Quick Look: Sunset

When I see this game what I think of is some old Bombcast where a developer of a failed MMO said something to the effect of "I hope this game is remembered for what it was trying to be, instead of what it was." and Ryan or Jeff saying "That's something a crazy person says!"

I'm sure in their minds, Sunset was the deepest, most meaningful game in existence that changed the world, and I'm sure some small number of people out there (including some on this staff) spend time pondering how amazing it could've been if they just did this instead. But the reality is that this game does not seem very good, and we should remember it for what it is, not for what some people wished it was.

@brianp said:

+1

Every time I see this game discussed, I think of Velvet Sundown for whatever reason. I was gonna say this did nothing for me, but it got me thinking about Velvet Sundown so that's cool.

But as a game? Sorry, I'll pass and I won't feel bad about it.

Well I watched half of this QL and couldn't bear to watch the rest of it. Man oh man do I not want this. The video did a fine job informing me about the product and I'm quite happy to not spend my money on it.

@bananasfoster: Ouija boards were, and remain, massively popular household toys.

@marokai: Can't we remember it both ways at the same time? Sometimes the context surrounding a game's development is very important to understanding the game itself. Duke Nukem Forever is just a weird, archaic shooter if you don't know it spent over a decade in development. Dragon's Dogma makes way more sense when you know it was originally planned as an online experience. Kingdoms of Amalur is far more interesting as a glance into an MMO world that could have been. If you don't recognize what Sunset was going for, yeah - it's kind of a pile of garbage. The story is where the dream and the reality intersect.

@bananasfoster: I just think it's funny that you say that, because you're actually being much more flattering with that comparison than likening Sunset to a Zach Braff film. You may not be a big fan of French art cinema, but Braff's movies are pretty universally seen as juvenile preening pieces, whereas a lot of "French art films that meander and lack any real message or purpose" are considered masterworks. I bet if you compared Sunset to Godart or Truffaut, even while sneering, Tale of Tales would be flattered.

@homelessbird: Certainly we can recognize what it was trying to be, and keep in mind the circumstances of its creation. All of that is important for historical purposes and some kind of academic argument, but the end result is still the end result, regardless.

I mean, every game is trying to be the hottest shit. Almost every game comes out saying it's the most innovative, mind-blowing thing you've ever seen. Bold. Experimental. Gripping. Emotional. And on and on. To try and remember Sunset for what it was trying to be more than what it truly was in the end, I dunno, it just seems like an unfair courtesy born out of people's more patronizing expectations of indie games that you would never give to much of anything else.

Looking at something with different context can be an interesting experience but nothing changes the actual quality of the thing itself. Duke Nukem Forever is certainly more interesting because of its history, but it doesn't alter the fact that the game is poop at the end of the day.

@marokai: Well, I guess I agree and disagree. The context can't change the actual gameplay, certainly - DNF will always be bad - but it does change how I experience the game. When I play DNF, and slap some wall titties and make a dumb joke, I don't just think "well that's stupid," I think "man - at what point did this get added? Who is responsible for this idea, and how did it make it all the way to the final product?" Similarly, when (if) I play(ed) Sunset, I wouldn't JUST think "wow, what a bad game" - I'd probably spend a lot of that playtime thinking "so this is what Tale of Tales thought mainstream appeal was, huh?"

But we're kind of talking semantics at this point, I suppose.

God Jeff, you're so jaded.

Oh sorry I wasn't sure which thing to complain about this time.

Looks like Olly Moss's color palette. I was kind of interested in the game, but after watching this it seems there isn't much substance to it.

This seems like a bad game. Not saying this is a bad product per se, but from what I gather, there is no reason for this to be a game. Interaction is tangential to the story being told. If you're going to use games as a medium, then use the medium to your advantage. This seems better suited as a book, or even as a short film. Her Story does a similar sort of 'mundane storytelling' in a way that is actually interesting and uses interactivity, the player's input, to further the story in meaningful ways.

On a personal basis, I'm not sure I'm all that interested in anything the creators have to say, and the writing of their products (that I've seen) has been overwrought and a bit shallow.

You say that as if Sunset was the first game to try something like this or ToT were the only devs making these type of games. Just because I'm not into CoD doesn't mean I'm going to run out and buy this. Especially not after the whole "hey you piece of this gamer, stop being a neanderthal for 5 minutes and spend money on this masterpiece" sentiment surrounding this game.

Video games as artistic, creative exposition into the mindset of people who, under normal circumstances, would be pushed to the wayside CAN be amazing, thoughtful, eyeopening experiences, but art for art's sake is as empty as this game's apartment. It's not enough to simply step out and proclaim "THIS GAME IS ART", but you have to be able to move people, or at the very least, make them think. And with how the creators lashed out on social media, belittling gamers and the industry for, from what I gather, not making something that can hook them(Note: Not all games need sick guitar riffs and 360 no-scopes from grizzled war vets to hook gamers), just reeks of "NO YOU JUST DONT GET IT I AM AN ARTISTE!"

