[Ariel Type]

Ok, I really don't get the logic of the reviews. While Samorost (the game without a progressing plot, developed characters (which are silent, btw), no logic in "puzzles" (which are actually not puzzles at all, just mindless clicking) and very linear and short gameplay) becomes a cult classic on AG, Full Pipe gets a low mark and is criticized for everything that made Samorost or Goblins games famous.

So while you'll often find yourself backtracking to rooms you've visited previously, you'll usually just be passing through or performing variations of earlier actions instead of finding new strategic opportunities available to you.

Huh? There are elevators everywhere which help you to move between levels. And you don't need to repeat previous actions.

The environments are dreary and plain by nature, and there's so much repetition that they quickly graduate to monotonous and dull. Similarly, the music is an interesting mix of earthy-sounding jazz, but new tracks are so rarely introduced that there aren't nearly enough to carry the game.

Repetition? It's the underground, not some fantasy world or alien planet. And every location has it's own individuality, there are plenty of imaganitive and well-animated characters which don't need to talk to show their personalities (and it's a puzzle game after all). Heck, every single character from FP is 10 times superior to those few in Samorost.
About the music. There are over 20 tracks - that's not enough??
Illogical puzzles.. There are often (maybe not always) enough clues to help you progress. If you must give something to a character, there is a broken item of the same type lying near the character (btw, the case with a puzzle spoiled in the review). And the game is always open to experimentation, as different characters react differently to the things from your inventory.
Arcade moments are easy and fun. You can't return to them, so what?
Graphics is polished, environment is abstract and surreal, characters are wonderful, music is stylish, the gameplay is several times longer then in Samorost or Telltale games.. We are still talking about a 10$ game? Even if you don't take the price in mind, the game concept is one of the most original in recent years.
Don't take it personal, but the rewierer is very unfair to this little game.

Btw, talking about similar games, Full Pipe is actually resembles The Neverhood rather then Samorost.

[Jackal]

Now now, AT, you really need to get over this Samorost envy.

Originally Posted by Ariel Type

Full Pipe gets a low mark and is criticized for everything that made Samorost or Goblins games famous.

Just because they share concepts doesn't mean they're done equally well. It's as simple as that. As I said several times, the concept of Full Pipe is great. It's just never ever fun. It's too often repetitive, boring, and frustrating. Samorost never felt like any of those. (It's been waaay too long for me to remember much from Goblins.)

Huh? There are elevators everywhere which help you to move between levels. And you don't need to repeat previous actions.

Not sure what the elevators have to do with anything. Backtracking is backtracking. I wasn't referring to the method. And I didn't say repeat the same actions, I said perform variations of the same actions, and you definitely do.

Spoiler:

Give someone a shoe, go back for the same shoe later. Use a coin in a slot, retrieve coin later. Lame.

Repetition? It's the underground, not some fantasy world or alien planet.

So perhaps a poor choice of location. All the more reason to be creative artistically, which this game is not (in terms of its environments).

And every location has it's own individuality, there are plenty of imaganitive and well-animated characters which don't need to talk to show their personalities (and it's a puzzle game after all).

There were indeed interesting LOOKING characters. Only a handful showed any notable personality at all, and most existed solely as obvious props. They did nothing but sit on the floor and block your way in how many cases? Of course they don't need to talk, but that again means you need to be more creative in presenting them. Full Pipe isn't.

About the music. There are over 20 tracks - that's not enough??

Not when the tracks themselves are so incredibly repetitive, no.

We are still talking about a 10$ game? Even if you don't take the price in mind, the game concept is one of the most original in recent years.
Don't take it personal, but the rewierer is very unfair to this little game.

Original concept? Hmm... sounds familiar, where have I heard that before. You really can't say the exact same thing I did and then say I'm unfair.

But to be clear, I'll say it again. I absolutely agree that it's a neat concept. Frankly, I'd say that this would have made a really fascinating 8-10 room freeware game. Instead it just feels like a neat concept bloated up with tedious repetition and lousy puzzles because the developers only had 8-10 rooms worth of good ideas. I simply don't feel that most people will enjoy the game as is. If you did, great. Appreciating it for its uniqueness is something I specifically pointed out as something that might make it worthwhile for people. (Or were you only reading the criticism? ) But it's simply not that good in any other single area.

I don't take your comments personally, just as I don't expect you to take it personally that I largely disagree with you.

EDIT after your edit: Neverhood? Mm, yeah, a little. There was a LOT more going on in Neverhood, though.

