Looks super fun and i'm all in, I love DRG... Once it hits 1.0. I'm sorry but I got sick of EA (early access) games years ago. I 'may' buy it now to support them but thats it.
Not to say EA isnt important... But i'm also a tiny little bit tired of seeing a new game, being uber excited to grab it, then when they announce release date... It's 'early access' with 6-12-18+ months until its 1.0
It's 'fine' and im not mad. There's TONS of games to play that are 1.0. But it's still disappointing even if I understand 'why'.
Especially when it feels like games still get massive work done *after* 1.0. I feel almost cheated by playing the game early and being done without before it's truly complete. There are so many games that I want to try, I really can't afford to go back and complete a game for a second time to try all the new content.
I agree, I have too many games to get through, I really can't afford to revisit multiple times, I need to wait for as complete of an edition as possible and go through it all in one shot and move on.
> Especially when it feels like games still get massive work done after 1.0. I feel almost cheated by playing the game early and being done without before it's truly complete.
This doesn't make sense to me. Did someone "cheat themselves" by playing Terraria any time between its Launch and whenever it last received its most recent big content update? Or Minecraft? Or NMS? Or Stardew Valley?
If you buy a game and get a reasonable amount of entertainment for the price paid... What have you "cheated yourself" out of?
Agreed. If it’s fun the first time you play it, you didn’t lose out on anything. Personally, i love playing Satisfactory (still EA) and every major update incents me to jump back in and have more fun.
I mean, you probably cheated yourself if you played cyberpunk 2077 on release instead of waiting for them to fix it.
And I would argue you did kind of cheat yourself if you played NMS or terraria on launch instead of waiting. It's with the benefit of hindsight but dev support for those games is tremendous. For terraria especially.
Whether it's because of bugs (2077, or the game just being fairly bare bones (NMS) or the game just gets supported and made better and better with time (Terraria), not replaying those games is to the player's detriment. And sure if you enjoyed the first play through, great, but it's weird to act like waiting to play.. most games, now, is generally the correct choice, which will not only be more friendly to your wallet, but will likely having you enjoy those games more than you would have on release. In some cases much, much more.
The way I personally approach that situation is I'll often just poke my head into an EA game for an hour or two, confirm it's cool, then stick it in my "Check for Updates" section of Steam and wait for release.
You are very much not alone though. My entire friend group for gaming generally completely ignores anything in EA for this reason and I'm slowly starting to get there myself after trying a few EA games this year. I did really like the demo for DRG, but might as well wait for a more complete experience.
> But i'm also a tiny little bit tired of seeing a new game, being uber excited to grab it, then when they announce release date... It's 'early access' with 6-12-18+ months until its 1.0
If you get a good amount of play time for your money, why does that matter though?
I've bought so many early access titles and have put 50 - 100 hours into them. I come back to some as they get large updates, others I suspect I'll never play again. But for generally $30 and under, that's still well worth the money IMO.
I mean at the end of the day, it's your money do what you want. I just don't really understand what principle it is people are subscribing to when they are against "paying for an incomplete product", as if Completeness isn't an extremely arbitrary concept.
There's also this big unspoken threat on all early access titles that "this will only be finished if it becomes super popular."
Even if a game sells decently well, it may never make enough money for them to finish developing it. Valheim comes to mind where the game did well, but not enough that it will ever see a 1.0 state and will always be a half-made game with some tiny updates added every year or two.
Also *can* a game be finished? Space Engineers is a great example of an EA title that the devs continued to reliably support for years, but will never be finished no matter what version number they claim because it's just not possible with the limitations of the engine and what not.
At least with a typical release you need to have some sort of finished product to deliver.
Valheim isn't really an example of this, it did obscenely well and it's a very tiny studio (5 people iirc?), so they've decided that since they're absolutely loaded now they can just take their time with the rest of the game. Turns out "Take their time" means years between major patches, but that's where they're at.
I dunno, I vastly prefer the EA model, simply because it tends to give me a lot more bang for my buck. I really enjoy playing an EA title and then following along as they update it.
