Quick Look: Sunset

ToT should have made a game about throwing a tantrum on twitter since people seem to actually find that more interesting than whatever sunset is supposed to be.

This as a game looks flat, boring and uninteresting.

I don't even find the visual style that gripping (given that 'art' is subjective and personal).

I get what they were trying to do (or at least; I think I do based on what' been put out there) but; like the same way some pieces of art, and some films fall flat of their intention; so does this game miss the mark.

I also think it is downright rude to call into question the sophistication of a fan-base that has been accepting of art games slowly for some time. In a lot of ways, thing's like Papers Please! have as much to say as Sunset; but it is told in a more engaging and fun way.

This is just my feelings on the whole thing.

@bobbarker: Are you saying they shouldn't quick look games that have a political theme? 'Cause I'm pretty sure that's not what Jeff meant when he said that.

@hcaryan: yeah, if the last couple years has taught us anything, it's that people really give a shit about twitter.

Happy Colourful Skeleton Day!

I'm not sure this is actually a game, so much as it is a semi-interactive freshman-level essay with absurd system requirements, especially given the limited environment and spartan aesthetics. When you're down to praising the fonts to fill space during a QL, the rest of the experience is clearly lacking.

Soulless Maid Simulator 2015. Now with 50% more pretension.

@homelessbird: No, that's not what I mean. This Quick Look was a vehicle for political ideas (eg. public funding of "art games"), I have no issue with the game itself being Quick Looked.

Well, with all the, let's call it "vivid" conversation and controversy surrounding it, the game at least accomplished something, right?

Still doesn't look appealing to me at all, even though I do like to dabble with the occasional arts game.

@bobbarker: They did not make this quick look to promote the idea that games should be funded by governments. That's part of the conversation because this game was funded by a government, and in talking about the subject, they gave their opinions on it, which everybody on this site does all the time. If you're asking them to be careful about which opinions they express, just in case it gets too "political," then I personally couldn't disagree with you more.

why is this guy leaving notes about his house all over the place

I really, really dislike this game. I was a fan of The Path by Tale of Tales, but this game just completely pissed me off.

The absolute worst cardinal sin a walking simulator game could ever do is give the player a freaking time limit. I'm here to explore and calmly read and put together the pieces of the story. If you give me a time limit on how much I get to interact with your world, you have just completely broken your own game's point.

Uninstalled this game very early on, thank god for Steam Refunds.

I'm totally on board with Austin's feelings toward mundane spaces in video games, but I reeeeally don't like how this game looks. The lighting, the spacing, it all reminds me way too much of a bad New Vegas mod. It doesn't feel like I'm walking around a house, it feels like I'm walking around a furniture store.

@homelessbird: The narrative about public funding in art games being a fundamental part of this game is a narrative being promoted primarily by Austin. I imagine Austin jumped on a single reference to public funding by the gamedevs as a way to talk about CanCon laws, which isn't relevant to this game. Austin goes as far as to distance the "larger political conversation" from this game, since it's a pretty bad "game" and not really relevant to the political discussion he's trying to push.

@bobbarker: The reason that Tale of Tails made Sunset, by their own admission, was because of a change in the way games were being evaluated by the Flanders Audiovisual Fund in Belgium. Their reaction was to produce this game, which was their attempt to make a "commercial" product. Outside of Kingdoms of Amalur, I can't think of another game more relevant to the subject of public funding of games.

But, really, the mere fact that you think Austin is trying to promote an agenda here, rather than discussing things he thinks are interesting, means that you and I inhabit different realities, and never the twain shall meet.

@homelessbird: you could talk about basically any Canadian game, or at least any Canadian game that was worked on exclusively by Canadians (which I believe is the CanCon funding requirement).

Guys, Austin is an "academic" from "Academia." His thoughts on the "larger political conversation" are beyond any of us. I'm glad he didn't go too much into it. My head was starting to spin from the depth and complexity.

Well, they are reviewing the game and not the developer/company. They're taking an objective view of the content. Sorry that it isn't more colored by events that don't happen in a game? That's what a quick look is for. they play the game and see how it plays, how they feel about playing it.

