| 20 JUN 2008 at 2:07am |
pavel4444Space Cadet
Posts : 124
Joined: 2 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Adventure games are not all about puzzles, thankfully.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 2:17am |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | I enjoyed the game quite a bit, even the 'girl talk' oddly enough. Although I'd have a hard time suggesting others play it, due to the many flaws. Puzzle wise it's pretty limited, but there are a few interesting ones near the end. However most of the puzzles occur in a 100% optional area with very little payoff story wise. The game also ends on a very disappointing note. I hope there's a sequel, because I don't want to be left hanging.
The interface is godawful though. Yikes. Why adventure games still have trouble with this even after Sierra and Lucasarts perfected it is beyond me.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 11:46am |
An_InklingSpace Cadet
Posts : 171
Joined: 20 JUN 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (20 JUN 2008 12:30am)
There are plenty of decent to great games out there, but unfortunately, it seems like adventure sites(the only ones willing to give adventure games a chance) continue to overrate games because they seem(yes, this is my opinion) to be so happy when a game finally comes, that they aren't bothered by any problems.
You've mirrored my thoughts on the game almost to the letter.
I also was expecting better, given the rave reviews. Modern Adventure's have largely gone away from puzzle heavy gaming, some, like Culpa Innata take this too far, and become little more than a series of non-interactive conversations. As you say, not much of a game at all, really. Even this type of "gameplay" can be fine with quality writing, CI was decent on this front, but far from great. I found the "catch-up" dialogues particularly excruciating, particularly as pretty much the whole purpose was to recount the day's happenings, providing little new information, talk about redundant. Apart from this, I never felt as if I was taking an active part in the investigation, the player is not given the opportunity to put together pieces of evidence and come to a conclusion, we just aren't given enough information and have to be content to wait for the next story point.
I liked that the setting was well detailed, but it is really rather cliche, and it was easy to see right from the start that not all was well in this supposed utopia. Which brings me to another gripe, a large part of the game seems to be the transformation of Phoenix from unquestioningly accepting of the World Union, to realising that all is not as perfect as it seems (see, Phoenix). For me, this fell completely flat, as I was questioning it right from the start, and left me groaning each time the dense and naive Phoenix would grapple in consternation with every criticism one of the other character's would make about the Union.
Anyway, having said all that, it is a decent game, but certainly not worthy of an A+ in my opinion.
Who is this great burdensome slavering dog-thing that mediocres my every thought? ([i]Nick Cave - We Call Upon the Author[/i])
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 12:47pm |
alkis21Schattenjger
Posts : 2112
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: GR
Status : Offline | I didn't like Culpa Innata either. In fact, I gave up on it. But I would like to repeat that people should base their purchases on the actual text of the reviews, not the final grade. A reviewer's job is not to magically include everything there is to know about a title in a single letter; that would be impossible. The way I see it, a review is the description of a game while the final grade is only the reviewer's opinion on it. As long as the description helps me understand the game and decide on my own whether I'll like it or not, it's fine by me. In that aspect, I think JA's review was good even though I disagree with the final grade. I somehow knew I wouldn't like it after reading it but I decided to buy it anyway just in case it would surprise me. That the reviewer liked it and I didn't is not his fault.
I also disagree with the popular notion that adventure game sites should be more strict. I don't see how grades help or destroy the genre. Other web sites are so proud of their low grades I'm surprised they don't have a huge banner that reads "OUR GRADES ARE LOWER THAN JUST ADVENTURE'S". Who cares? Your reviews are nowhere near as good.
I think we should all start disregarding grades, in fact I wouldn't miss them at all if they suddenly disappeared.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 12:55pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By alkis21 (20 JUN 2008 12:47pm)
I didn't like Culpa Innata either. In fact, I gave up on it. But I would like to repeat that people should base their purchases on the actual text of the reviews, not the final grade. A reviewer's job is not to magically include everything there is to know about a title in a single letter; that would be impossible. The way I see it, a review is the description of a game while the final grade is only the reviewer's opinion on it. As long as the description helps me understand the game and decide on my own whether I'll like it or not, it's fine by me. In that aspect, I think JA's review was good even though I disagree with the final grade. I somehow knew I wouldn't like it after reading it but I decided to buy it anyway just in case it would surprise me. That the reviewer liked it and I didn't is not his fault.
