Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Media
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsDE'S PROFILE
Close
Pixelart lives... AGAIN!
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
v56.png
Wrong!
It adds 11.6% + (CHA / 4) + (WIL / 2) to all status effect resistances except stoned and asthma attack.
It adds 11.6% + (CHA / 4) + (WIL / 2) to all status effect resistances except stoned and asthma attack.
Graphics and the sorts
I haven't played Human Revolution, but the original DE had cutscenes of just the right length - not too long, not too short, and certainly not pointless. Now MGS4, on the other hand...
Wither
What people? Names!
Me, I don't whine about short games. I LOVE short RM games. I'd sooner whine about the likes of Laxius Power when it comes to game length than Wither or Burning Grail...
Me, I don't whine about short games. I LOVE short RM games. I'd sooner whine about the likes of Laxius Power when it comes to game length than Wither or Burning Grail...
Graphics and the sorts
3D CAN do that, but it usually DOESN'T. That's a huge difference.
Most of the story-driven games of today are either first person or "second person" (a'la RE4). In the former the perspective rarely changes, if ever, you're always seeing everything through your avatar's eyes, which severely limits what can be shown on the screen. In the latter the perspective usually changes only during non-interactive cutscenes (QTE be damned). I was talking about scene direction in interactive cutscenes in 2D.
You can achieve lots of things in 3D that you can't in 2D, sure, but there's also things that work very well in 2D that don't work nearly as well in 3D.
So no, I am not wrong, and your condescending tone is not helping the discussion.
I sustain my statement that most games of today, especially AAA titles, strive for photorealism and not avant-gardism.
Most of the story-driven games of today are either first person or "second person" (a'la RE4). In the former the perspective rarely changes, if ever, you're always seeing everything through your avatar's eyes, which severely limits what can be shown on the screen. In the latter the perspective usually changes only during non-interactive cutscenes (QTE be damned). I was talking about scene direction in interactive cutscenes in 2D.
You can achieve lots of things in 3D that you can't in 2D, sure, but there's also things that work very well in 2D that don't work nearly as well in 3D.
So no, I am not wrong, and your condescending tone is not helping the discussion.
I sustain my statement that most games of today, especially AAA titles, strive for photorealism and not avant-gardism.
Graphics and the sorts
This complaint has nothing to do with the graphics, but the games themselves. If you don't get it, play Xenosaga 1... on a second thought, don't. Just watch the first hour on YT.
Now, that most 3D games do look identical due to wanting to be photorealistic is a fact. Unique takes on 3D are rare (Okami, Ico, etc.), most developers try to achieve as realistic graphics as possible. In the future games will look and feel like movies with human actors, but that will be a -good- thing.
Now, with 2D the graphic artists have much more freedom and can create truly unique worlds - compare FF7 to Chrono Cross to Sa-Ga Frontier 2 to Valkyrie Profile. One word - variety.
There's also the case of readability. With 2D the audience will always experience the scene the way the author intended, getting the most out of every map, carefully positioning each element, each character, and having actual real-time cutscene direction. With 3D you don't see shit. Sure, there will be breathtaking views, but everyone will see them from different vantage points and they won't have as big an impact. Not to mention many players don't care about the views and simply run from room to room gunning mobs - 3D games are usually simply too sight-intensive to allow the player to inspect the surroundings. There's also the case of limiting perspectives (1st person/over-the-shoulder 3rd person).
There's nothing wrong with 3D games per se, it's that most of them look samey. That said, both 2D and 3D serve different functions and it would be a shame to see one of them go.
Now, that most 3D games do look identical due to wanting to be photorealistic is a fact. Unique takes on 3D are rare (Okami, Ico, etc.), most developers try to achieve as realistic graphics as possible. In the future games will look and feel like movies with human actors, but that will be a -good- thing.
Now, with 2D the graphic artists have much more freedom and can create truly unique worlds - compare FF7 to Chrono Cross to Sa-Ga Frontier 2 to Valkyrie Profile. One word - variety.
There's also the case of readability. With 2D the audience will always experience the scene the way the author intended, getting the most out of every map, carefully positioning each element, each character, and having actual real-time cutscene direction. With 3D you don't see shit. Sure, there will be breathtaking views, but everyone will see them from different vantage points and they won't have as big an impact. Not to mention many players don't care about the views and simply run from room to room gunning mobs - 3D games are usually simply too sight-intensive to allow the player to inspect the surroundings. There's also the case of limiting perspectives (1st person/over-the-shoulder 3rd person).
There's nothing wrong with 3D games per se, it's that most of them look samey. That said, both 2D and 3D serve different functions and it would be a shame to see one of them go.
