| 20 JUN 2008 at 9:42pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Hi SirDave, aah! I see what you are saying now! In what way would you consider that the preference for an Ag genre seeped too much into the JA review?
I have come across completely biased and/or ignorant reviews of AGs in many glossy magazines that I just don't waste my money on any more. In my mind, a game has to be graded in context of what it's trying to achieve & the review should give enough indepth info to make sure that anyone buying the game is not going to be disappointed.
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 12:12am |
ElfstoneGuild Master
Posts : 5892
Joined: 4 NOV 2002
Status : Online | Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
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.
Yeah, that took me some in-game days. It's funny, because I can't remember what it was about.
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.
War Games puzzle was alright. Circuit breaker wasn't that much of a novelty, but it was ok. Annoyed me a little to follow the lines and getting confused, especially with the clunky interface on this puzzle. Forgot about the lighting puzzle. The unified puzzle, like I said, yes, that was the heart and soul of the game in terms of puzzling.
Someone mentioned the facial expressions and yes they were amazing.
I did. I'm likely out of touch with the genre, but I can't remember any games with better facial expressions. Maybe the tech leaves a little to desire, that is, the animationis is not flawless. But the expressions themselves are varied and fit with the character's mood and tone. Then again, I'm not a tech nut.
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.
No disagreement. My issue lies with the inventory. With as few items as you will possess within the course of the game, the sliding box is too small. But the bigger problem was that you had to click the use/examine button, then the item. And right click left the current screen, I think. Sorry, I don't remember. I only know I had huge trouble with it.
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.
Graphics didn't bother me. You are right about the walking. Not worse than in many other games. And there was a map.
Only between locations, of course. The passing of time between one end of the city and the other one often kills a whole day. You should pick carefully, if you don't want to trot back to your place, listen to the same voice over explaining this to you, again, then meet up with Sandra although you didn't call her and you can't say no to her. And I never heard about dressing bothering anyone, but alright. It is important at one point in the game and I guess that's why the ritual has to be taken almost every day. What is wrong about keeping a default dress and let you choose to switch it?
Get over it, this could have been done better.
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.
True. Again, the parts vital to the movement of the plot create necessity for Sandra's calls, that you can never say no to. Because if you couldn't pick when it's important, but at any other time, you'd know they are important. But I confess, I called her myself whenever I didn't forget. Because some of that chat was funny. I guess I'm speaking on behalf of people bothered by this feature.
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."
Very true. I know you are not talking to me, exclusively, but since I'm quoting you right now, I just say I didn't expect it any other way. I enjoy dialog clues. However, I was disappointed, because I found myself being unable to steer conversations, as same dialog options with different people led to very different results, none of which I could predict. I pissed off some people with Phoenix, not being aware that I even was provocative or a lack thereof causing them to get bored with Phoenix. Maybe my character-reading skills are not up to the task, but this happened quite a lot. Whenever I thought that some person would be helpful, either they were not or Phoenix didn't ask what I expected her to.
What I'm saying is that I enjoy the genre, but I think the game is not doing it well all the time. For a much better realisation of the same feature, see the Tex Murphy FMV games. Tex may still surprise you, but in general, I had a much better idea what he was going to say.
(split...)
[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
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 12:13am |
ElfstoneGuild Master
Posts : 5892
Joined: 4 NOV 2002
Status : Online | 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 puzzles are probably not evenly spaced out. There are portions with a couple puzzles in a row. Then I spent days with no puzzles at all. This might be due to non-linearity. But lack of conventional puzzles does not put me off, personally.
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.
If they all do it, what's original about it? It's a waste of a whole plot point. If Culpa Innata never gets a sequel, they might as well have left this out. There are no repercussions and you learn so very little about it that it only gets your hopes up for the story to go into a different direction, then it's over. If it doesn't play a role in the sequel it's just a useless gimmick.
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.
Exactly right. If you don't know what you are dealing with and you don't like what you are dealing with, you are to blame. If you pick an entire genre not meant for you, that's too bad.
Oh, and don't worry that I quoted almost all of what you said, it's not that I want to talk you down, I just like quoting from time to time.
