[skurken]

Any thoughts?

[bysmitty]

I've only played an hour of it so far but I am very impressed. The backgrounds are awesome and the game is genuinely funny. Also, everything you do has a unique response. Even using the mouth on a cactus in one screen will evoke a different response from using the mouth on a cactus in a different screen. A lot of time and effort went into the writing and it shows. Most of the voices are great, especially the narrator but I admit that I can't stand Al's voice. I'm glad I watched the trailer a few days before playing the game so I knew what to expect from it. The AGer's review ragged on the character models and animations but I don't think they are too bad. They aren't going to win any awards but they are serviceable. Other than that, I think the AGer’s review is spot on. I'll post back more after I get further along in the game.

...bysmitty

[Spricee]

I'm glad I played the demo and got Al's voice out of the way fast. I LOVED the game, yeah the intro (and ending) animations weren't the most detailed, but i don't care. Still hilarious and delightful!

[Fien]

Al Emmo came today, I don't have time to play it, but I couldn't resist the temptation of exploring the areas that were inaccessable in the demo. I have absolutely no problem with Al's voice, wish I could say the same about the narrator... must be all the clicking on things in the desert, without any real conversations.

[rtrooney]

I've only played the demo. (Still hoping to be a contest winner!)

I thought the comments about the graphics and music were somewhat unfair. While the developers deny familiarity with LSL and FPFP, a comparison is inevitable. Whether the Al Emmo graphics stand up to the games of today, to me, is largely irrelevant. It's how they compare to the derivative games.

And while FPFP and LSL5 are two of my all time favorites, the Al Emmo graphics blow them out of the water. I think that should be the true measure of comparison.

The music poses no threat to some of the great Western scores by composers such as Elmer Bernstein, but it's not bad. It's exactly the type of music I would expect to hear in a Western-themed game. Best of all, it's not intrusive. Which is more than I can say about other games.

On a scale of 1-5, I'd give the review about a 3.

[Jackal]

Comparing graphics (or anything else) to a game's contemporaries may be irrelevant to you personally, but it's hardly unfair. The game is competing directly with those games for consumer dollars, not with long-outdated titles. That said, there was no direct comparison with anything current, anyway.

And the review doesn't at all say the music was bad. In fact, what you just said was almost exactly what the review itself said about it.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by Jackal

And the review doesn't at all say the music was bad. In fact, what you just said was almost exactly what the review itself said about it.

Actually the review said

On the music front, there's not much to be said. I found the score fairly negligible, consisting mostly of variations on old west themes that we've heard in pretty much every western game that's come out before this one. On top of that, there are quite a few areas where there is no music at all, or areas where I had to turn my speakers up all the way to hear that there was music playing.

Which is, to my thinking, quite a bit different from what I said. That is, the review posited the music as a negative, and I posited it as a positive.

My first thought when the story started coming together was that it could easily be the plot for "Leisure Suit Larry 9: Wild West Larry"

Hard not to think that this was a derivative comparison. Graphic or otherwise.

And, after all, didn't the original poster ask what we thought of the review?

That's all I did. Express my opinion of the review.

There is another thread here that absolutely bashes another site for giving a game a bad review. Is this the road you want to travel? I.e., it's OK to find fault with a review on another site, but it is not OK to critique an AG review.

[Jackal]

I'm pretty familiar with what the review said about both, but you aren't supporting your interpretation with anything. Seems to me you're inferring negatives where they don't actually exist. Neutral isn't the same as negative.

I'm not sure what the LSL comparison has to do with your original comments, but yet again, it's simply an observation (one immediately followed by the unique strengths of AE).

Anyway, the only issue was whether the review was being "unfair" in those areas, and I see nothing to suggest it is.

[eriq]

I thought the review was fair. And you're right Jackal, the reviewer did NOT say he didn't like the music outright. But, in my opinion, it comes across that way. And since I thought the soundtrack was brilliant, I had to say something. Because it really is FAR from "negligible".

neg‧li‧gi‧ble –adjective so small, trifling, or unimportant that it may safely be neglected or disregarded: The extra expenses were negligible.

