ThunderPeel2001

I've never said any such thing, and I don't think I agree with the emphasis on "immersion". Games played in virtual reality don't automatically have better gameplay because they're more immersive.

I've heard journos struggle with it, too. Also, nobody is saying that Thirty Flights and Half-Life 2 have the same game mechanics!

I think you meant, "Oh, God. Oh, man! Oh, God. Oh, man! Oh, God" --- You get the idea.

Well I just had to purchase and playthrough the game in order to answer your question. To answer your first question, the only challenges I overcame was figuring out what the "game" wanted me to do next. When I did that, I got a bit more of the story. These challenges were extremely simple, however, and so as a game, I don't think it was much fun. However the story-telling was very well done. It focused on giving an immediate experience in the shortest time possible. I also enjoyed the art style and the music. There is also the fact that it was unique and original. There are three things here that it's important not to confuse: The game (go here and click this), the storytelling (fast, short, exciting scenes), and the story itself (three criminals get together for a crime). As Mr Pony quite rightly points out, it is not the story that makes it unique. The story could be changed to an equally immediate tale, with a different plot, and different characters. Similarly, graphic style could be altered. But if a new game offered similar "gameplay" -- i.e. do simple tasks to unlock a story -- then I think people would make the connection that it was derivative of Thirty Flights. This is not a criticism of Thirty Flights! It's unique and interesting experience, and I'm just deconstructing it, not criticizing it.

No, but it got the same reviews that all his non-Star Wars movies got. Sadly.

Max Payne 3 was too repetitive and limited. That's the general consensus. Gameplay is the thing you get from a game that watching a film can't give you. Or reading a book can't give you. Or listening to music can't give you. To be more precise, it's the satisfaction you get from overcoming a challenge. If the challenge is to simple (e.g. click here to win), it's boring. If it's too difficult (e.g. Paint a perfect copy of the Sistine Chapel with your mouse in 60 seconds), it's frustrating. If it's somewhere in between (e.g. Click the mouse to the beat of this song), it can start becoming enjoyable. (We get a rush from achieving something.) A game can offer an enjoyable challenge to begin with, but then just ask the player to repeat the same action, over and over, and then it becomes boring again. Anything outside of the satisfaction of overcoming a challenge is an enhancer or a inhibitor. For example, I love the story! Or, there's too much of a disconnect between the cutscenes and what the game asks you to do. Or, Oh God, I hate CliffyB! Or Tim Schafer is God! Or, the graphics are terrible. Or, the graphics are amazing! Etc, etc. You can play a game for its story, but you're not really playing it... You're just trying to get to the next bit of a compelling story. The game is a hindrance in this scenario, and people will often use cheats or turn the difficulty down, just to find out what happens.

This is a mystery, isn't it?

I agree with Mr Pony, and understand completely what this thing called gameplay is.

Surely he's referring to the red lines?

How did you manage this, exactly?

Holy shit! This is huge. The most successful independent filmmaker since Chaplin sells all to Disney. That's quite a sad ending to the story of LucasFilm, but then with no obvious heir, I suppose it was that or just close up shop. I respect his business acumen, at least in the early days. After he made Fox all that money with Star Wars, he decided he was never going to let that happen again. He did all the work, all they did was provide the money. You need both, yes, but which is more valuable? Lucas said it was the "art", and started giving the studios shitty deals (well, compared to what they were used to -- which just meant a fairer deal for the artist). They paid for everything, but he only gave them distribution rights. The rest stayed in Lucas's possession. Good for him. Sadly his Empire began to crumble. He sold off assets. Put money into digital technology, which pioneered change in the industry, but which didn't make him much money. He made a few independent movies (one of which is regarded as one of the biggest flops of all time), a moderately successful TV show. And then he returned to Star Wars for the Special Editions, and started making stacks of cash again. I think he felt the wrath of the fan boys quite acutely, and could never understand why their love had turned to hate. Maybe this selling to Disney was a final FU to them.

Any chance of a job for a foreign front end web dev, with back end skills, and 10 years of graphic design experience? Also without a work visa?

ROOM 237 is UTTER SHITE. I'm not usually someone who hates films, and to be honest, I don't really hate this one, but do think the entire film was a complete waste of time. If you fancy listening to lunatics for 90 minutes, then by all means, go see it. Otherwise this film has nothing to offer.

What did my wallet ever do to you?

The Real World: Idle Thumbs Edition - I'd watch that!

Wooty!

This is another one of those Kickstarters that I'd actually like to see happen, but it clearly won't. I think maybe they should have focussed on updating the game, rather than just the graphics. Either way, with 65 hours to go, they ain't gonna make it Anyone remember the Amiga original with any fondness? http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/850516062/wings-directors-cut

They run the shows like their games then, it seems: Lots of show, no real substance! Weird.

I did not know that! Thanks.

Cool, thanks. Is ME3 any good? (Ignoring the controversial ending.)

Hmm. I think it's going nothing to do with her. She does a perfectly acceptable job. The problem is that that was their approach. The whole "Cinemaware TV" and "hot babe" thing. Almost like GoDaddy or something. The other problem is what's explained in the video: Cinemaware games were never great gameplay, they were average gameplay with awesome presentation. That no longer flies for modern gaming. All they're trading on is nostalgia If I were them I'd go after the iPad market or try developing something new already.

Damn, I'm LOVING this game. So much better than ME in almost every way. Not finished it yet, but I'm super excited about playing ME3. Is the DLC any good?

I knew it! And by that I mean that I figured you probably follow a Whedon news site. Is it just me or is that video stuck at 301 views?

How did you find this? It's looks like it's just been posted this very second!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlvQW7tI4aE&feature=related