| 13 AUG 2008 at 9:40pm |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Terry Penrod (13 AUG 2008 9:29pm)
.
There wasn't a single redeeming quality about that insipid, moronic Games Radar article and Randy's admittedly harsh response was fully justified.
Who (other than yourself) gives a crap about the other details?
Details? As I said, what goes around comes around. If it's all for fun, clicks or whatever else: that response and this series of articles have been guilty of the very same all along! All claims, all generalizations, all prejudices, but little substance.
|
| 13 AUG 2008 at 9:42pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (13 AUG 2008 9:39pm)
Originally Posted By Terry Penrod (13 AUG 2008 9:29pm)
.
There wasn't a single redeeming quality about that insipid, moronic Games Radar article and Randy's admittedly harsh response was fully justified.
Who (other than yourself) gives a crap about the other details?
Details? As I said, what goes around comes around. If it's all for fun, clicks or whatever else: that response and this series of articles have been guilty of the very same all along! All claims, all generalizations, all prejudices, but little substance.
You have a very warped definition of the word "same".
Cheers, Terry
|
| 13 AUG 2008 at 9:47pm |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | Seeing what your view of an average games editor is like - just shortly we were talking about condescending things being thrown around in this thread, by the way - I can't say I'm surprised you don't take notice.
|
| 13 AUG 2008 at 9:52pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (13 AUG 2008 9:46pm)
Seeing what your view of an average games editor is like - just shortly we were talking about condescending things being thrown around in this thread, by the way - I can't say I'm surprised you don't take notice.
You haven't a clue what my view of an average games editor is.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 13 AUG 2008 at 10:05pm |
Mr Innocent.Journeyman
Posts : 1317
Joined: 15 JAN 2008
Location: GR
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (13 AUG 2008 9:14pm)
the majority however prefer to stick with classic-style PC adventures BECAUSE they are slow-paced, focused on puzzle solving and have relatively low system requirements.
Slow-paced to a fault, like the quoted review claims the game in question to be though? That is, if you read the entire paragraph instead of what is quoted in JA+'s article?
I did read the entire paragraph. The part quoted by Randy conveyed its meaning perfectly, and I am grateful to him for not making me read the whole drivel but gave me an abridged version instead. "Taking things out of context" directly if not explicitly implies changing the meaning of what the other person is saying. That has not happened here.
Verbosity does not make up for not having a real point to make. But if you were aware of that, your posts would be very different...
|
| 13 AUG 2008 at 11:34pm |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Terry Penrod (13 AUG 2008 9:52pm)
.
You haven't a clue what my view of an average games editor is.
Fair enough, make that average mainstream game editor if you like.
Originally Posted By Terry Penrod (1 AUG 2008 4:35pm)
.
Most (but not all) mainstream game-site reviewers do pander pantingly to younger readers that demand the latest graphics and lots of action. They also make a habit of launching into childish rants when reviewing slow-paced, point & click adventures.
It's like the latest crop of chatty, trend-mongering, MTV hype heads reviewing sophisticated jazz music, classic-style literature, traditional gourmet cuisine or fine wines.
That analogy is pretty absurd, by the way. Your average video game is the equivalent of french fries and a cherry coke to wade through, and a penny dreadful to sip on thereafter. Your average adventure game is no different. Not in any kind of way. Anybody could pick one up and get the gist of it. There is nothing special about them either: slow pace is nothing unique to adventure games. The shocking truth is: badly written game reviews and articles exist. We're all so human. They exist not just for adventure games. They're not limited to major sites and magazines, either. I know you're all trying to make a point, as is the article. But until you can prove anything, it's rather futile. In the case of the article, as it's also a response, a public response, even, it's one step further than that.
Originally Posted By nik2008ofs (13 AUG 2008 10:04pm)
"Taking things out of context" directly if not explicitly implies changing the meaning of what the other person is saying. That has not happened here.
Can I take it you conditioned yourself to bad voice acting and snooze-inducing narrative enough to not even bother anymore?
Verbosity does not make up for not having a real point to make.
And one ignorant article is no excuse for posting another.
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 12:19am |
Mr Innocent.Journeyman
Posts : 1317
Joined: 15 JAN 2008
Location: GR
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (13 AUG 2008 11:34pm)
Can I take it you conditioned yourself to bad voice acting and snooze-inducing narrative enough to not even bother anymore?
