[Scoville]

I took my sales figures from PC Gamer magazine. Every year they would feature the sales chart for the top selling games of the past year. I didn't mention my source because I had to throw out my copies of PC Gamer a few years ago and, as such, cannot scan the page to prove my claim. If anyone still has their old issues of the magazine (it would be in the news section of one of the mid-98 issues, probably March-May), I would appreciate their vouching for my numbers, but I know I am correct. CMI sold roughly 100k, Riven was number 1, Myst number 2.

There is absolutely no reason for people to get upset and start arguing over this. I'm not claiming one series is better than the other or insulting anyone, just pointing out that Myst is more popular. And that's an unquestionable fact, even without these particular sales numbers. As Jackal said, you can find evidence of that all over the internet if you really care.

[nl4m]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Ubisoft did develop Myst 4, and since they actually fund the adventures they publish, they have far more right than most publishers to declare themselves "into" adventures over the last few years.

On the game Myst 3. If you listen to the comments, in the game. The game makers say that Ubisoft was the one that came up to the company to ask them to make Myst for Ubisoft. My guess is that Ubisoft financed the project.

And I don't even think it's debatable that Myst is the most famous adventure ever. Nothing else even comes close.

Yes, you are right. It holds the record for the most sold PC games in 1997 (?). I think it sold 11 million. There is no denying it, Myst sold great. Was it a great game ? Not to me. I like Still Life and Syberia more.

Since that studio no longer exists, it's no evidence of a sequel even if they were privately trying to support the original game by reviving the website.

I don't know the much. This is only my guess. But I think that if the company brought the site down, to the point of you not being able to enter it. It would be highly unlikely that (the same people that brought the site down) would came back to (somewhat) update it and add "Underconstraction". Again, I don't know. Maybe Ubisoft is just doing this to get more people on their website(s). Maybe, since all the sites say "underconstraction", maybe they are planning to make it into one big information website about all those games.


I don't know if it's a fact. What I've heard is that Ubisoft just bought the Microids name and not the games (that's why the production of Still Life stopped. Ubisoft had no rights over it). If true, The Adventure Company may have bought the games and open the sites... I'm just wishing for the best here

[nl4m]

Some shocking news and facts...

http://www.justadventure.com/article...bisoft_EA.shtm


****FACT: Last year, Ubisoft published Frogware's Sherlock Holmes: The Case of The Silver Earring. Ubisoft also develops and publishes the CSI games and the Myst series. They are no strangers to the adventure genre.****

JA - Will Ubisoft now be the North American publisher for all future MC2
titles?

***Ubisoft Montreal has bought the technical equipment and the talented employees of Microids Canada only. Ubisoft didn't buy any of Microids IP' or incoming project and hasn't reached any publishing deal with MC2-Microids.***

JA - As this deal must have been in the works for some time, why is The Adventure Company, and not Ubisoft the publisher of the upcoming Still Life and Obscure?

The agreement has nothing to do with the publishing of any of Microids' titles.

********Microids still owns the IP rights to all of their properties. The release of Still Life will not be affected by any of this.*****


***FACT: MC2-Microids will no longer be developing games, but they do still own the Intellectual Properties (IP) to their past products.***

***************SPECULATION: MC2-Microids can sell their IPs to the highest bidder. This means that any company can, for the right price, develop and publish a sequel to Still Life, Obscure or any of their other titles. But the question still lingers, why didn't Ubisoft also purchase MC2-Microids IPs? Do they believe them to be of little or no worth?***********
*

[Jackal]

That's exactly what was announced publicly from the beginning, so it's neither news nor shocking. Any company can sell or license their IP's to the highest bidder any time they want, so there's nothing special about that. But no one's buying, no one's selling.

I liked Still Life myself, but I don't understand the desire for a sequel now that the studio who made it is dissolved. (Besides, I kinda liked the open ending. )

[nl4m]

Originally Posted by Jackal

That's exactly what was announced publicly from the beginning, so it's neither news nor shocking. Any company can sell or license their IP's to the highest bidder any time they want, so there's nothing special about that. But no one's buying, no one's selling.

