Support NeoGAF

[Amir0x]

I'm really enjoying Limbo so far, but if there's one thing that can be said, it's that Braid's puzzles were far more difficult.

I find Limbo's art and just the general way it goes about things to be absolutely enchanting, though. Sounds silly, I know, but even just the way the beginning of the game opens up and how you have to press A to "wake" your guy up - what a great little touch. I appreciate those small, mostly inconsequential elements. They ultimately end up combining to add a lot, I think.

I like the art direction of Braid more, but yeah... they've got a good thing with the look of LIMBO. I was really impressed with the way the Spider animated most. And that scene when

Spoiler

the two guys are tossing flaming wheels and shit at you, and when you approach up the ladder they depart

... extremely impressive animation.

 

[Shake Appeal]

All the puzzles were pretty awful.

"Some of the puzzles were hard and the game in general wasn't as streamlined and obvious as it could have been. It was really taxing for me to break out of the mentality of having my hand held and being told what to do, and sometimes I had to go looking for alternative or lateral solutions. I mean, sometimes the obvious thing didn't even work, and the game didn't always give me everything I needed on a plate to succeed either. Also, when it left something for me to find there weren't even instructions or a map or a flashing arrow to tell me where to look. And sometimes when I messed up a puzzle it took a while before I could mess up at it again. Boy, what a bad game this was."

 

[KoruptData]

This game made me buy Braid and I just put a little over an hour into it, I like Limbo more. I guess I should say so far.

 

[burgerdog]

Two ropes that pull blocks up and a mine cart. What's the solution to this?

Anyone? Been stuck for 40 minutes.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Two ropes that pull blocks up and a mine cart. What's the solution to this?

Anyone? Been stuck for 40 minutes.

Pull both the ropes!

 

[Amir0x]

Shake Appeal is so hilarious in his conviction that people who don't like LIMBO are somehow too stuck in their addiction to twenty years of old game design to UNDERSTAND ITS INHERENT GREATNESS.

It's almost cute, like a crazy hobo or something yelling that the world is ending.

 

[wizword]

Two ropes that pull blocks up and a mine cart. What's the solution to this?

Anyone? Been stuck for 40 minutes.

Spoiler

put mine cart on bottom. Pull down rope. Walk down on mine cart. Grab the rope. Than grab the next rope.

 

[TheOddOne]

Shake Appeal is so hilarious in his conviction that people who don't like LIMBO are somehow too stuck in their addiction to twenty years of old game design to UNDERSTAND ITS INHERENT GREATNESS.

It's almost cute, like a crazy hobo or something yelling that the world is ending.

:lol

 

[Zeliard]

I like the art direction of Braid more, but yeah... they've got a good thing with the look of LIMBO. I was really impressed with the way the Spider animated most.

I'm also not afraid to admit that the spider's first appearance got to me a little. :lol

I'm not really that arachnophobic, but the way the game is so empty and quiet up until then, but so ominous that you continually expect frightening something to pop out... when you stumble on that monstrous spider with just its legs sticking out, not in full view, it makes quite the impression.

And then I fucked his shit up.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Shake Appeal is so hilarious in his conviction that people who don't like LIMBO are somehow too stuck in their addiction to twenty years of old game design to UNDERSTAND ITS INHERENT GREATNESS.

Actually, it's only in the last ten years or so, and particularly the last five or six, that most games seem to have have stopped giving us credit for our own intelligence and perseverance.

 

[voodoopanda]

I think if you don't die a bunch in Limbo, you're doing it wrong. This flies in the face of most games, since death is a signal that you're failing and doing something wrong. But I think equating death with failure, as is often the case in most other video games, is a mistake with this game. Just like the game subverts assumptions with it's puzzles, it changes how death is used. Death isn't failing, it isn't a negative in this game, it is, instead, a huge part of the game that you're meant to experience. You're supposed to die, over and over, in gruesome and sudden ways, and from these deaths figure out the puzzles. It's a gameplay mechanic, not a "you have failed!" signal.

 

[Amir0x]

Two ropes that pull blocks up and a mine cart. What's the solution to this?

Anyone? Been stuck for 40 minutes.

Spoiler

Push the mine cart as close to the first rope as possible. Head back up the ladder. Pull the first rope until it can't be pulled any further. Run back and jump on top of the mine cart and grab the rope before he gets too high and passes the saw blades. Then, when the rope is fully pulled again, simply swing across and grab the next rope, making sure to only pull so much so that you have time to get through both doors

.

This was actually one of the better puzzles in the game. Nothing trial-and-error about it and the solution is easily understandable on a first try with some thought. Yet it's still challenging enough to give pause.

 

[Mutagenic]

Amir0x, if there's one thing I can say about you over the years, it would be that you have no shortage of passion when declaring your opinions.