You can take whatever you like, and most probably do, against doctor's orders unless I greatly miss my guess. What you can't do is state opinion as fact and get away with it in this forum. Secret Files: Tunguska had above average voice acting, an interesting if unevenly paced story, good graphics and amazing cinematics. Many adventure gamers didn't like the game as much as I did, and presented their case without sounding as if the very concept of letting 3 seconds of game time go by without shooting somebody is an insult to Reason. In case you are still uncertain, the previous sentence is my opinion of mainstream game editors, and if any of them wants me to start caring about what he (and it is always a he, in mainstream sites) has to say, he'll have to give at least 5 adventure games reviews that don't read like he's doing a chore.
Oh, and as an answer to what you have quoted me saying, your reply is so irrelevant that it is almost surreal.
Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (13 AUG 2008 11:34pm)
I know you're all trying to make a point, as is the article. But until you can prove anything, it's rather futile.
You aren't proving anything either. That doesn't seem to faze you.
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 3:48am |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Honestly, at this point I'd rather talk to his droid.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 4:32am |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By nik2008ofs (14 AUG 2008 12:19am)
What you can't do is state opinion as fact and get away with it in this forum.
The World Wide Web is cluttered with mess as is already, no need to place redundant qualifiers all over the place. IMHO. This ain't my opinion, this is what Games Radar's reviewer deemed voice acting and storytelling in Tunguska to be like. Exposition apparently taking centre stage for the better part of the game. Voice acting that makes you go "meh" all along. And one of the main character's being at fault here, nonetheless. If so or no, surely these are reasonable factors in jumping to quoted conclusion. The same conclusion that is then easily employed to shoehorn him neatly into twitch jockey category c). Really, who gives a green tentacle about bad writing, probably lost in translation, or else? He was tempted to skip it! Enough about details, as if the article wasn't full of childish insults and generalizations enough already. Eye for an eye, I guess, eh?
Oh my dear.
You aren't proving anything either.
It's not about proving anything. It's just very hard for one to imagine - stupid remarks made about men and girls or no - that this is deemed an appropriate response to the culprit at hand. By (what I assume) are grown-up men and women, nonetheless.
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 5:30am |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (14 AUG 2008 4:32am)
It's not about proving anything. It's just very hard for one to imagine - stupid remarks made about men and girls or no - that this is deemed an appropriate response to the culprit at hand. By (what I assume) are grown-up men and women, nonetheless.
Still totally missing the point aren't you?
The unbelieveably ludicrous and cowardly comment that the highlighted portion of your above reply refers to is the main reason that Randy took such offense at the GamesRadar article. It is also why we think he was justified in posting an angry response.
ALL other issues pale by comparison in this thread and your repeated attempts to off-handedly dismiss the original insult by Tyler Nagata and/or Shane Patterson at GamesRadar is almost as offensive - particularly given your exceedingly condescending attitude.
Which leads me to a perfectly serious and justified question.
Is your name Tyler or Shane?
If not, are you sleeping with Tyler or Shane?
Cheers, Terry
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 2:09pm |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Terry Penrod (14 AUG 2008 5:29am)
.
ALL other issues pale by comparison in this thread
Before finally putting this to rest, let. Me. Speak. More. Clearly. To. Explain. My. Disbelief. Taking action is one thing. But any point this response is trying to make is lost beneath the same kneejerk defensive, reactionary hogwash rethorics as seen a thousand times before. The response is not really about giving Games Radar's editors in question hell for making foolish remarks about a review, an audience and the corresponding game they might have or might not have played. While the culprit assesses Nancy Drew and Nancy Drew only, the response suddenly goes all pimping its agenda. At its very core the response is about generalizing, stereotyping and the same old adventure gamers vs button mashers rubbish all over again. It is us vs. them:reloaded. If the original article was ignorant scribbling to generate some clicks, the response wasn't all that either, based on equally ludicrous stereotypes, guesswork and broken arguments as is. Way to let your voice go unnoticed, but maybe that wasn't even the point, who knows.
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 2:51pm |
Randy-JAJourneyman
Posts : 1351
Joined: 11 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Well, I 've just read all of this today, so before onemanandhisdroid puts this all to rest with his final declaration, I would like to state the following in response to "any point this response is trying to make is lost beneath the same kneejerk defensive, reactionary hogwash rethorics as seen a thousand times before."
