-
I downloaded the Aquaria demo and played through it. Sadly, I wont be buying the full game. Sadly for me, because I really wanted to like it - I liked the main character, the graphics were gorgeous, the music was fantastic, and the game play mechanics were nice.
It did have one major fault though - the game world is simply too spread out. I spent the vast majority of the time just going from point A to point B. Perhaps that is the "exploration" part of the game, but it just gives me flashbacks to the "find key to open door" mechanic I thought had died with the 90's. And what distances you'll cover looking for that key! When I think of what to do next in a game, I don't want to contemplate options that include minutes of just moving. Add the archaic save-point system and the result is a game that is quite diluted - Portal showed that great games need not be long; it is intensity and quality of writing that matters and not how much of your life the game sucks up. The demo is about two hours of playtime. I think there's a 45-minute game in there trying to get out. Extrapolating to the 16-18 hours of game play the full version has, I suspect there's a solid 7 hour game embedded.
/
(http://www.imagicwonders.com/galleries/folk/candids/images/Monocle%20Man.jpg)
-
That sucks for you. A lot of people did buy it, however, and enjoyed the game.
So yeah, can't please everyone.
-
16-18? Wow. Took me more than 25 to finish, will probably be about 35 by the time I find the few treasures I'm still missing. But then, I'm obsessive about exploring.
I can see how the time spent travelling can be off-putting. Still, I'd say that 75% of the time or better there's something interesting to be doing on the way to wherever your ultimate destination is.
The thing is, I don't think that Aquaria is the type of game you think it is, or perhaps want it to be. Aquaria is not a follow-the-story type of game, or even a goal-oriented game (to a point). Yes, there's an undercurrent of story (no pun intended), but that's not the game. If it was, I'd have hoped the story would have been a little clearer in the end. ;) The game itself is about exploring the amazing world of Aquaria. There's only about four instances where you have a find-the-key dynamic, unless you count having to gain a form elsewhere to get through an obstacle. And you don't really have to return to most areas once you complete them unless you just rush through it and miss something.
I've never really understood the complaint about save points. I don't think I'd like automatic saves or anything like that. An automatic save may work in more linear games (most FPS campaigns, a number of RPGs), but would certainly have hurt me if I was in trouble over my head. "Save anywhere" might work, but it might lend itself to abuse during the trickier sections, unless there's a stipulation like "must be standing still with no enemies in immediate area" or something. There was probably a reason Derek and Alec chose the method they did, and I think it's appropriate to this situation. Not all, but this one.
I don't see how one could condense the world like you describe without completely changing the game. Shrink the game down and many things would have to be cut, or the regions made more linear. Plus, I think there'd be a loss of world realism; real life has plenty of dead space (try living in a small town) and the open areas of Aquaria makes it feel much more realistic--to me, at least.
Aquaria isn't a game to push through in an effort to beat, it's a game to sit back and absorb. If that's not what you're looking for, that's fine. I don't think it's a mark against the game, though.
-
There is a valid complaint in here, which is that, even with sea turtles, it can take quite a bit of time just to get from point A to point B. I know I had some frustrating when I had to cross 3 maps just to get from the kelp forest sea turtle to the save point in my preferred seadragon hunting grounds.
I've given a lot of thought to how the quick-travel was handled in aquaria, and come to the conclusion that there are two methods I can see that might have really helped cut down on boring travel time.
A) Some sort of hub map with those warp flowers
B) A song you could sing which would bring up the world map and let you warp to any save crystal that you've got on it.
Aside from that, the original poster here is totally off base with the nature of the game, unless he would say the same of Super metroid.
-
waves goodbye
-
Yeah, can't please everyone. I didn't find there too be too much travel at all, and my final save was around 26 hours I think with a few things missing from my collection. There's so much to see and do along the way to anywhere I can't understand this complaint. Whatever.
-
I've got to agree with all the replies. Part of the charm of Aquaria is that the player is in the same condition as the main character. She knows nothing outside her own world, nor of the abilities, flora, and fauna that she comes into contact with. Many of the moments in the game where Naija audibly gasps or is awed by her surroundings were moments where i did the same. Her curiosity, intrigue, and even anger became my own. We, as players, as forced to learn by experience and experimenting just as she has to. Many times, curiosity pays off. Having such an open environment allows us moments to bond with the character.
Getting from point A to point B can be tedious, but in time you learn to actually find it exciting. Outside of a few bugs that the developers have/are being fixed, if you can access a location, you can progress IN that location. Maybe you can't find everything that area offers the first time around, but you can certainly develop the storyline and your powers more. With each uncharted location, you find new ingredients, new foes, and new opportunities. After even an hour of game play, you realize that this story, this game, isn't about beating the game or about getting a high score, it's about playing the game. The journey from A to B is the true enjoyment. The boss battles are little rewards, each with its own unique tactic and puzzle; puzzles whose solutions are often revealed during the game play. (The Mithalan boss for example)
As for the save points, I prefer set locations to save (ie; the crystals) because it keeps you emursed in the story. It also turns many situations, such as boss battles, into much larger activities. The boss may be the end of a particular chapter in the story line, but traversing the dungeon before such fights is part of the battle.
