Opinions on how TCR & FG are dealing with AAMFP criticism

[Alardem]

Eh, it's the internet. People will just vomit out any bile they feel for something, particularly if it's a sequel. Some of it may be legitimate, but most of it's fit only for mockery.

So most people who were pretending to critique the game were actually just trolling? Okay, good that we know they aren't credible in any way now. Thanks.

Nice strawman. People thoughtlessly hurling insults and acting personally injured by a video game that didn't fulfill their expectations is exactly the same thing as having well-reasoned critiques on what could have improved it, or trolling. I like your reading comprehension skills! :p

[Lewk]

Nice strawman. People thoughtlessly hurling insults and acting personally injured by a video game that didn't fulfill their expectations is exactly the same thing as having well-reasoned critiques on what could have improved it, or trolling. I like your reading comprehension skills! :p

Okay, you said I strawmanned on your argument, but am I actually wrong? I think the following lines were supposed to be sarcastic but even if they were, it doesn't contradict or mock what my interpretation of your argument was.

People thoughtlessly hurling insults and acting personally injured by a video game that didn't fulfill their expectations is exactly the same thing as having well-reasoned critiques on what could have improved it, or trolling.

According to you, "people throwing insults" is not the same thing as constructive criticism, but trolling is the same thing as constructive criticism.

[Ghieri]

This thread has everything.

*Grabs random chair, breaks it over someone's back, then grabs a beer and raises it in the air triumphantly before chugging*

[Lewk]

This thread has everything.

*Grabs random chair, breaks it over someone's back, then grabs a beer and raises it in the air triumphantly before chugging*

Hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :

[Alardem]

Nice strawman. People thoughtlessly hurling insults and acting personally injured by a video game that didn't fulfill their expectations is exactly the same thing as having well-reasoned critiques on what could have improved it, or trolling. I like your reading comprehension skills! :p

Okay, you said I strawmanned on your argument, but am I actually wrong? I think the following lines were supposed to be sarcastic but even if they were, it doesn't contradict or mock what my interpretation of your argument was.

People thoughtlessly hurling insults and acting personally injured by a video game that didn't fulfill their expectations is exactly the same thing as having well-reasoned critiques on what could have improved it, or trolling.

According to you, "people throwing insults" is not the same thing as constructive criticism, but trolling is the same thing as constructive criticism.

Sarcasm, do you have it? :p

I'm all for giving artistic creations - games, movies, novels, what have you - criticism that eloquently states what the author believes could have been executed better, or points out problematic elements. Bioshock is a prime example of this; I personally dislike the series for multiple reasons (primarily its railroading you into contrived violence), and am struck by how a lot of reasoned criticism of it is dismissed offhand as 'jealousy' or the game being 'too deep for you'. The internet isn't conducive to thick skins, or reasoned thought for that matter.

Constructively criticizing something is not the same thing as throwing ad hominem arguments against a person whose work you don't like. I've come to understand that not many people see the difference between competent criticism and insults, which might be why professional critics get bashed so much. It's particularly bad on the internet - I've been on the fanfiction 'scene', and noted that the most highly rated stories are written by the most egotistical, incompetent and insecure amateurs, who equate any criticism to "flaming and trolling".

For what it's worth, I agree with the reviews that point out omissions made by this game as jarring and disappointing. I accept the opinions of folks like HarshlyCritical, who state their points in a sane manner. To somehow equate well-reasoned, balanced reviews which highlight both the negatives and positives with the flood of anonymous users throwing their incoherent opinion is, well, not very smart.

TL;DR - I'm being snarky because I think you're deliberately twisting my words, bro.

[Mastersarge]

For me there is a lot more wrong with Amnesia A Machine For Pigs. The psychological, atmospheric qualities, and even the music fail to give me the sense of nausea, fear and dread as the first game did. Hell I'd go so far as to say Outlast did a better job in terms of dread and fear because there was always something unexpected waiting right around the corner. Plus the story gets straight to the point and doesn't distract the whole of the genre with poetic nonsense and details such as the lack of interactivity and more focused on the monorail of generic horrors and pretty environment. People tend to ignore this fact mainly because they think that the game is good (even if they didn't look critically at it enough) or they just want to protect anything that is precious to their mind and heart of the series.

A Machine for Pigs failed to deliver on more than just one or two occasions. I even did a torrent finally, and I found that it was nothing at all liked they hyped it up to be. And it took them a whole nother year to put this out on September.

I will say this once, TheChineseRoom does not know how to design games. They use pre-existing engines with lack of coding and diversity in material, relying solely on looks and feels when they forget what really matters in videogames.

Games like Journey makes an excellent example of a videogame sticking to the narrative function but also primarily interactive. And it uses pictures, not words. Which is why my preference for Journey over Dear Esther will not be unscathed.

