Phoenix Point - Gollop's new X-Com-like.

[Sheepy 78]

Ow.  I remember that they were experimenting with different system.  Wish they stick with 100% hit.  If that's too much I'd be equally happy to see 95%...

[Jean-Luc 16]

It's over with a total of $765,948 of which roughly 320k are investments. Hopefully it's enough to produce something that might be called finished and hopefully sales are good enough to round up them aquatic stretch goals. One advantage is that dev expenses of working in Bulgaria will be much lower compared to Western Europe and beyond.

Slacker backer is also a thing so it's not too late to get in on it: https://www.fig.co/campaigns/phoenix-point

[Pave 13]

On 8.6.2017 at 11:04 PM, Jean-Luc said:

One advantage is that dev expenses of working in Bulgaria will be much lower compared to Western Europe and beyond.

Well it all depends on the organizing matters in reality: You could for example setup a non-profit studio if your legislations and other arrangements allow you to do so; this way you could also keep the wages low enough, or maybe even work as a "marginalization-prevention"-organization; not far fetched of in the current economy (especially with the planned / hoped "basic income"-implementations).

(( I know this is very off-topics, but the chance to include some inputs was far too tempting to me. ))

 

In the end, as I already mentioned "organizing", it primarily comes down to handling the expenses: Anything can be made expensive / unreasonably-bloated.

"Almost Human Ltd." ( of "Legend of Grimrock"-fame ) and "Enormous Elk" ( of "Unreal World"-fame ) are two example Finnish-video-game-development-teams that almost work  in "shoe-string"-budget, or at least (seemingly) started with little amount of savings.
And even today they seem to as "non-profit" as they possible are able to.

(A video showing "Almost Human"-team setting up their low-budget'ish stupio:)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbOX35sBl78

 

Then you have "Reto-Moto" with their "Heroes & Generals"-multiplayer-game with seemingly really huge (back-end-)infrastructure, at least when comparing numerous other similar games in the current market; we're talking of large databases or storage-bases for the replay-files, a rather large amount deticated-servers or datacenters hosting the battles, etc.
And yet this game is one of the very few on the market to be a genuinely "free-to-play", as in the content is available to all players even if no one else is paying it for you
(E.G. no "ransom"-items sold like for "slots").
True this game didn't start as "full-on-free". And some argue this in-game-store should be to be expected; fact still is it's very rare to see nowadays, especialy for a game of this caliber
(especially in market where "multi-billion"-studios claim they'd go bankrupt if they would host the gameplay-sessions themselves, and thus lob the responsibility on the players...).

(( To some extend, you could add "Mind-Ark" with their "Entropia Universe" do their "One World"-tech. But this game is more a "glorified-online-casino"; it can be still really fun though even if you don't give them any money, since you can for the most part freely explore the world regardless. ))

 

Let's not forget all these Japanese indie-devs that have been around like ever "always": Very high quality games that most of times cost some pocket-money because these works are more of passion.

---

There is a quite lot more I could possibly add. But I'll let this topic "recharge" for another more on-topical-situations.

But a summary is that hopefully they'll just handle the expenses and other resources well enough to make a good game.

---
---
---

Edited June 12, 2017 by Pave

[Chris 485]

Most indie dev teams essentially do run themselves as a non-profit during the development process; they minimize their costs and spend all their available funds on making the game as good as possible. The part that comes when they run out of money and release the game is where any profit happens!

[Commissar Pancakes 11]

On 5/29/2017 at 7:37 PM, Sheepy said:

Yeah.  I backed Xenonauts and other games on kickstarter, and I would back Phoenix Point if it were on kickstarter instead.  I have heard of Fig and it sounds like good for me since I backed nothing but games, but I am not as interested in game or crowdfunding as I once was.

Fig's pretty okay, considering how Wasteland 3 was campaigned there.

[Jean-Luc 16]

Geoscape & Ballistic Update: https://phoenixpoint.info/blog/2017/8/29/geoscape-ballistics-and-more

Interactivity with the geoscape should feel a lot more rewarding thanks to all the different point of interest but this is the best part.

