I think that's the classic case of a hardcore vocal minority. The big sales will come from word of mouth of more casual gamers though, people who probably don't have ID's to sites like this, because that's a much bigger market than the hardcore. Anyway, it sounds like the developer is acknowledging and addressing the problem quickly.
On the other hand, much as I like to eat... I hope when (if?) I make an iPhone game that I dare to make something that's NOT a crowd pleaser, but rather adds something NEW to the gaming world--something that some group of people enjoy and wouldn't have had without me. Even though that group may be small. But geoDefense has probably got a good balance now: Novice mode for the casual masses, and the full challenge for the "hard core tower defense" people. (Never thought I'd put THAT phrase together!) EDIT: for the sake of sales/word-of-mouth, maybe Novice mode should be on by default, and be visible right on the main screen? And I forgot to mention: I've tried the new tower placement (above-finger) and it's great. MUCH MUCH easier to precisely aim lasers. This too should be the default, I think. That's the top change I wanted, so thanks!
I wouldn't call myself hardcore, though I used to play a lot in my distant youth. Somehow the game just hit a chord a lot of us had been waiting to hear, as it rose to fame very quickly after release. I agree with the poster above who said not all games need to be mediocre easy stuff for masses. I think most of the games in appstore are of the easily digested variety, and they will lose flavor if consumed in large quantities. The harder stuff is needed too, to keep gaming interesting. Of course, this is all up to the developers to decide, and if they are after the big buck they probably should go with the flow and create lighter, easier games (or fart apps). But I think David of geoDefense should feel great pride for creating something more, something that has made people think TDs a little differently. I find other tower defense games a bit bland after the intense geoDefense sessions, so he apparently got the game right by following his own vision. If he decides to tweak the game and go after money, that's fine, I know software engineers have to eat too. But please to not offend him by implying he had somehow failed by making the game too difficult. It is a balanced gem.
so a game that is crazy hard is automatically something new and exciting? Then even I can develop "new and exciting" games that punish the players until they give up. Maybe Ill win a top 10 games of the year award for it I have played hard games that are hard but not punishing. Heard of a game called Ninja Gaiden? and the outcry of how hard is was? I finished it. It was damn hard but it wasnt punishing me until I gave up. It excited the player and you evolved. In geodefense the game casts you in hell on the very first lvl and says here you go and laughs at your face. I myself wont play it anymore until an update. Will wait 1 month. Then Ill write a personal review on the app store of what I think about it
Different people have different tastes. I found the game VERY hard at first (but fun, not hell), and then as I figured it out it goy easier--but still very hard--and even more fun. (Now they've added Novice mode. Have you tried that? I'm glad you're coming back later for a full review--a very fair approach.) No, being hard does not make a game, new, exciting, or fun. Hard CAN be PART of exciting and fun--a kind of fun you can't have without that challenge. And hard doesn't have to mean punishing. Hard can be rewarding. This game is new, exciting AND fun--but not to everyone. No game is. And part of that fun, for me is the REWARD: when you beat a level it is very satisfying. So is trying different things even when they fail. The game, to me, is about reward, not punishment at all. Now, later levels may defeat me--we'll see--but I'll still have had fun along the way. Some types of game you're meant to spend a long time trying the same level in different ways, rather than muscling through by perfecting what you know to be the one right method. Not everyone likes that kind of challenge, but it can be very fun. And geoDefence need not be as hard as you have found it--if you try different strategies. The wrong tactics will certainly punish you (This is not to say you should like it--different people like different things, which is great. It's just to explain to others why they might like it. I've found plenty of other games to be too hard to be fun, so I know what you mean.)
Well then stop complaining about how hard it is. Your complaint is that your score doesn't get recorded.
Calling something "Novice" is a turnoff. It would have been better to relabel the current version, and make the new slightly easier version the default "Normal" mode. If I make a game and design it to be too hard and punishing, does that mean everyone who can't beat it is a "Novice"? That's the classic "noob" insult. Fwiw, I played, beat and enjoyed Ninja Gaiden Black, Devil May Cry 3 and Ninja Gaiden 2.
Kudos for you spawn beating Ninja Gaiden. I couldn't cope even with Soul Calibur II You must have approached geodefense somehow totally wrong. It really is not that hard. I'm not going to try convert you as you probably have already grown a dislike for the game. Let it rest for some time, and try it again with fresh mind. Just build a bunch of towers and see how they behave. Or just forget the game and take the $.99 loss. Don't sweat on it. Maybe you just got a wrong game for you. Different tastes. Btw, I hated Snail Mail so much I had to delete the game. Did not review it though. I could never get past one of the levels right at the beginning where you must jump a few small platforms. I just couldn't get it. Sh*t happens.