[Ariel Type]

Jakal
Hey, you started all this "compare to Samorost" talks And taking this in mind, I re-read the "Samorost 2 review" topic. Here's your quote:

But we judge games on what they are, not what they aren't. That's right, Samorost has no story and no characters. That's the type of adventure it is. And AS that type of adventure, it's a damn good one. We're not about to start knocking off points for things it never tried to achieve. It's like penalizing a silent movie for having no sound, just because we think movies SHOULD have sound.

Why this "rule" works with Samorost and why it doesn't work with FP is beyond me. Again, don't take it personal, but it looks like you are just biased against Full Pipe, as, again, everything that makes Sam..(oh, tired of this) or Goblins or Neverhood a "great game" is presented here as "features of bad game". It's even not a full-priced game.

It's too often repetitive, boring, and frustrating.

I said perform variations of the same actions, and you definitely do.

Then you can said that about every single adventure. "You have to use inventory items again and again and again.. Oh, boring!". But even then the game has plenty of moments that differs it from this formular. There are six (or something) mini-games, there are several pure logic puzzles, there are different ways of contacting the world and the characters. There are actually LOTS of things to do here.

So perhaps a poor choice of location.

It's a pipe world, that's what the whole idea of FP is all about. It is easy to design lot's of complex worlds, forests, planets etc. But the designers of FP managed to make a whole new living world using a concept of.. severage.

They did nothing but sit on the floor and block your way in how many cases? Of course they don't need to talk, but that again means you need to be more creative in presenting them. Full Pipe isn't.

Again, it's a puzzle game, not an adventure, and the characetrs don't "sit and block the way" - they just live their peaceful live. I think most of them are very creative and memorible. Every character has its own distinctive features and habits. I really don't see a reason here for a complain. And the animation, again, is very professional, unlike..

Not when the tracks themselves are so incredibly repetitive, no.

That's not true. They might be not everyone's cup of tea, but to say "they are repeatative" is like saying "all the jazz is the same". Taking in mind that all the tracks are more of a mix between jazzy melodies and some abstract sounds, just like the mix of country music and crazy sounds in Neverhood, it creates a very unique soundtrack.

There was a LOT more going on in Neverhood, though.

There was MUCH more money invested in Neverhood. Compare concepts, not the games.

I read the review carefully, but most of the "pros" mentioned were quickly turned into "cons", because "the game never becomes fun". The review actually looks very subjective.. And that's a pity, because it is one of the best games you can get for 10$ (talking about modern games, of course).

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Ariel Type

Why this "rule" works with Samorost and why it doesn't work with FP is beyond me.

You're misunderstanding. The only "rule" here is that WHEN a game doesn't have certain features, then it had best make up for it by excelling in the features it DOES have. The better games are able, the lesser ones aren't.

It's even not a full-priced game.

The low price doesn't make it a better game. But you're right, it's cheap, which I pointed out in the list of positives. Hopefully it will convince some people who are on the fence to give it a try anyway. But they still shouldn't expect a good game, at least from where I'm sitting.

Then you can said that about every single adventure. "You have to use inventory items again and again and again.. Oh, boring!"

Do other games not get criticized for repetitive actions? I think they do. The same game mechanic applied in vastly different scenarios is a different thing, of course. That's what most games do.

But the designers of FP managed to make a whole new living world using a concept of.. severage.

Well, we differ on how effectively the developers managed to do just that.

Every character has its own distinctive features and habits. I really don't see a reason here for a complain. And the animation, again, is very professional, unlike..

I had no real problem with the characters. They were fine as props, but to me they never rose above that, and like any prop they added very little of interest. In a better game it wouldn't have mattered. They were non-factors in judging the game.

That's not true. They might be not everyone's cup of tea, but to say "they are repeatative" is like saying "all the jazz is the same".

No, I never said the tracks sounded like each other. I said that the tracks themselves were internally repetitive. Like listening to the end of "Hey Jude" repeatedly. Doesn't have to sound like any other song to be staggeringly repetitive.

There was MUCH more money invested in Neverhood. Compare concepts, not the games.

When we're speaking conceptually, I'll do that. When we're discussing consumer interests (like a review must do), then those issues are irrelevant.

I read the review carefully, but most of the "pros" mentioned were quickly turned into "cons", because "the game never becomes fun". The review actually looks very subjective.. And that's a pity, because it is one of the best games you can get for 10$ (talking about modern games, of course).

