Sword & Sworcery EP Also Coming to PC, Mac

Cant wait for it.

Awesome.

Kind of hate the "EP" though.

Wish this were coming for Android, but heck, Steam will do. Possibly even better!

@TheGorilla said:

@evanbower: Damn that made me laugh way more than it should have.

And sworn enemies became the closest of friends.

@evanbower: Damn that made me laugh way more than it should have.

@TheGorilla said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

Ah.

Well it wasn't funny. So maybe that's why no one got it.

Wow, you sound crazy as shit. Chill out. We are on the internet.

And I will reiterate since it seemed to piss some people off so much: S&S is a terrible game.

How do ya figure?

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

Ah.

Well it wasn't funny. So maybe that's why no one got it.

Wow, you sound crazy as shit. Chill out. We are on the internet.

And I will reiterate since it seemed to piss some people off so much: S&S is a terrible game.

@Tidel said:

Worth buying twice, so I will.

Don't forget the third time, for the consoles.

Now with multiplayer.

Awesome, can't wait! If it's a cheap indie game available on multiple OS'es, I'll at least try it out.

This doesn't strike me as a pretentious game, from what I can tell. "Pretentious" to me is someone who works in an art field, whether it be music, TV, games, etc., regardless of mainstream or obscurity, who goes "YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND MY ART, HOW DARE YOU CRITIQUE IT" if someone has the slightest complaint about their work.

@depecheload: EPs and LPs are a type of music release. Like, an EP is "short album" with about 4 or so songs, like The Beach Boys' Wouldn't It be Nice EP. An LP is a full album with around 12 usually, like The Beach Boys' Pet Sounds. The idea is that they put out the EP first, then return with a full-length LP. But by the time they have put out the full-length they have sold out their sound, that's the joke we were making.

@cabelhigh said:

@BrockNRolla: Beautiful art and story do not good gameplay make. It was soul-crushingly boring and the boss battles were TERRIBLE.

Never said they did. I didn't play it for the gameplay, as subsequent conversation in this thread explains. I enjoyed the boss battles though. They may have been repetitious, but I liked the rhythm ans sound design behind the encounters enough to enjoy them nonetheless.

@BrockNRolla: Beautiful art and story do not good gameplay make. It was soul-crushingly boring and the boss battles were TERRIBLE.

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

Good. I'm glad I'm not the only person who though this.

@JazGalaxy said:

@PXAbstraction said:

@DriftSPace said:

@PXAbstraction said:

I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes.

Pretentious does not mean "high-brow, intellectual" at all, and people should not use it to describe those things.

"Pretentious" is used to describe a statement about something which is unfounded, assumes a lot, or contains pretense; pretense is an attempt to make something sound true which is not, or is presumed to be true without a supporting argument. Pretentious is always a "bad thing in general sense," because it usually comes out in the opinion of someone who doesn't understand what they are discussing. Just saying "professional sports sucks" is pretentious because it objectifies someone's opinion by defining an object with a subjective experience; saying that Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the world is pretentious for similar reasons; talking animal movies (or all anthropomorphic stories) are, by definition, pretentious because they presume that animals think and act like humans would if they had animal bodies. Racism is also pretentious.

(However, calling any work of "fiction" pretentious is usually not apt anyway because -- as it is called "fiction" -- never tries to pass itself off as truth. If we use "pretentious" in this way: Star Wars and Tom Sawyer are both equally pretentioius)

My idea of intellectualism is when people have concise and consistent arguments for things because they have thought about them, and therefore (true) intellectuals are not pretentious because they can support their arguments.

So, yes, pretense is a bad thing because it means someone is trying to sell you a line of misinformed crap as authentic. Anyone calling Swords & Sworcery "pretentious" is being vastly more pretentious than the game could ever be, as the game -- a work of fiction -- does not assert itself to be anything other than it is; the people calling it "pretentious" are actually being pretentious by making assumptions about the aim of the game based on the language, art, or whatever else.

The appropriate word for describing something you think is trying too hard to be smart -- which is also sometimes involves being pretentious -- is "haughty," which is generally what people think of posts like this.

