PRINCIPIA: Master of Science

I'm writing this review mostly to warn people against buying the game... I was tempted because it was on offer, the reviews were ok-ish and the theme is right up my alley, so it was one of those implusive buys before checking carefully the fine prints. And unfortunately it does seem that the game is basically abandoned (I didn't check the dates of the review carefully). As it is now, it's in a very rough state. For example, I was assaulted by this very loud music there's no way to turn off. This is not anectodical; consider this: the authors didn't even mange or care to correct such a basic flaw. The quality of the game follows suit.

PRINCIPIA: Master of Science is a fun game that will waste about 4 hours of your life. The game mechanics are very simple, and overall the game does not have a lot of complexity. The graphics are very simplistic, the music is very loud with no way to adjust it aside from using the computer's volume mixer. There are no achievements, although there are some "events" like becoming an official of a science academy/getting sired, so I supposed by the time the game leaves early access it might support achievements. Personally I found the gameplay very repetitive, you are essentially doing research on a topic and waiting your turn to, again, do your research on the said topic. The funds you procure cannot be used to found your own university or fund science labs, as you only use the money to buy "tools" which boost your skill in a select science. Overall, I would rate this game a solid 4.5/10, it's pretty fun for the first 10 or so minutes, but it has limited replayability. The only reason why I played this long was because I was grinding it to 100% completion.

I want to be very sympathetic to this game – as it’s the kind of game I like. And so, I will recommend it. But to be clear, objectively speaking it is a bad game, there can be no denying that… One just repetitively clicks through the slow UI until the inevitable victory…

My inner geek is satisfied with the game however, I hope there will be more options to it and more complexity as well. Overall I would recommend it for a fun reminiscence on the brilliant minds of the past.

I don't even know where to begin. I *stupidly* bought this game because the promo videos looked good and the ratings were "mostly positive". I read that the game was "in development" and was fine with that. Lot of problems the, first being this game is NOT in development and has been abandoned. The creators don't even list this game on any of their social media websites probably because of how badly it failed. Second, all the positive reviews, when you read them, aren't all that positive. This is likely because the reviews are 1.) three years old, and 2.) these individuals believed the game was still in development and the bugs, and downright infantile game play would be updated. The game play is too easy, there's no modes of difficulty besides picking a different scientist. It becomes extremely repetitive and there's a lot of functions in the game that would have been more fun and interesting if developed further, but otherwise there's no reason to use them. You're assaulted with loud music you can't shut off so either suffer through or mute everything with your computer. Aesthetically it looks like garbage, which would have been fine for a newly released beta version of a game, not one that s been in the works for "four years." Again, it isn't updated and won't be. All in all, a waste of time and money even if its on sale. No replayability, boring game play, too easy. It's a shame because the concept is super cool. It just feels like someone had a rough idea, made a first draft, decided to put it for sale and move on to the next project.

“Overall game system is near completion, but we still need some time to implement.." ^ This sentence is clearly false advertisement unless your overall game system is planned to be a no brainer clicker. I like the idea of a strategy game taking place along the history of sciences, but this is simply terrible execution. Gameplay, UI, Depth, Graphics, QoS, and replayability; all pitiful.

[b]Summary[/b] A rather simple game with a huge potential. Overall, it is great now, but if the devs are able to improve on the concept by introducing more scientists, fields of science, and perhaps more locations/academies, it can become truly amazing. [b]What works[/b] 1. You can pick one of about a dozen scientists from the era of enlightenment, and guide him throughout his career. You choose what to concentrate on, you can study, attend lectures, conduct experiments, compose scientific papers and much more. 2. There are multiple scientific fields to choose from - astronomy, dynamics, thermology, biology, optics, mathematics and a hidden one. Each fields has several topics, each with a lot of different experiments, concepts, theories to prove or disprove etc. 3. You can obtain - purchase or create - a lot of items that can help you in your studies. 4. You can choose your profession - lecturer, professor, fellow of the academy, diplomat, or a government official. You can unlock better ones by becoming more famous and you can earn money this way. 5. You can interact with other scientists - question their papers, defame them, correspond or give them money to further their studies. 6. You can move around Europe, with locations giving you access to different structures - universities, academies or observatories. 7. I really like the style - both graphics and music. [b]What doesn't work[/b] 1. Once you're famous, you get attacked by an enemy every turn. In my playthrough as Newton I was slammed by Leibniz every turn, which usually caused the game to play the exact same animation of the Royal Academy hearing the case only to reject it every month. Tedious and ridiculous. 2. There are too few scientists to choose from in term of younger ones - only Leibniz and Newton are in their 20s, a lot of characters to choose from are in their 40s or 50s. 3. The game can get a bit repetitive after a while, having a more complex interaction with other scientists would certainly help a lot. [b]What do I wish to see[/b] It's an EA game so I guess the devs might change it somehow. Graphics don't need to be changed in my opinion, they're perfectly fine. I would much prefer some more scientific fields to choose from - perhaps social sciences? Writing about the law or economy could bring a whole new level to the game. Plus it could really use some more younger scientists to choose from or the ability to create one.

