Adventure Gamers - Forums

On release day this is basically a rough beta version, where the character teleports around, fading out then in on double click, character meshes are not rotated and positioned properly in some scenes, lack shading in many instances and look pasted onto the backgrounds, skipping dialogue fast forwards animations at 4x speed and ... This is all without getting into the voice acting.

I am bitter as hell because this was supposed to be the adventure of the year and it’s just a rushed beta with shoddy production values.

I’ve loved phoenix online studios games especially cognition. Now with gabriel knight i must say that this time they have done bit shoddy work. It still is the gabriel i love and all but darn the game is filled with little bugs. In the park scene game strangely freezed every time when i took mime to see the police until i found out that if i click the radio and not police the game doesn’t freeze. Then when i was talking with mosely and asked him to bring me a cup of coffee i accidentally got up at the time when mosely was just opening the door and coming back in, after that gabriel didn’t go back to sit on his chair but floated on the screen on sitting position. o_O I also was able to take folder/file from the police station after i copied it O_o. After that i saved and stopped playing. I will continue of course but it disappointed me a bit that i truly was able to do something like that in the finished version of the game. Of course there has been also teleporting and those graphical things when character goes thru environments (stairs and so on) but that happens in all of the games sometimes. (okay grace going thru stairs every time when the new day starts is something that truly bugs me). I’m bit disappointed not because of the quality of the game but the bugs i’ve experienced. They should have ironed those kind of things out. Now it feels bit betaish. Graphics could have been better yeah but i don’t understand why people hate those conversation screens. In my opinion heads/faces looks fairly nice and they’ve been animated well enough if you compare it to the other games in the genre. Hopefully this is the last of the freezes and strange bugs i’ve seen and the rest of the game goes smoothly.

rottford - 19 October 2014 01:15 AM

I never gave Hartridge the veve reconstruction, yet I still got the call from him about the analysis and found his body at Tulane with all the notes on the veve. This is a major oversight! One that could easily confuse newbies who never played the original game. Has anyone else run into this?

Yes and theres a few other things like it. Sometimes you dont have to ask grace to research things, and sometimes you do.

El Manny - 17 October 2014 10:43 PM

This thread is moving with lighting speed.

I’d say we moved right past lightning speed and directly to… ludicrous speed!

after a brisk nap - 18 October 2014 07:24 AM

Jackal, I also hate that attitude, but the context is a little bit different here. Cesar had posted:

Buncha stuff snipped for space

This is coming across as “even if you don’t like our games, you must support us (or at least not criticize us) because (1) we worked sooo hard, and (2) the only way adventure games will ever make a ‘comeback’ is with us.” It’s perfectly legitimate to respond to that by saying “No we don’t, because we don’t like your work, and if it’s between you guys making e.g. a GK4 game and an uncertain future where there might not be a game, or maybe someone better will come along, we’ll take our chances.”

Well, I don’t agree AT ALL that people should support games, either through purchase or praise, just to support the genre. (And clearly I don’t think it’s even theoretically feasible to do so.) But I don’t see any connection between this reasoning and the “nothing is better than something” argument I was addressing. If they’re on the same continuum at all, then they’re the two errors on extreme opposite ends. I guess if one is simply hypothesizing about future games, there’s no harm in such a statement. (Nor any relevance.) But that wasn’t the case here. Clearly the assertion was that the world would be a better place if Moebius or GK1 remake (I forget which now; maybe it was both) had never been made.

Yes, there’s some truth to that, but if you take the argument to its logical conclusion it would mean that we can never make any quality distinctions when it comes to art, that there is no such thing as talent or skill, just different tastes. But I’m comfortable claiming that my backgrounds are not as good as Bill Tiller’s, that Wall-E is a better movie than Food Fight, and so on, and consider this to be a “truth” above mere personal preference.

That’s not a logical conclusion to anything I said. It IS demonstrably better if a faulty bridge is not built. That is not true of art. I’m all for sharing varying opinions, good and bad, but that’s an entirely different thing than saying that something shouldn’t exist.

Also, while it may be true that there are valid quality distinctions in art, there is no valid value distinction. If someone loves stick art, then stick art has value, period. If people want to flock to Sandler or Transformers movies, more power to ‘em. I won’t be one of them, but I’ll hardly look down my nose at them as if my tastes are superior.

