Platform: Linux, Windows, Mac (digital distribution), Flash (web browser)
Not long ago, and guided by general consensus among friends and critics, I decided to acquire Machinarium, the then recent work by Amanita Design. To my surprise, when buying the game I was given their previous one, Samorost 2 (its first part is free), and both game's soundtracks. Shortly after I refused to keep playing Machinarium (another story) and mostly forgot about Amanita.
Fast forward to a boring evening, when I discovered Samorost 2's installer in my PC. "Let's try this," I told myself (metaphorically; I don't usually talk to myself), "a free game can't be worst than most you pay for."
Amanita Design is a studio specialized, judging by their main games, in Flash development and extremely detailed graphics. Gray, complex landscapes play an important part in their games, as do their beautiful musical scores. These two elements have earned the studio repetead and completely deserved awards.
Amanita's designs are, in essence, point and click graphic adventures with a very simple inventory system, if any, minimal stories, pretty backgrounds and limited interaction.
Amanita's designs are, in essence, point and click graphic adventures with a very simple inventory system, if any, minimal stories, pretty backgrounds and limited interaction.
In Samorost 2, the main character -let's call him/her Pyjama- wakes up to find a couple of space thieves stealing fruits from the garden's tree, and taking the guardian dog as a bonus. As a result, Pyjama embarks on an mission to rescue Dog and return to the home asteroid safe. And the player, not to be confused with the star, goes along for the ride.
Pyjama's adventure is a nice one, full of funny moments, detailed drawings, charming characters and some curious puzzles. So there are good things regarding this game. From time to time my efforts were rewarded with something more than "you managed to cross the door", which felt good, but not good enough. I always had this sour taste of frustration reminding me that I wasn't that much enjoyed.
But critics and players loved this game, so I am outnumbered. Am I wrong or do I have the right to call my Graphic Adventure Demise Culprit #3 to scene?
Pyjama's adventure is a nice one, full of funny moments, detailed drawings, charming characters and some curious puzzles. So there are good things regarding this game. From time to time my efforts were rewarded with something more than "you managed to cross the door", which felt good, but not good enough. I always had this sour taste of frustration reminding me that I wasn't that much enjoyed.
But critics and players loved this game, so I am outnumbered. Am I wrong or do I have the right to call my Graphic Adventure Demise Culprit #3 to scene?
How does it play?
The game is played with the mouse, interacting with the environment or, sometimes, Pyjama. Whenever the cursor is over an interactive object, it turns into a pointing hand, Myst style. You click and something happens. Maybe it will break, or Pyjama will place some object in its pocket, or an insect will fly away, or the cursor will turn into the selected object.
It is important to note that whatever happens, it is usually not related to Pyjama. The player is an external entity which forces the environment into action.
Most of the time the player toys freely with the environment, other times Pyjama interacts with the selected object, or picks it. Those actions in which Pyjama participates are not marked as interactive unless Pyjama is close by. And to place Pyjama there, you must click in an area where Pyjama might want to stand, turning the whole screen into a potentially interactive area.
So, the first problem appears: pixel hunting is the way to go. And it is even worse because background and interactive area most of the time cannot be told from one another. Everything in the game has decorations, wheels, buttons and levers, but most of them serve no purpose. Even worse, some can only be used if a certain object has been picked by the cursor. Unfortunately, in these cases the cursor loses its ability to notify that an interaction is possible. For a certain puzzle, I had to try placing a bell in each tree branch in a forest until I found the right one, because I had no visual clue regarding what was I trying to achieve. And let me tell you, Amanita loves adding trees and branches to their scenes a little too much.
 |
| What's an alien supposed to do? |
There are also scenery elements which can only be used when they are in certain positions, which adds an even more frustrating aspect to pixel hunting: timed interactivity. And not everything that moves is at some point interactive. In fact, most moving stuff is just decoration.
This dynamic pixel hunting by itself would be enough to throw this game away. Even though the game is only 90-120 minutes long (10-20 minutes if you know what to do), it managed to frustrate me almost to the point of quitting around five times. I did not, but just because I am very stubborn.
But that is not all, folks. Not knowing what can be used to fulfil your objective is bad enough if you have one, but when the designer's intentions are anything but clear, you are in trouble. Of course, that was the case more often than not.
In video games, as in life, objectives are stacked one over another, according to the order they must be performed to progress.
For instance, in a given screen in Samorost 2:
- Global objective: Rescue the dog.
- Room objective: Reach next room. There is a worker there, so it cannot be done via the door.
- Sub-objective layer 1: Find another exit, I guess. Or something to throw at the worker. FIND SOMETHING!
To find an exit in this puzzle you only have the option of clicking around, because no obvious way out can be seen. I won't spoil the series of events, but it includes turning on an object with no real relationship to the problem , and which you were not even aware was off. You discover it is when you click on a drawn line behind it. You discover why you wanted to turn it on after the fact.
So, we mix a nightmarish environment interaction with unclear objectives and get... a bad, although pretty, graphic adventure, overwhelmed by its abuse of elaborate drawings, with some charming puzzles. And another reason for the average player to stay as far away as possible from the genre.
Conclusion
This dynamic pixel hunting by itself would be enough to throw this game away. Even though the game is only 90-120 minutes long (10-20 minutes if you know what to do), it managed to frustrate me almost to the point of quitting around five times. I did not, but just because I am very stubborn.
But that is not all, folks. Not knowing what can be used to fulfil your objective is bad enough if you have one, but when the designer's intentions are anything but clear, you are in trouble. Of course, that was the case more often than not.
In video games, as in life, objectives are stacked one over another, according to the order they must be performed to progress.
For instance, in a given screen in Samorost 2:
- Global objective: Rescue the dog.
- Room objective: Reach next room. There is a worker there, so it cannot be done via the door.
- Sub-objective layer 1: Find another exit, I guess. Or something to throw at the worker. FIND SOMETHING!
To find an exit in this puzzle you only have the option of clicking around, because no obvious way out can be seen. I won't spoil the series of events, but it includes turning on an object with no real relationship to the problem , and which you were not even aware was off. You discover it is when you click on a drawn line behind it. You discover why you wanted to turn it on after the fact.
So, we mix a nightmarish environment interaction with unclear objectives and get... a bad, although pretty, graphic adventure, overwhelmed by its abuse of elaborate drawings, with some charming puzzles. And another reason for the average player to stay as far away as possible from the genre.
Conclusion
 |
| That middle ground is deceiving... |
In the end, as was the case with Machinarium, I found out too late, most people saw the game, thought it was pretty, got a bit into it and quit in frustration at first chance. But players still thought the game was pretty, some how funny and relatively original, so they recommended it all around. In Samorost 2, being way shorter, most people probably finished it and forgot the two hours of frustration it included. Marketing has taught us that the mind remembers beautiful and funny things easier than hard and boring ones.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n2LeCNKpw8
ReplyDelete