Of course it's subjective. It's my experience with the game. But I didn't just pull my criteria out of a hat. If you think it's a great game for $10, glad you're speaking up! For me, my experience was being grateful I only spent $10, because had I not been reviewing it, I would likely have quit playing.

[Ariel Type]

You're misunderstanding. The only "rule" here is that WHEN a game doesn't have certain features, then it had best make up for it by excelling in the features it DOES have. The better games are able, the lesser ones aren't.

But you pointed out in your review "no story or character support" as "cons" for the game (dedicating several paragraphs to this "problem"). At the same time, you mentioned that it is more of a "puzzle" type game and compared it to Samorost and Goblins several times. I quoted your phrase were you obviosly make a point about such games are not being about story and characters. Where's the logic?

The low price doesn't make it a better game.

No, but it lowers the demand for expectations. And, again, it was mentioned several times as a reason for Samorost being a 4.5 star games - "because for that low price you can get such a quality". The production values of FP are hundred times higher then those in Fatman, it is 4 or 5 times longer then Samorost and it managed to be unique and stylish.
Again, there's obviously only one factor for your criticizm - "it's not fun to play", which is very subjective factor, mind you. It is as repeatative as any other adventure - you collect items, give them to different characters, use them on environment, solve logical puzzles and play arcades, and you call this "very repeatative gameplay"? Then what game is not repeatative?
Btw, you complain about illogical puzzles. Here's the screenshot from that place:
http://www.travel.ag.ru/tours/poltruba/01.jpg
Both items you needed in that location are presented on the background. If there is a need for a hint, there's always one somewhere.

When we're discussing consumer interests (like a review must do), then those issues are irrelevant.

No, they are not. If the game is half-priced or shareware, it should always be taking into consideration. "We're not about to start knocking off points for things it never tried to achieve", remember? Actually, all the reviews on AG I read mentioned this factor, ESPECIALLY the samorostish ones

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Ariel Type

But you pointed out in your review "no story or character support" as "cons" for the game (dedicating several paragraphs to this "problem").

They're listed in the Cons section for two reasons. One, because the absence of those is a deal breaker right off the bat for many people. Had it just been this reason, I'd have probably added an "if that matters to you" sort of qualifier. (Not all pros and cons are applicable to everyone, after all.) But the more important reason is because the game does not make up for the lack of those things adequately, not because they aren't there at all. There's only so much a point-form list can say. (That's what the rest of the review is for. )

No, but it lowers the demand for expectations.

In some areas, maybe. Not in quality of gameplay. True, no one would expect the likes of Dreamfall for a 10-spot. But I doubt anyone would think having a lousy time for ONLY $10 is good value. There are lots of used games for that price that would be much better value than this one if someone had money burning a hole in their pocket.

And, again, it was mentioned several times as a reason for Samorost being a 4.5 star games - "because for that low price you can get such a quality".

Samorost got its rating on the basis of being a great game. The only relevance of its price was that it balanced out the short length. Obviously if it cost more people would have expected a longer game, and rightfully so. But it didn't get a high grade because it was cheap.

Again, there's obviously only one factor for your criticizm - "it's not fun to play", which is very subjective factor, mind you.

No, there are obviously all the same factors I listed in the review. I get that you disagree, but I'm afraid that doesn't somehow categorically eliminate them. You played the game and liked it, so I'm obviously not going to convince you to like it less, nor would I want to. Seriously, I'm glad you're speaking up for your positive experience of the game, as gamers NEVER unanimously agree with each other. But I'm quite confident that the majority of players would be disappointed in the game for some or all of the reasons I outlined, and nothing you've said makes me think differently.

It is as repeatative as any other adventure - you collect items, give them to different characters, use them on environment, solve logical puzzles and play arcades, and you call this "very repeatative gameplay"? Then what game is not repeatative?

If you want to grossly generalize, you can make everything sound like everything else. That gets us nowhere. It all comes down to the execution, and Full Pipe was more repetitive than most games. Heck, it didn't even have you keep collecting all different items, but some of the same ones over and over. Yawn. Again, if that didn't bother you, lucky you.

Both items you needed in that location are presented on the background. If there is a need for a hint, there's always one somewhere.

There are generally clues to what illogical thing is required next somewhere, yes. There's a difference between being nonsensical and unclued. Finding out what you need to do without having any rational reason for it is very unrewarding. You still don't feel like you're solving an actual "puzzle", but have simply identified what the developers want you to do.

