Bit Blot Forum
Aquaria => General => Topic started by: Cobar on February 19, 2007, 06:09:06 pm
-
I watched the new trailer, and i have to say that i am now even more excited about aquaria. The wall pouncing looked cool, as did every other maneuver (liked the leech ridding spin :D)
The deep water parts made me a little jumpy tho, especially the (boss?) fish.
Keep up the good work!
PS. Almost forgot about the voice acting :o Fantastic work on that too.
-
Oh yeah, I love the new footage. I really liked that whale/shark that followed you around in circles. I also loved that huge Jellyfish monster in the background.
This game looks amazing, can't wait.
Check this out:
(http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/4291/aqqn1.jpg)
Think this has something to do with her culture? If so, she could be from some raided culture that was overwhelmed by another race... just wild guessing her.
-
Looked awesome to me. I was sold already, but I'm really digging the feel of the trailer. It looks fun to move around, which is essential for a game like this.
-
I just showed my mom this trailer and she's all about me getting this game! ^-^
-
One thing that bugged me was the close-ups on her face, from this. It was just a little disturbing.
-
The trailer is great. It's the thing that made me register on this forum to keep track of the game better.
I guess that you have my 20$ already in your pocket ;).
-
One of the things I loved about the trailer was actually the soundtrack - if this is indicative of whats going to be in game then great! Also, I like the idea of using the voiceovers for much of the interaction elements - definately a good change there. The girl sounded distinctly British to me.
Overall, it also make me register here and keenly looking forward to the game!
-
I got hooked by the trailer too. I love the music and the look of the game. Combined with voice rather than text it looks really good.
Although that close up did look kinda creepy to me too :-X
-
Hmm, the beginning is far too reminiscent of soft porn with the voice and the first notes (ta-da taa daa). The rest of the musis was good though, and I like what I saw. It's just that voice acting in games in general is horrible. This reminded me a bit of that.
-
I've seen the IGF build of the game, and I have to say that the way they tell the story using the voice over, without pausing the action to go to a cut scene, is really well done. Also, the music is excellent. I'm definitely buying this game when it comes out.
-
I already have my money ready.
I really enjoy good stories, and Aquaria really intrigued me. It looks like a beautify game.
Something in that trailer grabs people, I wonder, is it the cool, mysterious music, or the allure of the unknown? Or is it anticipation for blood-pumping adrenaline-rushing action? Or perhaps...Perhaps, it's just because the trailer was put together better then most movie trailers. We shall see ^_-
-
I have nothing but praise: from the beautiful 2D artwork, the amazingly epic music, what looks like a deep story, and brilliant voice acting this trailer is definitely what pulled me into this game. I haven't been this excited for a game in quite while.
-
I said in a previous thread (the linux port thread) that I probably won't buy the game if I have to run it in Wine, but I might still change my mind. If it works really good in Wine, I might buy this game. I really enjoyed the trailer. This really is my kind of game and the price is fair if it stays at 20$.
First of all: I am a huge fan of the soundtracks that I could hear. I think sound is one of the most vital (and many developers underrate the importance of it!) parts of the game. Also the voice sounded very good. I hope all dialogs are voiced and that there are cutscenes between important parts of the game. Without a good story, a game of this genre is nothing.
Second: the graphics look very nice. It's not 3D, but it doesn't HAVE to be. The movement of the big "creatures" and the main character (umm, what's her name?) in the beginning does not look very real to me, but it does have something rather cool. I want to bet that when you play the game for the first time the movement of certain characters looks rather strange/sketchy, but I think that's part of the experience and you won't even notice that anymore when you're used to it after 15 minutes of playing.
For the rest: this game looks like fun. I want to play/enjoy it. I just hope I can. I'm still hoping for a native linux version :)
-
Without a good story, a game of this genre is nothing.
While a good story can be a plus, I disagree that it is necessary for what this game appears to be. As far as I can tell, Aquaria is basically an underwater platformer, like Ecco the Dolphin. Let us look at some other great platformers. My list might include, but is certainly not limited to, the following:
- Super Mario Brothers [especially 3]
- Megaman [and some of the sequels]
- Sonic the Hedgehog [and sequels]
- Metroid [and Super Metroid]
- Ecco the Dolphin [and 2]
- Castlevania: Symphony of the Night [among other Castlevania games]
Of those games, Ecco the Dolphin is the only one that has more than a skeletal story, or is otherwise driven by the story. Are the other games worse for lack of a story? I don't think so, though you are, of course, free to disagree.
