Opinions on how TCR & FG are dealing with AAMFP criticism

[The Raining Brains]

The only 'problem' here is their apparent inability to appropriately judge their audience. So the game ultimately comes off as a poorly concieved compromise between two conflicting approaches that fails to impress on both levels. Instead of contributing anything worthwile to the franchise, they've simply used it as vessel through which to elevate themselves as a company.

When they started talking shit about a rigid set of criteria I had to stop reading. First of all, if you want to experiment with the form of gaming then EXPERIMENT with it. Do not simply resort to cramming a tour guide story down our necks instead and then expect us to be terrified. There is nothing in AMFP that could not have been conveyed just as effectively through a movie or even a book. What seperates the videogame as a medium for storytelling is the freedom to explore and interact and the resulting potential for immersion and emotional engagement. AMFP failed to take advantage of that.

Secondly, just because your game dares to challenge a convention, it does not automatically convert it to a status exempt from criticism. What they are basically telling us is that they think their game is fantastically scary and that anyone who disagrees is the one with the problem.

Lastly, I am most certainly not one of those people who Pinchbeck has placed in the shallow "jumpscare" camp. I am a huge fan of atmosphere, deep story and psychological horror, I play games slowly and respectfully and I welcome anything that tries something new and different. I take nothing at face value. So then surely, I of all people should be your target audience? Yet I was not impressed with the game. Six hours. High-quality headphones. Midnight. An open mind. What more do you want from me?

The man is a dumb pretentious arrogant and pathetic cunt. As far as I'm concerned his shitty company can take their pitiful excuse for a sequel and shove it straight back up their assholes. Absolutely disgusting.

[padme]

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/ga...inese-room

I can't even be bothered anymore.

It's funny how they never talk about the game itself but only the story. The story itself is good but it's not like we have never seen anything like it.

And I think it's very arrogant of them not addressing the valid critics that the game is getting from the fans and summing them up to "Oh the people just played the game too fast". There are here, in the forums, genuine criticism to the game and they simply don't care.

Besides of Amenisa, FG made 3 Penumbra games with a great story line and great horror sensations. And not to mention about the DLC "Justine", that makes 4 good horror games. It's not like Amnesia is the only good horror game from Frictional Games.

To sum up, they didn't do a very good job and they are too arrogant to admit their mistakes.

[LuckyBlackCatXIII]

You know what's really funny? How they wanted to get under our skins with a 'terrifying story' and all that? Yeah, you're getting under my skin TCR but not the way you intended. Keep up your ass pats, stay classy.

For a team that's supposedly "sharply intellectual" (Ha ha. HA.) they just can't comprehend that there are not just 2 black and white 'camps' towards this game. Grey areas exist. There are tribes between those two camps you pretentious knobs. Maybe if you actually payed attention instead of separating critiques with 'you're with me or against me' mentalities you would grow and improve in your beloved area of story telling. Even with all my bitching and moaning? There are things in AMfP that I can talk positively about, doesn't mean I like it! And guess what, Dan? I love stories and atmosphere. More games need it! Frankly, you're really bad at it! But you can improve and we want you to. IMAGINE THAT. I'm just...baffled how far someone can have their head up their ass, have you never taken any class with critiquing in it? Honestly, no snarkiness, maybe you should consider it. It might do you some good.

I have so many things I'd want to scream but, clearly, it won't do much good because critiques don't exist in this delusional world. Here's a summary of what I'd say though: UGHHHHHHHHHHHHH

PS: Bless your post, The Raining Brains. To those who enjoyed the game: After a lot of thought, I finally came to a point where I could understand why you enjoyed it and respected your opinion just a little more. But I'm really sorry you have to defend a game with a company like this behind it. That's never fun and for those taking it in stride (looking at you Paddy) you have my entire respect. I don't know if I could do that myself.

[Mechavomit]

They keep talking about jump-scares. I'm not sure they understand what a jump-scare is.

[Froge]

Though [Dear Esther] was meant to be an experiment in fragmentary, restrained philosophical storytelling through beautiful environments, some self-proclaimed gamers saw it as a direct attack on the first-person shooter genre, unworthy of existence alongside the unchallenged might of their favourite action games

.

.

[WALP]

Though [Dear Esther] was meant to be an experiment in fragmentary, restrained philosophical storytelling through beautiful environments, some self-proclaimed gamers saw it as a direct attack on the first-person shooter genre, unworthy of existence alongside the unchallenged might of their favourite action games

.

.

I find myself unable to comprehend the meaning behind your reaction.

[MyRedNeptune]

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/ga...inese-room

I can't even be bothered anymore.

