KickStarter Darkest Dungeon AKA the Celerity Attention Whore Thread

[Lacrymas]

Something I want to mention regarding all this drama though - if Celerity is right about all this stuff then it should be noted and called out on it, not be buried under countless ad hominem attacks against him. If we allow anyone to jerk us around then what does that say about us? Gullible and naive fools who also let this medium be degraded with such practices. If he isn't right, oh well, we still shouldn't let devs do such things regarding anything else. Valid criticisms about the game itself is something completely different though.

 

[Eyestabber]

OK, come on...

• everyone discussing the game seems to think it's a "meh" game at best and utter shite at worst. So it's a safe assumption that Kodex Kommunity Konsensus (KKK) considers the game to be mediocre. Unless someone intends to pull the "muh vocal minority!!!" card.
• according to Roqua's post a couple pages back, the "RPG elements"™ of the game are close to non-existent.
  
• as demonstrated by the screenshot posted by Celerity, Red Hook is blatantly abusing the "flag" function to brand his review as "abusive", despite the fact that it doesn't harass nor abuse anyone. Blatant attempt at censorship if I ever saw one. If they are already pulling this crap now, as an indie dev, imagine the monstrosities they will pull if they ever become big players in the gaming industry

So, srsly, what's the point of endorsing a mediocre game with almost no RPG substance that also happens to be produced by a shady developer who doesn't respect its customers?

If the "mediocre" part is ok, then let's endorse every RPGmaker crap under the sun because why the fuck not? If the "barely an RPG" part is ok, then let's endorse Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl. Unlike Derpest, SSC is a GOOD game and its dev can't possibly screw anyone over since its pretty much dead. I mean...Bloodlines* is there so it's not like recommending a shooter is haram. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Now if the "lack of ethics" part is ok, well...eat a dick then.

*: Inb4 butthurt: Bloodlines deserves to be there, I only mentioned as an example of a shooter being on the list.

 

[Jimmious]

I personally would recommend the game to someone who wants a rogue(very)lite experience with nice artstyle and sound and lots of grinding. Plus it does have these supply and stress mechanics who for someone who hasn't played the game will certainly be interesting.
It's definitely not an RPG though, at least in my point of view.

 

[Angthoron]

Don't get me wrong, I don't give two shits about the list, I'm just saying if the option is raising the bar vs lowering it/keeping it low, why not raise it? This game really isn't an RPG game or a deep strategic/tactical game, though Pope Amole II's recent postis have indicated it might have more tactical versatility than the posters who talk about damage-spam indicate.

Well thing is, you can break a lot of games in a similar way. I can be an ace in UT with aimbot, and I could break Fallout 2 by rushing for power armor. Celerity played the game for over a thousand hours, or at least had it running for that long, if you're not an expert in a game in that kind of a time, and if you're not sick of the game and find it nightmarishly monotonous, you should probably get checked in with a doctor. Personally, I don't find DD anywhere that easy or formulaic, though you can certainly make it so if you desire. It has its ups and downs, and while it's not what I hoped it would be, I honestly can't call it a bad game.

I'm also a KS backer and enjoyed the game way before the corpse and the hound update, and haven't played since then.

I haven't either, but I understand they finally added an option to remove the corpses and some other stupid crap they originally added. Hooray for that.

Yea, I think BB and Starcrawlers are currently in a different category than DD. Though I haven't played SC yet.

BB is, not entirely sure about SC. It shows promise but it's really hard to tell which way the devs will take it.

 

[Trash]

Ahahaha, the guy who bitches about the whole censorship thing? You know the one? Guess who is heavily into removing negative responses from his own steam review comment section...

 

[Angthoron]

Ahahaha, the guy who bitches about the whole censorship thing? You know the one? Guess who is heavily into removing negative responses from his own steam review comment section...

 

[Murk]

Only posting cuz I agree with Angthoron about removing Pillars of Eternity from the Curator list.

DD can stay cuz fuckit whatever.

 

[Ludo Lense]

Seriously why do people even care about the Curator? This isn't some some journalistic organization, it is a fan community fundamentally. What? You are afraid someone will say "Oh man you post on the Codex? Well then you MUST LOVE xxxxxx game on the curator because it says so!". If that is the case just say yes or no depending on the game and if the person only cares about the Curator then probably the conversation had no purpose or point.

Nobody in the management represents any of your opinions and vice versa (from what I understand DU is adamant about this).

