Battle of the Four Towers

It reminds me of the classic Record of the Four Kingdom from Liar Game. Very cool very swag.

На DOS.е подобные игры лучше сделаны были. А вы это делаете в 21 веке.

Bu strateji ve zeka oyununda diğer 3 kişiyle savaşırken bir kulenin komutasını elinize alın. Her turda en fazla 3 eylem seçin; ya başka bir kuleye saldırın ya da başka bir kuleden savunun. Bir kuleye saldırmayı başarırsanız 3 Yaşam Puanı kaybederler, ancak savunurlarsa hiçbir şey kaybetmezler.

i love leann!!!!!!!!!!

[quote][b]Note: Dead PvP game[/b] This game contains no meaningful single player content. There are no available servers and no player population. This game cannot be played as intended.[/quote] This is an unusual and obviously failed attempt to make a conceptual PvP "prisoner dilemma" game... to explain, each player makes a number of choices each round, defend, attack, etc etc. Depending on the choices of other players, you'll have successful attacks, or be attacked successfully. You know, defending against someone who doesn't attack you wastes one of your moves, etc etc. Interesting idea, but not necessarily a good one, and the technical implementation here is garbage. So, Battle of the Four Towers is a dead PvP game. Why did it fail? It's video game autopsy time! [i]Almost every PvP exclusive game on Steam fails.[/i] Only a tiny proportion of them "go viral". This game failed for many of the same reasons those others fail. The chief of which is the developer thinking that their game will "go viral" without actually creating any reason for it do so. Competition amongst PvP centric games is extreme, and there's only a finite player base to appeal to. This game failed to reach any kind of critical mass and died as a result. Let's go into some of the reasons this particular game failed to appeal to gamers, despite the zero up front cost. First and foremost, there's no meaningful single player content. The developer gambled that other players would be an acceptable substitute for adding storytelling, level design etc to the Game. They lost that bet. Without a huge community of players or single player content to add a lasting value to the game, the game dies. Developers must learn that other players are not an acceptable substitute for adding content to a game. The developers abandoned this 3 years and 2 months ago. It will never be completed. This unfinished game is just polluting Steam and making it harder for gamers to find genuinely, completely made games. In terms of visuals, this features fairly low quality low poly 3D graphics which will deter a lot of gamers, understandably. Gaming is a visual medium, and while some developers struggle with creating high quality visuals, failing to do so is a disservice to gamers. It's very difficult to recommend bad looking games. On pricing, this is "free" enough, at least you won't be expected to spend any more money after you download this, but just because something is free doesn't mean it's good, and the cost of a game is more than just financial, your time is valuable too. Despite having no up-front cost, this failed to appeal to the 120 million+ gamers on Steam. SteamDB showed the game peaked at only 5 concurrent players... this is a dismal public reception. This was so bad they couldn't even give it away. Bearing in mind that free games don't add +1 to your game collector count, should you bother adding this to your library and downloading it? Nope. This isn't worth downloading. There's no financial cost up-front, but you'd still be spending your time and a little hard drive space on a product that's far from the best. There's thousands of better alternatives on Steam.

Absolute ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ grind achievements, when will devs learn that will earn them negative review.

incredible game, scenery is 10/10 and storyline and gameplay is truly magnificent and breathtaking. absolutely would buy again

not a good game, bug