If you haven’t looked recently, you might take another look.
I felt the same way when Slay the Spire came out in 2019 – not a lot of similar games at the time, and I couldn’t figure out why more developers hadn’t made similar games, as it seemed like a very good match for indie studios. But there have been a whole lot of games that came out since then.
I get over 600 hits, almost all of which came out in the past three years. I’d say that single-player deckbuilders – and note that I’m assuming that you’re talking about deckbuilder games, not, say, solitaire implementations or similar, as I think that there are pretty good entrants there – are actually doing pretty well.
Mount & Blade: Warband certainly has got some similarities, and it was one of two games that I thought of when trying to think of games that are at least a little similar (the other being the X series from Egosoft, though there the sci-fi theme is pretty different), but it’s also got a lot of differences.
The similar:
You start out as one person.
It’s not especially easy, particularly at the start.
You can control multiple characters in different places in the world, and the companions and yourself are on the order of the number of characters in Kenshi.
You can form military groups – much larger than squads, normally – that are out and about.
There is a base-building (well, capturing) aspect.
There is an economic aspect.
The game world is dynamic, and factions take control of different portions to the map and can be wiped out.
But there are also some pretty substantial differences:
While you start out with small units, M&B focuses on considerably larger armies, and while the battlefields normally have armies enter at a limited rate to keep load on the engine workable (looks like 150 cap by default, increasable to 500), you’re still working with considerably larger groups of units. Larger armies are just generally better, and the end game is hundreds are thousands of units. Kenshi has you working with a squad-level size, and you’re going to know and equip each character.
You’re generally working with formations, not individual units.
Kenshi is about wandering around in a world and discovering what’s there. Unlocking tech blueprints, which are important, really requires traveling the world. There’s a very minimal exploration aspect to M&B – you’re mostly looking at the strategic map, and get dropped into pre-created battlefields when two forced run into each other.
Most of the M&B fighting is between, nameless, expendable soldiers that die in battles. A lot of what you do in the game is to recruit and train them to maintain your supply. Companions are immortal. In Kenshi, characters can die, but you’re aiming to keep all the members of your squad alive.
The economic and military envioronments in Kenshi are unified. You have characters that might be running around in a squad or producing things. M&B has a black-box economy that is pretty disconnected from individual characters. In M&B, most of what you’d do with your companions, if they aren’t in your main army, is to have them run around with their own smaller armies defending territory you hold.
M&B locations are all pretty much similar. There’s the type of soldiers you can recruit and the type of factions that might be nearby, and a few locations that are more-advantageous for different types of industry (which themselves are basically drop-in replacements for each other). In Kenshi, if you’re setting up an outpost in an area that is taxed or has environmental hazards, different power generation capacity, different agricultural or mining potential, or significantly-different monster attacks, it plays out rather differently.
M&B does have a limited form of base-building to the extent that you can capture fixed, pre-designed locations and purchase some upgrades for them, but Kenshi lets you put outposts anywhere on the map, and structures and fortifications anywhere in the outpost.
M&B has a limited ability to affect an economy in that building an upgrade will tend to result in more of whatever that produces, but Kenshi’s modeling the whole shebang; what’s being produced matters a lot more.
Honestly, Starfield has a more-similar outpost-building and economic model to Kenshi. No random traders, but the arbitrary placement of outposts, layout of those, and modeling production is more similar. And the environment affects what you can produce. Though there production is automated, not done by in-game characters. It’s just that in Starfield – at least vanilla; we’ll have to see where mods take the thing – there isn’t a lot of reason to build outposts other than for the purpose of accumulating resources to build more outposts. Fallout 4 (vanilla, at least) was kind of similar. My guess is that Bethesda wants to cater to people who don’t want any base-building too, but it really makes the bases less-interesting.
In Kenshi (and M&B, come to think of it), you really do want to ultimately get outposts to support the upkeep of your characters in the field, and it’s a first-class part of the game.
