[Aj_]

Just finished the game, and I was pretty disappointed because of the hype. I'm gonna try and not give spoilers, just talk about the design.

The graphics aren't great, but they're consistent, it's not pretty, the concept isn't captivating, there are few flaws in this regard, it's polished but boring. I could go into technical details, but it's quite clear the graphics are modest, consistant, not special but moderate.

The animation is good, I noticed Tyler walks funny, but the action sequences are well made. The basket ball game and fighting sequences shows this quite well, Fahrenheit is an example of how to do animation.

The gameplay is pretty awful. It seems like a game made by people who don't play games.

I couldn't map my gamepad, which has pretty standard drivers, so some of the problems are probably not a problem with the gamepad, but this is a PC game, and the mouse/keyboard combo is more powerful, and there is nothing a gamepad can do in this game that a mouse or keyboard couldn't. Just seems like developers are lazy, and only developing for consoles.

For the PC version there were bad signs from the start, default set up had directional keys as the arrow keys instead of the wasd standard. There's a reason for this, right handed people need room between the hand they're using to control the mouse, and the keys they control the character with. I know, remapping is easy, but it seems logical to have the easiest mapping set as default.

A related problem is later on in the game, things like computers, magnifying glasses, and lamps are controlled by the arrow keys, not having uniform mapping is also a standard that is useful.

Using the numpad for the "Simon Says" sequences, I know older games did this, but default mapping the directions on there as 8, 4, 6, 2 is not going to work, atleast for me. Can anyone use the numpad for directions without setting down to 5?

Now the remappings over, "GET READY" because you're going to have to switch from your mouse to your numpad, then back to using the mouse, then back to the numpad, then curse at how stupid the controls are.

Doing actions, and selecting dialogue options, is done by mouse gestures, it beats scrolling through options, my browser has it, it's great, and although not entirely new in games, is one of the good things about the game. It's limited in that it gets complicated and harder with more options than the maximum four in this game.

The camera doesn't help, one thing I hate in games, is static cameras, like in Resident Evil or Broken Sword 3, you have no sense direction, it's like telling someone else to move, scale can be hard to judge, objects can get in the way of your view. You're forced to slow down, stop and turn, like your character is a tank. Your character is a tank, there is no sidestep, even in the first person perspective, you're moving like a tank.

Mini-games, not quite so mini, because I felt the majority of the game, which I thought was short, was just me doing "Simon Says" style arcade button bashing, which after playing the demo, pissed me off because it wasn't in there, and the left/right bashing which wasn't used so much, but was about as fun as scrubbing dishes, yeah, playing this game is like chores.

There is an Adventure game in there somewhere, it's well hidden, and it's ammounts to about 10% of game time, but it's quality. The puzzles are timed a lot, which I didn't mind, it's all about options, and choosing the right one. There are quite a few well made more traditional puzzles, like linking evidence to the suspect, I liked that, it's logical, with feedback and integrated into the story. There wasn't much of the good stuff though, probably because the story dictated the gameplay, in the direction of gratuitous fights and sex scenes, worse, you don't even get to partake in the sex or violence. What can I say? I'm a hands on type of guy, even virtually.

The dialogue is timed, I don't really know why, to justify how lame the system is? You get to dictate the subject, by controlling both characters taking part in the conversations, that were short and boring. Options are limited, you don't actually know what you're choosing to say, and although it can end the game, the effect on gameplay is minimal if you get through it.

The different paths are always welcome, but it's not subtle, or from my limited experience, that rewarding. Also not new.

The sound is great, I liked the music, the FX, the voice acting, it was all flawless.

I might post about the story, but it's going to be spoiler heavy, and maybe it was just the path I took that made the game incredibly short, and the story that was like rewriting and compressing the LOTR trilogy into 300 pages in terms of detail.