I also disagree with the popular notion that adventure game sites should be more strict. I don't see how grades help or destroy the genre. Other web sites are so proud of their low grades I'm surprised they don't have a huge banner that reads "OUR GRADES ARE LOWER THAN JUST ADVENTURE'S". Who cares? Your reviews are nowhere near as good.
I think we should all start disregarding grades, in fact I wouldn't miss them at all if they suddenly disappeared.
I didn't just refer to the grade... here is from the review:
"In the puzzle department Culpa Innata truly excels. Just like with the story, its puzzles are among the highest standards I’ve seen in the recent history of adventure games. Forget the simplicity you’ve been so used to recently. Forget the games where the toughest puzzle is “A locked door… Oooh I got a key too.” Culpa Innata means serious business and will shift your brain and adventuring skills to top gear."
As for the other comments, if they are implying that adventure games are mainly about story, Culpa's "story" rates about a .5 compared to a good book's 10.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 1:01pm |
alkis21Schattenjger
Posts : 2112
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: GR
Status : Offline | You have a point there. But maybe the puzzles improve later on? If I understood correctly, you haven't finished it yet.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 1:05pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By alkis21 (20 JUN 2008 1:01pm)
But maybe the puzzles improve later on? If I understood correctly, you haven't finished it yet.
Indeed, there are a few truly devilish puzzles, if you tough with it far enough. However, there aren't actually that many puzzles in my experience, so even I am a wee bit perplexed by the review's glowing mention of the game's puzzles.
Or maybe my memory is just bad?
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 1:15pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By JKing (20 JUN 2008 1:05pm)
Originally Posted By alkis21 (20 JUN 2008 1:01pm)
But maybe the puzzles improve later on? If I understood correctly, you haven't finished it yet.
Indeed, there are a few truly devilish puzzles, if you tough with it far enough. However, there aren't actually that many puzzles in my experience, so even I am a wee bit perplexed by the review's glowing mention of the game's puzzles.
Or maybe my memory is just bad?
After 7-10 hours, besides the gate puzzle 5 minutes in... most "puzzles" require you to simply use the only other item you could interact with in the room and use it as a password for the other item. The game is pretty much talking, then sleeping, then talking again, then sleeping. The writing is abysmal to top that off. It was pretty embarrassing to listen to with my wife in the room. The dialogue is just so poorly done and monotonous. Luckily I have a laptop here to surf the web while waiting through the grating dialogue. After all those hours of pain, I had to give up. Just disappointing is all.
Bad games happen. But rave reviews for games like this one show how adventure reviewers have low standards or just ignore major problems. Reviews should be critical. Not love affairs unless really really deserved. Picking up a dress and shoes as busywork is NOT fun.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 2:01pm |
ElfstoneGuild Master
Posts : 5892
Joined: 4 NOV 2002
Status : Online | I played CI a while back. It was disappointing. I didn't write about it, because I was in danger to bash it. I agree with the OP and I strongly disagree with Aya on this one. :-/
The routine of interviews, running around, sleeping, getting up, repeating this cycle...I was sick of this after a while. Although I didn't mind the constant meeting up with her chatty friend, I can imagine that some people would like to have the option to skip these. No such luck. If Sandra calls, you got to go.
The game is not linear, but at some point you can't move forward and you end up passing days until you figure out what to do.
As for dressing choice, I ended up taking the casual ones, because Phoenix looked...uh...funny in the sexier ones. Having to pick those again and again was painful, as well.
There are not that many puzzles. I get why Aya thinks it's upping the ante on puzzles. Mainly because there is one big puzzle in the vein of La Serpent Rouge. It's well done. Aside from this, most of the game is spent talking.
Which I don't mind. I loved Planescape Torment which is also knows as the RPG that won't shut up. The dialog is funny at times. I enjoyed quite a lot of it. Which means, I can't agree with the Gamespot reviewer who claimed the dialog to be without soul and humor or the characters without, well, character.
But then again, there is the issue that you know this world is messed up and Phoenix just doesn't get it. Not until it's almost over. Even then, the conclusion is a huge disappointment. I ended up not liking Phoenix, because she would be frequently peeved about criticism and I had to listen to those hissy fits time and again.
The dialog options often provide no clue which direction Phoenix actually takes in the discussion. I only played it once and therefore I cannot tell the influence of different dialog options on situations in the game.
There are many locations, but most of them follow the exact same structure. Something outside, enter a building, enter an office/store/home, someone to talk to. Object's descriptions tend to get generic, too. I know, most games have the same problems.