[Lewk]

Sarcasm, do you have it? :p

I'm all for giving artistic creations - games, movies, novels, what have you - criticism that eloquently states what the author believes could have been executed better, or points out problematic elements. Bioshock is a prime example of this; I personally dislike the series for multiple reasons (primarily its railroading you into contrived violence), and am struck by how a lot of reasoned criticism of it is dismissed offhand as 'jealousy' or the game being 'too deep for you'. The internet isn't conducive to thick skins, or reasoned thought for that matter.

Constructively criticizing something is not the same thing as throwing ad hominem arguments against a person whose work you don't like. I've come to understand that not many people see the difference between competent criticism and insults, which might be why professional critics get bashed so much. It's particularly bad on the internet - I've been on the fanfiction 'scene', and noted that the most highly rated stories are written by the most egotistical, incompetent and insecure amateurs, who equate any criticism to "flaming and trolling".

For what it's worth, I agree with the reviews that point out omissions made by this game as jarring and disappointing. I accept the opinions of folks like HarshlyCritical, who state their points in a sane manner. To somehow equate well-reasoned, balanced reviews which highlight both the negatives and positives with the flood of anonymous users throwing their incoherent opinion is, well, not very smart.

TL;DR - I'm being snarky because I think you're deliberately twisting my words, bro.

Not trying to twist words at all! Now I think I understand. Constructive reviews =/= trolling =/= random emotional anger. I agree, as far as I can tell; just thought you thought differently at first.

I agree with a few of HarshlyCritical's points about the game, so I am open to constructive critique, as long as it makes sense.

[Mastersarge]

For me there is a lot more wrong with Amnesia A Machine For Pigs. The psychological, atmospheric qualities, and even the music fail to give me the sense of nausea, fear and dread as the first game did. Hell I'd go so far as to say Outlast did a better job in terms of dread and fear because there was always something unexpected waiting right around the corner. Plus the story gets straight to the point and doesn't distract the whole of the genre with poetic nonsense and details such as the lack of interactivity and more focused on the monorail of generic horrors and pretty environment. People tend to ignore this fact mainly because they think that the game is good (even if they didn't look critically at it enough) or they just want to protect anything that is precious to their mind and heart of the series.

A Machine for Pigs failed to deliver on more than just one or two occasions. I even did a torrent finally, and I found that it was nothing at all liked they hyped it up to be. And it took them a whole nother year to put this out on September.

I will say this once, TheChineseRoom does not know how to design games. They use pre-existing engines with lack of coding and diversity in material, relying solely on looks and feels when they forget what really matters in videogames.

Games like Journey makes an excellent example of a videogame sticking to the narrative function but also primarily interactive. And it uses pictures, not words. Which is why my preference for Journey over Dear Esther will not be unscathed.

You just want Amnesia 2, as you've basically stated the atmosphere and music etc fails to be creepy. Wait, what? The atmosphere is creepy as fuck, and I don't think anyone but those who just go "WHOOSH USAIN BOLT RECREATION" deny that, and even then the music and atmosphere mainly support the narrative.

Also:

Outlast did a better job in terms of dread and fear because there was always something unexpected waiting right around the corner. Plus the story gets straight to the point and doesn't distract the whole of the genre with poetic nonsense and details such as the lack of interactivity and more focused on the monorail of generic horrors and pretty environment.

.. Are you saying here that a game that innovated is worse than Outlast because it focused on generic horror and monorail gameplay and it also had a pretty environment. That's.. I'm sorry, I'm legitimately lost for words at this, are you actually saying that less innovation is better? It should go without saying why this is the view that is killing the industry.
I'm certain amazing companies like Valve and Rockstar agree very much with your view and shitty companies like EA and Activision disagree.
Oh.
Wait.
Nope.

I also noted you did:

relying solely on looks and feels

and:

And it uses pictures, not words.

You kinda contradicted yourself there when criticizing TCR and saying they cant design games at all, and why Journey is better...

1. Journey was in a closer examination, more interactive than any game from TCR. 2. Journey was built on it's own engine, and not using pre existing ones. 3. Journey doesn't sprout nonsensical poetic nonsense that have or have not anything to do with the game and it's story. The fact that it uses Player's Interpretation of the world instead of having everything told is a more interesting experience.

Also, stop trying to shove words in my mouth. I am not complaining because it was 'innovative.' I am complaining because it was a shit done sequel which tried to rake in the Dear Esther route. And I never said I liked Outlast or said that it was perfect. It has flaws but AT LEAST IT WAS A GAME. But don't go saying my view of videogames is fucking ruining the industry. Consumers and Developers are doing that themselves.

[Paddy™]

This thread isn't about how good or bad AAMFP is, it's about the interpretation of the criticism it has received.

AMFP Member Review Thread

[Lewk]

Consumers and Developers are doing that themselves.

As a consumer, you are spitting out the retarded bullshit that is actually swinging developers more interested in money into making less creative and more boring games.