[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
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 2:03am |
An_InklingSpace Cadet
Posts : 171
Joined: 20 JUN 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
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 puzzle didn't bother me. My least favourite puzzle was the scone baking one (I think they were scones).
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 number and length of the conversations did not concern me, It was the lack of game in between that was the problem. Planescape: Torment is probably my favourote game, it has much more dialogue than CI, but it is better written and illicits more thinking. I disagree that the conversations in CI were a puzzle in themselves, yes, they can be, but I did not find them so in this game.
Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
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.
One of the most annoying aspects of the game. We know this right from the start, but Phoenix remains clueless till the very end. The game could have been much better if we joined the character on her journey to realisation.
Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
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.
I disagree, the problem with the game for me, is not that it's a thinking game, but that it is not . We are not given the chance to piece together the story, there is some of this, but not a lot. We certainly are not given enough information to solve the murder. Rather than a thinking game, where the player takes an active part in solving the mystery, CI is a game where you solve a few puzzles, talk to a lot of people and wait for the story to play itself out, there were moments where I was drawn into thinking through possibilities, but they were far too few. In many ways this game was similar to Blade Runner, but that game handled investigation play much better, and certainly had a much more satisfying ending.
Who is this great burdensome slavering dog-thing that mediocres my every thought? ([i]Nick Cave - We Call Upon the Author[/i])
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 2:15am |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By An_Inkling (21 JUN 2008 2:02am)
Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
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.
One of the most annoying aspects of the game. We know this right from the start, but Phoenix remains clueless till the very end. The game could have been much better if we joined the character on her journey to realisation.
Maybe I'm crazy, but it's still not obvious to me that there is anything "wrong" with the World Union. Yes, it's alien in the extreme, and yes if one applies a real-world logic to its functioning it is cold and inhumane and perhaps even self-defeating, but I never felt that there was a lack of fundamental justice in the Union, and any other sort of judgement is ultimately subjective. Had the Encyclopedia Galactica entry not been included in the prologue, I would not even have expected anything of the sort, so I don't see how Phoenix should be expected to come to any sort of realisation about the Union's supposed inherent wrongness.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 2:32am |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By loobiloo (20 JUN 2008 9:42pm)
Hi SirDave, aah! I see what you are saying now! In what way would you consider that the preference for an Ag genre seeped too much into the JA review?
It's related to the first paragraph of Ivinia's post above. The JA reviewer has a well known preference for dialogue-heavy, puzzle-sparse games (eg. sparse in comparison to the Myst games). Now that we are better able to see the review with hindsight -with the experience of many people who tried the game- it would seem that the game wasn't an A+ game even when it came to that AG sub-genre. Think of it this way- if A+ is the best there is, does Culpa Innata rank up there with Gabriel Knight 1 & 2?
I have come across completely biased and/or ignorant reviews of AGs in many glossy magazines that I just don't waste my money on any more. In my mind, a game has to be graded in context of what it's trying to achieve & the review should give enough indepth info to make sure that anyone buying the game is not going to be disappointed.
No argument there, but again with the benefit of hindsight I don't think the Culpa Innata met that goal.
I should be honest in saying that I'm not so sure I could live up to my own guidelines here. I don't do reviews, but if I did and I came across a really good Myst-like game, I'd probably gush over it likewise and maybe give it a grade above what it deserved. Being an objective reviewer isn't easy and I don't suggest that it is.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 2:47am |
antlerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 51
Joined: 28 NOV 2007
Status : Online | Originally Posted By JKing (21 JUN 2008 2:14am)
Originally Posted By An_Inkling (21 JUN 2008 2:02am)
Originally Posted By antler (20 JUN 2008 7:47pm)
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.
One of the most annoying aspects of the game. We know this right from the start, but Phoenix remains clueless till the very end. The game could have been much better if we joined the character on her journey to realisation.
