|
Lt. Danger posted:Firewatch would be a fine short story, or a fine film. As a game, it's overpriced - on both consumer and producer ends, I imagine. Why is a short game inherently less valuable than a short story or a short film?
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
Firewatch costs £15. In comparison, I can see a big budget film for £6 or buy a new book full of short stories for £8. That's a hell of a premium for three hours of content and some vague idea of 'interactivity'. Most similarly priced games offer around 12 hours of content, if not much more, and they're better at being games too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Your answer seems to be kinda tautological. I'm asking if this game really needs to be a game with choices, consequences, interactivity and such. Your response seems to be "well, it's got choices in it, so yeah". Why are those choices there? Yes, you could have told the same story in a different way in another medium. The fact that this game is a game doesn't actually require justification, in the same way that a movie doesn't need to justify not being a game. I honestly think you're mixing up what you're asking. You ask why the choices are there, and then go on to explain why they are there, but then reject those reasons because you don't think that those means of telling a story are sufficient. Sufficient for what? And, you say that the game sets out to trick the player as though it's a bad thing. Storytelling is about tricking the reader into feeling something. This story just uses the language of games to help its goal. Lt. Danger posted:Firewatch costs £15. In comparison, I can see a big budget film for £6 or buy a new book full of short stories for £8. Okay now this is a very different thing. This is less about the work existing as a game rather than in some other medium, and more that you just didn't want to pay 20 dollars for it? Like, if this was a 5 dollar game, you'd be happy with it being a game?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:Yes, you could have told the same story in a different way in another medium. The fact that this game is a game doesn't actually require justification, in the same way that a movie doesn't need to justify not being a game. I honestly think you're mixing up what you're asking. You ask why the choices are there, and then go on to explain why they are there, but then reject those reasons because you don't think that those means of telling a story are sufficient. Sufficient for what? No. The medium defines function. A film functions in a different way to a book or a game or even a TV series. Good craftsmanship involves using the strengths of your medium in your product. You wouldn't shoot or script a film in the same way as you would a TV series, would you? It'd suck. Firewatch doesn't play to its medium at all - and I say this as someone who's normally first to defend storygames and interactive fiction as legitimate games. I feel Firewatch rests on its character writing and art direction, which it could better do in another medium, and does very little with its interactive nature as a game. That's what started this conversation thread, after all - Firewatch being "more fiction with a camera" than interactive fiction. To borrow your phrase below, I don't think it makes good use of the language of games, and what it does use tends towards the tedious rather than meaningful. If it was £5 I would still think it a bad game, but at least I couldn't say it was so overpriced. e: and I don't think the devs would need to charge so much money if it was made in a less expensive medium. that's speculation on my part though quote:And, you say that the game sets out to trick the player as though it's a bad thing. Storytelling is about tricking the reader into feeling something. This story just uses the language of games to help its goal. No, that's my characterisation of your argument. I don't think Firewatch or any artwork is about tricking people at all. I think art is about the communication and construction of meaning; it can only ever be honest and true. "Tricking people into feelings" is a very cynical perspective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Wow, that ending put a look on my face that I'm guessing was not the developers' intention.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Glad to see this news from Campo Santo today: https://twitter.com/camposanto/status/702322523082362882
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
"Hey we should take every plot thread and just make it so literally none of them have satisfying conclusions. That'd be loving hilarious"
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Jet Jaguar posted:Glad to see this news from Campo Santo today: Great news.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
Jet Jaguar posted:Glad to see this news from Campo Santo today:  I do not regret my purchase and am curious what they do next.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 10:28
|
|
|
Jet Jaguar posted:Glad to see this news from Campo Santo today: I hope it's a gritty open world survival game where Henry returns to where it all started to embark on a desperate hunt to bring Ned to justice. Also you occasionally call your wife on a phone to talk to her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Jet Jaguar posted:Glad to see this news from Campo Santo today: I'm glad for them !
