[mag]

It seems like quite a few people found Syberia to be boring. I realize that part of that goes along with not having enough interactivity. Frankly, that's one thing I was a little disappointed in too. But overall, I thought it was a really great adventure. I liked the way Kate followed the story of this one man's life over the course of the century. It wasn't moved forward by some evil villain out to get our heroine. It was the mystery that drove you to keep going. But as I was thinking about it just now, that might be a big part of why some people found it boring. Because while I personally like the kind of story that Syberia had, a lot of people may have found that the lack of a villain slowed down the pace and the action of the game.

I also notice that it looks like Syberia II will add some villains to the story. So do you think this will help win over some of the people who were less than impressed with the original? Or will this hurt the story more than it will help it?

mag

[BacardiJim]

If the puzzles are as few and as easy as in the first game, then you might as well call it Snoreberia II. Adding a villain won't change the inherent problem with the game, which is that it was like watching a poorly dubbed but beautifully shot French movie (assuming you are an American) that revels in demonstrating the weird-looking heroine's angst through tortured phone conversations and uses scenery as allegory and offers a feast (of faerie food) for the soul... until you discover that the banquet is only a glamour and the game is actually as empty of nourishment for the soul as it is empty of food for the brain.

[EDIT: The preceding was an editorial comment from the Adventure Gamers for Puzzling and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of AdventureGamers.com or its owners.]

[fov]

Well, you make a good point that the first game was fairly devoid of conflict. And conflict is the stuff that good stories are made of (or at least that's what my writing teachers keep telling me!)

-emily

[atrius]

Kate's husband sounds like a real pain in the ass. Some mini-game involving bashing would probably make things more tart and snaky. Or maybe some bar definining one's self confidence in dialogue. nah, thats just plain stupid.

[Sky Warrior Bob]

Maybe its because its a translation (at least for me), but the story was just too complex & open ended for its own good. Nothing was ever really resolved, and I think the game's ending squashed at the last second.

I mean, what's the deal with the mamoth toy that you get when you go back to the hotel, and why is Voloberg there all of sudden. It just seems rather like the budget fell out, and they rushed to semi-tie up at least one loose end.

As for baddies, if they're anything like the weirded-out musical psycho, I'll say no thanks and have done with it.

However, Syberia 2 could do with a bit more strife than the first one, as progression of semi-pointless stops don't really enthrall me. Some of the mystery needs to taken away, at least to the point that the player has more of an idea of what's going on. From there, more story development can be made as well as give more meat to the events contained in the story.

Syberia 1 seemed more like a make-it-up-as-we-go sort of story. Like something where the author was switched over every five minutes, until they ended up with a story. Not a very good story, but certainly a interesting one...

SWB

[Garyos]

Originally Posted by fov

Well, you make a good point that the first game was fairly devoid of conflict. And conflict is the stuff that good stories are made of (or at least that's what my writing teachers keep telling me!)

-emily

The game had loads of conflict, just not PHYSICAL conflict all of the time. Your writing teachers should have told you a little more.

(That doesn't mean the story was that good, though).

[Skinny Minnie]

It always amazes me how few games come close to Syberia in terms of there being two distinctly separate opinions about it! It also never fails to amaze me how a woman like me who loves 3rd person games and female protagonists could wind up in the "Ugh!" camp.

My negative issues with this game, like most peoples' that I have read about in gaming forums, have to do more with the weak knob twiddling and lever pulling puzzles, plus the world's emptiness and lack of interactivity. You get Han's supposedly life-altering mammoth toy (after a pretty lame and quite drawn out lever puzzle) and there's no emotional cut scene, nary a comment from Kate, just a "thunk" as it plops into inventory. Yay. Or you have to listen to Kate say she "Doesn't need to go there" 2792 times in response to clicking 2792 game hot spots as she tromps through mile after mile of empty but gorgeous scenery. Why even bother to put those hot spots there? Additionally, the cell phone conversations were too dragged out.

I find it kind of hard to believe that Microids would be blind to such a strong and continual wave of complaints, and that they won't have made some effort to fix some of these weaknesses in the second game. I guess we won't have to wait too long to find out though, huh?

[ragnar]

A big bad villain would ruin the game completely imo.

[Pappapisshu]

Originally Posted by ragnar

A big bad villain would ruin the game completely imo.

I agree.


It's strange. I recognize all these things you found frustrating and irritating and annoying about Syberia. I would definitely like to see some more interaction, I'd like to right-click on everything in that absolutely gorgeous world and receive some info or personal reflections from Kate. I see where y'all are coming from, but I still love the game to bits. I definitely understand all of your complaints about it not being interesting enough to continue playing, but I couldn't stop playing. I found it more involving than anything I've played in a loong, long time. I'm not totally sure why I love it, but I'm glad I do. I'm waiting for the sequel with great aniticipation.