So there is (a little) chance that Still Life could have been sold. What's weird is that Syberia's site is under constraction, too. If someone bought Still Life they would bring the site up as a first sign of what's to come. But Syberia is done with. Why would anyone buy it or bring the site back up ?

I liked Still Life myself, but I don't understand the desire for a sequel now that the studio who made it is dissolved. (Besides, I kinda liked the open ending. )

At first I hated the open endings (for example Dreamfall, and Shenmue). Now I love them. I love the way DF ended. It was an unexpected, and welcomed, shocker. I even began to like Still Lifes ending. What gets to me is that there are soo many questions left unanswered.

[bulldog]

Originally Posted by Jackal

I liked Still Life myself, but I don't understand the desire for a sequel now that the studio who made it is dissolved. (Besides, I kinda liked the open ending. )

Oh yes the game was good and I did enjoy it myself….. but the open end is driving me crazy. To not “solve” the mystery, leaves me thinking something was undone or I didn’t do a good job solving the mystery. I also played “Jack the Ripper” and it was the same way, for me anyway, open ended. It is driving me crazy (in a good way).

I would like to see another still life or even a sequel to Jack the Ripper, just to tie up loose ends.

[Keregioz]

Originally Posted by Jackal

I liked Still Life myself, but I don't understand the desire for a sequel now that the studio who made it is dissolved. (Besides, I kinda liked the open ending. )

"Open ending"?....more like "no ending"...
Back when there was a thread discussing the game ending, there was one of the programmers(or something like that) of still life that posted there, and he did explain the game was not supposed to end there, they just decided to release the game as it is instead of not releasing it at all after microids closed down. I remember he described a little of what was to happen next in the game after the "supposed" ending.

[Wimli]

The original Still Life was a mess. Some nice graphics and cutscenes, but that's about it. This is one adventure franchise that can stay dead and buried as far as I'm concerned. Same can be said for Syberia actually, although those games still had some decent gameplay going for them.

[Jackal]

Yeah, the whole planned Los Angeles segment would have been great. But that wasn't to come after the current ending, but instead of. As for the current one, it felt like an ending to me. It just left more to the imagination. Sometimes questions are more fun than answers.

[akane_t]

Originally Posted by Wimli

The original Still Life was a mess. Some nice graphics and cutscenes, but that's about it. This is one adventure franchise that can stay dead and buried as far as I'm concerned. Same can be said for Syberia actually, although those games still had some decent gameplay going for them.

You are definitely in the minority if you think that the only good things bout Still Life was graphics and cut scenes. a game with nothing but some nice graphics and cut scenes wouldn't have gotten 75% rating on Game Rankings.

I found that it featured a great story albeit a hurried up ending that left a lot of people unhappy, a nice assortment of brain teasers, and an interesting concept in having two protagonists working through the mystery on their own time period. Still Life is in my top 10 favorite AG list.

I'd love to see a sequel but I doubt it will ever happen.

[Keregioz]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Yeah, the whole planned Los Angeles segment would have been great. But that wasn't to come after the current ending, but instead of. As for the current one, it felt like an ending to me. It just left more to the imagination. Sometimes questions are more fun than answers.

Don't get me wrong.... i also like open endings but only when done right and for the right reasons. In this case it was not done properly, it was a quick, sloppy wrap up that was not originally intended from the beggining by the developers of the game.... I would describe it more like a cliffhanger, much like dreamfall which also has a bad ending. In my opinion "cliffhanger" and "open ending" is not the same thing.

[Wimli]

Originally Posted by akane_t

You are definitely in the minority if you think that the only good things bout Still Life was graphics and cut scenes. a game with nothing but some nice graphics and cut scenes wouldn't have gotten 75% rating on Game Rankings.

