Morning, Love

Having pootled around in Love for a while last week, and watching Steenberg’s updates on Twitter, I decided it was time to have a decent session in the alpha build of the game. This led to me tell my girlfriend that I’d be spending the morning “in Love with James.” She didn’t bat an eyelid, used to such early-morning incoherence, and continued getting ready for work. Later, armed with Teamspeak and cups of tea, James (Arma II’s scriptwriter) and I set about investigating the indie not-quite-MMO in its embryonic stages. Our findings are below.

Before I say anything about our experiences, it’s worth remembering that this is a game at its earliest playable stage. Steenberg realised he couldn’t really do any more development without a population of players, and so he opened up the alpha to paying testers. The small fee goes to server costs. The game is definitely not finished: there’s no sound, and almost all game systems are in flux. What the game looks like in a few months time could be very different to what I’m writing about today, which in itself makes this an interesting record of the process.

Anyway, having dropped into the UK4 server, we began running about, soon finding our way to the main player settlement. Teamspeak was invaluable, as in-game text speak is only “local” meaning that people in visual range see what you type, but global chat is limited to the use of in-game equipment, namely the radio tag.

What Steenberg is trying to create is a game in which player-created content is key. It’s a building game, rather like Minecraft, but also a shooting game with a Quake-like movement. The building is centered around a settlement in which players can edit terrain to create tunnels, walls, plateaus, towers, trenches and so on. The shooting involves fighting off NPC attacks, and assaulting the enemy bases.

Crucially, all equipment is deployed within your settlement, and must be collected from the landscape as a series of tokens. Once the tokens are placed inside a settlement then they become available to any of the players who are bound to that settlement.

So we headed towards a half-ruined settlement and began grabbing equipment for ourselves. You can carry four things at once, and the selection consists in a variety of combat tools, a number of building tools, and some miscellaneous systems such as the config tool, used for interacting with structures and devices. As it turned out, it was the building tool set that engrossed to begin with. We began editing the base to clean things up. Soon though the denizens of the base – about half a dozen players – turned up and began to complain about the lack of the main resource: power.

To get power we need to bring it into the base from power wells, via a series of towers. The config tool allowed us to access nearby wells and towers, and to point their beams of energy to each other by entering the appropriate simple co-ordinates. Once we’d figured that out power soon became plentiful and many of the extra modules within the base became active.

Editing the base, as it currently functions, ends up being rather messy. With half a dozen people all experimenting with the environment the innards of the base became a horrendous mess of terrain blocks, elevators, trees, equipment dispensers, power-lines, turrets, windmills, holes in the ground, and particle effects. You can see from just a few minutes play with a good set of building tools just how elegant and elaborate a base /could/ be, but half a dozen newbies with no plan currently leads to chaos. Whether this process can be shaped by controlling the order and pace at which tokens are unlocked and building tools are provided, remains to be seen. I suspect experienced players will eventually figure out the best ways to quickly format a settlement, but the process is bound to change in code too.

That said, James and I had a fun time hooking up the power lines, going on mini adventures to bring power in across massive chasms and watery gullies, and took some time to explore the nearby landscape as we went.

What we hadn’t seen during this time was any NPC activity, so we finally elected to go off and explore the smoky landscape and find our foe. Perhaps, we thought, we’d be able to establish a new settlement along the way. This exploration took quite some time, as the enemy base was a long way off, atop a huge mesa. There are spawn points that you can bind to across the landscape, and it was sheer chance that we both managed to bind to one before we encountered a horde of enemies. These weird sketchy little blurs pelted us with laser fire, while their chums lobbed explosives at us from the rooftops of their settlement. Being bound to the nearby checkpoint meant we were able to respawn and fight through the worst of them, and begin an attack on their settlement.

This is where things went awry. While I got lost in the nearby wilderness while James fluked his way inside the enemy fortress. Communications and navigation tools are currently largely lacking in the current build of Love – there’s no way to locate a buddy in the world, for example. While there’s an arrow that points to a nearby settlement, and another to your spawn point, it’s very difficult indeed to find another person, and without VOIP comms we’d not have found each other again for some time.

A running battle ensued – James inside the settlement, and me outside, attacking what looked like a second attempt by the AI to establish a base. I found myself face-to-face with a missile-spitting turret which tore great chunks out of the landscape, while James slowly pushed the remaining NPCs from their defences. Soon we began to receive messages about losses from our original settlement. It seemed it was under attack. Was it worth going back? Should we let up our attack on the NPCs? It wasn’t clear. So we did neither and logged out to have lunch.

