Is it all random? A couple of Q's Are there consistant planet types connected to stars? It'd be great if I'm low in fuel to know that red dwarfs always have gas planets etc. Do I remember the language from game to game, or does that start over too? Finally, in my last game my in system motor blew up and I had no propulsion to get to any planets. So I quit. No option right?
So I keep sling vital parts of my ship... Random bugs or whatever eat my drill, or a propulsion system, or well you name it and I don't have the plans apparently even if I've got the elements to rebuild it? Does that seems right? Last 2 games I've gotten to 2 systems and lost a vital piece if equipment so I had to start over...
This game is brutally hard!! How the heck u guys play this.. I never score more than 10k never visit more than 6stars.... What's the secret !!!
Yeah, the randomness seems far too swingy to support a reasonable strategy game. I had my by far best run ended this way. And it was like totally out of nowhere, too. I was doing great, all the resources filled and was pretty far along already (I found this amazing tech that let me breeze through the galaxy). Really bad design there. So, details: I just came to a new system, used up my excess cargo and filled my resources to the max to have enough space to mine and gather fuel. Then I tap to orbit a planet and bam - "funny" text message out of nowhere: "Oh, my reactor broke, I better have the resources to repair it, else I'm screwed!" Guess what? I'm screwed. I hate it when games that pretend to be strategy games do that completely out of nowhere without any connection to the gameplay whatsoever. In 7 Grand Steps, there are these situations when you're doing really well (maybe because you made some good decisions, huh?) and then bam - "A flood. Your family died!". Guess games are supposed to feel "more roguelike" or "unforgiving" through these mechanisms. But in reality they're just pushed a lot closer to random slot-machines.
You guys don't understand the purpose of the App Store featuring process. It's not to highlight niche games you really enjoy, it's to promote iOS as a platform and put software that the mass market consumer is going to say "Oh hey, that looks neat" when they open the App Store. Like it or not, Disco Zoo is a game that most people can wrap their head around. A text-based permadeath space exploration vague roguelike is not, as good as it is. The game is good, ya'll are enjoying it. What difference does it make what Apple features? How does this change the game at all? Or how much you're enjoying it?
Not the game, not our enjoyment, but gaming as a whole. Some people would like games to progress as a medium, and (somewhat) good games to be standard.
Whoever said this was a reasonable strategy game? I don't know if its bad design - I think random events in the galaxy possibly causing extreme and sudden death fit the theme of the game nicely. I have run into those events where something randomly blows up; I've learned to keep a few Fe around to rebuild things like drills/probes/interplanetary reactors, because, yeah, if those stop working you're in deep trouble. That's strategy, no? Spoiler And makes finding ships with lots of extra space all that much better.
The game tells me by pretty clear signals that it at least somewhat wants to be one. - There's a lot of resource management. You manage your cargo space, your fuel, your oxygen, your hull, your tech, lots of other materials to build stuff with etc. In fact, the core gameplay is managing your sparse resources, which is like an absolute classic theme of strategy games ever since. - There are clearly risk-reward mechanics in place. You have to make decisions on how many planets to orbit (especially early on), how many systems to search (or skip). You have to balance your power against the things you want to do. You're playing against the randomizer, trying to maximize your odds of getting something good in the long run while at the same time not taking too many risks to be obviously killed within minutes. - You have to plan ahead. My above example makes that evidently clear. It also makes clear that you have to do that concerning a lot more factors than it initially seems like. I didn't even know you could have a random defect right before approaching a planet (I wasn't on the star map, I was already in a system). Which is by the way, if we look at it as a strategy game, a negative. It's missing rules transparency here. (And even if it were transparent, in that case I think it's just a bad rule. If you approach a gas giant, you at least know your hull is going to be in danger. It's not a "haha, gotcha!" moment like the one I described was.) - There's a score and a clear goal. If this was really all about being a random story generator, all about atmosphere and stuff, then why would it even have that. The goal is absolutely mechanical ("Reach that point!"). The score is obviously a rating of how well you did, i.e. how well you managed your resources, i.e. how well you strategized. The score doesn't measure the quality of your story at all (how could it?). I think it's clearly a strategy game at heart with a lot of flavour on top.
