So....Absolvers BIG problem seems longevity. The "story" mode meaning ALL of the content is just five hours long, without anything new to discover.

That seems like a BIG negative point for me. Sure you can run around and search for other human players to fight, but what is the point?

I somehow expected way more from this...

Seriously thinking about a refund.

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/08/29/wot-i-think-absolver/#more-472881

Hi, if you buy the game for the story, you obviously didn't get it. The solo part (story) is there to introduce the gameplay before the big part of the game = fight with/against others player !
It's a different approach of fighting games with RPG component, in a semi-open world.

It's not a The witcher or Horizon zero dawn.

Sorry for your disappointment.

Just to add to Seligu, the game lunched a day ago and the developers said that they will release new content in the next few weeks, so I think it's better to be patient.

The game's focus has always been a 1v1 figher with heavy movelist customization. If you look at any other fighting game, the "single player" length is comparable. People just see the 3rd person action style, Dark Souls style bonfires, and expected a massive Adventure. This was never the case, and all the previews clearly showed this. They even had week long early access for streamers so we could see everything the game had to offer. No offense, but this type of disapointment could only come from zero research.

If this was a traditonal 2D fighting game, people would be just fine with a short "single player"?

As I stated on my review aobut the game, I'm even fine with the short single player campaign. What I'm dissatisfied with is how they handled the advanced PVE experience (bosses and loot). Why the freak should I be forced to grind PVP in order to refight bosses and get their gear? Why Can't I get school experience from npc and why I can't choose other schools from npc, instead of having one stagger npc only?

This game is heavily - and this is little to say, PvP oriented. It has been sold this way since its first showcase. And still, people are complaining about the PvE experience ...

I'm dueling all evening long since the release and this game is freaking awesome !
So much customisation, so much possibilities, and finaly a versus game that let you have some creativity from the start !
Easy to play, hard to master, I didn't seen anything too broken within PvP yet.So what the fuck are you complaining about ?
If you want to play a freaking solo game please buy a solo oriented game.

Devs' here are realy focusing on the online features, don't be selfish trying to revert a whole developpement team from there main objective for your own ambitions !

If you can't make researches about what you are buying, please refund the game and stop complaining about something that have been stated so fucking long ago !

Hold your horses here.
First of all, despite the game being centered around PVP and its main focus, the PVE was advertised aswell, along the offline play. The issue isn't only the PVE feeling short, but you can't even fights again bosses without grinding for PVP; if a game offers an offline mode AND it's sold on GOG, people CAN and WILL have their rights to say that the PVE content is lacking. This is not steam.

As things stand now, this game shouldn't have any reasons to be on GOG, if extensive PVP grinding is required in order to unlock in game content such as gears, weapons and so on, breaking the "drm-free" flag.

As a last addendum, it's clear that the devs introduced the PVE feature to both gain money from people who wanted to enjoy the game without being forced into PVP mode (which turned out to be a lie, since without PVP fights you can't rematch bosses and get their loots), and to cover their butt from a possible fail, as an online indie game doesn't last long most of the times.

Yet they never said campaign and PvE would have a great place within the game, they always just said it would be part of the experience - while heavily underlining the online features. And every time they eventualy went for the gameplay core description : deck building, reaction and anticipation based mechanics, mind tricks, school / mastering / player to player experience.
Most of all : nearly 75% of previous showcases were 1v1 fights between testers or devs, before showing a bribe of the tutorial. And even after, all that people were doing during major video game events, was duels and online play.

Communication team was not truly transparent, it is true ; they could have deepened solo and offline experience explanations, and not just make robot logic affirmation to what they knew was a bit of a downside about the experience - yet they never lied.
But when all you see from the game is again and again online based, how can't you understand it isn't the main experience ?

Although the campaign is short to present days (if you see the campaign "last fight" as the end game, then you clearly had no clue what this game was about), it is clearly said if you actualy read or listen to what the game tells you, that a following is intended and will come soon. And I'm pretty sure it will be free content since it was advertised as such.