-
OK, it´s your opinion, but you are first who say that...
-
He is not first, but most people here like exploring and swimming through areas.
There are speedruns ~2 hours and there are savegames with 25-30 hours, so everything is possible depending on how addicted you are to collection or exploring. The thing that 2 hour-games are possible (okay, you have to be very skilled with the controls and should know where to go), kind of refutes the argument. If you play it the first time 2 hours is impossible I guess, but 8 hours should be possible, even if you miss some interesting stuff then. ;)
-
but 8 hours should be possible, even if you miss some interesting stuff then. ;)
It took me 8:30 to the last save point on my second run with all treasures (admittedly, I checked for one although I had a general idea of where it was), pets, health eggs, third cooking slot, memories, and Bosses, I obviously didn't get all recipes, but did get The legendary cake and rukh egg which are a pain to get. Considering I wasn't rushing through, 8 hours is entirely possible and get pretty much everything worth getting.
-
everyone is spoiled by today's games where they are much easier and do all the work for you. I was starving for a game like aquaria that brought back the things I grew to love in gaming.
I guess I am just a dreamer but I love just swimming around in aquaria that part of the game alone would be good enough for me but there is much more depth. I guess some people may not have the time to enjoy aquaria
-
everyone is spoiled by today's games where they are much easier and do all the work for you. I was starving for a game like aquaria that brought back the things I grew to love in gaming.
I guess I am just a dreamer but I love just swimming around in aquaria that part of the game alone would be good enough for me but there is much more depth. I guess some people may not have the time to enjoy aquaria
Propably, Yes. But such games require at least some time to play, or you'll just spoil the fun. If you wan't to get instant action, run UT2004 or Q3 :). I played main game for something about 33 hours. I wasn't rushing, just taking enjoyment of every moment that Aquaria could bring, and I don't think the time I spent on the game was wasted...
Oh, and btw - it's an exploration-based game so it means that you have to EXPLORE the world, and it will take some time.
-
waves goodbye
Come on Alec...
I won't pretend to belong to your core audience (which I suspect are fans of JRPGs), and so I understand if the game isn't going to be changed just because it'd suit me better. But I am a random sample of the people you're trying to sell the game to. As such, I make no claim to be objective, but if you ever find yourself wondering why you sold X copies of Aquaria and not 2*X, well, people like me sit with the answers. We're the ones who gave Aquaria a fair shot and decided that it wasn't for us.
I can't prove it, but I suspect that when you assemble all the criticism into a picture of what caused people not to buy the game the "slow movement" and "lack of saves" will be front and center. Even gamer-girl, which gave you a 9/10 complains about it, and that's coming from the hard core of the hardcore gamers.
Ultimately you have to decide if what you gain from lack of saves and the slow movement is worth the amount of people you scare away. Especially since, in my case at least, you had me impressed, excited and with my credit card out at the beginning but then made me reconsider.
Anyway, I wanted to give you some feedback, and now I have done so.
To respond to some other replies about the game length: I know you can go through the game much much faster if you know where to go. My reply to that is: I don't know where to go, and I don't want to have to wait until the second playthrough before a game becomes fun.
Regarding what I expected the game to be: Well, here's the big one, I suppose. Everyone who has stated that this game probably isn't for me are correct. It isn't. Aquaria is similar to a JRPG and my attitude to JRPGs is much like Yahtzee's: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/2563-Zero-Punctuation-Super-Paper-Mario (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/2563-Zero-Punctuation-Super-Paper-Mario).
I understand perfectly that that is not the general attitude of people on this forum - after all, if you didn't like the game, you wouldn't have bought it and played it and be here talking about it.
everyone is spoiled by today's games where they are much easier and do all the work for you.
I guess we differ here. I would say that today's games allow you to choose your difficulty level and allow you to skip the monotonous parts. I've been in this discussion before on the Steam forums and what it boils down to is that I get no sense of accomplishment from games. None. Zero. Doesn't matter which game. It's just not real enough. To understand my attitude, just think about something really boring. Something you really would like to edit right out of your life. Ok, now ask yourself this - if someone walked up to you and said "I just love (BORING THING), because when it is over, I get such a sense of accomplishment - you kids today have it so easy", what would you tell them?
-
Fans of JRPGs? Where the hell did that come from? I'd say it's more fans of the 2d Metroids or the recent Metroidvanias or Ecco, but certainly not JRPGs.
And, yeah, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish. You made your point, that's fine, but why did you post again? Like I said, lots of people enjoyed the game the first time around, I'm not sure why you'd want him to change it next time and piss off all his current fans?
