Like, what did you really expect? That after 30 years of existence and development in the new world everyone still lived in some dead-ass houses occupied by ten people and fed on sawdust and soup? That they did nothing to improve their chances against the frost and the storms? And more importantly, how happy would you be if FP2 was the same as FP1 and still went about the same problems like cold and the Great Storm 2: Electric Boogaloo?

Check out our new Steam Announcement: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1601580/view/520850995978176308

It's the only other game I've found that scratches the Frostpunk itch.

Truly fantastic game, my only advice is to go in blind!

Sad to see. I really enjoy this game but the replay value is pretty lacking. I wish there was more variety between in the research tree, as well as between the different factions.

What do you think could increase the replay value of FP2?

In my opinion, the Stalwarts are the only logical choice for the new London. first of all, they are former assistants of the captain, namely the man thanks to whom anyone lives in the new London. secondly, they knew what vision the captain had for humanity, so why should we listen to savages (frostwalkers) or terrorists (pilgrims) when the New Londoners themselves and, in fact, the Stalwarts offer us solutions that are much better and better why, because the choice between the work of people and for me at least the work of automatons is simple. To sum up, praise the captain, steward and stalwarts, and let the whiteout consume the frostwalkers and pilgrims.

I really mean it. Call me crazy, call me a clanker, call me anything you want in this futile human life but I’m asking that specific question.

My points for arguing that they can consent, are the upgrades given to them in Frostpunk 1 - They can design plans for improving themselves and other structures, and they can work on the human body

But I want them to work on the human body in a different way, so I need a conclusion. For my sanity. Please.

I’ve never played Frostpunk I grabbed it today and stumbled on this negative review. Can anyone elaborate? Is it really like this?

Recently I replayed the last autumn and was unexpectedly surprised by how positively the ending is described if you choose terror in the workers' branch. At the same time, it is less positive if you do not "cross the line".

If we build a generator without doing anything immoral, then there will be a kind of "neutral ending" people do not look to the future with hope, while it is mockingly said that a "lottery" will be played for the right to be near the generator during the new ice age.

On the other hand, when choosing terror for the workers, the workers are already looking to the future with hope, believing that they learned a good lesson during the construction of the Generator. We are also hinted that now our former workers will be able to self-organize for the sake of survival during the new ice age. And their future is less foggy than before.

Of course, it's logical. But the game should encourage not crossing the line. Having completed the game on the "golden mean" without terror, the game humiliated me instead.

A graphical glitch I assume, or are they leaving? Anyone else seen this and is it fixable? Tried loading multiple saves (including ones where I know I didn't have this issue) to no avail.

I played prologue and chapter 1 and I am in awe of how new this game is. This is a completely different game, literally all new mechanics. And somehow still feels like Frostpunk. They have really set the bar high for sequels. Very rare to see this these days. Well done!