Sidenote: Alex and Austin make a great team.

O_o

This is the kind of comment my criticisms are met with and I don't really understand it.

Okay. Ouija boards are household toys. That doesn't in any way discount the intentional inclusion of the element into the game. How many OTHER video games have you played that contain Ouija boards, yet don't specifically reference the occult? How many movies? The fact that a house might indeed contain a Ouija board is irrelevant. It's IN THE GAME for a reason.

I think Tale of Tales played themselves the moment they tried to make anything less than what they really wanted to do. We can discuss the success of what they ended up making (and it seems like no one is super hot on it, even people who wanted to like it).

I don't want to single you out in particular because a number of people make this point but your comment alluded to the idea and it was floating across the top so here goes.

That argument misses the whole other half about what video games can do at the fundamental level, often inextricable from interactivity, and that's embodiment. Think about the history of games. No not video games but games. They go back thousands of years but what's so special about video games. It's not interactivity, and it's not even role playing because that existed before video games. It's visually representing something that you embody and "play as" whether its yourself in a world, a thing, or an established character. That is something that inherently no other medium can do. That intuitive link between character, space, and interaction.

It is something that admittedly is pretty subtle but if you take that into consideration and take video games as not only able to leverage interactivity but embodiment, then we can understand games that have you embodying a certain character being in place as compelling. Not all of them are compelling, certainly, and that's not my argument at all. Sunset seems to be shallow or flat in its own right independent of its genre but that is the larger point. The genre or approach isn't the problem and it having to meld mechanics with the storytelling isn't strictly necessary in order for it to be an effective video game. That puts it that much more on what is there, namely the visuals, the storytelling structure, the writing etc., but when it's super good it does something movies or backs can't.

Now video games often do meld mechanics with story with player choice which is another wrinkle that has been used to magnificent effect in a lot of games but again, it's not even necessary in order to tap into what video games bring to the table as a medium.

I can't speak to your tastes of course and even sympathetic players still might not find it in themselves to enjoy games like these. To each his own. I have friends who can't get into point and click adventure games, most of which are puzzles layered onto a character journey or story. But goddamn if being with those characters and seeing it all play out isn't some of my favorite things in games.

@morelikelames: I just wanted to say you expressed my thoughts on the whole "games are/can be art" thing perfectly.

At no point was I in danger of being interested in the game being played despite the thoughtful commentary. I guess that even if Sunset had been what it "could have been", I still wouldn't have liked it.

@cripplor said:

Pseudo-intellectual masturbation would be more appropriate, certainly not anything insightful.. It felt like a lot of tip-toeing around saying things that could be said simply, and with far less hand-wringing. It also comes off as condescending and intellectually dishonest, it really rubs me the wrong way.

Oh thank God! I needed Giantbomb to have someone who was playing KRZ. I'm glad Austin fills that role.

Shame about Sunset though. Seems like this whole game could have been accomplished in a painting of that skyline of 70s concrete skyscrapers with a background of verdant jungle to be exploited over the rest of the century, and nearer to the city, in oranges nearly lost to the radiance of sunset, explosions. Tell me how I'm wrong.

@bobbarker: you might just be reading into it all a little too much tbh

@tajasaurus: maybe, I'm viewing it in the context of Austin's former writing, the general response and the developers blowing up in a Phil Fish-esque fashion. Again, felt like a lot of tip-toeing.

Could not have said it better.

Try this, guys: Maybe Alex and Austin are (a) interested in having an intelligent, measured, mature conversation about a topic (heaven forbid) and (b) classy enough not to fully stick the boot into a company that's just gone down.

I do like the look of the environment – the various colour palettes used are pretty deluxe and certainly impart their own mood – but that character model and its implementation are a bit awkward. As for the gameplay and story, I'd still want to play it for myself, if only to notch it up as an experience (rather than, y'know, an Actual For Reals Game I Played).

I don't know, I just like ingesting all forms of media, good and bad. This one sure don't look great, but like a lot of things I'd still at least like to have my own firsthand opinion on it.

I love indie games - To the Moon is literally my favourite game/media thing ever. Papers please, FEZ, SpaceChem, FTL, Freaking GUNPOINT, Antichamber, Shovel Knight, Kentucky Route Zero and The Fall are some of my favourite games of all time.

I do not like Sunset. I just don't.

This is total trash. This is even worse than Hatred.

@morelikelames: I want to favorite this comment. I agree completely, it's really distressing how some developers are lauded for extremely subpar products just because they're "different." If Fumito Ueda is Wim Wenders, ToT and Fullbright are Diablo Cody.

