Unity In Heat: Lustful Nights [v0.2.8 Itch] [MonsterBox]

[sgb3]

Got an email from them on a 'new release', and SURPRISE they're just scrapping the current version and starting over. Again. I don't even at this stage, calling this project a dumpster fire doesn't do it justice.

 

[Avindel]

AGAIN!?!?

 

[JustAl]

I prefer to judge released game content since development is speculation and I prefer not to track it.

The suddenly released new version (V2) of the prequel game added some notable changes.

1) Poppi can enter from the ceiling. I assume this happens by Ari opening the door on the left, which enables Poppi to shortcut into your office. Close the door by pressing the button, the door is no longer pointless.

2) Pursuer aggression feels higher. They arrive frequently and quickly, to the degree you often are surrounded on both sides.

3) To compensate for change #2 which would otherwise break the game, Misty the shark no longer ambushes you for overusing the sanity-restoring plush in your office -- if she does, the limit of interactions per second is way higher and I never triggered it by playing normally.

 

[sgb3]

Oh, so that's what the vent does. I never saw it happen because I always just closed the door right away and it almost never gets opened again. That said it doesn't really make sense that the Misty door is somehow now the entrance to the vent system, but it doesn't matter in the end because this version is '''finished'''.

 

[xdasdjbhdfoqhfo]

I thought the left door was how Misty got in, not from plush abuse.

 

[JustAl]

I thought the left door was how Misty got in, not from plush abuse.

I get the confusion, her cinematic is her forcing a door open -- although the cinematic is the same even when both of your doors are open. In previous builds it was fine to let Ari open the door and have Maddie waste her time there since the door didn't drain facility power when it was open.

By what I saw when playing since version 0.804, the player could only touch the plush 10 times in quick succession before the 11th time made Misty attack you. The limit of 10 was active back when you only needed to use the plush 4 times to recharge a half unit of sanity. Then V1 made each half unit cost 7 plush touches, but I never triggered Misty since. In V2, the pursuers are aggressive so the plush limit was raised high, enabling the player to mash the plush a ton of times which is needed to cope with being surrounded by pursuers.

Since a dev team member reads posts every so often, I'll say this: achieving good difficulty balance straddles the line between fair and unfair mechanics, and button mashing tedium is neither. The plush system for restoring points needed Misty as a limiter, but if her limit was too low it felt cheap since there is no UI to indicate when you are safe to use the plush again. It typically felt high to the point of overly forgiving, so you never really felt the pressure but again, if it's too low it'll feel unfair due to lack of indicator you're going too far. Pursuers suffocating you in V2 didn't feel bad [difficult] at all since the limit was so much higher, the player just mashed safely at that point.

The core gameplay loop is fine if trying to imitate and enhance FNAF, but one issue is the lack of reason to make scenes happen. I never tried the UE4 build but it seems to have been more interactive outside of the main gameplay loop, considering the scenes that made it into the UE5 build by gallery. The story presumably would enable safely meeting the pursuer girls.

I'm not particularly into FNAF, but the dev and fan community is active here compared to other threads and I wouldn't mind saying a little if a dev teammate can benefit from the banter. Really this game has big glaring problems but good potential too.

Edit: I changed "bad" to "difficult" in "Pursuers suffocating you in V2 didn't feel bad [difficult] at all since the limit was so much higher...", because the point I was trying to make is that it is bad to let the player safely mash buttons, they aren't challenged but they are bored and bothered by repeat inputs.

 

[sgb3]

The core gameplay loop is fine if trying to imitate and enhance FNAF, but one issue is the lack of reason to make scenes happen. I never tried the UE4 build but it seems to have been more interactive outside of the main gameplay loop, considering the scenes that made it into the UE5 build by gallery. The story presumably would enable safely meeting the pursuer girls.