 

[Amir0x]

Amir0x, if there's one thing I can say about you over the years, it would be that you have no shortage of passion when declaring your opinions.

We are all passionate about things. Shake Appeal is passionate too. Why am I the only passionate one in this thread!? :lol

 

[Zeliard]

I think if you don't die a bunch in Limbo, you're doing it wrong. This flies in the face of most games, since death is a signal that you're failing and doing something wrong. But I think equating death with failure, as is often the case in most other video games, is a mistake with this game. Just like the game subverts assumptions with it's puzzles, it changes how death is used. Death isn't failing, it isn't a negative in this game, it is, instead, a huge part of the game. You're supposed to die, over and over, in gruesome and sudden ways, and from these deaths figure out the puzzles. It's a gameplay mechanic, not a "you have failed!" signal.

 

[xbhaskarx]

No it's pretty much the number one rule of game design: a death should ALWAYS be the player's fault, never the game's.

Wow, I don't know much about the development side of things, but I really hope there is no set of shitty and arbitrary rules dictating what makes for good game design... If such rules really exist, that may help explain why video games are for the most part still stuck light years behind mediums like literature and film.

 

[Amir0x]

I love Demon's Souls. Fun fact about Demon's Souls is that none of its deaths are trial-and-error. All can be avoided with some calculating patience. That's why it is the BEST type of difficulty. And it's part of the reason Demon's Souls is probably one of the greatest games ever made!

Wow, I don't know much about the development side of things, but I really hope there is no set of shitty and arbitrary rules dictating what makes for good game design...

Only common sense rules. If it is the game's fault you are dying, then the player has the right to get frustrated and hate your game. Because you're causing something that is beyond their control. Game's are first about control. No matter the type of game, they all exert different levels of control over the player. LIMBO exerts an obscene amount of control over the player, and often abuses this control by intentionally misleading gamer's to unavoidable deaths. This is bad game design

 

[SapientWolf]

This game made me buy Braid and I just put a little over an hour into it, I like Limbo more. I guess I should say so far.

Beating Braid feels like getting an A on a metaphysics test, but I can definitely see how that might not appeal to everyone.

 

[d0c_zaius]

Shake Appeal is so hilarious in his conviction that people who don't like LIMBO are somehow too stuck in their addiction to twenty years of old game design to UNDERSTAND ITS INHERENT GREATNESS.

It's almost cute, like a crazy hobo or something yelling that the world is ending.

And you are the rich guy yelling at a hobo. Great job guy.

 

[The Friendly Monster]

No it's pretty much the number one rule of game design: a death should ALWAYS be the player's fault, never the game's.

If you disagree with this, then I'm pretty secure in my superior grasp of quality game design.

I disagree. It isn't a bad rule of thumb at all, but you are massively oversimplifying it in my view. The deaths in this game aren't just a fail state, they are more a genuine mechanic.

It seems daft to discount an experience just because you don't feel empowered or as if you are being "tricked".

p.s. I did the switch thing first time, it just seemed obvious to me, so in that way obviously the designers had managed to communicate....*shrug*

 

[Carlisle]

Beating Braid feels like getting an A on a metaphysics test, but I can definitely see how that might not appeal to everyone.

Not to mention that Braid's ending is the most jaw-dropping twist I've been blown away by this entire console gen.

 

[Shake Appeal]

We are all passionate about things. Shake Appeal is passionate too. Why am I the only passionate one in this thread!? :lol

Because my passion is for reason and understanding and yours is for an imaginary cardinal rule of game design that is completely at odds with the clear, intended, and successful philosophy that birthed Limbo.

I am sorry you didn't have fun with this pretty great videogame. But that's on you.

 

[voodoopanda]

Only common sense rules. If it is the game's fault you are dying, then the player has the right to get frustrated and hate your game. Because you're causing something that is beyond their control. Game's are first about control. No matter the type of game, they all exert different levels of control over the player. LIMBO exerts an obscene amount of control over the player, and often abuses this control by intentionally misleading gamer's to unavoidable deaths. This is bad game design

I'd say that's only true if death is meant to be avoided, that death is a signal that you're playing the game incorrectly. That you are not supposed to die, so therefore being killed is a bad thing, and you don't want the game to do bad things to you. I think this frustration happens because so many games use death for that very reason. In Limbo you are meant to experience the deaths, they enhance the game. You are rewarded for dying in a number of ways, from the sudden impact and gruesome imagery, to the surprise and subverted assumptions about what can kill you, to the way they hint at the correct solution to the puzzles. Limbo itself is a place you go when you die, and if you were to die in Limbo you would return to Limbo, with no escape.

 

[Amir0x]

And you are the rich guy yelling at a hobo. Great job guy.

