Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
broken age initial thoughts
I don’t know if you missed the point or are being deliberately obtuse here?
That’s a deliberate insult, and not your first one.
Oye, Karlok. No it’s not an insult (whether deliberate or not) - it would only be one (or actually more an accusation) if I said you were being deliberately obtuse! Actually what you wrote “Gulliver’s Travels. Please! I’m sure I can find Waiting for Godot or Ethel the Aardvark in BA if I try hard enough.” would have been a lot more insulting IF either I or nap had said we thought Gulliver’s TRavels “was in BA”. We didn’t, hence you either missed/didn’t understand the point or where deliberately trying to make us look stupid. Where’s the insult?
but I’m through talking to someone who apparently delights in lecturing and being unpleasant to other posters.
That’s fine then. I notice you didn’t bother to respond to the rest of the post. And you’re obviously no longer interested in my thoughts re Shirley Jackson’s short story. Shame. I found it interesting that as far as I can see, she was “guilty” of making the same “mistakes” which Doom accuses Tim Schaffer of. (Namely situation only really becomes clear at the very end of the story.)
It was the writing mostly. Full Throttle has an adult enough storyline, characters and dialogue, Monkey Island has a whole scope of razor sharp jokes, very polished to suit all ages. Broken Age has nothing of those + it is presented as a kid’s media, when development (plot, world, characters) doesn’t matter much.
Guess we’ll have to agree to differ as you say 
. Full Throttle’s storyline would be perfect for Pixar & I find the writing of all 3 works for both adults and children (with different levels - there were a number of things with both Broken Age & Monkey Island my son didn’t understand, but he still enjoyed both.) I do think you should accept that a lot of people (seems to be a singificant majority from reviews & comments I’ve read) enjoyed the plot and writing very much, and so you’re being pretty insulting when you simply describe it as “infantile”.
Yes, of course, she has motivation all the way. But the series of events that lead her to defeating Mog is still very loosely connected. She has no plan of escaping, she doesn’t even prepare herself. Leaving the skies by collecting golden eggs is another random thing. And she has no idea how to defeat the creature up till last minute. And in order to discover that, she has to - for no particular reason - wake up Alex.
Nowadays he also does have a tougher competition around, not only within adventure genre and even there I personally do not consider his plots as engrossing as Jensen’s, Tørnquist’s or Takumi’s.
Jensen and Tornquist hardly qualify as “nowadays”... Personally I think the high level of writing is what still differs Broken Age from many pretentious adventure/non-adventure games of 21 century that are painful to play. Not only writers are unable to tell a good original story without getting stuck in cliches and Hollywood stupidness, but they also lack writing skills. This is also typical for Hollywood itself.
I do think you should accept that a lot of people (seems to be a singificant majority from reviews & comments I’ve read) enjoyed the plot and writing very much, and so you’re being pretty insulting when you simply describe it as “infantile”.
I accept it, but I still think people overrate it 
I can’t take seriously every review that starts with “OMG after all those years it finally happened!!! Classical adventure games have returned!”, because it’s nonsense in every sense. And then there’s Eurogamer review that repeats everything I said almost word by word. Are you insulted by it as well? I think everyone is free to express their opinions about games, unless personal attacks start. They are just games.
PC means personal computer
I accept it, but I still think people overrate it
Fair enough lol. One of the tendencies with a game which has got as much attention (Even “hype” if you like…if any Adventure Game ever gets that!) as Broken Agre is that views do tend to become polarised. Some people won’t accept the game deserves any criticism at all, and so (And I’d suggest you come in here Doom) come across more negative than you would talking about a game which had lesser expectations.
And then there’s Eurogamer review that repeats everything I said almost word by word.
I read it when it came out, but haven’t looked since. As I couldn’t remember exactly, I’ve reread it. To quote the main sections which have to do with story and writing:
“These are two strong story concepts, each exploring rich dramatic themes that will resonate for anyone who is, or has been, a teenager. It’s a coming of age game, but one that avoids the usual clichés. It also hints at interesting gender themes…”
and
“Schafer’s script is a gem, funny but in a gentler and more heartfelt way than his earliest adventure games.”