If the game is half-priced or shareware, it should always be taking into consideration.

It always is. But a game will never be graded UP because it's cheap. That suggests it's better than it is.

"We're not about to start knocking off points for things it never tried to achieve", remember?

And we didn't. Full Pipe was judged on the merits of being a Samorost/Goblins style of puzzle-adventure and found to be a poor one.

Really, AT, you seem to want to convince me (or others) that bias is clouding my judgement unfairly against this game, even while you're disproving that very point by demonstrating how I don't discriminate against this sort of game. At some point, I trust you'll reach the conclusion that I just didn't find this game much good. The bottom line is that not all games are created equal, and there are many games better than this one.

[Ariel Type]

Ok, I see this leads nowhere. You obviously didin't like the game, that's your right. Maybe the problem is that you actually tried to analyse the game from the "regular adventure" point of view, while realising it is a non-regular adventure game. Maybe you just don't like such types of games.

Full Pipe was judged on the merits of being a Samorost/Goblins style of puzzle-adventure and found to be a poor one

I understand that the Samorost review wasn't written by you, and that it is not easy for you to defend Samorost while accusing FP. Otherwise, I guess you wouldn't repeat the "no story, no characters, no motivation", because Samorost or Goblins can be described in an exactly_same_way. Ok.
The thing is, the game has been on the market for three years now (in our country). I read lots of different opinions by different people. Your opinion is the first really negative one I've met. Honestly. That's why I tried to find an explanation to your negative feedback.

I'm quite confident that the majority of players would be disappointed in the game for some or all of the reasons I outlined

You didn't try to look into the gameworld, into the atmosphere, into the characters or puzzles (returning to previous items, btw, is the feauture of every single Coktel game and imo is actually a feature of an imaginative design). All you saw is "mindless repeatative adventure that lacks everything", turning every point of the game into the negative one (btw, you actually stated in the review that "new tracks are rarely introduced", not that they are monotonous).
I really can't understand all this attacks towards FP, but well, this is how you feel I guess.

[fireside]

While Samorost (the game without a progressing plot, developed characters (which are silent, btw), no logic in "puzzles" (which are actually not puzzles at all, just mindless clicking)

Samorost didn't have mindlessly clicking puzzles that weren't puzzles. Samarost actually is one of the few adventures that has true puzzles. A puzzle always involves ordering of either physical objects or events. Samorost used the ordering of events, mostly. Putting the right inventory item on the right hotspot doesn't qualify. That's a guessing game. If there are clues involved or logic required, it makes it a slightly higher guessing game, but still not a puzzle. Unless the review was completely wrong, that makes the two games completely different, because Full Pipe or whatever it was called used guessing objects that had no logic or clues. The very lowest form of "puzzle" that isn't a puzzle.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Ariel Type

Ok, I see this leads nowhere. You obviously didin't like the game, that's your right. Maybe the problem is that you actually tried to analyse the game from the "regular adventure" point of view, while realising it is a non-regular adventure game. Maybe you just don't like such types of games.

Well, you're right that this isn't going anywhere, but I'm not sure where you expected it to go. As I said, if you're trying to convince me, yourself, or anyone else that I had a bias against this sort of game, you're just plain wrong. I didn't review Samorost, no, but I loved it and would gladly recommend it to anyone. I enjoyed Neverhood, too. I didn't enjoy Full Pipe, and don't think it's a good game. There's nothing else going on here besides that. Maybe it's a language issue(?), but you seem to be blatantly ignoring some of the things I'm saying.

The thing is, the game has been on the market for three years now (in our country). I read lots of different opinions by different people. Your opinion is the first really negative one I've met. Honestly. That's why I tried to find an explanation to your negative feedback.

Well, if the consensus is that it's a great game, I'm sure it will catch on and do well despite my lone negative review.

You didn't try to look into the gameworld, into the atmosphere, into the characters or puzzles (returning to previous items, btw, is the feauture of every single Coktel game and imo is actually a feature of an imaginative design). All you saw is "mindless repeatative adventure that lacks everything", turning every point of the game into the negative one (btw, you actually stated in the review that "new tracks are rarely introduced", not that they are monotonous).

Of course I will object to you telling me what I was trying to do or not do, but again perhaps that's just a language thing. And no, the negative things weren't ALL I saw. But I did see them, and the game was a lesser experience because of them. Like I said, it's too bad, because the game showed a lot of potential.