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
People defending the ending like to make the tired argument of "oh well there aren't always happy endings in real life." But that is not the issue. The issue is you ostensibly have this main character trying to come to terms with his own guilt and ultimately finding a way to connect to someone new. And those are the best parts of the game! When it's just Henry and Delilah chatting and acting like real people. And then they introduce all this stuff with the mysterious person(s) tailing you and from there every single interaction between the two is "OMG I'm so spooked what's going on?!" and it loses all of the appeal. And then the ending comes and Henry basically has a giant steaming poo poo taken on him in every way imaginable. Delilah is gone and was probably lying and emotionally manipulating you the entire time. The bad guy just bails and you wonder what the entire ordeal was loving for (I guess he wanted to frame Delilah as some sort of revenge for his son's death?) And Henry ends up going home without having worked through any of his problems and with a whole bunch of new baggage to boot. It just sucked. The game should have been 2-3 hours longer (or had fewer long sections of walking from one side of the map to the other) to more fully explore the relationship and Henry's experiences. Oh and I also like that the game is constantly trying to browbeat Henry if he ever implies that he should have an option to move on with his life. The dude is 40 years old and has a wife who will never recognize his face again. Maybe it makes me a bad person but I wouldn't blame the guy for not wanting to be essentially alone the rest of his life. Sorry for the rant, I figured I'd add something more meaningful than my earlier posts just bitching. PantsBandit fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Feb 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
PantsBandit posted:People defending the ending like to make the tired argument of "oh well there aren't always happy endings in real life." But that is not the issue. The issue is you ostensibly have this main character trying to come to terms with his own guilt and ultimately finding a way to connect to someone new. And those are the best parts of the game! When it's just Henry and Delilah chatting and acting like real people. And then they introduce all this stuff with the mysterious person(s) tailing you and from there every single interaction between the two is "OMG I'm so spooked what's going on?!" and it loses all of the appeal. Nah, I agree with this entirely. I'm glad the game did well enough to support them making whatever they want to next, but for the same reasons you mentioned, I did not enjoy this game. The mystery felt tacked on and it doesn't seem like any of the writers were writing from their own experiences, or at least they hadn't fully considered how someone would feel in the same situation and just kept to a generic "stay with your single partner until you die" message, which wasn't really explored much anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
I don't know if anyone's pointed it out, but I think there's at least one reason Firewatch works well as a game and not as some other medium. It's a story about escapism, after all. Games are a rather popular escapist form of entertainment; Arguably, they're the most popular and visceral form of escapism you can achieve today, especially as VR and other technologies promise to immerse you into the game world. Perhaps the point at some level is that you, as the player, should consider how video games are a method of escaping from your own reality and problems. It's not like there aren't innumerable examples of people getting way too invested in genres or types of games for whatever reason - power fantasy, mobility, etc. - that serve as a distraction and escape from whatever awful life they have. I think that message wouldn't resonate quite as well if it was a book, or play, or podcast, or what have you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:I don't know if anyone's pointed it out, but I think there's at least one reason Firewatch works well as a game and not as some other medium. It's a story about escapism, after all. Games are a rather popular escapist form of entertainment; Arguably, they're the most popular and visceral form of escapism you can achieve today, especially as VR and other technologies promise to immerse you into the game world. Perhaps the point at some level is that you, as the player, should consider how video games are a method of escaping from your own reality and problems. It's not like there aren't innumerable examples of people getting way too invested in genres or types of games for whatever reason - power fantasy, mobility, etc. - that serve as a distraction and escape from whatever awful life they have. A fair point, but: 1) Firewatch still doesn't use being a game to its full potential. The gameplay still reduces down to holding down the w key while occasionally hitting space, exploring a largely pre-determined linear path, and once in a while choosing the tone of one voice actor's direction. You can still get escapism in other mediums. 2) It's kinda cheap on the part of the creators. Why is it okay for the devs to create escapism, but not okay for us to partake? It's a deliberately deceptive gotcha and suggests cowardice. GalaxyQuest is a far superior treatment of the idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