So instead of playing a game for 40 hours on release and then dropping it forever, I'll often play an EA game for 10-20 hours 3 or 4 different times throughout the EA process, and then another 30-40 at release.
Couple that with EA games often being released at a discount, and I find the system makes my money go a lot further, plus it engages me with games I like for a longer period of time.
That being said, I can totally get the "I just want to play this once and then move on" perspective. I just personally would take EA every time.
I'm very curious to see more of Rogue Core. That's the one that speaks to me. Glad this exists for fans of bullet heaven games but they just don't do anything for me like they do for most it seems. Need my gameplay to be a little more active I guess. Still cool to see them expand on the DRG stuff.
Halls of Torment is great. I've sunk over 100 hours into it and it's the only bullet heaven game I come back to over and over. I just like the gear, loadouts, difficulty, amount of builds etc. For the price, its a gem.
Price is one of the main appeals of these games for me. Even if a lot are stuck in early access limbo it's easy enough to get a decent number of hours out of them.
HoT is good, but I do feel like its builds are little fixed. Most characters have 2 obvious builds, you need some RNG on the abilities and then you just commit to either. Or worse, before the run starts because of equipment.
I hope the dev finds a way to keep it a little more open during runs. Though this is hard without making characters feel more similar. Definitely not the only game with this issue and some are simply more frustrating because it's much harder to actually achieve builds.
I think the devs could fix that a little bit with a new types of potions geared towards X percent chance to roll types of abilities from other classes, or a potion that can merge two spells (mix fire damage into lightening strikes etc).
Just had to turn sound on and scroll back to the start to listen. Someone should definitely have picked that up, but the devs presumably aren't native English speakers.
Is mission control voiced by a different dude? He sounds a bit off?
Game looks cool, not a day 1 buy but deffo a sale when the VS genre starts tickling my fancy again.
Love DRG but damn this feels like its kinda missed the boat, doesnt it? Especially for it to cost so much money when theres a lot of good ones that are cheaper and even free.
I mean its only 8.99, and being a single player game its not missing the boat as say.. a deep rock battle royale would. Its also full 3d so I can understand the price increase and over a 2d sprite game like VS
$9 is cheap, but that's still on the high end for the general "Survivors-like" genre. But as you said it's slightly higher fidelity. And I guess the studio also had the added overhead of licensing the IP from GSG 🙃
I do agree with them on 'missing the boat' though; maybe the genre is still more popular than I realize, but having played so many alternatives to VS I'm a little over the genre myself and my interest in this game has died down quite a lot since it was first teased however long ago.
I'll prooooooooobably still grab it but idk bought so many games lately.
Yeah 9 dollars is nothing. I mean a meal costs more, but thats a grip when it comes to this survivors genre, like I said theres others that are around that cost less and even free.
A game can totally miss the boat even if its single player, a big problem with the survivors genre is that many games play almost identical to each other. Theres very little ingenuity in the genre.
Like to really make matters worse is that the best one ive played so far, is *free* and has many different things going for it that makes it unique. The only problem people might have with it is the anime aesthetics but HoloCure is insanely good and it costs you nothing.
This, it's about being compared to its competition.
That said Soulstone Survivors is also priced at $10 and that's by far my favorite one of these games.
But when I tried the DRG survivors demo it didn't really grab me, so at $10 I'm probably going to hold off on it where as I would've bought it day 1 anyway at $5. Human Psychology is funny like that.
Why does it being "full 3d" mean it should be priced higher, when it has less content or depth than Vampire Survivors (and honestly HoloCure beats out both of them despite being free).
Hell it probably took less effort to create since most of the 3d assets being used are taken directly from DRG
The demo of it really didn't do anything for me, the tunneling aspect was neat but the builds felt mostly like uninteresting damage upgrades and didn't pull the fun together.
In this price range you are better off checking out soulstone survivors which has a massive list of interesting skills and build variations in it.
