Adventure Gamers - Forums

Blackthorne - 01 April 2013 07:43 AM

I do love it when people demand Gritty™ and Realistic™.

I wasn’t demanding anything. And when I say gritty and realistic, I don’t use them as shorthand for “like Call of Duty”. What I mean is less exaggerated lighting, a more subdued colour palette, environments that actually look lived in etc.

I don’t mean to say that I know better than the art director on the project. He/she has spent more time thinking about the look of Moebius than I ever will. It’s just my opinion, but I’m entitled to it.

Oh, I know - I was just being grumpy about those two Buzzwords.  People use them to describe everything these days - from art production, but mostly to tone and style of writing and the themes contained within.

Bt

J.H - 03 April 2013 06:11 AM

I’m sorry but judging from the trailer this game looks to be absolute trash.

Nothing like detailed analysis, is there .

Personally I liked the Alpha release and think it’s shaping up to be another complex, enjoyable Jane Jensen game. The story & dialogue appears to be well-written as ever, voice acting is good, and the music is just Robert Holmes. Need more be said .

There are some areas for improvement though, which is not surprising I guess - it is an alpha release after all. Things that come to mind:

1. The character models & animation as has already been talked about. Malachi in particular, as has been commented, clearly needs some more work.

2. I do agree with OneFlesh that the secondary characters seem rather dull. They’re plausible, and the voice acting is fine, but I just don’t find them particularly interesting. I don’t want constant oddballs (a la Broken Sword or something) but some with a bit more life or individuality would be nice - those we see are a pale shadow to the supporting cast in GK2 for example (all members of the Hunt Club were great, Gabe’s lawyer worked perfectly, and the guy with the wild animals was suitably creepy), or GK1 for that matter. Saying that, I don’t remember those in GK3 or Grey Matter being particularly interesting so maybe it’s a trend.

3. They were few puzzles (only 4 really I think) and though I liked the analyzing idea, I think they need to make it a bit more challenging. At the moment, it’s hard to see how it could take more than a minute.

Other things:

orient - 01 April 2013 01:20 AM

As an aside, personally I find the art-style to be a little too shiny and clean.

I know what you mean, but having played Gemini Rue, Blackwell games, Resonance, and some Tex games recently (which all end to have a darker or grittier side), it’s maybe a nice change. I like them overall.

Re Malachi, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the voice acting, but do agree that he’s pretty unlikeable. With the accent, plus his general superior, pompous and snobbish tone, he’s not going to be the easiest lead to feel sympathy for . If it wasn’t for some nice dry humour at times, he’d deserve a good slapping after 5 seconds, never mind 5 minutes! I also noticed a few bits which a British person wouldn’t actually say, but as his background is more complex I think (he was in South Africa initially presumably?), maybe that’s fair enough.

Interface definitely reminds me of Cognition but I don’t have a problem with that in general (think it’s straightforward enough & looks fresh), though it’s unclear what a few of the symbols actually mean/do until you’ve got used to them.

Overall I’m happy - I’m sure the game’s going to be very enjoyable though think it’ll need to improve to reach classic status. But early days yet & we’re only seeing a small early-part of the game.

DaveyB - 03 April 2013 09:57 AM

Re Malachi, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the voice acting, but do agree that he’s pretty unlikeable. With the accent, plus his general superior, pompous and snobbish tone, he’s not going to be the easiest lead to feel sympathy for

Yes, but I would also point out that anyone who didn’t say that about Gabriel in GK1 after playing it for 5 minutes is probably insane. First appearances can be deceiving.

DaveyB - 03 April 2013 09:57 AM

J.H - 03 April 2013 06:11 AM

I’m sorry but judging from the trailer this game looks to be absolute trash.

Nothing like detailed analysis, is there? .

 

Haha, this is the best retort I’ve heard to that kind of rhetoric.

Also, generally starting a sentence with “I’m sorry but,” generally means you’re going to say something absolutely douchey.

But everyone’s entitled to their opinion - but if I judged everything solely on it’s trailer, I’d be in trouble.  Sometime trailers just suck for good products.

Bt

Blackthorne - 03 April 2013 10:13 AM

Haha, this is the best retort I’ve heard to that kind of rhetoric.

Also, generally starting a sentence with “I’m sorry but,” generally means you’re going to say something absolutely douchey.
Bt

Why do you have a problem with people giving negative feedback? Why do you feel the need to denigrate people who choose to give feedback that isn’t praise? So, it is douchey to say you don’t like something? Or, is it douchey to pile on someone whose crime was to have a different opinion than you and to have expressed it in a pithy way? Would you sarcastically deride the person as offering “detailed analysis” if they merely said “the game looks great based on the trailer”?

Let’s keep the conversation about the game itself and not get into personal back-and-forth.

Quest1 - 03 April 2013 10:46 AM

Why do you have a problem with people giving negative feedback? Why do you feel the need to denigrate people who choose to give feedback that isn’t praise? So, it is douchey to say you don’t like something? Or, is it douchey to pile on someone whose crime was to have a different opinion than you and to have expressed it in a pithy way? Would you sarcastically deride the person as offering “detailed analysis” if they merely said “the game looks great based on the trailer”?

MtnPeak, you go back and forth like a pendulum.  This from the same person who raged at Bt and I for not wanting to see the KQ franchise resurrected by Telltale. 