I’ve missed the bit where they called it childish and infantile. On the contrary, as the quotes above illustrate, their views on the writing and story are largely gushingly positive. There’s just a caveat that the Shay/Vella plot “while clever - is so heavily foreshadowed…(that)one side of the game can’t help but act as a spoiler for the other.” Their fundamental criticism (and hence “only” 7/10 review score) is simply that it’s too easy; and though I think they’re overdoing it, most people agree there’s at least an element of truth to that. But “repeats everything I said almost word by word”?? Think you’ve failed with that review as an example of someone who agrees with you re the writing quality.
Jensen and Tornquist hardly qualify as “nowadays”... Personally I think the high level of writing is what still differs Broken Age from many pretentious adventure/non-adventure games of 21 century that are painful to play. Not only writers are unable to tell a good original story without getting stuck in cliches and Hollywood stupidness, but they also lack writing skills. This is also typical for Hollywood itself.
Maybe I am being too harsh on previous Schafer’s works (memory fails me), but Broken Age’s writing, while certainly refined in the use of words, wasn’t really up to a certain standard related to pacing. Up to now I can probably remember 6 or 7 moments in total that actually add up to the plot (introduction of Vella’s sacrifice, introduction of Shay’s problem, dialogue with Marek about little creatures, dialogue between Vella and space dude, nice talk with Mombot to confuse the player about sacrifice link, the ending).
Unlike, let’s say, a To The Moon or a The Walking Dead, where every single interaction adds to the whole experience, there were multiple moments that just felt like a boring chore, like the annoyingly repetitive Shay’s intro (I know that’s the whole point, but it’s still boring) or the whole shallowness of the cast in Meriloft. Of course those are problems that wouldn’t have touched my experience as much if the game wasn’t as story-focused and wasn’t split in two, but once you decide to remove the intellectual challenge I at least expect it to be backed up by an exceptional narrative structure.
I don’t know if you missed the point or are being deliberately obtuse here?
That’s a deliberate insult, and not your first one.
Oye, Karlok. No it’s not an insult (whether deliberate or not) - it would only be one (or actually more an accusation) if I said you were being deliberately obtuse! Actually what you wrote “Gulliver’s Travels. Please! I’m sure I can find Waiting for Godot or Ethel the Aardvark in BA if I try hard enough.” would have been a lot more insulting IF either I or nap had said we thought Gulliver’s TRavels “was in BA”. We didn’t, hence you either missed/didn’t understand the point or where deliberately trying to make us look stupid. Where’s the insult?
Gulliver’s Travels belongs in the same category as the allegories, metaphors, symbols I talked about in the previous paragraphs of my post: too much of a burden for a light, entertaining adventure game. You even said you agreed with that.
There’s a whole universe of world literature out there for you to choose from if you want to defend Schafer against people who are not enjoying the game as much as you think they should. Someone whining about disjointed worlds that don’t connect to Vella’s story? Tell them a) you don’t see the relevance of their opinion; b) they should read more about cults and young girls joining cults; c) point out that Schafer is beyond reproach because something in the same vein has been done centuries ago by a novel that made fun of the political situation of those days. That should shut the whiners up. Except that it has nothing to do with Vella’s story and Schafer’s game.
That’s fine then. I notice you didn’t bother to respond to the rest of the post. And you’re obviously no longer interested in my thoughts re Shirley Jackson’s short story. Shame. I found it interesting that as far as I can see, she was “guilty” of making the same “mistakes” which Doom accuses Tim Schaffer of. (Namely situation only really becomes clear at the very end of the story.)
And on it goes. So you didn’t read it for its own sake. Another piece of literature that you can use to clobber someone over the head with. (Yes, the word “clobber” was chosen deliberately.) Even *before you read it*, you clobbered me with an unread short story when you suggested it had altered my perspective of certain aspects of the game. See a pattern here?
