Heroes of Hammerwatch [Steam], the rogue-lite action-adventure from Crackshell is now officially out and it looks good, sadly though the Linux version is Steam only.
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
Originally, the GOG store actually showed it was coming to Linux, but at release it's Windows-only on GOG. Speaking on Steam, the developer stated this is due to GOG Galaxy not being on Linux:
Sorry, their Galaxy system and SDK doesn't support Linux so in the end it seems like its not coming on GOG until we get that sorted
Their previous Hammerwatch game has a Linux build on GOG, but that was due to it having Direct IP connect multiplayer, whereas it seems they've moved towards using services from GOG and Steam to help handle multiplayer. This is obviously a repeating problem for Linux gamers, with multiple games not having a Linux build on GOG due to this.
About the game:
Heroes of Hammerwatch is a rogue-lite action-adventure game set in the same universe as Hammerwatch. Encounter endless hordes of enemies, traps, puzzles, secrets and lots of loot, as you battle your way through procedurally generated levels to reach the top of the Forsaken Spire.
A rogue-lite with a lot of persistent progression. You will start each run in Outlook, a town which you can upgrade to grant your heroes with various enhancements that will further help you in your quest. The heroes themselves will also remain persistent, you can even bring your own heroes to your friends game!
We've reached out to the developer for review keys, hopefully we will be able to tell you what we think soon. So far, it seems users on Steam are quite liking it.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Kimyrielle Mar 2, 2018
Quoting: hummer010Quoting: KimyrielleBut make no mistake, GOG is NOT a Linux friendly company, ...
I disagree. EA is not a Linux friendly company. Bethesda is not a Linux friendly company.
While GOG may not be a champion of the Linux cause, the fact that they sell and support Linux games makes them a Linux friendly company.
Beth & Co. are openly hostile towards Linux. GOG is just "not friendly". Not the same thing. And sorry, but I don't consider a company that doesn't even port its own games to Linux "Linux friendly".
Yes, yes, I know that they are selling Linux games. And I appreciate that. But they have otherwise shown ZERO support to our platform. Compare that to Valve, which has actually invested money into Linux development, AND pushed developers into supporting it, AND ported their platform, AND ported all their games. Or Paradox or Square Enix, or all the other publishers that are actively supporting it, despite barely making any money with us. When GOG cannot even be bothered to pay a contractor for a few days of work to port their platform, let alone port their own games to Linux. Yet people think they are the salvation for Linux gaming and happily keep bashing that other company that actually DID push us more than any other. For no other reason than because they decided not to refuse doing business with those publishers that insist on putting DRM in their games. *shrug*
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: jensQuoting: ShmerlDevelopers should learn how to make this optional because it's not a multiplayer only game. Seriously, it's quite unprofessional. Added another Galaxy victim to the list.I think it's quite unprofessional to call an engineer unprofessional without ever having spoken to him/her
That's the real problem with Galaxy, and not the lack of the client.
or without ever having seen a bit of code.
No , actually you got Shmerl wrong.
Because absence of Gog Galaxy and according to that some Linux versions are not on GOG , Shmerl will took the route of blaming either game devs or he will say " Galaxy Client is not needed " ; instead of blaming GOG for not providing such as a useful tool ( networking , game organizing and keeping them update) for Linux at first place.
0 Likes
...back on topic, I'm really enjoying this game. The play styles between the core four characters is pretty extreme, but it does feel a bit grindy at the moment. The problem with that grind is that all you fight in the first three levels of the mines is grubs and bugs. Then you get murdered by the mine boss and you start again.
I'm four hours in and all I've done is those three levels, then murdered. It's a bit samey.
Of course, part of the problem is that I've tried all four characters to at least level 2, which means that I'm never quite levelling up one character to be powerful enough to take the boss, but still.
And you need that grind anyway, to unlock all of the town features which allow your character to upgrade beyond the first tier.
So yeah, great game, probably needs multiplayer to be properly fun and a bit grindy in solo mode. I'm gonna keep playing for a bit longer though - there's a "just one more shot" addictive quality to the game that keeps bringing me back for more, even if it does end a rock monster murdering me repeatedly.
[Well, literally after posting this comment, I picked up my controller and "had one more game". Beat the stone boss! Yaay! The game becomes much more interesting after this, with early mines levels filling with grubs/bugs and that resulted in my Warlock zooming up another level. Plus, there are portals to challenge levels. Not sure if I can start in the new "Dungeon" level though, seems like I have to grind though the mines each time and beat the stone boss again <sigh>. Maybe I'll just have one more go...]
Last edited by scaine on 2 March 2018 at 7:49 pm UTC
I'm four hours in and all I've done is those three levels, then murdered. It's a bit samey.
Of course, part of the problem is that I've tried all four characters to at least level 2, which means that I'm never quite levelling up one character to be powerful enough to take the boss, but still.