Well, I'm definitely not the only one either who thinks this way about Still Life. I've heard and read the same complaints about the game regularly as well. It seems though that the game has a large following on this website. And I don't even know what game rankings you speak of, but I certainly haven't voted there yet. Oh well, in the end it all comes down to opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

Originally Posted by akane_t

I found that it featured a great story albeit a hurried up ending that left a lot of people unhappy, a nice assortment of brain teasers, and an interesting concept in having two protagonists working through the mystery on their own time period. Still Life is in my top 10 favorite AG list.

I think it had a great build up for a story, but then failed to deliver on all accounts. It's like building tons of expectations and then stopping there. And I agree it's very unfortunate that they didn't get to finish the game the way they intended it, but that doesn't change the fact that the way things were wrapped up felt like someone laughing in your face, saying aha, I just wasted 10 hours of your time and now frustrate you even more by not giving you an ending, neh neh neh. For some it may have been an intriguing ending, to me it just felt like an easy way out. Hey, we can't come up with a brilliant ending that delivers on the build up, let's just not give an ending at all then eh?

That wouldn't have been such a disaster if the game had more going for it then the story build up alone, like challenging gameplay for example. Instead, the game was very linear, frustratingly uninteractive (hardly any hotspots so that it was blatantly obvious what you had to do) and contained no challenging puzzles. Well, challenging in a good way I mean. Sure, there was the robot puzzle, easy enough to figure out the solution, but executing that was a whole different thing. And what was with the cookie baking puzzle? Here's someone investigating a series of homicides, with files up in her bedroom from her grandfather that might shed some light on the current murder cases, and what do you have to do? Bake cookies for your daddy! I mean, I expect puzzles in a Myst game to be unrelated to a story line, but that just doesn't work in a story driven game like Still Life. It makes the narrative flow come crashing down to a full stop. Also, there was very little 'hands on' research to be done. The main character is a detective, let her do some investigating! Yet you have someone who does the research (forgot the name of her co worker), someone who does all the lab work, etc. I really wanted to work on the computer on her desk, scan some database or something, compare pictures, look for fingerprints, the whole works of an actual murder investigation. But instead I got to bake cookies. All kidding aside, there was some investigating to be done, but again, there was no challenge there. The only items you could interact with were the ones you needed to progress the story line. Still Life just felt like an interactive movie without an ending. I was also frustrating with the intertwining investigations. Great, novel idea I'm sure, but it just didn't work as it removed you too long from the other story line. It just ended up feeling like two games thrown together, with some links here and there.

Oh well, I guess it just wasn't my type of game.

[DEMON]

Originally Posted by Wimli

And I don't even know what game rankings you speak of, but I certainly haven't voted there yet.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/920745.asp

i have a feeling you will not vote there anytime soon

[Wimli]

Originally Posted by DEMON

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/920745.asp

i have a feeling you will not vote there anytime soon

Lol! I thought it was something based on gamers' opinions, something like imdb for films. Guess it's a whole different animal then.

[akane_t]

Originally Posted by Wimli

Oh well, I guess it just wasn't my type of game.

To each to his/her own I guess. In my case, AG review pretty much sums up my feeling for the game.

http://www.adventuregamers.com/article/id,520

You know, I know many people had a problem with the cookie puzzle but I thought it was very well placed. The first thought that came to my mind when I encountered the puzzle was

Spoiler:

Is Ida Victoria's grandmother and thus responsible for the recipe?

That made it more suspenseful and exciting to go through the Gus' chapters because I was even more heavily invested in learning what's to happen to Gus and Ida.

In my opinion, having too much interaction density would end up hurting the game. The greatest strengths in games like Still Life is its story and having too many things on screen that the gamer can interact would disrupt the flow of how the story unfolds. Gabriel Knight 1 features such heavy dose of interaction density and even though it remains my favorite game of all time, I did find the large amount of interaction on each screen distracting. I felt directionless and frustrated in many occasions. Grim Fandango is an example in the opposite. I don't remember GF having a lot of things to interact with on each screen. It it had as much interaction as let's say the monkey Island games, I think the games' pacing would have been hurt.

