You are, aren't you.
Never said either DE or GH were good, they are both bad.
The writing sucks in DE because of the reasons outlined in the video which I don't need to paraphrase since you can watch the video yourself and get an accurate idea of my thoughts.
The writing sucks in GH because it's literally nothing special. It's floating in that "not good or bad" area which is, arguably, the worst place for any piece of writing to be.
The game would have been much more engaging if it had actually been from the lesbos' perspectives.
I don't have anything against bad or subpar writing. I do, however, hate the fact that everyone and their dog seems to love it. I can't help but imagine people who only know games and not actual quality, classical or not, literature.
i know you are but what am i
if you need a video to articulate your opinion, it is not your opinion, you simply co-opted it from someone else. you "felt" a certain way about something, didn't know WHY you felt that way, heard why someone else felt that way, and said "eh that will do." try thinking for yourself.
the fact you refer to the characters as "lesbos" says more than I need to.
also idk how you interpolated me infering you though either of the games were good from my post. i was just reflecting how baseless and unfounded your ideas are in a general sense.
and at the end you just admit you're mad that someone else likes something. i have no words.
Well I didn't exactly mean lesbos in a derogatory way though I get why you might have thought that.
Also nice job deciding my feelings for me. It's not that I felt, didn't know why and decided to hide behind someone else's opinion.
If I had made a video like that then the main points would have been pretty much the same as the ones in the video I posted, irrespective of me seeing it beforehand or not.
Heck I only found out about the video like 2 days ago, I'd played DE way before that.
[editline]21st August 2013[/editline]
I am mad, yes, because a piece of work in an artistic medium I enjoy is being praised as the herald of a new age of story-driven gaming for being the videogame equivalent of an average book.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41913434]TWD is a game with a good story and proper gameplay elements.
That's why I posted the video, like I said, I'm not good with words.
What I mean is Gone Home and Dear Esther are games made to illicit some response from the gaming community that goes along the lines of "Oh dear this game is so artistic and beautiful". They're cashing in on the fact that shitty writing in a new interactive medium is not criticized as much as it would be in a book or movie.
A game that is artistic is journey which actually gets an emotional response from the player AND doesn't sacrifice gameplay in order to do it.[/QUOTE]
right, except the point of when you have enough gameplay to constitute not being pretentious and artsy is completely arbitrary. where do you draw the line if The Walking Dead "doesn't sacrifice gameplay," despite 90% of the game being composed of walking around and occasionally pressing a button to say a scripted line of dialogue that you have no control over?
if that counts as "not sacrificing gameplay," then that means that Facade is technically more of a game than tWD due to the greater degree of control, and thus that it is far less pretentious. i somehow doubt that you'd agree with that, and that's why pretentious is STILL a terrible word and you should never use it again.
I honestly don't really want to get into an argument on what's more or less a game. To me tWD just feels a little more like a game, it is able to entertain me better. That's about it.
As much as I don't want to dive into this shitstorm for many different reasons, I feel somewhat obliged to give my opinion on this. I'd appreciate it if you can pardon my conventions, because it's late at night here and I was never good with writing in the first place. Also, I don't have much to offer about Gone Home since I have not played it, but since this thread has derailed so much, I don't think it matters.
Now, in [I]my[/I] opinion, I think if your game can exist as any other form of media and give you the exact same experience, if not a better experience, then you have failed as a game designer. Your game must add to the experience with interactivity, otherwise there's no point in making it a game in the first place. Interactivity can add to the experience in many different ways, and it's why I love games so much. But if you don't utilize any of them, then you're better off writing a book or a movie. Now, I'm not saying gameplay is king. Far from it actually. In my opinion your narrative should add to your gameplay, and your gameplay should add to your narrative. In a game like Dear Esther, I think I can experience everything I took in from that game as a short novel or even a short film and I'd walk away with the exact same thoughts and feelings that I got when I played it as a game. Sure you can look around and see the ghosts, and the visuals are pretty appealing, but are you really getting anything more from it as opposed to reading a book that describes the aesthetics with impressive prose, or a decent budget film with ghosts in the far background.
Think of a game like Shadow of the Colossus. It's the perfect example of a game that can only exist as a game. You can have a bestselling book with the most mind blowing writing you can think of, or even a movie with the biggest budget, but there'd still be something the game can offer that those things can't. The fear you get by standing in front of these large beasts, hinged with the satisfaction of figuring out how to take them down, only to be attacked by guilt as you slay the seemingly innocent monster, and the themes of the game are perfectly depicted through the game mechanics by itself. These are things that are unique to games and these are the things that give video games such a huge potential to be fully recognized art forms one day.