I'm more like giggling at the hobo. I find these conversations more fun than the game.

p.s. I did the switch thing first time, it just seemed obvious to me, so in that way obviously the designers had managed to communicate....*shrug*

There's no way to prove if you're lying or not, but it is incredibly difficult to believe that anyone can "understand" this solution out of critical thought on the first try. One may indeed get LUCKY and magically land on the right spaces, but it is not because there was some obvious indicator of which spots were slotted.

Everyone knows those things will crush you though, of course.

 

[LordPhoque]

I love Demon's Souls. Fun fact about Demon's Souls is that none of its deaths are trial-and-error.

What ? I mean, not that the deaths in DS are particulary unfair or anything, but some of them are totally not avoidable during the first playthrough. Especially the bosses, you have to fight them for 1 or 2 trials so you can learn the pattern before you can actually defeat them. Or for example, when you run across these guardians in Latria for the first time, there's no way you could be aware that they can suck your life like that when you go facing them at close range.

I mean damn, if we were following your way of thinking, every game could be finished without dying once during the first playthrough. It is possible, but there's no way it'll happen for a normal/core gamer. The learn and trial process is a part of pretty much every game since the beginnings of game. Sure, it's less brutal these days, but it still exists.

 

[SapientWolf]

I love Demon's Souls. Fun fact about Demon's Souls is that none of its deaths are trial-and-error. All can be avoided with some calculating patience. That's why it is the BEST type of difficulty. And it's part of the reason Demon's Souls is probably one of the greatest games ever made!



Only common sense rules. If it is the game's fault you are dying, then the player has the right to get frustrated and hate your game. Because you're causing something that is beyond their control. Game's are first about control. No matter the type of game, they all exert different levels of control over the player. LIMBO exerts an obscene amount of control over the player, and often abuses this control by intentionally misleading gamer's to unavoidable deaths. This is bad game design

I wasn't too frustrated by the trial and error nature of Limbo because the deaths are usually pretty entertaining and the checkpoints are generous. It's almost like Trials HD in that respect.

 

[Amir0x]

Because my passion is for reason and understanding and yours is for an imaginary cardinal rule of game design that is completely at odds with the clear, intended, and successful philosophy that birthed Limbo.

I am sorry you didn't have fun with this pretty great videogame. But that's on you.

This snappy comeback is making me laugh because it doesn't actually make sense. My comment was saying we're all passionate in various ways, and I was asking a rhetorical question about why nobody else is considered passionate. Your response suggests you ARE passionate, so the rest of your answer is irrelevant and largely tangential.

I can assure you, nothing you have said is particularly reasonable or rational. In fact, a large part of your argument against LIMBO detractors seems to rely heavily on a gut feeling that we are somehow unadaptable to new game ideas because of our experiences with game design for the last decade. Which is of course factually false and makes no sense in the context of LIMBO discussion, since LIMBO is neither innovative nor some bold new stroke of gaming direction.

Not only have there been other puzzle adventure games before, but many of them have also had similar mechanics and even the same trial-and-error flaws.

 

[The Friendly Monster]

There's no way to prove if you're lying or not, but it is incredibly difficult to believe that anyone can "understand" this solution out of critical thought on the first try. One may indeed get LUCKY and magically land on the right spaces, but it is not because there was some obvious indicator of which spots were slotted.

Everyone knows those things will crush you though, of course.

It definitely wasn't critical thought, more a feeling of how the game worked. I didn't get lucky, and was deliberately aiming my jumps. In any case, I wouldn't have been too unhappy if I had been crushed, just as I wasn't unhappy when the kid threw an arrow through me on the path back.

You have every right to get frustrated at any game you want to, and you are fairly articulating your annoyances, but it seems you are in the minority in finding this annoying. Thus to say they are flouting rules of design seems somewhat moot.

 

[Amir0x]

I wasn't too frustrated by the trial and error nature of Limbo because the deaths are usually pretty entertaining and the checkpoints are generous. It's almost like Trials HD in that respect.

Interesting about that...

Thankfully the checkpoints in this game are very good, because otherwise this sort of thing would be unforgivable. Fortunately, it's only a mild irritation.

...I wasn't too frustrated either as you can see from my comment. I just found it to be one of the game's flaws. It is bad game design and so I don't like it. People are too busy blowing LIMBO to actually read any conversational nuance though.

What ? I mean, not that the deaths in DS are particulary unfair or anything, but some of them are totally not avoidable during the first playthrough. Especially the bosses, you have to fight them for 1 or 2 trials so you can learn the pattern before you can actually defeat them. Or for example, when you run across these guardians in Latria for the first time, there's no way you could be aware that they can suck your life like that when you go facing them at close range.

I mean damn, if we were following your way of thinking, every game could be finished without dying once during the first playthrough. It is possible, but there's no way it'll happen for a normal/core gamer.

In Demon's Souls, every single death can be avoided with patience or skill. Every single one. Never once is a player of any sort of intelligence led to believe they have stumbled on something they could not avoid.

