Jump to content
Double Fine Action Forums

Eiphel

DFA Backers
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Eiphel

  • Rank
    Action Newbie
  1. I think it more likely they just took inspiration from the same place Tim did. (The Day of the Dead.)
  2. That's a pretty arrogant judgment on people who might not have the same disposable cash or financial situation that you do.
  3. As I understand it, at this point the design is locked in, so unless something goes off track again, they won't be intending to cut more than they've already done so.
  4. But that's not the problem. They CAN'T just tell us that because the money will run out before the game is done. The point of the early release of part one is it will create a new revenue stream.
  5. I've backed the Broken Sword 5 kickstarter and own all the BS games due to my general love of point-and-click adventure games, but I have to say after playing the first two games, Broken Sword feels much rougher to me than any of the other classics of that era. A couple of the main things that always stand out are: Sluggishness: I feel like the walk animations are really slow, and a lot of walking back and forth across the screen is involved. Playing BS1 and 2 I felt a lot more impatience waiting for responses than I have playing pretty much anything else in the genre. Incoherent puzzles: I had to use the hint feature and occaisionally walkthroughs a few times because the solutions in BS are often really esoteric. Big offenders are requiring you to combine two items to achieve a functionality that feels like a huge stretch for what they could actually achieve; requiring you to do something for a 'surprise' outcome with no real reason to expect that to work; giving you a seemingly obvious goal to work towards, but actually requiring you to try and accomplish something else first, so what you're trying to do isn't what you think it is; and having obvious ways to achieve what you need to achieve, but which aren't permitted simply because they're not the 'right' solution. Sometimes the game even lampshades some of these issues in dialogue, which just adds insult to injury. Unfocussed tone: This is very subjective, but I felt like the tone of the games wanders back and forth, so at times I'd be really engaged, and at other times I really wouldn't care at all. I felt it was most successful when the game was echoing the historical mysteries that had inspired Charles Cecil, and fell most flat when it was playing up the humour, which never really worked for me. Related to this, I don't feel like George and Nico are as strongly defined a pair of leads as they should be. To veer slightly off the immediate topic of this thread, I think the second game's plot and characters are considerably weaker than the first. Still, they aren't terrible games. They're notably uneven, with some sections that play out nice and fluidly between more frustrating installments. They have a lot of what gave this genre its charm, but then, they have almost all the common flaws as well. I haven't played the third and fourth games yet, so I'm curious to see what happened to them when they made the jump to 3D.
  6. Unfortunately the first one I was ready for in advance I missed due to being out of the house : (
  7. Sorry, I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about those people in that thread making fun of - diminishing people - who dare raise any objection to anything Double Fine/2PP does. It's been over two months since we've had a video. A deadline has come and gone... Then (after a week) Chris finally says that it'll be out in another week. Some people are upset about it... and other's feel the need to put up crybaby pictures and similar... It just kind of gets on my nerves. Sorry for venting. So... You're voting Pitchtorch?