Before you misunderstand me, I want to make it clear that I'm not saying a game has to have a lifebar and things like that to make it count as a game. I'm merely saying that the interactivity, any form of it (yes even if it is just holding W), must add to the experience. Which is something [I]I[/I] think Dear Esther failed to do.
Once again, I have not played Gone Home, but from what I've heard it does seem like the interactivity adds something. I might try it out one day.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41914791]I honestly don't really want to get into an argument on what's more or less a game. To me tWD just feels a little more like a game, it is able to entertain me better. That's about it.[/QUOTE]
lol "feels like" see you have no basis what so ever for your points. this is exactly what i am saying. you like it more, therefore it is "better." all you have done is justify to yourself you like of one thing, and dislike of another. you haven't actually made a point about anything other than stating your stance with no legitimate reasoning.
I'm not sure why people are saying Gone Home is "pretentious"? What's pretentious about it?
I wouldn't classify it was pretentious... just meh. I expected a lot more of an interesting story than the one offered: but it was one one that has been the plot of countless movies, and in countless news stories. The fact everyone just wasn't there and the perfect timing coincidence was resorted to was depressing.
Halfway through the game it becomes painfully clear what the rest will be like, it would make a bigger splash if it came out 13 years ago than now. The paranormal was hinted at, even psychopathy but none of it went anywhere. The most I got out of this were a few references, pulp fiction and the giant TVs were neat, but the issue was the familiarity.
It's expected to be a really good game just because it feels like a normal house - it feels lived in but that is not worth 20 dollars and there'd be a lot less bantering over the subject if it was only 10 because you'd feel less ripped off. The experimental way the game plays out would be excused: It's just 10 bucks.
i think pretty much everyone when they make a game wants it to be artistic in some way. does that mean that their game is inherently pretentious just because they specifically set out to make a piece of art?
[QUOTE=Cone;41916430]i think pretty much everyone when they make a game wants it to be artistic in some way. does that mean that their game is inherently pretentious just because they specifically set out to make a piece of art?[/QUOTE]
Except theirs a difference between wanting a game to be artistic in some way and specifically setting out to make a piece of art.
[QUOTE=Oberleutnant;41918328]Except theirs a difference between wanting a game to be artistic in some way and specifically setting out to make a piece of art.[/QUOTE]
What's the difference?
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;41918369]What's the difference?[/QUOTE]
With one you're putting something into the game in hopes that whoever plays it will find meaning in it.
With the other you're designing your entire game around the player finding meaning in it.
The difference is that the former can stand up on its own since its success doesn't depend on people understanding the meaning behind it.
People label things as pretentious when they feel it tried too hard to be art, obviously this is open to interpretation and everybody is going to have their own opinion on this.
[QUOTE=mon_ons;41898305]Wasn't Dear Esther a free mod turned paid game that had you walking very slowly across a large island following a, mostly, linear path?[/QUOTE]
Dear Esther was actually insanely well made and had a pretty good hidden story that was implied through a bunch of symbolism and shit, but it was almost unnoticeable until somebody tells you what the whole game was about.
I don't think Dear Esther should be labelled pretentious, there is legit respectable artwork going on. but this game looks pretty pretentious. Especially if you can just instantly "beat" the game like that. Only thing pretentious about Dear Esther was the price. It should have been free or $5 from the start.
why should art games be free lol. people put hours upon hours of time into them, making these games is their full time job. these are people's lives we are talking about
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;41920794]why should art games be free lol. people put hours upon hours of time into them, making these games is their full time job. these are people's lives we are talking about[/QUOTE]
10-12 dollars seems like a reasonable price for games like these, but it depends on how much money was invested.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;41920794]why should art games be free lol. people put hours upon hours of time into them, making these games is their full time job. these are people's lives we are talking about[/QUOTE]
not all games
but its the same way with every other game ever made, some people believe they're not worth the price they have, and a lot of people seem to think that this game is not worth $20
As much as I like Dear Esther, I'm a sucker for pretty things, the thing I hate about it is that the remake was going to be free. The dev literally turned around at the last minute and went, "Oh, this is going to be $20 by the way, hope you all don't mind, lol" As much as I like it, I don't hold it as some bastion of gaming art. It's a pretty experience, nothing more, nothing less.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;41924576]not all games
but its the same way with every other game ever made, some people believe they're not worth the price they have, and a lot of people seem to think that this game is not worth $20[/QUOTE]
if you don't think it is worth price x, don't pay said price. that is all there is to it. i think it is fair to say you know what you are getting.
but that is the developers problem. if they think the price is right that is really all there is to it. if you think it should be cheaper, buy it when it is cheaper, or don't buy it at all.
