ThunderPeel2001

Phaedrus' Street Crew
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    8780

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ThunderPeel2001

  2. Posted

    For me Video games add a goal (a thing to accomplish) to the definition of interactive entertainment. It's you goal to defeat the end boss, or score the highest points, etc. There is no explicit goal in games like Dear Ester, TFoL, Proteus, COD: BLOPS; you just navigate the world and reach an end.

    I agree with this. I can't think of a single example of a game that doesn't feature some sort of goal, and some sort of challenge needed to be overcome to reach said goal.

    I went into more detail about this when I first brought it up, but since nobody can be bothered to go back and see, here it is again:

    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. Or 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. Tap a button 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.

    and

    The only challenges I overcame [playing TFoL] 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).

  5. Posted

    Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. TFoL is ostensibly a Video Game. I think it is, the Thumbs think it is, Steam thinks it is, Wikipedia says it is. It is a game because that's what we think it is.

    If you want to use special rigid definitions of what is a game versus what is a toy or a race or an interactive story, you'll have to define that from the outset, but just because you think the definition should be one thing or another doesn't mean that people will agree with you or that your definition is relevant to the discussion. In this case, sure, you can talk about what makes TFoL different and why it shouldn't be discussed in the same way, but I think it's more interesting to accept that TFoL broadens the scope of what a video game is and can be and to think about the implications.

    It's like the fuss over whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable. Well, it's both, but not within the same discussion. Biologically it's a vegetable, but the distinction between fruit and vegetable is purely culinary, so for the purpose of cooking, a tomato is a vegetable because it tastes and acts like a vegetable, just like eggplant an okra.

    Look everybody! It's Mr Troll! Hi, Mr Troll!

  6. Posted

    You know that shooting sequence in the game? The one where you do nothing? I keep thinking about how if that sequence actually allowed the player to shoot the targets (thus, robbing us of that great moment) more people would likely consider this a game. Would you agree? If not, how many shooting sequences would it take to make this a game?

    What would the goal be in the shooting section, and how would not completing it hinder you reaching your ultimate goal (reach the end)?

    TFOL isn't a game in the same way a book isn't a game (unless it is). You just keep reading the words in the correct order until you reach the end. That's not a game.

    I've given pretty explicit examples that should answer any questions you have, so if you don't want to get too deep into it, I suggest going back and reading what I read when I first brought it up.

  7. Posted

    Was any one else worried after Episode 2 that the game had jumped the shark and landed in crazy town? I really loved how quickly everything spiraled out of control but the leap from "choose who gets to eat today" to "crazy cannibal murder farm" gave me some pretty hard whiplash. I still really loved Episode 2 for the crazy roller-coaster that it was, but the relatively quiet episode 3 came as a relief to me.

    Absolutely. That's been the biggest shock so far (haven't played Episode 5 yet). That's probably the best example of how uneven the series has been -- it was almost like the two writing teams never discussed anything together. Not that it was a bad episode, but it was tonally very different, and if they'd all been little stand-alone crazy horror story of the week, I wouldn't have enjoyed the series as much. The best bits of the series for me have been getting to know the characters (even though the next writing team seems to be very happy to dispatch with new characters immediately) and learning more about the world.

    The biggest indication that I actually care about these characters came to me during Episode 4. When it came time to discuss whether Clementine should leave on the boat or stay in the new Crawford, I actually wanted to stay. Previously I'd been extremely interested in how the rest of the world was coping, but I would be happy to sacrifice that if it meant Clem was safe.

  14. Posted

    It's perfectly valid to have mixed feelings and question your success. I listened to Mel Brooks on The Nerdist and he insisted that, of the films he made, The Twelve Chairs was still his favorite, and it's weird to him how everyone tells him Spaceballs is his best work.

    What?! Who says Spaceballs is his best work?? The Producers won best screenplay at the 1968 Academy Awards. And I think Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein are both more popular and highly regarded than Spaceballs. Weird. I haven't seen it for years (although I just bought the Mel Brook Collection on Blu-ray, so I'll be seeing it soon, I guess). Is it really that well regarded...?