And what the hell is a Codexer anyway? Celerity started using popamole and "we" bizarrely in relation to Red Hook. I doubt many on this site will suddenly jump up and declare they are cut from the same cloth. I don't even consider myself a codexer even though I have been around here for over a year and I mostly discuss RPGs with (at least in my opinion) proper arguments and I always argue in good faith. So term is mostly meaningless unless you are discussing some heavy history users like VD.

TL DR: Ban Infinitron

 

[Gord]

Something I want to mention regarding all this drama though - if Celerity is right about all this stuff then it should be noted and called out on it, not be buried under countless ad hominem attacks against him.

Sure, but the thing is that after reading some of his posts (in the Steam forums) it's certainly understandable that they banned him (several times actually, the ban was usually lifted eventually) and flagged his review as abusive. He does come across pretty dickish.
I haven't looked into that issue further, though. Might be interesting to see which other negative reviews get that treatment.
As for downvoting, not necessary to blame that on RH - there are always enough fanboys willing to fight for their personal developer of the week.

 

[Celerity]

No talent and "vision". Also, meme about overconfidence. No drunk man pic this time.

Edit: What's this popeamole junk about variety and balance? You do know standard damage spam bots beat the so called ultimate challenge right? Because nothing else but damage spam works because of, not in spite of the game?

Well, excuse us for not playing 1337 hours.

Since someone else tried trolling me about this... It took 5 hours, if that. The rest was me making a real game about this. Resulting in some guy stalking my private profile, digging out some mod screenshots of scenarios that do not and cannot exist in the base game, where most of my party is dead (because it was actually hard now). Vanilla is all about mindless damage spam, I found that painfully boring, so I made a real balanced game and ran the clock on that.

There's plenty of negative reviews that are not censored...and really they aren't even censoring it people can still see the review...they are merely locking it for edit because they see it as abusive. In essence, it's not being locked because he has a negative view of the game, it's that the developers are most likely sick and tired of this insane person who spends over a 1000 hours in their game and is literally going off the deep end attempting to hurt their company and the sales of their game. He's moved well passed someone upset that the game sucks (in their view) and wanting to give their feedback and warn other players, he is on a irrational and emotional crusade to bring them down in any way he can.

The dude is acting deranged, I don't think it's such a stretch that when you go from "dissatisfied customer" to "obsessed foaming at the mouth stalker" that at some point they just don't want to hear from you anymore or want you participating in their community.

This is actually untrue. As Steam user Hobbes explained, when a review is flagged by the developer it drops from the most helpful list. So it exists, but is buried and is out of immediate public view many pages down. That is absolutely what is happening here and also explains why the votes and comments greatly slowed. Other negative reviews aren't censored, they're massdownvoted instead. Just check how many are 45-49% (the cutoff is 50%). They never were this brazen before though because one little screenshot makes it undeniable and gets them NAILED. You have no idea what sort of fun conversations I am having now.

There's plenty of negative reviews that are not censored...and really they aren't even censoring it people can still see the review...they are merely locking it for edit because they see it as abusive.

Flagging non-abusive reviews as abusive out of sheer butthurt is corrupt and dishonest behavior and it's a shady censorship tactic like moving critical threads into a retardo land style garbage subforum where potential customers won't see it. "We are not deleting it, we are just flagging it as trash or moving it so most people will be ignorant of its contents so it's not censorship!"

"Feedback and Suggestions."

it's that the developers are most likely sick and tired of this insane person who spends over a 1000 hours in their game and is literally going off the deep end attempting to hurt their company and the sales of their game. He's moved well passed someone upset that the game sucks (in their view) and wanting to give their feedback and warn other players, he is on a irrational and emotional crusade to bring them down in any way he can.

The dude is acting deranged, I don't think it's such a stretch that when you go from "dissatisfied customer" to "obsessed foaming at the mouth stalker" that at some point they just don't want to hear from you anymore or want you participating in their community.

You can't ban or censor unpleasant critics just because they are persistent, if they are not engaging in genuine harassment or abuse. Dropping unpleasant truth bombs is not abuse and if you can't deal with that, you should not be selling products for money. Otherwise you are a dishonest dick who doesn't deserve money or support.

That said, I don't hate Darkest Dungeons. I think it's just boring and shallow and such great visuals deserve a much better game.