I am a bit of a science history nerd, but this game is pretty boring and repeditive. The classical music can not be turned off in game, slowly drilling through your skull till you can not stand waiting for other scientists to complete their turn listening to the same song for the 100th time. I really appreciate that this game is a passion project so kudos to the game creators for following their niche interest and making a game that I can sometimes enjoy. This game drags out purely because you have to wait for other scientists to take their turns, if you did not have to wait for their turns or for text to scroll I could 100 % this game in a few minuets, because you have to wait it takes many hours. Be prepared to repedatively keep doing calculations so that your arithmetic calculation metre fills up, then repedatively keep clicking to fill up your reasoning for arithmetic, then repedatively keep trying to prove a peice of enlightenment science, then compose your paper, then publish that paper only to have Christiaan Huygens endlessly calling Royal Society meetings, accusing you of writing demonstrably false papers without being able to convince anyone else at that meeting. In this game Huygens would call me a bold faced liar for stating that 2+2=4 I do not think Principia is a good game, but that is because of game design flaws, I love that there are people who are passionate enough to make a game about being a scientist in enlightnment Europe, but the game is not fun. TLDR: Get this game if you like the history of science, though I am doubtful whether a game like this could spark an interest in a child for maths or science. I am probably the perfect target market for the game's topic but the game is not enjoyable. Hopefully the developlers learn more about game design so that they can continue to make niche games like this but also make those games enjoyable.

its a fun lil game to pass on time but its been abandoned. they said theyll complete the development of the game in six months and they put the game in early access back in 2016. as time of me typing this, its 2023 November. almost 2024. 8/7 yeaars. They should continue with development or remove it from the store. For this sole reason, I cannot in good faith recommend to buy it if you expect updates and continued development like AN EA game should. but i do recommend it to those who can look past all of that and want to pass on time. i wish i could press a ''maybe'' button. so at the moment itll stick to not recommended until like i said they resume development or pull it off from the store

Principia could fill a very valuable gap in computer gaming by giving us a meaningful simulation of the history of science. Interestingly, board gaming now has considerably more of this, with games about Darwin, Einstein and the rivalry between Tesla and Edison all having been published to reasonably positive reviews. But a computer simulation could offer us so much more. Principia does not. It suffers from enormous perspective issues. I GUESS we're the scientist -- but even at our earliest stage of scientific inquiry and development, we've got ratings on what parts of science we're good at an which ones we're not. I don't think that's that way great minds work. And in the early Renaissance, I don't think its the way scientific inquiry worked either. The was an option to ingrain in players the cycle of scientific inquiry -- ask, predict, plan, investigate, and analyze and reflect. This game shortens the cycle to two activities: "Reason" and "Experiment/Observe" Your success has a known bench mark -- "I am at level 65 out of 80" on reasoning on the origin of light. If I reason one more month, I have to uncover that last scientific insight! Yeah, that's how science works. Not only do you not go through a cycle a meaningful process -- its often better strategy (and the game may even suggest) that you keep experimenting until you reach 100% of experimentation and THEN reason until you reach 100% of reasoning. If anything, this game actually CONFUSES anyone who wants to better understand scientific discovery. There is sort of interesting catty back and forth with other members of the scientific community. And you are striving to become a member of the British or French Academy. But even this seems sort of reflexive and arbitrary. Once the Academy reviews one of your attacked papers, and pronounces the work beyond reproach, it wont stop the same aggrieved scientist from making the same charge again and again and again to the same ruling. Money is some sort of donation system which COULD be interesting, but also seemed sort of arbitrary and random. It definitely had a bad rich get richer system, which while true in life, is not a terribly interesting element of game play. In short, Principia is a missed opportunity. But there is still room for the great game on the history of science to be discovered.