Let me tell you a story to make my point clear: Imagine Michelangelo created a marble statue so beautiful eveybody wants to see it. People who have seen it tell you stories of its beauty with tears in thier eyes. So you draw a random number in a tombola and stand there for hours, but finally when your number is called and you are able to see it, only a random part of its body is illuminated, and that part changes every time you que up. Why is it not possible to explore the whole statue without the painful tombola grind?
Would you line up?
Would you enjoy the thrill of the tombola?
After you have seen the first part of the statue and know that only one part is visible at the same time, would you rejoice or loose interest?
If you are a connaisseur of arts you will probably tell everyone how brilliant that was.
Most importantly: If such a beautiful piece of art exists, why not let everyone decide which way they want to enjoy it?
I am back giving it another try. I am curious to see what's new in the game. I have read only resonable replys to a post that was not written with a calm hand. Bravo.
However, still, the way I enjoy games is to build something up and invest time, energy and emotion into it and watch it grow. That is why I have played WoW and other games that require long-term investments. I am not sure I can accommodate to this style of survival game, but I acknowledge the sweat that has been put into it and its quality. Therefore I will give it another try. However, I am not sure if the potential demise in every possible moment will help bonding with the game or prevent it.
Some of the greatest fun I had in other survival games was to try something amazing, like winning an impossible fight. That would have never been possible without checkpoints. There is so much enjoyment in controlling an uncontrollable situation with limited tools. I personally think being cornered by a angry bear with just a knife and being able to escape after reloading 10 times actually would be more fun than never go out on an adventure in the first place because its too dangerous. I know there are other games for this, but this game's setting is so beautiful that I still believe it is wasting potential by not having that single checkbox that could turn it into an adventure game and bring it to a whole new audience. However, then at the same time it is that unwillingness to make compromises that a gaming developing studio needs to believe in its vision and to not turn into *insert money hungry publisher*.
This are my experiences in the past:
While taking care of the players sustenance is challening the game is one of its best. You can feel the cold, the danger. But then there is a turning point. It starts when you start exploring. I caught myself multiple times not exploring because I didn't have to and it could have been dangerous. So survival is the challenge? There is a problem here. Because if you have understood all of the games principles, sat down with an excel sheet and calculated what you need to do, make a plan, then the challenge to survive is not that pressing any more. And here is a problem. How do I keep the player engaged after he has analyzed all of the game mechanics and knows them by heart? 1) make it random 2) increase the difficulty dynamically as the game progresses 3) make the mechanics fun even though they are repetitive (by minigames etc.)
Sorry I am drunk and happy new Year!