Appearantly, my response was not lost beneath blah, blah, blah (what you said), as the Future plc legal department sent me a letter of apology and removed the offensive line from the article. I only hope that Mssrs Tyler and Shane were also appropriately reprimanded. There are and should be consequences for such irresponsible and libelous remarks.
Mr. Onemanandhisdroid may also want to sharpen his fangs and stock up on some venom as I'm working on a follow-up, knee-jerk article concerning Future plc's response and quotes from the numerous emails of support that were received - many from developers and publishers who are fed up with sites like Games Radar.
|
| 14 AUG 2008 at 7:38pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Randy-JA (14 AUG 2008 2:51pm)
Mr. Onemanandhisdroid may also want to sharpen his fangs and stock up on some venom as I'm working on a follow-up, knee-jerk article concerning Future plc's response and quotes from the numerous emails of support that were received - many from developers and publishers who are fed up with sites like Games Radar.
I can't wait. This should be very interesting indeed.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 11:59am |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Randy-JA (14 AUG 2008 2:51pm)
Mr. Onemanandhisdroid may also want to sharpen his fangs and stock up on some venom as I'm working on a follow-up, knee-jerk article concerning Future plc's response and quotes from the numerous emails of support that were received - many from developers and publishers who are fed up with sites like Games Radar.
Well, no. I just sincerely hope the representatives in question have something meaningful to say, as I'd imagine there is something meaningful to say. Without ranting. And all the rambling. Talkint about rambling, one just doesn't know what the usual rambling is even really doing in that response. As said before, Games Radar's article adresses Nancy Drew. Its remarks are purely directed at Nancy Drew. Its audience. And a review. That this happens to be perceived as an adventure game by some? Doesn't matter. That is, until one wants it to. What is coated as a response to really foolish remarks turns into the same kind of by-the-numbers mainstream press vs. adventure games scribbling you can read all over the places since adventure games somehow appeared to go out of style.
Tragic as usual: every time the response tries to tackle a couple of issues well worth discussing, such as the difference in target audiences one is writing for or expertise in what one's writing about for instance, it's all lost in the mix. As it is then time to switch into lazy mode and just quote every prejudice, unproven accusation and cliché ever brought up whenever an adventure game got a spanking wherever. Bound to send some cheering. But still the same old meh all over. Games Radar might be a really shite site for all I care. If one points finger to apparent lack of professionalism, how about setting a good example, though? Maybe this is a cultural thing, and I just don't get it. But rant or not, removed remarks or not, at its very core this article is the antithesis of every insightful Steve Ince, Al Lowe or Jane Jensen interview ever published on JA+. And one terrible remark is no excuse for that. Considering that this remark and the corresponding article was misused as a springboard for the usual agenda, not anyway. Somebody felt the urge to step up and tell. An adventure gamer, nonetheless.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 1:22pm |
Mr Innocent.Journeyman
Posts : 1317
Joined: 15 JAN 2008
Location: GR
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (15 AUG 2008 11:59am)
I just don't get it.
Indeed.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 1:28pm |
ShanyGuild Master
Posts : 3313
Joined: 19 JUN 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (15 AUG 2008 11:59am)
Tragic as usual: every time the response tries to tackle a couple of issues well worth discussing, such as the difference in target audiences one is writing for or expertise in what one's writing about for instance, it's all lost in the mix. As it is then time to switch into lazy mode and just quote every prejudice, unproven accusation and cliché ever brought up whenever an adventure game got a spanking wherever. Bound to send some cheering. But still the same old meh all over. Games Radar might be a really shite site for all I care. If one points finger to apparent lack of professionalism, how about setting a good example, though?
Thank you!
I don't see why everyone else here thinks it was ok to act just as immature as that other site.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 3:03pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Shany (15 AUG 2008 1:28pm)
I don't see why everyone else here thinks it was ok to act just as immature as that other site.
Because sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. In doing so, he got their attention, they pulled the offending line and a follow-up from other developers and publishers who are just as fed up with that sort of treatment is now in the works. If Randy had written a nice elegant post, then it would have been read and largely ignored.