That article: http://philosophy.thecastsite.com/readin...mous2.html

[Cuyir]

Disclaimer: I am not a TCR fan. I enjoyed Dear Esther for what it was. I highly enjoyed AMFP but I can't call myself a fan of them. I don't wait for their projects with bated breath. I'm not overanalizing their hires, their thoughts on games, their anything. I AM a fan of Curry though. I love her music. But of the company itself, no. I say this cause it'll be called into question soon enough. Fair warning.

@ The Raining Brains and Black Cat: Jeez, angry much?

Criticism is fine and all but going off the rails in an assmad manner does nothing for the people that hated the game. Personal insults are pretty petty and speaks volumes of people.

As for the article itself, I liked this part:

[Just before the game went live," Dan continues, "We got an email from Thomas Grip [of Frictional Games]. 'What you've got to remember, if you get flak, is that you are being compared to a game that never existed. And there were these problems and these problems and we were proud of this … But you will get compared to the memory of a game that's three years old. And that's impossible. You will never measure up to that. If things don't go brilliantly, just remember that.']

Really nice of Thomas.

Spoiler below!

A few of you are quote mining to get angry at them and maybe ignoring other parts of the article. Or maybe some of you don't give a toss and react to a part of the article that matches up with your image of TCR.

Is their attitude not to your liking? Is their thoughts on why people didn't like it rubbing you in a bad way? Normal. That's acceptable. Still doesn't make them entirely wrong. People DID play TDD like a Haunted Attraction. Come Bob, come Sally, come Johnny, come everyone else, stand behind me while I ignore notes and go through all the scares so we can have some fun!

Yes, AMFP got rid of a few features and there were legitimate storytelling and mechanical reasons for them. Yes, it's not ''as scary'' as TDD (mostly because it's focused in another type of fear). Yes their reaction has sometimes been misguided (which i've spoken of in detail and will not regurgitate my thoughts on it). Why are people so violently angry at them? Why all the sheer amount of hatred towards them? Before they reacted mind you. They reacted because of how the fanbase reacted to AMFP. So I guess everyone should be even by now but nope.avy

They were spot on a few times in this article, which I will now number:

1. [There are still people who write about Dear Esther and say: 'I wish I could love it, but it's not a game.' Well you think: 'Well you're just a fucking idiot then, aren't you?' because actually if you have to call it a name before you decide whether you like it or not, you've got a weird kind of hangup."]
As brashly and bluntly as it was said, Dan's right. Some people are oddly more interested in trying to classify certain games instead of enjoying them. I understand the importance of classifications, but never did I ever let it affect my enjoyment of something. This doesn't have much to do with AMFP (even though the LOL NOT A GAME comments also exist for this) but I feel it bears mentioning. Curry also made reference to this in her first reaction piece.

2.["Just before the game went live," Dan continues, "We got an email from Thomas Grip [of Frictional Games]. 'What you've got to remember, if you get flak, is that you are being compared to a game that never existed. And there were these problems and these problems and we were proud of this … But you will get compared to the memory of a game that's three years old. And that's impossible. You will never measure up to that. If things don't go brilliantly, just remember that.' Which is a really nice email to send. We've been watching the Frictional forums, with people going 'It should have done this like Dark Descent did it', and then people write back and then go, 'Dark Descent didn't do that. And actually there is stuff in there going 'and it was just this and it was just this' …There almost were two Dark Descents."]

People DID attribute things that TDD didn't have or over credit its accomplishments. Main example? Sanity system. People have this idea of TDD being this game in their minds and how it did that and this and look at those mechanics and even the most ardent fans of TDD (which I don't consider myself, for those keeping score) would react saying ''wait...did the sanity system get patched or what"?

3. ["We wanted to make a horror game," Pinchbeck explains. "There was a distinction in our mind between making a horror game and making a game with jump scares in it. They're not the same. And we really shared that in the early conversations with Frictional as well - they were really anti-jump scares. That's not horror - that's just jump scares. So making a game that would get under people's skin in quite a deep level … What's interesting is a game that scares you while you are playing it, and what's really interesting is a game that scares you after you've finished playing it."]

[I say I was terrified of the Dark Descent. I played 10 minutes of it and then shut myself in an in-game cupboard. I made friends with a broom for a while before quitting.

Curry laughs. "It was a great game," she nods, giggling.]