The biggest...disillusionment I have to call it...the story. By the time I thought it was getting some place interesting...the game is done. Finito. You can tell they try to build up for a sequel.
I didn't have a handle on the case. Turns out I got the wrong idea about it. You can't shake the feeling that it only touches upon what is going on around there. The sequel, you know. Oh well. Maybe that was the intention and it's left open-ended. Or perhaps there are multiple endings?
Oh, worst of all: The interface. I think I am forgiving about these things, but this one really bothered me. Using objects was a pain in the butt, seriously.
But I have to say the facial animation is as good as they say.
[b]playing[/b]: Destination Treasure Island (done in two sittings, but it's nice), Syberia (ho-hum), Dracula: Last Sanctuary (on hold)&&[b]reading[/b]: even more study papers&&[b]listening to[/b]: [url=http://www.last.fm/user/Brax82/]this and that[/url], plus [url=http://www.musicovery.com/]Musicovery[/url]&&[b]TV favorites[/b]: (currently) Pushing Daisies, Chuck, Journeyman (cancelled! grrr...), Heroes&& all-time) 24, Stargate SG1, X-Files, Lost, House
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 2:10pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Well said.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 2:55pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (20 JUN 2008 12:30am)
There are plenty of decent to great games out there, but unfortunately, it seems like adventure sites(the only ones willing to give adventure games a chance) continue to overrate games because they seem(yes, this is my opinion) to be so happy when a game finally comes, that they aren't bothered by any problems.
I wanted to touch on this by saying it's a major problem with this genre right now. Thats why I kind of prefer the '5-star' approach. If it's an okay game then give it 3 stars. Most adventures these days will be 3 stars. If it's really worth playing and should be checked out by fans - give it a 4. It's an amazing game that deserves a lot of praise and can be compared with the 'good ol days' then give it a 5.
Culpa Innata deserves a 3/5. It had a good concept and some interesting spots, but overall it didn't do anything outstanding and fades into the background of the genre pretty quickly.
I think the problem here is that the grade system or the out of 100 systems make the game look worse than it actually is. It's not a terrible game, but it really shouldn't be hyped up as being anything more than average at best. The flaws also make it hard for some folks to enjoy at all.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 4:51pm |
alkis21Schattenjger
Posts : 2112
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: GR
Status : Offline | Guys, I totally agree on everything you say about Culpa Innata. OK except one thing: Facial animation? I'm surprised you liked them Elfstone, they reminded me of how you could take your picture and morph it into a player's face in NBA Live 98, or even an earlier version, I don't remember. Only the very front part of the face moves during an expression, which make the characters look like they've had several face lifts and chewed on 100 lemons. Not that it influenced my opinion on the game one way or the other.
Originally Posted By avatar_58 (20 JUN 2008 2:55pm)
I wanted to touch on this by saying it's a major problem with this genre right now. Thats why I kind of prefer the '5-star' approach. If it's an okay game then give it 3 stars. Most adventures these days will be 3 stars. If it's really worth playing and should be checked out by fans - give it a 4. It's an amazing game that deserves a lot of praise and can be compared with the 'good ol days' then give it a 5.
Well, 5 stars is a 10-point grading system while A-B-C is a 13-point system, so I don't think the difference is that great. Here's the thing though: If you ask most reviewers, they will say that they agree with you 100%. The problem is that what you think of as an amazing game is an 'OK' game in somebody else's eyes, an vice versa.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 5:34pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By alkis21 (20 JUN 2008 4:51pm)
Well, 5 stars is a 10-point grading system while A-B-C is a 13-point system, so I don't think the difference is that great. Here's the thing though: If you ask most reviewers, they will say that they agree with you 100%. The problem is that what you think of as an amazing game is an 'OK' game in somebody else's eyes, an vice versa.
No actually - because I think half stars should only be given when a game isn't quite another star. In other words very rarely. As I said most games should be 3 stars. If theres an element or two that makes it stand out, okay maybe stick half a star on there. However for the most part we should only see solid stars.
In fact I wish review sites wouldn't even bother with half stars. Just stick with the following
1 Star - Avoid, worthless
2 Stars - Mediocre, not worth playing
3 Stars - Average quality, not bad but nothing special
4 Stars - Good game, worth recommending. Elements make it stand out from the crowd.
5 Stars - Amazing game, well worth your time and a must play
Each rank is a massive drop / raise from the next. That way we know where the game stands. However you ALWAYS read the text of the review and give the score a glance. Even though a game may be in the 'good' category according the reviewer you may disagree based on the negatives presented in the text.