Hiding under the umbrella of "art" does nobody any favors. Hopefully, in the future, we'll have a mix of quality games on par with film -- a good selection of blockbusters, indies, and art. Games are still in their relative adolescence, though, and we're juuuust about to reach the Welles, Kurosawa, and Cocteau period... It'll be a while before we see our own Godard or Truffaut.

@amyggen: I don't see anything to that effect so it might have gotten deleted. But to be honest, I am starting to feel that way too. It kinda started when Austin was complaining about a lack of black people in The Witcher, a fantasy game from a Polish developer based on Polish books.

I think he's a good writer but that sort of thing always comes across to me as the laziest sort of observation. Cultural differences do not equal disenfranchisement. It's like questioning the lack of black people in Police Story or something.

Now there's this bizarre apologist shtick for an utterly terrible game (worse than Hatred by a mile, honestly) because its incompetent developers were rightfully put out of business. While, of course, tiptoeing around their extremely disrespectful Twitter explosion.

So yes, I think there is room to disagree here.

@larrydavis: But is it possible that Austin and Alex don't regard this as "an utterly terrible game", and "worse than Hatred by a mile"? If you're willing to contemplate that, this isn't a "bizarre apologist schtick" but someone who disagrees with you about a game. Crazy, I know.

Also, they've talked about "their extremely disrespectful Twitter explosion" on the Beastcast, but why should they talk about that here? That's not relevant to the game itself, it's just people bringing it up in the same way they brought up Phil Fish's "Twitter explosions" (which is something that's not relevant to Fez, if you're looking at that game today).

This just strikes me as you hating a game and a developer, and not even being willing to contemplate that some people might disagree with you and if they do they're doing some "bizarre apologist schtick." That's just you shutting down all conversation about this.

I hate such a great number of the comments here so, so much. Austin and Alex did a pretty terrific job elucidating upon why they didn't think that this was a successful game and why that's disappointing, especially for Austin who liked some of ToT's more experimental works.

And yet here everyone is, saying wildly inaccurate things about them sugarcoating their opinions, not being harsh enough, or even worse knee-jerk type bullshit. Both Austin and Alex nearly explicitly said they don't think this is a good game and over the course of the Quick Look dipped into interesting discussions on design philosophies, storytelling in video games, what makes an interactive environment interesting or not, &c. I love hearing shit like that, especially from a guy as articulate as Austin, so this is one of the most interesting Quick Looks I've seen here in a while. It just seemed like two dudes sitting down and casually but not emptily talking about a medium they love. It's goddamn dope and shove off if you don't like it.

P.S. So someone tried to make a game that didn't turn out so well. ♫Sooooooo fuckin' what?♫ It happens. I'd hate to live in a world where only tried-and-true capital-S capital-G Successful Games are made. As someone said, you people aren't looking so much to find fair criticism of this game (something, again, Austin and Alex spent the whole video doing) as you are someone to crucify it. Then some of you in addition are using your petty dislike of Austin against him, which is super fucked (here's looking at you, snarky comment in the QL page for Bientôt l'été).

Gamers are a fucking abyss.

@amyggen: they say themselves, in roundabout ways, that they do not like the game, and think it fails in almost every aspect, but couch it in rhetoric that masks their actual feelings. On the Beastcast, in fact, Austin said he hasn't really liked most of their games. It seems more like he feels an obligation to stick up for them like they're some misunderstood geniuses rather than the truth: talentless hacks skating by on government funding and pretension.

And yes, the Twitter thing is relevant. This game was (supposedly) their attempt at a financial success, and when it burned up because nobody bought into their bullshit, they went on a rant about the evils of capitalism and "gamer scum". Were they truly that disgusted by having to "sell out", even when the end result is nigh-indistinguishable from their other games? Or was it simply a feverish, angry lashing out over their darling being roundly ignored?

That's something that should be examined, and I think figuring out their rationale in this whole event is far more interesting than Sunset itself.

That last bit is funny too. You're the one trying to shut down conversation that doesn't fit your view... As usual. I normally just report you and move on, but you've been especially combative here.

And sure, to humor your completely irrelevant point, Phil Fish is human garbage, but Fez was cool. A bad person can make great art (Doug Tennapel, Roman Polanski) and as long as the two are separate, there's nothing wrong with enjoying it. The developers' personality has nothing to do with me not liking their games. I don't think I've even heard anything out of them until this debacle. They've just always made awful games.

@sor_eddie: @amyggen: For future reference, a discussion about the quality of the comments, within the same comments section you're trying to discuss, is completely ridiculous and ironic. Please stop.

If anyone believes a comment to be genuinely disruptive then flag the comment or PM some moderators. We'll deal with it.

Let's get this back on topic. Thanks.

My biggest problem lies with the developers of this game. Here is a small snippet from one of them about art and why most people cant appreciate art:

I understand that many people “just don’t get it.” It is not unimaginable that art would require a level of intellect and sensitivity that not everyone possesses. But usually it’s a lack of education that lies at the basis of our indifference towards the very thing that could cure us.