So if the word pretentious was being in appropriately used in my posts, what word would you say would have been more appropriate? I'm genuinely asking because I thought I was using the word correctly from the definition I looked up. The word doesn't matter to me so much as the meaning I was trying to convey with it.

I think you said what you meant to say when you said "high brow intellectual stories". But the question is, and I can't answer this, whether that in and of itself is pretentious? Why do you feel the need to play "high brow intellectual stories"? I personally feel like a lot of people say they want to play games like that because they feel like that portrays them as being people of substance. Like they're smart, cultured, refined, individuals. But wanting people to see them as such is the definition of pretentious. Especially when they point to games that AREN'T any of these things as justification as to why they are. A guy in a previous thread today was making all kinds of deep, unfounded statements about the brilliant morality study that was Grand Theft Auto. That was pretension because anyone who has played GTA, and most people in the thread, pointed out how unfounded his comments were even if GTA is a fun game.

I don't necessarily feel a need to play stuff with intellectual stories per ce and I don't play them just to look down on them. Some of my most enjoyable titles to play right now are shooters like Battlefield 3 and while I didn't care for Braid's story for similar reasons to this, I loved the game. The Longest Journey is my favourite game of all time and its story is quite complex and doesn't hold your hand throughout. I just like variety and want to try different experiences to see if there are other things out there for me to like. Trust me, I am not particularly smart, cultured or refined. :) I'm a big fan of storytelling in games and games that make you think (which doesn't happen much really) and I bought S&SW because it was apparently so story focused and so many were saying how great the story was. So far, my experience has been that it's a story that barely makes and sense and has virtually no gameplay behind it which could make up for that shortfall. I still haven't finished it and given it's length, I probably will because it will require minimal time investment so maybe that will change but thus far, not so much. Others may disagree and if they do, that's fine. It's quite possible I just don't get it.

Perfect. I've wanted to play this ever since Patrick brought it up in the GOTY discussions (or even before that, I can't remember).

I've wanted to play this for a long time, especially since it's made by Capybara. But when they released it on iOS my first gen iPhone couldn't run it. And it never came to Android or WP7.

It's great to hear that it's finally coming to a platform I can play it on, but I wish it hadn't taken so long.

Cool. One of the few smartphone games that I've been wanting to try.

Good choice of platform. I would be cautious if it were attempted on PS3.

I am stoked to finally be able to play this! I have been wanting to for some time.

Interested to give the game a try.

@Dan_CiTi said:

@abara said:

@Dan_CiTi said:

I'll wait for Sword & Sworcery LP.

Sucker. I'll keep repping the first demo (before they sold out their aesthetic).

You're right, I need to stick with the original 7 inch I got back in the day.

@depecheload said:

@Dan_CiTi said:

I'll wait for Sword & Sworcery LP.

You mean the soundtrack?

You missed the joke.

What joke? The game is called "Sword & Sworcery EP" while the soundtrack is called "Sword & Sworcery LP."

@abara said:

@Dan_CiTi said:

I'll wait for Sword & Sworcery LP.

Sucker. I'll keep repping the first demo (before they sold out their aesthetic).

You're right, I need to stick with the original 7 inch I got back in the day.

@depecheload said:

@Dan_CiTi said:

I'll wait for Sword & Sworcery LP.

You mean the soundtrack?

You missed the joke.

@Dan_CiTi said:

I'll wait for Sword & Sworcery LP.

You mean the soundtrack?

Oh, it's the game. I totally thought "EP" was the soundtrack. Makes sense, I guess.

LOOKS GREAT CAN'T WAIT.

@PXAbstraction said:

@DriftSPace said:

@PXAbstraction said:

I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes.

Pretentious does not mean "high-brow, intellectual" at all, and people should not use it to describe those things.

"Pretentious" is used to describe a statement about something which is unfounded, assumes a lot, or contains pretense; pretense is an attempt to make something sound true which is not, or is presumed to be true without a supporting argument. Pretentious is always a "bad thing in general sense," because it usually comes out in the opinion of someone who doesn't understand what they are discussing. Just saying "professional sports sucks" is pretentious because it objectifies someone's opinion by defining an object with a subjective experience; saying that Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the world is pretentious for similar reasons; talking animal movies (or all anthropomorphic stories) are, by definition, pretentious because they presume that animals think and act like humans would if they had animal bodies. Racism is also pretentious.