Try not to forget who drew first blood. The mainstream press have gotten away with ripping on the genre for YEARS in the most abusive way. Randy had been the sole voice standing up and saying, "WTF?!?" That sole voice has grown into a multitude of voices saying, "WTF?!?" Now you guys are saying, "Awwww, play nice. You are just as bad?" F that.
Have you not read the mainstream reviews that rip on an AG just because it's an AG and use their review as a soapbox to harp about what they think is wrong with the genre? Or reviews that rip on an AG because it is nothing like some action packed game that happens to share a similar name? Seriously, some guy ripped on Barrow Hill because it was nothing like Silent Hill. WTF?!? How is that "fair" to developers?
As far as I'm concerned, Randy gave those guys what had been coming to them.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 4:00pm |
ShanyGuild Master
Posts : 3313
Joined: 19 JUN 2003
Status : Online | I thought the offensive line has been removed because Randy personally contacted the owners of the site - not because Gamesradar saw the response.
Anyway, making generalizations about mainstream writers and insulting them only makes the adventure fans seem more like a jaded crowd stuck in their little niche - as if we think every non-adventure game is about shooting.
There may be a biased opinion against adventure games in the mainstream media - I don't go to many of the big sites so I don't know - but if there is, wouldn't you prefer to read a long, researched article with plenty of examples rather than an insulting repsonse to what was probably more of a joke than anything else?
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 4:15pm |
Mr Innocent.Journeyman
Posts : 1317
Joined: 15 JAN 2008
Location: GR
Status : Offline | A joke? Are you kidding, Shany? Any man that accuses me of being a pedophile in real life can fully expect to have his balls cut off and stuffed in his mouth. But maybe I should rethink the last part, it would impede his ability to argue that he meant it as a joke.
You don't visit major sites, fine. Take our word for it, there is no need for a long, researched article to illustrate a war against adventures they started unprovoked all they way back in 2000 and that they have waged ever since, with no organized response from our side. Articles like the ones in Games Radar have been prominently featured in one major site or publication or other every other month, none of them meant as a "joke".
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 5:27pm |
onemanandhisdroidIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 13 AUG 2008
Status : Online | If Randy had written a nice elegant post, then it would have been read and largely ignored.
There's a difference between stomping your feet on the ground and writing nonsensicals.
Seriously, some guy ripped on Barrow Hill because it was nothing like Silent Hill.
Sure, fishy reviews exist. Not just for adventure games. And not just on major sites and in major mags, while we're at it. But there's still no need to generalize. It's fun, I know. Game editors are male, twenty-somethings who like to blow stuff up, adventure gamers are middle aged women considering semi-interactive Powerpoint presentations to be the pinnacle of gami..., er, no. Bear with me and let me allow to quote two excellent posts from the thread I linked to earlier in this thread.
Adventure games are, at this point, a somewhat obscure genre. An excellent genre, but an obscure one. Some big sites (and small) do have problems with their reviews of graphic adventure titles. The thing is - they don't do it out of spite. They do it because they don't know any better.
people have now created an insular argument to deflect all criticism, unless it comes from adventure-only sites. If Gamespot, IGN, CGW, or PC Gamer (for example) criticizes puzzles at all, out comes the pre-packaged, ready-made argument, "They just hate adventures!" Convenient, isn't it? We've created a defensive kneejerk reaction that doesn't even allow them to judge the game for the very things they need to assess.
For an example of this I need to look no further than the rant.
Even more to the point is Paul Byrnes conclusion in his Games Radar Secrets of Atlantis review: [ch8220]You'll hate: Stupid, pointless puzzles, Stupid, pointless dialogue, Cookie-cutter story.
Harsh, but an assessment of what's important nonetheless, whether you agree with that assessment or not. Ditto the Tunguska example - surely fishy voiceacting and meh narrative is nothing desirable to have in your adventure game.
If you feel this sudden piece of mainstream vs. adventure games editorializing has a place in what is supposed to be a response to the Nancy Drew incident or not (I don't, as mentioned earlier), taking a closer look through the site in question makes it (#1) all (#2) even more nonsensical (#3).
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 6:39pm |
| Deleted User | Note that, interestingly, nik2008ofs is not a middle-aged gentleman stuck on point and click. Neither is Terry stuck on adventure games only, and neither am I a curious little girl stuck on Nancy Drew. We are actually gamers who play action titles as well - Shooters, Rpgs, Action-adventure, Strategy, etc.