All MHO, of course.

[nl4m]

Originally Posted by Wimli

That wouldn't have been such a disaster if the game had more going for it then the story build up alone, like challenging gameplay for example. Instead, the game was very linear, frustratingly uninteractive (hardly any hotspots so that it was blatantly obvious what you had to do) and contained no challenging puzzles. Well, challenging in a good way I mean. Sure, there was the robot puzzle, easy enough to figure out the solution, but executing that was a whole different thing.

Maybe your more of a action-adventure type of a gamer. Try playing Zelda. It has great puzzles and some great action scenes.

And what was with the cookie baking puzzle? Here's someone investigating a series of homicides, with files up in her bedroom from her grandfather that might shed some light on the current murder cases, and what do you have to do? Bake cookies for your daddy! I mean, I expect puzzles in a Myst game to be unrelated to a story line, but that just doesn't work in a story driven game like Still Life. It makes the narrative flow come crashing down to a full stop.

HAHAHAH... Funny. I felt the same way. The baking puzzle was totally out of place.

Also, there was very little 'hands on' research to be done. The main character is a detective, let her do some investigating! Yet you have someone who does the research (forgot the name of her co worker), someone who does all the lab work, etc. I really wanted to work on the computer on her desk, scan some database or something, compare pictures, look for fingerprints, the whole works of an actual murder investigation. But instead I got to bake cookies.

Yes. That would have been great. To feel like a true detective would be cool. Getting to work with the camera, and swabs, and the spray was nice too. I'm sure the developers would have added more puzzles, even more storyline. They just didn't have much time, before the buy out.


As for the ending. I think it was great. It ended like most big buget hollywood movies. How many movies did you see where the antigenist (sp ?) just "dies" without us ever seening the body, or finding out his name ? There are endless movies like that, yet they are still some of the greatest movies ever. Still life is the same way. They could have shown some guy named "Bob", who was a big fan of Mark's, as the killer and end the game by showing some form of an idenity for the killer. Would it really make that big of a difference if we knew the killers name ? What the developers did was great. They gave it some form of an ending. Yet they also gave it an "open ending" so that if another company buys the game they have a place where they can pick up the story and truly end it. I rather have a mysterious killer, then for the killer to be given a name that has nothing to do with the story.


To me dreamfall had an ending. It was a shocking and breath taking end, that was unexplected. It was something I've never seen before, in short...

Spoiler:

The bad guys win

I LOVED IT !!!

[Keregioz]

Originally Posted by nl4m

To me dreamfall had an ending. It was a shocking and breath taking end, that was unexplected. It was something I've never seen before, in short...

Spoiler:

The bad guys win

I LOVED IT !!!

If that was actually the ending of dreamfall i would of loved it too... but it's not since ragnar tornquist himself said the story will continue. He actually intended from the begining of the development to finish the story in two parts. So it's more like a cliffhanger.

[CrimsonBlue]

Originally Posted by nl4m

At first I hated the open endings (for example Dreamfall, and Shenmue). Now I love them. I love the way DF ended. It was an unexpected, and welcomed, shocker. I even began to like Still Lifes ending. What gets to me is that there are soo many questions left unanswered.

That's strange. Dreamfall is screaming for a sequel, and the ending isn't opening, it's a climax. Like the end of a lot of Lost episode. Shenmue also started to get really really interesting by the end of Shenmue II, and it was supposed to have a sequel. These aren't open endings. They aren't even endings. They are "to be continued".

In Still Life, I think they knew there wouldn't be a sequel because of the pending bankruptcy, so they left the ending open. It's not an ending they made when they first wrote the manuscript, but it came in at a later point. Because of that, the ending can feel both open and unfinished. But they're not comparable to Dreamfall or Shenmue, since the endings weren't adjusted just in case there wasn't a sequel. Dreamfall will get a sequel, Shenmue might not, but the ending doesn't reflect that.

