For the five people who've been missing my Independent Adventuring column, I'm happy to say that it's back on-line.Ã, I started a blog where I'd be publishing it, along with reviews of the more interesting games and whatever else I can think of.
Most games that were released between June 2005 and January 2006 (the period when DIYGames was not updated) are now covered in my columns here (http://indieventure.blogspot.com/).
QuoteThe Family Treasure. By all accounts, this is a very good game, if I am to paraphrase people on the AGS forums. Unfortunately, I was unable to move from the first screen, even after following the instructions of people who successfully finished the game. I attribute this to an awkward interface, and possibly some pixel hunting. The graphics and music are very good, but I personally found the game unplayable.
There is no pixel hunting in the first room. I take it you are referring to the flickering lense. You don't need to interact with the lense, interact with the crow's nest. Take away that stupid comment about unplayable or rather leave my game out of your thingy.
Nope; I already had the lens.
wow buloght, he can't have an opinion?
Also, I see all the OROW games [one room one week] were reviewed except mine, Automation! The winner of the first one! Argh!
Also, you might want to mention which ones were made for OROW because that is why they are so short.
Quote from: Jozef on Sun 26/02/2006 20:28:35
Nope; I already had the lens.
Then you you're just saying things.
Saying someone's game is unplayable is only valid it isn't. I think my game is quite easy to play
i knew it! my humour is forced! my mummy lied to me when she said i was funny! :'(
*off to go and a make a serious game*
;D
Yeah, you might want to mention that the OROW games are going to be limited by the fact they are one-room games made in one week, rather than simply calling them "short".
Jozef, good to have your reviews back!
buloght, relax. The puzzle with the crow's nest is quite fiddly. After that it's smooth sailing, but I have to agree with Jozef that the game gives a bad first impression. You may think your game is easy, but if someone who plays just about every game that is released has problems, you might want to step back and reconsider. It's something that beta testing would have revealed - I realize that you couldn't do that given the MAGS time constraints.
Screw game-making. I still demand that you remove that jozef, mine is the only game marked purple and calling it unplayable is just wrong.
He said he got stuck and that people say it's a good game and the art was very good. He isn't trashing your game.
It's marked purple because it's a link and you clicked it.
Hem, I have to say that a comment like "Tha game is unplayed", is rather rude, and of course is completly subjective. The rest of the review, is quiet good though.
I didn't click it, it was purple when i got there which i thought rather weird. Btu still the dude can just remove it.
It's not a fair comment by any means.
yeah, "unplayable" is a bit off.
hehe, i just scanned through all his reviews (2005 included), and it seems generally the games he hates i love! hehe. and vice versa. hehe.
He doesn't say it is unplayable, he says "personally it is unplayable." Meaning he couldn't play it. This is not an insult!
Whatever, I'm done sticking up for someone who doesn't need it, Jozef I'm sure is a smart guy who doesn't need me defending him.
Personally i think he is an idiot that shouldn't do reviews.
Quote from: MrColossal on Sun 26/02/2006 20:57:19
He doesn't say it is unplayable, he says "personally it is unplayable." Meaning he couldn't play it. This is not an insult!
True, my fault while quoting him, but still...
Anyways, I'm also done with this thread, Eric, for the same reasons.
lol ;D
I won't be releasing any "unplayable" games anymore, thanks jozef.
Buloght, could you change the face of the cutiy you have for avatr, with a mean, angry face, something like : :( >
Hey, good to hear it's back! I see you've reviewed Buna Wants Beer too. Thanks for the kind words. The link on Buna Wants Beer is old now thought. Could you replace it with this link: http://www.pabsoft.com/games.html
Thanks :)
Also, buloght, you should calm down a bit. A game creator must be able to handle critics. :P
I do pablo, i welcome comments, check my release thread. But unplayable is not a fair and sensible comment. Period.
Hey, nice to have your column back :) I was sort of missing it just a while ago.
"Interesting soundtrack"... Finally someone says something about the Tomb of the Moon soundtrack :D
Wow! You've got lots of reviews there!
I didn't know your blog, but I'm quite impressed. I'll sure follow it from now on.
if somebody who calls life of d duck's graphics professional (no offense to d duck authors), then i wouldn't worry about it, buloght.
man, if i just had a baby sister or brother, then i can ask them to do the graphics for me, and sell the game! ;D
I don't mind if he calls it stupid, the worse game ever made. But unplayable is a stupid comment. Clearly he only played like two minutes.
Pablo: Thanks for the heads-up; the link is updated.
buloght: If you release a game, you are opening yourself to reviews; both good and bad. If I write a review, I open myself for criticism, both good and bad. So why not call it even now? Also, the "purple link" will remain purple as long as your browser remembers that you visited the page it points to. It doesn't matter whether you clicked on that link from my column or not; it's a browser feature.
Mordalles: Sorry if I didn't fully get your humor, but I wouldn't be surprised that the second Mordy, being as expansive as it is, gets additional reviews on other sites, which may have more fun-friendly reviewers ;) As far as D. Duck goes, I tried once to do such graphics as well, and failed miserably. Doing "normal", computer-generated graphics and animations was much easier for me.
MrColossal: I'm very sorry for leaving out your game! It's not the first time that I overlooked a game, and I tend to include such titles in my later columns, as soon as I'm told about them.
Glad to see you back, Jozef!
I'm very well aware of bad and good reviews, my release page is full of them and i respect all of their opinions. But you said my game is unplayable which is simply not true. Just remove my review and we'll call it quits. I don't care if you ignore future games by me (which i'll probable keep to myself anyways). There are millions of other games more unplayable then mine but them you love.
\O/ Always good to see more Adventure Game critiques.
Feel free to review my game, whenever it comes out, and be as harsh as you see fit.
Call it a big steaming pile, if you feel it is. I won't mind.
I'm a happy fish! :)
Glad you're back, Jozef, even if you didn't like my epic CUTE game ;) Actually, you do seem less generous here than you used to be with some games dismissed out of hand. For example "Awesmoe Quest" is actually Meta and is deliberately like that, the dialog is escapable and the game features some of the mst innovative puzzles ever and was nominated int he AGS Awards for a number of Categories. Likewise, Mind's Eye and maybe buloght's game (which I haven't played)
However, buloght you are way out of order and I'm surprised at you. I've been impressed by your work so far but you have to accept that some people might just not get it at all and they are entitled to say so. If they can only play your game 2 minutes becasue they find it hard then its hardly unfair that they base their judgment of the game on that.