In the previous version the girls all had 'special abilities' that would trigger at random. The cat (I can't remember their names anymore) would cause a massive distraction and you'd have to find a button in time or lose a ton of sanity. The rabbit would set a bomb you can to defuse or lose sanity. The tiger would take your plush and move it to a random spot and you'd have to find it again on camera. The latter was super buggy and would often cause the controls to stop responding, but they at least gave you more to do than just hit the door buttons and squeeze the plushy. There were also different desk cosmetics you could buy as well as one use power-ups, and collectible models. It felt like a much more interesting game despite the bugs. The final UE5 version is super barebones; more polished perhaps but barely more complex than FNAF1 and a lot easier.

 

[JustAl]

In the previous version the girls all had 'special abilities' that would trigger at random. The cat (I can't remember their names anymore) would cause a massive distraction and you'd have to find a button in time or lose a ton of sanity. The rabbit would set a bomb you can to defuse or lose sanity. The tiger would take your plush and move it to a random spot and you'd have to find it again on camera. The latter was super buggy and would often cause the controls to stop responding, but they at least gave you more to do than just hit the door buttons and squeeze the plushy. There were also different desk cosmetics you could buy as well as one use power-ups, and collectible models. It felt like a much more interesting game despite the bugs. The final UE5 version is super barebones; more polished perhaps but barely more complex than FNAF1 and a lot easier.

Wow, that all seems interesting! Maybe if I had the old build to test out I can use it for feedback alongside what other ideas I've seen or thought to suggest.

 

[fence]

I want this game out as much as everyone and have been assisting Monsterbox on getting all assets done. But there's nothing Monsterbox or I can do to influence the programming end's speed or cooperation. Believe me, I have stated my frustration at the progress and setbacks but there is nothing we can do other than be directly involved at once with the engine switch.

I was the one to suggest re-framing the Unreal build into a prequel, and helped make assets for it while helping on the Unity build. And with the switch to Unity, I can lend a hand in tweaking and adding whatever is necessary asset-wise.
And along with helping on the main game and making its VN spinoff, I'm also doing a third chapter of another unrelated game for Steam. I can hence only stretch myself so thin for everything.
Please be patient, I wouldn't have put this much work for this long helping Monsterbox if there had been any sign of ill will.

You may want to reconsider that unity switch.

 

[JustAl]

You may want to reconsider that unity switch.

TL;DR: The switch to Unity might be valid and I'll support it if the game is better done for it. Anyone who cares about maximal 3D design will feel sour about not using Unreal Engine 5 but games are more than just render environment and animation handling.

Unity is okay but Unreal Engine 5 (henceforth UE5) is hyped for good reason -- if your game is strictly meant to be represented in 3D then UE5 is the better choice. It's easy to side with Unity as the engine shows powerful ability towards any genre of game, but a consequence of this engine's versatility is that developers often pigeonhole themselves in being stuck with Unity's somewhat lacking 3D rendering and animation handling compared to UE5.

UE5 will guarantee you an excellent 3D environment, but attempting to hybridize with 2D gameplay segments in UE5 is not normal and would lead to some hair-pulling trying to learn something most people do in Unity instead. So while I frown on using Unity to take on a deeply visual 3D game like what I suspect would be wanted for IN HEAT, the move to Unity could be valid if IN HEAT has a focus on 2D game segments and other things that are unorthodox in UE5.

I'd especially support the move to Unity if the dev team was so unconfident in their ability to work with UE5 in appreciable time that it would take them at least 2 times longer to make the game. Maintaining player hype is hard and projects die both due to development schedule length and lack of attention from fans. It's a hard choice to make since every artist dreams that their project will be the best and everything they ever wanted but real life is full of constraints. If Unity is the way they'll make a good finished game and UE5 feels like a time and effort trap that will kill the project then even though I'm sour on losing UE5 I'll admit it's not such a big deal for a controlled project scope and Unity works fine. When faced with a choice on game engine that can offer better art quality, companies like Nintendo still prove that crap hardware and game engine limitations are overcome through fun and concise game design. If the move is tactical it could be worth the engine swap.