Wither
author=Deacon Batista
Means we can ignore stories from now on, because it is always up to the player who co-creates it ;-)
In good stories that work so well due to rousing your imagination, yes. For example, all good horror fiction is based on that.
Define what "being entertained" is for you. If it's watching sprites kill sprites, then no, you won't be entertained by Wither. And yes, there are other reasons for reading books or watching movies; art house cinema is not made to entertain the audience, as are para documentaries. There's more to even fantasy fiction than sword fighting.
Yeah, that WAS one of the few positive points I meantioned in my little review.
This may actually constitute the whole game and captivate many a gamer.
Wither
Is the only reason you watch movies or read books is to be entertained too? If yes, then I'm not surprised you didn't like this game. Although there's more ways to be entertained than killing monsters or shooting terrorists - wandering through atmospheric surroundings, for example.
As for the story... well, there's as much of it as the effort you put into co-creating it, in a way...
As for the story... well, there's as much of it as the effort you put into co-creating it, in a way...
Wither
I would be the first to call bull on all art games, but I had real fun playing Wither. It's the kind of game that isn't about gameplay, but immersing yourself in the fictional world, just like when reading poetry or looking at a painting (not that Wither is of that magnitude, just the mental process). Whether the game achieves that is so subjective it's not subject to discussion or critical analysis.
Firing up games such as this and expecting a tight gamer's experience will always lead to disappointment and awkward reviews like the one above. It's like going to the theater to see Evil Dead and wondering why this horror movie is so silly. Or going to Last Action Hero expecting a Commando-like movie. You have to know what the game is about before playing it or you're in for disappointment and it wouldn't be the game to blame.
And yes, there is loads of story in this game, it's that much of it is not expressed through text. You're also supposed to fill some blanks with your imagination and try to piece the puzzle together. It's not the game's flaw, it's its feature.
As for the genre designation - does anyone care? Maybe the creator missed that part when submitting the game... It's nitpicking. Comparing this game to adventure games is also pointless, since I very much doubt the author meant to make a full-fledged adventure game, rather a simple exploration (for lack of better term) game. I'm convinced it was supposed to be minimalistic in every aspect, including gameplay and puzzles, it's its strong point in fact.
Firing up games such as this and expecting a tight gamer's experience will always lead to disappointment and awkward reviews like the one above. It's like going to the theater to see Evil Dead and wondering why this horror movie is so silly. Or going to Last Action Hero expecting a Commando-like movie. You have to know what the game is about before playing it or you're in for disappointment and it wouldn't be the game to blame.
And yes, there is loads of story in this game, it's that much of it is not expressed through text. You're also supposed to fill some blanks with your imagination and try to piece the puzzle together. It's not the game's flaw, it's its feature.
As for the genre designation - does anyone care? Maybe the creator missed that part when submitting the game... It's nitpicking. Comparing this game to adventure games is also pointless, since I very much doubt the author meant to make a full-fledged adventure game, rather a simple exploration (for lack of better term) game. I'm convinced it was supposed to be minimalistic in every aspect, including gameplay and puzzles, it's its strong point in fact.
Journeyman Review
I'm not saying you're defending Max, I'm countering your point about people being tools to Max just because he's Max and tricking him into flipping out. They're simply tired of Max acting the way he does and react accordingly.
The popcorn bit is meant to be ironic, I doubt anyone is really entertained by these... events.
EDIT: what does "your demographic" have to do with this review or Max? It isn't your game that generates such comments, so... why that bit?
The popcorn bit is meant to be ironic, I doubt anyone is really entertained by these... events.
EDIT: what does "your demographic" have to do with this review or Max? It isn't your game that generates such comments, so... why that bit?
Journeyman Review
Let me tell you this - if one of your friends is being a douche to another one of your friends, at some point you say "fuck it", stop being passive, and confront him. I used to defend Max, or at least not participate in these quarrels, but his latest behavior was the straw to break the camel's back. He's been shitting on people giving him honest, good-intended feedback for years (although there's been some spite in the past, I admit - hello, Karsuman!), is it a wonder some got tired of it and threw the shit back at him?
If he doesn't like this place, if he feels he's being persecuted and treated unfairly, why does he choose to stay and be part of the community? I don't get it. If he's after hosting space and downloads, he can just pop from time to time to drop a new game and quietly retreat to the shadows. And yet he argues with others all the time. Is he a masochist? Does he enjoy it despite what he says?
If he doesn't like this place, if he feels he's being persecuted and treated unfairly, why does he choose to stay and be part of the community? I don't get it. If he's after hosting space and downloads, he can just pop from time to time to drop a new game and quietly retreat to the shadows. And yet he argues with others all the time. Is he a masochist? Does he enjoy it despite what he says?
Games - Tester
Games - Other
