So I just finished 2 games with 100% achievements. This is just a quick AAR/review of the sort.
I’m happy I did not play this right after Hades. This game isn’t a 3D action RPG. This game is a 3D beat’m up. I didn’t know if at first. I played it like Hades, Zelda, etc and I died before the end of the first level. Then it clicked. I played it like I would play Final Fight if I wanted to 1CC it.
Treat every hit like a touch of death (or touch of 1/4 of your life gone) because it can be. Never get surrounded. Use the dodge like one would use jump in FF since there’s no I-Frames in WoL’s dodge. Most importantly, the game treats stun like a beat’m up. Basic attacks can stun lock most enemies, Bosses you can stun but you have to understand it’s pattern to do so.
I ended up getting 100% achievements in this game around the 16 hours mark. Which is great because if it weren’t for that I’ll probably still be playing it non-stop.
This game is the opposite of Wizard of Legend. IS looks like a roguelite beat’m up but it’s actually more inline with an action RPG with a different view.
You can’t go toe to toe with enemies pass the first Boss and win. There isn’t really a stun mechanic in the game. you have to weave in and out of combat via the invincible roll. You can have a huge inventory, different skills, powerups, pets, etc.
This is a great game but you will be very angry if you play it like a beat’m up because you will have a hard stop on the third level.
Both have lots to unlock and is made for people who like to experiment with builds and figuring out mechanics.
Based on your “review” here I picked up WoL and just poked at it. I guess when you buy arcana during a run they don’t carry over? You have to buy them before the run for that?
No, first time I see it. Interesting, at this point I am accostumed to all these game being released in Early Access, but this won’t be. And it’s in 3d engine, unlike most the popular ones (Dead Cells, Hades, Rogue Legacy, BoI, etc).
Visually, it has some tradeoffs, even if it’s 3d, it doesn’t have the detail of AAA 3d games. I don’t think this looks good:
But of course that’s the trailer that shows things much closer than in normal gameplay. I guess it will be fine when playing it normally.
It also irks me that the game isn’t out but they have already a day 0 DLC where they have split off the content of the game, 2 classes and 3 locations are exclusive to the DLC.
edit:
How is this a good idea?
Back on the island, you can choose to have another try—essentially gambling another of your Celts—or go and see what’s behind another door. The latter might be the smart choice, thanks to difficulty levels that vary hugely from god to god—but you never know which ones will be harder or easier, because they’re randomised for each playthrough.
I just read the PC gamer review. Looks like there’s platforming in this game and each run will take 8 hours. With the 0 DLC and the randomized difficulty, I don’t think I’m sold on this.
Anyone taking the plunge?
At some point, somebody will have to study how many of the best rogue-lites are 3d. So far, I think all of the best ones do not use a 3d engine. Is it because generating random content in 3d is harder? Because the genres these games utilize are almost all traditional?
Gods Will Fall having day-0 DLC seems odd. DLC usually has a lower attach rate. Why would they give up price on their biggest sales period? Or, as they’re doing it, offer two SKUs at such a close price point?
Simon Carless’ thoughts on DLC from the middle of last year: “It’s all about increasing $ yield smartly for the ‘long tail’ of sales, and for post-launch players finding the game for the first time… I think it works particularly well for in-depth strategy or simulation games where you can build out new ‘level packs’ and scenarios, and for cases where you can stack DLC so the ‘complete pack’ is 1.8x to 3x the normal game cost.” https://gamediscoverability.substack.com/p/the-surprising-way-that-paid-dlc
I think adapting that kind of visual fidelity to all the game’s assets would have been a Herculean task for what I’m guessing is a small team. It’s funny because Going Under’s recent animated update trailer reflects the game’s visuals nicely.
Atomicrops’ looks totally different but Toby Dixon’s pixel art is so good it still looks amazing.
And Hades is the rare game where the in-game visuals look better than the animated trailer’s.
Oh, and Risk of Rain 2. I dig the in-game visuals more than the higher fidelity Edge of Tomorrow-style cinematic trailer:
I don’t pretend the game looking like the trailer, lol. I was more questioning why invest in doing that trailer in the first place, precisely because they seem to a very small indie team.
I’ve no idea how much an animated trailer like that must cost (and how far that would go on further development) but presumably somebody thought a slick animation would get more eyes on it, even if there’s a big visual difference between it and the game.
No idea. I downloaded the demo a while back but started playing Hades around the same time so never got round to it. Once I’m back in the mood for an action roguelike I’m going to give it a spin. I think it looks really cool and different though.
It’s okay, the main gimmick is that most of the objects in the dungeon are physics-y objects that you can pick up and use it as a weapon, so there’s a bit of physics-comedy built into it. It also means that there’s a bit of floppiness and jankiness.
The theming is cute, although it’s a less venomous take on Silicon Valley culture than it first appears.
