(09-20-2013, 11:32 AM)Dogfood Wrote: Speaking of "immersion", having no inventory is more immersive than having one. I dont see how a person can carry 4 cogwheels, hammer, acid, huge machine batteries in his pocket.
I always assumed that he had a satchel or backpack on him, where he'd put the stuff... Btw, in TDD you had to carry the cogwheels around manually as well. I don't mean to argue, just saying
Anyway, to each his own i guess, i'll get over it.
Better to reign in hell than to be a servant in heaven.
(09-20-2013, 02:07 PM)Fortigurn Wrote: Stupid level design which shuts a door behind me as soon as I've left an area I want to re-explore.
They may also have to keep in mind that if some very adventurous players wander all over the place, and end up straying too far from the objective to know where they were originally supposed to go.
(09-20-2013, 02:07 PM)Fortigurn Wrote: Stupid level design which shuts a door behind me as soon as I've left an area I want to re-explore.
To be fair, that happens in TDD as well.
And in many many many many other linear games. It's why I always check, double check, triple check and quadruple check areas i'm in before moving on in every linear structured game.
(09-20-2013, 02:11 PM)Paddy Wrote: To be fair, that happens in TDD as well.
It does, but nowhere near as much since TDD was designed with a hub system which encouraged exploration and re-visiting areas.
(09-20-2013, 02:24 PM)Nuits Grace Wrote: It's why I always check, double check, triple check and quadruple check areas i'm in before moving on in every linear structured game.
I had already done a full circuit of the walls and crossed the center several times, but I did want to take another look and grab some more screenshots. All I did was walk across a threshold, not even through a door, and immediately I was shoved out and a previously concealed door slammed down out of nowhere. A bit cheap.
Dan and Jess have recently commented on a few of the criticisms AAMFP has received, in ways that I'm finding increasingly irritating. I adore both of these people, and I love AAMFP, but I can't contain myself when I read this shit.
Spoiler below!
In a new article written by Jess herself she says:
Jessica Wrote:The writing, music, sound, levels of immersion and psychological depth were all praised to the hilt but then in lots of the reviews we were heavily penalised for the removal of the mechanics that featured in the original game. Why was that a problem? Well…it just was because, games, y’know, should have, like, mechanics. Duh!
Jessica Wrote:I don’t care if you don’t like it, (patently not true but you know what I mean), but what I genuinely do care about, and this goes for fans and critics alike, is that the reason you don’t like it is better than “it’s different to what came before.” It’s weak, insubstantive and if I’m honest pretty bloody dull as a rationale.
Dan has come off with the same kind of swinging, pendulous, strawman's bollocks on his Twitter account as of late, feigning bafflement (I assume he's feigning, for dramatic effect) at why people would say "I'd have liked the game more had it not been called Amnesia", with an almost wilful ignorance of the point.
Reducing these criticisms down to a white noise of negativity with no rhyme or reason behind them is childish and defensive. Lamenting the removal of core game mechanics isn't necessarily evidence that the reviewer has stubborn, immovable notions of what a game "should" be, or that they're too "threatened" by diversity and breadth to see the bigger picture.
And let's be clear, they're not directing this at the wankers who spew hatred and bile in YouTube comments and forum posts; they're talking about professional, "respectable" reviewers, too.
I "get it", in that I'm 100% on-board with TCR and what they did with AAMFP. I get it and I love it. However, I have no difficulty empathising with those who feel differently, which is something I can't say for Dan and Jess if their recent comments are anything to go by. And I have no need to pretend that the negativity is little more than "don't change our games!" insecurity or general narrow-mindedness in order to for me debate the critics. At the same time, you can "get it" and still disagree with it. Which I don't, because I love it
This might just be my frustration talking, but they've earned this reaction. Not the death threats or any of that crap, but the wide range of criticisms from every quarter. They've earned it because they led everyone to believe that the game was going to be something it was never intended to be, through their pre-release descriptions of the game and their stated goals ("needs to be scarier than TDD in order to be successful", etc.). I don't agree with all of the criticisms myself, but they're completely valid and really shouldn't be causing so much eye-rolling over at TCR HQ.
Imagine how it feels to read this kind of response from Dan and Jess if you're one of those who criticised the game (in a rational, reasonable way). How condescending can you get?? I expect these kind of responses from hit 'n' run FG forum members, not from the devs themselves.
Criticising AAMFP isn't the same as denying TCR the right to make something new and different. Saying it's a sequel to Amnesia and then removing everything which was most identifiable as "Amnesia" is another matter. I have no issue with it, but I totally understand why people do and it's the height of arrogance to criticise the critics on that basis.
tl;dr summary - they really need to get over themselves.
(This post was last modified: 09-20-2013, 04:33 PM by Paddy™.)
Search
Member List
IRC
Help
AMFP Member Review Thread
![[Image: Tv0YgQb.gif]](http://i.imgur.com/Tv0YgQb.gif)
