That’s neat and all, but I will be incredibly surprised if even a tiny fraction of those players are still playing it in 6 years (which is how long DRG has been around). I haven’t played Survivor, but the reviews don’t really paint it in a super good light, compared to other similar games… claims that the upgrades are uninteresting and there’s not much to differentiate the characters and the balance feels off… Early access problems, hopefully, but we’re talking about player counts for an early access game, so that’s what we’ve got to work with. It seems like it’s just riding on the coattails of the DRG name, for the most part. If you compare it to the player counts for other similar games, it’s doing surprisingly well out of the gate, yet reviews ~10-15% poorer than those other entries did at the same point in their life cycle, which suggests maybe it’s being bought for the name, not the gameplay.
It’s funny that they call out the lower price as being what’s drawing people, because $10 is actually on the high end for ‘bullet heaven’ games. Most drop in the $3-$8 range.
Anyway, point I’m trying to make is that they’re comparing apples to oranges, these oranges just happen to have been marketed very well to apple fans.
Can confirm the balancing is whack. Permanent upgrades are also basically useless (very miniscule difference for a high price)
There’s no point where you’re overpowered which is the most fun part in these types of games
Same opinion from time with the demo. It seems to be a GSG design philosophy to keep players from the power fantasy aspect of games, which was a big part of why DRG never clicked for me. I still was willing to give this a try when I expected the price to be in line with other titles at around $5. But they came in at the premium survivor price with much less innovation than others at that price point. Let them keep getting that bag tho. Their loyals can help fund something I really want to play like Dark Swarm.
I have never played the original DRG, but I really enjoyed the free beta or whatever that they had for Survivor last year, and having even more fun now with the early access build! I have not had this much fun with this type of game since Brotato.
I swear the last half a dozen games I wishlisted have all been early access. I refuse to pay for a game to be a beta tester. I can’t be the only person who dislikes this approach to modern game releases.
If it’s done well, it’s an excellent process. It lets smaller studios start getting paid earlier, which helps significantly. It also lets them establish a strong feedback loop with their player base.
Factorio is an excellent example. The player base provided instant feedback on the gameplay, as they brought in more features. They also weren’t afraid to change things that didn’t quite work as well as planned. It also helped guide where to focus efficiency efforts.
Unfortunately, a number of big companies have jumped on the bandwagon. They don’t quite get what early access is good for, and just use it as an excuse for bugs, as well as to drum up cheap advertising.
Or an excuse to dump whatever they have built so far and say “we’ll finish it” and never do.
Another great example is Project Zomboid.
I think they’re the worse example of early access.
It’s a stable game for years. And the early access title is hurting it.
Move it to the Terraria’s and Minecraft’s of the world, and continue releasing new features, rather than this purgatory of refusing to call it a “completed” game.
It’s not finished though. They don’t have NPCs etc which is the scope they set out to do, but it’s a great game and very polished in its own right.
Drg survivor has been done right too as was drg. GSG is a great developer.
I dislike it too, but not always. It’s usually dependent on how long they start in EA. If you read their “how long will this be in EA” and they say anything more than 1 year, or they make vague statements that don’t give you a time scale, it’s almost always a pass from me.
Genre also matters. Roguelites are great EA games since normally they just flesh out the item pool. Crypt of the Necrodancer was great in EA. Survival games tend to stay in EA forever.
You have to know what you’re buying into. It’s not a finished game.
When you say “survival games stay in ea forever”, I don’t follow. Does that mean the game is never done?
I’ve been like that for years now. You do not need it. Fuck FOMO.
The only times I didn’t wait were games that had millions already, like Valheim, V Rising. And while they were pretty polished honestly, I hate that I have to wait years for updates. Don’t get me started on Project Zomboid’s abuse of the early access title.
The one time I bought a Early access that was 100% absolutely worth it was Against the Storm. They made Early access like a conversation between player and dev. Baldurs Gate 3’s early access (for like two years straight) was also like this!
But the 10 other times I did early access, it was a major headache and not worth it. Do it because you WANT to help the dev. Don’t do it if you just want to play something.
Especially since there’s so many polished games out now.
I only play single player games anyway. There’s nothing I am missing out on by waiting.
I had a copy of Survivor from the high seas and typically like games like this. Enjoyed couple playthroughs and ended up buying it from Steam. Been enjoying it so far, but it def needs work, hence it being in Early Access. My biggest gripe is the countdown needing to get back to the ship after the boss is killed on each stage. A lot of the times, you take damage just trying to get back.
If anything is interested, here is the roadmap for the game - https://rogueliker.com/deep-rock-galactic-survivor-roadmap/
- Upgrading Bosco, the companion that follows you, if their first goal
- After that, working on a new biome
- Overclocks & Artifacts are next
- Mutations
- Other things
its mindless fun for $10.
From what I played during beta it was meh at best
I’ve played a ton of vampire survivor / brotato clones.
This one is interesting because it doesn’t last forever and you’ve gotta extract in time but that also limits what kinda builds you can do. I got all my characters to about level 15 or so and called it there.
It doesn’t feel great to find a really good combo but have to restart before you can do it all over again.
Also a lot of the tasks are like “get this weapon to rank 18” but the game is basically over by then so you’ve gotta put everything into that one weapon. All of that is fine but you’ve practically gotta do it for all the weapons and it gets old fast.
Rock and stone, everyone!
While still an early access title, I very much have enjoyed the time I’ve put into Survivor so far. It channels the spirit of DRG well while being a great Vampire Survivors-like. An easy recommend for $10
The trailer kinda looked…generic. The original computer game is very fun, and the board game is excellent.
As someone who has not played DRG, was it roguelike as well, or is this now a roguelike spinoff?
I really liked DRG. Have maxed out all the classes and enjoy carrying people through Haz5 and EDD. However, DRG:Survivor from the very first announcement just seemed like nothing more than a cash grab to me and made me uninterested in it.
Don’t buy games for what you’ll hope they are, but there was just enough systems in this one that it finally got me to jump in and try out the Survivor genre. I like the inclusion of secondary objectives, the tension between mining for upgrade materials versus the strengthening bug hordes, and the ability to mine through walls to create choke points or escape routes.
For what it is now, feel like it was $10 well spent and I’ll get plenty of hours of game out of it. The road map looks interesting, and if there’s enough community support I could see them adding and tweaking the game for a long while. It’s good fun and plays well on the Steam Deck too. Not to mention that, while it is just the theme on top of it all, I do enjoy another take on the Deep Rock Galactic experience.