Don’t get me wrong. I like M&B too. It’s just that in practice, I don’t think that it plays all that similarly to Kenshi. You spend a lot more time traveling and exploring with Kenshi. You have bands of characters that you individually equip and know. The characters chatter with each other and in response to different areas. Expanding the tech tree by exploring the world is important. Characters can change drastically, become much tougher, lose limbs and have them replaced with robotic ones. M&B has one mostly fighting large battles on fixed battle maps, and once you’ve picked up the companions you want around the world, you can mostly settle down. You capture fixed outposts rather than building them and laying them out. Companions don’t individually change things that much militarily (realistic, but less RPGish); their major perk is that unlike regular troops, they are immortal, aren’t killed in battles, so having them fight in each battle constantly saves soldiers. You don’t really see the game world off the strategic map other than on the fixed battle maps. In battle, you control formations, not individual characters (aside from yourself). There’s a black-box economy. A lot of what you deal with is replenishing and training new troops, which isn’t really a thing in Kenshi. A lot of what you do in Kenshi is exploring and traveling, which isn’t much of a thing in M&B. In Kenshi, you have a starting character, but they are otherwise unimportant; you can switch to any other character. In M&B, you can only follow the main character in the game world – that’s what the camera follows on the strategic map.
It’s not dead as a genre, but I was in a conversation the other day on the Fediverse – don’t remember whether it was this community or not – trying to figure out what happened to the space combat genre. One guess was that it was just a really good match for the hardware limitations of the time. In space, there often isn’t a lot of stuff near you, so you can get away with making 3D games that don’t have to render all that many objects. And they were popular in the early days of 3D hardware, around the late 1990s and early 2000s. So maybe some of it was that developers would have done other genres, but that hardware limitations pushed more towards space combat.
I think that some of it has to do with a sort of societal interest in space. In the 1950s and successive decades, humanity entering space was very new, was a completely new frontier – maybe a frontier that no life form out there has ever crossed the barrier on. People liked theorizing about what society in space would look like, and so you had schools of architecture that alluded to it, comic books and novels about it, and then later movies about it, and later video games about it. But maybe space just isn’t as novel any more, is part of ordinary life. The video game genre tended not to be hard-realism, but adopted conventions from movies and TV series, like slowly-moving visible laser pulses that make a distinctive, synthesized sound, ship orientation changing ship direction of travel, objects like nebulas based on false-color NASA images, audible explosions, and such, so I think that those were maybe important in building interest. I don’t think that there have really been recent new entrants in movie and TV series that inspired the video games – Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, stuff like that had their heyday in the past too.
Realistic naval fleet combat sims. There’s not a lot out there. I assume that there’s probably limited demand – flying fighter planes seems to be a lot more popular when it comes to military sims. Rule the Waves does keep seeing releases, but it’s not a genre with many decent entrants.
Kenshi-style games. I’m not sure that there is a name for the genre, but sandbox, open-world, squad-based combat with a base-building and economic side.
There’s a reliable way to combat scalping in general. Start selling the item at a high price or in larger quantity and then cut the price whenever sales drop off.
Scalpers can only make money by scalping something when it is being sold below what the market is willing to pay for it in the quantity in which it is available.
On a non-economic note, I’d add that I don’t think I’d want to buy an easily-modified Linux computer system from some random person unless I planned to wipe it. How do you know that the thing hasn’t been rootkitted?
As a piece of hardware and platform, I like it. I think that the OLED screen is definitely a win too.
But I carry a laptop and tablet (EDIT: and smartphone) with me already, and I rarely game much when out and about. Just not enough additional utility provided by the thing.
You start out a bit fragile in the game. Qud tends to, IME, get easier over time (though one needs to learn how to deal with the goatfolk when one runs into them).
Giant centipedes are generally harder than crocodiles and snapjaws. Giant beetles too.
Start in Joppa, which is the default.
Can you kill a single crocodile in the nearby salt marshes in surrounding maps?