To put this in perspective, I thought the story and characters were dull, like the overall game was, although it started off really strongly and I thought that I was in for an amazing game. The style, direction, and storytelling ability is up high, but the content, concepts, and imagination was sucky, really sucky. I loved The Matrix very much, Reloaded and Revolutions are two of the worst movies I've seen. It's like that, the good parts generally happen in the beginning, the later parts mainly contain something that resembles faeces.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Sorry you were disappointed with it. I myself had a tremendously fun time. The story, while not necessarily original or even exciting in itself, was enjoyable for the way it was handled and paced. Not a perfect game, mind you, or even excellently executed, but I had way too much fun in the end to not forgive its many little flaws.

[Legolas813]

I thought the controls were pretty intuitive on the Xbox version.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

They were to some extent for me. During the stealth sequences they sucked, but this may have more to do with my being used to the the classic full camera control with the right the right stick instead of the severely limiting 360 degree panning with the left and right triggers. It was also quite awkward moving the character around in a tight space during timed sequences.

[Orange Brat]

I can't get passed the goddamn indoor hurricane. I keep getting slammed up against the wall right before I'm supposed to get out. All that dodging and jumping around and my trigger finger gets tired. I'm playing on normal.

[entranced]

I agree with some of AJ's comments but overall the game made me forget about my life for several hours...and kept me locked with a great story (well at least the first 75% of it)...and I left the game entertained.

I am personally glad/lucky the graphics weren't state of the art for this game, because my computer just barely exceeded the minimum requirements, and it ran great. If it had the requirements of most games out today, I probably would have missed this game too. Regardless, though most of the graphic quality was 2 years old, you got used to it after a while, and it didn't affect the game that much for the average gamer to notice. Besides, even if they had used pixel shading and you needed a 128 mb video card to run the game with decent frame rate, would it really have made a difference in the long run?

I hated all the Matrix spoofs because they made it seem like this game was PURPOSELY trying to copy the Matrix, instead of making it seem like a coincidence. They've could have been a lot more creative with that material instead of making it look like they took something straight out of a scene from the movies.

But also keep in mind that their last game (Omikron) came out before the first Matrix was in theaters, so they didn't get a chance to spoof any of the Matrix scenes for like 6 years, while all the other developers were making this a common trend. I guess they just didn't want to be left out.

Oh and I liked the fact that dialogues were timed. It made things seem realistic. I didn't like the fact that most of the topic choices were vague as hell and you didn't know what you thought your character was going to talk about half the time, but it was still nice that they put a sense of urgency in the dialogue as this not only holds true in real life, but it got you anxious and made you feel more connected to the game (or was that just me?).

By the way, I also thought the default controls were not thought up very well.

I switched my key mapping o the standard FPS player controls:

W - UP
S - DOWN
A - LEFT
D - RIGHT

And then I remapped the second DOWN (number pad area) from Num 2 to Num 5..which made my number pad setup:

NUM 8 - UP
NUM 5 - DOWN
NUM 4 - LEFT
NUM 6 - RIGHT


So when the Simon Says sequences came up, both of my hands had plenty of space from each other, and were lined up so this made the reactions almost second nature. Mapping the walking keys to up down left right caused the default controls during Simon Says to be pretty awkward and uncomfortable as hell. Don't know what they were thinking there.

But then again it seemed like the controls were designed for people who almost never play games. That shouldn't be a surprise, since this game was technically aimed at casual players that don't play a lot of games (with your Simon Says sequences and what have you), not your common everyday gamer who blows up aliens from another dimension or installs coffee modifications to watch hidden sex scenes in their favorite car jacking games.

Many aspects of the game bored/annoyed me, but thanks to the fact that the story gripped me for a good portion of the game, it kept me interested. I didn't walk away from the game completely happy, especially when I thought they fast fowarded the story, but overall I enjoyed it.

