Underhanded design, no respect for the player

Unlocks in zero-k are hardly a "skinner box".

1) you can disable at any time using modoptions

2) they arent progressively harder to achieve

3) you can get all unlockable units after few days of playing

4) unlocks let people try and practice labs one by one. ZK is unique in having hundreds of units, mastering them takes months of practice. Having people introduced to them slowly is part of the design.
"Too many units". "Too many options" was actual complaint of new players.

5) you dont have to do any boring "grinding" to get unlocks. All you have to do is play the normal game and have RTS fun.

well spoken, big chief licho.

Dear test:

While I get the point you're trying to make, you're way off base here. The Zero-K developers play this game themselves. They are deeply and passionately committed to making ZK the best game it can possibly be; a game which is challenging, engaging, and fun; a game that exemplifies the best concepts and execution in RTS gameplay. A game that unquestionably respects its players.

There is a world of difference between what Zero-K does and what's done by the typical casual mobile game that Edmund McMillen was railing against. The most telling difference between them is that the Zero-K developers play their own game. Developers of the games McMillen is talking about don't, and wouldn't ever, because they know that the games are deliberately designed for the single purpose of manipulating players into paying money without thinking about whether they're actually enjoying the game for the sake of its gameplay. They know that their games are for suckers.

The Zero-K devs know that their game is for themselves, and for people who share their love of this particular style of RTS gameplay.

For more thoughts on these matters please watch this lecture by indie game designer Jonathan Blow, the developer of Braid. It's a fascinating talk, well worth your time to watch. He makes these same points and many more besides. He makes a convincing case that games like Farmville are actually evil, and he talks about how developers can use a "toolbox" of otherwise-manipulative gaming concepts without becoming evil as well. The key is to respect the players.

Zero-K respects its players.

test, plz read the comments.

- there is a reason why it is like this. read it above

- there is a way to disable it if you like it. read above.

but, as typical german, first complain. ZOMG.

mojjj: I thought it was "as a typical German, first invade France."

:)

Fundamentally, you need the high-level gear to play an FFA game on a respectably-large map. But most newbs won't be doing that, so it's still okay.

My only problem with the unlocks is the amount of time it takes to get a decent amount of Comm gear unlocked, and the fact that there's no freaking way that blastwings should be a starting unit. They're the worst noobtrap in the game right now.

I'm kind of agreeing with Test, here. Back when I was new, I hated it. I didn't have any factories. I didn't have any com modules.

I mean, what the hell? Com modules? Why are they unlocks? I can see how things such as Singularity Reactors, Starlight and Detriment are unlocks. But having modules as unlocks are simply crippling.

So, yes. This game has the elements of a Skinner's box.

Eh, I didn't like unlocks at first. Now I think they are a good thing.

Most campaigns in RTS games these days do NOT allow you to build all units at first. Take SC2 for example: the campaign only allows you to build a couple units at start. Each mission unlocks another unit for you to learn 1-by-1. They usually make that mission more-or-less require whatever you have just unlocked. So in the mission you unlock the Siege Tanks, they design the mission to work best with siege tanks.

ZK, on the other hand, has a handful of missions that can't accomplish this goal. Because the missions sort of suck (sorry guys who have worked hard on them :( ) the only way to let people slowly learn units is to apply unlocks. I'm sure if we had a full mission set like SC2, we could choose to do away with unlocks and let newbies learn units in the missions.

Lastly, all units can be unlocked within a couple days of playing. Custom commanders take a bit longer, but all the best players don't use them anyways. They're situational noobtraps that more often than not fail to make cost.

I should add that there are no pay-to-unlock features with ZK, which is what Edmund McMillen was talking about. The game is 100% free. I am currently the all-time top donor to the project (ignoring that Licho has paid for all servers since forever) and I still have the same gameplay experience as everyone else. I don't have a single special feature or unit to show for my donation. I did it because I love the game and want to see it grow.

Time is worth nothing to us. If you came up and said "Wow, you managed to milk 45829532423 hours of gameplay out a single user!!!!" we'd say "Eh... ok?". Having players play more benefits the project in no direct way.

i dont get it what you want to achive here. you are not open for a rational discussion or arguments. because thats what you can do for make changes happen, convince devs with arguments.