I also think there’s an important difference between saying “I don’t like this because it’s 3D-rendered graphics, and I don’t like 3D-rendered graphics” (and same for pixel, cartoon, Myst-style etc.) and “I don’t like this because these 3D-rendered graphics are, in my artistic judgment, poorly done.”

There is, although often those who complain the loudest don’t bother to differentiate the two—as evidenced by the irrational degree of venom that frequently comes with it. No one would ever have any issues with the kind of thoughtful feedback you propose. 

In the first case, someone might draw the conclusion “They shouldn’t have made the game like this, because I don’t like this kind of game,” which is narcissistic and non-constructive. In the second, they might draw the conclusion “They shouldn’t have made the game like this because they weren’t able to execute it well enough, so doing it differently might have led to a better game,” which is in fact constructive.

I question the constructiveness of such a statement, since so much is invariably tied to personal tastes, but a reasoned response like that is perfectly fine. If people were able to maturely post statements like that and stop there, these forums would be a much more reasonable place. But you know full well that all too frequently it inevitably starts there and expands to “I don’t like the character models, therefore Jensen is a hack, Phoenix should never make another game, Game X is balls, and the genre is ruined forever thanks to these clowns.” (Hyperbole, obviously, but only slightly. ) And then usually repeated ad nauseam.

Well, yes and no (and note that Cesar was the one who brought it up in the first place). There is such a thing as “adventure games” because they exist as a concept people write about, as a network of inspiration and influence between games, as a market, and as a community. Individual games do not succeed and fail entirely independently of each other, and they help set expectations for the AG “industry” as a whole (price point, production values, bugginess, platform support, features like hotspot reveal and hint systems…). So for these reasons, games can help or hurt the “genre.”

I’m pretty sure Cesar is a person; he’s not exempt. Of course the genre is a concept. A fairly loose concept comprising a broad range of styles and experiences. But the concept is not the market; the concept is not the community. (They’re related, but not the same.) It is not a thing that can be affected in any tangible way. Sure, we can talk about it changing in abstract ways for the sake of convenient dialogue, but that’s not how people tend to use it. They treat it like one big entity that can be pushed and pulled and manipulated, for better or worse. And really it can’t. Not with one game, not even with many. 

But this is more a philosophical topic that has nothing to do with this thread, so I’ll drop it here. My point is simply that people should stop treating “the genre” like something that needs to be championed OR defended.

Shnubble - 18 October 2014 09:47 PM

Hear, hear! From Saul to Paul. You changed your tune considerably and forgive me if I suspect your new ties to POS have more to do with that than any true reformation.

This year, at GDC, I had the chance to meet a lot of developers that I’ve known over the net for years, but never had the chance to meet face to face until that moment.  Cesar was one of them - and when you’ve met someone personally, had drinks and broken bread, it can change your perspective on a lot of things.

As a result of my work, I’ve had the chance to meet and talk with many more developers on a personal level, and it can make you re-evaluate how you conduct yourself in certain situations. Several developers post here, many who I’ve become friendly with, and the truth is we all just want to create games that people enjoy, and being supportive to each other only helps us all. There ARE people behind the pixels and text here, and it’s something that I’m striving to keep a better perspective on.  It’s really nothing more than trying to embrace positive human growth.

Bt

dave_minall - 19 October 2014 01:18 PM

Getting quite frustrated at POS’ technical support desk.

I told them my issue regarding the game saves and politely requested they send me one for the location I’m currently at in the game (I’m about 80% of the way through it now) and they’ve not even bothered to reply to me.

I’m not going to play through the game again just to get where I already was.

Very disappointed customer right here.

well, they are dealing with a lot of bug issues right now, and theyr not a huge staff. They released like 3 patches last night that addressed a lot of stuff. Theyr busy, im sure they’ll get back to you when they can.

Blackthorne - 19 October 2014 12:23 PM

Shnubble - 18 October 2014 09:47 PM

Hear, hear! From Saul to Paul. You changed your tune considerably and forgive me if I suspect your new ties to POS have more to do with that than any true reformation.

This year, at GDC, I had the chance to meet a lot of developers that I’ve known over the net for years, but never had the chance to meet face to face until that moment.  Cesar was one of them - and when you’ve met someone personally, had drinks and broken bread, it can change your perspective on a lot of things.
......embrace positive human growth.