-Not significant or important enough to be worth considering; trifling.

1: so small as to be meaningless; insignificant; "the effect was negligible" 2: not worth considering; "he considered the prize too paltry for the lives it must cost"; "piffling efforts"; "a trifling matter"

[Marian]

I've been typing all day at work, so I'm going to take the lazy approach and cut and paste what I said about the game at GameBoomers:

I absolutely love the game. I loaded it up a couple of days ago while in the midst of playing Ankh, and have since dropped playing Ankh for the time being so I could play Al Emmo instead. I was enjoying Ankh, but I like Al Emmo even more.

Funny, but the comments about the voice of Al being annoying and also that of the graphics looking "old school"--well, neither of them are issues for me. I think the graphics are beautiful and do an excellent job of conveying a sense of the time and the place and that they are great to look at! And as far as Al's voice goes, I'm not looking for realism in a game of this sort; I'm looking for an escape into a relaxing and fun time, which is exactly what this game offers, in spades. His voice, to me, shores up the overall humor and spirit of the game and bothers me not at all.

I'm really looking forward to the rest of the game. Playing this game has made me realize that, while I have enjoyed games like Still Life and others with heavy and dark subject matter in the last couple of years, that I was more than ready for something brighter and more cheerful.

I hope Al Emmo is a success for Himalaya and that they are able to make many more games in the future. I'll be first in line to buy new offerings.

I've been playing computer games since 1982, so I may be speaking from an "old fuddy-duddy" perspective, but Al Emmo is the kind of game that got me interested in playing computer games in the first place. A relaxing, fun time. Something that is entertaining.

Not to pick on Still Life, as I did enjoy the game, but it's a good example of how many games have shifted away from fun, relaxing entertainment into a dark probing of the psyche, or whatever, and when I am playing a game, I would much rather be taken away from that sort of thing into something much more lighthearted--if I want to dwell on the dark side of human nature, I can turn on the news (which, by the way, I avoid like the plague).

And too many games now (as a wise friend of mine commented) feel too much like work. Yes, they do--either in the constant need for a walkthrough to solve some incredibly obtuse puzzle, or in the fact that one has to spend way too much time getting them to run (and in some instances only to discover after finally getting them to run, that basically they proved to be something of a disappointment). Al Emmo is blessedly free of both these afflictions.

__________________________________________________ ______________

I think the music fits the game very well. I also haven't had any issues of not being able to hear the sound properly---at least so far. I believe I'm liking the game more than the reviewer did, but 3-1/2 stars seems fair (although I probably would have given it a 4 or a 4-minus (not that such a thing exists!).

[Melanie68]

Originally Posted by Marian

Funny, but the comments about the voice of Al being annoying and also that of the graphics looking "old school"--well, neither of them are issues for me. I think the graphics are beautiful and do an excellent job of conveying a sense of the time and the place and that they are great to look at! And as far as Al's voice goes, I'm not looking for realism in a game of this sort; I'm looking for an escape into a relaxing and fun time, which is exactly what this game offers, in spades. His voice, to me, shores up the overall humor and spirit of the game and bothers me not at all.

I'm really looking forward to the rest of the game. Playing this game has made me realize that, while I have enjoyed games like Still Life and others with heavy and dark subject matter in the last couple of years, that I was more than ready for something brighter and more cheerful.

I'll be a lazy git and agree with what Marian said. She put it better than I would have.

I liked the music a lot as well.

[Fien]

Originally Posted by Melanie68

I'll be a lazy git and agree with what Marian said. She put it better than I would have.

I liked the music a lot as well.

Me too! (2x)

I'm really enjoying this game.

[skurken]

Time to get this off my chest.