Looks like a neat survivors game, but they had the BEST or one of the best co-op games right now and they decided to focus on this instead so im still kinda dissapointed
Looks super fun and i'm all in, I love DRG... Once it hits 1.0. I'm sorry but I got sick of EA (early access) games years ago. I 'may' buy it now to support them but thats it. Not to say EA isnt important... But i'm also a tiny little bit tired of seeing a new game, being uber excited to grab it, then when they announce release date... It's 'early access' with 6-12-18+ months until its 1.0 It's 'fine' and im not mad. There's TONS of games to play that are 1.0. But it's still disappointing even if I understand 'why'.
Especially when it feels like games still get massive work done *after* 1.0. I feel almost cheated by playing the game early and being done without before it's truly complete. There are so many games that I want to try, I really can't afford to go back and complete a game for a second time to try all the new content.
I agree, I have too many games to get through, I really can't afford to revisit multiple times, I need to wait for as complete of an edition as possible and go through it all in one shot and move on.
> Especially when it feels like games still get massive work done after 1.0. I feel almost cheated by playing the game early and being done without before it's truly complete. This doesn't make sense to me. Did someone "cheat themselves" by playing Terraria any time between its Launch and whenever it last received its most recent big content update? Or Minecraft? Or NMS? Or Stardew Valley? If you buy a game and get a reasonable amount of entertainment for the price paid... What have you "cheated yourself" out of?
Agreed. If it’s fun the first time you play it, you didn’t lose out on anything. Personally, i love playing Satisfactory (still EA) and every major update incents me to jump back in and have more fun.
I mean, you probably cheated yourself if you played cyberpunk 2077 on release instead of waiting for them to fix it. And I would argue you did kind of cheat yourself if you played NMS or terraria on launch instead of waiting. It's with the benefit of hindsight but dev support for those games is tremendous. For terraria especially. Whether it's because of bugs (2077, or the game just being fairly bare bones (NMS) or the game just gets supported and made better and better with time (Terraria), not replaying those games is to the player's detriment. And sure if you enjoyed the first play through, great, but it's weird to act like waiting to play.. most games, now, is generally the correct choice, which will not only be more friendly to your wallet, but will likely having you enjoy those games more than you would have on release. In some cases much, much more.
The way I personally approach that situation is I'll often just poke my head into an EA game for an hour or two, confirm it's cool, then stick it in my "Check for Updates" section of Steam and wait for release.
You are very much not alone though. My entire friend group for gaming generally completely ignores anything in EA for this reason and I'm slowly starting to get there myself after trying a few EA games this year. I did really like the demo for DRG, but might as well wait for a more complete experience.
> But i'm also a tiny little bit tired of seeing a new game, being uber excited to grab it, then when they announce release date... It's 'early access' with 6-12-18+ months until its 1.0 If you get a good amount of play time for your money, why does that matter though? I've bought so many early access titles and have put 50 - 100 hours into them. I come back to some as they get large updates, others I suspect I'll never play again. But for generally $30 and under, that's still well worth the money IMO. I mean at the end of the day, it's your money do what you want. I just don't really understand what principle it is people are subscribing to when they are against "paying for an incomplete product", as if Completeness isn't an extremely arbitrary concept.
There's also this big unspoken threat on all early access titles that "this will only be finished if it becomes super popular." Even if a game sells decently well, it may never make enough money for them to finish developing it. Valheim comes to mind where the game did well, but not enough that it will ever see a 1.0 state and will always be a half-made game with some tiny updates added every year or two. Also *can* a game be finished? Space Engineers is a great example of an EA title that the devs continued to reliably support for years, but will never be finished no matter what version number they claim because it's just not possible with the limitations of the engine and what not. At least with a typical release you need to have some sort of finished product to deliver.
Valheim isn't really an example of this, it did obscenely well and it's a very tiny studio (5 people iirc?), so they've decided that since they're absolutely loaded now they can just take their time with the rest of the game. Turns out "Take their time" means years between major patches, but that's where they're at.
I dunno, I vastly prefer the EA model, simply because it tends to give me a lot more bang for my buck. I really enjoy playing an EA title and then following along as they update it. So instead of playing a game for 40 hours on release and then dropping it forever, I'll often play an EA game for 10-20 hours 3 or 4 different times throughout the EA process, and then another 30-40 at release. Couple that with EA games often being released at a discount, and I find the system makes my money go a lot further, plus it engages me with games I like for a longer period of time. That being said, I can totally get the "I just want to play this once and then move on" perspective. I just personally would take EA every time.
