[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Legolas813

It's in the general forum because I put it there. Truthfully, like Indigo, I found it hard to classify this game. And I knew there would be a big argument if I put it in the adventure section, so I didn't even bother.

I'm usually on the purist side, but this one has really a lot of adventure elements, much more so than Indigo Prophecy. I'd say it's an adventure-action game. It's a lot easier to classify than IP, really, become the gameplay is less unorthodox.

[squarejawhero]

So much for avoiding that argument.

[Crunchy in milk]

Originally Posted by Manhunter71

The 2 most annoying flaws are the unskippable cutscenes and the lack of save game game tokens...

Not by a long shot. I had no trouble discovering enough save tokens in the game and I found the cutscenes are generally quite short.

Should you get at least a couple of fighting moves under your belt its possible to win most fights you *need* to. You don't always need to win fights given the body possession feature.

The most annoying flaws (imo) are:

Spoiler:

The puzzle maybe 3/4 of the way through the game, in which, via north/south/east/west directions engraved on a ramp in the previous room, in conjunction with blurry diagrams anchored at the tops of the walls of a giant room filled with dozens of coffins... you must pick the correct little crystal/gem from inside one particular coffin.

Inside every incorrect coffin is an identical crystal/gem so you don't know until much later if you got the right one... That is, much much later, right near the very end of the game, when the cyrstal is required in order to open a door, and going back to try for another crystal is more than just frustrating... it can be impossible.

and

Spoiler:

The final boss can be an absolute pain to kill. Even if you cake walk through the shooting/fighting scenes and know exactly what to do in order to defeat him, its an exercise in precise character movement and targeting that can require a rag to wipe the spittle off your monitor that builds up after swearing a blue streak at it while foaming at the mouth.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

Not by a long shot. I had no trouble discovering enough save tokens in the game and I found the cutscenes are generally quite short.

Should you get at least a couple of fighting moves under your belt its possible to win most fights you *need* to. You don't always need to win fights given the body possession feature.

The most annoying flaws (imo) are:

Spoiler:

The puzzle maybe 3/4 of the way through the game, in which, via north/south/east/west directions engraved on a ramp in the previous room, in conjunction with blurry diagrams anchored at the tops of the walls of a giant room filled with dozens of coffins... you must pick the correct little crystal/gem from inside one particular coffin.

Inside every incorrect coffin is an identical crystal/gem so you don't know until much later if you got the right one... That is, much much later, right near the very end of the game, when the cyrstal is required in order to open a door, and going back to try for another crystal is more than just frustrating... it can be impossible.

and

Spoiler:

The final boss can be an absolute pain to kill. Even if you cake walk through the shooting/fighting scenes and know exactly what to do in order to defeat him, its an exercise in precise character movement and targeting that can require a rag to wipe the spittle off your monitor that builds up after swearing a blue streak at it while foaming at the mouth.

Yeah, those are annoying. But the action scenes I had trouble with are the FPS parts, or more precisely the one in the roofs. I lost a whole bunch of token there.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Ninth

I'm usually on the purist side, but this one has really a lot of adventure elements, much more so than Indigo Prophecy. I'd say it's an adventure-action game. It's a lot easier to classify than IP, really, become the gameplay is less unorthodox.

Well, obviously we're talking some pretty murky areas here in terms of classification, so there's no hard and fast rule, and no right or wrong. Frankly, Fahrenheit is where it is because it's a title of great interest, and it's in the forum where it'll get the most attention. Yes, a very pragmatic reason, not some grand philosophical rationale. It could just as easily be discussed in this one, though.

If I were going to draw a distinction just for kicks, I'd say it's that Fahrenheit's action is really intended to propel the story, not hinder it (in the gameplay sense). I think they cheated on that design goal a few too many times, but not often enough to change the argument. Omikron's action is straight-up classic obstacle challenge. Shooter segments, combo-style fistfights, etc. Had the game actually handled those elements with any skill at all, they might have been manageable enough to make a case for it. But, they sucked. Massively.