None of the game was too difficult, and none of it was monotonous. There, I gave just as much of an opinion as you, so I guess yours is nulled now.
-
... and what it boils down to is that I get no sense of accomplishment from games. None. Zero. Doesn't matter which game. It's just not real enough.
Sorry to interrupt, but that's not what games are supposed to do. If you got that wrong, no offense, you seriously should think about shutting down your computer and try to achieve "accomplishment" in real life before it's too late.
-
I guess we differ here. I would say that today's games allow you to choose your difficulty level and allow you to skip the monotonous parts. I've been in this discussion before on the Steam forums and what it boils down to is that I get no sense of accomplishment from games. None. Zero. Doesn't matter which game. It's just not real enough. To understand my attitude, just think about something really boring. Something you really would like to edit right out of your life. Ok, now ask yourself this - if someone walked up to you and said "I just love (BORING THING), because when it is over, I get such a sense of accomplishment - you kids today have it so easy", what would you tell them?
Skippin' the monotonous moments? Your words doesn't make any sense now. Sense of accomplishment varies due to different kinds of users (players). It's the way how do you react to a certain game and how do you understand it, which is important. Some will say that Aquaria was just a "nice game" and nothing else, others will say the final ending had bring something that they haven't felt from the games in whole bunch of years of gaming on various platforms. But this doesn't have any matter at all, because they are Aquaria fans and enjoyed playing it very much. This is what games are meant to be done.
Honestly, you perceive games in a strange way...
-
And, yeah, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish. You made your point, that's fine, but why did you post again?
I posted again because I don't want to do a hit and run posting. I am really willing to engage in constructive criticism.
Like I said, lots of people enjoyed the game the first time around, I'm not sure why you'd want him to change it next time and piss off all his current fans?
No matter what the sequel end up being, some people will either consider it changed too much, or not enough. I am saying that I think a lot more fans can be gained if just a few bad design decisions were fixed, because the game has just about everything.
None of the game was too difficult, and none of it was monotonous. There, I gave just as much of an opinion as you, so I guess yours is nulled now.
Back to what I said about objectivity - there is none. You love the game, I don't. One opinion doesn't cancel another out.
-
Skippin' the monotonous moments? Your words doesn't make any sense now. Sense of accomplishment varies due to different kinds of users (players). It's the way how do you react to a certain game and how do you understand it, which is important. Some will say that Aquaria was just a "nice game" and nothing else, others will say the final ending had bring something that they haven't felt from the games in whole bunch of years of gaming on various platforms.
And some will say that they couldn't understand it because of a game design decision. Like I said to Alec, what it boils down to is that Bit-Blot have to decide whether the elements that scare people away are important enough. If they are unwilling to change those parts of the game, then they also have to accept that some people will not buy or play the game.
-
Skippin' the monotonous moments? Your words doesn't make any sense now. Sense of accomplishment varies due to different kinds of users (players). It's the way how do you react to a certain game and how do you understand it, which is important. Some will say that Aquaria was just a "nice game" and nothing else, others will say the final ending had bring something that they haven't felt from the games in whole bunch of years of gaming on various platforms.
And some will say that they couldn't understand it because of a game design decision. Like I said to Alec, what it boils down to is that Bit-Blot have to decide whether the elements that scare people away are important enough. If they are unwilling to change those parts of the game, then they also have to accept that some people will not buy or play the game.
Yeah, and it's been accepted from the very beggining.
The game making isn't just supposed to be on a tight schedule of "we will make the game of everything people will like". It's more like "We will make a game of our own idea/concept and people will have to decide, if they like it or not". It's obvious, that ideas can have lots of glitches, errors and mistakes. The most important thing is to have a will to fight with them so even if they occur in the game, they just won't bug the players. And it can be seen by an example of us, that those things are just minor.
You just demand to much from games.
-
The game making isn't just supposed to be on a tight schedule of "we will make the game of everything people will like". It's more like "We will make a game of our own idea/concept and people will have to decide, if they like it or not".
But even so there is a tradeoff involved in including something in the game. Another indie game that I enjoyed very much, Darwinia, is an RTS and originally had a gesture system in place where you had to use mouse gestures to build units. After many complaints and a couple of patches, hotkeys were added so you didn't have to use the gesture system.
So what is that? Should they have left the hotkeys out and stayed true to the original ideas, or was it correct to smooth over this part of the game?
Personally, I had no problems with the gesture system, but some people did, and I understand if you just want to let people get on with playing the rest of the game instead of trying to get the gesture right for the tenth time.
A blog post about usability from Introversion, makers of Darwinia: http://forums.introversion.co.uk/introversion/viewtopic.php?t=1028 (http://forums.introversion.co.uk/introversion/viewtopic.php?t=1028)
-
I congratulate you for posting further and staying polite, I guess it is not easy to do your "job" in a crowd of people who love this game. ;)
I think Alec and Derek will think (again) about these points because they are the main points of critism, but I don't think they'll change it. I guess that most of these issues were found out during the beta-testing and the decisions to make it this way were consciously.
