Bastion, any good?

[anus_pounder]

Wasn't andhaira working on a game or some such? At least I think he was either planning on joining a company or was already a game developer?

 

[J1M]

The game is notable and got better reviews because of a couple facts:
-1st and most importantly Greg Kasavin worked on it, and he was the editor in chief of gamespot for like 10 years
-2nd the artwork is pretty nice and all drawn by one asian chick

Greg is smart enough to sell the game by claiming it is a modern day chrono trigger.

I haven't played it but I intend to, should a method of acquisition under $15 present itself.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Greg is smart enough to sell the game by claiming it is a modern day chrono trigger

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

(does search)

oh, chrono trigger fans will like this because it LOOKS sorta like chrono trigger and uses sprites. Hello everyone we made a game called Space Siege and I think Bladerunner fans will be particularly interested in our approach to the question of humanity

 

[Notorious]

So I have bought it and played through it, it's only 6 hours long. Some thoughts...

-It's too short...
-It's pretentious...
-The combat is nice... but it's too easy, far too easy...
-I didn't give a crap about the world and art (I also didn't like the music)
-It's too expensive for what it offers...

So it has nice and involving combat, that's about it...

 

[Metro]

Yeah, this game was being built up for a year and a half plus. It isn't bad but ultimately fell well short of my expectations. Even for something done by a small team. Take away the art and it's a pretty sad effort. I don't know how anyone could think this is better than Torchlight (developed in half the time and with more content) or Deathspank. Hack and Slash Braid really is the best descriptive for it.

 

[J1M]

Tried it. I like the narration, but the combat so far is lackluster. Seems to be a heavy focus on ranged weapons, which is fine.

Art style is pretty good. An rpg with turn-based combat that had this art style would be pretty boss.

 

[Chaotic Lulz3r]

Tried the demo...

It certainly looks pretty, and the narrator sounds cool but I definitely wouldn't buy the game just to listen to him some more.

The thing that bothered me the most is the character speed. It just felt like he was about 20% slower than an ARPG hack'n'slash hero should be.

While not belonging in the same sub-genre, as far as indie RPGs go, Cthulhu Saves the World offers twice the fun at 16% of the cost...

For anyone who wants to see what this "reactive narration" gimmick is all about without downloading a 700mb demo, this short freeware game does it pretty well.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Played it. What Notorious said sums it up pretty well. Though I'll also add it removes any exploration/replay value for finding all the little secrets by making it both impossible to revisit levels on the same playthrough and adding a shop that sells anything you missed on a level. Story was ok until the ending, which was pretty retarded and overly artsy. Would have been better if it left more to the imagination. I can understand why the game is so short though; if the narrator runs out of shit to say or you go too long without seeing a new kind of enemy or weapon, the game will get boring pretty damned fast. There's no real platformer elements, the game essentially boils down to choosing a weapon and then erradicating everything, and the difficulty is trivial. If they'd made more and more interesting content (More timed sections, actual difficulty, proper boss fights, etc.) it could have been a real gem. As is, it's more on par with a nice flash game with better graphics.

15$ for 6 hours is a better deal than a movie ticket I suppose, but a good movie gives you stuff to think about a references to make with your friends afterwards, while this won't. More akin to spending 15$ on candy.

 

[Lesifoere]

Style over substance. Gameplay is ehhhhhh, but at least the backgrounds are pretty and shit. I've come very close to uninstalling a few times due to flat gameplay mechanics.

 

[LoPan]

I played it and I finished it, and I quite liked it.

I can understand entirely why someone would snub it, half the reason I say I like it is because I am not entirely certain why I thought it worked. By all measures and standards on my own part I should find Bastion dull, flat and weak. The character design is a load of Japanese rubbish (why does the main character have a constant plaster on the lower right of his jaw?), the level design is largely inexistant and same goes for monster design which consists mainly of the same model of differing sizes and colours which is hardly acceptable in this day and age what with our fancy art-making tools.

I found the music good and the western/blues/jazz thing worked for me but I did feel a grand old shift between what I was hearing and what was going on on the screen itself, and that, surely, is the very definition of failure when it comes to music in a videogame.

On the overall Lesifoere is right, it's a style over substance sort of affair but also one of style over context, but I deign to claim it does do some interesting things with handling voluntary difficulty and the use of leveling. When leveling up all you really get is another slot for a tonic which can give you a bonus or grant you an ability and by choosing certain gods you can make the enemies stronger in a variety of ways and on the upside defeating them grants you more fragments (money) and experience. In the end though, and especially in the long run, that whole systems starts to shit itself seeing as how you quickly stick to two or three weapons you fancy and upgrade them quick as all shit and the tonics are not interesting or important enough for you to care about any one or other particularly and you end up picking a select few obviously important ones and the rest is fluff and convenience. I can't even remember why I said I thought this game worked.