All in all it was in peculiar and yet fascinating experience. Steenberg’s project current lacks many of the communication and social systems that players of multiplayer games take for granted, which means that the experience is somewhat stifled, but I suspect to see such things developeed and implemented in good time. Actually exploring the parameters of the game as it exists now – and seeing that there really /is/ a game there, in both building and combat – has been genuinely interesting. While you can see parallels with Love in all kinds of other games, it really does seem to have created a unique recipe of fast action, weird visuals, and player-built environments. Nothing is quite like this.

It’s refreshing to play something that feels like an MMO, with its persistence and worldiness, but does not really play like one. My concern is that this mixture will defeat whatever Steenberg’s ambitions are to deliver on the long game, by making sustained play unrewarding. Not that we can really tell where he’s going, of course, since the game is being written as we go along.

There’s a sense in which /all/ MMOs are built as a collaboration between players and developers, since they can often only be properly understood by being played, but here it’s absolutely on the surface, and I’ll be fascinated to see how Steenberg’s singular vision is transformed by exposure to the behaviour and opinion of real gamers over time.


  1. Ian says:

    How’s the action shaping up in this? Obviously it’s still in the very early stages but I’ll be interested in both the quality of the action gameplay and the balance between it and building/creating stuff.

    • JB says:

      Yeah, I was wondering much the same thing. Is it FPS-like or is it select-a-target auto attacks, MMO style?

    • Stijn says:

      It’s very much an FPS. A click means firing a projectile, aimed at whatever your crosshair is hovering at that moment. There is no PvP at the moment (in theory there is, but at least at the server I play on there’s only one settlement I think, so everyone is allied), so all you fight for now is AI. The AI invade your settlement every now and then, so you defend by spraying bullets or defense structures (turrets, mines). You can also go out to invade enemy settlements, as Jim described, but for now there’s not much incentive to actually do so, especially not once you’ve already built most available structures in your settlement.

    • Jacques says:

      At the moment, the balance is lacking, due mostly to a lack of pacing, it’s all to easy to get a full base very quickly if a few people know what they’re doing. Hopefully Eskil will find ways to remedy this.
      Also, the AI needs some work, it used to be a great deal more aggressive during the first day of alpha, but was toned down due to complains, hopefully it’ll get a good boost soon.

  2. Joe says:

    You and James and cups of team?


  3. Simon says:

    I’m assuming you have a pretty hefty rig so this may be moot… But during this massive terrain-destruction form the AI turrents and the oodles of particle-effects spewing out from various buildings etc, were there ever performance issues?
    I tried the alpha “loading screen” which ran at a decent 30-40fps or so. (C2D 1.8GHz, HD2600M 512MB, 3GB DDR).

  4. Jim Rossignol says:

    Actually the turret battle stuff didn’t seem to hammer the FPS too much, but I got random FPS drops anyway. I think there will be optimisation to come.

  5. Schmung says:

    Sweet. It’s nice to finally hear what the game is actually about and how it works.

  6. Tei says:

    The game is somewhat brutal about heights. This make so walking around could be extremly hard. You could follow the landscape to your homebase, and be unable to enter, because theres a abism, betwen you and the base.
    Needing the radio as a item, make the game harder, and force you to change from weapon to radio, back to weapon. Players are abastract puzzle of images, and the name is not over his head, but on top of the screen. So the game make it harder to recognize people.
    Like Mr. Jim say, is a game, is already a playable game, and maybe fun. Is labeled as alfa, but I don’t really know what need to complete. Interface, maybe? the textbox and buttons on the interface to make login, or register, can be better (and support stuff like TAB to change textbox)

    Because HE!… Civilization!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    One of the best features of Civilization was a endgame map with your expansion trough the world and battles. It was a “redeaming feature” in a game that was already epic.

    And …… QUAKE1………………..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    It was the first 3D multiplayer FPS with a decent number of (humanoids) players (16). (Doom was only 16 players, and fake 3D). And there was this littel “rocketjumping”. RJ is another “redeaming feature” in a game (Quake) that was already epic.

    LOVE needs, imho, something like that. A “redeaming feature”. Need something else than eyecandy + community. Withouth a Redeaming Feature, it will be another game,… a “FPS darwinia with broken shaders”. my humble opinion.

    • Stupoider says:

      I think the dependency on player-created content might be this game’s redeeming feature. :D

    • Kelron says:

      Not sure what you’re getting at, Tei. It has similarities to other games, but overall it’s unique, and not just because of the visuals.