 

[ThatMintMan]

TL;DR: The switch to Unity might be valid and I'll support it if the game is better done for it.

I don't reckon it's a smart idea to go with Unity regardless. They out there announcing they'll start charging for installs of a game now. And they did so with only a few months of notice too. It's also retroactively applicable to games made prior to this new pricing structure change. Not really a good look to use Unity if they're willing to change this kind of thing with minimal notice. It'll only get worse too if there ain't pushback.

 

[JustAl]

I don't reckon it's a smart idea to go with Unity regardless. They out there announcing they'll start charging for installs of a game now. And they did so with only a few months of notice too. It's also retroactively applicable to games made prior to this new pricing structure change. Not really a good look to use Unity if they're willing to change this kind of thing with minimal notice. It'll only get worse too if there ain't pushback.

Well, I'm being tolerant and forgiving. Yes, I don't really like changing to Unity but it has perks.

As for charging for installs... we're a pirate forum. There's plenty of cheapskates here but sometimes that's valid because there are many money-grubbing devs out there. Yes I'm aware that the latter half of the statement may seem like it devalues honest work but some folks really do charge too much for dishonestly bad quality.

I'll be neutral and say this: if the payment model starts pissing off current and prospective paying fans then the team fucked up. Hype and exposure sound like crap because they don't pay the bills, but enough hype and exposure gets you success stories like Dwarf Fortress that made 60k USD annually in donations before finally being able to sell on Steam for an actual price tag.

One thing to remember: many of us would have never heard of IN HEAT if it wasn't for pirate sharing. I found this game somewhere else before I found the forum page for it on F95. Pirate communities are so vast and ubiquitous that it honestly makes more sense for indie devs to be involved in sharing builds of the game themselves on forums instead of ignoring the possibility that someone else would do so. I recommend having a valid demo copy (often an old build) of the game up so if people were motivated they could pay for all of it.

Of course eventually the full build would get leaked too, which is where the other half of dev comes in: quality. I'd support a dev if the game was awesome. That's how it all goes: make a good game and hope it catches on. If you make a bad game pirates wouldn't even want it for free.

 

[ThatMintMan]

snip

Well, I was looking at it more from a business standpoint anyways. Unity has decided to change the terms of how much it costs to develop on Unity. A change that is being announced with little time to even adjust, and it also affects games made prior to the pricing change. Charging based on install means being charged potentially multiple times for one customer. Given that possibility, and how Unity has decidedly changed their prior agreements and even clarified that installs made by a single customer on two different platforms, say once on PC and once on Steam Deck, do indeed count as multiple different installs in their calculations, Unity is definitely not a good idea to partner with. They are willing to change how they charge developers on short notice, and are willing to charge a developer multiple times for a single purchase. That's not a good policy to agree to for developers. They're getting shafted here. And Unity could easily make the situation worse later down the line if they aren't feeling they're getting enough money out of this.

Also given the pricing structure a valid demo copy, even an old build, would still count towards an install and therefore count towards potentially charging a developer. This discourages developers from even doing demos in the first place. Why put out a demo when said demo could cost you money? The changes Unity has announced is going to create serious monetary concerns when using Unity, and given the short notice and retroactive nature of this change the future may make your past use of the engine detrimental to you as Unity decides to once again change the terms of the pricing structure. No matter what, these changes flat out state that Unity is absolutely willing to change how they deal business with little warning and no respect for prior agreements.

 

[JustAl]

Well, I was looking at it more from a business standpoint anyways. Unity has decided to change the terms of how much it costs to develop on Unity. A change that is being announced with little time to even adjust, and it also affects games made prior to the pricing change. Charging based on install means being charged potentially multiple times for one customer. Given that possibility, and how Unity has decidedly changed their prior agreements and even clarified that installs made by a single customer on two different platforms, say once on PC and once on Steam Deck, do indeed count as multiple different installs in their calculations, Unity is definitely not a good idea to partner with. They are willing to change how they charge developers on short notice, and are willing to charge a developer multiple times for a single purchase. That's not a good policy to agree to for developers. They're getting shafted here. And Unity could easily make the situation worse later down the line if they aren't feeling they're getting enough money out of this.

