At the Gates: New turn based strategy game by Jon Shafer at Kickstarter

watched the gameplay video and there are some of mine points to be made about it.

1) The visuals look good. they are not obviously Crytek level, but have it's style and look good, I didn't even bother much about the animations of movement... if it would be on me...they can easilly leave the visuals as is

2) the UI needs a lot of work

3) nothing can be said about AI since we didn't saw AI doing anything (romes just standing still, the Pagans seemed like they were standing there just forever?)

4) diplomacy doesn't look like it has depth

5) have troubles a bit with depletion of resources from "fun gameplay" perspective, but for all I know it can work (or will fail)

6) it was a little bit too unclear why the settlements move but your farms don't and yet you gain still food from them?
the whole idea of moving settlements is a bit troubling for me

7) the idea of weather changing surrounding and it's impact on economy seems like good idea having some potential

____
all that said... I think I would probably like to see what they do with it in 1 year, but didn't convince me to give my money (even if I gave it fair thought).

The name of Jon have a bit troubling association for me.
Not convinced the sum they claim they need will suffice to get the game into great shape (UI, AI, diplomacy, maybe even some game design features overhaul/adjustment, beta testing etc) even without touching visuals (which they clearly care a lot about since it was basically the first sentence about lack of animations being problem).

Sonereal said:

Markets>Your opinion

Given the relatively good scores CivV got in the press plus the fact it has been in the top ten played games on Steam for years, I have to go with the crowd that thinks that market has decided it is a quality game.

The Wii is the best home console because it did sold the most. I don't think you understand how capitalism works. I get on Steam. I read about game. I buy game. I like game. I buy DLC. Millions others buy game. They also buy DLC. Market decided game is success.

Click to expand...

That is the definition of financial success, not the game's quality. The Call of Duty games are the top selling and some of the most played on Steam and the consoles, but they are hardly the best quality FPS games. Spore sold well but is one of the most disappointing games ever. There have been numerous good games that haven't sold well either (often due to a lack of marketing) like Grim Fandango, Psychonauts, The Void, Titan Quest, Dominions 3, Mirror's Edge, Vampire The Masquerade:BLoodlines.

Most people don't do any research or specifically seek out quality games, they just buy something that looks like it will be fun or because they fell for the hype.

Civ5 certainly wasn't the worst game, but it still has plenty of problems (although some of them have been in the last few Civ games too).

Geddy said:

I don't believe for moment that anyone who was a serious player of Civ 4 could like Civ 5.

Click to expand...

200 hours in CivV.

Avid CivIV player.

That's like saying someone who liked the original XCOM can't like XCOM Enemy Unknown. Again, elitist at best, reactionary at worst.

@Maniacal

Provided anyone ever wants to see a CivVI, CivV has to do financially well. True, there are good games that performed subpar financially, but the people funding the projects thought they would do well financially. Financial success is needed for the Civilization series to continue on the way it is unless they decide to go off the rails and do a Kickstarter.

Furthermore, continued sales means the game is doing exactly what a business product should do, be of high enough quality to keep the buyers buying DLC and expansions. If CivV was a quarter as bad as half the people whining groan it is, then DLC and expansion sales would've reflected that.

Windsor said:

When I see how much more I agree on what Soren says and writes I can't help but think that its not accidental that Civ4 was much more my kind of game than Civ5.

Click to expand...

Yet still, what has Soren Johnson done for you since then? Not much of note, I suspect. So this might not be a good guide to who's actually going to produce games that you want to play.

Soren set the bar so high for himself. Must be a motivation killer to know you have to top perfection

I suspect Jon still feels unfulfilled with the qualified (but still pretty spectacular) success he has had in the industry so far. Falling always just short of your ambition is much more healthy for continued progress.

Great Churchill quote in the paper this morning: "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm". Not really appropriate but funny as always

Sonereal said:

Furthermore, continued sales means the game is doing exactly what a business product should do, be of high enough quality to keep the buyers buying DLC and expansions. If CivV was a quarter as bad as half the people whining groan it is, then DLC and expansion sales would've reflected that.

Click to expand...

It's not that the game is horrible. It's a decent game, and the fact that it is a steam game probably helps it out in getting noticed. However, I am disappointed with the direction the game took, which is the main issue.

I don't understand why they couldn't keep features from BTS, improve them rather than completely remove, and add more to the diplomacy. Because what is the point of playing civ if the nations in the world are morons? I can't have fun killing off entire empires with one to a few artillery units. In the end I don't feel like they did enough to elevate civ5 from it's predecessors.

I want to see the evolution of this series I want to see it become more advanced, introduce new technologies. If there's one thing I can't stand in game developers is complacency.