Well, I certainly wasn't expecting this when I opened this thread. I just wanted to see how people are disappointed with the damage spam fest this game is. Pirated it and realized that in the third "dungeon" then quickly uninstalled. I always like reading valid and thought-out criticisms but Celerity takes it to a whole new level.

Celerity, with your fervor-like dedication you might achieve something worthwhile, use it wisely.

Indeed.

I think I found Celerity:

What we see here is a typical Rekt Hook fan. So bad they lose on the easiest boss in the game then rage like a dumbfuck. This is also the specific reason Deepest Dark was made actually hard, specifically so I could troll dumbfuck casual popamole fuckwits like that idiot, who only is there so the game can appear good and honest when it's neither of those things. Oh, were you shitpost trolling? Doesn't matter, it made my point anyways.

It's interesting seeing the logic of "we won't remove this from the curator because that would be pandering" (this different kind of pandering is not pandering, trust me). How about removing it because it's shallow under-delivered over-"designed" decline and in no way belongs in the company of most of those other games, which range from stellar to quite good and have actual effectual RPG mechanics? Maybe AAA was right all these years and voice acting is the only thing that matters in games. I suppose I should get in line and preorder Darkest Dungeon 2.

I can understand first recommending it many months ago when it presented a view of a reasonably strong fundamentally sound backbone, with the promise of more content built up around that sound structure. But now that the developer has designed all the choices out of the game in order to fix minor problems, it's Progress Quest with good artwork and narration. The gameplay has devolved significantly while the grind has increased in kind. So is pandering to the non-pandering crowd a better choice than disassociating this lemon with RPG Codex?

Also, on a different topic, I think it's reasonable to poke fun at Celerity for his obsession, but the things he's saying are fundamentally correct when you wash away the angry verbiage.

Don't get me wrong, I don't give two shits about the list, I'm just saying if the option is raising the bar vs lowering it/keeping it low, why not raise it? This game really isn't an RPG game or a deep strategic/tactical game, though Pope Amole II's recent postis have indicated it might have more tactical versatility than the posters who talk about damage-spam indicate.

Anyway, it seems like the problem with the curator list is that it isn't defined. What is it supposed to be? Right now it's defined by what it is, which is a reflection of pop Codex culture. That's fine, maybe that's all it should be. If we want it to be a list of good RPG and Strategy games though, I don't think DD fits.

I'm also a KS backer and enjoyed the game way before the corpse and the hound update, and haven't played since then.

"Popeamole" also describes games with simplistic mechanics and low difficulty aimed at the lowest common denominator. When someone literally has named after them
why are you taking what they say seriously? What you see in his posts is someone who cannot math succeeding in spite of the game. That's not surprising at all given everything I've said.

Worse than DD ? i am not sure , theres something i really, but really hate its when marketing take over gameplay . Lot of fluff , youtubers promoting the games,hiding behind early acces and a shitty shallow gameplay at release. Many games on the list are garbage thats for sure, but none been deceiving like this one. I was really hyped for this ,i am not the only , it had really cool ideas but they stopped at that . I can forgive errors and mistakes but behaviours like that no .
Same reason i absolutely loathe sword coast , promoting a baldur's gate spiritual sequel and ending up with dumbed down low budget rpg lite for kids .Shitting on the most prestigious license in my eyes that is D&D .

As for the rpgwatch curator list, its even shittier but its no surprise everything they do is neutral positive ,extremely positive even. It has good news but its mainly about promoting and advertising games, not really reviewing them .They are no better than ign and such and probably getting some money from gaming studios marketing budget.

Something I want to mention regarding all this drama though - if Celerity is right about all this stuff then it should be noted and called out on it, not be buried under countless ad hominem attacks against him. If we allow anyone to jerk us around then what does that say about us? Gullible and naive fools who also let this medium be degraded with such practices. If he isn't right, oh well, we still shouldn't let devs do such things regarding anything else. Valid criticisms about the game itself is something completely different though.

OK, come on...

• everyone discussing the game seems to think it's a "meh" game at best and utter shite at worst. So it's a safe assumption that Kodex Kommunity Konsensus (KKK) considers the game to be mediocre. Unless someone intends to pull the "muh vocal minority!!!" card.
• according to Roqua's post a couple pages back, the "RPG elements"™ of the game are close to non-existent.
  