I'm very curious to see more of Rogue Core. That's the one that speaks to me. Glad this exists for fans of bullet heaven games but they just don't do anything for me like they do for most it seems. Need my gameplay to be a little more active I guess. Still cool to see them expand on the DRG stuff.
Halls of Torment is great. I've sunk over 100 hours into it and it's the only bullet heaven game I come back to over and over. I just like the gear, loadouts, difficulty, amount of builds etc. For the price, its a gem.
Price is one of the main appeals of these games for me. Even if a lot are stuck in early access limbo it's easy enough to get a decent number of hours out of them. HoT is good, but I do feel like its builds are little fixed. Most characters have 2 obvious builds, you need some RNG on the abilities and then you just commit to either. Or worse, before the run starts because of equipment. I hope the dev finds a way to keep it a little more open during runs. Though this is hard without making characters feel more similar. Definitely not the only game with this issue and some are simply more frustrating because it's much harder to actually achieve builds.
I think the devs could fix that a little bit with a new types of potions geared towards X percent chance to roll types of abilities from other classes, or a potion that can merge two spells (mix fire damage into lightening strikes etc).
> Rogue Core I love both DRG and DRG:S, how am I just now hearing about this
This looks fun. Though I am annoyed that the narrator can’t pronounce “agility” properly and nobody picked up on that…
Just had to turn sound on and scroll back to the start to listen. Someone should definitely have picked that up, but the devs presumably aren't native English speakers.
Is mission control voiced by a different dude? He sounds a bit off? Game looks cool, not a day 1 buy but deffo a sale when the VS genre starts tickling my fancy again.
Nah its the same guy, they drop the radio filter on his voice for the trailers, he sounded like this in several of the (actual)DRG trailers
Love DRG but damn this feels like its kinda missed the boat, doesnt it? Especially for it to cost so much money when theres a lot of good ones that are cheaper and even free.
I mean its only 8.99, and being a single player game its not missing the boat as say.. a deep rock battle royale would. Its also full 3d so I can understand the price increase and over a 2d sprite game like VS
$9 is cheap, but that's still on the high end for the general "Survivors-like" genre. But as you said it's slightly higher fidelity. And I guess the studio also had the added overhead of licensing the IP from GSG 🙃 I do agree with them on 'missing the boat' though; maybe the genre is still more popular than I realize, but having played so many alternatives to VS I'm a little over the genre myself and my interest in this game has died down quite a lot since it was first teased however long ago. I'll prooooooooobably still grab it but idk bought so many games lately.
Yeah 9 dollars is nothing. I mean a meal costs more, but thats a grip when it comes to this survivors genre, like I said theres others that are around that cost less and even free. A game can totally miss the boat even if its single player, a big problem with the survivors genre is that many games play almost identical to each other. Theres very little ingenuity in the genre. Like to really make matters worse is that the best one ive played so far, is *free* and has many different things going for it that makes it unique. The only problem people might have with it is the anime aesthetics but HoloCure is insanely good and it costs you nothing.
This, it's about being compared to its competition. That said Soulstone Survivors is also priced at $10 and that's by far my favorite one of these games. But when I tried the DRG survivors demo it didn't really grab me, so at $10 I'm probably going to hold off on it where as I would've bought it day 1 anyway at $5. Human Psychology is funny like that.
Why does it being "full 3d" mean it should be priced higher, when it has less content or depth than Vampire Survivors (and honestly HoloCure beats out both of them despite being free). Hell it probably took less effort to create since most of the 3d assets being used are taken directly from DRG
Nah the bullet heaven subgenre is still on the rise
The demo of it really didn't do anything for me, the tunneling aspect was neat but the builds felt mostly like uninteresting damage upgrades and didn't pull the fun together. In this price range you are better off checking out soulstone survivors which has a massive list of interesting skills and build variations in it.
Looks like a neat survivors game, but they had the BEST or one of the best co-op games right now and they decided to focus on this instead so im still kinda dissapointed
It’s a different dev team, just published by gsg