Cristoval said:

I don't understand why they couldn't keep features from BTS, improve them rather than completely remove, and add more to the diplomacy.

Click to expand...

Clearly they wanted to simplify Civ gameplay in order to broaden its appeal. Civ IV was popular but not remotely up to the standards of mass hits that ultimately most of 2K's value depends on. If you want a breakout hit then you've got to have a game that requires less thinking. I'm sure this was a directive from above that wasn't under Jon's control, or anyone at Firaxis.

His lack of any significant (that we can see) output at Stardock is more troubling to me. They don't have to aim at the mass market.

DaviddesJ said:

If you want a breakout hit then you've got to have a game that requires less thinking.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily true, RTS and MOBA games require quite a lot of thinking and quick reflexes and they are extremely popular. Dota 2 is still in beta and it has more people playing it on a daily basis than every single game on Steam outside of the top 10 list combined. Besides, making features more in-depth and better doesn't have to mean making them harder to understand.

Maniacal said:

Not necessarily true, RTS and MOBA games require quite a lot of thinking and quick reflexes and they are extremely popular. Dota 2 is still in beta and it has more people playing it on a daily basis than every single game on Steam outside of the top 10 list combined. Besides, making features more in-depth and better doesn't have to mean making them harder to understand.

Click to expand...

RTS and MOBA games don't generally require a lot of thinking to play. Maybe to play well.

Sure they don't, if you don't mind getting completely destroyed in every game and (especially in MOBAs which have some of the worst communities) being on the receiving end of your teammate's wrath. Not very fun. A part of their appeal is that they aren't mindless games that even someone with half a brain could play well (Like CoD or Skyrim).

To Mr Kid R
About that Churchill quote - it goes so well with Mr. Peter Molyneux.
Sorry for the off topic post.

Not impressed looks actually worse than Fallen Enchantress and that was already not that great. Better back up Chris Taylor's Wildman

Its funded!

Really looking forward to see what comes from this. If anything we should all be happy a strategy game is successful in getting funded so quickly.

Now onward for some sweet stretch goals!

I'm also one of the people who really enjoy Civilization 4 and also really enjoy Civilization 5. I do still play both, since both have features I enjoy. Most of the time goes to Civ 5 now though. I can't see why someone would not be able to enjoy both for the games that they are. But to each its own.

That said I also really enjoyed Civ 1 and 2. Civ 3 was the least in the series for me, that felt a bit designed by comity to me. Still I easily put 100 hours in it over time so still very much worth it.

I think I might like the Civilization series somewhat

With 26 days to go more money would produce more features, apparently.

Civ 5 was an awful game, no doubt about it.

However it's always good to see more strategy games being developed. The most interesting part of this Kickstarter is their intent to release the "ElfTools" code library to the public. That I can absolutely get behind.

Glad it got funded. Hope it can meet its stretch goals.

Sink or swim time for Mr. Shafer. I'm rooting for him and I'll be helping out with the Alpha and Beta testing. This game has real potential and I think it'll really benefit the strategy gaming community as a whole.

People are jerks...why trash the guy? He is trying to create something cool, on his own. Bringing some new ideas to the turn based strategy space. He is clearly passionate about it.

Civ V is what it is, some people love it, some don't. When will people get over it?

It's frankly pathetic at this point.

Jon Shafer is on a few interesting podcasts talking about the At the Gates plans.

Gamers with Jobs:
http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/114328

Three Moves Ahead:
http://www.idlethumbs.net/3ma/episodes/gate-crashing-the-roman-empire

Interesting discussions even if you don't want to support this particular game I think.

Hey everyone, thanks for your interest in ATG!

I know many of you didn't enjoy Civ 5, and I'm sorry that my design didn't live up to your expectations. I just posted a lengthy article explaining why, in spite of that, ATG might still appeal to you. I go into a fair amount of detail regarding the elements of Civ 5 that I wasn't really happy with and how I'm solving those issues in ATG.

Additionally, I'll be posting updates on the Kickstarter page every couple days where I delve into each of ATG's major features and what makes them special. In the meantime though, if you guys have any questions about the game or any particular aspect of it, I'd be more than happy to provide some answers!

I very much believe the strategy genre still has a great deal of untapped potential, and I'm hoping ATG can help show what's possible with a small, dedicated team. My sincere thanks to all of you who are helping to make that possible, and have contributed to our Kickstarter!

- Jon

"At The Gates" is also a melodic Death Metal band from Gothenburg, Sweden. They developed their own style that was ripped off by every lame "deathcore" band in the 2000s.