["The problem we had with the Dark Descent is that you couldn't do the things that Dark Descent did," Pinchbeck says. "Like hiding in a cupboard is amazing, you couldn't hide in a cupboard in A Machine for Pigs … So you're in this really awful situation where you have to make the same game again, but if we made the same game again, it'd just be a disaster. So you're trying to reconcile that contradiction, you're trying to make it the same game, without it being the same game. In the end we talked about it quite a lot, especially with Thomas and Jens [Nilsson, of Frictional Games], and went 'what's the spirit of the original game, what's the trajectory of the original game? Let's do that, let's not do a mechanical recreation.'"]

They NEVER talked down TDD. They loved it. They also said it was good for lets plays and such BECAUSE of the focus of the fear in the game. They didn't even call it a shallow scarefest, like Thomas himself said of TDD. The focus of TDD was more adrenaline focused, more ''oh God, I can't let it see me'', being seen meant running away with the music clanging in the background and such. And yes, it did have a few jump scare centric moments that were huge hits in youtube but calling it a jump scare game is missing the point, and they never called it that. AMFP had a completely other focus on their mind, and its fair share of jump scares. Fear is subjective. Some people were scared by AMFP (i was for most of the game, then wonder took over), some weren't. Just the effects of having a different focus, doesn't make it ''a horribly shitty game by a bunch of morons'' (channeling the rage and hatred on the internet, not quoting anyone from this thread)

If they had wanted to make a youtube lets play friendly game they'd have made a Doom 3 esque game. Doom 3 had its moments of decent atmosphere but the scares were ''BOOO, I WAS IN THE CORNER HA!'' or ''GAURRGUUUAAAAGH!!! I WAS IN THE DARK!" They didn't, and i'm pretty glad.

Could AMFP have been better? Sure. But not by aping TDD (that would have made it pathetically bad) or even giving the player a less linear world. I personally am a believer of telling a story through gameplay. This doesn't just mean that I want games without cutscenes or games with very traditional gameplay mechanics. That means that I want to see themes, feelings and such as told by the narrative to be playable or have some effect on the gameplay or myself while playing said games. With these ill defined thoughts i'll quickly run through FG and TCR's games so far in the spoiler(that i've played).

Spoiler below!

Penumbra Overture: it had combat which could have affected the player, but it just turned into a boring, but almost necessary tool to explore without being bothered by dogs. Reading notes and doing puzzles didn't really tell a story or experience though the gameplay. The one shining moment that fits in my ''telling a story and communicating feelings through gameplay'' mantra was burning Red. YOU had to do it. That simple decision of pressing a button and realizing what you did was great but it was a single moment in a game, that's not enough. That and this was the worse game they've ever done. The horror completely left the game after you realized you could easily kill the dogs (which was very soon in the game) and it became horror-less.

Penumbra Black Plague: No combat, just the same sneaking around and such. Amabel and Clarence helped a lot in the mantra. Clarence made the player know firsthand that Philip was not well and that helps to tell said narrative point through gameplay, not just being told '' Philip is ill''. Amabel being in the game helped a lot of players get a sort of ''emotional anchor''. Every time I ran into a computer I hoped to talk with her again, even if she was showing signs of the virus. That means that the sheer loneliness that FG tried to exhibit through the tense gameplay worked and made me want to be ''clingy'' with the only character in the game. I could say the same of Red in Overture but he always seemed odd and was frequently rude so he didn't do much for mehaha. Killing Amabel and realizing it was a hallucination (or not) brought on by Clarence TELLS a story through gameplay. Philip is, again, not well. You end up killing your anchor and you begin doubting the things you are seeing ingame more now. Does it fit with my mantra? Yes, the one game FG has done that does JUST enough to fit (SPOILER ALERT). They could do much better and i'll bring up examples.

Skipping Requiem cause why not.

Amnesia: The Dark Descent: It had its moments that it fit with my mantra (drowning the guy is the only moment I can think of right now) but it felt empty. I felt as if I was being thrown around a castle only to hide and run from monsters and solve a few simple puzzles. There was no emotional connection to anything ingame most of the times. It was just a horror game for the sake of being a horror game. A shallow fright-fest, using Thomas' words. Was pretty damn well done, mind you. But doesn't do enough to fit into my mantra.

Dear Esther: haunting narration and music, odd images and specters, and an excellent atmosphere. I didn't feel like I experienced any of the themes ingame, MAYBE experienced some of the person's visions (sometimes you'd see ghosts in certain places) but overall, i was just narrated a story with some excellent music playing under it. Doesn't fit in the mantra.

Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs: It made me explore and see just how twisted Mandus was before and after the ''events''. It had incredible atmosphere and explored themes in such a way that I was affected personally by them. Made me nervous to press the button AND then made me regret doing so. But that's it. Doesn't fit.