We just happen to also enjoy AG's, amongst other genres.
It is for the very reason that we also play other genres, and therefore tend to visit other, general gaming sites, that we know how nasty and condescending the "fast-twitch only" crowd can be.
I might have agreed with Shany, if I didn't know that the detractors love portraying adventure gamers as old, doddery freaks (or curious little girls? :-[ )
So if the reply had been polite, it would simply have re-inforced the stereotype.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 6:50pm |
Lucien21Guild Master
Posts : 4876
Joined: 9 JUL 2003
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Shany (15 AUG 2008 1:28pm)
|I Don't see why everyone else here thinks it was ok to act just as immature as that other site.
I wouldn't say everybody.
The remark on the GamesRadar website was below the belt and a response was required, however the reply was over the top and certainly didn't flatter the genre to outsiders.
It gives the impression that we are happy to be stuck playing the mediocre rubbish that is getting churned out recently, that things like graphics or innvoation are not welcome, we are quite happy in our little niche corner pretending it's still 1990.
It perpetuates the stereotypes that we think the mainstream are dumbass, no patience twitch jockies. (I for one play a lot of games outwith the genre and yes compared to recent adventure games the 60 hours I spent in GTA4 was pure bliss, A fully realised world with decent AI, superb graphics, a good storyline, good voicework and loads and loads of FUN. It's no wonder the likes of Act of Murder or Nancy Drew doesn't stack up against them)
Because sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. In doing so, he got their attention, they pulled the offending line and a follow-up from other developers and publishers who are just as fed up with that sort of treatment is now in the works. If Randy had written a nice elegant post, then it would have been read and largely ignored.
More due to the personal threatening letter to the website than the article i'm sure.
Try not to forget who drew first blood.
Yeah because when I was kid and I punched my sister, the "but she punched me first" excuse always works. A stongly worded article without the insults would have worked just as well.
Dear Diary, My teenage angst bullsh*t now has a bodycount.
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 7:36pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
According to Randy, the editors and reviewers at GamesRadar completely ignored his initial response to the article and it wasn't until he contacted the parent company and STRONGLY complained that the offensive text was removed. As far as I know, he recieved no explanation or apology from the writers or the editors at GamesRadar - public or private.
A more reserved response from Randy would have accomplished absolutely nothing except to reinfoirce the same insipid adventure-gamer stereotype that many websites like GamesRadar have been perpetuating for many years now. A stereotype of staid, stodgy, old dinosaurs living in the past, always standing on ceremony, and refusing to "lower" themselves to the same childish level.
The fact that Randy's first response was ignored comes as no surprise to me. That's because I've tried employing a dignified, respectful, intelligent approach when lodging complaints with the editors of numerous mainstream game sites about similar rants, insults and accusations aimed at the AG community. Complaints that got one of two and only two types of responses. Either a curt, insulting reply or none at all. In no cases did my complaints ever lead to a civil, respectful reply, let alone any admission of guilt or a retraction or any other action.
This has happened more times than I care to recall over the past seven or eight years involving reviews that start out with a typical "If you like slow, boring games that look like they were made last century, you'll love (game title)." In many cases, things just get nastier and more ignorant from there and often, the actual details of the games being reviewed are barely covered at all. That's because the reviewer spends half of his word count babbling on about how horrific AG games are in general and how much cooler 3D action, action-adventure and other genres are.
No, Randy's harshly worded response was not only 100% justifed, it was also necessary - that is if you agree the offensive remarks needed to be deleted from that article and the offenders needed to be exposed as the "dumbasses" they really are.
In this case, a polite and dignified response would have yielded no action. Calling the offenders out in no uncertain terms and calling the higher-ups' attention to their ignorant insults got immediate action.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 15 AUG 2008 at 8:06pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By onemanandhisdroid (15 AUG 2008 5:26pm)
.......But there's still no need to generalize. It's fun, I know. Game editors are male, twenty-somethings who like to blow stuff up, adventure gamers are middle aged women considering semi-interactive Powerpoint presentations to be the pinnacle of gami..., er, no......