Quote

 

However, Phoenix Point is going back to the original X-Com roots. A physical projectile will then be simulated from the shooter to the target following a trajectory which can deviate slightly depending on the weapon type. Even a shot that drifts slightly wide can still hit its intended target, with a higher chance to hit closer targets. Stray shots can also hit other enemies besides the intended target, or even friendlies if they get in the way. Stray shots (and those deliberately aimed) will also be able to destroy certain cover types.

Speaking of cover; the cover in Phoenix Point is dynamic. Instead of cover just being "low" or "high" with a fixed stat modifier, the cover in Phoenix Point will be a physical barrier, which will vary depending on the size and shape of the object being used as cover. The physical simulated projectile will then have a chance to hit the cover, unless it can find a way around or through it to reach its target.

 

That's how you do it, that's the Jagged Alliance way.

[Sheepy 78]

10 hours ago, Jean-Luc said:

Geoscape & Ballistic Update: https://phoenixpoint.info/blog/2017/8/29/geoscape-ballistics-and-more

I am more interested in the cover and accuracy system.  Sounds like they are going bullet trace and without giving exact cover % or hit %.

[Chris 485]

Be interesting to see how that pans out. If it doesn't generate a lot of complaints when the game is released I might consider moving to a similar system for future games - but in general I've always thought that people want to be able to properly evaluate their options before making a decision, rather than having to eyeball it (and then hope that the reality in the game logic actually matches up with what the player's eyeballs are seeing).

[Jean-Luc 16]

4 hours ago, Chris said:

Be interesting to see how that pans out. If it doesn't generate a lot of complaints when the game is released I might consider moving to a similar system for future games - but in general I've always thought that people want to be able to properly evaluate their options before making a decision, rather than having to eyeball it (and then hope that the reality in the game logic actually matches up with what the player's eyeballs are seeing).

I expect most Gollop fans are of the old school variety and the push for this kind of system has been pretty strong. I'd say the thing to watch for is what kind of interface improvements they come up with to improve transparency. 

[Sheepy 78]

16 hours ago, Chris said:

Be interesting to see how that pans out. In general I've always thought that people want to be able to properly evaluate their options before making a decision, rather than having to eyeball it (and then hope that the reality in the game logic actually matches up with what the player's eyeballs are seeing).

Valkyria Chronicle get around that partially by making all "hit" rounds hit the center.  That means your accuracy % stat is the guaranteed hit chance (assuming you aim correctly), and "miss" will be distributed evenly in the aiming cone - the bigger the enemy the more miss turn into a hit.

It should also be noted that VC's accuracy is make up of two parts: soldier's accuracy stat, and weapon's cone degree.  Accuracy is relatively low (~10% at level 1 to ~40% at level max), but powerful (=wide) weapons still has high effective hit% if you are really close (up to 100% if you can fill the cone).  As a result, soldier class (weapon) selection and tactic (how to get close) is generally regarded as more important than stat grind.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Sheepy

[Dranak 12]

This game is still more than a year out, but I've been amused by some of the subtle changes in wording in more recent (mostly fluff) articles/interviews about it.  One that really stood out to me was talking about aliens "randomly" getting new attributes/evolutions as opposed to how that had initially been phrased as being reactive to counter whatever tactics you were using.

[Jean-Luc 16]

Mutations were always intended to be random until something comes up that works at which point they stabilize. Once the player adapts their tactics the mutation deck starts shuffling again. I don't know whether the system will work out but the stated intent hasn't changed so far from what I've seen.

[Jean-Luc 16]

A fairly long narrated demo showing off a mission and explaining some of the mechanics: 

Have to say this is shaping up really well. 

[roxxed 7]

Gameplay and UI is looking good!

[Moonie 12]

So far the game play and mechanics have my vote. Backers build 3 next month. 

[Ruggerman 35]

Snap Shot Games, has provided a link to down the next incarnation of this game, and it plays out very well, in the ground combat, but you do not get a sense of being in the game when you are flying around to find the ground combat sites. This is not like the game above, as the game interface, has changed a bit?

[sectoid 10]

i backed this game with soldier roster edition.

the only thing i am complaining about is - Julian/ the team is releasing too much spoilers.

i understand the developer need to update the backers about progress and cool stuff they're making, at the same time attracts more customer.

still, i am very reluctant to read, to see, so many advance item even before installing the demo.

what is the fun of reading the whole UFOpedia first? if you got what i mean. hahaha.

 

 

[roxxed 7]

Recent Q&A by Julian