[jacog]

Funny thing is, your example of an illogical puzzle might have persuaded me to want to try this game. But then, I enjoyed games like Gast, despite lack of plot or character development. Hmm, no review of that on AG.

[Jackal]

Ironically enough, I actually reviewed Gast for another site before I came to AG. Early days, so I don't vouch for its quality.

Silly puzzle solutions have been a long-time staple of adventures for years, of course, but generally the better ones make you feel like you're discovering the game's internal logic in solving them. Others leave you feeling like you're required to do arbitrary things, just cuz. Needless to say, the latter is how I felt here, but other people's mileage can (and obviously does) vary.

[Ariel Type]

fireside

Samarost actually is one of the few adventures that has true puzzles. A puzzle always involves ordering of either physical objects or events. Samorost used the ordering of events, mostly.

Samorost games were all about "catch the pixel" logic, like most flash games. From time to time you did have to trigger events in the right order, but it was always so obvious that you could hardly call it "a puzzle". Most of the time you were searching for the right pixel on the picture. And the lowest form of puzzle is even not "guessing objects that had no logic or clues" (btw, that's not the case with Full Pipe, as I wrote before), but pixel-hunting logic.

Jackal

I'm not sure where you expected it to go.

I hoped that you would agree with some untrue points in your review, i.m. "illogical puzzles" or the "no story, no characters problem".
Ok, you enjoyed Samorost and said that "such type of games don't need story/characters" (and FP actually HAVE characters). But while your review talks a lot about such issues (actually making them some of the major problems), here, on the forums, you stated that "the game is just no fun". I really can't understand the issue with "illogical puzzles" or their repeativness. The issue with "returning to some objects being boring" is even more strange to me - I thought it was a great designer decision to make the player actually think about the items he needs, without collecting a full pocket of useless items.

the negative things weren't ALL I saw. But I did see them, and the game was a lesser experience because of them.

But you managed to find faults in EVERYTHING, including interface and mini-games. It looks like your personal goal was to make everything look blunt, so you looked at FP through the magnifying glass, deeply analysing every component of the low-priced game, and excluding such "global" questions as "atmosphere" or "gameworld". That's how you got everything to be "repeatative". Well, again, that's a matter of personal taste.
And about that puzzle you mentioned being "illogical"

Spoiler:

1. There were clues on the picture that indicated what that particular person required in exchange, as I mentioned
2. By that moment you knew that you need some small object to put into drawer-creature, because the eating-creature required more balls and the drawer you had in your inventory was too big for this procedure (the character even tried to put a drawer into a drawer-creature). And that's why you needed glasses.

It is easy to show everyone that the puzzle you just ripped out of the context of the game is "so strange and illogical". But if you know the game universe and know how the logic works inside its boundaries (that's where the "atmosphere and gameworld" issue is nessesarry), you'll make it more understandable. Though it is still not fair to use game material in such a way.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Ariel Type

I hoped that you would agree with some untrue points in your review, i.m. "illogical puzzles" or the "no story, no characters problem".

Well, sorry, there's nothing at all "untrue" about my review, and I stand by everything I said. (Of course, or I wouldn't have said them in the first place.) If you don't understand my explanations, hopefully you'll figure it out sometime, but I'm now done explaining them. If you do understand and simply disagree, that's fine by me, but you'll need to figure out the difference between disagreeing and disproving, or even discrediting.

Ok, you enjoyed Samorost and said that "such type of games don't need story/characters" (and FP actually HAVE characters). But while your review talks a lot about such issues (actually making them some of the major problems), here, on the forums, you stated that "the game is just no fun".

The review itself says it's no fun, too. What about it? I spent two pages of a review explaining why. All you're doing is selectively picking out points, either from the review or my posts, conveniently ignoring everything else, and pretending a few random sentence fragments go together. Well, they don't. I'm afraid I don't have the time to keep showing why.

But you managed to find faults in EVERYTHING, including interface and mini-games.

If I managed to find them, it's because they were there. If you want to be an apologist for the game, feel free. But don't expect me to do the same, or anyone else to overlook flaws because they didn't bother you personally. The suggestion that I have some sort of personal grudge against this game is beyond absurd. End of THAT story.

And about that puzzle you mentioned being "illogical"...

And once again you're defending something other than what I've said was the problem. Yes, there is a logical sequence of events required if you accept the totally nonsensical premises for doing such things. THAT is what's illogical. If you inexplicably accept that 2 is the same as 3, then 2+3 is both 4, 5 and 6, isn't it? Yes. Logical once you've accepted the ridiculous premise in the first place. Otherwise, totally silly. And while even illogical things CAN be fun in the proper context, in Full Pipe it's not. Everything is connected.