Moreover, why is there a grind system to next level boss encounters ? It is a purposedly placed feature, to force people experience what Absolver is trully about. Since the training mode (that is what truly is the campaign) is very original and non explicit, I'm pretty sure they realised people would think it is the "main" game.
Yes, the PvE is very basic because the gameplay is purposedly built as a human to human versus game !
Do you stop playing fighting games for its mediocre solo experience ? No ! Because it only serve as a training mode for PvP battle.
The formula here is way more innovative, and by far more immersive than a simple "arcade mode" or "story mode" line within a stale menu. (if you do stop playing a versus game because solo campaign wasn't enjoyable ... try to wipe your ass with sandpaper ; I'm pretty sure it isn't intended to be used that way).

Sloclap hasn't a big AAA team, and still lots of people are comparing what can't :
Souls games have great solo experience because the developpement team is far more populated than this studio. And even so, the PvP is realy dumped down compare to what it could have been ; because even Fromsoftware couldn't find the time to realy polish this part of the game, favoring PvE experience to appeal for the many ; true arena experience came more than a year after the official release for the third title, can't you see how difficult it is to make those 3D games ?
And yet, you want a way smaller studio to make a "Jack of all Trades" game ?
Those dudes are humans, they have lives, experience frustration as us, from not being able to make exactly what they intended. Yet they released a great game experience, very close to what they advertised.
Don't forget this is the first game of this team, they are profesionnal it is true, but it is the real first time they are all working together. Don't be that asshole who crush his mates because they are not perfect from the begginning.
If you let them down now, I'm pretty sure you'll never get what you wished for as a game. Just for your own little comfort, you'd crush your own desires ... That's a shame.

And pardon me the opinion, but you're thinking as classic cynical player ; assuming all devs' are rotted mind mofo's who just want your money, to keep up on the robbery cicle.
This is realy sad to read, since the developpers were realy pationate when talking about their game, and this is the kind of mentallity that destroys inovative concepts, for the sacke of stinking stability.

Now please people, if you read me : stop thinking every 3D action game with stamina management and timing precision orientations will be very much like Souls. Demon Souls, Dark Souls and most probably Bloodborn are dropped series. It is sad it is true, but please keep in mind those have greatly impact the video game industry.
So please burry the urge for a new one - no messia is coming, and accept the warm new flow it brought to the video game industry ... or just keep hurting yourself with missconception, and further feed and expand this toxic ambiant cloud of fear for innovation, that is holding back the creative industries and validating those "rentabilisation over experiment" politics for decades now.

P.S : GoG politic hasn't anything to do with the game quality, so please stop mixing two things that have nothing in common. It is a thread to debate, but jamming those bad situations together isn't good for anything.

EDIT : After cooling a bit, I red again your comment and I get your point, GoG is questionnable on this, even though It isn't a problem by me (so what about Gwent then ?). But it realy pisses me off to see all those people who are slowly but firmly crushing this awesome concept and online game. And most disappointement comments don't have a thing to do with DRM free politic, it is mostly because they have a hard believe that all games must be made for everyone. That's the worst thing that can happen for any expression media ! No one realy wants to perpetualy live within an absolute gray goo.

If you don't like fighting games, please don't buy one to bitch about its lacking of developpement for what it isn't about right after ! And if you didn't get that it was a fighting game, at least admit that you made a mistake - there surely is a part of guilt from Sloclap since there is so much people that didn't understood, but you have eyes, brain, and able to think aren't you ?

If you take the game for what it is (a fighting game with RPG elements) : this game is fucking great and a big breath of fresh air for versus games !

Don't put words in my mouth which I never said. Also, keep it low with your language.

I also said that I'm fine with the campaign being that short, as I like to focus on getting levels, stats, loot, and learn moves. NOW this is a stupid statement. No matter how you try to defend the game, there is no reason to lock PVE content EVER under intensive PVP fights. People should do pvp when they want, while doing co-op or kill npc when they feel like to do so.