I really disliked Omikron, and it's one of the few games I've given up on (about halfway through), as my appreciation for the overall concepts gave way to the total lack of enjoyment I was experiencing.

I felt the same about Project Eden, another unique game that has lots of adventure stuff in it. Managed to finish that one, but was happy to get it off my hard drive afterwards.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Jackal

If I were going to draw a distinction just for kicks, I'd say it's that Fahrenheit's action is really intended to propel the story, not hinder it (in the gameplay sense). I think they cheated on that design goal a few too many times, but not often enough to change the argument. Omikron's action is straight-up classic obstacle challenge. Shooter segments, combo-style fistfights, etc. Had the game actually handled those elements with any skill at all, they might have been manageable enough to make a case for it. But, they sucked. Massively.

I think you're exagerating a bit. The action elements didn't all suck. Some were really badly done (mostly the shooter parts), but some were kinda fun (nothing fantastic, though, but the fist fights were ok). In the same manner, some action parts made sense in the story, while others didn't.
Also, the difficulty setting could be cranked down a bit.

It's funny you disliked it so much. Even though I found it heavily flawed, I had a terrific time playing (and again, I'm a purist ).
In any case, the game still has a lot more adventure to it than Fanhrenheit, as far as gameplay is concerned. And it feels more like a living world, in my opinion.

[Jackal]

Well, it's possible the game crammed in a ton of fun stuff the moment after I quit. I doubt it, though. But none of the fighting or shooting parts I encountered were anything but horrible. Of course, I'm comparing them to games I've played that do both far better, rather than as an adventure game trying to "do action". So I cut it no slack in that department. I'm not sure if your experience is different or not. Maybe that makes a difference?

There's a difference between action "making sense" in the story and "propelling" the story. The action in Fahrenheit wasn't an in-game plot event like shooting the bad guys (which makes perfect sense in context). It was just a mechanic used to draw the player into the story happening onscreen (which obviously never had anything to do with playing Simon). That's what I'm calling "propelling". The role of the action was entirely different in the two games (though, as I said, Fahrenheit did cheat on that a handful of times.)

No argument on it feeling a lot more like a living world. That it did very well. But then, so do most RPG's. In fact, the argument you're making applies to KOTOR and a ton of other RPG's. And it's the same hazy line of reasoning to distinguish those.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Well, it's possible the game crammed in a ton of fun stuff the moment after I quit. I doubt it, though. But none of the fighting or shooting parts I encountered were anything but horrible. Of course, I'm comparing them to games I've played that do both far better, rather than as an adventure game trying to "do action". So I cut it no slack in that department. I'm not sure if your experience is different or not. Maybe that makes a difference?

I don't know. I've played a few fighting games, but I didn't see Omikron as trying to do perfect fighting scenes, rather trying to relax the player by making him mash the keys at random and still win. The shooting scenes were useless, that I agree with

Originally Posted by Jackal

There's a difference between action "making sense" in the story and "propelling" the story. The action in Fahrenheit wasn't an in-game plot event like shooting the bad guys (which makes perfect sense in context). It was just a mechanic used to draw the player into the story happening onscreen (which obviously never had anything to do with playing Simon). That's what I'm calling "propelling". The role of the action was entirely different in the two games (though, as I said, Fahrenheit did cheat on that a handful of times.)

I can agree with that.

Originally Posted by Jackal

No argument on it feeling a lot more like a living world. That it did very well. But then, so do most RPG's. In fact, the argument you're making applies to KOTOR and a ton of other RPG's. And it's the same hazy line of reasoning to distinguish those.

It wasn't an argument for it being an AG, but for it not being as bad as your post implied.
It's an AG for me because it relies heavily on AG components like collecting and using objects, talking to people, running errands, exploring, a great part of peaceful wandering, etc...

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Ninth

It wasn't an argument for it being an AG, but for it not being as bad as your post implied.
It's an AG for me because it relies heavily on AG components like collecting and using objects, talking to people, running errands, exploring, a great part of peaceful wandering, etc...