Haha Jozef, are you carrying the Gladiator Quest joke, or did you really fall for it? Glad to read your reviews, happy you liked Caverns!
buloght, do you really need to take it so seriously? It's just one person's opinion. If the game looks great and has got a lot of positive attention, why should one person's opinion effect that in any way? I haven't played your game yet, and the only reason for me not playing it would be you getting so angry because of a such little thing as this. But I will play it, when I have the time and stuff.
For someone of his status or whatever giving reviews on all games he should take more time to play it. I don't care for bad reviews , I just think he's comment about unplayable is completely and utterly stupid and doesn't apply.
He is Jozef, the guy that makes reviews and basically buloght games have now been labelled as unplayable and that is the and probable be the only written review i get. So i might as well quit game-making.
Whatever, i've had enough.
Jozef, you can count me among those five people who were eagerly awaiting your return! When DIY came back from its... break... I checked back everyday hoping to see a new installment. Right up until recently when the editor went MIA again.
Hooray! Thanks for all the hard work.
And since everyone is doing it:
Seriously, try META (Awesmoe Quest) again!
Fifa Football 2004 was released in 2003! :P You probably thought it was new because someone bumped a three year old thread with a question about how Duzz did something in the game.
stop being such a drama queen Buloght...
The only reason now that I have no interest in playing your game is because of the way you're acting right now.
He said that for him personally he could not play the game, which would make it unplayable for him. Right?
Jozef:
http://kafkaskoffee.com/images/games/AutomationV1.1.rar
There's Automation if you want it!
MrColossal i don't think you would have played it anyway.
SSH: You are right, I may have become a little harsher in rating games. Ã, Over the past few months I've been under a lot of stress, and I guess I let my mind wander while playing, instead of immersing myself in the game.
Helm: Are you serious? Ã, I thought the file was real...
Vince: Thanks for the heads-up. Ã, I guess I was so excited to see something by Duzz that I didn't look at the date.
As far as META goes, I may give it another try. Ã, Something tells me that if I'm patient enough and click through a nearly endless loop of text, just like I did with No! I am Spartacus!, I'll somehow get to the end.
buloght: I really value and admire your commitment to your game, but I cannot change what I wrote. Ã, This is an issue with consistency: I always write what I feel about a game, not what others think. Ã, I gave you the most benefit of the doubt I could by mentioning that other players thought your game was very good, but since I personally was unable to find a way to move forward, I could not write anything else.
However, you are free to post a comment to my column, where you tell your side of the story. Ã, In fact, I would really encourage you to do so, and as long as you keep to the issue at hand (merits of the game vs. merits of my description), you, as the author of the game, would be credible enough to convince the readers not to trust my description of the game.
Let me also tell you where I got stuck. Ã, This is not the Hints and Tips forum, so I don't expect you to help me, but this may be useful for you if you want to comment on my column. Ã, I've completed the rudder and fixed the telescope. Ã, I was then told to look at the map and move there. Ã, The only item that worked was the showel, but no matter where I clicked I got a "You must first complete the rudder" message or somesuch. Ã, I was then told to click on a very specific (but unspecified) point on the map. Ã, After I gave up, I concluded that there was one of the following three problems: Either the specific place was too small (pixel hunting), or the game used an unusual interface (hence my "awkward interface" comment), or the game was giving me the wrong feedback, another interface problem. Still, I don't feel that I've written anything untrue in my column.
MrColossal: Thanks for the link; I found v. 1; I'll redownload the game.
You add the rudder to the raft. Then use the shovel to travel accross the map .. use shovel with map... and sail to under the
Spoiler
compass
You never have to click on a specific place, you row and figure out it's as in hide. It's a puzzle, no pixel hunting,
I still wish you just listen to my PM and remove my review, i don't plan on making anymore.
Asking him to remove the review is lamness of the highest order. Get over it and move on. Enough internet drama.
Quote from: Squinky on Mon 27/02/2006 00:24:16
Asking him to remove the review is lamness of the highest order. Get over it and move on. Enough internet drama.
It's not if he's writing crap.
Look. I've always been nice to everyone, i try and play most AGS games released. I always give compliments (never afraid of things like that as some others) and i accept all the critique given for my game in my page since you people know a lot of adventure games. I really love the feedback. I generally don't mind what people say about my game. I've never complained on these forums.
But i don't care who this jozef is. He said something that cuts me deep. Sure it might not be a game you like, but i'ts playable. I don't appreciate his comment on that and i think it foolish. I have been waiting for the older members to jump on my back as soon as i say something like that since that's what they do even though i'm nice to them and play there games.
I have nothing more to say.
I wouldn't want to discourage anyone who takes the time to play, evaluate and review amateur games but I think you should turn the cynicism level right down. I think your reviews have the tone of commercial game reviews, with an unspoken belief that you as a player are in someway entitled to high-quality entertainment. You can make value judgments and tell of your experiences but you must remember that ultimately you are entitled to nothing from a freeware amateur game.
Quote
"January offered a mix of very good games and titles, which were a disgrace to the adventure gaming community."
Here you are straight out stating that some of the games released this month, reviewed on your page, are "a disgrace to the adventure gaming community." I think you should consider what an aggressive statement that is. This is not the work of large companies being paid you are talking about, it is the work of amateurs who are doing this simply because they have a passion for it.
Quote
"January was a month of good news and a few good titles. Unfortunately, it also featured a few sub-par games. This time, however, the production value stayed way above average, and instead it was the scripting that hurt those titles. I remain very hopeful, though. For me, it indicates that new authors are playing with adventure engines, and that soon they'll deliver much better titles."
Again you are implying that none of these titles meet some level or standard you are demanding. Again there is an expectation that you feel entitled to be entertained. I am not surprised buloght took offence.
I think what you are doing is great, but you need to reconsider how you sometimes come across. These are not commercial games. You are reviewing the fruits of someone's hobby. I think serious care must be taken to appreciate the time and dedication put into these projects.
Buloght, please calm down, don't blow this out of proportion. There's no conspiracy against you. You can't ask someone to take down a review of your game just because you are hurt by it, it doesn't work this way. You're free to disagree with his review as much as he's free to write it and post it. I haven't played your game but I hear it IS playable and it is good, but that doesn't mean someone can't disagree.
Jozef: No I'm not kidding, the readme was part of the 'theme' me and ghormak went for. We were trying to capture the ambience of an old c64 game, that sort of thing.