Well, I´ve only played the demo, but based on that, review was spot-on, almost. I´m glad the reviewer pointed out obvious flaws that I´ve been surprised to see other reviews not mention a lot. You guessed it, I´m talking about the (in my opinion) amature-ish production values, expecially in the 3D and animation department, the review tackled those pretty well so I´m going to discuss other matters. Don´t shoot me yet, please read on.



The resolution used is mentioned in the review;

"Regrettably, the game is presented in 640x480 resolution, which lessens the
effectiveness of the visuals considerably".

Again I was glad that the reviewer commented on this, and I 100% agree with him. I´m completely baffled why the developer didn´t use a higher resolution. I remember someone from Himalaya saying that the mission was to make a nostalgic adventure game. Great! But why did´nt they go all the way then and make the game in 320*200 resolution since most of the famous adventure games utilized that resolution? The answer; because that would probably put some people off buying the game because of the pixelated mess and they wanted to bring a more detailed experience to the players. Again, a valid point. But why then did they stop at 640*480? I would say that 600*480 is neither nostalgic nor detailed so both those arguments would´t hold.

Actually, when I think about it, I think I have the answer ; the engine used, AGS cannot comfortably run games in a higher resolution without frying lower-end machines, so unless the engine was optamized expecially for Al Emmo it was technically impossible for them to go any higher in resolution using that engine. I believe it would have been a smart move, buisness-wise, to use another engine that would have allowed poor Al to be a little less pixellated, because such a low resolution as used in Al Emmo could put lots of potential buyers off even thinking about buying the game.



Another thing which I noticed immediately (although not mentioned in the review) is While I totally agree that the backgrounds are beutifully painted, some suffer from amature-like perspective mistakes, where the vanishing points are all over the place and make no sense. I don´t have the time to draw diagrams too proof my point, but I´m confident that anyone with a experience in perspective drawing can notice the errors.

Someone said that this was just the "style" used in the game, but I don´t see the point in using a "child-like-perspective-errors" style for a commercial game sold for $30, expecially as this supposed "style" is not consistent as sometimes the perspective is correctly drawn. Lucasarts games such as Day of the tentecle had a distinctive style; rules were bent and mangled masterfully to create wonderful pieces of art. That was a "style". I think the phrase "you must know the rules before you bend them" is appropriate here.



Pheww! I probably sound like a arrogant brat, but I do have a degree in art, design and animation and things like the above jump at me immediately. Some would say they are not important for the "normal" gamer (I´m trying to say this without sounding lika an complete arse), but I´m very afraid that this "normal" gamer is now, in 2006, a rather visually mature person considering all the media overload going on.

Just to convince myself that I´m not insane, I´ve shown the demo to some friends, although not hardcore adventure gamers - but gamers nevertheless, average gamers that spend their hard earned cash on games once in a while. Some of them grew up playing adventure games like me, some didn´t. Their initial impressions have been, I´m sorry to say, very negative.


All this leaves me to the conclusion that Al-Emmo could possibly have a very small market, even smaller than the developer anticipated. That is heartbreaking since the game probably has much to offer story and gameplay-wise. with basic adjustments like using a proper resolution it could have avoided losing potential buyers like me looking at the first screen of the demo and thinking; "what in the name of God is that?...this is not worth $30"


Thank you for your time and I REALLY hope I´m wrong on this one

[rtrooney]

^Well, the first post asked for opinions. Some agree with the review. Others don't.

At the end of the day, they are opinions. Nothing else.

It is interesting that you look at some things, e.g, the lack of true perspective in backgrounds, as being a flaw.

This is a throwback game. If you look at any number of the "Best Games of All Time" threads, you will find any number of games that suffer the same problem. Did you ever consider the possibility that replicating the genre was part of the game's design?

I am glad that you have the credentials to be a valid critic of the game. More power to you.

Nevertheless, I like AE as is, and, apparently a few others do as well. It takes me back, as the narrator of the Lone Ranger used to say, "to the thrilling days of yesteryear".