Reviews are very subjective. You can't please everyone and it's impossible to have everyone agree on a game's worth. However I would hope that most games in the 5 star column deserve it and very few should be disagreeable. Otherwise whats it doing with 5 stars?
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 5:55pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4940
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Re: Grading
I'm in favor of grading. I don't want to have to try to figure out from the text of the review (which may be confusing) whether to buy the game or not. I think the more important point is how careful the reviewer gives the grade. The best news journalists (such the, sadly, late Tim Russert) don't let their political persuasion interfere with the objectivity of their discussions. Likewise, the best AG reviewers will try to stay objective about games that are of a genre either not of their preference or one that is. A preference for a particular type of AG genre appeared to me to have seeped too much into the JA Culpa Innata review grade even though the overall review was comprehensive in a good way .
The same problem occurs particularly with most of the game mag reviews. Obviously, most of those reviews are heavily biased against the AG genre itself: I've been trying to throw out a big stack of old game mags & once again came across the following grades: Alida 25%, Dark Fall: Lights Out 58%, Aura 17%.
I am not saying that AG reviewers shouldn't have a bias towards Myst-like games or Gabriel Knight type games- only that they need to take extra efforts to make the grading objective. One way to do that might be to give 2 grades or to strongly qualify the score. For instance, with Culpa Innata something like: 'I have a particular love for these types of adventure games Culpa Innata is so close to my concept of the ideal that I have to give it an A+, but many others who are more middle-of-the-road in their genre preferences might only see it as a B.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 6:06pm |
pavel4444Space Cadet
Posts : 124
Joined: 2 MAY 2008
Status : Online | I almost never care too much what the review says or what score it gives. I rely on demo, screenshots and my own intuition. And I rarely pay full price for games, I wait for price to go down. I do check out reviews, but with a grain of salt. I do like when they summarize the pros and cons. And if I see that the pros outweigh the cons or that their cons aren't really what bothers me then I usually get the game.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 6:24pm |
Steve VSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 265
Joined: 16 MAR 2008
Status : Online | I don't usually take too much notice of reviews pe se because I have played so many games with an expectation based on reading a couple of good (or bad) reviews and ended up wondering whether the reviewer had played the same game as me. This works both positively in favour of some games and negatively in others.
What I do find useful are the 'customer' or 'user' reviews - when a game has been out for a while there are usually enough well-reasoned reviews from actual people like you and me that you can get an idea of whether a game has something going for it or not. I have written a few of these for Amazon for games I felt strongly about one way or the other and tried to tailor them to provide the information that would inform a purchasing decision. (Mine are some of the ,ahem, 'longer' critiques you will find on there, I just love the sound of my own typing!)
It's not a perfect science by any means but usually any game on Amazon that has less than a 3 star rating overall after 20 or so reviews are posted must have some serious flaws, although with the caveat that people will routinely give a game a one star review if they couldn't actually get it to run on their system or (even more pointlessly) if there has been a delay in shipping AND THEY HAVEN'T EVEN HAD THE DISK OUT OF THE BOX >
On the mainstream rating sites I have found that the games I enjoyed were usually rated 1 or 2 points higher (on a scale of 1-10) than the main review by the customers themselves and I think thats a useful benchmark to use if you are undecided about buying a game.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 6:59pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By pavel4444 (20 JUN 2008 6:06pm)
I almost never care too much what the review says or what score it gives. I rely on demo, screenshots and my own intuition. And I rarely pay full price for games, I wait for price to go down. I do check out reviews, but with a grain of salt. I do like when they summarize the pros and cons. And if I see that the pros outweigh the cons or that their cons aren't really what bothers me then I usually get the game.
When it comes to adventure games though I sort of *have* to spend time with reviews. Demos only showcase a single scene out of a few dozen. A single event. They are only really useful to judge the graphics, controls and superficial qualities. It's really hard to get a feel of the full story or characters when you get such a limited time.
Personally since most adventures are $20-30 these days I leap in and just don't worry about it. If it's no good, it's no good. No harm done. However my initial purchase is based of a few things for me:
-Do I like the overall graphic style? Not so much the technical aspects, but the style.