[wilco]

I agree with no big bad villain. That really would just ruin the game. Although I agree with the fact that the game was just too short (number 2 should finish it), I really don't agree with the lack of interaction, I think game designers just wanted to focus on the plot, allowing people to view the beautiful scenarios and taking their own conclusions, but not drifting too far like away from the main action, maybe that's because of Benoit Sokal comic book origins.

Syberia 1 had a great villian in the russian part, why should just want take over the world or kill the main guy? They could just be obsessed guys that want to hear some good quality opera...

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Um, aren't you peepz tripping over yourselves a bit early? Firstly, we don't know how the antagonists will figure into the story, simply that there will be human obstacles for Kate. Secondly, it doesn't necessarily mean that the non-human obstacles for Kate will be compromised. Whether all this affects the quality of the overall story and flavour of the game remains to be seen - and experienced. I'm not holding my breath just yet.

[ragnar]

I never saw the benefits of holding your breath for long periods of time.

[mag]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens
Firstly, we don't know how the antagonists will figure into the story, simply that there will be human obstacles for Kate.

That's a good point. They could be like the crazy Russian guy that wilco pointed out. When I heard about Microids adding bad guys to Syberia II I wasn't too sure about it. I was thinking of them more as the big villains you usually get in games. To me that just didn't seem to fit well with the story that Syberia is telling. Especially since Syberia II is basically going to be the second half of Syberia. It would be kind of weird to have some major bad guy show up half way through the story. But I suppose they could also be just temporary obstacles for Kate. It should be interesting to see how they fit into the story.

mag

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Gamespy has a feature on some of the characters in Syberia II, both good and bad guys, and a bit of background about them. It should give you some insight to the story's particulars.

[remixor]

Originally Posted by BacardiJim

If the puzzles are as few and as easy as in the first game, then you might as well call it Snoreberia II. Adding a villain won't change the inherent problem with the game, which is that it was like watching a poorly dubbed but beautifully shot French movie (assuming you are an American) that revels in demonstrating the weird-looking heroine's angst through tortured phone conversations and uses scenery as allegory and offers a feast (of faerie food) for the soul... until you discover that the banquet is only a glamour and the game is actually as empty of nourishment for the soul as it is empty of food for the brain.

Hey, I actually pretty much agree with a BJ post outside of the Chit Chat forum. Although I will say that I'll give Syberia 2 the full benefit of the doubt, and I do sincerely hope the game holds my interest better. I'll probably even buy it outright, adventure game sucker that I am.

[BacardiJim]

We'll be buying it too, I'm sure. Theresa wasn't quite as disappointed with it as I was, though she shares the same general view that it was a rip-off to make us think it was going to be a game featuring a lot of mechanical/clockwork puzzles and then to actually have so few of them and to make the ones that were in it so easy.

But we did both love the graphics. Enough so that after we played it we immediately went on eBay and got a copy of (the far superior) Amerzone. And I'm sure the promise of the beautiful graphics and the HOPE of more substantial gameplay will have us buying S2 as soon as it is released.

[nordic_guy]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Gamespy has a feature on some of the characters in Syberia II, both good and bad guys, and a bit of background about them. It should give you some insight to the story's particulars.

Link? Yes, I'm too lazy.

[Wajus]

I also reccomend this great Interview with Benoit Sokal by LauraMac . There are some answers to questions concerning "villains" and puzzles/interactivity etc.

Obviously there won't be no Big Bad Final Boss neither no ultimate "Villains". Just characters that - how to phrase this - have other goals and plans concerning Hans and/or Mammoths than Kate.

[Zanthia]

Just characters that - how to phrase this - have other goals and plans concerning Hans and/or Mammoths than Kate.

You can say it about any villian in any game

I don't think adding villians will make syberia 2 more ineresting, for it was boring not because lack of villians but because other reasons that was already mentioned here.
Both BIG BAD BOSS and just bad episodyc guy can spoil game or make it better. It all depends how you put them in the game. And how you merge them into story.

[Wajus]

Originally Posted by Zanthia

You can say it about any villian in any game

But Villain is such a big and ultimate word. Every time I hear it I imagine all those tweasted freaks from Batman and Superman. They are all so stereotypical and their world is black and white. But in Syberia it seems there will be "villains" that are people that are simply devoted to different things than our hero. Think of'em as counterweight rather than obstacle.

I don't think adding villians will make syberia 2 more ineresting, for it was boring not because lack of villians but because other reasons that was already mentioned here.

I can't agree that it was boring. It has some faults but they were minor and definitly not guilty of making game boring. The graphics and the story were really superior and in the end (along with the melancholic mood those created) they won me over.

Both BIG BAD BOSS and just bad episodyc guy can spoil game or make it better. It all depends how you put them in the game. And how you merge them into story.

If you've read the inteview you'd knew that thy're neither BIG BAD nor episodic. They are integral part of the story.