Amazingly also one of the patreon goals for one of the developers is the following:

Shut me up! $5,000 per article You can silence me by simply not supporting this Patreon. But if you really want me to disappear from videogames altogether, stop writing about them but also stop trying to make them, basically get the f out of your precious hobby, all it takes is a bit of cash. Make my day!

So donate cash and he will stop writing about them and will not make anymore games either.

For more pearls of wisdom here is the link to the patreon site: https://www.patreon.com/MichaelSamyn?ty=h

Such an enlightening opinion.

Maybe it's a bad game? Maybe it's bad art? Maybe it's both?

Yeah, it's both.

So I am a bad person for not even knowing Sunset/Tale of Tales was even a thing till now?

I think I see why the team folded.

You often see people complaining that games are too similar and that gamers do not embrace anything "different".

I guess I am of the mindset that I want fun along with "different". The latter in and of itself does nothing for me. There are plenty of experiences that try to tell unique and interesting stories that are outside of what we traditionally see, but they do so in a way that is fun to experience. Sunset, and what I have seen from Tale of Tales' other offerings, do not seem to find that balance.

@yummytreesap: Yup.

@nardak: Geez. He seems to think... highly of himself.

Gabriel would give 3 stars on Yelp for Angela making the bed so coldly if Yelp existed yet.

This is more politics than game.

I liked The Path... a lot, probably more than it deserved, but when it came out, I was craving something different. I was in the same sort of sequel fatigue that I am now. I wanted Tale of Tales to do well and be recognized for merely daring to go for something, even if it didn't hit in all of the ways it was intended. I wrote a glowing review, compared it to some of my favorite works of cinema, suggested it to everyone I knew. As a broke artist, I have an affection for the concept of small, underdog creators advancing the medium.

I recall sending them a link to the review. I didn't really care to get a response, just wanted them to know that I enjoyed the experience. Imagine my shock when they responded by yelling at me for not comparing them to their favorite French auteur filmmakers. They were angry that I didn't praise them in a manner they deemed correct. Not a thank you, not even an acknowledgement that their work was appreciated.

I haven't played this game, nor do I plan to. I will say that, good, bad, or indifferent, things like this do need to be made. Perhaps they don't need to receive the critical equivalent of a participation medal simply for choosing to make it, but I'm certainly not offended that it was created.

I just wish the guys that made it weren't such pretentious douchebags.

@rockhardmeattitanlord: remember when Jeff said he didn't want Giant Bomb to be a political platform? =/

@bananasfoster: If you are horror game literate it screams horror game. That much is true. Gone Home certainly has lots of fun with that aspect. I’m not really into or (at least wasn’t) terribly aware of horror game tropes, so for me Gone Home was none of that. I also went into it (somehow) expecting it to not deal with any supernatural bullshit and it to be deeply rooted in reality (which it is).

I despise supernatural bullshit (hm … ok, I love it in KRZ, but there it’s more weirdness and not the super generic trope filled video game supernatural bonanza) and don’t generally can appreciate it on any level. It just flies over my head or it really, really annoys me. Luckily all the supernatural elements in Gone Home are obviously just two teenagers doing stupid teenager things. I mean, if you go in with the frame of mind I went into this game then that’s bloody obvious … and also part of the story. It tells you more about their character and frame of mind and maturity.

All of this is to say that I loved (loved, loved, loved!) Gone Home for its exploration and the lovely artefacts I could discover, the 3D space it created and placed to lovingly created artefacts in and the simple story it told. Super, super in love with it. No supernatural pretences required. I mean, dark spaces made me feel slightly creeped out (like when I go into the basement at night … I know there aren’t any ghosts), but all dark spaces do that if the atmosphere is there, and that was certainly alright … but mostly it’s about the writing (not so much the simple plot … I loved the heaps of detail in the writing on the artefacts and how lovingly crafted they were!) and the exploration and having to manually puzzle it all together and how well it all fit together and the sense of place and all of that and man, oh, man, I could write on and on and on.

All of this is to say, be a little more open minded about the reasons why some people liked Gone Home. You don’t have to like it, that’s ok. If you are not into the artefacts and exploration and if you are also not in simple coming of age plots (though for me the plot isn’t the star in this game … it’s the, again, lovely and detailed and awesome artefacts that tell the simple plot) then this game is not for you and that’s ok … but Gone Home wasn’t just loved because it was spooky. (Actually, I somehow feel that especially the most video game literate can be easily lead to believe this … because to them every dark space in a game where you don’t have a gun is obviously a horror game. That’s how a game like this just reads to a person like that. Others who are not similarly aware of those tropes may actually fare much better. Maybe for me personally it helps that I despise horror games and that they do absolutely nothing for me.)