Now, I might be wrong about what genre of game Aquaria fits into, in which case the above is pointless. But, given the comments of Alec and Derek, I think I am close. ;)
xander
-
Well, I'm an adventure gamer at heart. As such, while I recognise that, when done well, a game can rely almost solely on good gameplay (e.g. Space Invaders) or story (e.g. Dreamfall - gameplay? What gameplay?) , I believe the best games have an interplay between the two - i.e. the gameplay 'works' with the storyline. If done well, when my interest in the gameplay wavers, my interest in the story keeps me playing and vice versa. The water temple in OoT could be irritating, but I ploughed on to find out what happened. In short, story is never *necessary*, but, well executed, it's a boon in any genre.
And, like xander, I get the impression Aquaria is in the main a platformer.
-
In short, story is never *necessary*, but, well executed, it's a boon in any genre.
Exactly. When you are playing a game, the most important thing is gameplay. Games are about gameplay, period. A good story can carry a mediocre game, but good gameplay can carry a terrible or non-existent story. I can come up with lots of examples of games with great gameplay and little to no story, but I can't think of any games with great story and poor gameplay that I would be willing to play again. The holy grail is getting both good gameplay and good story, but if one is to be forgotten, by all means, forget the story.
xander
-
Games are about gameplay, period.
No they're not.
-
Yes they are. Gameplay is how well the mechanics of the game are set up to be fun, challenging, and fair. Gameplay is the part of the game that makes it fun to play.
Aka ; in chess, the differences in the piece's movements make it so each piece is useful in it's own way , keeping one piece from being 'the best'. Having each side set up the same keeps things even, and having to take turns makes it fair. The positioning of the pieces also is part of the gameplay.
Eh, ask xander if you want coherent reasoning :P
-
Games aren't only about gameplay.
There are many factors that make up a game, and they play off each other.
I'd rather see a game where all factors are working well, than one that just has "good game play".
-
Well, duh.
Why settle for less?
-
I guess what I'm getting at is not everyone has the same tastes.
-
Right-o!
:)
-
For example, I wouldn't have a problem playing a game with a good story if it didn't have the greatest gameplay. And some games that have deep gameplay, but a shit story, I'm not interested in. I like it when they both play off each other in interesting ways, when it feels like they're tied in together.
Music makes a huge difference for me too. If a game has annoying audio, I find it really hard to play, even if the gameplay is supposed to be good.
I don't think every element of a game has to be perfect; its all about how the elements play off each other.
-
Music makes a huge difference for me too. If a game has annoying audio, I find it really hard to play, even if the gameplay is supposed to be good.
I don't think every element of a game has to be perfect; its all about how the elements play off each other.
Yes, I have the exact same feeling. For me, personally, the story keeps me interested in finishing the game and the gameplay makes it enjoyable. And the music cannot be underestimated. It makes up a big part of the game (I cannot stress that enough, but sound is just as important as graphics, at least that is my opinion)
-
In short, story is never *necessary*, but, well executed, it's a boon in any genre.
Exactly. When you are playing a game, the most important thing is gameplay. Games are about gameplay, period. A good story can carry a mediocre game, but good gameplay can carry a terrible or non-existent story. I can come up with lots of examples of games with great gameplay and little to no story, but I can't think of any games with great story and poor gameplay that I would be willing to play again. The holy grail is getting both good gameplay and good story, but if one is to be forgotten, by all means, forget the story.
I really dont think so. For me the story is the most important in a game. By the story i dont mean only the scenario, but all the atmosphere, the surroundings, and that includes the scenario of a game, but also the music, the sounds, the details, the background, the scenery and so on...
Everything that manages to take us to a new dimension. To be imerged in the game (oh my god, I made a pathetic play on word with the fact that Aquaria is a underwater game, and I didn't intended to make it XD).
Of course gameplay is important, but I think that a game can be great onl with a good story. I mostly think about the Legacy of Kain games, or the Xenosaga games.