(However, calling any work of "fiction" pretentious is usually not apt anyway because -- as it is called "fiction" -- never tries to pass itself off as truth. If we use "pretentious" in this way: Star Wars and Tom Sawyer are both equally pretentioius)

My idea of intellectualism is when people have concise and consistent arguments for things because they have thought about them, and therefore (true) intellectuals are not pretentious because they can support their arguments.

So, yes, pretense is a bad thing because it means someone is trying to sell you a line of misinformed crap as authentic. Anyone calling Swords & Sworcery "pretentious" is being vastly more pretentious than the game could ever be, as the game -- a work of fiction -- does not assert itself to be anything other than it is; the people calling it "pretentious" are actually being pretentious by making assumptions about the aim of the game based on the language, art, or whatever else.

The appropriate word for describing something you think is trying too hard to be smart -- which is also sometimes involves being pretentious -- is "haughty," which is generally what people think of posts like this.

So if the word pretentious was being in appropriately used in my posts, what word would you say would have been more appropriate? I'm genuinely asking because I thought I was using the word correctly from the definition I looked up. The word doesn't matter to me so much as the meaning I was trying to convey with it.

I think you said what you meant to say when you said "high brow intellectual stories". But the question is, and I can't answer this, whether that in and of itself is pretentious? Why do you feel the need to play "high brow intellectual stories"? I personally feel like a lot of people say they want to play games like that because they feel like that portrays them as being people of substance. Like they're smart, cultured, refined, individuals. But wanting people to see them as such is the definition of pretentious. Especially when they point to games that AREN'T any of these things as justification as to why they are. A guy in a previous thread today was making all kinds of deep, unfounded statements about the brilliant morality study that was Grand Theft Auto. That was pretension because anyone who has played GTA, and most people in the thread, pointed out how unfounded his comments were even if GTA is a fun game.

@DriftSPace said:

@PXAbstraction said:

I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes.

Pretentious does not mean "high-brow, intellectual" at all, and people should not use it to describe those things.

"Pretentious" is used to describe a statement about something which is unfounded, assumes a lot, or contains pretense; pretense is an attempt to make something sound true which is not, or is presumed to be true without a supporting argument. Pretentious is always a "bad thing in general sense," because it usually comes out in the opinion of someone who doesn't understand what they are discussing. Just saying "professional sports sucks" is pretentious because it objectifies someone's opinion by defining an object with a subjective experience; saying that Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the world is pretentious for similar reasons; talking animal movies (or all anthropomorphic stories) are, by definition, pretentious because they presume that animals think and act like humans would if they had animal bodies. Racism is also pretentious.

(However, calling any work of "fiction" pretentious is usually not apt anyway because -- as it is called "fiction" -- never tries to pass itself off as truth. If we use "pretentious" in this way: Star Wars and Tom Sawyer are both equally pretentioius)

My idea of intellectualism is when people have concise and consistent arguments for things because they have thought about them, and therefore (true) intellectuals are not pretentious because they can support their arguments.

So, yes, pretense is a bad thing because it means someone is trying to sell you a line of misinformed crap as authentic. Anyone calling Swords & Sworcery "pretentious" is being vastly more pretentious than the game could ever be, as the game -- a work of fiction -- does not assert itself to be anything other than it is; the people calling it "pretentious" are actually being pretentious by making assumptions about the aim of the game based on the language, art, or whatever else.

The appropriate word for describing something you think is trying too hard to be smart -- which is also sometimes involves being pretentious -- is "haughty," which is generally what people think of posts like this.

I disagree. Something is pretentious when it is concerned with pretense. You are absolutely right when you say that it is something that pretends to have content but in reality lacks the content it portrays itself as having.

Sword and Sworcery is EVERY BIT of that.

As I said in my previous statement, it sells itself with the quote that it is "hipster zelda". It's not even a game. It features a number of game systems that are used once if they're fully fleshed out at all and ultimately fails to be a game in any common sense of the term. Is it an experience? Sure, one could say that. Is it art? One could say that. Is it a videogame? No. Attempting to sell it as such is disingenuous and pretentious.