  8. Thanks for the response, Chris, but in point of fact the Boy's World and Girl's World labels were not actually what prompted the post, and I have always understood them to be what you describe. The post was prompted by specific discussions of what content should go in each world, particularly as seen in the fourth documentary episode. And as I tried to make clear in my earlier post, my voicing this consideration shouldn't be seen as implying I believed any cause for concern existed - I didn't then, and now having seen even more info I am even less worried. Rather I made the post because it's always worth considering and bearing in mind, and I just wanted to open up the discussion. Comments like this usually stem from a misunderstanding of what's being said and asked for. In reality the issue being raised is not, I suspect, the one you are reacting to. They absolutely can. Nothing in the sentiment I expressed aims to constrict the range of what a character can be. I believe you're fundamentally misunderstanding the point, and reducing it to a much less nuanced point which has not actually been expressed. First of all, I am not asking that this game be co-opted to a cause. There seems to be the misapprehension that what I want is the game to be turned into a piece of activism. That isn't so. This is a request for conscientiousness and awareness, not for advocacy. Not all media can be devoted to all causes, but all media can be sensitive to them. (Alright, no, not quite true. There is a caveat to that. There are conceivable games/stories/films/et cetera which are inherently incompatible with certain sensitivities. This request does circumscribe a small amount of media - but only that media which is directly, wilfully harmful. And if you are unhappy about intrinsically, intentionally harmful media being opposed, I would have to wonder why. Regardless, for what's relevant to this discussion, nothing I am saying circumscribes anything Double Fine would ever be remotely likely to do.) We don't, and I am not. This is a flawed premise. The fact is that everything already does have broader social impact and relevance. This is the very nature of culture. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and everything, even a piece of content produced for pure escapism, regardless of the intent of the creator, impacts upon society. This isn't opinion, this is fact. It's a basic principle of the social sciences. It's human nature - the very basis of culture, of our civilisation. We're not demanding everything be given a broader impact. Everything has one already. What we're asking is that the creators be mindful of that significance. On the other hand, if you do understand all this, and you still have a problem with it, that is a lot more problematic - It's easy to understand your comments stemming from a mischaracterisation of what's being discussed, but if you get all this and you still find it annoys you, I'd have to wonder why - since ultimately the discussion is really nothing more than a desire for creators to take reasonable steps to avoid being accidentally problematic with their creations. This is a nice post, but actually it still assumes a larger request than I was really making. Direct inclusion is definitely great and a good way to be conscientious, but it's certainly not the only way to be sensitive. Double Fine could produce a game about the 'girliest' girl that ever did girl, and the most boysterous boy in boytown, and have them play to traditional expectations the entire way through the story - And it would still be possible to make a sensitive game. It's as I mentioned in an earlier post - what is important is that, whatever characters and cultures are presented within the story, and whatever expectations, normative traits, stereotypes et cetera are being expressed by objects within the game, it can still be fine as long as the game's own authorial/authoritative voice does not express those ideas in the real world. I bring this up specifically in reference to the line 'whether it can be addressed without ruining the integrity of the what the author is attempting to create'. Because the thing is, it can - it always can. Because all that's asked is that Broken Age not reinforce stereotypes with its authoritative, out-of-universe voice. Your post tends to assume that slightly more is wanted - Inclusivity of a specific character or viewpoint within the game for example. And yes, those are good, and it is noble to consider things like that - and yes, equally, there will be times when they would actually distract or interfere with the vision of the game - But those are not actually, necessarily, the extent of what's being required. The only way in which the request in my original post could actually ruin the integrity of what Tim was creating would be if Tim were directly creating a game intended to reinforce and condone normative stereotypes. This is what I meant earlier when I said the only things my sentiments circumscribe are irrelevant to this discussion - because obviously Double Fine has no intention of authoring a conservative screed of that fashion at all. Beyond that, whatever Tim's vision, there really is no reason why sensitivity to these issues would interfere with the integrity of what he was creating. And that's really true as a general rule - Merely being aware of issues is not imposing on a creator anything that should proscribe elements of their work - With the only exception being where that work is specifically created as an invective in opposition to that issue. Again, I believe you're misunderstanding my motivations in creating this post. I am not implying anything about these characters and their relations to their worlds. I didn't write the original post in response to a perceived problem at all - I wrote it because the game's themes seemed that they might touch upon an area where there, historically, has been a problem. I didn't think Double Fine had already gone wrong or was hugely likely to go wrong down the line. I just saw that the issue was at least pertinent to the area in which they were working and for that reason wanted to voice it - even if it is completely unnecessary from the point of view that Broken Age could easily have navigated these pitfalls anyway, I don't think it's a wasted post because it's opening up a discussion of an issue and making it a little more visible. I also wrote that post when I'd just watched episode four of the documentary, and acknowledged in the post that I was somewhat behind the times - but this shouldn't matter, because like I've just said, I feel like the discussion has merit even if Broken Age is doing fine without it. Having caught up a bit more now and seen more of the design for the game and its themes, I am actually very enthusiastic about where it's going and think it looks to be doing a great job of not simply avoiding problems, but actually chipping away a bit at the stereotypes too.