[SamandMax]

It's not a bad game by any means, but I don't feel I got the $50 worth I spent for it. The story starts off well enough, but it continues to get weirder and weirder until it goes completely insane at the end. The game kinda starts to lose credibility when characters start to run on the sides of buildings and weird electrical monsters shoot mini-tornados at you. And I didn't even mention the completely illogical love story that develops in the last 20 minutes of the game. Oh wait, I just did.

Also, the actual game wasn't too fun too play. There are a few sections I loved, like the beginning Diner sequence, or trying to put together a composite of Lucas that comes up later in the game, but overall, it's just you wandering around pretty un-interactive environments and mashing buttons over and over again. And then again. And then once again after that. Then, every so often they'll throw in a really poorly executed stealth sequence. I know it's supposed to be an interactive movie, but when the story is pretty standard direct-to-video sci-fi fare, it'd be nice if at least the interactive parts were entertaining.

Plus, it's a really short game. My first time through only took me about 5 hours. Even with a little bit of replay value, I don't think I'm going to put much time into the game, which really doesn't make me happy I paid full price for it.

So even though I seem pretty harsh about it, I still think it's a good game. I would just say to rent it. Or wait until it goes down in price.

[Orange Brat]

I'm not sure why everyone is so harsh on the graphics. I have no problem with them...I think they're beautiful. I just don't see the blockiness that constantly gets mentioned.

[squarejawhero]

I really enjoyed it, but then everyone knows that. I find a lot of its issues very forgiveable, and that the narrative, despite its problems, is still a million times better than pretty much every AG I've played in years. The pacing and direction, speaking with my professional hat on, was also impressive. As a movie, it's derivative. As a game, it's lacking in places. But seeing neither side has been completely successful, as a whole, to me, I was suprised and delighted that it worked.

Even viewed as an experiment in moving film narrative and values into games, it's a first. Even compared to TLE. This is a game with direction. But I can only see things moving forwards from this, any attempts to move sideways or copy or replicate the formula to me, would be a failiure. The only way is to improve the shortcomings, including roping in the fantasy if the game didn't need it. The more slight scenes worked more in its favour, and even action gamers on mainstream sites are praising that OVER anything else, no matter what the puritans might be fearing of the action being the pull in AG sites. You don't play this for the action, as the action is lacking, you play it for the drama, choices, characterisation, pacing and narrative first and foremost. And that's actually a first in gaming, even if the parts are less satisfying - this game is easy to dissect, but viewed as a whole I find it more successful.

Do you know what I'd like to see? A game by Cage with more balls to the narrative approach. If he's going to be inspired by outside sources and include action, something more akin to Oldboy than The Matrix. Something with intelligence only without the fantasy clichés. Then we'd have arrived at something that isn't just groundbreaking, but truly special.

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by Orange Brat

I'm not sure why everyone is so harsh on the graphics. I have no problem with them...I think they're beautiful. I just don't see the blockiness that constantly gets mentioned.

I do, but the design works in its favour as the brilliant production art has been successfully replicated. Good production design isn't easily noticed when dealing with real-world locations, but it must be memorable. And they achieved that remarkably. The characters are far more wooden as disjointed as models, but the characterisation and acting is at least really well done. The mocap works in its favour to a degree too, although tweaking could help - the bit where Lucas' arms nearly fall off after the stabbing, for example. That appears to be a weakness in the skeleton system not working with the model so the joints appear elasticated in some way. Some of the later fight scenes also felt a bit rigid in the animation. CG models still require a bit of overacting to truly convince, especially when they're simple.

[Fop]

I agree that the design could be better, but I only agree with one or two points from your post. Specifically, using a stick (or the mouse) for actions and choosing dialogue options wasn't very intuitive.

Also note, that if you had used a proper gamepad, you wouldn't have had to switch positions for the Simon sequences.