Maybe I'm crazy, but it's still not obvious to me that there is anything "wrong" with the World Union. Yes, it's alien in the extreme, and yes if one applies a real-world logic to its functioning it is cold and inhumane and perhaps even self-defeating, but I never felt that there was a lack of fundamental justice in the Union, and any other sort of judgement is ultimately subjective. Had the Encyclopedia Galactica entry not been included in the prologue, I would not even have expected anything of the sort, so I don't see how Phoenix should be expected to come to any sort of realisation about the Union's supposed inherent wrongness.
I agree Jking, only the player was privy to potential problems in paradise. So Phoenix was expected to be clueless.
And SirDave rating Culpa A+ is saying it is up there with GK1 + GK2. We all know that would be a cardinal sin to suggest anything could come close to the sacred games. However, when comparing Culpa to post 2000 games within it's sub genre there is almost nothing that compares in depth of story and detail. I can't think of any perhaps some can, but most games fall far short. Dreamfall could have except the designers could not decide what kind of a game they wanted. The result was a game that disappointed all of the TLJ fans that waited years for the sequel.
I would submit when looking at those post 2000 games and what Culpa accomplished while staying true to the point and click interface, and by sparing us the terrible 3d spinning around with badly designed camera angles, Aya's rating was spot on.
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 3:31am |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By antler (21 JUN 2008 2:47am)
I would submit when looking at those post 2000 games and what Culpa accomplished while staying true to the point and click interface, and by sparing us the terrible 3d spinning around with badly designed camera angles, Aya's rating was spot on.
I don't follow that. If there is going to be a grading system used, it should follow some predictable logic. If the highest grade given a letter-grading system is A+ (as is usually the case) and you accept that Gabriel Knight 1&2 are examples of the very best of that sub-genre ever released, then giving Culpa Innata an A+ not only confuses the review reader, but diminishes the value of A+. It is, in effect, saying that it is comparable to GB 1&2. I guess my issue is with the concept of the rating being 'spot on'. It could have been given a good grade without putting it up there with the stars of the AG universe!
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 3:49pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Personal preferences aside, there is no way that Culpa deserves an A+ in this or any other era.
It simply isn't one of the elite few AGs that belong in the best-ever category.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 4:31pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | In my own estimation Terry is "correct" (or at least has a point): Culpa Innata is difficult to qualify as A+ material. By the same token, though, I don't think Gabriel Knight 2 is A+ material, either (though its predecessor might be; it is very good). Culpa Innata does have many flaws, some of them quite serious. Still, the sum of its failings was not enough, for me, to spoil my experience with it, but this is where "objective" rating always falls apart: the success or failure of a game depends on whether it fulfilled for the player a want or desire for a particular sort of entertainment, and this requirement is not only different for each person, but could be different for the same person depending on their mood when they first pick it up, or when they complete it, et cetera.
Thus rating a game based purely on its artistic merit, or even the sum of its constituent mechanical parts, is about as useful as rating a movie based solely on the quality of its effects or cinematography, or a combination therewith: you miss the essence of a game.
I disagree with Aya's estimation, but I can understand how he reached an A+ rating while nevertheless being objective: when reviewing games, objectivity is by necessity subjective. Depending on what one finds important in a game, Culpa Innata could easily merit an A+; largely it depends on how you approach it.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 8:22pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By JKing (21 JUN 2008 4:31pm)
By the same token, though, I don't think Gabriel Knight 2 is A+ material, either (though its predecessor might be; it is very good).
Obviously, you have a right to your opinion, but this is not just a case of a difference of individual opinions which is often true with newer games where there is conflicting information from reviews, relatively few reviews and individual responses are all over the map. Take a look at what are now the many reviews of Gabriel Knight 2. By far, most of them place it right at the top of the heap or very nearly so. It was also mentioned often as 'game of the year' for 1995. And it has withstood the test of time so I didn't include it with Gabriel Knight 1 on a whim. There is a now pretty much a general consensus now on what are the gems of the AG genre from the 1990s. There will be a few naysayers on even those games, but based on, over several years, the number of reviews supporting it and the overall response of players, the general classification of an A+ for these games stands on its own.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 10:09pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By SirDave (21 JUN 2008 2:32am)
Originally Posted By loobiloo (20 JUN 2008 9:42pm)
......... In what way would you consider that the preference for an Ag genre seeped too much into the JA review?