Now, I know that you play a boatload of these free adventure games every month, and you can't afford to dig deep in each and every one, but what I see is that maybe you should make more of an effort on the investigation side of the review. The games aren't made in a vacuum, so if they're orow games, that should be mentioned, if they're 'theme' games, that should be mentioned. If you disregard that aspect of reviewing, what you're left with is 'I played this, it was ok/bad/great/unplayable' which I guess IS a needed service to people who want to play the 'good' AGS games out of the pile and trust your opinion, but the issue is, do you want your reviews to be just that, or do you want to give constructive criticism back to the creators, and also inform the readers of more specific traits of the games? There's fine lines, and boy, do you have a workload on your hands that concern them.
If you find yourself pressured for time and you have to play an ags game to test it, don't. That's not a good mindset to sit down with an adventure game, you will quickly grow impatient at first stuckage and might rush to conclusions about how 'playable' it is. If you're trying to give your readers an unbiased opinion of the merits of these games, give them a fresh chance, every one of them. I'm not saying it's easy, but it's the honest thing to do.
Buloght:Ã, Amateur or Hobby Adventure Game Making is something that should be enjoyable, regardless of positive or negative critisisim that a game might receive. Just learn from it and strive to keep improving your game-makin' skills.Ã, :)
Ã, Ã, I don't always agree with some of Jozef's opinions / comments regarding some of the games he reviews as well, and yes, sometimes his comments does seem to come off as a bit blunt / harsh or unhelpful / un-constructive.Ã,Â
Ã, Ã, Sometimes he has given some of my past projects positive comments, and sometimes negative comments (or comments I don't quite agree with or perhaps don't quite understand why), and sometimes he will give a project a mix of both positive & negative comments.Ã, I appreciate the time he takes to play all these adventure games, and I appreciate and respect his opinions & comments, even if I don't always agree with what he says.
Ã, Ã, What it comes down too is, it should NOT really matter too much what just one person may say about your game. He's not an all-authority-all-knowing-entity. He's just one guy who seems to love playing adventure games, and likes to share some of his comments / opinions, even though perhaps sometimes his comments at times seem harsh or may make little-sense.Ã, Regardless, everyone should feel welcome to express their thoughts / opinions as they like.Ã, Just look at it as a learning experience and move on, and go to make even better games.
Ã, Ã, There's an old saying that comes to mind: "You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."
Ã, Ã, Anyways, if you look at the overall majority of what people had to say about your game, from what I seen most of the people that played your game really enjoyed it and said positive comments.Ã, I myself thought your game was wonderful and much enjoyed it... however, I did find using the Map a bit awkward too, but not to the point that I would say it's "unplayable", just for me it was a bit "awkward".Ã, Ã, Anyways, no worries, you had fun making your game, people had fun playing your game, and not everything in a game can always be "perfect".Ã, I, and I'm sure many adventure-gaming-fans around here, would very much enjoy to play any future games you care to make and share with us.Ã, Ã,Â
Ã, Ã, Don't give up at it, as I think that would be a shame.Ã, I think you obviously have a LOT of talent and potential, so don't throw it all away just on the odd "negative" comment, kay?Ã, ;)Ã, Hey, if you get like like aroundÃ, 90% comments like "Wow! Great! Awesome! Loved it!", and maybe around 10% Comments like "It sucked! Bah! Unplayable!"... Geee, man, I'd be happy with a percentage like that.Ã,Â
I'd neve have noticed that bad review of buloght's game if he hadn't made such a fuss about it.
Heh, this guy never probably made it off the raft of the ship. But as they say everybody has a right to their own opinion. I read this very depressing thread and moved along to
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=24728.msg317889#msg317889
this one and was happy again. ;D see my colgate smile?
In anycase moving along; Bulloght tried something new, hes interface may or may not be accepted by some
and altough he had a very short time of production he released one of the games I can easily rate in my top ten
AGS.
Buloght : Well I must say that you are one in few, you do what many others wish to do and you will get burned for it... (at the stake like witches were ;) ) bat alas me matey these land lubbers do not know what ye be holding in ye heart is the key to true adventure treasure! Thas be waiting great success on you Buloght.
Anyway what I am saying is that few dare to change what they already perceive as perfect, for there minds are
to shallow and weak to see beyond the limitation that there once were (in there cases still are) So no sweat of your back Buloght as many of us respect your game your skill and your efforts at producing these wonderfull titles!
Cheerz
Afflict
well, i totally aggree with modgelator. calling people's hobbies "sub-par" is pretty rude. im sorry i disappointed josef, but then again, i didn't make the game for him, i made it for me.
i think calling buloght's game unplayable just because you can't solve one (really easy puzzle), is ridiculous.
now, i have read most of his reviews, and having played all the games myself, i have to say josef is really inconsistent in his reviews, and some of his views are just completely unprofessional. actually, i don't know if there is any use in reading his reviews, since he makes a lot of uninformed remarks and sometimes it just seems he doesn't know a lot about what he is reviewing. i hope he doesn't get offended, i'm just reviewing the reviewer. so just an opinion. i hope im entitled to it.
Well I cant even get into the website as it keeps on timing out? Dunno doesnt sound like that big of a los to me anyway...
Maybe Jozef should get someone else to help him do reviews, so that there are two people writing reviews.. IMO someone completely oppposite of him that would help. Cause people relate to different people,
Thanks helm, i am glad you're are not simply dismussing my argument :) I don't mean to be angry towards the older members but they were pretty quick to back josef.
Thansk barbarian and afflict and mordalles Ã, :)
:P and say this. I don't mind bad or good reviews. It's fine saying my interface isn't all that good (i see that too) and will learn from it. I thank Grundi and Zooty for telling me about it.
But saying someone's game is unplayable is ridicuous if it's not, I haven't found one AGS game this year unplayable. I spent too much effort on my game and trying to make it user-friendly for josef to make that comment.
If you can't finish a puzzle (it's not even a hardf puzzle IMO) it's completely unfair calling the game unplayable and I refuse to accept that. That is the worst kind of comment you can receive for a game. I'm not some 5-year old imbecile that made a game that crashes each time the inventory opens.
He should change what he wrote, i don't care if he didn't like my game, i don't care if he gives me constructive criticism, i love that, thanks to all the people in the community who has given me this in my thread. I want to learn from that and become a better game maker. But Josef, that comment doesn't apply and i don't like it you calling it that on your public independent site, rather give it a bad review.
PS. Cedric and The Revolution is not a sup-par game Jozef. If i understand your website correctly.
