What went wrong?

What went wrong?

Attached: dims.jpg (1920x1080, 459K)

Honestly, I thought progression system was just kind of boring and very quickly stops feeling like you are making a progress and just do the same thing over and over again.

I think the rogue-lite element shouldn't have relied on achievements and either rely on amount of times you've played (so each failure would actually count), either be more dependent on RNG like in FTL.

it's just not that interesting of a game, especially compared to the fantastic FTL

FTL was a real time tactics/stratefy with a pause and management of ship and crew (however basic that was)
Into the Breach is just a puzzle game, that i completed in under 2 hours, which allowed me to refund

Didn't get any expansions, otherwise it's a really good puzzle game.

Its fun on the 1st playthough and that's it

>be more dependent on RNG like in FTL.
the RNG in FTL was pure fucking cancer and an endless ball-ache. You could never do anything cool because you were constantly just getting shit on by every event unless you have exceedingly specific prerequisites that you'd hardly ever in time. There was plenty of RNG with ITB based on what gear you got in capsules or from the shop, what enemies spawn, the map layouts, and enemy composition.

Making it a shitty "rogue-lite" so they don't have to present you with a winnable situation because you can re-start your playthrough every time.

Nothing it was great, i 100'd it.
The gameplay system is pretty much perfect.

the whole point of the game is unlocking the other squads which have completely different ways of solving the puzzles presented, you mostly just seem like a brainlet

Dunno man, admittedly I never beat it on hard, but after a while I learnt how to beat it more or less consistently on normal.

The game heavily goes out of its way to present you with completely solvable puzzles unless you heavily fucked up in previous turns

Pixel Art. It gets so over-used by indie artists that it turns people off to a game.

>they don't have to present you with a winnable situation
Genuinely unwinnable situations are extremely far and few between and easily avoidable with proper threat management. If you find yourself frequently running into situations you think are unwinnable it's probably because you aren't considering every possibility and letting it get to that point

Nothing, it's a great game. A little short, though.

Too many white people in it.

I have never once ran into a game where in retrospect a loss was impossible to avoid
they did a fantastic job on the procedural generation

What game?

It's more of a puzzle game than a strategy game, it doesn't have enough variety in maps/enemies, and it uses the same shitty anti-fun unlock system as FTL where 90% of the game's content is locked until you complete the entire game a dozen fucking times.

Needed more content and needed longer campaigns with more interesting character progression.
Great game though. Falls more on the side of puzzle than turn-based strategy, but has a neat take on the genre.

unfortunately it's become one of the defining characteristics of the "roguelite" genre and actually providing half your content upfront would, at this point, be seen as a negative that "breaks with tradition"

It feels a lot like chess in that it's a game I'll occasionally revisit and dive deep into for a week or two, then get distracted with other things and shelve it for a while. I wonder if the devs would ever consider making a multiplayer version of the gameplay? That's the only thing holding it back from being a timeless classic like chess or go.

I wait for the expansion but all I get is radio silence from the devs

it wouldn't really work as a multiplayer game, one of the key game mechanics is that you have perfect information which wouldn't be true in a MP game

Imagine if Nethack had been like "you can only play as a Neutral Human Tourist until you finish the game five times".

>that i completed in under 2 hours, which allowed me to refund
Beating this game once does not count completing it.

at the very least the actual roguelikes are not as corrupted by it
though you do get idiots complaining about this whenever an actual roguelike comes out because someone should really give "roguelites" a different god damn name so the 2 don't get confused

Enjoy your repitation

>just play the same shit over and over again just to mark all of the stupid cheevos
completionists are mentally ill

The different squads are drastically different and there is a lot of different weapons to fuck around with, but you probably know this and want some easy (you)s to start off your weekend of shitposting. Sad.

I had lots of fun with it, simple but addictive and fast.

nothing, it's perfect

4\5 of the squads has useless gimmicks which can be screwed instant with a bad rng. Litterally a wrong building position can screw totally an easy mission.

Into The Breach. Made by the same dudes who made FTL but everyone was expecting not-FTL2.0 but it didn't live up to its name.
It's alright game but they had some big shoes to fill after making FTL.

Even though there are multiple squads to unlock that have different weapons, things all end up feeling very samey on subsequent playthroughs. The devs were one hit wonders.