-
Thanks for posting, in my option (Alec doesn't completely share it, obviously) the fact that you care enough to let them know what they need to fix (in your option) is a pretty good indicator that you'll be a good person to give out constructive criticism.
Anyway, about monotony;
What I've picked up from not only my game experience in aquaria, but what iceD was trying to say is; The long 'monotonous' parts of aquaria aren't about just getting from point A to B, it's about enjoying the journey. It's to show how large the world is compared to Naija, and how devoid she is of companionship.
Now, I understand how this doesn't float your, or many other people's boats, But some of the hugest games of these last few years are five-bazzilion times more boring then traveling in Aquaria ever will be. I'm thinking of WoW, Everquest, Guildwars, and many many RPG's that feature grinding. Killing enemy after enemy, each with the same series of attacks and death thralls, you using the same boring combination to kill them...just to get that rare item drop...
I think I've made my point. But to add to that, in Aquaria, you can easily get faster forms. Spoilers
By going to the kelp forest after the first boss, you can grab the fish form which dramatically speeds up travel. And the beast form after that also speeds things along.
There are plenty of games on the market that get just plain stale from playing them. That's one of the things the dev's worked so hard on in Aquaria; They did their best to make every area different by featuring hordes of enemies, and boatloads of different wildlife; they wanted Aquaria to have as much eye candy as possible, so it wouldn't get boring. They tried their best to make it so every time you went exploring into Aquaria, you'd find something new.
-
But even so there is a tradeoff involved in including something in the game. Another indie game that I enjoyed very much, Darwinia, is an RTS and originally had a gesture system in place where you had to use mouse gestures to build units. After many complaints and a couple of patches, hotkeys were added so you didn't have to use the gesture system.
Actually, if I recall correctly, the icon system was included as a requisite to distribute the game through steam. And even so a reasonable amount of darwinia players prefer the gesture system (and indeed, while I don't use it, I admit that it was part of the initial charm of the game).
Second, IV has stated that they are now becoming a "proper company", and they hadn't made a usability test until defcon so it could go on Steam. At this point bit-blot are those two guys who made a game and decided to sell it. In fact, while still indie, IV is trying to go mainstream, something I'm not sure Bit-blot is aiming to.
Look, I too have some gripes with the accessibility of Aquaria, in fact I said so in another thread, however I have no issue with what the game is and what Alec and Derek want it to be, which is not necessarily the same that we, the players, do.
Perhaps the point that you're missing here is this: the game wasn't designed for you. It was designed for the devs and those who might enjoy it. If you don't enjoy the game, that means the game simply wasn't meant for you and probably never will be.
-
You seem awfully caught up in the idea that all a game is, is a game. I think when Derek and Alec made this game, they didn't make it for you, or me, or anyone else. They made it for themselves. Just like many artists (and when you make a game like this, that's what it is, art.) they make their art for one of two reasons, because THEY like it, or because it holds something they want to share with the world. With the exception of a few glitches, this is exactly how they wanted Aquaria to be. Honestly, I doubt very much that they'll even consider changing anything about this game, just because people didn't like it, the point is that THEY like it. And that even when people say they are having trouble with the game, or don't like some part of it, they still keep playing.
-
Yeah, your "change it to get more fans" thing doesn't make sense. They'll lose fans.. and gain some. Why would they wanna do that? Wouldn't it be easier (and better for me personally and the other people who liked Aquaria like it is) to just.. make more of what we already like?
So, yeah, I guess go play/buy another game if you aren't going to enjoy this one? There are lots of games out there.
-
Really it boils down to: do you like the game or not.
You don't, that's great:
Bye bye!
There really is nothing for me to discuss, we made the game we wanted to, its done, we'll fix what we can, the game is what it is.
I still like it, tbh. :)
Is it flawed?
Probably.
Will every one like it in the same way?
Uhh... No, they won't.
Do I care?
Not really.
I'm not going to spend a year rebuilding it to see if it works better a different way because some loudmouth thinks it will.
I don't want the game to be needlessly annoying, and we took great pains to ensure that it wasn't. We'll also fix issues and tweak/patch things as necessary to improve the game, as we have been.
But you hate the way the game is structured, and that's not something we're going to agree on.
I'd also love to work on a new game and try out some new stuff.
Oh, but you'll probably hate that too.
Cool. :) Maybe your monocle will pop even further next time.
-
I think he was telling you this for future games, not in the hopes you'd remake this one.
-
Yeah, but I don't think we're going to be consulting with him to make sure that we make a game that he approves of for future projects; we'll probably just end up doing something that is interesting to us again.
So I think the chances of him ever liking anything from us are pretty slim.
-
Cool. :) Maybe your monocle will pop even further next time.
You know Alec, I don't think I've done anything that deserves ridicule.
