It takes a while for it to process.
If I may make another suggestion Andy it doesn’t seem like the scientists serve a viable purpose. Also tbh I dislike the blue background and the title picture. It seems a little childish for such a serious game.
@Shawn_Patrick_Reed, Beezlebub is correct. The modules are placed into a queue and are worked on by the engineers. The more modules you have queued, the longer it takes to complete them all. At the same time, the more engineers you have (and the better your facilities) the more you can work on at a time.
@Beezlebub I partly agree with the background image and I have been thinking about changing it a little. Watch this space. We chose the pastel blue background as it feels right for a future/space game to Sam and I (Chosen by Mara). Does anyone else have thoughts on this?
ETA: The use for scientists will be implemented soon.
Maybe a little lighter on the blue tones then? Like a blue steel or greyish configuration? It just seems like the blue overtones for everything is a little much.
I’ve just changed the logo. Let me know what you think. The blue tones will stay for now until there is more feedback regarding them.
Better but why not a more realistic looking asteroid?
Ah, well… That’s not an asteroid! Haha! It’s Earth being hit by an asteroid. It’s also the company logo and can be seen on some of the characters in the game.
1 Like
That was quite a long game, which makes it all the more irritating that it could end so abruptly due to a single choice (got shot in the head by terrorists). If you decide to get rid of things like that I might consider playing it again as up until that point I was enjoying myself. Anyways I found some errors;
"Everyone, I would like you to meet the newest member to our team. Art Johnson. Art has just returned to $[nation}
As Marlon Canters replacement, the resentment from the twins is understandable. You just hope that Art is as good as his $[leader}ial recommendation.
@MutonElite That is a very good point. I can change it easily enough to be a serious injury instead.
The errors made me laugh: thats new content written today that I didn’t realise I had posted live! I’ll change it.
My suggestion would be getting rid of that section entirely. It doesn’t make any form of sense anyhow. A bunch of gun nuts trying to use violence to preserve culture is in itself a contradiction. Even if I had said yes to their demands, what possible ways would they have had to make sure I kept my end of the bargain?
By trying to use violence they put themselves at a disadvantage from the very start, especially given their cause. And when I did predictably refuse, by killing me they achieved nothing at all. They had a need, I had a way of satisfying said need which means I had the upper hand and nothing they did helped to promote their cause. There’s just no logic in any of it.
It would have made more sense at that point to kidnap me, but even so there’s just no plausible way for them to get a lasting deal out of that, as once they release me I would be more likely to spite them. Kidnapping someone dear to me and holding them ransom would also make sense. But really, given their objective, what would have made the most sense would have been to at least have tried to present their case verbally without any threats. Maybe even trying to bribe me, try different angles. Guns blazing is a means of desperation and stupidity, and in either case given their cause; a more valid last resort would have been to secretly smuggle in cultural treasure.
It’s interesting how you view terrorists and violent people as hyper-rational and calculating to the point of extreme foresight and logical decision making.
2 Likes
Even terrorists wants to accomplish something. What did they accomplish by killing me? You don’t plan an operation like that, get guns and man power together without a plan, that’s not a spur of the moment kind of thing. If they were morons, they shouldn’t even have managed to get past security. Not to mention their lives are pretty much forfeit at this point, without anything to show for it.
You’d be surprised how many people would actually do that, especially violent terrorists.
1 Like
I’m not really feeling like you’re presenting a counter point right now, at least not one that I haven’t already addressed. But I’m surmising that you’re the one who wrote that section and is feeling a little defensive?
Maybe take a while to ponder it and let things cool down if so. 
I know I at least am still a bit sore after that sudden defeat.
I haven’t written anything for Evacuation, nor am I really trying to be confrontational. I’m just saying that perhaps you’re thinking too deeply into things.
@MutonElite You are right that a sudden death in a game this long is not a good idea and I have removed it. You will still be shot but survive.