 

[Lesifoere]

I don't hate it, to be fair. It's fun enough, but I do wish there'd be more to the gameplay. Supposedly the story/ending will make it worthwhile, so I'll finish it at least.

 

[LoPan]

I don't hate it, to be fair. It's fun enough, but I do wish there'd be more to the gameplay. Supposedly the story/ending will make it worthwhile, so I'll finish it at least.

The story itself and the ending is the high-point. They do good with the focus of the story being the people who survived the calamity rather than the calamity, they keep the unnecessary bits vague and maintain a sharp focus because of it. Suppose I'll have to start caring more about the origins of my own opinion; its a pretty decent game, solid story and good execution of that story. It's worth the price unless you're poor; actual poor that is, if you own a smart phone or have a subscription to an MMO then you are not allowed to complain about the price of Bastion.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

The style over substance that you bros refer to is the singular trait called indie games charm, perfect for convincing yourself that you're sticking it to the corporates by playing a hidden gem crafted by artists

 

[Barrow_Bug]

I didn't mind the demo. May be worth a purchase. After DX:HR, that is.

 

[Jasede]

-The combat is nice... but it's too easy, far too easy...

In English: the "game" is garbage.

 

[Lesifoere]

I'm flip-flopping. It's fun enough, in small doses. Very small doses.

 

[Metro]

"The kid says it's fun in small doses... ponders playing some more."

 

[Lesifoere]

"Kid picked up a pair of flip-flops today."

 

[LoPan]

The style over substance that you bros refer to is the singular trait called indie games charm, perfect for convincing yourself that you're sticking it to the corporates by playing a hidden gem crafted by artists

Are you raising the accusation that if you play something like Bastion you do so because it makes you feel you are sticking it to the corporates? Or is it more of a prejudice against Indie games?

It seems a very general thing to state. Applying it to all indie games is a grand sweep that includes anything from Knights of the Chalice to the Chzo Quadrilogy. Unless you mean, specifically, that independently developed games that have style over substance are inherently deceptive and thus fatuous, but then we are entering the area of defining an abstract concept. Mind you I am making assumptions here, just not sure what the application, use or particular meaning that statement carries.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

there is a difference between criticising those predisposed to self-back patting and saying a game would only be played by the same

for games the term 'indie' is rapidly turning out to be yet another marketing label used to convey a certain type of approach to a product

I find that it usually means bog standard genre mechanics with a visual or gameplay gimmick
add attractive yet low budget graphics and slightly different soundtrack that further serve to heighten the effect of 'everything is new here'

all this contributing to the contrived appearance of an independently made, free spirited innovative art piece of a game and therefore conferring the same honors on the developers who would not have made such an unique and daring product that they the anointed are currently appreciating and supporting, free of the prejudices of the main industry

when in fact as this thread has quite properly examined in this case Bastion would not have survived on the strength of its core mechanics alone and instead relies on peripheral distractions and hooks to convince the buyer of its worth

when commercial indie games are like this, and they so often are, I consider the creators very much chained to the whole concept of catering to their audience at the expense of possible genre creativity, much like AAA games do in the first place, and yet the perception of the indie games industry is still that of a dynamic and pioneering one. perhaps it is so market-share wise, but it is anything but the unchecked renaissance that the community would like to portray/perceive it as

the distinction between the reality and the idealised image of indie game label is where all this comes from

if they aren't as I have described I'm pleasantly surprised and the creators of such games deserve full credit for an uncompromised vision and a heaping of accolades and brofists or what have you

kotc, penumbra1+2/amnesia, solium infernum, super meat boy, frozen synapse etc

btw I don't know why you think I'm including free indie games under this, since they aren't made with the looming spector of required profitability over their shoulder they should be judged differently and that does not fall within the scope of this post


the quick bit by theonion may further clarify the matter in a lateral manner
http://www.theonion.com/articles/lowbud ... big,21102/

 

[LoPan]

there is a difference between criticising those predisposed to self-back patting and saying a game would only be played by the same

for games the term 'indie' is rapidly turning out to be yet another marketing label used to convey a certain type of approach to a product