We obviously don't agree on what makes a good game, and I don't expect us to reach an agreement on that. But you have repeatedly (via your website, when exiting the game, in the readme etc.) given me your sales pitch for the game, and asked me to pay $30 in order to play more of it. Since I took the time to evaluate your sales pitch, and to try out the product you were pitching, you can at least hear my reply and reasons without responding in such rude a way as you have done.
I've written to other game developers, and while, for example, Valve, only gave a one-line response back and I don't know if they even read what I wrote (for all I know, "Realm Lovejoy" is the name of an auto responder), none have edited what I wrote to make it seem silly and generally acted like a bully.
I might swing by and check any replies to this, but otherwise, as you put it, "bye bye". Wishing you all the best in your game development and business endeavors.
-
To be fair, I didn't edit anything you wrote, but I did add a picture of a rather refined gentleman underneath your text inside your post.
My apologies if that was offensive.
In case it makes up for it, I've added one to mine as well, albeit mine is significantly more scruffy, old chap.
/
(http://www.comparestoreprices.co.uk/images/unbranded/m/unbranded-monocle-on-string-value-.jpg)
-
I think this thread starter got the whole concept of games like Aquaria wrong in my opinion.
What made games like this unforgettable was not only the gameplay, gprahics and sound, but the exploration.
Remember Super Metroid for the Supernes? I remember that game wreaking havoc and picking up 9.5 reviews when it was released. A big part of the game was as i recall exploring the planet Zebes.
Remember the original Castlevania Symphony of the Night for the PS1? What made that game great was exploring the castle dracula.
This guy completely missed the point of Aquaria...
-
I don't think he missed the point, I Just think he doesn't like the exploration aspect. (kind of like some people didn't like exploration in LOZ:Windwaker, except windwaker didn't have a lot happening)
-
I don't know, why didn't someone mentioned it already,
but if you need to travel fast in Aquaria, just drink any soup with speed boost and then you can swim throught two maps in 30 seconds.
*spoiler* When you get beast form, it is even faster.*spoiler*
Somewhere on the forum has someone mentioned, that you have to shoot all the time in game, because there are enemies at every step, but you can swim past them in a few seconds.
Anyway, I am surprised :o on how many things people complain in some threads. Most of the game elements, which are for someone painful and wrong,....? I didn't noticed any of these to be wrong (save system, some problems with boss, boring? monotous?,thread next time make it easier ?!? what?!, ...)
Maybe it is because the Aquaria look like a never-dying-just-swiming-and-jumping-and-singing-with-fishes-enjoing-the-bright-side-of-life=> danger is none just underwater visual extasy
,...so it attracts people, who maybe (just maybe) don't play that often, and then they think its difficult, but in fact Aquaria is game made on hard basic stones of expernice from good old-fashioned game gems and it can't be both Old-Fashioned Game Gem and Relaxating Screensaver at the same time.
Conclusion :) :
I think, that for a player, who play games for quite a long time, It is not boring and not difficult and it has exactly these game elements, that hook us to play it (collecting ingrediens, boss fights, upgradeable home!, costumes!, places, which you can't visit right now, but after getting the right form (CSOTN bat,double jump),.... companions,....)
-
I don't know, why didn't someone mentioned it already,
but if you need to travel fast in Aquaria, just drink any soup with speed boost and then you can swim throught two maps in 30 seconds.
*spoiler* When you get beast form, it is even faster.*spoiler*
I think fish form is faster than beast form. But agreed, travelling is quite fast if you do it right.
Conclusion :) :
I think, that for a player, who play games for quite a long time, It is not boring and not difficult and it has exactly these game elements, that hook us to play it (collecting ingrediens, boss fights, upgradeable home!, costumes!, places, which you can't visit right now, but after getting the right form (CSOTN bat,double jump),.... companions,....)
I'd sign that...
-
Hmm now.
Sea Cucumber MkULTRA, you sound like precisely the sort of person who would not like Aquaria. So is it any surprise that you don't? It's like a ten-year-old girl going on the Halo 3 forums and saying, 'needs moar ponies' or perhaps, a so-called "hardcore" gamer buying Pippa Funnel's Wonderful Fun Happy Horse Racing And Looking After Horses Game: Horsey Challenge! and complaining that there isn't enough variety in the weapons, and some of the controls are a bit twitchy. When making the game, the designers have surely taken on board that no game will ever be 100% accessible, nor will it ever appeal to anywhere near 100% of the current market for games.
Alec and Derek have clearly made their own game. It barely even matters what their core audience thinks about the game, let alone a guy who doesn't share similar tastes with them.
If they wanted to sell 2*X copies of Aquaria, they would have already implemented all the suggestions you bring to the table, and they'd have made a game that they didn't like. I'm trying to avoid saying the phrase "sell out", because I hate it, but you'll understand what I mean if I do.
/
(http://www.worth1000.com/entries/49000/49391MrUQ_w.jpg)
(When I grow up, I'm gonna wield dual monocles.)