PantsBandit posted:People defending the ending like to make the tired argument of "oh well there aren't always happy endings in real life." But that is not the issue. The issue is you ostensibly have this main character trying to come to terms with his own guilt and ultimately finding a way to connect to someone new. And those are the best parts of the game! When it's just Henry and Delilah chatting and acting like real people. And then they introduce all this stuff with the mysterious person(s) tailing you and from there every single interaction between the two is "OMG I'm so spooked what's going on?!" and it loses all of the appeal. Don't quote me on this, but apparently there's a way to get Delilah back in the Japanese version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Why is it okay for the devs to create escapism, but not okay for us to partake? It's a deliberately deceptive gotcha and suggests cowardice. Do you think that maybe rather than cowardice they were trying to make a point?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
And that point is cowardly. It's a lazy, self-serving bait-and-switch, the equivalent of "it was all a dream!" e: like, it's fundamentally contradictory. "escapism can't solve problems!" except obviously the devs think it can, since they deliberately made some escapist fiction to explain how escapism can't solve problems. presumably escapism can solve the problem of people thinking escapism can solve problems? Lt. Danger fucked around with this message at 13:37 on Feb 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 13:33
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:it's fundamentally contradictory. "escapism can't solve problems!" except obviously the devs think it can, since they deliberately made some escapist fiction to explain how escapism can't solve problems. presumably escapism can solve the problem of people thinking escapism can solve problems? The message in the game is pretty simple, but you're saying it's invalid because it's a game? This is a bizarre way of looking at it. I really think you're trying to find a way to dismiss their message by over-analysing it and applying it beyond where it belongs. If I know the guys at Campo Santo, I know that one of the things they would have wanted from this game is to get people talking, and they've certainly managed that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
Mr Scumbag posted:The message in the game is pretty simple, but you're saying it's invalid because it's a game? This is a bizarre way of looking at it. I really think you're trying to find a way to dismiss their message by over-analysing it and applying it beyond where it belongs. No. I think the message in the game is fine. It's a perfectly decent story. It's that specific interpretation that's contradictory. You can't argue that Firewatch needed to be a game to give us escapism is while at the same time turning around and saying how Firewatch is about how bad games giving us escapism is as well. Well, you can, but then I can say "that's cheap and lazy, the dullest and simplest kind of self-reflection, substituting trickery for actual content". Again, the obvious point of comparison is GalaxyQuest, which could have just been a mean-spirited parody of Star Trek and its stupid fans. The natural response to that is "if Star Trek is so bad, why should we care about a Star Trek parody?", to which the only reply is "You shouldn't". Instead, GalaxyQuest was actually a really thoughtful story about fiction and how people relate to fiction, the nature of truth, lies and meaning, and it also had good jokes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:A fair point, but: I respect your position, and I agree on some level with your first point - Firewatch underutilizes it's medium if it's really trying to subvert the notion of a game. Looking at other 'art' games, though, I'm not sure if there's a better way to go about it. There's certainly exploration-based challenges; finding the other clues in the world, finding the animals, etc. The reward for completing those challenges, however, ultimately don't have any impact on the critical path (finding the turtle, for instance). There are a lot of subtle ways that you, playing the game, can interact with the narrative and shape your attachment to it. Would it have been a better game if there was a pop up at the end, TellTale style, showing your decisions and how many people chose the same? I'd argue that mechanics like that reinforce the way that there's a "right" and a "wrong" way to go through the story based on the wisdom of the crowd. Could there have been achievements for picking up all the beer cans, or stamping out fires? Maybe, but again, there's something to be said for the intrinsic motivation to do what's right when no one is looking, even when it doesn't matter. My point, generally, is that a lot of the decisions seem to be deliberate in an effort to subvert expectations about not only the narrative, but also the meta-narrative. Apologies if this came off a bit rambling, haven't had coffee yet. Edit - I want to note that I don't think Firewatch is trying to say that it's "bad" for games to be escapist. I think it's trying to inspire you to reflect on how you as the player use games as an escapist form of entertainment. It doesn't strike me as a judgement, more as a mirror.