    • gulag says:

      Read the above post in the style of Manuel from Fawlty Towers, it’s hilarious.

  7. Tei says:

    error on my post:
    Doom was only 4 players, and more than fake… it was 2.5D

  8. Wilson says:

    How did you both find the graphical style, especially the fog/smoke? I’ve played a little bit, but found it very hard to really see anything clearly (players especially). Combined with the speed of movement I felt not entirely sure where I was at any given moment, and following people was quite tricky for me.

    • Jacques says:

      I honestly got used to all that very quick, players are easy to spot if you keep an eye out for their name in the black bar at the top of the screen, and if something’s moving, it’s probably an enemy AI. Worst comes to worse, shoot it, if there’s blood, it’s an enemy.

      The game’s a lot easier on the eyes if you turn on the low-end mode.

  9. pignoli says:

    Sounds like this could shape up nicely, and as something quite different. Steenberg must be getting tonnes of this kind of feedback now, so I’m pretty optimistic he will make it into something good.

  10. Jacques says:

    As a plus side, you can trick enemy artillery into bombing other AI settlements.

  11. linfosoma says:

    I wish this wasn’t a subscription based game.

  12. Jim Rossignol says:

    >>I wish this wasn’t a subscription based game.

    Well right now it’s a one-off 3 euro payment, so it’s not.

    • NukeLord says:

      The wording on the website seems to suggest it’s €3 per 30 days of alpha. Is this not the case? I’ve been holding off as I’d rather not do that.

    • Jacques says:

      That is correct. 3 Euro for 30 days.

    • linfosoma says:

      Hmmm….Now Im confused.

    • Railick says:

      Well if you don’t want to look at it as paying a subscription you could just say you’re paying 3 dollars for an alpha build. In 30 days the game could be totally diffrent so you’re just paying 3 bucks for the next alpha build ;P

    • Stromko says:

      There’s more to it than that. You don’t automatically get charged for another 30 days worth of time, and you spend that 30 days worth of hours as fast or as slowly as you want. To actually spend that 3 Euros / 5 Dollars worth of time in only 1 month, you’d need to be online 24/7.

      You also get a Friend account that someone else can use to play with you, but they can only be logged in when you’re logged in.

    • Stromko says:

      Whoa, I just realized time does get counted off even when you’re offline. Either that or I’ve already spent 6 entire days online. Seems unlikely. :) At least I really don’t think it auto-renews: what you’re buying is a Voucher that you use to create / renew an account, it’s not a subscription.

  13. DMJ says:

    This sounds like the sort of thing I really should be playing.

  14. Sporknight says:

    I’d love to get my hands on some alpha content and contribute via feedback and monies – if I had the time for it. Maybe I could talk my manager into letting me play at work… “Oh, yes, I’m practicing exploratory testing and quality assurance!”

    LOVE gets my attention simply out of sheer originality in a market (not just MMOs, but games in general) that can be severely lacking in that. Let’s just hope it strikes a balance between originality and playability – what you were saying about the radio seems like something people will circumvent by just using TS or Ventrilo, thus making it not such a good idea. If there’s one thing I learned from WoW, it’s that if players *need* 3rd party apps to play your game effectively, that capacity should’ve been there in the first place.

  15. kevinzana says:

    first thing that came to my mind was wurm online.

    but then, shooting! shooters give an experience very different from the mmo model.

  16. Smurfy says:

    I gave Steenberg some motherfucking money, but I am yet to play the motherfucking game. I played it for a bit, but was so confused that I could only bring myself to utter a single word: “Wut?”

  17. Heliocentric says:

    One concern i have is by mixing creation and competition. Ever tried building something in a public server of garry’s mod? Also, everything you hold dear could be wrecked while you are offline. Unless every account can select a few grid squares to make invincible, a whole clan could secure a base.

    • Tei says:

      One of the problems of Garrys Mod, is for some reason (price?,freedom?, griefing potential?) It attract the wrong people. Is not just “grieffing heaven”, is more than that, for some reason very juvenile people play Garrys Mod, the age is very low. Theres something very strange that make so people with 11 years old play Garrys Mod, but don’t joine Counter-Strike.
      A totally obscure indie game will probably attract more mature people, so there will be Drama, but not general stupid vandalism.

