Live Inc.

polecam dobra na nudę ze znajomymi

Very well made for being early in development. The map is sometimes very buggy as to where you cannot see the players (glitched so they're icon is still), but overall a 7/10. If it was more polished, it would be better! VERY FUN WITH FRIENDS!

A good game, but only when it actually works, most of the time while playing with my friends the game didnt work, for example, when we started a match we couldnt move and sometimes even the screen was fully black, also we couldnt join each others matches without completely restarting the game and (even though this was mostly just funny) whenever I pressed leave in the in-game menu the leave button would go up every time I clicked it. The game would be good, but there are waaaay too many bugs. I hope the developers fix them.

If u have friends that are not dumb af and u want to play something new to escape league for a while play this

[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 "heist" game has an unusual premise as 2 teams of 2 players each conduct a heist against each other, with one player on each team in the game and the other playing the role of a "hacker" and manipulating the environment. The novel idea wasn't the cause of failure, but the buggy implementation and laughably bad graphics and gameplay had a lot to do with it. So, Live Inc. 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. In terms of visuals, this features fairly low quality low poly 3D visuals 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. 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. Even though this is "free", it failed to appeal to the 120 million+ gamers on Steam. SteamDB showed the game peaked at just a dozen or so concurrent players, and now there's basically nobody playing it. Even though it's free. This is a dismal public reception, but it's easy to see why gamers rejected it. 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? Not this time. This isn't worth downloading. While this won't cost you any money, you get what you pay for, and sometimes, even when the game is free, it's still not enough.

Banan