Cagliostro88's forum posts

#1 Edited by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

Depends on the game

@bigsocrates you can have unintentional weirdness even in recent games. Vinny is basically your man for that. Seeing him play Velvet Sundown, Bot Colony, and the bus simulator to name a few in the last months was really entertaining

#2 Posted by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@nightriff: No it's seems to be quite different from Civ 4,5, and from Alpha Centauri (that was one of my favourite games of all times, but I already understood this game is not a remake of it). Much of the focus seems on the three different paths (purity, supremacy, harmony), the way these interact with the "tech web" (no longer linear tech advancement), and the aliens wich have a much more prominent role in the game than classic barbarians in civ. From this point of view the harmony affinity (kind of adapting/merging to the new planet) seems to have interesting possibilities (even though i'll go for supremacy the first time, yay cyborgs!). Also satellites appear to have a large role. I don't have proper understanding of the various factions (like franco-iberian, slavic, brasilia), but they are not like the factions in AC as far as i can tell.

The most different feature i see, and the one i don't understand much at this time, is the quest system. It seems like it will create kind of a narrative inside the game, and the winning condition of building the affinity "wonder" appears tied to it (like merging with planet conciousness for the harmony path), but i didn't see enough myself to properly understand

They released a lot of promotional dev video logs in the last months, you should check some of them to understand more of it :)

#3 Posted by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

My deepest condolences Jeff :(

#4 Posted by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@fisk0: I agree 100% with you. Patrick even compared it to Hack 'n' Slash, saying the latter had more interest around it, but that's not true: it peaked at 226 players, just before release and after release. That's less than 1/4 of Spacebase. It can be fairly compared only with other Amnesia Fortnights products, and it comes on top even with the game only on early access! Iron Brigade peak was at 702, Costume Quest 742, Stacking 660, and they were all games fully released.

The more i reason about this whole mess, the less i understand why, if they wanted the game to be only funded by the early-access program and so they needed to be able to sell it easily, they priced it in a extremely high tier of prices for smaller games. 25$ (or the equivalence of 30$ if you are european) is a lot to ask for an early acces game of this size, it only reinforces the stance to wait for it to be finished and to see if it is good

#5 Posted by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@deegee: The team was 4 people, led by Jp Le Breton. Development was one-year and half. That's 720k only on employees, to that you must add every other voice of expense (like licensing fees). Tim Schafer said they used every every cent from the early access program to develop the game, plus a little from their own accounts. The 400k in investment they got was recouped in just two weeks, that means the game stopped selling quite early. But you have to think that a decent amount of money would come only when the game is fully released because many people, and we have some testimonies in this very thread, buy games only when they are in their final form. Now i doubt that money will be the same as before this debacle, and they damaged at least slightly their future projects with crowdfunding. Many very loyal fans like me will not go through a similar experience with them (at least it appear so by reading their forum and the game's one on steam). On this game they'll probably go even or with a minor gain, but who knows to how much the future damage amounts.

I guess I wished they stated clearly from the start: this game will be developed only with continuos payment by customers all throughout development, we're not gonna take any prominent financial risk of our own on it (they are not a 2 people indie studio that don't have any alternative), so be mindful of this additional risk.

#6 Edited by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@jthom252 said:

http://www.doublefine.com/forums/viewthread/14974/

I understand the majority of points, but i'm absolutely dissatisfied by Tim's answer about sales. He basically said "yeah sales are on a lot of times". That doesn't excuse at all putting the game on sale 50% just a week prior to it moving to the final state. If a person decided to buy the game a week prior, by seeing it on sale, he/she would have seen "alpha 6", not "beta", not "version 0.9.3". Tim says they are development terms but this is just technically right and a lot disingenious, if you put it on the game page it becomes a marketing term. So this person is gonna buy the game, thinking it's still a long way in development, and instead he gets basically the same version with hotfixes. It's simply not accetable, they knew a week prior they would not continue developement, so it's not an attempt to create audience to keep working on it. Furthermore if said person was worried by looking at the sparce updates, he would have ended up on DF forum looking for answers, and would have read that post (i see now that with the merging of threads on their forum it no longer link properly) by the main developer that only a month ago declared to not worry, since Double Fine it's not a "fly-by-night indie developer".