I played Dear Esther in both mod and game form, and it was amazing. Great storytelling, great visuals, and definitely worth the price.
I played the Walking Dead as well as the 400 days DLC, and that was a great story as well. I wouldn't say 400 days was worth the price (it was a bit short for my tastes), but it was still a great game.
You play Dear Esther for the story. You play The Walking Dead for the story. You play Gone Home for the story. If you want to go around blowing things up instead of listening to a story, then don't buy the game, because the game's not for you.
[QUOTE=supersnail11;41928461]I played Dear Esther in both mod and game form, and it was amazing. Great storytelling, great visuals, and definitely worth the price.
I played the Walking Dead as well as the 400 days DLC, and that was a great story as well. I wouldn't say 400 days was worth the price (it was a bit short for my tastes), but it was still a great game.
You play Dear Esther for the story. You play The Walking Dead for the story. You play Gone Home for the story. If you want to go around blowing things up instead of listening to a story, then don't buy the game, because the game's not for you.[/QUOTE]
And yet the gameplay elements of those games are not at all under scrutiny.
What is is the objectively bad storytelling in Dear Esther.
Go read a book. Sorry if I seem condescending or somehow insulting but Dear Esther should never be praised for storytelling. Only voice acting and visuals.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41929337]And yet the gameplay elements of those games are not at all under scrutiny.
What is is the objectively bad storytelling in Dear Esther.
Go read a book. Sorry if I seem condescending or somehow insulting but Dear Esther should never be praised for storytelling. Only voice acting and visuals.[/QUOTE]
EcksDee, tell us more about how you unlocked the secrets to objectively judging writing!
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41929337]And yet the gameplay elements of those games are not at all under scrutiny.
What is is the objectively bad storytelling in Dear Esther.
Go read a book. Sorry if I seem condescending or somehow insulting but Dear Esther should never be praised for storytelling. Only voice acting and visuals.[/QUOTE]
again refusing to say why the storytelling is bad rofl
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41901686]Dear Esther prides itself on being an immersive narrative experience.
True, the visuals did look pretty good at times (caves especially), but every line of monologue, while spoken by a great actor, sounded like they came from a high school junior hoping to impress their literature teacher.
The gameplay itself is completely bogus, they make references that have nothing to do with the story and include visual imagery (like fucking circuit boards or some shit, I don't know), which completely take you out of the experience.
I'm sorry but that's literally all it is.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41902153][url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST25ur3JSMU] Here have a video that properly outlines my thoughts on Dear Esther and Journey in a more articulate way than I ever could. It's really good go subscribe to him.[/url][/QUOTE]
I figured you'd post this. Sounds like you took your opinion from his.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;41925920]but that is the developers problem. if they think the price is right that is really all there is to it. if you think it should be cheaper, buy it when it is cheaper, or don't buy it at all.[/QUOTE]
i just think it will greatly slow the progress of the art games industry if they put high price tags on stuff (which as I understand, they don't, most of the time, but still) because, as it was said, it turns a lot of people away.
a lot of them are pretty much books in game form, and a lot have that 'experimental movie' vibe to them, but those industries are far more developed than the whole art game thing
[editline]22nd August 2013[/editline]
so what i'm saying is that if they want to call attention to that and keep making games like those, it wouldnt be a bad idea to make these games cheaper
if people don't buy it because of it's price and the devs don't make as much money as they projected, it will be a learning experience, like anything else, and they will price their future projects appropriately, or even cut the price as it stands.
avant garde movies were being made very soon after film cameras were developed, some being made before movies even had sound sync. we have to start somewhere.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DZ1x-xBtUM[/media]
yeah but thats my point, I want to see more artistic games and better quality ones, too, and for the sake of the industry it'd be great if they lowered the prices. more people will get interested and more people will make games like those.
right now, the biggest reason people are complaining about this game is because they didn't even know what it was about. look at this thread, people are using like 3-4 games as examples, because there aren't a lot more games like it.
yeah, but if they lowered the prices they might not even be able to make them in the first place.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