-
It's like a ten-year-old girl going on the Halo 3 forums and saying, 'needs moar ponies' or perhaps, a so-called "hardcore" gamer buying Pippa Funnel's Wonderful Fun Happy Horse Racing And Looking After Horses Game: Horsey Challenge! and complaining that there isn't enough variety in the weapons, and some of the controls are a bit twitchy.
Quoted for added effect! That is precisely what this thread is! Comparing a game with ponies to an FPS! Come to think of it...that sounds pretty fun...I've just had an idea!
-
I have the agree that the vast size of Aquaria is a HUGE part of what makes the game so damn good. Can you imagine how lame it would be if everywhere Naija explored was within like a 2 minute swim of her home? Give me a break. I remember being blown away at the start of the game but also vaguely worried that the world itself wouldn't be all that large since it was an "indie game" or whatever... wow, was I wrong. It delivered.
Like others have said, games like Wind Waker and San Andreas and Shadow of the Colossus benefit greatly from a sense of scale, something a lot of games (even good ones) don't really bother to create. It's fine for the topic creator to not care for that particular aspect of the game, but that's an issue with him, not Aquaria itself. Exploration is practically the point of the entire game, so that would be like me saying I hated Call of Duty 4 for having too much shooting or Mass Effect for having too many characters and too much backstory -- sorry, that's how they're supposed to be.
-
Aquaria is one of those games that you can judge a person by what they think of it.
-
The problem with this thread is, the OP for some weird reason thinks he is giving constructive criticism, when in fact he's saying "I don't like that genre, please redesign the entire game". Because the genre (shared with the Metroid, the recent Castlevania series', and Zelda to a certain extent) is ALL about exploration and backtracking. That's the gameplay. It's good you enjoyed the graphics, sound, and swimming/fighting mechanics, but the game is about exploring. You mention that you are spending most of your time going from point A to point B, but it's not that kind of game. You generally do NOT have a point B to go to. You are exploring, and trying to find new places to go to, new things you can do. New plants you can pluck, new creatures you can harvest for ingredients. New treasures to find, new abilities. If you are following a Walkthrough, then yes, I guess it would be really boring sitting there swimming from point A to B following it.
Also, the game *does* deal with travelling to places you've been to before, speeding up travel. For example, you say you finished the demo - did you note that it gave you a nice shortcut from the end of the temple where the boss was back to the beginning? That way you didn't have to travel back through the entire temple to get out. There are a number of those shortcuts throughout the game, and more of them as you progress. For example, the game world really opens up and becomes HUGE after you finish the demo area - but the game starts giving methods of "warping" around the world from extreme places. And as has been mentioned, there are foods which temporarily increase swimming speed, some which combine that with extra defenses and stuff, and there are a couple new abilities you get (not too far into the game past the demo) which allow you to travel faster anytime you want.
-
The other problem with the thread is that for some reason, the original poster did not take Alec saying "okay, bye bye" to mean that Alec was, in fact, perfectly accepting whatever sales may be lost due to not considering that particular opinion.
-
I have to say this, dangit.
Mind, that Bit-blot isn't a mainstream game company, and what they do is rather a hobby and a way to spend some free time than normal game developing oriented mainly to get profit from the products, which doesn't mean they aren't doing stuff in a professional way and they aren't trying to earn some cash for future projects and living. It's obvious, that reactions and expectations to bit-Blot should be quite different. Be more polite to those people. What they were trying to do was to give fun and enjoyment, both to themselves and us all. It's painful to see after so many successful years of indie game advantage, most of people still don't even bother to understand the pure essence of independent game creation :-\
This discussion is starting to get really annoying, so stop the criticism and enjoy what so far we got. Peace ;)
-
I was in no way criticising Alec. What I was referring to was, to summarize.
Sea Cucumber: I don't like you're game, its dumb and takes too long.
Alec: Okay. Bye bye then.
Sea Cucumber (Angry now): YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT SOME PEOPLE WON'T LIKE THIS KIND OF GAME!!!!!!!
See, Alec had been perfectly accepting of the fact that Sea Cucumber didn't like the game, but sea cucumber refused to see that, and continued to lecture Alec about how he would have to accept that not everyone likes this type of game, far beyond the point where Alec had already demonstrated that he does accept it.
-
Hmm now.
Sea Cucumber MkULTRA, you sound like precisely the sort of person who would not like Aquaria. So is it any surprise that you don't? It's like a ten-year-old girl going on the Halo 3 forums and saying, 'needs moar ponies' or perhaps, a so-called "hardcore" gamer buying Pippa Funnel's Wonderful Fun Happy Horse Racing And Looking After Horses Game: Horsey Challenge! and complaining that there isn't enough variety in the weapons, and some of the controls are a bit twitchy. When making the game, the designers have surely taken on board that no game will ever be 100% accessible, nor will it ever appeal to anywhere near 100% of the current market for games.