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:A fair point, but: I feel like your second point is rather unfair, because if you compare anything to Galaxy Quest, it'll always be inferior. If I had to choose between destroying the cure for cancer and destroying every copy of Galaxy Quest, I'd blow up the cure for cancer without a second thought. uncurable mlady posted:I respect your position, and I agree on some level with your first point - Firewatch underutilizes it's medium if it's really trying to subvert the notion of a game. Looking at other 'art' games, though, I'm not sure if there's a better way to go about it. There's certainly exploration-based challenges; finding the other clues in the world, finding the animals, etc. The reward for completing those challenges, however, ultimately don't have any impact on the critical path (finding the turtle, for instance). There are a lot of subtle ways that you, playing the game, can interact with the narrative and shape your attachment to it. Would it have been a better game if there was a pop up at the end, TellTale style, showing your decisions and how many people chose the same? I'd argue that mechanics like that reinforce the way that there's a "right" and a "wrong" way to go through the story based on the wisdom of the crowd. Could there have been achievements for picking up all the beer cans, or stamping out fires? Maybe, but again, there's something to be said for the intrinsic motivation to do what's right when no one is looking, even when it doesn't matter. I think the problem is not the lack of artificial achievements or anything, but the lack of a reaction from the game. At the start I picked up the beer cans, thinking at the very least, someone might mention it off-hand in some dialogue at some point, but there was nothing, which sorta zapped my enthusiasm for interacting with the game like I would naturally in real life, so I stopped and just started being a video-game arsehole who threw the turtle under the bed and threw all the food off a cliff and all that jazz. What's great about the telltale games isn't the crappy data analytics you get to see, but the fact that they actually react to the little decisions you make. It doesn't have to unlock a new branch, or a new ending, or anything, but when the game reacts to you, it motivates you much more to interact with the game thinking your little choices actually make a difference, and it all adds up over the course of the game. What sucked was that Firewatch didn't react at all to my predictable actions, when I chucked all the food off the cliff, no one mentioned it, though later on the dude wrote that I consumed a lot of food, which I guess is triggered by simply interacting with other food, if it's not just there no matter what. I liked when it commented me throwing the boom box in the lake, because it was something I did instinctively without being prompted, and it rewarded me by having a consequence to my action, though later I worried that it would have ended up forcing me to do that anyway to progress, diminishing that little experience a little bit. I guess maybe I'd have liked the game better if they took the time and resources they spent developing the VR stuff and put it into all the little bits of polish that would've made the game good for me. Did anybody play Firewatch with a VR helmet by the way? I'm like 96% sure they spent a bunch of time on money on doing that, and it seems like a good game for VR. curse of flubber fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Feb 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
You can still fight cancer with radiation therapy, you can't properly reproduce Galaxy Quest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
I left the game feeling pretty lukewarm, but I think my opinion is retroactively brightening with every "NOT A GAME!!" loon that decides to come out of the woodwork.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Played this in one sitting mostly uninterrupted. Overall it's a good experience and utterly beautiful looking, and as an unashamed fan of walking simulators it's one of the more interesting ones, but I'll agree with everyone who said the game wraps itself up abruptly and in an unsatisfying manner. I think I was rather more of a fan of the mundane aspects and conversations before all the intrigue kicks into high gear and I'm siding with people who think that the story would've been more effective if it was just two people dealing with the park and themselves. As it stands, the themes of the game still work and are clearly present throughout the length of it, but I didn't find myself caring enough about the ancillary characters they introduce for it to have a major impact on me. I just feel they were rather undeveloped and that the pacing felt extremely off at the end. The rapport the main characters have is great and I definitely felt sad when their time together was over. The ending left me rather cold but I'm wondering if I was too neutral in my responses to her and so the reactions I got to my suggestion just felt kind of flat, the same way it feels when you talk to a friend who you fell out of contact with a while ago for reasons you can't remember. Overall the things this game does right, it really nails. The forest is absolutely beautiful, there's a ton of attention to detail, a lot of the dialogue is charming and well acted and the two main characters are intensely likable. I'll probably revisit it later to see if pushing my responses harder in a certain direction results in any dialogue changing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 11:38
|
|
|
I just finished this game thinking that you can make a game using the same general premise (and not the mystery stuff) and have it be much much better. Feels like this could be a better book than a game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
I get that line of reasoning, but the mystery is probably a draw to some people too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
It also fit the themes and narrative, Henry and Delilah are both a bunch of irresponsible flakes that are desperate for any sort of excitement in their miserable lives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
