Adventure Gamers - Forums

wilco - 19 February 2016 09:08 AM

Gog weekend promo:

http://www.gog.com/promo/weekend_promo_atari_deepsilver_170216

Prisoner of Ice, Shadow of the Comet, Alone in the dark trilogy

I’ve never played the Alone in the Dark games, but they get excellent ratings on GOG. And the price is right, too. If anyone here has played them before, how did you like them?

Kurufinwe - 19 February 2016 05:11 PM

Awful, awful controls. The last quarter of the game has a lot more unavoidable action, and that’s where the awful, awful controls become particularly painful.

Also, did I mention the awful, awful controls?

How awful were they? 

Well, that kills it for me. I really dislike that kind of action/combat in AGs regardless of how good the controls are. About the max I can stomach is what was in Quest for Infamy, and I could have done without that! Too bad, as the story (of #1, anyway) sounds really good.

The first one is good. It has the least combat and the what is has is against zombies and what not, so they are slow and pretty easy to hit. Alone 2 is just horrible, as it has more combat against machine gun toating goons, which pepper you before you can even turn thanks to the horrible controls. 3 is okay western ghost story and the rest of the series is best avoided in its entirety.

Even with a gun 2 is almost unplayable. It says a lot that there’s a cheat zone pretty close of the beginning that allows you to bypass the first half of the game.

The thing is though, with out the cheat zone I would have never gotten past the Garden. The enemies there can shoot you even when they are not in your sight. And even when you are in the same spot with the enemy they have an advantage over you as they turn faster and are more accurate than you are. There’s just too much of pure “learn where the enemies are and proceed” style of gameplay there. It’s just bad design, plain and simple.

I used to love the first 3 games, as a kid it was the best of the best there were no other games like them. Great story, puzzles, action and a suffocating atmosphere very well achieved. Many modern games owe Alone In the Dark a lot, much more than they would admit. I have seen vestiges of Alone In the Dark in countless modern games.

Regarding the controls ... I must admit that at first are a little annoying but nothing really terrible imo, playing 10 minutes and you get used to the mechanics.

The third game is the best of all, is more varied and Edward Carnby (can be transformed into an animal!)

Oscar - 20 February 2016 04:10 AM

Most people complain about too much shooting. Well, most fights can be avoided, won easily or made more easy for you, by using your brain.That’s right, instead of mindlessly shooting all those gangsters and then complaining about it, you could have instead used your head. For example, without giving too much away, there was a room with gangsters armed with guns, rifles, etc. There was also an object in there that you needed. Well, most people go inside with their Thompson or whatever is it they have, save/load many, many times until they manage to kill all the gansters and then go and write bad reviews. How much easier it is to go to the upper floor instead and toss a grenade down the chimney. Then you just jump in with the armored vest that was also
on the floor yourself and finish off the gangsters.

These options weren’t possible in the first game, where you HAD to fight. I think that’s why so many people thought those fights in 2 were unavoidable. Options like these are also why it’s known of more as an adventure game than an action game.

Exactly, moreover although at times it seems that everything aims at the action if you pay a little attention you’ll realize it’s not always the case. Most of the “great confrontations” can be solved in another way than just an indiscriminate killing, if I remember correctly in that particular part you can kill them by poisoning the wine, there is a poison in the kitchen but many do not pay attention and just get carried away by the action.

tomimt - 20 February 2016 04:34 AM

The thing is though, with out the cheat zone I would have never gotten past the Garden. The enemies there can shoot you even when they are not in your sight. And even when you are in the same spot with the enemy they have an advantage over you as they turn faster and are more accurate than you are. There’s just too much of pure “learn where the enemies are and proceed” style of gameplay there. It’s just bad design, plain and simple.

I do not remember having these drawbacks. Also keep in mind that it was 1993, it was transgressive and revolutionary for its time.

Sure, 2 has puzzle action scenes as well, but it also has a lot of that rely on reflexes as it emphasises action more than the first did, which was a big mistake with the engine they had. It was bad then and it is bad now. I tried to play 2 through a couple of months ago and it’s just not playable the same way 1 and 3 are.

Oscar - 20 February 2016 03:32 AM

It would be a shame to avoid the series because of the combat - I’m no action hero and managed to get through by saving every few minutes.

Unfortunately, I really have no choice but to avoid this series, or any other game that doesn’t let me completely bypass timing/action/tactile controls and movements. I have essential (familial) tremor which doesn’t allow me to do these things without severe frustration, so I avoid them like the plague. I’ve gone so far as to download saved game files for certain games (when they’re available) to get me past these sequences, but they often pass up non-action gameplay when I’ve done that, and there goes the immersion!

Like I said earlier,

Mike the Wino - 19 February 2016 05:36 PM

...the max I can stomach is what was in Quest for Infamy, and I could have done without that!

I actually had to have my daughter get me past that combat, which she did so reluctantly, so I could progress in the game. This is also why I play hardly any RPG’s…the mage has to use timing to cast spells, the brigand has to use keyboard mashes or fast mouse movements, the thief needs control movements requiring dexterity. Now, I’d really enjoy these types of games if there was some kind of halo-to-computer interface I could wear that allowed me to just think the control movements required…that would be cool! 

GrahamDaventry - 20 February 2016 01:26 PM

tomimt - 20 February 2016 01:18 PM

which was a big mistake with the engine they had. It was bad then and it is bad now.

Try and name a better 3D engine in 1992?

I don’t think that really matteres. What matters is that the devs pushed for more action fully knowing it was the weak link in the engine. It was bad design and the fact that they placed the chat zone for bypassing the hardest action part fully speaks for that even they knew what they did wasn’t the best choice.