    • Hypocee says:


  18. Shigeko says:

    Just buy one month play time and see for yourself. 3 E are like half a movie at the cinema.
    The graphical style is so fresh after all that wow gayness. The only problem is, you can’t identify friend from foe if they are more than 10 meters away, which is pretty bad in hectic/fast battles to defend your settlement.
    Yeah, once the you have build all major tools in your city and raided a enemy fortress there’s nothing much else to do, but I got a good 6 hours of entertainment out of it till now and I’m eager to see how this game shapes up.

  19. Carey says:

    It’s true! We were in Love.

    Answer to the above, I’d say the visuals are ‘distracting’. Initially because they are beautiful but soon because they are annoying. It’s quite hard to navigate anyway and combined with the smeary palette and rapid day night cycle it started to feel like I was fighting through the landscape, having to force my way through the colours and light changes to get anywhere. It’s still beautiful in a painterly way, but I WAS thinking the actual mechanics of the game would work just as well without the ‘art wank’. I like mechanics me.
    That said I wouldn’t want it to look any different because then it would lose some magic. I was in a vale at one point with a wooded hill on one side and a series of tall mesas on the other. Day dawned, the sun rising behind the wooded hill and you could actually see the shafts of sunlight coming around the trunks, through the mists in the vale, and creeping down the cliffs on the other side. It was lully.

    • Darthey says:

      I would have to agree with the issue over the visuals. Important stuff, like radio dispensers, isn’t easy to spot unless you know what your looking for. I had a problem earlier where I found an AI base, and a friend over the radio told me to ‘take out the spawners’, but he wasn’t able to explain what they looked like.

      The day/night transition also has so much contrast you can’t see anything for a few moments.

  20. Heliocentric says:

    Also, you need to construct a tower of babel and tell me how that goes, go until you reach the server side max height or pass out from oxygen deprivation, and in the game.

  21. Jim Rossignol says:

    I notice there’s a wiki beginner guide here.

  22. lumpi says:

    It may sound weird, but the fact that you seem to be both confused and curious about where things are going, brings back some very, very good memories of the golden ages.

    Think of it. The first time you played XCom, Civ1, SimCity, TF1, System Shock or Ultima Online… it was confusing, overwhelming, often even plain frustrating. Your strategies weren’t developed yet, you didn’t really know where to go, what to do. But you were curious of where things are going.

    No way this could ever become a mass-success such as WoW. It will get 7/10 or even 6/10s for the lack of “accessibility” or some broken expectations… but damn it, it’s a NEW game and it’s NOT a pseudo-8-bit-retro 5 minute indie prototype… it’s a big, growing game that pushes genre definitions, eventually even creating a new one from scratch.


  23. Heliocentric says:

    Is it wrong that I just want to build a base/warren and populate it with ai drones like dungeon keeper?

  24. tba says:

    grr all the servers are full?

  25. JimmyJames says:

    I immediately thought along the same lines as Heliocentric. What’s the potential for griefing like? In Minecraft, the only game I’ve played where you can seemingly modify terrain like this some jackass inevitably comes along and digs holes in it or creates swastikas, calls you a fag and logs off, undoing an hour or more of creation.

    • Jacques says:

      At the moment, quite high, it’s all too easy to completely ruin a settlement with the smooth edit tool, and by rerouting power and such. Lots of things have been tweaked and fixed, but it’s still very easy to grief.
      Most of the “griefing” at the moment just appears to be new players experimenting with the tools, rather than people actively trying to fuck off others.

    • Clovis says:

      Who says that has to be “griefing”. Can’t destroying stuff be a method of play? It certainly sounds like fun. I guess they could have safe (ie, carebear) servers and free-for-all servers. It would make sense to cater to both sides.

      Griefing never really bothered me in minecraft because I just accepted that my creations would be destroyed; maybe in a totally mean way, or maybe in an interesting way. Almost all gamers love destruction, so why should we stop destroying just because another person made it?

      It is also similar to complaining about corpse camping in WoW, or other MMOs. Once you get over your RAGE, you just ignore and can almost have fun getting away from the camper.

  26. Mort says:

    Can you not shoot other players anymore then? I thought that was the most fun part!

  27. Kelron says:

    It’s easy enough to find another player if you either have radios or are communicating out of game. Pointing at any object or the ground displays the co-ordinates of that tile. You can then save the co-ordinates by clicking on them (you actually have to click on the word), which gives you a compass arrow pointing towards the tile. If you type co-ordinates into chat you can do the same, so you can tell another player your co-ordinates and he can save them.

