Maybe the backlash isn't that bad

[Arheo]

In my experience, ‘backlash’ is quite a negative term, but you’re right - it isn’t always bad.

I’ve seen a great deal of opinions over the last few days, some expressed more forcefully than others, and many of which contain valuable feedback and criticism.

It’s understandable that people feel ready to pass judgement on a game based on what they know, but what they know isn’t everything. Similarly, making promises early on that end up being impossible to keep, is why we don’t simply spew out all the plans and intentions at the very beginning. The downside to that, is that everybody has created an ideal version of IR in their head, and it is difficult (read; impossible) to meet all those expectations.

I enjoyed reading this thread, particularly because comments on both sides of the fence have been thought-out and on the whole, well meant.

Ultimately, we do listen - ‘the devs’ are not faceless corporate drones; we love playing PDS games as much as you. We are trying our best to create a game that will be loved, so, please keep criticising, keep suggesting, and keep telling us your expectations. They may not all be met, but I guarantee you that every thread posted here is read by one or more of us.

What is unfortunate, is when criticism becomes anger. It’s hard to expect it not to, with the internet being what it is, but for a team who are genuinely invested as players as well as devs, who are working (hard!) to create a title that will be fun as well as immersive, it can be incredibly disheartening, and is rarely productive.

Tl;dr: Rational discussion ftw.

All best,

Peter

 

[Arheo]

Now, can we reasonably expect an actual change in Imperator's direction towards the points addressed by the community in these past days?

This is a fair question, but one which I can't answer in the way I expect that you desire.

What I can definitively say, is that you haven't seen 'the direction' yet - you have seen a tiny snippet of what is to come, and people have extrapolated based on that. As mentioned previously, it is fully understandable that many are jumping to conclusions, forming opinions, and making judgement on the information they're given, and I don't fault anyone for that.

The community have had diverse opinions on many issues, and even in this instance, I haven't seen what I'd call a concerted opinion. If pleasing everyone was an achievable goal, we'd have:

- World conquests that are easy, but also impossible.
- A perfectly balanced start, that accurately portrays the historical imbalances of the time.
- Minutely detailed 'modelling'* of literally everything, combined with unparalleled game speed and an AI capable of playing 38 games of chess, peeling a banana, and redefining poverty.

*This word makes me cry.

I understand the frustration - I do. I'm equally frustrated that we can't show you all the cool things you haven't seen yet - but that day will come.

Peter

 

[Arheo]

So you are telling me that you are not going to model the sweat on the brow of Scipio Africanus? Even partially?? Next you will be telling me Hannibal's beard is not trimmable.

If you've seen the shamefully leaked PDXcon footage, you'd already know that brow-sweat is a flagship I:R feature .

You wouldn't say that our - community - opinion were concentrated, regarding increased usage of mana points in I:R? You surely didn't miss one of the hottest topics ever created on the forum

Personally, I find this issue a particularly challenging one. I am not in charge of deciding what system we use - but I would still pick this one, myself.

'Mana' is traditionally the domain of a Splendid Wizard. The name is misleading, but I understand the sentiment. Why do characters in MMOs have a health or mana value? It represents how close they are to death or exhaustion. Some games have done away with the concept, but I don't feel like grand strategy is the place for that.

Is it an abstraction? Sure. Is that bad? Not necessarily. Many of the complaints I have seen about the power system, is that it was too broad, too nonspecific, and too ubiquitous. With many complaints over features, there are often amazing suggestions that go alongside. With power, I haven't yet seen a suggestion that I think adequately provides an alternative. Time gating as the only method, as any game developer will tell you, makes reactive gameplay difficult, especially in our genre. Random chance is utterly horrible (what's that? I got the wrong result, oh well, I'll alt-f4 and try again).

Abstraction is the domain of gaming - show me a game with none, and I'll be eternally grateful. Refer to bananas and chess comment in my previous post.

There are some in-betweens, and some decent ideas, but none which adequately represent what power is, in my eyes. Power to me, is influence. It's a gameplay mechanic, certainly, but it has a representative purpose. The sum total of political or national influence in an arbitrary number of categories that you as the 'spirit' of your nation, through your puppet, the ruler, can extend over the forces in play within your empire. Caesar, despite what he would have liked people to believe, didn't have absolute control over his subjects - he had to constantly balance his political situation. I feel like the main thing to be careful of is not having a power system, but how we use it.

What this is: my personal opinions on the topic of power, or, as we apparently call it now, mana.

What this isn't: a blanket statement on the future of the game.

What this also isn't: confirmation of Splendid Wizards.

Peter

 

[Arheo]

Seriously? You don't see the voice of the community in the anti-mana riot? Look on the thread I created about mana... more than 100 up for anti-mana post and less than 20 against.

This is entirely true, and the voices of those who are concerned about the power system are being listened to, however, the community is not 120 people, nor is it representative to judge any topic on the number of up or down votes it has.