I find that it usually means bog standard genre mechanics with a visual or gameplay gimmick
add attractive yet low budget graphics and slightly different soundtrack that further serve to heighten the effect of 'everything is new here'

all this contributing to the contrived appearance of an independently made, free spirited innovative art piece of a game and therefore conferring the same honors on the developers who would not have made such an unique and daring product that they the anointed are currently appreciating and supporting, free of the prejudices of the main industry

when in fact as this thread has quite properly examined in this case Bastion would not have survived on the strength of its core mechanics alone and instead relies on peripheral distractions and hooks to convince the buyer of its worth

when commercial indie games are like this, and they so often are, I consider the creators very much chained to the whole concept of catering to their audience at the expense of possible genre creativity, much like AAA games do in the first place, and yet the perception of the indie games industry is still that of a dynamic and pioneering one. perhaps it is so market-share wise, but it is anything but the unchecked renaissance that the community would like to portray/perceive it as

the distinction between the reality and the idealised image of indie game label is where all this comes from

if they aren't as I have described I'm pleasantly surprised and the creators of such games deserve full credit for an uncompromised vision and a heaping of accolades and brofists or what have you

kotc, penumbra1+2/amnesia, solium infernum, super meat boy, frozen synapse etc

btw I don't know why you think I'm including free indie games under this, since they aren't made with the looming spector of required profitability over their shoulder they should be judged differently and that does not fall within the scope of this post


the quick bit by theonion may further clarify the matter in a lateral manner
http://www.theonion.com/articles/lowbud ... big,21102/

That is absolutely lovely. Not one to compliment, do onto others as you would have done unto you and all that, but I dare say well done sir, very well done.

 

[Damned Registrations]

snip

You seem to be implying that any indie game has some sort of duty to break the mold set by games with publishers. I don't see why that should be the case. Just because there is a (well founded) stereotype that major publishers won't endorse developing anything significantly new, doesn't mean the guys without publishers shouldn't be permitted to make anything that's been done before with their own take on it.

That aside, Bastion is bog-standard compared to what? When's the last time a top down hack n slash game that WASN'T a diablo 2 clone got published on PC? Let alone for 15$ on release day?

The appeal of indie games isn't that every single fucking game is going to reinvent the wheel, it's that they're going to spend almost none of their budget on marketing, and make whatever fucking game they want without retarded suits moaning about how it doesn't resemble a AAA game released a week ago. And then they sell it for a sane price. A 15$ Diablo clone with unimaginitive items and skills set in a cyberpunk setting is still leagues better than a 60$ Diablo clone with the same mechanics in yet another fantasy setting with higher poly models, voice acting and nicer textures. There's still a market for "X" clones, and I'd rather it get filled by cheap clones with minor quirks than expensive clones with no quirks.

If you're just raging at every indie game being regarded as being as original as genuinely original games (Mount and Blade comes to mind) you'd be better served by reminding people of games that actually did something new, rather than pointing out the incredibly obvious fact that most indie games are based on games made before them. It's like bitching about landscape paintings for being landscape paintings when artists are supposed to be original, and why haven't they painted something I've never seen before instead?

 

[J1M]

Someone please explain the endings because I am curious what the others were and will not be backing up/playing again to find out.

 

[Skittles]

It had good ideas about difficulty modifiers and character creation, but the game wasn't deep enough to make them really shine. I would definitely support a sequel that built those systems out and made the game itself difficult and varied enough to warrant using them to the fullest extent.

To be more specific:
--I quite liked the "spirits" concept. You can equip one stat/character modifying spirit per character level. The problem was that there were more "+10 to HP" or "Falling does less damage and landing hurts enemies more" type spirits--incremental differences that didn't really matter when playing the game. The most exciting ones only increased the number of potions you could carry. I would want spirits that do more insane, game changing things, kind of like the "Hopscotch" you get for one level, at the end. That one changed how you move through the game--and actually made certain kinds of melee weapons a lot more appealing (as it's been mentioned, ranged is the way to go in this game).

I want liquors that do things like keeping the character on fire, so that every enemy he touches ignites, but he constantly loses health. I want something that makes you fall so hard whenever you get knocked down that you carry away a chunk of the floor and all the enemies standing on it with you. I want one that makes you move like a steam engine when running in a straight line--fast and nigh invincible--but about as agile as one. Stuff like that, which might make you play the game differently or at least make it feel like you're playing a different game each time you change up your line up.

Also, synergy would be cool.

--The difficulty system was similar, allowing you to equip 'idols' that made the game incrementally harder. Equipping all of them all at once did make the game feel noticeably harder, yes, but I can only think of one that had a specific, noticeable impact--one that made enemies drop explosives on death. That's the only one that actually forced me to change the way I played the game a little, training me to roll away from dead enemies as soon as they dropped. The other ones weren't very noticeable--enemy speed, damage, health, etc. upgrades mostly come to mind along with a couple of random shrugoff effects.

I want idols that actually change the game in bigger ways.