-Does the story sound interesting? Most reviews will give you an idea of what a game is about.
-Do reviews complain about the UI/controls? It's universally agreed that "The experiment" is flawed do to it's UI.
-What games have these guys done in the past? Past failures can indicate whether a new game is worth checking out. Of course it's not possible with new games, like in the case of CI
For instance I bought Dracula Origins because it's cheap and I like vampires. A story about Dracula's origin sound intriguing. Reviews generally agree it's a fun game. So I bought it. I'll be the final judge whether it's any good to me personally, but at least I sort of have an idea going in thats it's decent.
With shooters, rpgs and other genres it's far easier to get an idea from a demo. If the core gameplay sucks, you don't buy it. However the 'core gameplay' of adventure games includes the story, logic of the puzzles and overall look and feel. Unless you are psychic you can't know this stuff without speaking to/reading a review by someone who's played it.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 7:17pm |
pavel4444Space Cadet
Posts : 124
Joined: 2 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Also I sometimes dislike a game from the demo, but then decide to give it a try anyway and it turns out to be pretty good. I can afford making a mistake because I get them pretty cheap and most of them are pretty short so I don't invest too much of my time to finish it.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 7:47pm |
antlerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 51
Joined: 28 NOV 2007
Status : Online | I can see why a lot of people get upset with Culpa. There is a lot of talking in the game and there is one stupid puzzle. That door lock thing with the incense cloud once you get inside. But that aside there were some unique puzzles included. The one featuring the reference to the movie War Games was clever. The routing the circuit breaker wiring was also very different and the lighting puzzle in the mines was cool too. The video piecing together was far from easy. Someone mentioned the facial expressions and yes they were amazing.
The interface was your standard point and click with no dizzying 3d spin around. There was no annoying loss of all reference to direction. A point of view that is becoming all too fashionable in far too many games. The graphics were standard with drawn backgrounds that were mostly easy to see without serious lighting issues. Yes there was a lot of walking around but with your map you could get there quickly. As for the changing of clothes, how many times have we read complaints that characters wear the same thing through the whole game, yada yada yada? Get over it they had the foresight to address an obvious issue few have attempted before.
As for the Sandra character, yes she got old but if it bothered you at any point you could end the conversation. There were two places where interaction with Sandra led you to gain more progress in the game.
As for the long conversations, this is a murder investigation, interviewing witnesses and suspects is a large component of how investigations are done. The conversations are in themselves a puzzle. You are required to listen, piece the answers together to THINK what you need to ask next. So no! If you think the conversations are not necessary then you have not had to conduct an investigation. After all the bad guys are not going around holding up a sign saying "it's me come shoot it out."
There is a considerable amount of puzzles and most of them are original not seen in other games. True they are a variation of what has been done before but for the most part they are well thought out. Some were more difficult than others but this is not a game for the sake of puzzles. It is a thinking game and is story based.
The voice acting for the most part was excellent especially Phoenix's boss. I worked in investigations and I can tell you the boss mimicked one I had. In fact she was so much of a clone it sent chilling memories of many inquisitions I had in her office.
Underlying this murder investigation we have the thinly fleshed out underground story of the Renovators. Something is very wrong in paradise and they reveal little. Our heroine stumbles around the edges unaware of it while she picks up bits and pieces. Enough to know something is going on but not quite sure what. The underground events of this subplot are not supposed to be known by the citizenry. It is intentionally subtle that's the whole point. Of course it is to setup a sequel, they are all doing it. You get your mystery solved, you get the bad guy and you are left as Phoenix to muse over this unsettling feeling of trouble under the surface.
The point is this is a thinking game, it is not meant to be an action and puzzle solving quest. If you can't listen and process information then this game is not for you. If you have patience, enjoy sorting and sifting information to piece together a story then you will like it. for those of you who need constant motion or puzzle after puzzle then go get a Myst clone or play an rpg. but I for one thought this was an amazing game.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 8:03pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
As for the long conversations, this is a murder investigation, interviewing witnesses and suspects is a large component of how investigations are done. The conversations are in themselves a puzzle. You are required to listen, piece the answers together to THINK what you need to ask next. So no! If you think the conversations are not necessary then you have not had to conduct an investigation. After all the bad guys are not going around holding up a sign saying "it's me come shoot it out."