Games that portray themes, feelings, narrative and such through gameplay :

Spoiler below!

Spec Ops: The Line
The Last Of Us (i've written enough about this game in this forum already)
Dead Space series (ditto)
Dishonored (yep)
Max Payne 3 (mostly in how the player feels as drugged out, drunk and depressed as Max thanks to the visuals and narration while playing the game)
Metal Gear Solid 4 (forces you to furiously tap buttons in a section of the game that leaves you feeling mentally and physically drained which is made worse by what happened before and after said section)

These either were based around portraying themes, feelings, narrative, la dee la dee da through gameplay or had moments that did this.

All they're doing, really, is reacting to the harshest and loudest of the criticisms and talking about their thoughts on them. I've had my say on what I thought of some of their reactions before but in this article they have a few solid points.

AMFP wasn't meant for everyone (and neither are all of FG's games so far), as stupid as that sounds. Their focus quite clearly is looking for a specific kind of player and that shouldn't be criticized. Why? The Gran Turismo series isn't meant for everyone; the people that enjoy the series do so because of the simulation aspects. It's just how it works. There will always be groups of people that will like, dislike or feel ''ok'' about certain piece of art or entertainment. So them saying that specific players enjoyed it more than other type of specific players isn't a backhanded observation by them. Just the nature of the type of games they, and a lot of people, do.

Anyone who read this in its entirety to this point with the same care and patience as I had while typing this (though I wouldn't be surprised if I have to keep editing it in the future), I thank you. You deserve a few internets. Have them.

[Ghieri]

It pisses me off so much because I used to kind of look up to him, and now he turns out to be a cunt.

[Damascus Rose]

Wow, I didn't realize TCR have responded so much to criticism (also I've never read this thread before). I actually respected them a lot, and enjoyed amfp although I was disappointed with a lot of it. But reading some of the shit they said which you guys are talking about is actually disgusting, especially pinchbeck's post. He responded in such an immature, and obviously frustrated way showing that he's letting all this criticism get under his skin. Honestly, what would you expect was going to happen when you're releasing a sequel to probably the biggest horror hit of all time, hyping it up to be scary as hell, then creating a game that doesn't even focus on scares? Did you seriously not expect there to be backlash from fans? If you weren't ready for this, then you probably should've marketed the game differently and at least you'd have something to go back on. I honestly don't even blame people for how they responded to this game. There will be idiots that will do nothing but shit talk it and give it 0/10 for every game, but that's a given. There will be people that love it, and there'll be people that were inbetween and gave it honest reviews pointing out the flaws and good things about this game. They can say whatever the hell they want about it. But responding in such a condescending and vulgar way when you're the lead designer, and an adult, is just plain disgusting. If you want to respond to criticism putting the game in a bad light, don't stoop down to dumbass 12 year old i-fucked-your-mother level, and actually give a good point. Just because a review mentions lack of mechanics doesn't mean they aren't open to change. Maybe the change to the game mechanics was, I don't know, not as effective as you had hoped? If you're going to change up so much you have to be ready to take criticism of it. Also, it's not like every other part of the game was super-praised, every aspect had its flaws.

God damn guys, this is your second game, of course you will mess up on some things and its okay to admit that but don't say that everyone who says the game sucked is wrong. Even if the game has no flaws in your eyes this response is just bad. This has upset me very much reading the stuff people I respected and looked up to wrote, and they have lost a lot of my respect. This has been my unintelligible rant on my opinions of how TCR is dealing with criticism. I hope you enjoyed reading it.

Edit: and wow, what the FUCK is that blog/interview paddy linked.. I have never seen such ridiculous ass-kissing like that in one of those interviews. "The developers' deep intelligence about how stories can manipulate the mind
,"A Machine for Pigs provides a lasting imprint on players that somehow is more psychologically manipulative","Curry and Pinchbeck seem sharply intellectual".. what the hell. And whoever wrote this does not seem to even understand what amnesia TDD is about. "That game was popular for its jump-scare qualities, its ability to frighten in small intense doses, to elicit squeals from players and the makers of online Let's Play videos." What the actual fuck, that sounds like a description of outlast. Sure TDD had jumpscares and frigtened in small doses, but it was all about slow grinding psychological horror. And about amfp: "This new kind of horror hasn't leant itself to the YouTubers who flourished on the drama of publishing video of The Dark Descent's jump scares." No... there isn't any different horror in pigs. There's just less of it. And it obviously relies more on jumpscares to scare you. This is just disgusting to read.. so fucking pompous and pretentious..