It would be great if someone just took the game engine and made an endless "Fire Lookout Simulator" where the player just has to look for smoke, use the Osborne Fire Finder, and accurately call in any fires that pop up. Basically a masochistic test of will slightly more fun than Desert Bus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Accordion Man posted:It also fit the themes and narrative, Henry and Delilah are both a bunch of irresponsible flakes that are desperate for any sort of excitement in their miserable lives. Did no one else expect the ending right from the moment you see that mystery dude at the beginning and you can freak about it, but Delilah just says something about it being a public park that people can walk around in? I thought that pretty much foreshadowed the ending exactly, probably too much, because I was expecting the ending the entire time I was playing, which made some bits roll my eyes to hell and back. The only bit which made me doubt it for a second was the tent with all the monitoring equipment and charts and poo poo, which in retrospect is completely stupid, I don't believe a single dude could've or would've set all that poo poo up to gaslight people, bunch of heavy machinery and expensive poo poo in there. The ending feels really flat, I think, because absolutely no one learns a god drat thing. The characters have no arc, there's no story, there's only constant backstory exposited out at you for the entire game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Megaspel posted:The ending feels really flat, I think, because absolutely no one learns a god drat thing. The characters have no arc, there's no story, there's only constant backstory exposited out at you for the entire game. Like you can totally just have Henry never develop, but that's your choice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
Accordion Man posted:This is all on you though, because they do change if you let them. As I've said my Henry decided to stop running away from his problems and Delilah sounded like she would start to too. That just seems like a very flimsy way of character development to me. Like the entire game is "I'm running away from my problems by being in this remote location away from people, by the way did we mention it's remote and away from people", then it's "okay I'll stop," the end. He didn't really change as a character, I said I would visit my brain-dead wife or whatever, but it didn't feel like anything really changed with the character. Plus, having "the good thing" for the protagonist to do be "okay I'll spend time with this woman who can't recognise me", is a pretty terrible message for anyone who actually has to go through that poo poo and is awfully pushy. Is there any other more interesting directions the ending can go besides "select this choice or you're a bad/unfulfilled person"? Do I only get to experience a good story if I choose everything the developer thinks is morally superior?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
It sounds like you're the one making the judgement on what's the "good thing" and not the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:It sounds like you're the one making the judgement on what's the "good thing" and not the game. Well, the "go back to your wife or you're a bad person" is certainly the angle Delilah pushes. Of course Delilah is the grossest, shittiest person in the game by far, assuming the bit about her still being in a long time relationship with what's his name and lying about it to "a string of partners" is true. And there isn't any reason to believe it isn't. Still I think it would've been very nice for "my Henry" to stand up for himself a little on the topic. The inability to do so is what leads me to believe the devs see Henry going back to his wife as the right thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
PantsBandit posted:Well, the "go back to your wife or you're a bad person" is certainly the angle Delilah pushes. Of course Delilah is the grossest, shittiest person in the game by far, assuming the bit about her still being in a long time relationship with what's his name and lying about it to "a string of partners" is true. And there isn't any reason to believe it isn't. Still I think it would've been very nice for "my Henry" to stand up for himself a little on the topic. The inability to do so is what leads me to believe the devs see Henry going back to his wife as the right thing to do. Did you miss the part where all that poo poo about Delilah was made up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:Did you miss the part where all that poo poo about Delilah was made up. I guess? Even if that specifically is false she does still do some pretty garbage things like lie to the police without consulting you and getting hammered when there could very well be someone trying to kill you. edit: Actually she does consult you about the police, but then lies to them no matter what you tell her lol PantsBandit fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Mar 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:It sounds like you're the one making the judgement on what's the "good thing" and not the game. Delilah explicitly tells you everything you've done in the game has been running away and you should go back to your wife.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
I don't think my wife's family is going to be particularly interested in having me around considering they took her away due to neglect. Delilah makes bad plans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Fans posted:I don't think my wife's family is going to be particularly interested in having me around considering they took her away due to neglect. Huh, didn't realize that could happen. I chose to put her in a home and apparently her family was in favor of that decision.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
PantsBandit posted:Huh, didn't realize that could happen. I chose to put her in a home and apparently her family was in favor of that decision. Seems like the better option. One of the choices if you do look after her is if you should leave her completely unattended at night while you go drinking or if you should wedge a chair under the door so she can't wander off. Henry is not a very good carer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2016 16:17
|
|