Bt

So you suggest Social contacts are preferable to meritocracy??
I believe this behavior comes with a cost which manifests into poor workmanship,
not positive human growth. YES if it helps make you score some as your
promotional outfits but NO if its means political correctness and one-sided bias.

Problem is, this type of behavior begets an environment where we are free of
fair-minded criticism.

I suggest that being a decent human being is a good thing, and something to strive for.

Bt

nomadsoul - 19 October 2014 01:29 PM

So you suggest Social contacts are preferable to meritocracy??
I believe this behavior comes with a cost which manifests into poor workmanship,
not positive human growth. YES if it helps make you score some as your
promotional outfits but NO if its means political correctness and one-sided bias.

Problem is, this type of behavior begets an environment where we are free of
fair-minded criticism.

This is the same line of logic that people who beat their kids use as justification for abuse.  The old “Builds character!” line.

Iznogood - 19 October 2014 08:21 AM

It is not about threading on eggshells because the developers might be listening, I wouldn’t dream of doing that myself. Its about the constant nitpicking on even the smallest details or the most minor imperfections, like a jackhammer that start every morning at 6 a clock right outside your bedroom window.

But that’s very much up to each and everyone’s perception.
Many here will agree immediately that an upscaling filter for pixel art is a heinous atrocity. And yet there are people out there who don’t get what all the fuss is about. A small detail for one person might be a huge deal for the next one.

How about this? Those who have something positive to say do so and those who have something negative to say do so, too? It’s natural there will be some discussions but I don’t think it’s a good thing if one side tries to create rules that the other has to adhere to. (This goes in both direction of course.) Trying to silence the other side will only result in even more jackhammering. As far as I see it there is exactly one person on this forum who seems to be on a personal crusade against POS, for what reason ever, and he or she hasn’t posted in here for a while. Everything else is valid criticism in my eye.

@Blackthorne:
That’s perfectly understandable, but not everyone has that kind of bias. I’m sure everyone welcomes developers taking part in the discussions here, but at the same time this is not a feedback or developer forum. Yes, harsh critique might hurt or might be annoying if you think you’re listening to a scratched record, and of course it’s highly encouraged to be polite and constructive, especially if you address a developer directly. But if someone thinks a game or one of its aspects sucks, he can simply say so, too, in my opinion, without having to explain in detail- or even knowing- why. Not everyone can be an expert in everything but everyone can say if he likes something or not. And that alone can be valuable feedback, too, in my opinion. It’s the job of the developer to figure out why some people dislike a certain thing and to decide if he wants to and can act on it. But to expect that people say their piece exactly once and then shut up is a bit naive, in my opinion.

Suggesting a game should not have been made (in this way) is certainly pretty harsh.
But if you really think that the future of adventure gaming or one of your favorite series depends on it, (a scenario that both sides brought up, here, as exaggerated as it is) it can be a valid conclusion. Additionally, a finished release replaces hopes and dreams with cold reality. The less you know about a game, the more you can hope. There won’t be a remaster of the remaster, at least not for considerable time. This is what we got now and some people simply don’t like it. It’s perfectly natural, too, to concentrate on the things that were changed. Of course GK is still a great game at its core, but most of us did know that already.

It’s possible to criticise something without being nasty and/or condescending. I don’t think all criticism needs to be constructive, nor should passion be sated, but it’s worth remembering that human beings work on these games before posting something potentially hurtful.

Lambonius - 19 October 2014 04:28 PM

nomadsoul - 19 October 2014 01:29 PM

So you suggest Social contacts are preferable to meritocracy??
I believe this behavior comes with a cost which manifests into poor workmanship,
not positive human growth. YES if it helps make you score some as your
promotional outfits but NO if its means political correctness and one-sided bias.

Problem is, this type of behavior begets an environment where we are free of
fair-minded criticism.

This is the same line of logic that people who beat their kids use as justification for abuse.  The old “Builds character!” line.

You are cut from same cloth tbh, changed your tune after they became your Promotional outfits, so bias is apparent, hence zero credibility. You need to scratch their back maybe for future deals so please don’t act like neutral party, its not working.

Point being, be unconditional not conditional, and you are the last good person on earth (with civil criticism) when it comes to TTG. Maybe when TTG will publish your game things might get different.