As I see it Jozef, reviews games as his hobby in his free time, why does "professional" apply to him and not to us game makers?
And because you think I was dismissing your arguement is just another reason why you just don't understand what is going on or what Jozef wrote in that particular review. You didn't appear to read anything I wrote since you think everyone else can have an opinion and tell you about your game BUT Jozef. You keep leaving off the word "personally", that he could not complete the game.
Let's see your last comment with a little edit:
"But saying someone's game is personally unplayable is ridicuous if it's not, I haven't found one AGS game this year personally unplayable. I spent too much effort on my game and trying to make it user-friendly for josef to make that comment."
Every AGS game that came out you were able to beat, no problems? I can think some I couldn't beat and they were just in the OROW competitions.
He also couldn't beat 1213 because he isn't good at fast reaction arcade like games, that makes 1213 personally unplayable.
"MrColossal i don't think you would have played it anyway. "
Why? Because I'm a member of some Anti-Buloght League?
Look, buloght, you realize that a reviewer can't just remove a review because the creator of the game doesn't like it, right? That would make the whole exercise pointless.
Now, apparently what happened to Jozef was that at some point early in the game, he was supposed to do one thing, but he thought he was supposed to do something else. Since he wasn't able to do what he thought he had to do, no matter how hard he tried, the game appeared unplayable to him. It would be like someone playing a platform game and trying to shoot the enemies when you're just supposed to jump on them.
Now, the wonderful thing about adventure games you make yourself is that any problem with the game, you can fix! A couple of other people have also said they had problems with this bit, so maybe there's something confusing about it? It could be a really easy puzzle if you look at it the right way, but really difficult if you look at it the wrong way. (I don't know, I haven't played it. I downloaded it and was planning to, but your behavior hasn't really encouraged me to try it.) Maybe you should provide a hint, or rephrase the instructions to be clearer, or allow multiple solutions... It's up to you.
I don't understand why "unplayable" is the one thing we're not allowed to call your game. Is it really that much worse than, say: "This is a really bad game that isn't fun to play at all. Totally useless"? Jozef's review was so hedged in its criticism that it really didn't make me want to play the game any less at all, which the example would have.
I think everyone who's played a few games Jozef has reviewed knows that his opinions are not the ultimate authority, and that he sometimes just doesn't get it. He completely failed to understand META, for example. Hey, Roger Ebert didn't get Blade Runner, it happens to the best! His reviews are really useful for drawing attention to little-seen games that are actually quite good (and for that I think he provides a great service to players and creators alike), but they don't make me stay away from games that have been praised in the forums or that look promising.
So chill. If the worst thing said about your game is "a lot of people think it's really good, but I never got past the first screen, so I found it unplayable," you should count yourself lucky. Saying you'll never make another adventure game, or never publish them, that's just throwing a tantrum.
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 15:22:17
"MrColossal i don't think you would have played it anyway. "
Why? Because I'm a member of some Anti-Buloght League?
No, you are the leader of the Anti-Everybody League! Haven't you noticed that you don't like anyone ever and you have personal vendettas against them all!?
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 15:22:17
"MrColossal i don't think you would have played it anyway. "
Why? Because I'm a member of some Anti-Buloght League?
Hey! Don't talk as if all anti-buloght leagues are the same. That kind of thinking is buloghtian. There are important doctrinal differences between for example
Mothers Against Buloght, the
Resist Buloght (Trotskyite Chapter) underground movement,
www.buloghtbad.org,
Fatwa al-Buloght, the government-sponsored
Parents: The Anti-Buloght, and
People For Being Against Buloght.
Whereas I understand all the points you guys are making and generally I agree, I do not think you can pretty up the world 'unplayable' from a point and onwards. It's not the same as saying 'this game, personally, I found it to not be my cup of tea'. I don't see the need to twist words around. Unplayable, personally or not, means the game is significantly broken in ways that PROBABLY will annoy or confuse most users. This is an unsaid assumption that is very easy to make. Should jozef have the right to say this or that game is broken? Sure, I'm not saying any different. But the discussion of whether it actually is broken is warranted as well.
I don't understand what you're saying Helm. It seems like "I don't agree one on point of what you guys are saying but I do agree on that point also..."
If a user gets stuck because of a game design element, wouldn't you consider that a problem and from a user's stand point to be "broken" or "personally unplayable"?
It's not about the game being someone's cup of tea or not. That's content more often than not. I'm not interested in games like Guild Wars because it isn't my cup of tea. I am interested in AGS gamse and if I play them then more often than not they are my cup of tea. If I can't complete the game then it becomes unplayable for me. Excuse me if I'm confused, because...
I am!
I agree that buloght should take it easy, stop asking for the comment to be removed because life doesn't work that way.
I disagree that 'personally unplayable' conveys what you and snarky are saying it conveys. I understand how someone would take offense to 'unplayable' and not to 'I didn't like it'. Even if both are admittedly subjective views, the first seems to imply that the problems encountered were problems of design, whereas the latter can mean a lot of things, usually that the game is well done but didn't suit one's fancy.
The review says 'a lot of people say this is a good game' and then 'for this and that reason I found it personally unplayable'. The fact of the matter is, the problem which rendered the game 'personally unplayable' for jozef, was getting stuck in a puzzle. If -especially before the internet- that counted to make adventure games personally unplayable, then I guess me getting stuck on a Fate of Atlantis puzzle for A FULL MONTH would make the game quite 'personally unplayable', right?
In laymans terms
Broken: out of working order.
How many people did complete the game due to not giving up on puzzles?
IOW : Couldnt due to the fact that the game crashed (not the system)
The game not being in working order aka BROKEN (see detials above.)
By those terms which Helm so nicely put means that 80% of the worlds population
find the Rubic cube "personaly unplayable"
How does this relate to Jozef?
Because he wrote something on his blog means that now everyone who gets stuck in a game has to call the game personally unplayable?
He said that he tried to do exactly what people on these forums said to do to pass the first screen and it still didn't work.
I've tried playing Discworld Noir many times and each time I get to 1 part where I can't progress. I follow all the walkthroughs and it just stops. Unplayable to me, other people have beat it. Same difference. Your FoA bit and Rubik's cube don't apply.
I'm sorry, I think you're being needlessly argumentative.
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
How does this relate to Jozef?
Quite directly. A reviewer reviews stuff, he should be careful with the distinction outlined above.