Still, the best is to have them both. :-*
-
Games are, by definition, an interactive media. That is why I say that gameplay is the most important aspect of a game. If you want great visuals, why not paint something? If you want great story, why not write a book? If you are interested in audio, why not compose some music, or a radio drama? If you want a great combination of visuals and audio and story, why not make a movie? Games are about interaction, and that interaction comes in the form of gameplay.
As I said above, there are some games out there with mediocre gameplay and great stories that are popular, and get played, and are made better by the story. I would put the Final Fantasy games in this category -- the gameplay isn't that great, and remained pretty much the same from FF IV all the way through FF IX, with some minor variations (though some may disagree with me). But can a game with truly terrible gameplay still be a good game because of a strong story? Can you think of any games that fit that criteria? Great story, terrible gameplay?
On the other hand, can a game with a terrible or nonexistent story and great gameplay be a good game? I think the answer is obviously "yes." What kind of story does the original Super Mario Brothers have? "The princess is in another castle?" Terrible story telling, but a great game. Rez is a game without a story that is a great game (though it does have strong audio and visual, which I will get to in a moment). Castlevania: SotN has great gameplay, and a downright stupid story, terrible voice acting, and a pretty good sound track. Sonic the Hedgehog has great gameplay, no story, and mediocre sound. Shadow of the Colossus has virtually no story, and is all mood and atmosphere, though it also has unique gameplay, which makes it interesting.
So, while story can enhance a good game, or even bring a mediocre game into the realm of good, I don't think that it can make a game. A game with truly terrible gameplay will never be good, while a game with a truly terrible story could be good. I would make the same arguments about sound and visuals. Great sound design or visuals can enhance a good game, and improve a mediocre game, but they can't fix poor gameplay. Which gets us back to Rez -- the gameplay in Rez is a bit ho-hum, and is not all that unique, but it is not bad -- it is actually reasonably good. Without good sound and visual design, Rez is a run of the mill on-the-rails shooter. With good sound design and visuals, Rez is a really good game.
That is exactly the point that I am trying to make -- games are about interactivity and gameplay. If the gameplay is poor, nothing else matters. But, with the right sounds, story, and visuals, a less-than-great game can be good.
I will finish by reiterating a question from above: Can you name one game with a great story and terrible gameplay that you would consider to be a good or great game? Name just one...
xander
-
Phoenix Wright.
I'm really loving it, and the majority of fun comes from the writing and the feelings it generates. The gameplay is very simplistic. I wouldn't say terrible, but its very limited. I still feel like I'm playing as the character, and more connected than if I was reading a book.
-
So yeah, to clarify, I'm not saying that a game has to have a complex story. Obviously Mario 64 and Super Mario World are on my list of top favorite games of all time. But I'm saying not all games have to put the focus on gameplay to be good games. There are many different types of good experiences to be had, they don't all have to stem from gameplay. There are many different players, who look for different things in games.
-
I think you guys are forgetting to take in consideration the duration of the game.
What I mean is this: most gameplay only/mostly games are usually very devoid of any deep story (as the above mentioned Sonic the hedgehog and alikes). A good player can easily finish many of those games in about one hour or two (assuming they a have a linear succession of levels, like most classic platformers did). I could exemplify with Defcon for instances, to all effects it is simply a very advanced board game which you can play in about an hour, story isn't very relevant.
However, if you have a game with an average duration of 10 effective hours to the end, you usually need more than just a fun gameplay, you need a reason on why you keep playing. A comparison I would like to make is Prince Of Persia: Sands of Time VS Soul Reaver 2, the first, with all its tricks and moves and whatever took me one to two weeks to play, simply because it didn't gave me any reason to go on, except: there's a bad guy at the end, I honestly felt the game was really dull although the gameplay was a lot more complex and you could do a lot more things than in Soul Reaver 2. Soul Reaver 2 however, I finished in 2 days and wanting more, not because of any super advanced and cool gameplay, but because the story had so many twists and turn I couldn't stop wanting to find out more.
Short version: Gameplay keeps you coming back, story keeps you going.