Alec and Derek have clearly made their own game. It barely even matters what their core audience thinks about the game, let alone a guy who doesn't share similar tastes with them.
If they wanted to sell 2*X copies of Aquaria, they would have already implemented all the suggestions you bring to the table, and they'd have made a game that they didn't like. I'm trying to avoid saying the phrase "sell out", because I hate it, but you'll understand what I mean if I do.
/
(http://www.worth1000.com/entries/49000/49391MrUQ_w.jpg)
(When I grow up, I'm gonna wield dual monocles.)
Thats the most stupidest thing that one can say. Your saying that they create a game, only for them? That they don't cater to their audience? Why on earth would they sell it in the first place then? They don't want to sell double their games? Thats just crazy. I honestly think that the guy was offering constructive criticism and in no way did he hate the game at all. Grow up, you create games for OTHERS to play, whats the point in keeping it to yourself and say haha i've created an awesome game. The guy did say he loved the music, art, and main character didn't he? He played the game, might have enjoyed, didn't like a small bit in it and thought he would come back and just give his feedback? So if you don't like one aspect in aquaria, you should walk off rather then have people piss on you? I dont think so. He certainly didn't troll his opinion then back out by not giving justification right..?
But anyway..if Alec or Derek thought this would appeal to most gamers..then there it is.
-
Thats the most stupidest thing that one can say. Your saying that they create a game, only for them? That they don't cater to their audience? Why on earth would they sell it in the first place then? They don't want to sell double their games? Thats just crazy.
Actually, Alec said pretty directly that they made Aquaria as a game they could enjoy. He also said equally directly that if you didn't like the game he is not going to change it for you.
-
Regarding what I expected the game to be: Well, here's the big one, I suppose. Everyone who has stated that this game probably isn't for me are correct. It isn't. Aquaria is similar to a JRPG and my attitude to JRPGs is much like Yahtzee's: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/2563-Zero-Punctuation-Super-Paper-Mario (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/2563-Zero-Punctuation-Super-Paper-Mario).
I understand perfectly that that is not the general attitude of people on this forum - after all, if you didn't like the game, you wouldn't have bought it and played it and be here talking about it.
Oddly enough I HATE JRPG's with a passion but loved Aquaria. I'm not sure if I entirely agree with the comparison. Or maybe I should try playing JRPG's again?
-
Oddly enough I HATE JRPG's with a passion but loved Aquaria. I'm not sure if I entirely agree with the comparison. Or maybe I should try playing JRPG's again?
you shouldn't. the comparison is, at best, very flawed.
-
Well, I like most JRPGs, but Aquaria is nothing like them. There's no leveling up, no turn-based combat, no linear worlds nor a set storyline to uncover in a specific order through dialogue and cutscenes...yea I don't see anything that looks like a JRPG in Aquaria. However it definitely reminds me of Metroid and Castlevania. Huge open worlds to explore that sometimes require a new item/form to fully explore, insane boss fights that often require both skill and strategy to overcome, puzzling puzzles to work through, and that sense of isolation and purpose that only comes from a NEED to explore. Sounds just like Metroid to me.
-
It's Ecco meets Metroidvania, with elements such as cooking/combining...
The biggest complaints have been some of the puzzles (Too vague), the combat (Too Hard) and the sense of where you're supposed to be going, but in making the game a more linear "Now Go Here!" (As Metroid will often do), you lower frustration but you kill the exploration element of the game.
I like Aquaria because it's something that hasn't been done to death: The 2D Undersea Exploration deal, and I was a big fan (Still am really) of the Ecco series. While it retains some elements of the Shoot-em-up and a bit of platforming on top of that, it's got a good selection of clever puzzles and scenery, and at the end of the day it was primarily done by two guys in their spare time, not a professional company.
Reguarding the comment about the gameplay being a glorified version of "Get Key and Open Door", you'll find that *EVERY* game follows this mechanic :p It's the simple 'Gate' principle of having to achieve something to proceed (If you've listened to the commentry on Half Life 2: Lost Coast there's a nice example of this - Defeat squad of badguys, Helicopter crashes into obstacle clearing it for you etc.), and you'll find Aquaria is one of the less linear examples - Whole areas of the game are optional, and several areas can be done in any order, the whole Food/Cooking thing is optional (but handy), optional bosses etc etc.
Also, your comment on the Gesture v HotKeys example from Darwinia? Aquaria already has examples of that. Obviously there's a few tweaks the game can still have to make things a little smoother but for the most part the only things I can fault are fairly minor (And mostly put down to the fact I never used the handy cooking system so just made things harder for myself until I stuffed Naija full of spicy food and decimated the final boss)
It's odd because one of the hugest complaints about Oblivion was the game constantly tells you where to go with a nice big arrow. Mods instantly appeared to kill everything on the map and have a true "Lost in the Wilderness" experience.
And yes, despite perhaps some loose influences with the art style, Aquaria has about as much in common with JRPGs than I do with Captain Pugwash.