QuoteBecause he wrote something on his blog
Because he has taken it upon him to play all these freeware games and share his reviews of them with the community, yes, he should take care of what he says and how valid it is. This is not an unreasonable request. By strawman-ing this, "some guy wrote on his blog", you neglect the specifics of the issue.
Quotemeans that now everyone who gets stuck in a game has to call the game personally unplayable?
No. It means that Jozef should perhaps consider what is actually
broken/unplayable, and what simply proved to be a challenge for him to solve. If there's bad puzzle design, cool, that's critique. If it's actually broken, cool, that's critique, fix it. If he just got stuck early and gave up, that's neither broken, nor bad puzzle (yet).
QuoteHe said that he tried to do exactly what people on these forums said to do to pass the first screen and it still didn't work.
Fuzz mentioned on irc that it might actually be a bug. An actual bug. If this is the case that a bug exists, then the broken/unplayable thing is very valid! Is it, though? And I agree that when you know what you have to do and the game seems to resist that's usually bad game design. But bad game design isn't the same as unplayable game design.
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
How does this relate to Jozef?
This relates to him because he said "Unplayable" I dont see how still but whatever.
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
Because he wrote something on his blog means that now everyone who gets stuck in a game has to call the game personally unplayable?
He did, and according to you, you did the same thing... as follows
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
I've tried playing Discworld Noir many times and each time I get to 1 part where I can't progress. I follow all the walkthroughs and it just stops. Unplayable to me, other people have beat it.
and its like you said...
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
Same difference.
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
Your FoA bit and Rubik's cube don't apply.
Huh ok so you say if you cant solve something its "personaly unplayable" so how does this not apply?
once again...
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 27/02/2006 18:09:24
Same difference.
Ps helm and I posted same time..
modgeulator: You are right that sometimes I came across as harsh.Ã, I've been trying to limit this by always editing my columns.Ã, The way it works for me is to write a column, print it out, let it sit for a day or two, editi it by hand, rewrite it, print it out again, and so on, until I'm happy with it.Ã, With the June to Dec. column each printout was 27 pages long (double-spaced), and it took me nearly two weeks to edit it to a form I liked.Ã, You should see my first version of the column; it would make even Mother Theresa want to kill me.
I know that's no excuse for being harsh even in my final version, but my thinking is this: I love playing adventure games, and I love independent adventures.Ã, However, if I praised things I personally didn't like or if I said something like "It's okay; next time you'll get better", I doubt I'd see progress in future games.Ã, In addition, the column is aimed primarily at the general gaming population, and I would like to direct their attention to the best games in the niche, in order to increase its credibility.Ã, I will try to sound less harsh, but I will still strive to highlight the better games at the expense of the worse ones.
Mordalles: You have the full right to criticize my columns, and I appreciate it.Ã, Let me just say that I may be a little of an anomaly in here: I'm already turning gray, and my thinking may be a little different from others'.Ã, Consider me as the lowest common denominator among older gamers, who tries to describe the games to my peer group, and you'll see how consistent I am ;)
Afflict: I appreciate the suggestion to have other writers help me.Ã, However, in real life I'm currently managing a startup of six people, which is currently seeing anywhere between 10 and 20 venture capitalists each month, and the last thing I can do right now is to coordinate with somebody in another project.Ã, That said, though, if anyone wants to write about independent adventuring, I'd be very happy to host them in this blog.Ã, I hope to make the monthly columns to be only a small part of the texts there.
Helm: As for the OROW issue: There are OROW games that stand on their own, such as Anna, Into the Light and Sheet: The Art of Art.Ã, I also praised the vast majority of the other OROW games.Ã, However, that's beside the point.Ã, As I said previously, I expect people outside this community to read the columns and download games based on my recommendations.Ã, These people don't care about whether the game was part of an OROW competition or not; they want to see a solid title they can have fun with.Ã, I personally admire people who are able to come up with a story, illustrate it and script it within a week, but I believe that mentioning that a game was created in only a week would be a turn-off for people who don't know anything about the creative process that's needed to accomplish such a task.Ã, They'd see a rushed title, which they should avoid.
buloght: So in that case, the game simply suffers from awkward interface.Ã, It was giving me conflicting feedback: The rudder was completed, but I needed to complete the rudder in order to continue.Ã, And as I said in my description of the game, "I attribute this to an awkward interface, and possibly some pixel hunting."Ã, In my original writeup, I considered the game to have "convoluted puzzles that defy logic", but later I toned it down, and instead of design I blamed only implementation.Ã, And you may be assured that this won't hurt your future games too much: the majority of people who'd read my column (people outside the AGS community who already are in the loop) will be interested in games on their own merits, not because of who designed them.
"I'm sorry, I think you're being needlessly argumentative."
I'm not, Helm.
Again, he said he did exactly what people said to progress in the game. It didn't work. What is he supposed to think about the game? That he, after doing exactly what one is supposed to do to get pass that part in the game, is at fault and just gave up too early?
Afflict, I don't understand your point, the broken up quoting/sentence fragment style is confusing me.
Rubik's cube. If I show you step by step how to beat Rubik's cube and you follow each step and it still doesn't work then the Rubik's cube is more than likely at fault, yes?
Just because someone tells me step by step how to solve the Rubik cube doesn't mean that I'll be able to solve it as I might not be understanding the way you are explaining it to me.
And as for breaking it up for you, heres a brief description, you said that discworld was personaly unplayble due to a puzzle and the walkthrough didnt help. In that regard anybody that you talk to / blog / any other way who holds your opinion in high regard will not even play discworld because its unplayble... (you know people have selective hearing)
And they dont want to waste their time, which in which case they wont because discworld ROCKS!
And altough you might think that I am being needlessly argumentive, thats your opinion your entitled to it just like I thought saying a game is unplayble just because you couldnt solve a puzzle needlessly unaccurate.
But Buloght just nicely asked to change the review or remove it from the thread.. Simple.
Look, here's the review in its entirety:
QuoteThe Family Treasure. By all accounts, this is a very good game, if I am to paraphrase people on the AGS forums. Unfortunately, I was unable to move from the first screen, even after following the instructions of people who successfully finished the game. I attribute this to an awkward interface, and possibly some pixel hunting. The graphics and music are very good, but I personally found the game unplayable.
Now, whether or not you agree with the use of the word "unplayable," I don't see how anyone could misunderstand what it means in context. "I was unable to move from the first screen, even after following the instructions of people who successfully finished the game." That's the reason for calling it unplayable. It's not going to mislead anyone who reads it into thinking the game is unplayable for any other reason than the one given. And it clearly says that others
were able to get past this one point, and thought it was "a very good game."