    Mel Brooks is an unreliable witness, though. I'm sure I've heard him in several different interviews say that different films were his favourite. I think he gets swept up the moment :-/

  15. Posted

    I work at a nuclear power plant. In the US, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is the govermental body that regulates nuclear plants. Their job is to oversee the safety, security, licencing, etc. of nuclear plants. It is an independent agency of the federal government, which means that it is part of what we call "the government" but it is not under direct control of the President. The President cannot "order" the NRC to do anything. NRC madates carry the force of federal law which means we are required to comply with them under penalty of fines or even losing our licence to operate.

    Thanks for taking the time to give a real world example here. Of course, The President has ways of getting control of things he doesn't like.

    On the subject of the sale of entertainment to minors, I personally believe it's quite simplistic to say there should be no restrictions on what can be sold, and to whom. Off the top of my head I can think of a stack of things that I believe any reasonable person would want controlled (pornography, images of rape and torture, images of real violence/death, instructions on how to build bombs, etc).

  16. Posted

    So nobody has checked out Industrial Revolution yet? It's from the creators of COGS (a game I really enjoyed) and apparently will never be seen again once it's taken down.

    Industrial Revolution is not offered for sale as a standalone game, it is not part of BioShock Infinite, and we currently have no plans for its content to be used elsewhere.

  17. Posted

    I can't help but feel you're being a tad ungrateful, and unnecessarily negative, I_smell. People like something you've created. It doesn't matter that it's not your best -- people like it! If you feel you can do even better in the future, then excellent! People are more likely to pay attention to your next release because of the popularity of this one.

    I'm sure Edmund McMillen isn't super happy with some of his early (notorious) Flash games, but they're a distant memory now he's released Super Meat Boy and Binding of Isaac.

  19. Posted

    Yes, that was an odd thing to say.

    So: I'm not sure if I've said this before, but I'm surprised that Terry P's books have so many fans here. I've always looked down my nose at them, but never actually read one. I did the same with Harry Potter and Buffy - and then I became huge fans. Maybe the same will be true of Mr P?

  21. Posted

    If all of that is enough to keep Flash alive as a technology, that's great. It will still appear less and less on web sites as it's supplanted by SVG and canvas frameworks, which both have far more potential since they have wider, more built-in support and are getting a lot more developer attention in terms of performance. Maybe it'll be like Java – it disappears from the browser, but is still used a million other places.

    It's dead for the web (except for movie sites it seems). All I need to say to the client is, "Do you want people with iPads to be able to view the site?" And boom! No Flash. (Yay.)

  22. Posted

    Yep. Not only were the characters slightly different, but the storytelling seemed very different, too. Breaking the stories as a group and having show runners (*cough* Sean and Jake *cough*) have the final say, would hopefully solve this.

  23. Posted

    Also as far as the discussion on the GDRT podcast I had the opposite experience of Dirk. I was always thrilled when there was a part of the game where it slowed down, and you would just sort of walk around and do typical adventure game stuff. I remember actually breathing a sigh of relief on several occasions just because of how heavy the game would get. What didn't work for me (mostly) was the whole tap a button a bunch of times, then press another button. That felt the most like a "I'm playing a video game" moment, and would take me out of the experience. That being said, I understand that the game needed to provide some resistance to the player at points, and it was nice hearing the discussion about it. Also, unless I'm just hearing what I want to hear, it sounds like Sean & Jake had reservations about how it was implemented as well.

    Pretty much agree with all of this.

  24. Posted

    I thought I'd crank through the first season in about a week but I actually find myself taking a week off in between each episode. The game is just too stressful and upsetting.

    Yeah, same here. It's pretty hardcore.

    It's also a little uneven across the episodes. I wonder if a TV style writing process would help the series: There's an assigned show-runner who gets final say. Then all the writers "break" each of the stories, laying down the story beats, scene by scene, together as a group.

    Then each writer is assigned an episode, or episodes, and goes off to write them alone. Then the show-runner gives them notes on their draft, they go off and produce a new one, until the show-runner is happy.

    Then the script is run past the room, with everyone helping polish it. Then the show-runner gives it a final pass -- possibly re-writing parts of it/all of it -- and it's good to go.

    It works for TV shows, and helps maintain a consistent voice. (I felt Lee became a different character in Episode 4).