It's related to the first paragraph of Ivinia's post above. The JA reviewer has a well known preference for dialogue-heavy, puzzle-sparse games (eg. sparse in comparison to the Myst games). Now that we are better able to see the review with hindsight -with the experience of many people who tried the game- it would seem that the game wasn't an A+ game even when it came to that AG sub-genre. Think of it this way- if A+ is the best there is, does Culpa Innata rank up there with Gabriel Knight 1 & 2?
Thanks SirDave for answering. Sorry about the need to pick you up on two points here - starting with the second where you illude to Culpa Innata being in a sub-genre? I don't think you could put it in the same category as Myst so I'm assuming you mean that of GK 1 & 2? Maybe I've misunderstood you again but aren't the Myst type games the sub-genre?
As for comparing CI to GK1 & 2 - both of those games had excellent stories & were both 'blessed' with top notch & perfectly cast actors/voice actors. I think this went a long way to compensate for infuriating timed sequences out of context with the rest of the gameplay,
Taking this into consideration I think Culpa Innata does a pretty good job on balance & is well worthy of an A at least!
|
| 21 JUN 2008 at 10:59pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By loobiloo (21 JUN 2008 10:09pm)
Thanks SirDave for answering. Sorry about the need to pick you up on two points here - starting with the second where you illude to Culpa Innata being in a sub-genre? I don't think you could put it in the same category as Myst so I'm assuming you mean that of GK 1 & 2? Maybe I've misunderstood you again but aren't the Myst type games the sub-genre?
Although adventure gamers have been known to disagree with almost anything at one time or another, I think the concept of 2 main sub-genres under the main AG genre has been fairly well accepted and useful: the plot/dialogue/character oriented games epitomized by the Gabriel Knight games and the Myst-like games which tend to be limited on plot, dialogue and character-interaction and heavy on puzzles. There are, of course, many AGs that don't fall strictly in either of these categories, but usually a game tends to be more in one direction than the other overall. For instance, in the Myst-like Game list, I tried to address that in a separate list called Borderline or Crossover Myst-like games.
http://justadventure.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1121474960
Taking this into consideration I think Culpa Innata does a pretty good job on balance & is well worthy of an A at least!
Given how much the JA Reviewer liked Culpa Innata and keeping in mind the implications of an A+, I agree that A would have been a better choice.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 22 JUN 2008 at 8:15am |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Thank you SirDave for the link to your lists. The categorization is interesting & very helpful! There's games on both lists that I've played, quite a few in a 'yet to be played' pile & many more that I would be prompted to find out more before buying!
|
| 22 JUN 2008 at 3:49pm |
ElfstoneGuild Master
Posts : 5892
Joined: 4 NOV 2002
Status : Online | I think we need a sticky saying "Reviews are subjective!", because I find that every second person feels the need to explain this concept to us.
But funny enough, I thought I knew where Aya is coming from, but anyway, the praise of CI and Aura caught me off guard.
If you are wondering based on my posts, I'd give CI a C+. Or maybe B-.
But if you were to not allow + and - I'd pick C for sure.
[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
|
| 22 JUN 2008 at 5:16pm |
ukpetdSpace Cadet
Posts : 176
Joined: 27 JUL 2007
Status : Online | I too read the reviews, both JA and a certain Mike Kelly appeared to evangelise this game.
I played with sky-high expectation. Big mistake!
Nobody has mentioned the scoring system. I like such things. The problem was that once I'd been through the game, achieving a moderately low score, I found I had no desire to re-play to improve. Why should that be, I ask myself? Well, I found I was out of sympathy with the main character. Naive questions. Incorrect questions. Irrelevant questions. Several times I was disappointed with the range of questions presented for Phoenix to put to the interviewee. This led to frustration, irritation and ultimately to putting me off the game.
Overall it is a reasonable game. It's certainly not an outstanding one.
I estimate B+ (average game=B, with tech innovation=+)
|
| 22 JUN 2008 at 6:21pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Elfstone (22 JUN 2008 3:48pm)
I think we need a sticky saying "Reviews are subjective!", because I find that every second person feels the need to explain this concept to us.