• as demonstrated by the screenshot posted by Celerity, Red Hook is blatantly abusing the "flag" function to brand his review as "abusive", despite the fact that it doesn't harass nor abuse anyone. Blatant attempt at censorship if I ever saw one. If they are already pulling this crap now, as an indie dev, imagine the monstrosities they will pull if they ever become big players in the gaming industry

So, srsly, what's the point of endorsing a mediocre game with almost no RPG substance that also happens to be produced by a shady developer who doesn't respect its customers?

If the "mediocre" part is ok, then let's endorse every RPGmaker crap under the sun because why the fuck not? If the "barely an RPG" part is ok, then let's endorse Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl. Unlike Derpest, SSC is a GOOD game and its dev can't possibly screw anyone over since its pretty much dead. I mean...Bloodlines* is there so it's not like recommending a shooter is haram. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Now if the "lack of ethics" part is ok, well...eat a dick then.

*: Inb4 butthurt: Bloodlines deserves to be there, I only mentioned as an example of a shooter being on the list.

Ahahaha, the guy who bitches about the whole censorship thing? You know the one? Guess who is heavily into removing negative responses from his own steam review comment section...

Ah, the fittingly named Trash, who was one of the useless trolls in my review and got taken out for being a clueless spamming fuckwit. I forget if he was a death threater or not, but he can go fuck himself with a spiked dildo.

Something I want to mention regarding all this drama though - if Celerity is right about all this stuff then it should be noted and called out on it, not be buried under countless ad hominem attacks against him.

Sure, but the thing is that after reading some of his posts (in the Steam forums) it's certainly understandable that they banned him (several times actually, the ban was usually lifted eventually) and flagged his review as abusive. He does come across pretty dickish.
I haven't looked into that issue further, though. Might be interesting to see which other negative reviews get that treatment.
As for downvoting, not necessary to blame that on RH - there are always enough fanboys willing to fight for their personal developer of the week.

Twice. One for a month, once permanent, both times for Jim Sterling. Dozens of others were also censored for some form of criticism. Every aggressive attack shill has never ever been removed for any time for any reason.

If any other negative review should become so strong the downvote brigate cannot bury it, it will also be censored. And if you have been following reviews over the past 2 days, you'll see it was like 75 Helpful and now it's like 12.

As for the source of the downvotes, I don't see evidence of Reddit this time, but I'm sure they'd spend some of their 7 mil on a service, since they don't spend it on the actual game...

 

[Lacrymas]

Sure, but the thing is that after reading some of his posts (in the Steam forums) it's certainly understandable that they banned him (several times actually, the ban was usually lifted eventually) and flagged his review as abusive. He does come across pretty dickish.
I haven't looked into that issue further, though. Might be interesting to see which other negative reviews get that treatment.
As for downvoting, not necessary to blame that on RH - there are always enough fanboys willing to fight for their personal developer of the week.

Yes, he is quite, let's say, forceful. That doesn't mean his arguments are invalid and that's why I want to separate his persona from them. I don't know if they are invalid because I haven't followed DD's development so someone else should comment on that, but my point stands regardless - that we shouldn't allow devs to do these things even if it turns out Red Rook are innocent in this particular scenario.

 

[Celerity]

This situation has slowly escalated for a year, so that's why I come on strong now. Everything's already fact checked and proven beyond all reasonable doubt, just a matter of getting that word out there while being bombed with idiot troll shill remarks like "kill yourself".

 

[ST'Ranger]

And what the hell is a Codexer anyway? Celerity started using popamole and "we" bizarrely in relation to Red Hook.

He consistently says "popeamole" and has no concept what it refers to whatsoever. In addition, he holds a (contextually) comical level of ignorance regarding Fallout vs. Fallout 3/4 and has the patience and maturity of the average 8 year old playing Cow Clicker on their smartphone ("tell me why I should play this", "explain the difference to me or can't you?").

That said, the issue of whether he belongs here and whether the curator is a form of belonging or brotherhood are red herrings.

Celerity obviously has personal grievances against this game, having spent a huge amount of time trying to improve upon it only to see the developer go in a totally different and disappointing direction with the game. However, amongst his personal grievances are legitimate criticisms which ring true and stand out despite the source and the vagaries of the situation. His posts are, on the whole, more interesting and valuable than some others in the thread - as much an indictment as that is.

