Independent Adventuring column back on-line

[Mordalles]

can we let the argument rest everyone?

no. i protest.

[Ishmael]

can we let the argument rest everyone?

no. i protest.

Why?

[MrColossal]

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.

[Snarky]

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.

[Helm]

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.

[Bernie]

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?

[LimpingFish]

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...

[AGA]

Media around the world run the risk of being sued for libel if they knowingly allow incorrect information to go uncorrected however.

[scourge]

http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=25331.0

[LimpingFish]

Hmm...

LimpingFish ponders the possibility of Buloght bringing an "Unfair Opinion" suit against Jozef...

...nahhhhhh.

Edit: I think this thread has reached its end.

[Mordalles]

can we let the argument rest everyone?

no. i protest.

Why?

because . . . blip blip

[modgeulator]

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, 

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.

[Sinitrena]

Just wanted to say I'm glad that your column is back on-line, jozef. I always liked to read it.

[Trumgottist]

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.

[Jozef]

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

[Alun]

Last 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.]

[Helm]

Last 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.

[Alun]

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...

[m0ds]

For 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

[Erenan]

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.