]
Most of the relevant info was signified by a change in music. Once I knew this I found conversations rolled out pretty naturally. If I wasted time I had to come back another day. I actually didn't mind this mechanic, although I would have liked more optional things to do besides talking to Sandra. Maybe if she had a few more friends or some places to visit.
There is a considerable amount of puzzles and most of them are original not seen in other games. True they are a variation of what has been done before but for the most part they are well thought out. Some were more difficult than others but this is not a game for the sake of puzzles. It is a thinking game and is story based.
I liked the puzzles involved with finding the Renovators. In fact the entire Renovators plotline was interesting to me and kept me involved. Every time I solved something on my own I felt like I had accomplished a major task. I didn't enjoy the reference to the movie, because frankly I hadn't seen the movie. So I actually had to look it up. However everything else I did on my own.
What annoyed me though is how this plotline was not followed to the end. It was like it didn't matter when or even if you visited the Renovators at all. The ending didn't reflect whether you'd been there or not and that was truly dissapointing.
I hope in a future sequel we get to learn what they are about and what they are doing.
Also the married with children reference was too much, I laughed hard when I started to notice it.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 8:06pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | "The point is this is a thinking game"
I disagree. Spending 7 hours listening to repetitive conversations and putting your character to sleep in between... with 1 puzzle that required anything resembling thought(and was easy anyhow) is NOT a "thinking game."
It always astonishes me when people think that the stories in adventure games are something special. Even the BEST adventure game story is absolutely pathetic when compared to a good book or even tv show(battlestar galactica, Deep Space Nine, Farscape).
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 8:21pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | While I agree with some what you are saying, you can even get enough information from a review you think is wrong. I never picked up Culpa. The first issue were the graphics. The second issue was that Aya loved it. I know enough about his tastes to know that if he loves a game, I won't. Likewise games I enjoy, he doesn't. I agree with your tastes in regards to endless dialogs. I don't like them either.
Where I disagree with you is where you seem to be trying to turn this into some conspiracy with Adventure Game sites/reviewers. In the end it all comes down to taste of the individual reviewer. I can give you a long list of reviews I completely disagree with on this site.
You got me laughing over here about sometimes wondering if the reviewer even played the same game. I've been doing that too in regards to these Dracula Origin reviews I've been reading. Especially when mainstream sites that constantly rip on the genre decide to give a positive review to a game that I felt was lagging in so many areas.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 8:36pm |
antlerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 51
Joined: 28 NOV 2007
Status : Online | Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (20 JUN 2008 8:06pm)
"The point is this is a thinking game"
I disagree. Spending 7 hours listening to repetitive conversations and putting your character to sleep in between... with 1 puzzle that required anything resembling thought(and was easy anyhow) is NOT a "thinking game."
It always astonishes me when people think that the stories in adventure games are something special. Even the BEST adventure game story is absolutely pathetic when compared to a good book or even tv show(battlestar galactica, Deep Space Nine, Farscape).
Then it clear we disagree on styles of games and that is fine. I enjoy conversation, you don't. But to say this is not a thinking game is flat out wrong. Reasoning is primarily what you do in this game. you don't physically assemble bits of one conversation and connect it to another. But mentally you do, one character gives you a piece, you retain that and consider it when you question another character. that's called thinking.
Of course the story detail in a game will seldom achieves that of a well written script. Not always there are many tv shows and movies that are so thin as to be pathetic. Interesting you cited Battlestar and Deep space Nine, never saw Farscape. Battlestar is so far above tv fare it embarrasses most everything else on the tube.
|
| 20 JUN 2008 at 8:55pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By SirDave (20 JUN 2008 5:55pm)
Re: Grading.....
A preference for an AG genre appeared to me to have seeped too much into the JA Culpa Innata review grade even though the overall review was comprehensive in a good way .
SirDave??????? I'm a little baffled - is this site not devoted to the AG genre & does Culpa Innata not fall perfectly into the category :-?
I personally thought that this was one of the best games to come out over the last few years. It had a strong immersive story which was very well constructed & thought out well enough to allow different sequences of gameplay.
The AG genre seems to have diversified a little with the advent of the Myst type games & the introduction of more & more 'puzzle' type puzzles into other AGs.
I think it's great that there is more variety in the type of AG available, but while I appreciate the opinions of why someone prefers one type to another, I think it needs to be considered that a lot of people like myself don't want to play games which consist of a sequence of 'puzzles' & don't consider them an obligatory inclusion for a good AG & therefore don't think a game should be judged on the lack of them!
|