So… nothing I can do about it. I never felt you were interested in other people’s opinion to begin with. You can have every book, play, novel, article, in the universe to prove other people wrong about any game, any subject. As long as you leave me Ethel the Aardvark.
Butter my buns and call me a biscuit! - Agent A
Some people won’t accept the game deserves any criticism at all, and so (And I’d suggest you come in here Doom) come across more negative than you would talking about a game which had lesser expectations.
That’s what you get for being Schafer 
I’ve missed the bit where they called it childish and infantile. On the contrary, as the quotes above illustrate, their views on the writing and story are largely gushingly positive.
Well, these particular quotes pretty much sum up my feelings:
It’s just that, under those criteria, what you find is a nice but largely unremarkable adventure game. It’s a game that makes no terrible missteps, yet that’s largely because it never attempts anything bold enough to risk landing flat on its face.
Even without the expectation and hype of a fêted developer and a Kickstarter windfall, Broken Age would feel like a slight little thing. Had it arrived without fanfare, just another quirky Double Fine experiment in the vein of Stacking or Costume Quest, its surface charms might have been enough.
Schafer’s script is a gem, funny but in a gentler and more heartfelt way than his earliest adventure games. There’s little sarcasm or irony here.
PC means personal computer
Fair enough lol. One of the tendencies with a game which has got as much attention (Even “hype” if you like…if any Adventure Game ever gets that!) as Broken Agre is that views do tend to become polarised. Some people won’t accept the game deserves any criticism at all, and so (And I’d suggest you come in here Doom) come across more negative than you would talking about a game which had lesser expectations.
Of course, people who like the game and people who don’t like it are going to argue with each other. Disagreeing, even refusing to accept some particular arguments, is not the same as disrespecting or not listening to the other side.
I’ve mostly been defending Broken Age, but that doesn’t mean I’m against criticism of it. I’ve criticized some aspects myself, and I agree with some of the criticism others have offered. Other parts I don’t agree with, but they’re still interesting points to consider, or valid perspectives by others. AFAICT, such criticisms have not been getting attacked, they’ve just been met by counterarguments.
What I feel has drawn more ire are some of the ways in which “criticism” has been presented. In paraphrase, examples that come to mind include “Although I haven’t played it, Broken Age is too easy, so Tim Schafer is a talentless fraud and anyone who defends him is a brainwashed fanboy.” “Broken Age is a totally infantile experience that has nothing to offer grown-ups.” and “If you see any subtext, allusion or metaphor in the game, you’re a delusional, pompous fool.”
These are not really criticisms of the game, they’re personal attacks. That’s why people objected to them.
Maybe I am being too harsh on previous Schafer’s works (memory fails me), but Broken Age’s writing, while certainly refined in the use of words, wasn’t really up to a certain standard related to pacing. Up to now I can probably remember 6 or 7 moments in total that actually add up to the plot
Oh, I agree with you on all your points. I was talking only about the quality of writing itself - dialogues and the whole presentation. Compared to, say, Daedalic adventures it feels much more professional and polished.
PC means personal computer
In paraphrase, examples that come to mind include “Although I haven’t played it, Broken Age is too easy, so Tim Schafer is a talentless fraud and anyone who defends him is a brainwashed fanboy.” “Broken Age is a totally infantile experience that has nothing to offer grown-ups.” and “If you see any subtext, allusion or metaphor in the game, you’re a delusional, pompous fool.”
I’m not sure why people got so frustrated and even insulted by the word “infantile”. To quote myself properly,
the game world and game story are too infantile at this stage
I don’t quite see how it qualifies as a personal attack, when it was an attack on the game’s writing - and not even a whole game, but the first part we have an opportunity to discuss. Can’t say anything in defense of other quotes, because they are not mine and I certainly don’t think that Schafer is a “talentless fraud”.
PC means personal computer
I’ve mostly been defending Broken Age, but that doesn’t mean I’m against criticism of it. I’ve criticized some aspects myself, and I agree with some of the criticism others have offered. Other parts I don’t agree with, but they’re still interesting points to consider, or valid perspectives by others. AFAICT, such criticisms have not been getting attacked, they’ve just been met by counterarguments.
