ForumsGamesComparing the various Gemcraft games

5 2878
jdguy99
offline
jdguy99
58 posts
Farmer

I wonder how people feel about the gemcraft games. It seems very obvious that Chasing Shadows is the most complex.....or at least allows for the most complex digging into how it works and finding ways to take advantage of its mechanics. It also has so many levels and options for difficulty that it allows a wide range of skill/interest level players.

It also has the longest time spent on any given level when you are going for super xp runs. Having gotten over wl 10000, and have a couple of beaten endurance runs, but not being one of the extreme players, i find i am getting bored.

Yet at the same time GC calls out to me. I found myself this weekend going back to the original. I liked the quick levels. i could play one or two then go on to other matters ( work, food, watching hockey....oh yeah......and time with my kids), and come back for a couple of more without tying up the computer for hours while i had a game paused.

The quick run through a game you enjoy still vs the deeply complex is kind of where i was at. Chapter 0 was probably my least favorite. Labyrinth was pretty enthralling.........but each still seems to have a place for me in my gaming hours. so back to the start......wonder how others felt about the various games.

Talk amongst yourselves.

  • 5 Replies
UgAhgItHurts
offline
UgAhgItHurts
259 posts
Peasant

GCL is exploitable in the same ways, it's just not needed. Once you hit level 500 or so (reachable by replaying the first map a few times), you can beat the easier endurances with full settings in about half an hour which quickly gets you to the level 2k needed to beat the hardest ones easily. If Peter realized that swarms or random wave composition is much, much harder than giants, it'd be a different story.

GC games have always been complex in the wrong areas: Complex to play, but have a simple far and away best approach to any level that never changes. That's the problem with these two games (haven't played much of 0 or 1). There's more fun to be had in both non-premium (although the grind for high level non-premium in CS is awful--decent talisman and cores).

Oktavia_witch
offline
Oktavia_witch
56 posts
Blacksmith

GC games didn't change much starting from GC0.
Even in the first GC, maps with splash+crit gems were way easier to complete than any others. The reason GCL and GC:CS "stand out" is because of interface and optimization tweaks. GC0 lagged to hell with like 200 monsters on screen and didn't have duplicate/upgrade and pause buttons, yet it already had manafarming and wave enraging mechanics.

vetokend
offline
vetokend
28 posts
Peasant

I've absolutely loved both Labyrinth and CS, because I hate reaching caps on progression, and you can improve endlessly in Labyrinth, and nearly endlessly in CS.

One thing I wish is that mana leech wouldn't always be the required setup in late game.

ExplosiveCake1
offline
ExplosiveCake1
43 posts
Shepherd

I don't really see what's the big deal about this game. I mean, it's alright of course, but...

psorek
offline
psorek
447 posts
Jester

Well, how to explain that... The thing is that the winning strategy isn't simple. At all. You actually have to do huge amount of thinking in order to beat the game and even bigger amount to fully exploit it. Just complexity.

Showing 1-5 of 5