As you still don't get it, I NEVER EVER SAID that I think of them as rotten to the core devs that spreads lies, are you high?
I even preordered the game here because i had good faith in them. Also, this is not charity. Do you have any clear idea of how GOG and the way it function, works? It's obvious that many people are arguing about the game, since there is the offline experience locked behind online! GOG is a platform known for purchasing and enjoying the games fully offline! This very game is breaking this flag, by forcing the players to both use galaxy (because there are people who don't like to use the client, as they are free to choose) and play online in order to experience features that could be in the game PVE wise!

About Gwent: Do you really think that people are happy about it? Of course the majority of customers doesn't, but the game is free.

There are many people who like fighting games and enjoy them against npc, IA and the likes.

I never said the game is bad in any way, but the choises made by the devs are unjustified.

I'll say it again: Either the devs change how the pve content works (by not being forced to grind pvp fights) or this game should be only on steam. You can't sell your product on GOG by advertising offline content available but then pull the excuse of locking it behind online mode, not on GOG.

Welp welp ! I was sure a bit agressive previously ; "5 hours gameplay" and "no difficulty within PvE" statements just get me very angry, since those are mostly clear mistakes from ignorance and lack of awarness on this game, or about this never ending escalation of illusory comfort, where all games need to be all things, indies alike.

Was seeing red, and was missleadingly seeing you as dishonest, not understanding the words the way it needed to - internet sometimes makes me react this way, since I'm sadly aware of trolls and can't see facial and body expressions of the person I'm talking to. I'm sorry about this.

As I said within the edit part, I get your point about GoG policy, the thing I dislike is the mixing of the two situations : misled or "no researche" people whom state the game is bad for thing it never was intended for and no DRM free wich seems to be the least talked about ; even though the last one is way more relevant. You didn't mixed the two yourself, but placing a comment like this within a thread about an other thing can lead to such thing.


And DRM free isn't you buy you play offline - you got me good, I had to check if I was missunderstanding. To me DRM free is more, you buy, there is mostly no restriction to the usage of it, and actualy this is very close to its core definition.
The games need to be clearly advertised as xx% intended online play though - that's where Sloclap made a mistake apparently.

I know the plateform is DRM free, and this is a thing I would like to defend and a thing to expand. But if a heavy multiplayer game, give you its intended solo playable offline, this isn't a problem to me.
Yes this isn't full experience of the game, and yes the game realy needs to be played online. But f it is intended that way, without further money needed, then it's okay to me.
And your DRM free definition means online play incompatibility. But why would it be so terrible that online games are little by little brougth to DRM free plateforms ? Yes you would have to play online most of it, but isn't the essence of it is still present and editable ?
Even more, it means potential to modular online play, possible evolution for online modding and gameplay adaptability.


Now, even though, the offline of Absolver is "short", the potential for modding is very high - and no I'm not defending modding as an end here, Bethesda ear me. If people see the potential of this game and are a bit more skilled within developpement than I am, DRM free is a real gift here.

And PvE locked behind PvP is a bit weird yes. But since I've payed for an online game, it wasn't so disturbing ; even though there isn't realy any reason to not repeat the fight under your PvP level - since marked ones can be farmed. And this isn't so far from MMORPGs way around difficulty progression.



Anyway, the devs are under heavy fire since the release, if the studio is still able to make it out after that, I think they will do something about this somewhat "need" of offline play. Or maybe it'll come with the next updates, but since they have other things to focus on at the moment, it won't be within the next months.

"NOW this is a stupid statement. No matter how you try to defend the game, there is no reason to lock PVE content EVER under intensive PVP fights. People should do pvp when they want, while doing co-op or kill npc when they feel like to do so. "
Yes Boss Tiers locked behind PvP level is weird for it is uncommon with 3D action / fighting games, but definitly no : a game isn't made for every one and should not. If the game wants you to play PvP because it has been made to be very enteirtaining this way, you have the right to say it's a shame, but you can't decide it needs to have even PvE. It is better, sure thing. But from an indie game it's fine to me.