The Codex Curator is something which anyone ought to be able to criticize and which the gatekeepers ought to be able to control as they see fit. But surely everyone can see the outcome of the current responses regarding the curator. If someone gives arguments why it shouldn't be there and the response is "well there are a lot of things that shouldn't be there", then any declined shit that ends up there is going to stick around indefinitely if we keep following that logic. The curator doesn't need to be some superlative beacon to ideological purity just like it doesn't need to be some shitlist whose only purpose is to troll. It would be nice if most of its entries reflected at least a pattern of thoughtfulness. At the moment, especially with entries like Darkest Dungeon, it pretty much seems like a personal blog for curators. I absolutely despised almost everything about PoE and found it hugely disappointing, but there are good arguments for it to remain on that list. There are no such arguments for things like Darkest Dungeon, and I think most people (curators included) can appreciate the idea of the curator being a bit more consistent in that respect.

 

[Bubbles]

At the moment, especially with entries like Darkest Dungeon, it pretty much seems like a personal blog for curators.

I think that's the only thing it was ever meant to be.

 

[Gord]

Yes, he is quite, let's say, forceful. That doesn't mean his arguments are invalid and that's why I want to separate his persona from them.

Well, some things are bordering on paranoia. The actual arguments regarding gameplay? I totally agree with the general consensus that the game turned out too shallow and that some mechanics that can be abused to trivialize the game.
Yet I think my personal version of DD would go in a completely different direction than Celerity's. And vice versa.
Then again I don't consider it the worst thing ever, merely somewhat average (but fun enough for a couple of hours)

Dozens of others were also censored for some form of criticism.

And dozens others have criticized the game and still do. Myself included. Yet they didn't get banned and/or censored. Tone probably plays a role.

And if you have been following reviews over the past 2 days, you'll see it was like 75 Helpful and now it's like 12.

What are yo trying to say here? That they (RH) can change the number of people flagging a review as helpful or not by removing those they don't like? I'm quite sure that Valve doesn't offer the possibility to devs.

 

[ST'Ranger]

At the moment, especially with entries like Darkest Dungeon, it pretty much seems like a personal blog for curators.

I think that's the only thing it was ever meant to be.

And my point, in answering Ludo's question, is that forumgoers seem to be ultimately against this concept and would prefer a kind of overall philosophy (even if they disagree with many of the games on there) underlying the curation.

 

[Infinitron]

We put effort into appraising the Codex consensus. As I said, Darkest Dungeon was very popular here in early 2015, including among those posters who are likely to use the word "Inshillitron". There's probably some revisionist history going on here, with some newcomers going "Wut, this was always some indie hipster thing, rite?" No, it wasn't.

 

[Ludo Lense]

We put effort into appraising the Codex consensus. As I said, Darkest Dungeon was very popular here in early 2015, including among those posters who are likely to use the word "Inshillitron". There's probably some revisionist history going on here, with some newcomers going "Wut, this was always some indie hipster thing, rite?" No, it wasn't.

Putting EA tittles in the curator has a high chance of triggering such situations. It is an endorsement of something that could be good or bad rather than a clear cut situation.

 

[Celerity]

And what the hell is a Codexer anyway? Celerity started using popamole and "we" bizarrely in relation to Red Hook.

He consistently says "popeamole" and has no concept what it refers to whatsoever. In addition, he holds a (contextually) comical level of ignorance regarding Fallout vs. Fallout 3/4 and has the patience and maturity of the average 8 year old playing Cow Clicker on their smartphone ("tell me why I should play this", "explain the difference to me or can't you?").

That said, the issue of whether he belongs here and whether the curator is a form of belonging or brotherhood are red herrings.

Celerity obviously has personal grievances against this game, having spent a huge amount of time trying to improve upon it only to see the developer go in a totally different and disappointing direction with the game. However, amongst his personal grievances are legitimate criticisms which ring true and stand out despite the source and the vagaries of the situation. His posts are, on the whole, more interesting and valuable than some others in the thread - as much an indictment as that is.

The Codex Curator is something which anyone ought to be able to criticize and which the gatekeepers ought to be able to control as they see fit. But surely everyone can see the outcome of the current responses regarding the curator. If someone gives arguments why it shouldn't be there and the response is "well there are a lot of things that shouldn't be there", then any declined shit that ends up there is going to stick around indefinitely if we keep following that logic. The curator doesn't need to be some superlative beacon to ideological purity just like it doesn't need to be some shitlist whose only purpose is to troll. It would be nice if most of its entries reflected at least a pattern of thoughtfulness. At the moment, especially with entries like Darkest Dungeon, it pretty much seems like a personal blog for curators. I absolutely despised almost everything about PoE and found it hugely disappointing, but there are good arguments for it to remain on that list. There are no such arguments for things like Darkest Dungeon, and I think most people (curators included) can appreciate the idea of the curator being a bit more consistent in that respect.