Afflict, that first quote was a quote from helm. Not directed at you.
And I'd say Buloght did everything but ask nicely.
"(you know people have selective hearing)"
If I told someone "I was unable to get past a certain point in DW:N and I don't know why, all walkthroughs on the internet told me to do something and it didn't work. There must be a hidden bug in the game and it is personally unplayable to me." and all they listen to is "UNPLAYABLE!" how is that my fault?
Is it possible that it could be edited to say something like...
'based on this encounter, i was unable to progress, and therefore the game was unplayable for me.'
Or rather "I was unable to finish the game even after looking for help at the guys on AGS who already finished the game. " and also something about "This game won the MAGS award on the AGS forum" something like that.
Well whatever its really Jozefs blog and let him write it, I still stand with what I say and that having someone else give reviews too might be a good option.
Altough Buloght might of taken offence quickly he was fighting for something he has dedicated alot of time and effort into and he did win the MAGS too. So granted he did a very good job and I'll be dammed if he sat down and took a statement like that after all his time invested into making such a great title.
MrColossal its not your fault if someone doesnt play discworld, its their own. Regardless of how much you influenced them...
"Hey billy bob do you know grandma is leaving us a half a million dollars when she dies?" "Well no I dont but (cocks his shotgun) I am jsut going to hunt some squirels"
Now would billy bob have gone of and shot his grandma gee I dont know.
I am not argueing with anybody just stating my opinion and view point. And now I think ill leave this topic be cause really we all are of topic here.
Firstly I DONT'T consider my game one of the best at all, i agree it's an average AGS game, nothing special.
This is how I see it (have been from the start). Jozef has to play all the games to review it. So after playing ONLY one room (of at least 8 rooms) of my game and struggling to finish a puzzle he decided to just say it's unplayable excusing himself from playing further.
Firstly you have to complete a game to make a review, what he did was lazy and unfair and he shouldn't be making reviews CLEARLY.
And he clearly he is also lazy to correct his mistake.
And I cannot see how people disagree with me, he isn't very positive for independent gaming and he shouldn't be doing what he's doing. We are making adventure games, taking the effort to make them and not just throwing ill-sprouted opinions which in most cases are extremely wrong, especially on his artistic side. Most of the time he doesn't even know if a game is ripped, 3d or 2d. If he's gonna take the time to make reviews then his attitude should change completely.
I don't mind bad reviews, constructive criticism, whatever, but he shouldn't be aloud to say things are unplayable when it isn't. That's it, end of discussion, MrColossal.
Quote from: Jozef on Mon 27/02/2006 18:26:23
1. I would like to direct their attention to the best games in the niche, in order to increase its credibility.Ã,Â
2. who tries to describe the games to my peer group, and you'll see how consistent I am ;)
1. well, i don't think you are doing that at all. i don't know if i understand the setup of your page, but you said you will list the best games first with a proper review, and then the "sub-par" games underneath that with a description. if that is the case, then you put cedric and the revolution, mind's eye and emily enough under the "sub-par" games, while they were all nominated for best game of the year. and some other really better games like silent knight 2, etc. and, correct me if i'm right, but soviet something was nominated for best story, yet it seems you found the story a disappointment, and mentions this.
2. sorry, i still don't see any consistency. Ã, ;D especially where you mention art or the difficulty of the game.
however, i respect your opinion, and rather enjoy reading it. so please continue. i think, games are very subjective, and you learn what games a certain reviewer likes, and how you aggree or disaggree with that reviewer.
but about the puzzle. it was really easy, and not akward at all? that is what baffles me. considering i'm really bad at adventure games myself. will there be an award for most talked about puzzle in an AGS game. since i think we have a winner.
Actually.. I do agree with Buloght a bit..
a reviewer should complete a game to review.. really!
But.. as said before by people.. i respect the reviewers opinion.. and like to read.. cause it is subjective..
tho.. in this case i would say it's bad publicity for buloght.. and we amateur game makers need all the good publicity we get.. if its bad publicity cause of negative comments on the game after its being played it's just too bad, but to be taken and to be respected!.. but in this case.. i would say get the review out of that page or first finish or even play the game..
But i cant make you, can I? ;D
And keep up the good work, looks fine for the rest Jozef!
Dude, you are way out of line. You need to take a step back, because the only one you make look bad is yourself.
Quote from: buloght on Mon 27/02/2006 19:32:11
Firstly I DONT'T consider my game one of the best at all, i agree it's an average AGS game, nothing special.
This is how I see it (have been from the start). Jozef has to play all the games to review it. So after playing ONLY one room (of at least 8 rooms) of my game and struggling to finish a puzzle he decided to just say it's unplayable excusing himself from playing further.
Firstly you have to complete a game to make a review, what he did was lazy and unfair and he shouldn't be making reviews CLEARLY.
Some AGS games have fatal bugs that make them impossible to complete. Some are so fundamentally broken that asking a reviewer to complete them is cruel. It is therefore not reasonable to demand that a reviewer has to complete the games before reviewing them,
as long as they make it clear what they based their review on. Jozef did.
Jozef couldn't make it past that point in the game even though he knew what to do, and even though he got instructions by people who had done it in the Hints/Tips forum. Wouldn't you think that there's a problem somewhere, not that you're just unable to solve a puzzle?
The review is not unfair, since he describes exactly what he experienced, and even mentions that others think it's a great game (indicating that it may very well be a problem only he is having).
QuoteAnd he clearly he is also lazy to correct his mistake.
If you think it's about laziness, you clearly don't understand a thing about what this debate is about.
Don't you see the ethical problem of removing or changing a review because of pressure from the person who made it?
QuoteAnd I cannot see how people disagree with me,
Your problem is that you can't see a thing beyond your own narrow point of view. At least try to understand the points others are making, instead of decreeing "end of discussion."
Quotehe isn't very positive for independent gaming and he shouldn't be doing what he's doing. We are making adventure games, taking the effort to make them and not just throwing ill-sprouted opinions which in most cases are extremely wrong, especially on his artistic side. Most of the time he doesn't even know if a game is ripped, 3d or 2d. If he's gonna take the time to make reviews then his attitude should change completely.
I have a hard time taking this as anything other than sour grapes. Jozef provides something really valuable to the community. A brief and relatively comprehensive guide to indie adventure games, he allows players (who don't all follow the Completed Games forum and all the MAGS, OROW, etc. threads) to know what's out there. And for creators, his capsule reviews may sometimes be the only piece of critical feedback they receive.
