|
So I finished the game and have seen some of the responses and I have some thoughts. First of all: I think it's good, albeit not outstanding in a "this is the pinnacle of what games can do" kinda way, but strong in its niche (that niche being interactive fiction, where the game mechanic is the story choices you make). I think a lot of people have missed the IF aspect, as I see a lot of criticism of the physical world of the game but for me the physical environment is just the setting. This is not an "open world" game and I think that's ok, it's not necessary for it to be, as the "game" is the story and the way it unfolds. I feel this is the kind of game that has to be approached like a novel, or maybe even a short story. World building isn't necessary, and by extension neither is open world exploration. We're in tight focus here, and open-world freedom would make for an entirely different game. So yeah. Firewatch: very good, not amazing, game. Story might not be for everyone. I think I enjoyed it because it was a bit like going for a walk in the woods and falling into a story, and if that's not something you'd find appealing it's probably going to fall quite flat.
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Edit: why are practically all of these games set in the 80's? I'd bet it's down to a bunch of thirtysomething devs trying to draw from the well of childhood wonder or something similar.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
So I've just been watching the IGN super secret Firewatch spoiler cast and oh my god the Vanaman Hat Reveal has slain me. Appears at 44:40 and obviously there are other spoilers surrounding it, though it isn't really a spoiler itself unless you're Past Sean Vanaman or are really wild about hats.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Vando posted:So I've just been watching the IGN super secret Firewatch spoiler cast and oh my god the Vanaman Hat Reveal has slain me. Appears at 44:40 and obviously there are other spoilers surrounding it, though it isn't really a spoiler itself unless you're Past Sean Vanaman or are really wild about hats. Also to come back to this: the rest of the cast really goes into why some of the decisions were made that some people have been highlighting as less than great. Usually it's because of technical limitations, or the fact that everything becomes dependent on every prior choice the further you go into the game and it's hard to make the story still 'work' with all those variations. I hadn't really thought about what it takes to make a game like this (I avoided all the pre-release devblogs etc) and the cast really opens up what a technical achievement it is, especially with a small team. I did like the part where Sean talked about having to write parts of the script through gritted teeth because "this is wrong! This isn't how the story should go! I hate this!", but because the player choices could have led to that point, it had to be written that way.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 12:53
|
|
|
ja2ke posted:We had a fat guy tries to climb fence interaction in there for a while but it was kind of a mood killer. It got replaced with the bee in the box which I majorly prefer. Great, another thing to add to the list to track down for future playthroughs. I don't think everyone has clocked the whole 'scavenger hunt replayability' aspect yet, which is a shame.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:And? The big climax of the game is finding out that Ned did everything. There's no wind down from that. You just immediately get told to get out and go to her lookout to end the game. The ending is abrupt. I've been saying this the whole time, I don't know why you can't understand that. You realise that this is traditionally what is meant by a 'climax' in a story, right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
I feel like people who complain about the nature of the ending are people who would also be unhappy with the conclusion of any traditional whodunit plotline, where the killer is unmasked as the unassuming character that just bumbled along in the background. The artistry is in the way it was hiding in plain sight all along.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Why does that make it a bad choice though? e: like I can get behind the people saying they found the ending unsatisfying, but there's a bunch of people saying the ending was flat out bad and I'm just not seeing that. Vando fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
At the same time, I'm not trying to argue that it's objectively good either. I liked it, I can see why others liked it, I can see why some might not, but that doesn't imply disastrous flaws in the game or anything.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Blind Rasputin posted:Wait. What happens with the map?? The only way they could render the drawing of Henry in the tower was to steal the map for that purpose, so trying to read the map is probably hilariously broken at that point. e: 41:25 here http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/02/12/firewatch-secrets-spoilers-and-behind-the-scenes-with-campo-santo Vando fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Maybe I missed something that truly set in stone what Ned's motivation was, but if the motivation was "get Henry the hell away from the area so he can't investigate the cave" then I have trouble believing that it fully explains Ned's actions. He was just passing the time listening in on their radio chatter. Then the clipboard gets found and oops now someone is motivated to look for him and it all spirals from there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
I've had a bit of a brainwave about why it seems opinion is so polarised on this game: I suspect it's a function of it being a relatively new genre (at least mainstream-wise) and because lots of the reviews are good, people are playing it without having discovered it isn't their type of game. It's kinda like if massive grognardy war games were making a breakthrough and someone raved about War In The Pacific: I'm not going to like it even if it's critically acclaimed because it simply Isn't My Thing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
For me, the thing I liked about the art was how it was unreal in a way that felt comfortable. Kind of like when you watch a Pixar movie and you know it's our world, but kinda... once removed? I don't think I'm describing it all that well but hopefully at least some people will get what I mean.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 00:50
|
|