[Orange Brat]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

I do, but the design works in its favour as the brilliant production art has been successfully replicated. Good production design isn't easily noticed when dealing with real-world locations, but it must be memorable. And they achieved that remarkably. The characters are far more wooden as disjointed as models, but the characterisation and acting is at least really well done. The mocap works in its favour to a degree too, although tweaking could help - the bit where Lucas' arms nearly fall off after the stabbing, for example. That appears to be a weakness in the skeleton system not working with the model so the joints appear elasticated in some way. Some of the later fight scenes also felt a bit rigid in the animation. CG models still require a bit of overacting to truly convince, especially when they're simple.

I'm guess I'm just a forgiving slob.

[squarejawhero]

And I'm a picky bastard.

[entranced]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

I find a lot of its issues very forgiveable, and that the narrative, despite its problems, is still a million times better than pretty much every AG I've played in years.

I think the last game I've played with a story that left an impact on me at the end of the game, was the third person shooter, Mafia. (This may or may not have something to do with the fact that I haven't played a lot of games in the past 2 or 3 years.)

I thought Fahrenheit/Indigo was going to have a great finale, but the last few chapters flopped out for me... just when I thought it was going to soar.

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by entranced

I think the last game I've played with a story that left an impact on me at the end of the game, was the third person shooter, Mafia.

I'd argue that Mafia is an interactive drama / movie / whatever in its own sort of way. Brilliant game.

[ILoveYou]

I don't see anything wrong with the graphics. Why should it have been something like HL2? That way many of us couldn't have played the game. The graphics ain't everything.

[Aj_]

Apart from the design flaws and mediocrity, in graphics, controls, camera, and gameplay. It's not that special to look at, it's not as easy to play as it should be, and the main part of the gameplay consists of something like Dance Dance Revolution, without the dancing. As an Adventure, the puzzles are excellent but there are hardly any of them, the dialogue system is limited, and the exploration is confined to doing everyday things in very small scenes. If you take out the Simon Says sequences, there isn't a whole lot of gameplay there, the game would be very short indeed.

If the story was transplanted into a movie and released with as much hype it would be panned so much it would make Gigli look like the Shawshank Redemption. I'm all about the style, in my top 5 favourite movies, is Le Fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain. Fahrenheit has a murder scene in the beginning where the camera cuts back and forth between a mysterious figure and Lucas, and at the end the colours in the screen are inverted. Pretty sure Broken Sword 3 had this, minus the silly inverted colours which are tacky and don't communicate anything. I can name two games from the top of my head, Max Payne 2 and Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines, both use the camera better. Let's not forget Half-Life 2, rarely leaves the first person perspective, but it does a fine job. Fahrenheit uses picture-in-picture to display threats and create urgency, like a little game called XIII, accept XIII intergrated this into the game a hell of a lot better.

Fahrenheit has raised the bar, for the adventure genre, outside Myst, half of the features you won't find in adventure games at all. For starters, the graphics and sound are so much better than Broken Sword 3, even if they're about on par with Max Payne 2's 3 year old graphics. The sound is also much improved. It's very arguable that Fahrenheit constitutes an Adventure. I thought most people thought The Longest Journey and Still Life were a bit thin, Fahrenheit takes the elements that are not Adventure, from the modern adventure game, and adds some wierd reflex arcade gameplay on top of it. In the same way some old RPGs look like RTS games, overhead, same mouse interface, same graphics, but doing very different things.

About the graphics being justified because of the requirements. Why don't we just stick with 2D, 640x480, 8bit, and go back to floppies? Also, the requirements for Half-Life 2 aren't that much different, Fahrenheit requires a better video card for one, and for all you who can't play HL2, but can play Fahrenheit, there are more who can't play either.

[ILoveYou]

Well I wasn't saying I can't play HL2. I can without any problems either. And I don't believe Fahrenheit needs a better graphics card, since it's graphics are a little outdated and HL2's ain't. What my point was that not every game should be made for hi-end computers. That'd be unfair to those who don't wanna upgrade their computers every month. I respect the creators because they actually cared for the gamers instead of just selling this game to those who have money to upgrade. The graphics were just fine, the rest... not so good.

