[h1]Summary[/h1]
This game has an impressive breadth of features, an array of great environments to sandbox base-build in, and an active development team who make regular updates. If you can deal with the game's problems, it can definitely shine for the right player.
However, I'm unsure if I can recommend it in general due to some significant systemic issues, especially coupled with the high price tag - there are other games in similar niches that may be more worth investing in.
I'm leaving this as a positive review based on my own enjoyment of the game - I'll list the game's strengths alongside my (fairly significant) criticisms, and let you decide for yourself if it's worth trying out.
[h1]Strengths[/h1]
The game has a vast array of interconnected systems, most of which can feed into each other in some way. Even though the game lacks a dedicated narrative or story mode, players will naturally develop goals as they explore the in-game systems.
Probably the game's best strength is how free the player is to grow and play, at least after basic life support is sorted out. You can choose to embrace the aesthetics of the game and build grandiose bases, lean hard into the atmospherics and create huge-scale refinery infrastructure, or perhaps work on genetically modifying plants to support agriculture.
Or do none of that and choose your own path - you really are free to explore the game's systems as you see fit, and there's a lot to choose from.
Another great aspect is how much the skills you develop transfer to other areas of the game. For example, if one of your goals is learning how to prepare rocket fuel, you'll naturally be led into using the concepts you learn to improve your base cooling, use phase change to upgrade your distillation system, and use programming to better control devices in general.
There's a lot to love, and I've personally poured many hours into working on my projects. However, the game has more than its fair share of issues, which I will detail below.
[h1]Weaknesses[/h1]
To start with, while there are a lot of good features in the game, there are also a lot of pain points. Many systems in the game are poorly executed or not fully implemented, including ones you're forced to interact with like the wiring system.
It's also unfortunately quite common that you need to limit your goals based on what the [b]game[/b] can do, not what [b]you[/b] are capable of designing. Sometimes this leads to interesting design spaces due to forcing creativity, but it's often just a serious letdown.
By far my biggest criticism of the game however is the state of documentation. To get started with the game, you will have to fight against a nearly vertical learning curve - not because the game is especially difficult (although it's by no means easy), but because of a lack of clarity and communication about how things function.
It should be telling that for me, my most reliable method of finding out about the game was the decompiled source code.
This causes a lot of friction in learning about the game, and is especially rough for new players. If you're interested in getting into this game, I recommend you join the official discord, as there are plenty of wonderful people willing to help, although it isn't without its flaws (more on that later).
[h1]Development Direction[/h1]
I'm often disappointed by the studio's chosen development direction, especially their ongoing refusal to (or perhaps inability to) add desperately needed polish to the game.
Many systems with simple, known issues are left in a state of disrepair in favor of pushing what I would characterize as poorly thought out, half-baked expansions, which in turn add themselves to the game's list of issues.
For an example, at the time of writing we've just gotten the sanitation update, whose flagship feature is unfinished and uninspired in my opinion. It isn't terrible, but it feels more like a beta test than a fully fleshed out addition.
The same update also managed to break two core game systems. One of them is especially egregious since it appears that they pushed it to live without ever testing it in beta, which is irresponsible.
At the time of writing, it's been a week since this update, and they've taken zero action to address these issues. This response time is forgivable given their lack of resources, but more fundamentally the update shouldn't have been released in its current state in the first place.
I have sympathy for their situation, but as a player, their actions often breed frustration. I am nonetheless hopeful for the future, as they do seem quite passionate about the game, despite their somewhat shaky throughput.
[h1]Bad CEO Interactions[/h1]
Finally, a small but important point regarding the devs' community interactions. The devs for this game are somewhat accessible due to the small size of the community, which is great and opens up players to meaningfully contribute to the game. This can elevate Stationeers from a video game to an art project that you can be a part of.
However, this relationship can turn sour fast due to the CEO, who commonly hangs around the official discord. Any sort of criticism of the game or its development in his presence will result in a bad interaction, with him often using his authority to browbeat critics. I've witnessed this behavior aimed at all kinds of people, including newer players.
For an example, some players were working on tracking down the causes of a serious bug, and were making comments on how problematic it was. Despite their efforts to contribute to the game, the CEO came in and shut down the conversation, threatening to take action against people if they didn't "follow the rules," pointing to staff harassment.
Needless to say, nothing of the sort was happening - the most that was said were some jokes criticizing the state of the game.
Worse, after someone called the CEO out for his behavior, they were [b]permanently banned from the server[/b]. This person wasn't even a party to the original conversation - they were banned solely for confronting the CEO for his conduct, after only a few messages, unilaterally.
I shouldn't need to say how dismaying it is to see someone behave this way, [b]especially[/b] the CEO of a small game community towards his customers.
To be clear, the actions of one staff member (even if they're the CEO) do not reflect the entire dev team, and interactions I've had with other devs have been quite positive.
But because he's the most active staff member, and especially because he has so much authority as the CEO, it's hard to engage with the game critically and comfortably. Players of a game, especially those actively trying to contribute, shouldn't have to walk on eggshells when interacting with the community for fear of persecution.
From the server rules and his language, it's clear that part of his behavior is motivated in protecting his team, and ensuring that they aren't exposed to the unfortunately quite vile parts of human behavior. However, he's overzealous in this goal, and in pursuit of it, he ends up repeating a lot of this same behavior towards his customers and community.
This is especially a problem since, as a small game, there's basically only one community hub, and it's one the CEO has total control over. A healthy community scene is the lifeblood of a small game like this, so for the sake of its long-term health I hope these issues can get resolved.
[h1]Conclusion[/h1]
In short, the game is really quite the mixed bag. The most significant issue with the game is the new player experience, which can be immensely frustrating and seriously deter new players from sticking around. However, once you get past that hurdle, the game really starts to shine, and provides a great sandbox experience. Rocketwerkz is sometimes disappointing, especially the CEO, but their passion for the game is real, so I'm tentatively hopeful for the its prospects going forward.
