It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Release: Spacechem(93 posts)(93 posts)
(93 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 24, 2012
The Chemistry-Based Spiritual Successor to The Incredible Machine.

SpaceChem, a brain-bending puzzler that challenges you to create convoluted chemicals in a nuclear furnace, is available on GOG.com right now for only $9.99, and we’re including the 63 Corvi DLC for free!

Spacechem is an indie puzzle game that depicts pseudo-scientific chemical reactions in a reactor. As an engineer, the player will conduct increasingly more difficult experiments that both challenge and entertain in a way unexpected by a puzzle-game and especially a chemistry-based puzzle game. Everyone knows that SpaceChem is only pseudo-science, but building the atomic reactor in the actually feels like you’re only a few steps away from getting a Ph. D. in helium-, hydrogen- and stuff-based reactions.

SpaceChem was named the best indie game of 2011 by [url=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/39187/Gamasutras_Best_Of_2011_Top_10_Indie_Games.php" target="_blank]Gamasutra[/url] and that is for a reason: it’s a mind-twisting, smartly-crafted puzzler with an interesting background story that will either force you to spend countless hours finding the proper solution or spend those countless hours slapping the atoms and waldos in random order in hope of something finally clicking (like you did with TIM). This game challenges your abilities to apply logic in a creative manner to problem solve, using nested loops and what are actually simple programming concepts to create very complex molecules. The challenges provided by Zachtronic Industries (which include the game + more levels from 63 Corvi DLC) do not require a Nobel prize, but they’re only short of that, and guarantee a high amount of challenge.

In short, SpaceChem is a fantastic puzzle game, difficult and joyful, and is now available on GOG.com for only $9.99.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
PMIK: Why?
avatar
keeveek: Because everybody bought it for like $1 already. Everybody who hasn't overslept, ofc.
Oh, fair enough. I've never really heard of this game before though. The name seems vaguely familiar but I never looked into it.

I guess the guys at GOG must have a plan for these newer releases, since most of them so far have been available for a while at cheaper prices. Maybe they just aren't planning on selling a large volume of them.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
PMIK: Why?
avatar
keeveek: Because everybody bought it for like $1 already. Everybody who hasn't overslept, ofc.
I didn't buy it....of course with all the games coming out every year it's kind of hard for me to keep up.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
Wishbone: Mind you, it's a great game, up to a point. For me, that point was where the game started punishing you for making optimized solutions. When I have to go in and deliberately make a worse solution than I already have in order to clear a level, I lose interest.
avatar
bazilisek: Eh? That never happened to me. Could you be more specific?
In some of the "combined" levels, the tubes from the source reactors to the target ones fill up unless you go and de-optimize the algorithm for the simpler component of the reaction. It's ridiculous that a reactor can only run full-out at maximum speed.

You can of course run the tubes all over the landscape, which is enough in some cases, but a) it's a horrible, inelegant solution, and b) it's only a stop-gap measure. It may be enough to get you through 40 cycles (or whatever the target is for the level), but that just means that the reactors would have crashed right after the level was finished. It's enough to satisfy the game, but it's not enough to satisfy me.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
PMIK: Why?
avatar
keeveek: Because everybody bought it for like $1 already. Everybody who hasn't overslept, ofc.
It's WORTH well more than one dollar.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
PMIK: Why?
avatar
keeveek: Because everybody bought it for like $1 already. Everybody who hasn't overslept, ofc.
I have it.. i'll be getting it here for the DRM free DLC
Posted April 24, 2012
low rated
avatar
keeveek: Because everybody bought it for like $1 already. Everybody who hasn't overslept, ofc.
avatar
PMIK: Oh, fair enough. I've never really heard of this game before though. The name seems vaguely familiar but I never looked into it.

I guess the guys at GOG must have a plan for these newer releases, since most of them so far have been available for a while at cheaper prices. Maybe they just aren't planning on selling a large volume of them.
Yeah, I don't think it's a bad game, but putting this as the only release today a game that was avaible in Humble Bundle is not what I would expect from GOG.com new releases.
Post edited April 24, 2012 by keeveek
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
Wishbone: In some of the "combined" levels, the tubes from the source reactors to the target ones fill up unless you go and de-optimize the algorithm for the simpler component of the reaction. It's ridiculous that a reactor can only run full-out at maximum speed.
I see, but that's part of the puzzle, figuring out how to cope with the uneven delivery of source material. Often you just have to add a few idle cycles to one reactor (extending a waldo's path by a few squares) to compensate. I don't think that's a design flaw: some processes are inherently faster than others, and you're supposed to work with that.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
bazilisek: Eh? That never happened to me. Could you be more specific?
avatar
Wishbone: In some of the "combined" levels, the tubes from the source reactors to the target ones fill up unless you go and de-optimize the algorithm for the simpler component of the reaction. It's ridiculous that a reactor can only run full-out at maximum speed.