The reviews are certainly not perfect, but gee, do you really think all AGS games deserve the effort of a professional-quality review?
QuoteI don't mind bad reviews, constructive criticism, whatever, but he shouldn't be aloud to say things are unplayable when it isn't. That's it, end of discussion, MrColossal.
Actually, he should be allowed to say whatever he wants. As it happens, this was a fair and accurate review. You may quibble that the word "unplayable" is too negative, but it's used to describe an experience that he explains in detail, so there's no risk that it will be taken the wrong way.
Besides, you do seem to have a bit of a problem with criticism. You weren't too gracious about Farlander's comments in the "80s to 90s" sprite jam: "thanks for letting me know i'm such a bad artist."
A person can write whatever they want, people keep saying he needs to change it or that he shouldn't be allowed to put things like this on his own blog. That is just dumb. He has every right to his opinion, and to make a website displaying it. You have the choice to accept that or not, and he has even extended an opportunity for you to post your concerns on his page, so people could read your side of the arguement. As far as I am concerned thats more than good enough.
I can agree that a person really should play through an entire game before reviewing it, but Jozef has every right to do things his way.
I am more suprised by the wacky behaviour of Buloght, seems like there is a big huff every time you don't win a sprite jam or get a good review, and I'm not quite sure what that is about.
snarky, now i know why you're called the private insultant. Ã, 8)
Here's my review of everyone in this thread: You're all stupid and your mothers are smelly. The end.
Now to sit back and await the end of the world that my review has caused!
My....Mother....died last week...
This thread is unreadable!
Quote from: Squinky on Mon 27/02/2006 20:15:50
My....Mother....died last week...
Why do you think she's so smelly!!! HAHAHAHA.
I only said that about farlander since he said i didn't work long on the sprites when infact i did.
I have never complained not winning a sprite jam, i have only mentioned a dozen times how bad an artist i am.
I'm not bothered about the review just the comment and have explained that. So stop being stupid. You're just throwing the old-member against new-member mumno jumbo. Well you can have your exclusivity.
I think it's silly to bring any newbie vs oldbie slant into this, it's completely nonsensical... most of the people disagreeing with you are relatively new members, I would have no idea if you joined earlier than them or not, it's a non issue. I'm glad you're not too bothered by the review now anyway, can we let the argument rest everyone?
A review is a buch of comments in the row. You're evading the argument by what you're saying. You object to a comment in a review. What makes you think the reviewer should change it because of this? It's one thing to discuss the validity of a comment or a full review (go post a comment in his blog if you like, as he said you could) and one thing to demand the comment to be taken out. Come on, now.
Who is being stupid? Do not insult people. Handle this calmly.
Quote from: scotch on Mon 27/02/2006 20:21:04
can we let the argument rest everyone?
no. i protest.
I just want to add that I have absolutely no idea when you joined buloght. I still don't, I haven't gone to your profile to check.
You know why? Because I don't care.
Believe me or not, I don't expect you will. It's easier to think a secret group of AGSers hate you because you joined a few months ago... I guess.
And I was actually so impressed with buloght's sprites that I looked up his join date to see if he'd be eligible for "Best newbie" in the next AGS Awards.
Now? Eh, not so much. (He's a 2005 recruit, anyway, so it doesn't matter.)
I still admire his spritemaking skills and productivity, though. A MAGS-winning game within a couple of months of joining, that's impressive. I've hung around here for a couple of years now without anything really to show for it.
I played his Mags game, and it's hell of a lot better than my own first-game-has-to-be-pirate-themed Crown of Gold. I didn't have any problem with the said puzzle that caused stuckage for jozef. The dipped ale crow rope puzzle was pure illogic, though.
Personally, I found it quite playable, on the whole. I didn't encounter any showstopper bugs, I didn't have to look at any walkthroughs, I didn't get stuck for more than 1 minute or 2 at places (solved the crow rope puzzle by mistake, though) Then again, it's the first ags game I try since Life of D. Duck, and before that, the orow3 games. I don't play every game released, so I can give one of them a fresh look once in a while, and this one won me over. I think jozef may be hurting his own endeavour by playing all the games released, for 3 minutes each.
Jozef, have you considered splitting your reviews into two kinds - Quick Glances and Reviews? I'm suggesting this because that way, you could focus on a selection of games and spend less time on others.
In their current form, the reviews feel rather unbalanced. I'd rather read more detailed reviews of a handful games than many reviews which may contain games you only gave a quick spin (as appears to be the case with The Family Treasure, a game I personally like a lot). What do you think?
This is all an argument over the phrasing of Jozef's review.
If he had simply said "I can't get past the first screen, so I'm unable to complete a concise review." I doubt Buloght would be so enraged.
In a way, the word "Unplayable" is far more damaging to a game than saying "This game sucks".
So I can see where Buloght is coming from.
Plus, the various "Media" around the world retract statements every day.
Free speech aside, Jozef COULD alter the wording of his review without compromising his integrity.
Of course he's perfectly entitled not to.
But this argument should never have reached a thread this long. Buloght, you could have simply PM'ed Jozef and kept it personal. You have now dug a hole for yourself, and you seem to be pulling the dirt in after you.
You seem set on painting an unflattering picture of yourself, and alienating yourself from a generally friendly community.
But that's simply my opinion...
Media around the world run the risk of being sued for libel if they knowingly allow incorrect information to go uncorrected however.
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=25331.0
Hmm...
LimpingFish ponders the possibility of Buloght bringing an "Unfair Opinion" suit against Jozef...
...nahhhhhh.
Edit: I think this thread has reached its end.
Quote from: Jozef on Mon 27/02/2006 18:26:23
I know that's no excuse for being harsh even in my final version, but my thinking is this: I love playing adventure games, and I love independent adventures.Ã, However, if I praised things I personally didn't like or if I said something like "It's okay; next time you'll get better", I doubt I'd see progress in future games.Ã,Â
I somehow doubt calling people's games sub-par, a disgrace or unplayable will lead to much progress either. But anyway, I think you should go all out and write the most extremely critical reviews you possibly can from now on. Really tear some hearts out, make them cry. Teach them a lesson.
Just wanted to say I'm glad that your column is back on-line, jozef. I always liked to read it.
FWIW, I'd like you to be as harsh as you want if you'll include my game in your February writeup. I want to hear it all - the good, the bad and the ugly.