If so, you’re good. Just don’t get aggressive. Don’t fight more than one at once. Back off if you’re low on health and heal up – important for the game in general. You can run if things start to go badly (especially if you take starting perks perks that let you move more quickly).
You can start with some kind of “burst” ability. Like, a marauder has the ability to lop a limb off, which will not only gimp the enemy in various ways but cause bleeding for a while. Espers can start with damage-causing abilities like Freezing Ray or Light Manipulation. Using that to kill the first few monsters and letting the ability recharge after each is desirable.
If you want to try to get a starting level of two, go to talk to Argyve in the southwest corner of the starting map. Get his “find an artifact” quest. You can loot chests in houses in Joppa without angering the citizens if you close the doors first ((o)pen them again) so that nobody can see you. You’ll likely get an artifact or two, which lets you complete his first and second artifact quest.
IIRC, you can also get some experience from examining the statue in the northeast of the map and another on the map immediately to the north of the starting map.
In the north-western corner of the Joppa map, there’s a secret passage in the water that you’ll find if you walk in the water. That will take you to a tunnel that leads to the bottom level of Red Rock, gives you a reliable early way to get underground. I think that the enemies there are generally harder than the ones on the surface, but there are snapjaws, and they’re easier (and they also are a good source of dropped equipment for a starting player). Don’t go below the first level underground at first.
Don’t try to rush to the rust wells for Argyve. And you might want to gain a few levels before you do Red Rock for the warden of Joppa. Same, but more so for trying to cross the salt desert to the Six Day Stilt for the zealot who is also on the starting map.
I like Qud – didn’t at first – but I feel like it kinda plays out similarly each time, at least with the chimera-marauder build that I like. Like, I’m not really forced to deal with drastically-different situations each run, which is kind of a core element of roguelikes.
Given how much time they’ve had to think about branding, I’m not sure that this is necessarily the name that they’ll stick with. But I think that it’s probably – while this is in the news – a good move to get people looking at some channel that they do control, so that if they come up with something else, they can tell people about it.
I guess you could potentially make a device that appears to be a controller and translates keyboard/mouse with a couple USB inputs
They control the console, the OS, the controller hardware, and can require the console to connect to them. They already have the ability to push out controller firmware updates. They can have the controller cryptographically authenticate to the console and push blacklists to the console of keys that get leaked (like if someone somehow extracts a key from a legit controller and uses it to make a knockoff).
TLDR: It’s really really underbaked, should’ve delayed it like 6 months. I have refunded the game and returned back to C:S 1 with DLC unlocker.
You could also just put it on a list to keep an eye on and look at it in six months or a year later.
I think that a number of times, publishers put out a half-baked release but do ultimately see the issues at release fixed. Fallout 76 was horrendous at release, and while it’s still not Fallout 5, I think that the updates have made it a decent game. Cyberpunk 2077 also wasn’t ready at release, and while I haven’t looked at it recently, my understanding is that with updates and DLC, it’s also pretty decent. Paradox does have a history of titles that see a lot of post-release work.
I think that in many cases, the patientgamers crowd – wait at minimum a year after release before looking at a game – has the right idea. They may not get the absolute latest, blingiest stuff. But:
Many bugs are often fixed by then. You aren’t the guinea pig.
The hardware it runs on is cheaper and/or performance is better.
People will have done up wikis to refer to.
The game itself may cost less.
DLC is out. For many games – Paradox games in particular – a lot of the content is in the DLC, and the base game is kind of dwarfed by the DLC. For a number of these, a new title in a series isn’t going to be as good as the last before a lot of DLC has come out.
Mods are out. For some games, particularly on the PC, mods make the game vastly better.
I’m not saying that everyone should do that. But in this case, we knew going into the release – and the developer announced – that the performance wasn’t where they wanted it to be at release. So I think that this is a good candidate to wait on. Either they improve performance post-release or they won’t. Either way, you’ll know prior to purchase. Plus, hardware keeps getting faster, so to a certain degree, performance problems solve themselves.