feedback Whoa! This is it?

[krystyl.rose]

On 8/5/2020 at 12:56 PM, Highclass said:

I feel the OP is a tad more hardcore than the target demographic of this game. Its promoted as co-op, starring kids, in a backyard.  That screams casual fun. Just sayin. 
i someone who hates survival games in general and doesnt play them, my friend and i are having an absolute BLAST playing this. 
i hope this remains accessible as it is for us carebears

Agreed, there shouldn't be a sweeping difficulty adjustment that thrusts the non-hardcore survival gamers into hardcore mode.  I HATE that so many survival games do that ("Many players are finding this too easy, we'll make it more difficult all-around"), there are many players that like survival games but either aren't great at it (young, less skilled, whatever the reason) or that just plain enjoy a less hardcore gaming experience.  I have played many early access survival games where after a number of updates, I've been left without the ability to even play the game anymore because it has become too difficult, even at the easiest settings. I enjoy playing these games with my kids and while the older kids may find the game to be less challenging, the youngers are dying as much as I am.  There HAS to be a balance so that all levels of gamers can enjoy the game.  If they want to up the difficulty in WHOA! mode, fine, but I am still struggling to fight off ANY spiders, stinkbugs, bombardier beetles, or ants or ladybugs if I aggro'd them.  My older kids tend to take on those threats so the youngers and I don't have to without better armor.  So many seasoned gamers don't consider the difficulty for "noobs" if their own gameplay is too easy.  I would argue that instead of sweeping changes that eliminate the safety of high ground or something, they add another difficulty level (or update only the WHOA! level) that makes the AI of certain mobs (spiders, for example) be able to climb on things they can't currently (after all, spiders climb to high places all the time in reality) but don't make that change to the EASY level... There doesn't seem to be anyplace in the game that doesn't have aggressive mobs having the ability to spawn (we build in the relatively safe area of the mysterious machine, and yet on many occasions have had spiders spawn in that area randomly) so to have an aggressive mob spawn into an area that is usually safe AND have them able to climb up and rip off our faces on EASY mode.... well, that would just make the game unplayable for some of us.

That said, I do fully agree with some of the OP's points.  There SHOULD be a way to transfer entire stacks or split stacks and the armor SHOULD definitely be removed from your inventory when moved to an equipment slot (except for things like the glider or torch, as those aren't permanently worn).

Edited August 7, 2020 by krystyl.rose

[LaikaFromSpace]

8 hours ago, krystyl.rose said:

there are many players that like survival games but either aren't great at it (young, less skilled, whatever the reason) or that just plain enjoy a less hardcore gaming experience.

Yes, this!

I'm a run-of-the-mill gamer who really enjoys survival/resource management games, with hundreds of hours in games like Don't Starve, Subnautica, and RimWorld. What I like about those games specifically is that they're only as punishing as you ask the game to be. I agree there's some great points made by OP about quality-of-life adjustments, but on difficulty levels, I would be incredibly disappointed if suddenly Grounded turned into a hardcore DayZ wasteland with blood test kits and morphine injectors. Removing a save-state system someone thinks survival games "shouldn't" have one actually does nothing to improve the game itself; if someone don't want to rely on save-scumming to advance, then just...don't do it? I'd be leery to start asking for changes that artificially inflate difficulty to the point that people who might otherwise be interested in the game suddenly get turned off by it. (What about folks with kids or obligations that might call them away from the PC/Xbox at any moment? Should they be penalized just for that?)

[Truth]

On 8/5/2020 at 9:45 PM, Uberkull said:

You obviously never played a server based survival game...like ever. What I outlined is today’s basic survival games that have been out for some time. Some for a decade. So, what I provided feedback for is not ‘5 different games’, it’s one game genre. Survival games.

Adding a hardcore mode is fine for me, if thats what it would take to make this game more challenging. There will be zero longevity to this game for actual survival game players, it just isn’t challenging survival.

And don’t throw ‘game preview’ excuses around, like I stated in my OP, core game design usually won’t change drastically so what you see is pretty much what you will get plus some added features. And early access shouldn’t be excuse for delivering a 15 minute story and no further content other than a robot giving 3 daily quests...all for $30? Yea...no.

Exactly.  One genre.  A single survival game doesn't contain EVERY thing you listed.  Those features are spread between various games.  

Actually survival game players won't bother playing a game that consists of kids in a backyard.  Even the game rating is for teens. They were not playing decades old hardcore survival at 5 years old.

It's ok that games don't adhere to the same standards of the late 1990s to early 2000s.  They are supposed to be more inclusive.

It's ok for games to be fun the way Grounded is so far.  

The game is basically still in alpha, not even beta.  It's like 20% of the game.  I've played many games where menus , abilities, items greatly change.  You have no idea of what "core" features will be changed in coming updates.  They haven't even released a story yet.

Lmao.

 

[Truth]

 

Double

Edited August 7, 2020 by Truth