-
It's odd because one of the hugest complaints about Oblivion was the game constantly tells you where to go with a nice big arrow. Mods instantly appeared to kill everything on the map and have a true "Lost in the Wilderness" experience.
This was one of my favorite features in Oblivion. Oblivion featured characters that would go to different places based on the time and day.
Morrowind didn't have this and even though there wasn't a AI schedule I found it annoying not to have one. I don't find it fun to be forced to talk to 20 AI characters or wander the country side looking for a building. I do love exploring; I would walk or ride my horse and pick herbs as much as possible but I like when I at least have the option to fast travel (or the compass or other things that kill exploration).
Aquaria doesn't have a bunch of AIs you have to gather information from so I don't think it would be appropriate for the compass to be a game feature. Aquaria has too many areas and too much fun that would be missed!
-
It does have a compass. Remember the White and Red Ripples on the minimap?
-
Well OP, it's your loss. As for me, I like going from A to B and via C, D and E too, if only for the hell of it. ;)
??? I highly doubt 2X copies would have been sold should the game have been truncated as you think it should have been.
-
I really don't understand why you came in here, registered and made a topic just because you didn't like this game. If I was Alec, I would've alreay banned you and ban you from buying this game just because you nag so much. This is just a simple vete like Sony and Nintendo, like Halo and Metroid, like Mario and Sonic and way more things, you just do or don't like this genre, don't annoy others with it. Like my old man used to say, if you don't have anything good to say, just stfu then.
This game is a classic game, it has bits of all old games combined into one superior classic super game. And like I have said in several topic on this forum. Alot of the hints in this game are almost unnoticable, small and require some logical thinking. I beat many bosses just with logical thinking. Which is why I like this game so much, just like Metroid.
I must say it's more worth then most newer games. I would've even bought it if it was 60$, and if there will be some sort of special edition with CD and box or poster I WILL buy that too, just because this game is that good. And I must say that I never ever bought a game twice just because it's that awesome.
So now you have 2 choices: be smart, leave. Or don't be smart and be hated and ridiculed cause you're making no sense with your posts and arguments, also to note that you haven't been giving constructive critisism from post number 1 to now, just been nagging over everything that was wrong according to you.
-
I don't know how hard it is for most people, (I suspect it is) but I think cooler heads on both sides would have been better. (woulda, coulda, shoulda, but it isn't)
A suggestion to Alec, before giving the cold shoulder, perhaps a reminder that this is an independent game, and whether pandering to an audience is something you have no interest or not. I honestly wasn't sure if it was obvious that you were indifferent to the desires of the players or not. I happened to have known that it was an independent game, but you still can't make assumptions based on that.
and original poster, try not to assume intent of the creator(s). I noticed someone else saying how ludicrous it is that the creators would not want to sell more copies. and they were wrong.
I deal with the same problems of offering criticism to things I feel have more potential, but my opinion about where the potential lies isn't the same as the artist's, and you have to respect that. I don't know how many people who can't get along with others have poor social skills like me, but I suspect that's most likely. It's hard to overcome. I feel social skills will let me get along, but our opinions will still differ and we'll still be so isolated in our thoughts. Well, perhaps some artists can share the same visions...
uhm... LOVE! everybody! :D ;D :-* <cue Groove is in the Heart by Deee-Lite>
-
You care about what people think and you also don't.
Feedback on bugs and features to improve the game can actually make the game better and be things that we didn't realize about the game.
If someone's like "I don't like this style of game", that's all well and good, but its not something I'm responsible for.
-
I'm not sure why people have gotten so worked up about this. I can see that the original poster probably felt that he was providing constructive criticism, and I didn't really see it as a demand that the game be changed; merely some comments that the developers are free to consider or not.
He did, however, refer to some game design decisions as faults. It felt like he thought that these were issues that hadn't even occurred to the designers, when in reality it seems pretty clear to me that they were a stylistic choice. So this game probably isn't for him, and that's okay. I'm not a fan of country music, so Garth Brooks will never see a cent of my money. That doesn't mean I expect him to change his music, and it wouldn't be fair for me to refer to his choice of music genre as a flaw.
-
Aquaria is too spread out for the amount of content it offers, but if there was more within the game, the length would be justified.
-
It didn't feel too spread out to me. I mean, the maps are big, but it never seemed like there were any long stretches of the same thing without running into some new creature or different looking area or something. I think it's more a matter of taste than being justified or unjustified.
The huge world to explore is one of the things I like about this game that I was hoping for after being impressed by the size of the demo, which kinda makes sense considering my favorite series is The Elder Scrolls games (which might be a better comparison to Aquaria than JRPGs mentioned earlier, since while they have very different gameplay they both allow for a kind of play style in common of just like wandering through a large place without much of a set objective looking at cool landscape features or finding ingredients or whatever, and collecting costumes and treasures for your home base).