Calling my opinion “irrelevant” is meeting it with counterarguments?
What I feel has drawn more ire are some of the ways in which “criticism” has been presented. In paraphrase, examples that come to mind include “Although I haven’t played it, Broken Age is too easy, so Tim Schafer is a talentless fraud and anyone who defends him is a brainwashed fanboy.” “Broken Age is a totally infantile experience that has nothing to offer grown-ups.” and “If you see any subtext, allusion or metaphor in the game, you’re a delusional, pompous fool.”
These are not really criticisms of the game, they’re personal attacks. That’s why people objected to them.
I know what you mean. I feel that way too about the personal attacks aimed at me.
Butter my buns and call me a biscuit! - Agent A
Compared to, say, Daedalic adventures it feels much more professional and polished.
I’m inclined to agree with that. And yet I enjoyed Daedalic’s Deponia 2 and 3 much more than Broken Age.
Butter my buns and call me a biscuit! - Agent A
Calling my opinion “irrelevant” is meeting it with counterarguments?
If we’re discussing one thing, and you bring up – as if it was an argument – an unrelated point, then calling it irrelevant to what we’re discussing is a counterargument, yes.
I know what you mean. I feel that way too about the personal attacks aimed at me.
I’ve scanned through the thread. Can’t see any person attacks aimed at you (“I’m not sure if you’re being deliberately obtuse” is not a personal attack IMO, nor is “what the hell is your problem?” in response to unprovoked aggression). Did see several personal attacks by you…
I’m inclined to agree with that. And yet I enjoyed Daedalic’s Deponia 2 and 3 much more than Broken Age.
I only played through Deponia 1, and while I didn’t like it much, I’d say it was more satisfying in terms of gameplay. And Edna & Harvey was a pure fun in every sense.
PC means personal computer
Calling my opinion “irrelevant” is meeting it with counterarguments?
If we’re discussing one thing, and you bring up – as if it was an argument – an unrelated point, then calling it irrelevant to what we’re discussing is a counterargument, yes.
I’ve noticed that you tried several times to get us to post about the things YOU want to discuss, but this thread is meant for people who want to share their initial thoughts. I’m one of them. Why should I only be allowed to post things related to what other people have said? It was also perfectly clear that particular part of my post was about what Schafer had in mind, not you or DaveyB.
I know what you mean. I feel that way too about the personal attacks aimed at me.
I’ve scanned through the thread. Can’t see any person attacks aimed at you
Your scan must have missed the part where I said: I’m not taking this lying down after the undeserved flack I got from fanboys who wanted to express their contempt for me when I posted about my disappointment in Schafer. That was obviously another thread about BA. You must remember that discussion about Schafer’s financial mismanagement, you took part in it.
(“I’m not sure if you’re being deliberately obtuse” is not a personal attack IMO, nor is “what the hell is your problem?” in response to unprovoked aggression). Did see several personal attacks by you…
You’re applying double standards. In your previous post you made it look like someone said “If you see any subtext, allusion or metaphor in the game, you’re a delusional, pompous fool.” Quotation marks and all. Nobody said that. It’s YOUR interpretation of what someone said. So you have no leg to stand on when MY interpretation of DaveyB’s words is: “either you’re stupid or you’re pretending to be stupid to make us look stupid.”
PS: I don’t think of you as a delusional fool. Not at all.
Butter my buns and call me a biscuit! - Agent A
I’m inclined to agree with that. And yet I enjoyed Daedalic’s Deponia 2 and 3 much more than Broken Age.
I only played through Deponia 1, and while I didn’t like it much, I’d say it was more satisfying in terms of gameplay. And Edna & Harvey was a pure fun in every sense.
I thought Deponia 2 and 3 were better than the first one, especially number three. But for me, Edna and Harvey was in a class of its own. Loved it. Including its deeper themes and serious undertones.
Butter my buns and call me a biscuit! - Agent A
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