@Robster said:

Cant wait to play this! haven't experienced it yet

This "game" is garbage, honestly. There's very little interaction at all, and what is there isn't very compelling outside of the general asthetics of it. I, non sarcastically and in all honestly, would have enjoyed it more on YouTube than I would have actually "playing" it.

The art is awesome.

The music is cool.

Some of the dialog is funny in a "heh. that's quirky" way.

The unorthodox "we're serious about not taking this seriously" way of naming characters and objects is funny.

None of those things take place in the context of a game.

I bought it because it was referred to as "hipster zelda". It's more honestly a "hipster speak and spell".

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

Ah.

Well it wasn't funny. So maybe that's why no one got it.

Or perhaps you're really, really stupid. I mean, it's entirely possible!

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

And, seriously dude, how much is this going to run me? Cause.. I've got money.. but.. well, we'll talk.

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. Where do I get one?

@Dan_CiTi said:

I'll wait for Sword & Sworcery LP.

Sucker. I'll keep repping the first demo (before they sold out their aesthetic).

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

Ah.

Well it wasn't funny. So maybe that's why no one got it.

@evanbower said:

@ChrisTaran said:

@depecheload said:

@Alex_Carrillo said:

@mbr2 said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

WOAH OPINIONS

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact that I stand behind.

No, your personal taste and views on things are opinions. Get over yourself.

Nope, sorry. It's been scientifically proven. It's a hugely offensive game.

How do ya figure?

Goodness. Relax a little and learn how to take a joke. Opinions by their very definition can't be objective, it's blatantly obvious I wasn't being serious. Get a sarcasm detector.

@DriftSPace said:

@alternate said:

You are so pretentious.

By definition, the most pretentious statement yet; you don't know shit about me.

Literally.

Sigh, I really wish more of these games would come to Android. I'm sick of only being able to Angry Birds and Game Dev Story.

@DriftSPace said:

@PXAbstraction said:

I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes.

Pretentious does not mean "high-brow, intellectual" at all, and people should not use it to describe those things.

"Pretentious" is used to describe a statement about something which is unfounded, assumes a lot, or contains pretense; pretense is an attempt to make something sound true which is not, or is presumed to be true without a supporting argument. Pretentious is always a "bad thing in general sense," because it usually comes out in the opinion of someone who doesn't understand what they are discussing. Just saying "professional sports sucks" is pretentious because it objectifies someone's opinion by defining an object with a subjective experience; saying that Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the world is pretentious for similar reasons; talking animal movies (or all anthropomorphic stories) are, by definition, pretentious because they presume that animals think and act like humans would if they had animal bodies. Racism is also pretentious.

(However, calling any work of "fiction" pretentious is usually not apt anyway because -- as it is called "fiction" -- never tries to pass itself off as truth. If we use "pretentious" in this way: Star Wars and Tom Sawyer are both equally pretentioius)

My idea of intellectualism is when people have concise and consistent arguments for things because they have thought about them, and therefore (true) intellectuals are not pretentious because they can support their arguments.

So, yes, pretense is a bad thing because it means someone is trying to sell you a line of misinformed crap as authentic. Anyone calling Swords & Sworcery "pretentious" is being vastly more pretentious than the game could ever be, as the game -- a work of fiction -- does not assert itself to be anything other than it is; the people calling it "pretentious" are actually being pretentious by making assumptions about the aim of the game based on the language, art, or whatever else.

The appropriate word for describing something you think is trying too hard to be smart -- which is also sometimes involves being pretentious -- is "haughty," which is generally what people think of posts like this.

So if the word pretentious was being in appropriately used in my posts, what word would you say would have been more appropriate? I'm genuinely asking because I thought I was using the word correctly from the definition I looked up. The word doesn't matter to me so much as the meaning I was trying to convey with it.

@alternate said:

You are so pretentious.

By definition, the most pretentious statement yet; you don't know shit about me.

(Har har.)

Anyway, I really liked this game, but I also didn't really have any expectations when I started it. It's unique, which is a plus, and it engages the player in some non-traditional and creative problem solving. I don't really expect touch-screen games to have good play-control; I think that's ... pretentious.

It reminded me of when I used to play King's Quest as a kid, but with a smarmy and psychedelic twist.