Uhh, except as I mentioned before, they already spent some time in the QL discussing the company and the funding situation. If the QL was entirely focused on the game, sure, this would be a good argument, but since they clearly had no issues talking about the situation around the game and the developers of it, not mentioning the massive elephant in the room seems like a very deliberate decision to shield the devs from criticism.

@sor_eddie: So because they mention that it's a kickstarter game that didn't sell very well they're discussing the company?

I understand you have a fucking erection for dragging these devs through the mud, but this is not what a quicklook is about. You read a blog post for juicy dev drama gossip. This is not the format for that.

Tigsource Devblogs is a forum with an amazing collection of supportive devs that will give you help if you ask for it (and if you aren't producing something that looks novel or game-worthy you won't attract attention, something to definitely take note of), so after stumbling on their devblog there it's obvious to see that the problem was obviously ineptitude compounded by a short release window (a lot of devs starting out there, and they ask for feedback and advice, Sunset devs did neither though they obviously needed it).

The overt focus on irrelevant graphical details, lack of actual gameplay demonstrations or play-testing of any sort until very late in development, while simultaneously griping that the game would be hated throughout the logs really lends credence to my belief that they recognized they were in over their heads technically, and skimped on actual game design thinking they could rely on a crowd to buy it simply because it was indie/an art-game (quality notwithstanding).

Those who are fans of adventure games/"walking sims" and proponents of more experimentation in gaming shouldn't blindly rush to defend devs like this, they should judge them on their relative merit alone in order to prevent devs from just shoveling out work without thinking.

If Jeff reviewed this I'd have been upset if I didn't hear "hot garbage" said at least once. However, with how late this QL was in the whole saga, and how the operative policy for GiantBomb as a whole tends towards toning down overt criticism of controversial topics in order to appease all camps of the polarized, closed-minded gaming-forum-posting crowd GBeast not ragging on it makes perfect sense.

No, they also mention the stuff about the government funding, about who Tale of Tales said they were aiming this game at, etc. They very clearly have no issue with discussing the devs, their situation, their motivations, etc.

@sor_eddie: So basically you're upset they didn't shit on them enough? What exactly are you looking for? They got their point across by showing the game for what it is. Boring. Pointless. Telling rather than Showing.

They haven't reviewed the game yet on the site, and they may not ever. I reiterate so maybe you'll understand. Quick Looks are not the format for what you're asking for, so you being upset they didn't go off format enough is ridiculous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moving_the_goalposts

Originally you said that they didn't need to and shouldn't speak about the "external" story of the developers

When I pointed out that they already did so in the actual QL, you then attempted to downplay the extent of what they talked about

Now that I've pointed out said extent, you've now gone and changed your tune yet again.

Please make an effort to not be so obvious in the future. And btw, it has nothing to do with "being upset they didn't shit on them enough" or something ridiculous like that. It has to do with it being a glaring omission to the "story" of the development of Sunset which they otherwise had no issue entering into some candor about.

I've just finished Sunset and I agree; it is interesting. The trouble with it is that it's inordinately slow. Every day has only a few tasks to achieve which drags out the narrative over almost an entire year. I enjoyed the themes, but because it was so slow and the forced gameplay contrivances it has (e.g. Angela HAS to go home at 6pm and she never stays late), it often feels disappointing.

Still, it has some great music.

@sor_eddie: Dude, you keep talking and all i'm hearing is "wehh, they didn't gossip enough".

Yeah they went off structure talking about the devs, but they're not supposed to, which is why they didn't keep doing it. You can act like I'm moving the goalposts, but you still don't get it that what you want is not what a quicklook is about. Here is what you want: http://www.polygon.com/2015/6/22/8826145/tale-of-tales-studio-will-no-longer-make-games-after-commercial Now go read that, and stop saying that Alex and Austin should have continued the gossip parade you're desperately longing for. Yes, I saw your previous posts, you obviously have some sass to dish out against the developers, so really all this would be for is to satisfy you and you alone. This topic has been covered by other sources already.

Damn, I didn't know they had broken the rules. I guess it's because Austin is new... Can you link me to the relevant passage in the Official Giant Bomb Quick Look Guidebook for posterity?

