Got as far as mission 2 before I had to start the mission over twice because the game starts (a) being unable to save the game, even after restarting it (it just doesn't do it -- it ignores your clicking ok to save), or (b) saving the game but loading it back in a bugged state (like if you save while planes are being moved on the deck, when it reloads, the planes are stuck and cannot be moved, and nothing can be done on the flight deck anymore, meaning end of game for that save). Very, very bad form to have game-ruining save bugs at this stage.
I really enjoyed this game. It's a well-done sim that has a good amount of insight and thought put into it. I can't speak for how this is for people who aren't accustomed to business strategy/sim games, but I know it's going way too far to say this game wasn't intuitive at all, as some reviewers have. I suppose it's a little dryer than a lot of games in the genre, but it does what it does well. And yeah, it's meta as hell -- deal with it, people. Is anyone going to complain about books that are about authors now too? Or movies about the film industry? Come on. I haven't bought it yet, but I'm looking forward to playing the sequel. Big thumbs up from me on this one.
This is still the best game in this genre, ever. It was the apotheosis of space 4X, and everything since still pales. Fie to those who prefer SE4, btw. SE5 is the best. I'm not sure what happened, aside from the scant notes in Wikipedia about Strategy First, but SE6 would be be amazing. Even a remake/polish/continuation of SE5 would be grounds for great celebration.
If you plan on playing this multiplayer, search the internet for "grim dawn multiplayer problems". The multiplayer is only provisionally useful -- you might be able to connect and play with friends if you're lucky, but there's a very high chance you won't, and nothing you do (turn off firewalls, port forwarding, setting up DMZ, changing to low IP address in your range, hold your mouth just right) will work. I'm to the point where it has completely ruined the experience and soured the game for me, as I've spent too much time holding up friends while we try to get it to work when it should. If you want to play a multiplayer ARPG, find another one -- avoid the frustration. It's well-documented and well-known, and there hasn't been a real solution. And looks like there won't be.
There's a core to this game that is enjoyable and fun, in its lane -- an action-shooter flavored with Lovecraft. But the experience is completely by 1) the infrequent saving (once every half hour to an hour, approximately), (2) glitches where you get stuck in a spot on the map and have to quit and lose your last 45 minutes of progress if you don't have a teleportation bug with you, and (3) the constant traps everywhere. The last one really spoils game flow, because you have to move an inch, stop for 2 seconds, move an inch, stop for 2 seconds, everywhere, or you'll run into traps that often inflict bleeding that drains half your health bar and run you out of your consumables constantly. And you *will* hit traps anyway, and it is just tedious, frustrating and makes the game flow halting and slow. SUGGESTIONS TO THE DEVELOPERS: Roguelike games can be fun, but it's time for the stupid Roguelike fundamentalism fad to end; respect people's time and allow them to free save if they want. Remove or GREATLY reduce tedious, un-fun things like the traps. And, of course, fix your game so people don't get stuck behind chests and unable to get back out.
So the game is okay and I've played, what, 10, 15 hours, and had a character I liked and was progressing nicely. But I hit a dealbreaker that always results in a 1-star screw-you review for me. If you quit mid-mission, it tells you your game is saved from before you start the mission. I've done it many times. This time, it auto-killed my character and, when I reloaded, I came back to find my character dead and all ammo/inventory reduced to minimal levels. No, just no. I'm not going to start over with a new one, especially when I fully expected to be able to resume where I was. Any game developer that doesn't *very* carefully make sure not to ruin the player experience this way can eat dirt as far as I'm concerned. Even in a "rogue-like". It's a respect thing, you know? Respect your players and their time. Uninstalled, and would seek a refund if I had had it less than 30 days.
It's buggy and just barely working. I am excited to see what it's going to be when it's ready, but this was not ready for release. You guys jumped the gun...
Have been playing a few hours now, and though I'm enjoying most of the game, I can already see the seeds of me throwing up my hands in annoyance and quitting because of the save system. The game gives limited saves per mission system, like 3 or 4. What this means is that, because of the need to succeed at certain RNG rolls or lose a mission objective (or have a stealth mission go loud), you're going to be repeating the same things over and over... a lot. This is an unfortunate trend in games in the last decade. Guys, the rest of us are getting really annoyed at this. I'm middle-aged and I just don't have the time to play the same mission over and over -- I want to get through the game, and I don't want to do it on a gimped easy mode. I want to be able to play normal difficulty, and I want to have whether I can save, scum-save, whatever, be my choice. As it stands, it creates artificial difficulty -- gotta repeat 4 minutes of gameplay over and over and hope you get that RNG roll success in commanding a suspect to surrender, or have the next stage of the mission start without one of your guys getting killed. This is not like the old XCOMs, where you can just buy new guys easily. One of your guys dies, it really is a crimp to future play. I'll give this game a 4 if this annoying save-limitation feature is made optional. Otherwise, I suspect I'm going to just give up on it -- I just don't like repeating stuff. Maybe you like it, I don't.
