AMFP Member Review Thread

[Istrebitel]

...You cannot really remove features from a game when you make a sequel and get away with it... This is a sad problem, but even if the game would be better without it, you cannot remove features in sequels...

Really? Who said so? Problem? Why a developer can't do something? Isn't the word "independent" means that developer is free to experiment with their products? There's no responsibility to deliver a customers what he waits for.

Sad problem? What sad problem? It's a customer sad problem if one gets not something he wants to. For example to make it clear, it's my own problem if I am expecting to get Thief game series resurrection in a way I imagine that resurrection, but finally would get something that I didn't dreamed of. It will be only my personal "sad problem". Isn't it?

...But you can't be upset if some people are displeased with it...

I am not upset ))) I am just laughing at those "displeased" crowds )))))) If they cannot enjoy innovations and experiments, then I presume they are half-people ))) Isn't it a lot more interesting to achieve experience, then fucking game? To play or not to play? I vote for immersion, the less I play, the more I am immersed into imagery world. Presumably, that's why I am absolutely satisfied by Dear Esther. And I am a lot more satisfied with a Machine for Pigs, because the story itself is a LOT MORE intriguing, chilling and frightening. And what is more important unlike Dear Ester it's interactive and that interactiveness is injected into gameplay and plot intrigue. Interactive David Lynch or Hitchcock.

Well, you see, first of all, presuming someone is "half-people" is a sure way to get people to dislike you or outright hate you. Really-really. Because, who are you really to judge?

But anyways, on topic of independence and feature removal.

"Independent" developer only means one thing - not constrained by publisher. Full creative control. This does not mean that there are no BAD decisions that an indie dev can make! Like, if you're independent from your parents, it doesn't mean you can't do a bad thing - like, rob an old woman of her purse, or betray your friend to earn something valueable.

When I talked about the removal of features and how it's bad to do so in a sequel, I didn't say that they aren't allowed by someone to do so. I said that a large part of the audience (if not the majority) will not like such action. Look at the frigging facts, what is it that fans of TDD speak the most about? Lack of custom stories (yes I know they actually now promise to update TDD with features from MfP), lack of inventory, lack of sainity system... That's what I was talking about.

If MfP would have limited latern "fuel", inventory, sainity system and the thing about custom stories features being included into TDD would be properly advertised in advance, there would be way less bark and negativity. Noone would say "why the game still has that useless inventory", noone would stay "who do we still have limited latern usage", noone would say "why do we still have problems with staying in pitch black areas for prolonged time / looking at the monster"! So yes, the game WOULD be viewed better with these features staying by the audience. And you have to consider your audience, your fans.

When you make a sequel, you don't just make a new game. Amnesia: TDD would not be viewed the same if it would be called Penumbra 4, and it could suffer from the fact it had less complex technical puzzles, unability to stay in the darkness (and no "night vision" like in penumbra) and so on. Quake would not be viewed the same if it would be called Doom 3. When you make a sequel, fans expect to have everything they had in the previous game, except what was deemed as an obvious limitation or a flaw by majority (and even then, someone will argue that it was important to the gameplay, like, transition in RPGs from grid-based movement to free movement was argued to be dumbing-down the tactical aspect, for example Might and Magic 4/5 -> 6, 7, 8).