...What's that? No such thing exists? And you're moving the goal posts yet again while also acting as some weird arbitrator of the "rules" of Giant Bomb content? You don't say!

@sor_eddie: weh, their opinion isn't what i wanted it to be, obviously it's because they're afraid to speak the TROOF

Deflection, deflection, deflection...

Wanting people to state all relevant literal facts in order to fully tell the story and paint a situation accurately isn't the same as being upset with someone's opinion, hope this helps.

@sor_eddie: THE TROOF.

The basic frame work of the premise is sound, but they needed a more engaging set of mechanics to accomplish the game. They needed the character you play to "show" not just "say" information, and most importantly they needed in the story and game actions to engage the player.

Sorry to say it, but they might have had a vague ideas of the game they wanted to make, but they obviously just did not know how to make it.

What is really puzzling is figure out what THEY THOUGHT was so commercially desirable about this game....? Moreover, what the hell were they were making before that was even less mainstream?

@briktal: I think you're right, around the time there was talk of there being a ghost in the game. The quick look comments were full of it.

I enjoyed the discussion between Alex and Austin and the end bit was pretty funny, but man this "game" seems absolutely boring as fuck.

@bananasfoster: I thought the 'haunted house' feeling successfully put across the realistic vibe of being alone in an empty house, trying to figure out what the hell is going on. That vibe is very much and purposely there but it just added to the atmosphere of playing that game.

I don't believe Fullbright ever advertised the game as a 'horror' game by any means, critics just pointed out the false vibe the game gave and people took it to mean it was actually a horror game.

@brootyz:

You can't honestly look at THIS:

and say the "spooky" vibe was subtly implied or just built up into the heads of consumers. Add to that the multitude of reviews and previews that specifically stated "there are secrets in the game... the less you know going in the better the experience will be"; phrases that are commonly used to avoid spoiling horror/mystery stories, and it's a clear case of the developers pulling a bait and switch and the gaming press going along with it. I can also say this from personal experience: I wasted $20 on this garbage I would have had zero interest in and would not have looked twice at had I simply known what the genre and theme were.

@absolutedeicide said:

@brootyz:

You can't honestly look at THIS:

and say the "spooky" vibe was subtly implied or just built up into the heads of consumers. Add to that the multitude of reviews and previews that specifically stated "there are secrets in the game... the less you know going in the better the experience will be"; phrases that are commonly used to avoid spoiling horror/mystery stories, and it's a clear case of the developers pulling a bait and switch and the gaming press going along with it. I can also say this from personal experience: I wasted $20 on this garbage I would have had zero interest in and would not have looked twice at had I simply known what the genre and theme were.

I completely agree. I just looked this up on GOG the other day and the attract-text now goes out of it's way to explain that there IS no puzzle solving, combat, or gameplay of any kind in the game. It's actually a very apt description now. When I bought the game off Steam, Day 1, it wasn't.

I don't know why no one else praised this comment. Your painting idea perfectly encapsulates what Sunset seems to be trying to say, and I bet examining that painting would be far more engaging than playing this game. Also speaks to an apparent problem with the game: they're attempting to communicate, over multiple hours of dull gameplay, a message that would fit more comfortably in a medium-size canvas that takes only a few minutes to understand and appreciate fully.

Then again, I didn't play the game, so I really have no idea what I'm talking about.

didactic!

@absolutedeicide: Well, I personally CAN look at that and say I wasn't expecting a horror game. And like I said, there is a spooky vibe to the whole game but that's done on purpose. The game itself it subverting your expectations but I never saw the game marketed as a game that belongs in the horror genre.

The game's 'secrets' end up being the strongest aspect of the game. The secrets in the games game are story details you have to explore to find out about. Secrets about your family and the history of the house.

You can't knock a game for subverting you expectations, especially after reading reviews of the game and never noticing the words "jumped out of my seat" or "spooky monsters" mentioned in any of them. Look at Metal Gear Solid 2, the game was marketed as a game where you played as Snake and look at what it ended up being. People don't go up in arms complaining about that fact and Kojima even gets praise for it.

But yeah, I'd agree that the game was a little overpriced. That's why I waited for it to be under $4 during a Steam sale.

I'm shocked they even had this much to say about the game.