As far as Moebius is concerned, it does look better graphically than Cognition, but I really hope they change the interface.  Cognition’s interface is clunky, and at times, actually prohibitive to the gameplay.  There’s a great discussion of the problems with Cognition’s interface in the gamecritics.com review of Episode 2.  I know that a lot of the things in the alpha are placeholders, so hopefully that’s something they are planning on ironing out.  I honestly don’t understand the need to try and “modernize” the interface—both Sierra’s old multi-icon interface AND the Lucasarts verb coins were very elegant.  Cognition’s new interface felt like change just for change’s sake, in the process adding in a ton of extra clicks to perform the various actions—all for the sake of something that LOOKED slick.  I could see it possibly working better for tablets though—but there really should be two interfaces then—one that works well for mouse and keyboard and one that works well for touchscreens.  What works for one does not necessarily work well for the other, and I think Cognition’s interface is a great example of that.

TimovieMan - 03 April 2013 12:05 PM

Just saying “It rules!” or “It sucks!” doesn’t tell us anything at all. On a forum we usually expect a little bit more than a “likes” and “dislikes” count…

The best comments are like the one DaveyB made a bit earlier, imo…
(Btw, Davey, did you send your feedback to Jane and Phoenix Online?)

Exactly - this was my point.  I actually never railed on the guy for thinking it sucked, but merely for a one sentence statement gleaning that something sucked… from a trailer.  I’m sorry I found that humorous, Quest1.

I’m all for feedback - positive or negative.  Especially in this case - as I know members of Phoenix Online read this, and they do take things in consideration.  I happen to know that they take great pride in their work, and they do care what people think of their work.  They don’t want to make a crappy game, that’s for sure.  fov, thanks for keeping it on track - and like I’ve said before, Quest1, if you want to talk to me about something, you can send me a personal message.  I’m quite approachable.

A note about Moebius, as I’ve read, is that the interface is similar to Cognition - which I did stumble a bit with in the beginning.  Using items was a little clumsy, for sure.  But, as I’ve said (not having played the alpha), I enjoyed the over atmosphere offered by the trailer.  It’ll be great to see more when the game is released.

Bt

TimovieMan - 03 April 2013 12:05 PM

Just saying “It rules!” or “It sucks!” doesn’t tell us anything at all. On a forum we usually expect a little bit more than a “likes” and “dislikes” count…

The best comments are like the one DaveyB made a bit earlier, imo…
(Btw, Davey, did you send your feedback to Jane and Phoenix Online?)

Thanks TimovieMan. We did fill in the survey after finishing the alpha release, but maybe I’ll also paste & send the FB I put here to Jane as it goes inot a little bit more detail I guess.

Blackthorne - 03 April 2013 12:41 PM

A note about Moebius, as I’ve read, is that the interface is similar to Cognition - which I did stumble a bit with in the beginning.  Using items was a little clumsy, for sure. 
Bt

It is with Moebius too. But I prefer it to what you get all too often these days - namely left click examine, right click action. Far too limiting for my taste. I know what Lambonius means re the old Sierra & Lucas Arts interfaces though.

Lambonius - 03 April 2013 12:19 PM

MtnPeak, you go back and forth like a pendulum.  This from the same person who raged at Bt and I for not wanting to see the KQ franchise resurrected by Telltale. 

Yep. He’s also happy to pour tons of vitriol onto Phoenix Online, (though he’s then embarrassed and regrets it when he releases they read forums too lol) - that’s why he’s happy when someone rips into Moebius no matter whether any reasons are given or not. Still, each to their own.

Way to miss the point J.H.
Thanks for elaborating your statement anyway, I wonder why you didn’t do so in the first place. I think you’re too quick to judge though considering the little you have seen of the game so far. As in, merely a trailer. The premise is tired? Most people, me included, weren’t even sure what the premise of the game was after having seen the trailer. So I at least wouldn’t know how to judge that…
The dialogue is cheesy? The trailer only presented a few lines taken out of context from their individual scenes. Not much to go by either.

Also, speak for yourself. I certainly didn’t expect more of the production values, especially taking the budget into account, and all of the expenses that go towards rewards and the cut that both Kickstarter and Amazon Payments take. The final sum that remains for the development of the game is quite a bit smaller then than the amount raised. But even the amount raised is the smallest of all the big name adventure game kickstarters. It’s not really a lot for a game. So…I think your expectations were unrealistic in the first place, to be honest. Of course, the money question shouldn’t affect the quality of writing or puzzle design in any way, and I don’t expect that the game will be lacking in these regards.

The graphics aren’t great overall, and you won’t find much disagreement there, especially regarding Malachi’s pose and teeth. But then, Gabriel Knight 3 didn’t look great either. You know, Mosely, the T-Rex man? Because of his short arms? Still was a good game, right?
It might just be that the trailer wasn’t put all that well together, and that the shown footage wasn’t quite ready to be shown to the public yet, considering all the graphic problems the developers still plan to fix (like the missing reflection in the mirror).
If none of the graphical issues exhibited by the trailer were to be fixed, then I guess that would be disappointing. I place my trust in POS that they listen to the feedback and fix some of the raised issues. 

You can say all you want that the game sucks and is trash, but how this will help anyone to understand what you base your judgment on, well I don’t know. Because it isn’t self-evident, you know? That’s why we need to explain our reasoning and stuff.