snipers, or any semi-auto rifle/carbine).

Overall I think this definitely has a place for a certain group of gamers but it didn't appeal to me in the state it's in now.

It's definitely worth a shot for the two hour refund window... I think a lot of people would really like it, with or without balancing tweaks. With the right balancing I think it could draw a lot MORE people to it, especially if they can do a better job with the procedural component and use things like heat mapping and player metrics to dial in a better algorithm. As someone who works on similar things the algorithms driving the battleground generation and funneling player behavior seem very weak and rudimentary. I still applaud the effort of including this as a core component of the game. With more tiles or even procedural tiles this game could really take off... but that would require significant investment in algorithms and fine turning said algorithms. Consistent ballistic/material behavior is key to being able to generate truly engaging procedural environments.

I wasn't a big fan of Halcyon 6 (their previous game) even though it was certainly serviceable but I do really enjoy this one. The combat is pretty engaging, there's an interesting camp mechanic that allows your party to use cards and gain relationships with each other that unlocks passive buffs and combos. The timing system in the combat is well done and there's interesting interactions and considerations to take on what skill to use when. There's also a mini-nemesis system for enemies like in Shadow of Mordor, though generally only one or two will get promoted a game and it doesn't end up playing a huge role in each playthrough. Still adds a little welcome flavor though and makes you consider what route to take through each level a bit more.

I'm not sure why people are saying it's too easy, I didn't find the difficulty to be exceedingly easy and I play a lot of challenging strategy games and original style rogue-likes.

Literal hot garbage. How can you have so much money and release something so blatantly bad?

Also there seems to be a ton of shilling going on... I guess that's what money gets you. It's not going to save the game though, it's very poor.

If this is what Amazon is putting out after all this time then I wonder what New World is going to be like. Kind of disappointing, I was hoping their efforts would produce good games.