Um, okay. But I was answering why it's being discussed here instead of Adventure (which is what you asked).

My personal impressions of the game have nothing to do with whether it had lots of AG components or not. Sure it did. Like a lot of RPG's. And it had a lot of cool features that I really appreciate objectively. I just didn't find it at all enjoyable. Aside from the action, the controls were clunky, the save system sucked, and I felt like I spent way too much time wandering around that big living city just to get anywhere (even with the car). It's been too long for me to remember any other specifics, but I just kept waiting for something to become "fun", and it never came.

[entranced]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Um, okay. But I was answering why it's being discussed here instead of Adventure (which is what you asked).

My personal impressions of the game have nothing to do with whether it had lots of AG components or not. Sure it did. Like a lot of RPG's. And it had a lot of cool features that I really appreciate objectively. I just didn't find it at all enjoyable. Aside from the action, the controls were clunky, the save system sucked, and I felt like I spent way too much time wandering around that big living city just to get anywhere (even with the car). It's been too long for me to remember any other specifics, but I just kept waiting for something to become "fun", and it never came.

But it sure as hell was fun for me. They wanted you to really feel immersed in a large, vast environment as if you were another living, breathing inhabitant of the virtual world, where anything could happen. Kind of like a GTA environment, except more adventure based, and less freedom (then again this game came out in 1999).

If you've thoroughly enjoyed games across all genres...adventure, fps, fighting, and rpg...then it really is amazing to have a game with the balls to give you all of that in one package. Some found it tacky and aimless like you did, but for me it was just superb. Of course the quality of each individual genre element in Omikron couldn't compare individually to other games which only have one of the above. I couldn't help but admire the fact that they took the time to pack so much material into this game. I can definitely see why you thought Omikron's fps and combat systems were crap, but if you accepted their flaws and took the game in by its entire package, I don't see why you didn't find any of it fun. The story had it's ups and downs, but overall I thought it was well written.

I'm still not sure what made you quit half way, but what excited me the most and kept me going was not knowing what was going to happen next...control wise that is...as I had no clue if I'd be running around solving a puzzle, gunning down enemies, and/or going head to head against a foe. This is why it felt so fresh for me. I guess you obviously did not respond the same way...maybe you hated their versions of fps and combat so much that it just frustrated and bored you.

I'll admit that Omikron had lots of flaws (like how it starts out as a thriller and then falls into this never ending cycle of missions) but its concept was original enough for me to overlook majority of that and just play through it. What other games dared to fuse so much in one package back then? Few if any...probably because most developers know a lot of players will find it awkward, and some elements will not be as polished as others. I loved it though since it was just such a huge change from the ordinary.

Aaaah...I'm done rambling here.

[Jackal]

Well, like I said, it's been too long for me to remember precisely what I didn't like. I did admire the whole "living world" thing, but the novelty quickly wore off since most of it is cosmetic, and I just found the whole experience plodding and cumbersome.

As for the action sequences, nowhere did I say they were tacky and aimless or anything of the sort. I only said they were done poorly. And they were done so poorly they weren't "fused" into the game seamlessly as they should have been. It was like a sudden and abrupt change to a whole different gamestyle tacked on for variety. Lots of other games have tried to mash genres together (often equally clumsily and unsuccessfully), so there's nothing new there. The only difference with Omikron was that it tried to do it with several. I don't find that particularly ballsy, but even so, my enjoyment level has nothing to do with the size of the developer's cojones. They still need to do it right. And Omikron didn't, from where I was sitting. This was a pretty common reaction among reviewers at the time, so what I'm saying shouldn't come as that big a surprise. If you acknowledge you needed to accept the game's flaws, then it should be easy to understand the opposite reaction.

So... yeah. Good concept, commendable ambition, but uneven execution that really hurt the first two.

[cristane]

I'm bringing this thread back to life, with one question: can this game be purchased from somewhere? Anywhere? I'd love to play it again. Thanks