[smiley=rofl.gif]
Very true! Just like every second person feels the need to criticize Adventure Game sites of being biased and too light handed on games when that person doesn't agree with the review. Kind of funny if you think about it. If the reviewer rips on a game players like, the reviewer is criticized. If the reviewer praises a game that players don't like, then the entire website is to blame for being biased towards adventure games. Funny how that works. Even funnier is that I do it too with other sites. :-/ Maybe it's just human nature.
|
| 22 JUN 2008 at 8:06pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Elfstone (22 JUN 2008 3:48pm)
...........If you are wondering based on my posts, I'd give CI a C+. Or maybe B-.
But if you were to not allow + and - I'd pick C for sure.
Reply #41 - Today at 7:16pm
Overall it is a reasonable game. It's certainly not an outstanding one.
I estimate B+ (average game=B, with tech innovation=+)
I wondered Elfstone & ukpetd what games released within the last two years each of you may consider worthy of a higher rating than CI & why?
|
| 22 JUN 2008 at 10:33pm |
ElfstoneGuild Master
Posts : 5892
Joined: 4 NOV 2002
Status : Online | loobiloo: I wonder why you base ratings on recent years rather than objective all-time quality?
I see you mixed up both our posts. Was wondering where the second (and first part) came from. I should explain that C in my book means average. B is good and mostly fun. A is very good AND fun. The + doesn't tell anything about tech innovation, it's just a tendency towards the higher or lower category.
And in my case, the answer is pretty easy to give:
I didn't play any.
Not because games are worse. No, just because I don't play that many games any more. Which is an understatement. I hardly play any at all. But I'm pretty sure, from after more than half of Sam & Max Season 1 (a couple months ago, last time I played...), I like that more than CI. And I love games from Kheops, rating all of them above CI in fun factor. Oh and Runaway 2, I happen to give this an A (I think Aya would agree with me on that one, by the way). Even though it suffers from similar problems regarding the ending...
I agree with ukpetd. I found myself thinking that Phoenix was plain wrong on some questions and I didn't expect her to ask that way from the dialog option alone. But I should say, within the course of the game, I came to expect these answers. Which angered me nonetheless. :-/
Perhaps Phoenix is too human and her flaws are too obvious and off-putting. This society saved her when she was little, she is entirely thankful for that. Still, her inability to cope with criticism and behavior slightly uncommon of the norm as she understands it was annoying to me.
[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
|
| 23 JUN 2008 at 11:28am |
ukpetdSpace Cadet
Posts : 176
Joined: 27 JUL 2007
Status : Online | <quote>I wondered Elfstone & ukpetd what games released within the last two years each of you may consider worthy of a higher rating than CI & why?</quote>
Elfstone quoted Sam & Max season 1. I agree with this.
The Lost Crown is also rates higher (than CI) IMHO.
Both these games I found far more immersive and more fun to play. I guess the characterisation is more to my taste.
|
| 23 JUN 2008 at 12:30pm |
Taurnil MithrandirJourneyman
Posts : 1093
Joined: 13 AUG 2006
Status : Online | I liked both the story and the puzzles. Also it was not short and it will be a sequel!
....set the controls for the heart of the sun....
|
| 23 JUN 2008 at 1:43pm |
CulturaJourneyman
Posts : 1337
Joined: 1 SEP 2004
Location: NL, Amersfoort
Status : Offline | I think we need a sticky saying "Reviews are subjective!", because I find that every second person feels the need to explain this concept to us.
Well, eehh.. no. That is a being bit cynical. But a reviewer should seriously (re)consider his/her opinion, in case the fall out is as heavy as with the CI review.
There's a widespread feel, or so it seems, of disagreement. Of course reviews are subjective, but a reviewer is at his best if he translates the general feeling of the majority of (future) players in his review.
I, BTW, concur: CI was really, really dissapointing, almost from chapter 1.
|
| 23 JUN 2008 at 6:21pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Elfstone (22 JUN 2008 10:33pm)
loobiloo: I wonder why you base ratings on recent years rather than objective all-time quality?