-
Wtf! Alec, why do you have time writing so much at this forum?!? Is the game already finished and now you make a vacation before releasing it? ;)
-
I think it's better to view media as a multi-dimensional spectrum - interactivity, story, audio etc. can all make their own valid contributions to the quality of the end product, and there can be variable emphasis on each - that is, our definition of 'game' is too narrow, and only really focuses on one of many factors which contribute to the end product. For example I've already raised Dreamfall, which has a brilliant storyline, and where it was praised by some critics, others panned it for the minimal level of actual gameplay involved - at parts, it was more an interactive movie than anything else.
That is, you can have a bloody good game which relies primarily on one aspect of the medium other than interactivity (though in the process you may be blurring the definition of 'game') , and equally (and in my opinion, ideally) you can have games in which there is interplay between these aspects - i.e. they rely on eachother: for example, in the case of Phoenix Wright (and most adventure games), the gameplay is the storyline (in that your actions directly contribute to its progression, and the 'aim' is essentially to progress the storyline), whereas in Mario the storyline is simply a premise for why everything is going on.
EDIT: This is where I hope that makes sense to anyone other than me.
EDIT 2: Xocrates - that's essentially what I was trying to say in my OP in this thread re the example of Ocarina.
-
Indeed. I think that the term "gameplay" has been slightly misinterpreted. A game basically constitutes three things: graphics (i.e. how pretty the pictures are), story/premise (i.e. what determines which pretty pictures to choose from) and interactivity (i.e. how to control the pretty pictures). These all make up the "gameplay" or perhaps more precisely the gaming experience. Tetris was a good game. Why was it so popular? The graphics worked, the premise was simple, the interactivity was again simple. Some new games seem to be more cut-scene than game, but there are some of those that work too. You don't play the game very much as such, but you are captivated and entertained by the pictures and the words. And that last bit is the clincher: is it entertaining? If you don't enjoy playing it, by definition it's not a good game. Of course it is very difficult to have a game that you'd never get bored of - excellent games like Death Worm and Tetris for example have potentially unlimited gameplay, but there's only so much you can take. However, I thoroughly enjoyed both games, particularly due to their pick-up-and-play qualities.
I kinda digress, but to summarise: of course games are about gameplay. That's what games are. The only other measures you could rate a game on is the quality of the box they come in or the CD/DVD/cartridge/whatever, which is rediculous. The best measure of overall quality of a game is this:
From starting the game up until all replay value has gone, how much did you enjoy what you experienced?
-
Enjoyment can come from more than just game play. That's why I feel its more valuable to think about games in their entirety.
Certainly some people value certain aspects above others. But pretending that all games are about are game rules is silly. They're multimedia, there's no getting around that.
I frankly don't agree with those articles that are like "LOOK, YOU CAN TAKE THE GAME PLAY FROM THIS SHINY GAME AND DO IT WITH CUBES". Its like... "Duh". But its not the same game. A game is at very least the sum of its parts, and I believe they're more than the sum of their parts.
With that said, I think game play is important. A lot of mainstream games have pretty graphics and pathetic game play, and that's why they're no fun to play. As a developer, I'm very concerned with the game play being central to the game and having it be a lot of fun.
But I don't support a view of games that forces them to be defined in such limited terms. I think there's lots of room for great experiences of all sorts, they don't have to stem from pure game play.
The way that most game reviews break games down into their components annoys me. Just because some games don't have the most replay value, or they have "tricky" controls, or whatever the minor complaint is, it doesn't mean that as a whole they're worse than a more generic game that doesn't have those minor "issues".
I prefer to read scoreless reviews that deal with how the game works as whole, how the game feels to the user. Once you start pulling out components of the game and examining them individually without concern to how it fits into the larger picture, I think you're missing the point.
-
Exactly. The problem with rating games based on gameplay - or any particular feature - is that it assumes said feature is equally important to all games. It also assumes that all games are essentially equatable - that there's a "Plato's cave" format that all games aspire to fill, and this is clearly not the case.
A game is an experience, like any other form of media. That it chooses to use interactivity does not necessarily make interactivity central.
EDIT: Incidentally (to return to the topic of the thread...) the trailer looks awesome. The art and music (and voice work) go without saying, but I haven't played a game with good 2D boss battles in years :)
-
Destructoid (http://www.destructoid.com/first-look-at-the-aquaria-level-editor-34433.phtml) seems to have some interest for Aquaria :)