Originally Posted by Aj_

About the graphics being justified because of the requirements. Why don't we just stick with 2D, 640x480, 8bit, and go back to floppies?

Why not? It's definitely smarter than using thousands of dollars to new hardware just to get a few games work on your computer. Nothing but a big waste of money.

[cardician]

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I respectfully disagree with just about everything you stated though. I thought the graphics were fine. Maybe not Half Life 2 graphics, but certainly very good. Facial animations were good, and the motion capture made the movement throughout the game fantastic.

As for gameplay, I enjoyed every bit of it. The only part I didn't like was making Lucas walk across the beam and trying to keep him balanced when he's saving Tracy. That was the only part that I actually had to repeat like three times. Other than that, I had no problems at all and totally understand where Cage was coming from with his ideas of immersion. He's admitted himself though that it wasn't perfect. But it was different, and thats key. If more people don't start creating different and innovative ideas to lead the way for even bigger better ideas, then eventually things will become disgustingly stale. Some would argue they already have. Well I think the game is refreshing and totally achieves every goal Cage was going for. I was immersed, loved the entire story (who care if it was realistic, its NOT real!), and played the entire game twice through just because it was so much fun.

If I had to change anything, the only thing I would change is allowing the major fight scene of the game to be one of the scenes that you can watch in the bonus section. But overall, I thought it was fantastic. I loved the action sequences, I loved the immersion into the characters lives, it was all quite brilliant and much more original than you're willing to admit. But you know what, if you're so stuck on how bad it is and think you know better, then perhaps you should show us? I would love to play a game that was even better because I loved this one. So please, whip up something that shows Cage how its done and I'm sure we'll all love that even more. Seriously.

[squarejawhero]

Development time, budget and production have a lot to do with the differences. HL2 also had some top engine programmers working on it and a nearly 6 year production cycle. It's unrealistic to expect all games to have the same resources available to them as HL2 did.

Again, we're talking opinions. I think the graphics worked well within the remit of the design and it looked good on my LCD with a crisp 1280x1024 resolution.

Problem with your arguments, Aj, is that many people are also loving this game. Stepping out of my liking of it, moving away with my critical hat on, I can see your problems with it. But then donning the cap of my professional work I can see this game does far more and goes further than many others in terms of respecting the rules and foibles of the screen. A game with pacing? Very interesting.

If it was a movie it would be panned, but no less so than the two ridiculous Matrix sequels. I also find it unfair to compare a first-time director with no experience in films first attempt to a marvellous movie by an undeniable talent, Jean-Pierre Jeunet. For one thing, David Cage has had more on his plate other than just the cinematography. For another thing, he makes amateur mistakes in his writing, which he admits, and doesn't have the experience or nous within the film field, which he also admits. I have problems with it as a film and within its direction, which is occasionally messy and moves the camera around far too much, but for a first effort through merely studying movies, it's really well done.

I can respect it as it tries to do so much even if it has problems you couldn't get away singularly within either of its two areas, games and movies. What Farenheit does the other games you mention don't do is transplant pacing and direction into a game, and based on the reactions in general it appears to have done so reasonably successfully. It doesn't aim for the same bars. The direction and narrative might not be your cup of tea, or mine, but undeniably to a point it gets a lot right before it flings itself off into la-la-land.

For some reason, this game is working. In general. Not for everyone, but it is, so it's succeeded in something... it's a great start. The framework has potential. Now the gameplay, narrative and direction can be worked on in Quantic's next release. David Cage, at least, listens to and accepts criticism, as we've found on the developers thread, now it's up to him to seperate the wheat from the chaff. He KNOWS it's not perfect. He even agrees that he went overboard at the end. His own admissions to Farenheits failings as a developer are brave and can only point to someone who looks onto the next project with the aim of not replicating those failings.

And that can only be a good thing. Farenheit is an exciting and interesting experiment, which is better than most experiments.