I've never seen a written description of "popeamole" but have a decent idea from context and his posting history. As for the Fallout shit, we're already past that. In case you forgot I thought they were the same, once people quit going full retard they explained they were not and I conceded the fucking point. Get over yourselves.

And dozens others have criticized the game and still do. Myself included. Yet they didn't get banned and/or censored. Tone probably plays a role.

Yes, here. Now do it on their boards. I'll wait. Go make a thread right now, voice skepticisms about the game, doubt you will purchase it. Be completely reasonable and non hostile. Watch what happens, then screenshot your perma ban for us ok?

What are yo trying to say here? That they (RH) can change the number of people flagging a review as helpful or not by removing those they don't like? I'm quite sure that Valve doesn't offer the possibility to devs.

I'm saying a large volume of reviews got buried at the same time. Not long before I found my review was flagged. But if you look at it, you won't see the flag. Which raises the question of how many other people will see a nice flag if they check their own.

 

[Infinitron]

We put effort into appraising the Codex consensus. As I said, Darkest Dungeon was very popular here in early 2015, including among those posters who are likely to use the word "Inshillitron". There's probably some revisionist history going on here, with some newcomers going "Wut, this was always some indie hipster thing, rite?" No, it wasn't.

Putting EA tittles in the curator has a high chance of triggering such situations. It is an endorsement of something that could be good or bad rather than a clear cut situation.

Sure. I don't think one bad apple is good enough reason to make a rule about not curating Early Access games, though. Imagine not curating Age of Decadence, Underrail, etc.

 

[Celerity]

There's plenty of EA success stories. I think only screening games when they are actually out is fair.

 

[ST'Ranger]

I've never seen a written description of "popeamole" but have a decent idea from context and his posting history.

Skyway save us.

We put effort into appraising the Codex consensus. As I said, Darkest Dungeon was very popular here in early 2015, including among those posters who are likely to use the word "Inshillitron". There's probably some revisionist history going on here, with some newcomers going "Wut, this was always some indie hipster thing, rite?" No, it wasn't.

I don't think there is anyone here saying "this game was terrible all along in reality." What happened was that the early builds looked very promising but then many of the interesting characteristics of the game were designed out of it in an incompetent attempt to fix minor problems. The developers took something that looked and felt sound and went in a very wrong direction with it. I think it'd be fair and consistent, if the curation team so decides, to remove it - or to put it in a more negative light - as a result. I also think it'd be fine to leave it there if the team feels that it belongs, but it might fare better with a reason other than "well there is other bad shit on the list too, might as well pile it on".

 

[Celerity]

So I'm gonna explain what's going on here and preempt the horde of shitposts.

I was operating under the assumption the entire Fallout series was Bethesda trash and auto ignore. Instead of saying something, even a "Fallout 1-2 are RPGs produced by a different company, 3-4 are what you think the series is." and immediately correcting that misassumption, they just shitposted for a while, so I assumed they were idiots and dismissed everything they said. Eventually I worked that one line out of them, at which point I conceded. They are still very salty about it though and keep spamming a good time later.

Now we see someone claiming that I am using the term "popeamole" incorrectly. But instead of proving that by providing any definition whatsoever, he's just shitposting. See how this works?

If you think I'm wrong you fucking prove it, with actual words and logic and shit, and then I accept that. Or you just rage mindlessly and I you. Whichever.

So what is popeamole then? I'm listening.

 

[agris]

So what is popeamole then? I'm listening.

DarkUnderlord new tagline material here

 

[CRD]

Can anyone give me some insights about how it is the late game?

Because the bit I have played doesn't look very promising and more like Grindan Dungeon, and grinding is a mechanic that I simply don't play as for me is just an unfun lazy mechanic.

And if the game is going to be exactly the same at level 2 with 4 hours and at level 12 with 20 without any extra kind of mechanic that at least makes you think or change the game to other thing than repeat the same dungeon again and again with enemies that just scale with you until the end of the game, I think I prefer to know it now and just drop it before wasting more time.