[nl4m]

***WARNING. HEAVY SPOILERS on game Shenmue, Still life, Syberia, and Dreamfall***

If that was actually the ending of dreamfall i would of loved it too... but it's not since ragnar tornquist himself said the story will continue. He actually intended from the begining of the development to finish the story in two parts. So it's more like a cliffhanger.

I didn't know that the game was to be continued. To me, it was the end. The bad guys won.

Originally Posted by CrimsonBlue

That's strange. Dreamfall is screaming for a sequel, and the ending isn't opening, it's a climax.

From my point of view it was the end.

Spoiler:

April got "killed". So did Zoe, so did all the dragons, and so did the boyfriend (in my poinion the man at the end wasn't really him. As Zoe said.) Going by the way "The Longest Journey" ended. I would find it *very* hard to make another story without adding another character (As Zoe was added in the second installment, to continue the story). Everyone died. Who are they going to tell the story of the next time around ? The only man left standing was Alvanay (Sp ? The assasin). His story was the only one that didn't end. Of course the writer can bring back to live any character and continue the story. I don't know what he planned exactly. I am just going by what I saw in the game. That was everyone dying, and that was the end for me.

Like the end of a lot of Lost episode. Shenmue also started to get really really interesting by the end of Shenmue II, and it was supposed to have a sequel.

*Fingers still crossed* 6 years later

These aren't open endings. They aren't even endings. They are "to be continued".

You have a point there.

In Still Life, I think they knew there wouldn't be a sequel because of the pending bankruptcy, so they left the ending open. It's not an ending they made when they first wrote the manuscript, but it came in at a later point. Because of that, the ending can feel both open and unfinished.

Back, when Syberia was being made. I don't remember Microids talking about a take over. They had enough money to finish the game as they saw fit. When you compare the ending of Syberia (a fully finished game) to Still Life (a half finished game). Still life was better. Syberia's ending was *weak*, at best. Their ending was not longer than 30 seconds. It didn't explain anything.

Spoiler:

He just leaves her, and the game ends. To me, at least in Still Life you got to see someone getting "killed", some closure. The same can be said for Dreamfall. Not so with Syberia.

But they're not comparable to Dreamfall or Shenmue, since the endings weren't adjusted just in case there wasn't a sequel. Dreamfall will get a sequel, Shenmue might not, but the ending doesn't reflect that.

Spoiler:

Every game has it's place. Dreamfall left little room for the story to go now when they killed off all their characters. In Still Life you killed the bad guy, also leaving little room for the story to go now. The only thing still life was missing is the link between Mark and the man you shot. If you got the "link" the ending would be great, almost everything would be explained. Shenmue, on the other hand, left HUGE room for the story to go on, no ending what's so ever. You don't find out anything in Shenmue 2. There is still a world to be discovered. Syberia had an ending, but left us in the dark over alot of the events that happened throughout the game. For example, what happens to Kate ? Her job ? Hans ? Do they stay there ? Do they leave ? What happens to Milka (Kate promised to take her to American) ? What happened to the factory ? The game really had a brief/abrupped ending. To me Still Lifes' ending was better. At least you kill the man you were after.

[Keregioz]

Spoiler:

I didn't know that the game was to be continued. To me, it was the end. The bad guys won.

Spoiler:

From my point of view it was the end. April got "killed". So did Zoe, so did all the dragons, and so did the boyfriend (in my poinion the man at the end wasn't really him. As Zoe said.) Going by the way "The Longest Journey" ended. I would find it *very* hard to make another story without adding another character (As Zoe was added in the second installment, to continue the story). Everyone died. Who are they going to tell the story of the next time around ? The only man left standing was Alvanay (Sp ? The assasin). His story was the only one that didn't end. Of course the writer can bring back to live any character and continue the story. I don't know what he planned exactly. I am just going by what I saw in the game. That was everyone dying, and that was the end for me.

Seems like you've never watched a tv series before . Like for example "Alias", were everyone gets killed and resurrected several times!
Anyway, about Dreamfall... if you want/need to think that the story ended there that's fine, but it's an undisputed fact that it didn't.