However the section stays as it is an important part to the story. Besides, when everything is at stake, people dont think think rationally. Before the terrorists arrive, you get to read one of three emails. The third was from the terrorists and has a deadline for rational conversation. The deadline had already passed. Furthermore, the terrorists escape unharmed. Their message is loud and clear: preserve art. As you have seen, they have the means to repeat their attack. Fear is their weapon so killing you, or whoever is in charge, is a viable strategy for them. Especially when time is at a premium.
There is also a hidden agenda from the terrorists that can be uncovered, although it is not vital to discover for the game to continue. It will be nice for players of CK62e Paradox to read.
2 Likes
Oh, I thought I saw your name in the credits. Well given that it’s me we’re talking about; that may very well be true. I’m just trying to look at it from a game design point of view as well as (mostly) logical motivation for characters. And I really want to stress my point as the way we remember things is usually through what we last experienced. Just look at the Mass Effect endings. Many would argue that that ruined the entire franchise.
So if it’s between playing for hours in vain or rethinking things, I would be on the side of rethinking things. And since it sounded like you defended the original outcome; naturally I wanted to respond to that, but oki doke.
@MutonElite @Samuel_H_Young
hmm well preserving culture has been something that has been done in the past thru extreme cases of violence
as well as using military power to preserve it before destroying the area example would be WW2 with the Brits and the Americans preserving art and sculpture before major events in the area heck i believe in some instances the Nazi’s protected artwork and some literature as well. then it was also don in the American civil war, i think both sides did it in the Spanish English war much earlier in history based on what survived and the fact that English art and Spanish art ended up on both sides that should not have survived though most of these cases could be perceived as just theft but preservation was the case occasionally so benefit of the doubt
this being said in the defense of it making sense for: “terrorists” protecting culture from thoughtless elitists only caring about themselves, cultists preferring history over uncaring selfish self posed humanitarians, gun toting historians hoping to push memories of the past to the future, or desperate misguided people trying to get history and culture to another world so that they will not be forgotten
on the other side of the argument it makes little sense to try to push culture onto a ship when they could just get there people on it and take it or try to blow it up to prevent spread of people who don’t deserve it (lots of reasons can be said that’s just the most friendly of them i can think of saying in the defense) however not all are considered maniacs fanatics or gun toting idiots
@andymwhy
removing the death at that point is a decent idea due to aggravating the viewer potentially but… at the same time killing the person for not complying could be seen as a understandable thing to due based on them being written as terrorists cultists or just desperate people they might try to kill the character as a instilment of fear and just take it to far or potentially they have there own acd thingy and are taping it to show to the world or to the replacements to intimidate them into complying
so killing them makes sense wile it is brave, its also unwise so it can be seen as a bad end move however yes it can also be agrivating
At that point, the logical move from the terrorists was to kill you. The reason is that if you won’t bargain, the next person in charge might. Any other option backing down would be a weakness from the terrorists and I don’t want to portray them that way. They are not weak and they are determined to do whatever it takes to ensure the artwork survives.
As such, I have taken a different route with it. You will now be shot and wake up in hospital several months later. The consequences will be severe (still writing them now), but the player will be able to continue with the game.
3 Likes
i agree with that, backing down is a bad idea for the terrorist its a view of the concept of the full threat scenario in schools i was at threatening to expel, kill, whatever you go with the most threatening option first you end up with either going through with it or backing down to a less threatening option at that point if you choose the less threatening thing you’ve proven you might not be able to do it or they are too important or effectively your weaker than they are once that happens they can stand up to you
the only thing was i wanted to show both sides of the argument for a balanced perspective since often both sides dont get clearly seen sometimes so i thought a clear perspective of both sides might help
Some minor changes have taken place today. These include:
-Introductions of Art Johnson and Wynne Hinchliffe.
-Death removed from terrorist attempt. Replaced by 3 month coma.
-Corrections to engineers and scientists.
Next up:
-Scientist use
-Implementation of international agreements
-Tweaks to make the building process harder (at present it’s too easy to build everything)
Then:
-Newspaper reports (2 or 3 stories each year from home and abroad)
-Late year events
1 Like