For a game with so much style - and interesting symbols, for example an iron helmet that has the eyes covered with hands, or The Turned Throne - I was personally let down by the story-change they made in the closing dlc. The video is about that change:
I think the story was better before, and it may have been too hasty to leave behind before the next game. Without spoiling things, it's not a good idea to reduce the main antagonist, and that's even if you aim to make them a nested figure in your next game in some way; I think that in this type of setting you do require a respectable main antagonist and not one which is reduced to just another target.
Then again, Blasphemous is an action game, mechanics-wise; for that it is the norm to reduce the archenemy to another target of the heroes. But to me it went against the atmosphere built in the previous versions.
I played it a few years ago and loved the graphics but I did not love the gameplay so I never finished it. Not much to add here I'm afraid lol.
QuoteWithout spoiling things, it's not a good idea to reduce the main antagonist, and that's even if you aim to make them a nested figure in your next game in some way; I think that in this type of setting you do require a respectable main antagonist and not one which is reduced to just another target.
I haven't played
Blasphemous. But it reminds me of this GDC talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOkq7fUdgYQ) by some of the creators of Owlboy.
At 23:00, they explain that they had prepared a fight against the main antagonist. Yet they feared it would belittle him so they scrapped it. It's a pity but I can understand it. Although the story is generally paper-thin and secondary in these kind of games, I think it's important to maintain a semblance of logic.
That's one aspect I disliked about
Iconoclasts: the story didn't make any sense and was just an excuse to throw action sequences at you. As a result, my involvement dwindled over time.
Quote from: Creamy on Sat 26/11/2022 08:36:18QuoteWithout spoiling things, it's not a good idea to reduce the main antagonist, and that's even if you aim to make them a nested figure in your next game in some way; I think that in this type of setting you do require a respectable main antagonist and not one which is reduced to just another target.
I haven't played Blasphemous. But it reminds me of this GDC talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOkq7fUdgYQ) by some of the creators of Owlboy.
At 23:00, they explain that they had prepared a fight against the main antagonist. Yet they feared it would belittle him so they scrapped it. It's a pity but I can understand it. Although the story is generally paper-thin and secondary in these kind of games, I think it's important to maintain a semblance of logic.
That's one aspect I disliked about Iconoclasts: the story didn't make any sense and was just an excuse to throw action sequences at you. As a result, my involvement dwindled over time.
Imo Blasphemous (despite being a beat-em up) does rely considerably on atmosphere, and I do think that was better in the version before the final expansion. Because now the main antagonist is really... just another obstacle, while before it was (literally and figuratively) on a different plane.
I guess in the new game they can always make that antagonist be another side-figure ("nested"), but still I see no reason to have the player fight and do stuff on the different plane too; it reduces any sense of distance and the idea of different levels and wonder at unapproachable things above :) This won't change even if they have still further levels of separation in their new game: if you are told that you are on x, but y is another realm and y is the true realm, then even if told x and y are lower realms and some z higher realm exists you have no reason to imagine z is the last=> loss of atmosphere.
As stated, the atmosphere is its driving point. Brilliant identity and animations.