"As you still don't get it, I NEVER EVER SAID that I think of them as rotten to the core devs that spreads lies, are you high?
I even preordered the game here because i had good faith in them. Also, this is not charity."
Maybe a bit, blindfolded with anger. But you were honest - at least you seemed, but everyone isn't. And I mistood you for one of those, sorry again.


Well, anyway, I had to refund the game on GoG to play it on Steam, since GoG realease is very messed-up for the coop play experience at the moment, and friends were hoping to play with me ; lots of missmatching and wrong errors about the geographic region on GoG release.
I'm sad about it though ... since Absolver on this plateform means potential for the futur, even though you see it as bad for what it stands for.
But I'll be glad to sustain again some DRM free games with high online multiplayer orientations, and hope for something good out of it, and for what it means.
If you don't get DRM free online games is a good thing for the video game industry, I don't think you get what it truly means and what is its potential. Here it isn't realy deepened, but with time it could be a realy nice thing to have I think.

Most likely to encourage PvP and community interaction. They are trying to give incentive to people to join the PvP community, since that is ultimately what this game will live or die by. And of course, being sold as a PvP focused game, with the PvE "open world" having PvP interatction, they maybe just assumed that it made sense and was a natrual evolution of the player base. I agree it couldn't hurt to let you face those challenges based on your character level and not just PvP level.

But I was originally speaking to the person that was thinking of a refund because of the expectation of a longer PvE experience.

Well, no worries than, I kinda entered the topic and said what I was agreeing with and what opinions I had.

I was also kinda upset about how the bosses and loot turned out, that was unnecessary and I felt kinda ripped off.

So yeah, no hard feelings :) .

As for the meaning of DRM free, I still believe that to me, drm free means both no restriction for the usage of a game, but also full access regardless of it being offline and online.

I mean, Absolver does NOT fall in this category, as it's both server and galaxy dependent. I would agree if it had lan play, bit it does not, and I can't even argue with that, since it wouldn't work due to the game's mechanic. Still, to me it doesn't mean drm free.

Modding wise, I'm not against at all, heck I have skyrim on steam and I couldn't love it as much as I do without its mods. Problem is, modding would be fairly limited to just textures and aesthetic stuff, as being a competitive game, anything that would edit stats and whatnot would be an issue.

Honestly though, the reason for which I'd say that it still needs to have not PVE locked under PVP it's mainly due to claim to be drm free (also, I do recall some extra lines only on the GOG storepage which emphasize the offline play).
As I said previously, if you like PVP you should do it, but if you don't, you shouldn't be forced at all. There are even people who want to do PVP only after clearing the PVE, something that cannot be done.
Also, the meta of the game right now is not great, more than competition it turned out to "spam fast attacks".

But you know where lies the problem? If you ask me, it's due to the PVE portion. If the devs truly wanted it to be a PVP experience, they should have never started with this short semi open world PVE experience, and instead focus the game only on the pvp component. If people wanted to train and such, a single little map with an AI with basic settings would have been enoough.

Sure, many people purchased the game without further research, but you can't even deny the fact that they still advertised the PVE experience, albeit short, they didn't uncover some major details, which in turn angered many people.

With that said, I doubt to ever issue a refund for the game, firstly because I got fury, which was on my wishlist, so it's like I paid absolver for half the price, secondly because I want to give time to the devs to polish the game (and well, I still want to support GOG).

You see, I'm not against drm free games with multiplayer features, if anything, I'm happy about it. The problem is that multiplayer ONLY games can't be considered drm free, since it requires an internet connection to start it. Add to it that a fully drm free multiplayer games can only be when it's lan side, not server or galaxy locked.
Yeah I know, I kinda butted in, sorry about that :P

Still, It seems that many people didn't like to lock loot and bosses under PVP, so let's see how the devs will respond to that :)

I see big potential for story DLC and more. All free hopefully. So I'm happy.

Only thing I want fixed is the terrible online free world.. crashing and stuttering and crashing