Setr's Auto Battler

过于马赛克，我都分不清谁是谁。

Great game. Simple game. Overall a definite recommend. Only a few complaints. The art style is very monochrome and difficult to identify characters visually without having to mouse over and read them. I would also love to see the game play improve upon the existing auto-battler space but the level up system just doesn't quite work as intended. The "cost vs benefit" analysis feels more restrictive on the creativity of your team rather than restrictive on the overall power.

Tenebroso de tão ruim, é uma cópia do autopets, com nada de bom, os personagens não são carismáticos como os animais, o jogo é extremamente desequilibrado, por algum motivo os caras pensaram que seria uma boa ideia não poder evoluir seus personagens a cada unidade, precisando ter uma nível completo para subir o que você já tem e juntando eles automaticamente

Horrible On ne comprend pas grand chose. Faut jouer pour apprendre surement. Je n'accroche pas du tout.

very good indeed but limited more updates, a way to comunicate with other players and should be very promissing

[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 was a badly made "autobattler", basically a kind of soldier attack/defense game where you pick your units and then kick off a fight that you can't influence to see if your selection of troops was good enough or not. This is of course academic, there is nobody to fight against, so there's nothing to do here. So, "Setr's Auto Battler" 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 game is really simple and unambitious in terms of implementation, more of a tech demo or one of those cases where an amateur developer spends $100 to publish something on Steam Direct to see if it's possible. Yes, obviously it's possible. A proof of concept, tech demo, or something that's less than a little blip on the radar isn't offering anything truly valuable to gamers. This features really godawful pixelcrap "art" instead of real graphics. It's hard to say if this was because the developer didn't have the skill to do the job of creating 3D visuals, or couldn't afford to hire someone who does, but it also doesn't matter. What matters is that this looks much worse than most other games because of that decision, and that's a major deterrent to gamers. Games like Terraria and Stardew Valley succeeded [i]despite[/i] the bad graphics, not because of them. Now on to pricing and value for gamers. This is "free" enough (not every "free" game in the "free" section is truly free, there's usually some hidden price tag), 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, and you'd be wasting it downloading a dead PvP game with no players. 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.