  9. I played this just a few weeks ago, so hopefully I'll be able to join in for the first time (I only just got around to registering for these forums). Incidentally, I have an unused Steam Key for this game (I already have it on GOG), so I can give it to someone if they want to join in but money is tight.
  10. I was thinking you could play one of the individual cases. The early ones are wholly self contained plot wise and basically function as mini-adventures all to themselves.
  11. As far as I can tell there isn't some Game Club master-topic, so I apologise if I'm asking about this in the wrong place, but how would you guys feel about featuring L.A. Noire one week? (Obviously the game as a whole is enormous, but it's broken down episodically, and I think one of the early cases could be neatly played through start to finish in a single sitting.) Whilst the kneejerk reaction might be that it's got nothing to do with adventure games, I've always thought that in fact it really is a modern progression of the genre. Behind the polish and the new trimmings, its core is very very similar to adventure games of yore. I think it could make for some really interesting discussion.
  12. I've watched the episode(s) about the Princess Cake puzzle now, and I'm actually really excited by that, because it really nails how I hoped BA would handle this material. (I was never hugely concerned, just moderately conscious of it.) Because the whole nature of the sacrificial maiden thing is very typical - but 'Sacrifice Girl' decides she's having none of it and busts out. That's great, and also it lets me succinctly reply to Ted's question: The difference is that reflecting stereotypical roles is: The game portrays that there's a cultural notion that are 'girly' or 'boyish'. Reinforcing stereotypical roles is: The game portrays that are 'girly' or 'boyish'. What I was conscious of was that the game not include elements 'because they're girly/boyish', but it can be ok to include things 'because they are perceived as girly/boyish'. And in fact the latter can be a really good thing to do (as SurplusGamer was getting at) since it can actually lead to more consideration and exploration of these perceptions, and potentially break them down or open up a wider point of view. The Princess Cake puzzle with the girl's goal being to break away from it really excites me because it's doing the latter excellently, and hopefully it also shows that sensitivity to these issues can easily exist without 'having to be an activist'. That puzzle wasn't concieved or designed to specifically make a point and drive home an issue, but it's still sensitive to that issue. From what I've seen in the later documentaries (still catching up), I'm really hopeful that not only will this game dodge the pitfalls I worry about, it could even actively push against them (without ever having been designed with an agenda in mind.) --- To quickly address your other points, Ted: It's not wrong to tell those people's stories, but it is problematic when they form a blanket that blots out the stories of other people. There's no threat of 'typical' people being underrepresented in media, whilst people who don't conform to normative expectations are underrepresented, misrepresented, or outright erased all the time. It's that that's wrong. I would say it's every artist's responsibility to try and be aware of the potential problematic aspects of a work.
  13. I'm just watching 'Walking Around in Our Pictures' (Yes, I'm behind the times), and this thought crossed my head with the extensive talk about the respective Boy's World and Girl's World. In particular a few comments like 'Garden Zone - That's for the Boy's more sensitive side '. I sorely, sorely hope that this game won't define the two worlds with traditional narrow gender definitions. I really hope that 'This feels girly' and 'This feels boyish' are not in any way criteria for what is a good fit for either world. Pick what feels right for the specific character and their world, and don't colour it with gender, because gender biases are narrow, frustrating things. Not everyone fits those definitions, and the people that don't are erased, excluded, and at worst forced into a shape they don't fit. I'd be really sad if this game joined the weight of material which reinforced those perceptions. I'll note at this point that I'm not saying this because I think it is happening. It's just something that could happen, and I feel strongly about it so wanted to call attention to it. It may be that this issue isn't at all present thus far anyway - That's exactly what I hope is the case! If this post is unnecessary, that's the best possible scenario. But on the chance that it might be pertinent, it's something I felt was important to say. (Full disclosure - I'm a queer trans girl, and gender binarism/essentialism is very much a first-hand frustration for me.)
×
×
  • Create New...