It doesn't make any difference at all in terms of enjoying the game, but it is nice to see a game you love do well on the charts, and being featured by Apple certainly helps.
Don't go to every planet. You should only need to go to a rocky planet to drill once for every 2-3 gas giants, since you'll definitely need fuel, but your hull should be a bit more resilient. Notice that going to and landing on/taking off from planets takes a bunch of fuel.
I agree with all of that. But you seem to be against any kind of randomness in your strategy games, and this game clearly has a lot of it. So I suppose "unreasonable" strategy games aren't for you. Not trying to put words in your mouth, please elaborate further; I value your reasoned opinion!
Also, this quoted bit points to why Out There can be classified as a roguelike, given the similarities in permadeath, difficulty, randomness, and specific to your quote, learning the rules. Take Nethack, a quintessential roguelike. If you were playing unspoiled, you would die countless times, learning something each time, as you attempted to ascend with the amulet. The same thing is going on here. I'm rather enjoying Out There for that reason, the same reason I enjoy nethack-type games, even though I'm rubbish at them. (and also why I'm using spoiler tags often, to help keep readers of the thread unspoiled if they wish.) Is nethack a strategy game? I'd say yes. Same with Out There (and FTL). Not that this is proof of anything, but I've stashed Out There in my TBS folder on my iPad. FTL will go in my RTS folder.
You are right about Disco Zoo, sometimes its hard for me to understand that concept, true, and it doesnt change how I feel about Out There, but... I completely agree with this guy. I kind of look forward to the future of gaming, I know the golden age is gone, but if it Apple featured this instead of Disco Zoo, maybe more people will dive in (its an Apple Choice) and this would get more exposure, widens peoples concept about gaming (happened to me), it sells more, the devs keep on doing games like this. Gaming wins in my opinion.
I swear that at some point I'll take a notepad and do a Out There dictionary. I just live the idea of it, makes me feel like playing a good old adventure game where I write down anything I see (or a Simogo game for that matter). Yes and while I agree with that I can't help but feel like a Clash of Clans clone (even a good one) isn't something that people will look at and say "That looks neat". I know that I'm biased because I love Out There and because I couldn't get behind Royal Revolt's grindy mechanics but just by looking at the ratings of both games I can tell which one is getting more love. Of course I can't compare a free game with a paid one so I know it's not fair (and truthfully the ratings are often terrible in the appstore) but I just feel like this is a missed opportunity to showcase the breadth of content available on the appstore both artistically and technically. It makes a difference because not only do I want the game to succeed (and a lot of developer knows that success often hangs on that huge banner) for Mi_Clos's sake as an independent artist but also because I want to see more games from him. In the end it's just a little rant and I know that I won't change anything just by saying it but this is how I feel. /Rant Over
I can understand Disco Zoo getting the editors choice, since Nimblebit and Milkbag make great games. I beta tested it and I gotta say, I really like that. I am saddened by the fact that Royal Revolt 2 won as well (yeah. There were 2 editors choices for iPhone in the US.). At least half of the Out There icon can be seen without scrolling. Oh well, haha I guess I have unrealistic expectations
For me right now, Out There is listed third under Best New Games and is the 4th larger banner under that, both visible without scrolling on my iPad mini in landscape mode. That should help! AD: Warlords is also featured prominently. Great games this week!
I checked Afew hours ago, it is #57 paid in Canada. Third "best me game". I bought it after that, it has iPod 4 support, I scored 11 thousand on my second run. I didn't find a new ship, and also I got into some thing that took me far away, met an alien, gave me some weird horseshoe item, and tried adventuring into a black hole, found I couldn't. I never found a new ship tho
Based on my experience so far, finding a new ship is essential to progressing in the game. And though it really is luck of the draw, the longer you last, the better your chances of finding a new ship.