    On the griefing – I’ve seen very little deliberate griefing, but lots of players who either don’t know what they’re doing or have no interest in building to any plan. It is frustrating when you build a nice settlement and someone comes along and ruins it, for whatever reason. I’d like to be able to start a private settlement where I can choose who joins, but there seems to be a lot of hostility towards this idea from players who like the current free for all.

  28. Sir Digby says:

    Is there any discussion on the option of having plots of land which are specific to a player, so only the relevant player can edit on it?

  29. RC-1290'Dreadnought' says:

    After experiencing the same problems with settlement-building, I started my own quest. I swore to destroy a big AI settlement. Having destroyed one settlement already by using its own bombs against it, I wanted to try that with a bigger city. Like Jim, I found a huge city on a big mesa. That is where it became very interesting, because even though it does not have any preset missions or maps, it still felt like a big pre-scripted mission. All the obvious ways in were missing. Enormous cliffs on all side of the base and the only stairs going up to the base where destroyed (on purpose?). The game challenged me to find another way in. Every time I got a bit further, after finding some hidden stairs or rocks I could jump on, I could see where I needed to go, but not exactly how I could get there. It usually meant going back a bit. Like a rubiks cube puzzle, I had to destroy my progress to get further.

    After I finally found a cable transport I could reconfigure to go up where I wanted to go, I went on the radio to tell all the guys listening to the radio on 100hz that I found a teleporter to where they could help me kill the AI. Only problem was that the city I found was actually some kind of guard post, and after we killed most of the AI, the guard post started falling apart, or actually, disappearing. If only I had shot that last AI guy before he shot me, I would have been able to get to the main city. But I didn’t, and after respawning at the nearest checkpoint, the way into the city was gone.

    That really felt as if it was a preset mission, which was cool. Too bad I couldn’t quicksave/load.

  30. Diogo Ribeiro says:

    “Was it worth going back? Should we let up our attack on the NPCs? It wasn’t clear. So we did neither and logged out to have lunch.”

    You cads :D

  31. Dominic White says:

    I’ve said it elsewhere, but the fact that the game is as coherent, playable and stable as it is right now, in early alpha testing, is nothing short of amazing.

    Most other games, you REALLY don’t want to see them before they hit Beta at the very least.

  32. mno says:

    Can I use anyone’s username as a reference for the extra play time?

    • Redd says:

      Sure, do you want my password to?

    • mno says:

      Username alone is fine, i am referring to:

      # If you give a user name of an existing player as reference when signing up 24h extra will be added to you account.
      # If a user gives your user name as reference when signing up you will get 5 days of play added to you account.

      So please don’t be a wiseass.

    • Redd says:

      I was trying to help. :(

    • mno says:

      It came over differently though, my apologies for the remark.

  33. nabeel says:

    I'm really enjoying Love, and it has been fascinating witnessing how the game is growing and improving little by little with the community feedback.

    mno said:
    Can I use anyone’s username as a reference for the extra play time?

    Have you registered already? If not, my username is nabeel, thanks.

  34. KP says:

    Arma2’s script writer? tell him *thumbs up* :)

  35. TheSombreroKid says:

    i want to like this, but i’ve got an aversion to the subscription model.

    • Stromko says:

      It’s not actually a subscription. You purchase a voucher for 30 days-worth of hours, and those are counted down while you play. You also spend up 24 hours after switching servers once you pick your first server (Eskil wants people to get attached to their own world / server).

      So you don’t pay automatically to renew, and your time isn’t being spent while you’re not playing. Those two things mean it’s nothing like a normal subscription.

    • Stromko says:

      Scratch that, I do believe time is counted down even when you’re not playing, just like a regular subscription. But I don’t believe it auto-renews at all, since what you’re paying for is a voucher that is used to create / renew accounts.

  36. Wooly says:

    What happens when you take over the world?

  37. Quests says:

    I hope there’s no general chat channel, i hate those, so incoherent with all the environs

  38. Cvnk says:

    Here’s a tip for locating someone in the game (assuming that someone is willing to stay put until you find them and you are within chat distance of each other):

    Have him bookmark something (anything, a nearby object or even the grass tile he’s standing on) by going into menu mode (middle mouse click or ESC) then click where it says “COORDINATE”. A bookmark will appear to the left of the coordinate. If he clicks that it will be copied to the chat area. Once he presses enter to send the chat message it becomes a clickable link that you can click to copy the bookmark. Now you can follow it to his location.

  39. DXN says:

    Quests, not as such — there’s a chat channel that only picks up people near you, and then there’s a radio where you can communicate with people who tune to the same frequency.