Methinks you said that as a joke but sadly there's a lot of truth to it. Games must be the only media where there seems to be a large 'dominating' clientele which seems to narrow the outlook of anyone working within mainstream PR which dictates an attitude towards games that just don't fit in. AGs are almost never reviewed without any ignorant or derogatory remarks; devoid of any idea of the target audience. e.g. from PC Gamer:
ANKH – HEART OF OSIRIS
May-2007 Fancy a brisk, superficial Ankh?
Balls of steel. That's what you need to not merely ship a game using bloody codewheel copy protection in this day and age, but to advertise it on the box as a special feature. A "collector's item", even.
Pah. Ten out of ten for chutzpah, but a big fat zero for painfully reminding us of the glory days of free Zorkmids, novellas, and cloth maps. A collectable codewheel? Only if made of solid gold, and autographed by Ron Gilbert.
Heart of Osiris is an odd release. It's not a sequel to Ankh; more a standalone expansion. That's pretty rare for adventures, but there are worse games to do it for. Ankh was a genuinely pleasant surprise: hardly a genre classic, but still a playful adventure with plenty of personality.
Osiris continues its story after the end of the first game, bringing back the cast, tightening up the puzzles, and featuring a bit where you meet God manifested as the burning bush, and promptly fry an egg on Him. Just for that laugh, Heart of Osiris gets a bonus of 5%. (Oddly, there's no gag about Mohammed.)
The catch is that Osiris seems utterly oblivious to the idea that anyone didn't play the first game. The plot's hardly complicated - an evil death god, a magic relic, a version of ancient Cairo that takes itself as seriously as Monkey Island took the Caribbean - but none of it is properly introduced. Far too many conversations are of the "Hey, remember when..." variety, and despite jokes about the first game's length, this story is even simpler and shorter.
Were Ankh a movie, Osiris would be its direct-to-DVD sequel - and it's odd that they weren't released as a double-pack, given how little attention the first received over here. It would have been much easier to recommend, to new and old players alike. Still, we have what we have - and what we have claims to be an expansion, not a sequel. It's only fair to score it as one.
Sherlock Holmes: The Awakened
16-Apr-2007 The grating detective
Have a look at the Penumbra tech demo from indie developers, Frictional Games. It's taken many of the important principles of the old-fashioned adventure, and applied them to a 3D, first-person world, with all the lighting fancies and finely balanced physics you could hope for.
In other news, Sherlock Holmes: The Awakened has taken an old-fashioned adventure, and crammed it into a 3D, first-person world, with, er, some lights, and otherworldly physics, for seemingly no reason. Funny thing, perspective.
Holmes and Watson, played alternately, are investigating the mysterious disappearance of immigrant workers in 19th century London. But the narrative is so disjointed that it's necessary for Holmes to give Watson an awful comprehension test at the end of a chapter.
The Awakened is put together all wrong. Puzzles aren't introduced, but plopped in front of you with all the grace of an underpaid dinnerlady. Items are often concealed behind a single brick in a vast wall. And the occasional wonky physics puzzles feel out of place in the cerebral world of the great detective.
One of the most familiar adventure traits is the pixel hunt. But now, instead of scraping the cursor around the screen, searching for a microscopic detail essential for progress, you've got a complete 3D town to laboriously wave your first-person view all over, hoping to stumble on whichever obscure object will be necessary in three scenes' time.
The puzzles, despite their rude appearance, are fine. However, thanks to the higgledy-piggledy structure, you'll be Googling walkthroughs before the first hour is through. That's if you survive the voice acting that long. Hollyoaks doesn't come close.
So, points for making an effort with the 3D; it's occasionally quite pretty. But then take them all away again for not thinking in 3D. Or in order. And then a kick in the face for the voice "acting".
people have now created an insular argument to deflect all criticism, unless it comes from adventure-only sites. If Gamespot, IGN, CGW, or PC Gamer (for example) criticizes puzzles at all, out comes the pre-packaged, ready-made argument, "They just hate adventures!" Convenient, isn't it? We've created a defensive kneejerk reaction that doesn't even allow them to judge the game for the very things they need to assess.
The reviewers above just have to get their boot in, they tell you nothing about the game & 'things needed to be assessed' are not helpful without any constructive comments! Also bad spelling & phrasing - they deserve to be called 'dumbasses'.
|