[Marian]

I played the game some more tonight; and the more I play it, the more I like it.

Skurken, you may well be right about the graphics. Having said that, I don't have the professional eye that you do and nothing that you mentioned in terms of what the game was lacking is anything I had noticed, let alone recognized as a flaw. It may well be because I have played a lot of ancient games where the graphics are so pixellated that it's hard to even make out objects on the screen, so by comparison Al Emmo looks like a work of art. But of course I realize that probably isn't the mindset that the majority of gamers would bring with them when viewing the game.

This game has made me smile (and even laugh!) several times since I started playing, and it's been a long time since I can remember having experienced that with a game. That's worth a great deal to me; so much so, that I would have considered it money well spent if I had spent more on the game than I did.

[Melanie68]

Everyone's value for their dollar is different. I have no regrets preordering and spending the $30 plus shipping (some of which they refunded me). It's a game I thoroughly enjoyed and will probably replay.

[Ledz]

When I saw the intro movie's low resolution I was worried that this was going to be a b-game without much investment gone into it.. but when I started playing and realized how much dedication went into the quality and amount of dialogue, and the successful recreation of that oldskool adventuring, I changed my mind. Awesome awesome game showing that we don't need 3D, polygon, textures, branching plots, combat sequences, or anything other than a good story and a good implementation.

[Scoville]

Originally Posted by rtrooney

On a scale of 1-5, I'd give the review about a 3.

A review of a review?

[Spikey]

Here's a question. People keep saying "you can't compare Al Emmo to what Sierra did back in the 80's/90's". I disagree with that in itself (since it's supposed to be made in the same vein as those games), but why do people keep talking about Al Emmo having bad graphics in its' own right? I've only seen screenshots, but they look lush and detailed to me.

I also don't think many modern games have very lush graphics! Most console games look polygon-ish and pretty ugly to me, whereas Al Emmo looks like it'll be gorgeous, nicely rounded art, not all square and box-y (if that makes sense- music's my thing, not art). (Though, reasonably old adventure games like Myst were pretty incredible looking.)

Also, we're talking a graphic/plot tradeoff here. If you want incredible graphics, go somewhere else, but you're looking at an inferior plot, however if you want a slight dent in graphics but an overwhelingly more enjoyable game in other areas, buy this one.

Looks to me like Al Emmo will be excellent. I do think it'll be hard to see sales beyond the niche market of Sierra fans, though- the marketing doesn't seem to have been exactly brilliant. Though, most gamers play games like "Grand Theft Auto", so Al Emmo's hardly going to be commercial and crass enough for those sorts of gamer.

Anyway, I'll stop ranting now.

- Spike

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Spikey

People keep saying "you can't compare Al Emmo to what Sierra did back in the 80's/90's".

They do? Al Emmo is often compared with the Sierra oldies, for obvious reasons. If you're basing this on my statement above, then you've misunderstood. All I said is that as a current game, it is also subject to current comparisons, since it's directly competing with its contemporaries, not old classics.

why do people keep talking about Al Emmo having bad graphics in its' own right?

Again, who's doing that? Aside from skurken's points, which probably only a trained eye might notice, the general consensus seems to be really high quality background art. The only consistent criticism of the graphics is that it uses such a low resolution. And the tolerance for that seems to come down to individual preference.

Also, we're talking a graphic/plot tradeoff here. If you want incredible graphics, go somewhere else, but you're looking at an inferior plot, however if you want a slight dent in graphics but an overwhelingly more enjoyable game in other areas, buy this one.

And hopefully that's the message AG's review got across. I guess the question is, why does there have to be a tradeoff?

Though, most gamers play games like "Grand Theft Auto", so Al Emmo's hardly going to be commercial and crass enough for those sorts of gamer.

Now now, don't be snobbish. I (and many others) happen to like the GTA games as well. And based on certain sections of the game, Al Emmo has no claim on the high moral ground, either.