And you need that grind anyway, to unlock all of the town features which allow your character to upgrade beyond the first tier.
So yeah, great game, probably needs multiplayer to be properly fun and a bit grindy in solo mode. I'm gonna keep playing for a bit longer though - there's a "just one more shot" addictive quality to the game that keeps bringing me back for more, even if it does end a rock monster murdering me repeatedly.
[Well, literally after posting this comment, I picked up my controller and "had one more game". Beat the stone boss! Yaay! The game becomes much more interesting after this, with early mines levels filling with grubs/bugs and that resulted in my Warlock zooming up another level. Plus, there are portals to challenge levels. Not sure if I can start in the new "Dungeon" level though, seems like I have to grind though the mines each time and beat the stone boss again <sigh>. Maybe I'll just have one more go...]
Last edited by scaine on 2 March 2018 at 7:49 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: jensI think it's quite unprofessional to call an engineer unprofessional without ever having spoken to him/her
or without ever having seen a bit of code.
Unfortunately not making multiplayer optional as a release blocker is so rampant, that it is unprofessional, because developers didn't do due research on this topic.
GOG are very explicit, that Galaxy is indeed not a requirement. But it's developers' responsibility to make sure they don't code it in as mandatory. GOG aren't forcing anyone to do it. And multiple developers managed to make Linux releases without Galaxy just fine, even though they are using Galaxy in their Windows versions.
Sure, GOG can be blamed for not releasing Galaxy, and in result causing this mess. But developers can be blamed all the same for not releasing without it. According to GOG Linux support, they offer all resources and help to explain to developers how to handle that. It's up to them whether to actually do it.
Last edited by Shmerl on 2 March 2018 at 7:04 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: KimyrielleBeth & Co. are openly hostile towards Linux. GOG is just "not friendly". Not the same thing. And sorry, but I don't consider a company that doesn't even port its own games to Linux "Linux friendly".
GOG isn't run by CDPR, they are related, but not the same people are making decisions for each. So while CDPR can now be considered not Linux friendly because they totally borked The Witcher 3 Linux release, GOG is Linux friendly, because they support Linux games. However, I'd say they are not doing enough to avoid problems such as these, i.e. lack of Galaxy preventing Linux releases.
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: ShmerlI can't image that you know what has been discussed between the engineers and publisher of this game, so I guess you are just assuming things.Quoting: jensI think it's quite unprofessional to call an engineer unprofessional without ever having spoken to him/her
or without ever having seen a bit of code.
Unfortunately not making multiplayer optional as a release blocker is so rampant, that it is unprofessional, because developers didn't do due research on this topic.
It's sad to see that you feel the need to call game devs idiots (in your words "unprofessional" or "there is no excuse" ) only if they don't do things according to your (partially) extreme views.
0 Likes
Quoting: jensI can't image that you know what has been discussed between the engineers and publisher of this game, so I guess you are just assuming things.
There is no need to assume here. They explicitly said, lack of Galaxy needed for MP is release blocker here. If you want to blame it on the publisher - it doesn't make a difference to the end user. The result is still messed up. And yes, I consider such result unprofessional.
Last edited by Shmerl on 2 March 2018 at 7:17 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlContrary to you I don't want to blame anyone here nor want to call anyone unprofessional either. My guess is that they deliberately decided that the very few Linux GOG only users are simply not worth the effort (which would be a professional business decision). Though just assuming here, thus these are my thoughts only.Quoting: jensI can't image that you know what has been discussed between the engineers and publisher of this game, so I guess you are just assuming things.
There is no need to assume here. They explicitly said, lack of Galaxy needed for MP is release blocker here. If you want to blame it on the publisher - it doesn't make a difference to the end user. The result is still messed up. And yes, I consider such result unprofessional.
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: KimyrielleBeth & Co. are openly hostile towards Linux. GOG is just "not friendly". Not the same thing. And sorry, but I don't consider a company that doesn't even port its own games to Linux "Linux friendly".
GOG isn't run by CDPR, they are related, but not the same people are making decisions for each. So while CDPR can now be considered not Linux friendly because they totally borked The Witcher 3 Linux release, GOG is Linux friendly, because they support Linux games. However, I'd say they are not doing enough to avoid problems such as these, i.e. lack of Galaxy preventing Linux releases.
You know what , that is like saying " I hate MS and all of it's paywalls but i like MS Office and i like it's paywalls."
Totally absurd , they're targeting Windows and Mac only. That's it , they're just same companies under different divisions with game makers and market supervisors. Their vision is same.
0 Likes
Quoting: jensMy guess is that they deliberately decided that the very few Linux GOG only users are simply not worth the effort (which would be a professional business decision). Though just assuming here, thus these are my thoughts only.
Treating GOG Linux users as second class citizens isn't something I consider professional either, so your hypothetical scenario only highlights my point.
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me