I didn't ignore the "global" positive points. There simply weren't enough of them and/or those that are present aren't strong enough of carry the game.

And with that, I'm considering this particular "debate" finished on my part. I guess if anyone else demonstrates that they don't understand my points either, I may make another attempt. But at this stage, I'm pretty convinced it's just you, AT.

[After a brisk nap]

I was more disturbed by the copious pipe-related puns. What kind of mind sits and comes up with ways to express everything in terms of plumbing?

[Jackal]

You don't want to know!

[Ariel Type]

Jackal
I asked you not to take it personal, because my complains concerns the manner in which the review is written, not that I want to blame you for "hating the game for some reason". It's just how it feels.
I'll just make some connections between review, your words and the game.

If I managed to find them, it's because they were there.

And still you managed to end up the review of little mini-games with

Once completed, however, there's no way to replay some of them short of loading a saved game.

(very abstract and strange complain), review of interface - with

The one drawback is that it's often difficult to align the ambiguous interactive point of the cursor with hotspots, so at times you may find yourself missing an object you're trying to interact with.

(actually the simpliest smart-cursor scheme when the cursor changes its shape as it is moved over an object, absolutely nothing difficult), review of graphics - with

The environments are dreary and plain by nature, and there's so much repetition that they quickly graduate to monotonous and dull.

(while every location is unique, and the only thing repeating is the settings, which is dictated by the nature of game) and review of music - with

new tracks are so rarely introduced that there aren't nearly enough to carry the game.

while I pointed out that it is not true, and you stated that what you ment is

I never said the tracks sounded like each other. I said that the tracks themselves were internally repetitive.

(completely different things).
As you ended the description of every feauture with a negative point (even if it is a minor complain), it gives a feeling that that feature is a total "con", especially when EVERY feature is discribed in such a way.

I want AGAIN to mention your phrase

But we judge games on what they are, not what they aren't. That's right, Samorost has no story and no characters. That's the type of adventure it is. And AS that type of adventure, it's a damn good one. We're not about to start knocking off points for things it never tried to achieve. It's like penalizing a silent movie for having no sound, just because we think movies SHOULD have sound.

and that you compared both games, but at the same time the absense of story and characters is mentioned in 6 (!) paragraphs and it is one of the major "Cons".

And the "illogical puzzles" which you illustrated in a form of a ripped-out puzzle

Why did I want the glasses? I didn't, or at least I didn't know I did, but I was glad to be rid of the drawer, as it had proven too big to turn into an egg in a previous room. If you're not exactly following this line of reasoning, join the club.

again, has its logic inside the game, not in a form it is presented. Every single obstacle from Goblins game, or Monkey Island, or Neverhood, or some other cartoon game can be presented in the same way, without describing the gameworld. You gathered dogs, pigs, bugs, maggots and ladders, changed it for sculls, sticks, cheese or porridge, talked to trees and skeletons, perform different kinds of action that is

Logical once you've accepted the ridiculous premise in the first place. Otherwise, totally silly.

The SETTINGS require you to act otherwise then in your normal life, not the absence of logic (and I think that in my explanation of puzzle I demonstrated that there is the logic behind all this, no more, no less then in most of cartoon games). You are not told what you have to do directly, you have to think in the boundaries of the game. I, somehow, had no problems with it.

P.S. I'm not expecting any answer and I have nothing against you or your opinion. Just to make MY opinion totally clear

[Jackal]

I don't take it personally, except for when you try to tell me what my motivations are (which you did). Then you ARE making the issue personal. Otherwise, I'm simply correcting your false assumptions and misinterpretations of what I've said. Your latest post is equally filled with them, but I just don't see the value in addressing them all. I don't mind clarifying things, but it seems I'm just giving you new things to distort and/or take out of context with each new post, so that's enough of that.

I think you can be pretty sure that you made your appreciation for the game very clear.

So... anyone else play Full Pipe?

[Thello]

I bought Full Pipe as an impulse purchase, but I haven't bothered to go back and play it yet. It's certainly interesting, but I've got a bajillion other things I'd rather play than an obtuse adventure game first.

[Eureka]

I'd just like to say that this review didn't have enough poop or penis jokes in it for my liking. And for a game with the word "pipe" in its title, it's unforgivable.

[Melanie68]

Well you won't find them here on a gaming site.