Bernie: Dividing reviews between Quick Glances and Reviews makes a lot of sense. I did something like that with the June-December column, even though the reason there was that with over 100 games I didn't want to make the column unnecessarily long (keeping it under 10,000 words). However, I do try to complete each game I'm playing. Last month there were three that I didn't finish: 1213 ep. 3, The Family Treasure and Santa's Sidekick. With each game, I mentioned why I didn't finish them. Because of this, putting unfinished games into a separate category would be deceiving to the reader.
LimpingFish: Buloght actually PMd me twice; I just didn't reply to him, because I did so in the thread. Don't blame him for dragging it on; the problem lies with me. As far as the language of the reviews go, in my February column I'm calling one of the games "despicable" and "stomach-turning". Don't know whether I'll keep it in the final version, but I would consider those words much harsher than "unplayable".
AGA: In my previous life I worked as an investment analyst, and I learned never to say or write anything without a qualifier, so that I can't get sued for libelous or untrue information. In addition, I asked Buloght to comment on my article and correct what I said wrong; he's still free to do so.
Trumgottist: Don't worry; you'll get trashed for that Tetris puzzle ;)
Quote from: Jozef on Tue 28/02/2006 19:32:07Last month there were three that I didn't finish: 1213 ep. 3, The Family Treasure and Santa's Sidekick.
I'm actually kinda surprised you couldn't finish
Santa's Sidekick. Granted, there was virtually nothing to interact with in the first two rooms, but if you clicked on the door in the second room it would take you to a third room (with nothing to interact with), and then you could walk from there to a fourth room (with nothing to interact with), etc....eventually you do find people to talk to and have to go back and get some objects from those first two rooms (apparently you can't interact with those objects until you have a
reason to interact with them)...
Mind you, I don't otherwise disagree with your comments on that game. I agree that it's poorly made and has a terribly unresponsive action icon (don't recall the hotspots to enter the next rooms being particularly small, but then it's been a while since I played it). I didn't like the game either. But I wouldn't have numbered unsolvability among its faults...
[EDIT: Or, come to think of it, maybe you had to walk back toward the doors, not use the action icon on them...like I said, it's been a while since I played the game. (In which case, maybe your being unable to get out of there was due to those small hotspots you mentioned.) Either way, though, the doors do get you out of those first two rooms, though the next two rooms don't have anything to interact with either. (The fifth room does, though.)
By the way, I hope this doesn't come across as if I'm trying to say you're stupid for not being able to finish the game; that's not what I'm saying at all. What seems obvious to one person can easily be overlooked by another. It just kinda surprised me that you couldn't find your way out of those first two rooms, but I'm not trying to say I think that reflects badly on you in any way.]
QuoteLast month there were three that I didn't finish: 1213 ep. 3, The Family Treasure and Santa's Sidekick.
So wait, the month before that, did you finish Gladiator Quest, then? I don't think you did. I think you ran it, walked around for 30 seconds, saw it's a text-parser game and quit. The game doesn't take place in a Roman prison either, it's the protagonist that is Roman. On his way back home he is captured by some barbaric borderland raiders and put to a warlord's private arena. This all is explained in the game's very first text message. I know you didn't play the game not to completition, but even for 5 minutes because you would have noticed and mentioned in your review that the game has extensive battle sequences (with which you'd have understandable trouble, they're pretty difficult).
Factual accuracy, or lack thereof, in reviews says a lot. It might be your 'personal opinion' that GQ takes place in a roman prison, and as such I can't contest your right to have it, just like it might be your 'personal opinion' that The Family Treasure is broken, and I can't contest your right to have that opinion either. I can however, question the validity of such claims as I am now. I urge you to be more careful when you play the games, give them some time to develop and keep your attitude fresh. This approach will fall flat on most ags games because simply, they're bad and they don't need anything of the type. But the few that do, will benefit. Otherwise you're not doing a service to the people that read your columns, because they're not approaching the one or two AGS games they'll pick to play with the tiredness and time-constraint-induced pressure you seem to have on your shoulders. Simply said: ags games should not have to win you over from the handicap that reviewing so many games understandably creates, because this handicap doesn't exist in your target audience.
I found it funny at first that you thought GQ was a remake of an old c64 game, but now I understand it is because you're probably not looking at the games you play critically enough. You've had to play so many bad or completely uninteresting AGS games, I guess your receptory capacity to them has understandably thinned, but you gotta fight that. I'm not sure anybody needs a review that says very little about the game, contains factual innacurances and is two phrases long. It slips from 'review' to 'just mentioning this exists and I tried it, guys.' I for one, don't care for the latter sort of journalism in the scene.
OK, for the record, regarding Santa's Sidekick, I just replayed the beginning to make sure I was remembering right, and...I wasn't. There's yet another room with nothing to interact with that I'd forgotten about, and you can't use the door in the kitchen until you've been to it. So...you have to go right from the kitchen to get to the living room, then you can go back to the kitchen and use the door there to go outside...
(Also, I'd forgotten another annoying feature of the game you didn't mention...the inability to skip blocking messages you've already seen...bleah.)
All in all, like I said, not a good game, but certainly not one I thought was difficult to solve (though, again, what's obvious to one person may be anything but to another). Though I certainly agree that putting some interaction messages in would improve it immensely (even something as simple as "I don't have any reason to take that yet" for the items the player has to come back for later). It still wouldn't be a good game, IMO, but it wouldn't be as annoying as it is...
QuoteFor the five people who've been missing my Independent Adventuring column, I'm happy to say that it's back on-line. I started a blog where I'd be publishing it, along with reviews of the more interesting games and whatever else I can think of.
I've been waiting for updates for MONTHS so make that SIX people! It's great news that you're back and writing it again - its the most comprehensive roundup of independent adventures I could care to read. Keep it up :)
Well, I'm torn. I agree with Helm concerning the inaccuracies in reviews. Really, I think you ought to play and review fewer games.
But on the other hand, all three of my releases (The Bunker, Elf Motors Inc., and Javelin Catch) were mentioned because of how many games you were reviewing. Now, this really means very little in a practical sense, but I was happy to see my games mentioned, regardless of how briefly. It did surprise me, of course, because the Bunker, the game I personally like most, got a worse review than Elf Motors Inc., which I personally thought was kind of crappy. Anyway, the fact that you actually reviewed Javelin Catch made me fall out of my chair. It was a game I whipped out in an hour because I was bored. :)