    I’ve been really enjoying the Lova alpha, so far! it’s extremely pretty, I’ve had less problems getting around than other people (though there is lots of glare and particle effects), and although the game is quite ‘flat’ at the moment I’m sure it will be developed enough to make it interesting, wherever it goes.

  40. A-Scale says:

    I have ABSOLUTELY no idea what this game is about, what it plays like, how I acquire it or why I would want to do so. Granted I’ve only skimmed the RPS articles on the subject, but I think there has been a massive failure on the marketing side here. Can someone give me the quick run down?

  41. MD says:

    I’d love some more detail on the movement system. When you say Quake-like, I assume that means there’s some sort of bunnyhopping and/or strafe-jumping? If so, what’s it like, in terms of speed/air control/jump timing/etc.?

    • nabeel says:

      The movement control and speed is quite good; not as fast as Quake obviously, but a decent enough pace for exploring and combatting. There is an odd tilting of the view, though, when you jump up against the edge of a ledge, which momentarily makes things a little disorienting.

    • Stromko says:

      You can actually do backflips and spins if you let go of the movement keys but keep the space key held down, and I notice sometimes when you change direction in mid-air this tilt comes into play as well.

  42. Corbeau says:

    I tried the alpha client and got 6 frames per second on the opening screen. I was a sad panda.

  43. Premium User Badge

    phuzz says:

    Ran nicely on my quite average rig (duel core 3GHz, 8800GT, 4Gb ram), but the difficulty curve, well, it’s not there right now. I (and a couple of other people on UK3) spent a long time trying to find our base, but the arrow seemed to point to a blank piece of ground. I eventually worked out that I was looking at the (highly stylised) arrow the wrong way, and we were actually on the polar oposite side of the planet.


    Can’t wait to see where it goes from here though.

  44. nullpointer says:

    I’ve played a few hours of the alpha.. it ran fine on my pc but the experience was pretty baffling. The exotic and laudable visual style doesnt seem to suit a fast paced FPS in the same way it would work well with a more atmospheric adventuring game. Wandering th eladnscape is a lovely experience and the movemtn is nice and springy. However once you start to try and work with a settlement and associated tools it all gets a little like a lego fight party. Landscape blocks and game elements are quite similar with all the post processing and with all the manic building you end up with a wierd cubic swiss cheese. STandard fps combat seems to work ok outside the settlement areas (mainly because its much harder to build/break the terrain out there). Near settlements it gets a bit too escher for me. As people have mentioned this might get more more streamlined, it needs to be, as imo you will always get new players spamming the landscape with lifts,blocks and holes.
    Wierdly enough it really reminds me of the magic carpet series, with the home castle construction, and the energy gathering. Unfortunately i think the freeform creativity that is available to players needs to be heavily toned down to make it a functioning mechanic. At the moment i was defending myself not by shooting but by drawing random massive walls around me. This is cool, but after a few minutes of it its like playing knot in 3d!

    I’ve still high hopes for the game though and i love the interface style, world design and aesthetics.

    • Stromko says:

      High walls are a pretty good way to defend your settlement, and outside of your settlement you can’t do any terraforming. I think the combat is good considering this is an alpha, the 6 weapons (blaster, wall-bouncing hyperblaster, skewering slug-rifle, basic rocket, tripwire-mine rocket, and grenade) all handle differently and have their own roles. The AI can lay down some pretty withering fire so there’s certainly a potential for adrenaline-inducement.

      I’m really rather enjoying the alpha myself, but I can only bring myself to play in about 6-hour increments at most. Once you’ve built up a settlement there isn’t a great deal to do– although I find myself really really wanting to start a new settlement so we can get the tokens placed out more ideally and make more interesting designs.

      When I say ‘we’ I mean the chaps that I talk to on Ventrilo on a pseudo-official channel. Eskil’s dropped in a couple of times this week (3 days ago and today) to collect feedback and answer questions. The game is just plain better with voice chat though.

      My crew’s over on Atlanta 1, it says Full on the server list but since the server registration cap was JUST increased from 200 to 400 we’re thinking it isn’t really full. There’s also folks playing over on Atlanta 2. The teamspeak info is in this thread, on the pseudo-official forums link to .

    • Stromko says:

      When I say ‘There’s also folks playing over on Atlanta 2’, I don’t mean the UK servers aren’t populated, far from it. I just mean the only people I’ve seen using that Voice Chat channel are in Atl1 and Atl2.