![]() ![]() ![]() At the moment we focus on performance, stability and gamebreaking bugs. And it is still in the very early stages of Early Access. It is quite a jump from a game that has been around for several years and improved a lot over time to one that has only just released into Early Access. That said, no, WWD now is not what MD is now. But because of that I also know what hard work and dedication can do and how the cooperation between players, publisher and devs shapes a game into something amazing. So I remember some of the especially frustrating or funny ones (looking at you, Alwin!), and I started over many times. I was part of the bug hunting team then and still am now. MD was quite bugged in the beginning too. It's a fun game, even in it's very raw state, and as I mentioned earlier, it's true potential is very much evident and I know it will be a great game that will, in time, provide me with hundreds of hours of entertainment. Is it bad? When taken on it's own merits and viewing the potential of the game, no. Is it bad? When compared to other early access games, no. Is it bad? When compared to Medieval Dynasty or other complete and released games, yes. But when you look through that, the game has great bones and as long as the devs keep updating and working on it (which I have no doubt on) then it will become a great game. It's a very early access game, it isn't complete and it has bugs and other issues. It's not a complete game, it's a game that is still in active development and in the case of this game, very early active development.Īs for the question at hand. Haven't read the reviews in a bit but if they are anything like some of the early ones and the ones on other early access games, then they are mostly from people that don't understand what early access is. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |