NTC3'S PROFILE

OK, why would anyone make a game work like this? Just, why?

Oh, and there is a ton of typos there. And the enemies are still speaking in Polish even if English language is selected.

author=Merlandese
Sorry, NTC3, for hijacking the comments on your review!

I mean, when I wrote this ~3000 word review, I certainly didn't anticipate the discussion would be centered on the largely peripheral aspects (though I certainly agree with Merlandese's points on the Power Grid), but oh well, any activity is still activity, so I'll take it! And after all, it's good if you like the majority of an in-development game enough to only consider the margins of it. I certainly wouldn't mind if my opinion is a minority one and the game is a great success upon release.

author=Deltree
Thing is, I had mostly positive responses so far, with a few rough edges that I thought I'd addressed over time.

Like I said, that's good. The burning question, of course, is whether enough outside players will share their view. I've seen warnings on some development blogs before that early followers can be a self-selecting group that might not be a good representation of the actual playerbase upon release. I suppose we'll only know this for sure once it releases. For now, best of luck, I guess.

author=harmonic
We should make the UN irrelevant by pulling out US influence and support.

I would honestly love to see you try. The US contribution amounts to ~620 million USD. That's twice as large as the next contributor's Japan, sure, but is still only 11%, or so. It wouldn't take that much extra spending to fill in most of the gap: if China were to, say, double their contribution from 140 to ~300 million, and we + Japan, Turkey and key EU countries would give extra 20-30 million each, that already covers more than half. In return, all of these countries get to paint the USA as a literal self-declared rogue state, while your Security Council seat will be vacated, and up for grabs - an opportunity no reasonably powerful state would miss.

Just imagine the possibilities: it might go to Japan by the virtue of them being the current largest donor (though China would likely object a lot to that). It might be given to Brazil as the uncontroversial option, but I don't think they want it as hard as India or Turkey do. Erdogan has been wanting to cement his legacy like this for years, and Modi certainly wouldn't pass this chance up as well. They might not contribute too much to it now, but I doubt any sum would be an object for them if it'll help attain such a clear prize. Whatever happens next, though, one thing is clear: Israel is going to have fun fending off UN resolutions with a far less reliable Brexited Britain veto at best - no veto at all if Britain somehow gets a Labour PM.

author=Dyhalto

author=kentona
quotes by Sideshow Bob and Marvel's Loki

Not to poo-poo your contribution to the discussion, but I think we all need to be getting away from these conjectures of cultural pessimism. There is no craving for subjugation or deep-rooted desire for a strongman. If anything, the recent Women's March proves that it's completely the opposite. That deep down, people will step up when the going gets tough.

Honestly, I think kentona is closer to the truth out of you two here. If there's no "desire for a strongman", then how do you explain the success of Philippines' Duterte, who was elected on the platform of encouraging vigilantes to wipe out drug crime, and now that he's been succeeding at the cost of ~7,000 dead people last year, his popularity is unprecedented? Of course, he's been notably far-sighted on many other matters, from birth control to relationship with China, and history will probably judge him kindly, but it is nevertheless a good counterpoint.

In my view, it again comes down to the perennial parable of the carrot and stick. People don't just need to believe you'll give them carrots and be good to them; they also need to think you'll protect them and be capable of using the stick on those who are against them, and prospective leaders who cannot do that are considered weak and do not last. The Women's March seems more like a response to clear deficiences of Trump the person, whose victory was enabled by the ever-growing polarization of the US politics that also normalizes the march (and polarization itself is a consequence of the outdated system; in particular, its lack of the mandatory vote that only empowers the extreme wings of majority parties.) It doesn't really disprove the underlying principle. After all, what does the whole "Nasty Woman" meme signifies, if not the desire for a strong and combative female leader who'll fight to protect the rights and priorities of the person using it? It's the same principle, and it may well work soon enough: after all, I see no logical reason not to call Marine Le Pen a "Nasty Woman", should she win this May in France.

Though, I'll still say that "the desire for subjugation" and the Loki quote is tosh, a rough equivalent of the "false consciousness" back in Marxist theory. Both are/were little more then condescending narratives people tell themselves to justify the systems they grew up with in opposition to others, and to banish the thought their preference might not be based on anything stronger then habit. Having experienced growing up in two substantially different countries, and avidly reading up on others since, it's truly fascinating how much collective morality can shift and adjust across times and places, defying the simple linear scale categories people use by default. My favorite recent example was the shock that registered on people's faces in Russia whenever I told them of prison camps for refugees on the islands around Australia, (almost) entirely normalised by the proudly free Australia itself.

EDIT:

author=Dyhalto
Instead it's back to a free for all, and China can move in on Taiwan or whoever without setting off any tripwire alliances.