@Snail said:

@burnquest said:

@Snail said:

"Before the summer solstice" has go to be the most pompous, pretentious way to announce a release date I've ever seen.

It's actually very funny and fits right in with the mood of the rest of the game, where gameplay is actually dependent upon what the current phase of the (real) moon is.

Ooooh, I didn't know that. That's kind of cute actually.

Yup, but you can't have fun with language guys. That'd be artsy and we wouldn't want that.

/sarcasm

@DriftSPace said:

@PXAbstraction said:

I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes.

Pretentious does not mean "high-brow, intellectual" at all, and people should not use it to describe those things. "Pretentious" is used to describe a statement about something which is unfounded, assumes a lot, or contains pretense; pretense is an attempt to make something sound true which is not, or is presumed to be true without a supporting argument. Pretentious is always a "bad thing in general sense," because it usually comes out in the opinion of someone who doesn't understand what they are discussing. Just saying "professional sports sucks" is pretentious because it objectifies someone's opinion by defining an object with a subjective experience; saying that Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the world is pretentious for similar reasons; talking animal movies (or all anthropomorphic stories) are, by definition, pretentious because they presume that animals think and act like humans would if they had animal bodies.

(However, calling any work of "fiction" pretentious is usually not apt anyway because -- as it is called "fiction" -- never tries to pass itself off as truth. If we use "pretentious" in this way: Star Wars and Tom Sawyer are both equally pretentioius)

My idea of intellectualism is when people have concise and consistent arguments for things because they have thought about them, and therefore (true) intellectuals are not pretentious because they can support their arguments.

So, yes, pretense is a bad thing because it means someone is trying to sell you a line of misinformed crap as authentic. Anyone calling Swords & Sworcery "pretentious" is being vastly more pretentious than the game could ever be, as the game -- as a work of fiction -- does not assert itself to be anything other than it is; the people calling it "pretentious" are actually being pretentious by making assumptions about the aim of the game based on the language, art, or whatever else.

You are so pretentious.

@PXAbstraction said:

I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes.

Pretentious does not mean "high-brow, intellectual" at all, and people should not use it to describe those things.

"Pretentious" is used to describe a statement about something which is unfounded, assumes a lot, or contains pretense; pretense is an attempt to make something sound true which is not, or is presumed to be true without a supporting argument. Pretentious is always a "bad thing in general sense," because it usually comes out in the opinion of someone who doesn't understand what they are discussing. Just saying "professional sports sucks" is pretentious because it objectifies someone's opinion by defining an object with a subjective experience; saying that Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the world is pretentious for similar reasons; talking animal movies (or all anthropomorphic stories) are, by definition, pretentious because they presume that animals think and act like humans would if they had animal bodies. Racism is also pretentious.

(However, calling any work of "fiction" pretentious is usually not apt anyway because -- as it is called "fiction" -- never tries to pass itself off as truth. If we use "pretentious" in this way: Star Wars and Tom Sawyer are both equally pretentioius)

My idea of intellectualism is when people have concise and consistent arguments for things because they have thought about them, and therefore (true) intellectuals are not pretentious because they can support their arguments.

So, yes, pretense is a bad thing because it means someone is trying to sell you a line of misinformed crap as authentic. Anyone calling Swords & Sworcery "pretentious" is being vastly more pretentious than the game could ever be, as the game -- a work of fiction -- does not assert itself to be anything other than it is; the people calling it "pretentious" are actually being pretentious by making assumptions about the aim of the game based on the language, art, or whatever else.

The appropriate word for describing something you think is trying too hard to be smart -- which is also sometimes involves being pretentious -- is "haughty," which is generally what people think of posts like this.

@evanbower: Sorry, was being sarcastic :p

I came here simply to say "hell yes."

It's a game. If the mechanics are bad they should have made some other form of entertainment instead. It's cool that you liked S&S so much. I wish I could say the same, but I just found it so unpleasant. We'll never agree.

I'd say ME2's unique class mechanics make that game's combat interesting.