Those points aside, I did want to jump up and down pointing with glee at the moment of fridge logic of Melvillean proportions the game's writing produced.

"Call me Ishmael."

Still didn't play more than ten minutes of the New Game+, though.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

You seem to be implying that any indie game has some sort of duty to break the mold set by games with publishers. I don't see why that should be the case. Just because there is a (well founded) stereotype that major publishers won't endorse developing anything significantly new, doesn't mean the guys without publishers shouldn't be permitted to make anything that's been done before with their own take on it.

Did I say that? Please, people stop projecting your assumptions for the sake of making the horse you're on higher. But then again, I should not imply that you have some sort of duty to break the mold set by other codexians.

Publish whatever you want, tis glorious capitalism und der free market. Join in the cyclical vagaries of the big boys without losing the underdog label you conveniently exude and everything that means indie these days

But enough of the communal circlejerk reiteration that indie developers can always be counted on for new and better things.

That aside, Bastion is bog-standard compared to what? When's the last time a top down hack n slash game that WASN'T a diablo 2 clone got published on PC? Let alone for 15$ on release day?

Would be that I shared your sense of excitement.

A 15$ Diablo clone with unimaginitive items and skills set in a cyberpunk setting is still leagues better than a 60$ Diablo clone with the same mechanics in yet another fantasy setting with higher poly models, voice acting and nicer textures.

as such I'd like to thank the indie games industry et all for being brave enough to establish new and affordable frontiers of audience milking
seamus mcnally would be proud

There's still a market for "X" clones, and I'd rather it get filled by cheap clones with minor quirks than expensive clones with no quirks.

and I'd rather it get filled by moderately priced semi-clones with or without quirks. I dare not dream higher least the fires of ambition consume me, or perhaps give me less shit to waste time with
tragic that extreme dichotomial views like ours can never ever meet without sparking conflict or even worse nitpicking via semantics

If you're just raging at every indie game being regarded as being as original as genuinely original games (Mount and Blade comes to mind) you'd be better served by reminding people of games that actually did something new

I didn't?

kotc, penumbra1+2/amnesia, solium infernum, super meat boy, frozen synapse etc

and ai war, perhaps evochron, aquaria, escape velocity nova, dominions III, pathologic, spacechem, immortal defense, recettear, drod, everyday shooter, jets n' guns, magicka(good for one go solo at least), trine(likewise), breakquest(shatter can piss off), oasis, unreal world, gemini rue, crimsonland, starscape, saira, sorr(because I'd have paid for it fuck off sega)
some of them were even profitable
as before notwithstanding free ones that easily rival the aforementioned

Small as this list is due to my hate of indie games, perhaps you'd like to add some? You know, instead of feigning armchair elitism? Or since I've addressed the burden of proof required on your end that there are actually good indie games, you now can try at the self-defeating side task of framing these as not original and in fact completely derivative "oh you criticise indies but instead this list is proof you fall for banality just like everyone else and these are indeed banal sir, banal and I don't know where I'm going with this but I'm right and you're wrong"

What distinguishes style over substance(or a gimmick versus an actual well thought out mechanic) is whether the meat of the game is still laudable without the style. If so the style is an added bonus and elevates both itself and the substance.

rather than pointing out the incredibly obvious fact that most indie games are based on games made before them.

This completely misses all the points I raised about having a choice and still choosing derivative design and favoring style over stubstance and everything else that I wrote in favor of a strawman. Hey everyone stop complaining about games, of course they're based on other games. The hell does this have to do with my post?

Had I written along the same lines on the self-publishing written word industry you'd be coming in with your trite noises of 'durr most books are the same durr why you post this stuff'.

This might seem less incredibly obvious, but perhaps you should first check the span of your own reply for the same kind of nebulous arbitary personal standard of insight you seem to have required with my post and yet saw fit to omit from yours, or is there a far less interesting reason like me having struck a nerve elsewhere?

It's like bitching about landscape paintings for being landscape paintings when artists are supposed to be original, and why haven't they painted something I've never seen before instead?

No, it's like bitching about amateur landscape paintings for being just landscape paintings while the amateur artists and their fans smack themselves insensate against the glow of cutting edge landscape painting innovation and say it's amazing I've never seen paintings like these before and why don't the famous painters paint something like this instead oh you must suffer for your art but no fear I shall tell all my friends about your work?
Then you come in and say why don't you tell us of paintings that actually did something new, rather than pointing out the incredibly obvious fact that most artworks and based on artworks made before them tsk tsk I am not missing the point at all.

Do you post just for the novelty of seeing yourself think, or were you just in dire need to reinterpret a post until it would be something you could safely disagree with?
I don't see why that should be the case.