Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem

There are other reasons for me placing it as neutral, but that was the big one. The Card aspect wouldn't make it on that, since it's non-ambiguous - deckbuilder doesn't have variable meanings and suffer from common misinterpretation.
- No meta progression can be a problem for some people, since each run is fairly self-contained, and the only unlocks are lore and achievements. this means replayability is almost strictly 'challenge based' (especially after you've beaten it with all 3 factions)[/quote]
I see what you wan't to achieve but it feels strange, to put it as a neutral point, that this game is a roguelike game, when it actively describes itself as a roguelike. If it had used the term roguelite then that would have been a negative point, but you don't put it as a neutral point that the game has cards, don't you? So why tell everyone, that it's a roguelike?
Cheers!