@BrockNRolla said:

@PXAbstraction said:

My girlfriend recently bought a used iPad 2 and I've been trying out some of the big "gems" of iOS. I just don't get this. It has incredible music and sound design but there's barely any interaction besides walking and solving some puzzles that just have arbitrary trial-and-error solutions. And yes, the storytelling as I've seen it is pretentious. So was Braid but at least is had solid puzzle gameplay to back it up, this doesn't seem to. I've only done two "sessions" or whatever they're called so far. Can people tell me if things improve or pick up steam over time? I often share opinions of popular titles but I just don't get what the deal is with this.

A person writes a story that is strange and abstract, so instead of attempting to understand why and how it fits with the overall theme and feeling of the game you just write it off as "pretentious?" If you finish it, and don't like it, that's fine, but just because something tries something different doesn't mean it is "pretentious."

As the story progresses, you begin to understand it more and more, and maybe even begin to appreciate the weirdness. By the time you realize what's going on, if you're anything like me anyway, you'll be surprised at the emotional response you end up having. If you're not feeling it, and don't want to play it, that's your prerogative, but the "pretentious" claim is simply a way for people to talk mess about the game without actually engaging with it.

Well, I think "it's not pretentious just because you don't engage with it" is as reductive an argument as any you claim I'm making. Something being abstract and hard to understand doesn't make it artful and meaningful. I've played other products that have abstract narratives like this that I've enjoyed quite a bit. But so far, everything I've been reading in this game basically doesn't make any sense. Every description given is a confusing mix of abstraction mixed with modern language and all it does is confuse. I did another "session" today on the treadmill and I still have no idea what's going on or what emotional investment I'm supposed to have in it. Now that I know how short the game is, I probably will play it through to the end to see what happens and if it can hook me in. But if I have to wait until the end to get hooked in, there's something wrong. Something can be arty and outside the box without having to read like someone ran every third word through Thesaurus.com. This is supposed to be a game but there's barely and "game" to this.

The thing is, I use the term pretentious but I don't even think that's a bad thing in general sense. High-brow, intellectual stories are a great thing and I'm all for strong narrative in games that explore unique and different themes. I think games can and should be emotionally moving (my favourite game ever is The Longest Journey for that very reason and I'm buying Journey tonight) but when a game's story is so confusing as to be barely understandable, that can be pretentious because the designer expects you to "think like them" in order to make sense of it. That's the vibe I get from this game, despite liking games that try to push the narrative envelope. There's lots of games I don't like, particularly from a story point of view but I don't use the term pretentious to describe them all. Like I said, I think Braid was too, it was just a great game on top of that so it didn't matter.

@TheGorilla said:

@BrockNRolla said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

I'll assume you haven't played it then. It might be unconventional, but between the fantastic story and great art style, I can't imagine how someone can call it "terrible."

Totally did play it, although I admit I didn't finish it. Story and art don't make a great game. Gameplay does. S&S has, in my opinion, terrible gameplay. It is extremely unpleasant to control and has poor pacing. I think the game is boring. I also don't actually like the art. The only thing going for the game is the soundtrack.

If all a game needed was an okay story and great art then Battlefield 3 would have been fantastic. But holy shit, that game's single player was terrible.

Well, a lot of people would disagree with you about Battlefield, but I've got no interest at all in modern military shooters, so I won't go there.

But people play games for all kinds of different reasons, not just mechanics. Between the art, music, and story, S&S comes out to be a wonderful experience. People put up with lackluster mechanics all the time to experience great games. ME2 had only passable shooting mechanics, but people sure as hell still thought that was a great game.

One of my favourite games from last year. I'l definitely pay for it again.

I guess I'm interested. I'll probably pick it up anyway since (I assume) it won't be very expensive.

@BrockNRolla said:

@TheGorilla said:

Great! So more ways to play a terrible game.

I'll assume you haven't played it then. It might be unconventional, but between the fantastic story and great art style, I can't imagine how someone can call it "terrible."

Totally did play it, although I admit I didn't finish it. Story and art don't make a great game. Gameplay does. S&S has, in my opinion, terrible gameplay. It is extremely unpleasant to control and has poor pacing. I think the game is boring. I also don't actually like the art. The only thing going for the game is the soundtrack.

If all a game needed was an okay story and great art then Battlefield 3 would have been fantastic. But holy shit, that game's single player was terrible.

I'm all over it.