I've already made peace with the fact that i cannot trust them on future early-access/crowdfunding ("fool me once...") and that's ok, i'll buy their games only after a while they are out and only if they have positive reviews (and to think i own every single one of their games...it won't be the case any longer); but the whole attitude with the latest steam sale it's not fine at all to me.

#7 Edited by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@pcorb said:

@cagliostro88: The infantile attitude towards sexuality I'm talking about is not anywhere near as pervasive outside of games. Case in point is the fact that you're talking about Mass Effect as if it's Crime and Punishment when the characterisation and "romance" elements you're talking about would be regarded as pulpy, B-movie material in just about any other medium.

No i'm not talking about Mass Effect as if it's Crime and Punishment. At most i related the sexy elements in it to trash pop culture. And you know that ;)

You don't have to tell me narrative in games is a very basic level, everybody knows that and i agreed from the start. Would you point me to someone who wrote otherwise? That games are at the same narrative level as a whole to any another medium?

What i'm saying, for the n time, is that to me the way to reach new and better levels in narrative and inclusion is through adding and expanding. Not through eliminating. The positive force has to come through new games, new ways of thinking the narrative and characters in games, not by taking away the things you don't like. Make the people who are doing improving works feel your support, mainly by buying their games, and don't support the games you don't like. Simple as that

But this is getting very repetitive. I think i cleared more than once the points i was trying to make, so i'm gonna stop :) always a pleasure having a civil discussion with disaagreeing points!

final edit: @tdot: I understand what you're saying. I guess i didn't think that much of it because Bioware has use this kind of sexualization for years, mainly post acquisition from EA, see Samara/Miranda/Isabela/etc, but usually the characters behind used to be at least thought-through. The Bioware that made ME3 is not the same that was behind ME1. And personally doesn't bother me that much because i think of it as silly and done in a cheap way, the same way i can think of Megan Fox bending on a bike in a transformer movie

Regarding the video in the first page i'm totally with you, "boys will be boys" is not a way to argue anything (especially since this specifical line was used for years to justify bullying). She raise some points that are intelligent, others very stupid like the magazine/tv shows one (like having Cosmopolitan and Elle is the only printed press in existance, while we have so much magazines targeted specifically at males -_-')

#8 Edited by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@tdot: But they made much more than just show off her polygonal body. They changed the whole attitude of the character. If they simply gave her a "sexy space amor" (i would have never imagined to type a sentence like that in my whole life :D), and kept the same attitude that would have been somewhat fine. But they went from a strong no-nonsense soldier (that i didn't like btw, hate space racists :D) to a different character. They evolved her in a massively stupid way (i guess i should have expected that from the late Bioware). Look at Samus Aran for a similar comparison: they did give her too high heels and a skin-tight suit. But the actual problem was how the character itself changed in Other M

#9 Edited by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@pcorb said:
@cagliostro88 said:

And that is totally different than saying "they lack the confidence in their creative skills and use it as a substitute for well-thought characterization".

It's not. The characterisation in ME2 is only well-thought out for a video game, as I said. One of the main things holding back video games as a narrative form is the infantile attitude they routinely display towards sexuality. If ME2 is your best counter to that, I really have no idea what universe you're living in.

I guess that we're living in different universes then, because to me Miranda and Samara are not a sign that Bioware was reduced to use sex as the only way to develop characters (and that was your statement)

To say that this attitude holds back videogame is proved wrong by simple reality. Compare to any other medium you want: Movies? Written narrative? Music? You have your Transformers, your 50 shades, your Max Martin pop. You're gonna tell me that these things existing don't make it possible to have great movies, books and songs at the same time? That having these trashy pop things cancel the other amazing works? Because if not you can have you're pixely boobs and at the same time you can explore new narrative in other, new, exciting games. And that's exactly what i want. Keep the Dragon's Crowns and the Lollipop Chainsaws of the world, there is an audience that wants that, but at the same time we can have more serious games that want to improve the status-quo. And i'll pay for them

Your answer to the representation and narrative issue is "remove things". Personally i prefer "let's add things" :)

#10 Posted by Cagliostro88 (129 posts) -

@nexas said:

@cagliostro88: Fair enough, but considering Bioware's output in recent years I think the assumption is pretty valid. The company seems to have huge lack of confidence in everything they do now a days.

I agree, that's why i used *past* Bioware in that post :)