Hi Elfstone, I can see that it came across as that but I don't! I just wondered what elements within the game lead to such an anomaly of rating. There's quite a big difference between Aya's A+, your B- & ukpetd's B+ which does generally seem to reflect the diversity of opinion from many people who have played the game.
The only reason I asked you to name more recent games was that I was more likely to have played them & therefore better able, out of my curiosity, gauge the difference if that makes sense! Otherwise I'm very aware that there are many superb games you could have listed pre my game playing years!
I see you mixed up both our posts. Was wondering where the second (and first part) came from. I should explain that C in my book means average. B is good and mostly fun. A is very good AND fun. The + doesn't tell anything about tech innovation, it's just a tendency towards the higher or lower category.
Oops! Sorry about that! : I've edited it & hopefully all's well! [smiley=laughing.gif]
And in my case, the answer is pretty easy to give:
I didn't play any.
Not because games are worse. No, just because I don't play that many games any more. Which is an understatement. I hardly play any at all. But I'm pretty sure, from after more than half of Sam & Max Season 1 (a couple months ago, last time I played...), I like that more than CI. And I love games from Kheops, rating all of them above CI in fun factor. Oh and Runaway 2, I happen to give this an A (I think Aya would agree with me on that one, by the way). Even though it suffers from similar problems regarding the ending...
I agree with ukpetd. I found myself thinking that Phoenix was plain wrong on some questions and I didn't expect her to ask that way from the dialog option alone. But I should say, within the course of the game, I came to expect these answers. Which angered me nonetheless. :-/
Perhaps Phoenix is too human and her flaws are too obvious and off-putting. This society saved her when she was little, she is entirely thankful for that. Still, her inability to cope with criticism and behavior slightly uncommon of the norm as she understands it was annoying to me.
I haven't played any of the Sam & Max games yet but will get round to them! I've played all of the Kheops games which seem for the most part to be well thought out & well produced & I also love both of the Runaway games.
I really liked Culpa Innata but it was interesting to read why you didn't like it so much. While I respect that, I can't agree that it deserves a lower rating.
(from ukpetd) The Lost Crown is also rates higher (than CI) IMHO.
I thought the Lost Crown was a very engaging & immersive game that I felt totally cheated by on reaching the end & being no wiser as to what the story was about. The story is everything to me & from that point of view Culpa Innata totally 'knocks the socks off of it'! [smiley=laugh.gif]
Thanks Elfstone & ukpetd for answering.
|
| 23 JUN 2008 at 7:39pm |
antlerIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 51
Joined: 28 NOV 2007
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Cultura (23 JUN 2008 1:42pm)
I think we need a sticky saying "Reviews are subjective!", because I find that every second person feels the need to explain this concept to us.
Well, eehh.. no. That is a being bit cynical. But a reviewer should seriously (re)consider his/her opinion, in case the fall out is as heavy as with the CI review.
There's a widespread feel, or so it seems, of disagreement. Of course reviews are subjective, but a reviewer is at his best if he translates the general feeling of the majority of (future) players in his review.
I, BTW, concur: CI was really, really dissapointing, almost from chapter 1.
Oh? Why should Aya, (yes Aya the reviewer has a name) change his review because you don't like the game? Are you that knowledgeable that others should change their opinion because it is not the same as your's? You say because the fall out is heavy. Heavy? Yes many in this thread are complaining about the game but then again it is easy to jump in and echo others statements. Yes this game has many who do not like it, however, A large number of people really liked it. For that matter for every person who idolizes Myst there is an equal number who hate it. That's the way it is.
A review is a reflection of what the author thought of the game. Along with describing the mechanics of how the game played and the type of game the author offers his or her opinion of the game. In this case Aya really liked the game, it is his right. If you are put off by long conversations because they get boring, there is nothing to do, fine don't play the game. I understand that some people's attention span is short, fine play something else. But to say Aya should reconsider his opinion because you disagree is blatantly over the top. If Aya reduced his opinion of this game because of "heavy fall out" I'd lose all respect that I have for his reviews.
|