Ninja Gaiden was hard but in a different way, finger dexterity and speed of eye hand coordination. geoDefense is more like a chess match (with some frantic action thrown in). This really sums up the game for me(from the dev's website): "Think of it like Chess. There is your opening moves, which are setting the stage for how you will win the level. The middle game is where you do your busy work of getting built-up for the final push at the end. The end game is where it gets completely crazy! If you didnt have a strategy up until this point, no amount of fast fingers will save you."
Huh? When you play a new game for the first time, are you not a novice in it? I don't get your point... Unless you are talking about an ego problem or something These are just games we are talking here, not some dead-serious competition.
It depends. Most genres follow certain conventions in controls and gameplay so typically with any new game I am no novice compared to say, my mom, who doesn't play video games. This is the reason why console games used to offer modes for, "Beginner/Normal/Hard" and now offer, "Casual/Normal/Hard" The point being it's not insulting to be thought of as being casual, but who wants to be called a beginner or novice at anything? As I said, you could equally use "Noob" for that skill level, and how many would choose it? Ideally the game is as welcoming to as many people as possible, while at the same time not turning away the hardcore. Give the people who play it for 100 hours all the tools they need, but there's no need to turn away everyone who isn't in that tiny club.
When I'm beginning something, I feel being called a "beginner" is no insult at all Noob is another story! (An insult I probably deserve, after some of the clueless stunts I've subjected my team to in Quake Wars.) Calling the first level "Casual" is an interesting thought though. If I ever make a game I'll consider what you're saying. On the other hand, I wouldn't want a gamer who sees themselves as NON-casual (and "casual" may insult them) to skip right to the middle level--when in fact, as beginners, they ought to start at the first level. Depends on the game though. In any case, the insult (coming from a dev who doesn't even know you exist) of using the wrong term must be a VERY tiny one, so tiny that it should never make anyone reject an otherwise fun game. Anyway, I don't get too far off-topic... to answer the O/P: yes, I tried it
When I'm beginning something, I feel being called a "beginner" is no insult at all Noob is another story! (An insult I probably deserve, after some of the clueless stunts I've subjected my team to in Quake Wars.) Calling the first level "Casual" is an interesting thought though. If I ever make a game I'll consider what you're saying. On the other hand, I wouldn't want a gamer who sees themselves as NON-casual (and "casual" may insult them) to skip right to the middle level--when in fact, as beginners, they ought to start at the first level. Depends on the game though. In any case, the insult (coming from a dev who doesn't even know you exist) of using the wrong term must be a VERY tiny one, so tiny that it should never make anyone reject an otherwise fun game. Anyway, I don't want to get too far off-topic... to answer the O/P: yes, I tried it
True, but it hurts the dev more. If you buy a game, or on console maybe you rent it, and let's say hypothetically it gave you the choice of, "Noob / Normal / Hard", and almost nobody chose Noob. You'd have a lot of people not progressing very far, feeling they wasted their time and money, not recommending it to friends, and perhaps even leaving bad reviews. If the developer can be inclusive with his customer base, then he should be. Everyone wins.
Right. "Noob" is a real insult, but the insult of being called "casual" or a "beginner" is very tiny. I can't imagine someone not clicking "beginner" in the privacy of their own home, for fear that it's an insult. They'd click a higher level because they thought they were already good at this kind of game. But once they realize they are actually a beginner (because it's NOT the same as other games after all), I don't see them feeling insulted to change to Beginner. Nobody will know, after all. And if they ARE insulted, it will be such a trivial insult that it won't stop them from playing the game. I know what you mean and it's an interesting point--I just think the insult is too small to worry much about.
if someone new to any game chooses normal and does not get very far, but has too much pride to choose the easy / noob / for crap people level what do expect the developer to do level 1 for really cool people level 2 normal level 3 only for psychotics ????????? if you don't like geoDefense get over it, if you don't want to play it don't, if its too hard go and play something else but for gods sake leave it alone you see from the other 2000 posts here praising it you are here in the minority, live with it and play something else
huh. I thought the Novice option was good. I'm only a casual TD player, and can't be bothered to learn the strategy. I just wanna blast things and enjoy the eye-candy. Is high-scores that big a deal? I'm not worried. I have *cash*! PS: Soup is dead right. Get over your insecurities. It's just a game. Download another of the million games and play that.