You can of course run the tubes all over the landscape, which is enough in some cases, but a) it's a horrible, inelegant solution, and b) it's only a stop-gap measure. It may be enough to get you through 40 cycles (or whatever the target is for the level), but that just means that the reactors would have crashed right after the level was finished. It's enough to satisfy the game, but it's not enough to satisfy me.
From reading this it seems like you really think you're building these things for real or something. ;)
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
wodmarach: I have it.. i'll be getting it here for the DRM free DLC
I don't want to be a spoilsport, but the DLC isn't all that great. Bit of a throwaway, really. There's way more meat in the research journal levels.
Posted April 24, 2012
I don't really like puzzle games (they often get very repetitive), but Space Chem is one of the few exceptions to this rule. It is a blast to play, well worth your time and money.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
bazilisek: I see, but that's part of the puzzle, figuring out how to cope with the uneven delivery of source material. Often you just have to add a few idle cycles to one reactor (extending a waldo's path by a few squares) to compensate. I don't think that's a design flaw: some processes are inherently faster than others, and you're supposed to work with that.
I just see it as stupid. In any real situation, you'd just adjust the speed of the input flow to the reactor to slow it down to match the output of the slower reaction. It's like watching a movie where they have flying cars, but no windshield wipers, and so can't fly in the rain. What I mean is that if they can program nanobots to physically construct molecules by manipulating single atoms, then they probably have valves too.
avatar
Wishbone: In some of the "combined" levels, the tubes from the source reactors to the target ones fill up unless you go and de-optimize the algorithm for the simpler component of the reaction. It's ridiculous that a reactor can only run full-out at maximum speed.

You can of course run the tubes all over the landscape, which is enough in some cases, but a) it's a horrible, inelegant solution, and b) it's only a stop-gap measure. It may be enough to get you through 40 cycles (or whatever the target is for the level), but that just means that the reactors would have crashed right after the level was finished. It's enough to satisfy the game, but it's not enough to satisfy me.
avatar
GameRager: From reading this it seems like you really think you're building these things for real or something. ;)
Maybe it's because I'm a programmer by trade. It just rubs me the wrong way to have making a poor solution be a criterion of success.
Post edited April 24, 2012 by Wishbone
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
PMIK: Oh, fair enough. I've never really heard of this game before though. The name seems vaguely familiar but I never looked into it.

I guess the guys at GOG must have a plan for these newer releases, since most of them so far have been available for a while at cheaper prices. Maybe they just aren't planning on selling a large volume of them.
avatar
keeveek: Yeah, I don't think it's a bad game, but putting this as the only release today a game that was avaible in Humble Bundle is not what I would expect from GOG.com new releases.
We still have Thursday so who knows what will come out?
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
bazilisek: I see, but that's part of the puzzle, figuring out how to cope with the uneven delivery of source material. Often you just have to add a few idle cycles to one reactor (extending a waldo's path by a few squares) to compensate. I don't think that's a design flaw: some processes are inherently faster than others, and you're supposed to work with that.
avatar
Wishbone: I just see it as stupid. In any real situation, you'd just adjust the speed of the input flow to the reactor to slow it down to match the output of the slower reaction. It's like watching a movie where they have flying cars, but no windshield wipers, and so can't fly in the rain. What I mean is that if they can program nanobots to physically construct molecules by manipulating single atoms, then they probably have valves too.
------------------------
Maybe it's because I'm a programmer by trade. It just rubs me the wrong way to have making a poor solution be a criterion of success.
Maybe they had budget cuts due to spending all that money on fancy nanotech and metallic tubing? 0.o

Also valves is for Gabe Newell alone, silly. XD :p
-------------------------------
As I said above)albeit in a silly way) maybe it's more realistic in that you're forced by the company/game to work with less and still make it work somehow.....you have to cobble together a solution as best you can given the circumstances and parameters of the game/levels/world.
Posted April 24, 2012
avatar
JudasIscariot: We still have Thursday so who knows what will come out?
I don't buy every old game that is released on GOG, so only one game a week would minimize my purchases even further :P
Posted April 24, 2012
Anticlimax. Better luck on Thursday. ;)

That being said, I own Spacechem and I'm happy for the developer that it's such a succes with gamers, but despite liking puzzle games and despite all the praise Spacechem gets for making (pseudo-)chemistry fun, so far I wasn't able to get into it and personally I don't really see the appeal of it. Not sure if it's just me being stupid but contrary to those reviews, to me it feels more like playing an educational game than an enjoyable puzzle. And even SpaceChem wasn't able to get me hooked on chemistry ... Too abstract for my tastes, but to each their own.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Release: Spacechem(93 posts)(93 posts)
(93 posts)