Also given the pricing structure a valid demo copy, even an old build, would still count towards an install and therefore count towards potentially charging a developer. This discourages developers from even doing demos in the first place. Why put out a demo when said demo could cost you money? The changes Unity has announced is going to create serious monetary concerns when using Unity, and given the short notice and retroactive nature of this change the future may make your past use of the engine detrimental to you as Unity decides to once again change the terms of the pricing structure. No matter what, these changes flat out state that Unity is absolutely willing to change how they deal business with little warning and no respect for prior agreements.

Oh no, I thought you were talking about the IN HEAT devs charging for the ability to download the game. I didn't hear about the Unity engine use terms being changed. I'm not recommending Unity anymore.

If I'm understanding that correctly that means game devs who intend to sell their game must pay a royalty that scales upwards with the amount of installations by customers, and installations are counted just on the basis of putting a game on a machine. It would count in the case of reinstalling the game on a fresh PC install, installing multiple versions of the game to test, virtual machines, cloned drives, and if the criteria were particularly vague perhaps separate Windows user accounts saving their AppData in different user directories as multiple installations. Maybe having partitions set up in a way that can play the same games across multiple installed operating systems can be considered different installations despite only 1 instance in a single partition. That's a tremendous problem for developers and the players on the other side.

Edit: Articles appearing on the internet about this are all within 18 hours since now. I'll post a couple articles below. You should not use Unity, and if you're set on not using Unreal Engine 5 then try Godot.

1)

You must be registered to see the links

2)

You must be registered to see the links

 

[kbutler]

they've already walked back on charging for multiple installs, and will probably pretend the whole thing was a big misunderstanding by this time next week

 

[sgb3]

they've already walked back on charging for multiple installs, and will probably pretend the whole thing was a big misunderstanding by this time next week

As it turns out, questionably legal extortion of thousands if not millions of dollars from big corporations, who have legions of lawyers, is not a good business strategy.

 

[Basty96]

they've already walked back on charging for multiple installs, and will probably pretend the whole thing was a big misunderstanding by this time next week

with those heads on the executive board i don't believe that. back to pirated unity games they will count that to the install threshold too as they said (even tho they don't have the means to track if it's legal or not, or the means if you installed it (which they could do if they put trackers in there and that goes against several laws already))

 

[Uyamuya]

Is the link not updated? I downloaded the game from 2/4 of the links and it gave me a different version of the game (doesn't match with the pictures) and there's no tutorial. How am I supposed to play? Played first night and there's an unavoidable cutscene and I just died from a white girl. Pls help

 

[eleumaS - 1]

Is the link not updated? I downloaded the game from 2/4 of the links and it gave me a different version of the game (doesn't match with the pictures) and there's no tutorial. How am I supposed to play? Played first night and there's an unavoidable cutscene and I just died from a white girl. Pls help

It works pretty fine to me, and also I managed to finally pass the First Night up to the Third, where other Versions I couldn't understand the game at all.
The First Cutscene that serves as intro to the Game Menu, you can skip it by just simply clicking on the screen.
You just need to pay attention to Bots when they stick on the Windows, at the Third Night you need to care to watch Nile (Egyptian one) as much as possible or she goes mad, and pay attention to the Sliding Doors on the sides (don't know if both or just the left one) that are in the Corridors at your sides: once those Doors are open, seems like another Bot may come through within mere seconds or even a lager time frame, didn't measure it. You just need to close them ASAP, and care to hug the Plushie on the Microwave when your Sanity goes below two Bars, also turn off the computer screen ASAP if the erotic movie should trigger and re-open Doors ASAP as well, since both things drain your Sanity at very high speed.

 

[GypsybardI]

I see the reviews are good for version 7.2, but anything after that when they changed over to U5 are poor...is there a way to download an older version of this game then?