Taiwan is going to be interesting case soon, because Trump and co. will eventually find out that pursuing rapprochement with Taiwan and pushing back against the (irrelevant) island bases is going be practically impossible at the same time, because Taiwan has exactly the same territorial claims; all it lacks is the ability to enforce them, though it does make its own shows of strength every once in a while. Ideally, of course, China should accept there's little point in bringing back Taiwan (and before you say Crimea, 70 years apart is not 20 years) and let them be independent. In a perfect world, there could've been some sort of a bargain where China agrees to that in response to the other island claims being settled and USA/West accepting DPRK will remain a nuclear-armed nation as long as it exists, thus simultaneously pouring cold water over the most volatile flashpoints in the world. We don't live in that world though, and have to make do with the present interesting times.

author=Toaster_Team

I like to think that I got the basic rules predicting success or failure sorted, but often, you'll never know.

I think that would certainly make you part of the minority. Understanding and predicting sales is nothing short of a complex science as it involves a lot of variables which themselves are hard not only to identify but to properly scope and make predictions about. Good on you for having a good understanding of things like that. I must admit I am more insecure about making such predictions.

Well, I wanted to reply to this earlier, but the part above made me go and recheck the stuff I wrote down on this for myself before against the Steamspy data, to be extra sure I'm not missing anything. Turns out I was: mainly, I rather underestimated the Summer/Christmas sales' impact, and how they can benefit a game even 2 years or so after release. With that mind, I'm now confident enough to list the following points:

* The median sales for a game at the start of last year amounted to 3000 (Galyonkin, the creator of Steamspy.) I haven't looked up the latest number, but after 40% of Steam's contents were released last year, I can only assume it's gone down. However, that number is obviously dragged down by many "Jimpression-level" games hardly anyone wants to buy (there are some unfortunate exceptions, like "God's Chain" somehow managing to get 77,000, which I hope is a bug, or a result of some enormous discount/bundle). A perfectly average indie game, however, one that works, (largely) free of bugs but doesn't stand out, will usually get 1-3k in the first month or two of sales, then sorta stay there for a while, then generally manage to accumulate ~10,000-15,000 in a year since its release (though it can fluctuate a lot more depending on how well you manage sales and discounts.)

** The "perfectly average game" above likely has a userscore of 70-80%, or so. The median userscore is in that range, at "Mostly Positive" reviews. If the game works, is not bugged, is not considered overpriced, and didn't disappoint the pre-existing fanbase, then getting lower then that is unlikely. However, Steam users themselves know this, and so mixed-negative critical reviews will almost always trump the high userscore and cripple its sales. When speaking of a "perfectly average game", I assume one that failed to interest enough critics in it to get reviews from 4+ Metacritic-approved critics, and thus has no Metascore displayed on its Steam page. Metascores make things more interesting, though not necessarily the way creator might want.

** Broadly speaking: it's still possible to be successful and explode (~100,000+ quickly) on Steam without getting any Metascore until months later, if ever, though that is highly dependent on knowing your audience/plain luck. Getting a red Metascore, however, instantly cuts off sales and they don't come back beyond a trickle, ever. "Yellow" scores in the fifties are only a little better. 60-67 slows the game down, but can be overcome. 67-75 doesn't really boost or hinder: a game which got that far is in the top third of Steam anyway, and can have above-average to very successful performance. Having good (75+) or great (85+) reviews, however, doesn't guarantee immediate success: often, if you're little-known indie and/or in a less popular genre like point-and-clicks, people will put you in a wishlist and wait until sales approach.

Technobabylon was a good example of what I'm talking about: that game got good reviews (82) and very high userscores, yet sales were stubbornly slow for a long time: 3,000 after release (May 2015), 7,000 later, ~9,000 throughout 2016...until, finally, I checked its stats after a recent Christmas sale, and it's now at ~100,000. The Magic Circle is another example I know of which went like that: good game, good reviews (79 Metacritic; our Riot Pixels gave 85 and Riot Top award, which they hardly ever do), but was at 5,000-7,000 from July 2015 release until about April 2016, when they finally jumped to about 80,000 (now at 100,000).

So in all, I hope this helped you, and was worth the three-week wait. Having modest expectations is certainly helpful for survival in the industry: I've seen several indie studios on Steamspy whose games had tiny sales until their 4th-5th game suddenly eclipsed all the previous ones (though the other way around is probably more common). I cannot predict how successful your game will be, but I can certainly say that you have an advantage with your distinct, good-looking, nicely animated graphics. After all, games with good-looking screenshots and well-put together trailers most certainly have a significant starting advantage over others, especially in the absence of reviews and such at the start.

Certainly looks good, and bodes well for the future!