If you are slow and methodical about your progress, you will find the game massively easier than everyone is suggesting in the Demon's Souls thread.

In LIMBO, you literally cannot avoid a first death on many puzzles without some bizarre happenstance or luck. In Demon's Souls, every trap has some general indication, or some leeway to "get out of the way" before it hits you, or online player's can leave you clues about it. And bosses are the same way - you simply require skill.

 

[Zeliard]

I love Demon's Souls. Fun fact about Demon's Souls is that none of its deaths are trial-and-error. All can be avoided with some calculating patience. That's why it is the BEST type of difficulty. And it's part of the reason Demon's Souls is probably one of the greatest games ever made!

And this is why I will always love you.

 

[voodoopanda]

In fact, a large part of your argument against LIMBO detractors seems to rely heavily on a gut feeling that we are somehow unadaptable to new game ideas because of our experiences with game design for the last decade. Which is of course factually false and makes no sense in the context of LIMBO discussion, since LIMBO is neither innovative nor some bold new stroke of gaming direction.

I dunno, you seem to be holding onto the belief that dying=bad pretty hard, which is an element of game design that has been used a ton in video games, so much so it's hard to imagine it differently. Can you imagine a game where dying is good and a benefit instead of a bad thing that needs to be avoided? Or do you think that's impossible?

 

[Shake Appeal]

I was going to type out a lengthy response, but then it occurred to me that if you follow The Rules of Game Design According to Amirox, then Another World is a terrible videogame.

And once I realized I was dealing with someone who could consider Another World a terrible videogame, I just felt like giving him the biggest sympathy hug I could muster.

 

[Amir0x]

I dunno, you seem to be holding onto the belief that dying=bad pretty hard, which is an element of game design that has been used a ton in video games, so much so it's hard to imagine it differently. Can you imagine a game where dying is good and a benefit instead of a bad thing that needs to be avoided?

The specific problem is when you die and you do not feel like you can AVOID that death. That you feel it is the game's fault for it, not the player's fault.

I have no problem at all with a game that feels death is some necessary thing (although, I have not seen many games that have ever done something like this right. LIMBO doesn't either).

I do not see how LIMBO is different than any other flawed games in this regard, though. There's nothing special about the way you die in LIMBO that hasn't been done before in any other game with liberal check points and trial-and-error gameplay, of which there are many. The crux of the argument is that there is some special, justifiable reason the game forces you to die at points, but the actual game does not draw any of this out. It feels exactly the same to die here as any other trial-and-error flawed game.

 

[Brother Sport]

I think I might understand Amir0x in all of this.

So let's say dying is part of the Limbo experience, what is it really that differentiates Limbo from any other platform/puzzle game where the player can die? No matter the case dying in a video game is a way to show the player the right way, you restart and do it right (jump farther to not fall in the hole or whatever). The difference with Limbo is that the game doesn't always show you what you have to do in order to avoid death. With the exception of the cosmetic features of dying in Limbo (the variations and gruesome detail of death) how does Limbo make dying a new game mechanic? In the end, what you are doing is replaying the same puzzle or making the same jump over and over again. It's not something that I really think enriches the experience.

 

[Amir0x]

Apparently the sole remaining positive aspect of dying in LIMBO is servicing some lame meta joke that art house elitists think is super duper hip.

 

[voodoopanda]

The specific problem is when you die and you do not feel like you can AVOID that death. That you feel it is the game's fault for it, not the player's fault.

I have no problem at all with a game that feels death is some necessary thing (although, I have not seen many games that have ever done something like this right. LIMBO doesn't either).

I do not see how LIMBO is different than any other flawed games in this regard, though. There's nothing special about the way you die in LIMBO that hasn't been done before in any other game with liberal check points and trial-and-error gameplay, of which there are many. The crux of the argument is that there is some special, justifiable reason the game forces you to die at points, but the actual game does not draw any of this out. It feels exactly the same to die here as any other trial-and-error flawed game.

I'll try an example to explain what I mean. Let's say there was a platform/puzzle game where, if you managed to make a difficult jump, you were rewarded with a Power-Up. This Power-Up was unavoidable. This Power-Up allowed you to more easily get past a different obstacle in the level. That's basic game design you see in a ton of games and usually feels pretty awesome because you've been rewarded.

Now what if we changed that Power-Up to a sudden death animation, that sets you back a couple feet, but gives you a clear idea of how to now get past the obstacle. They both work, in essence, the same way, but since we've been programmed to think death is bad, we get frustrated in that second example.

I'm not necessarily saying Limbo is completely unique, just that unavoidable deaths aren't always a negative, depending on how the game is designed. Limbo seems very much about death, from the title of the game, to the graphics, to all the dead bodies and death that appears throughout, and how you have to use both your own deaths and the deaths of others to get past puzzles, so it fits thematically.

 

[The Friendly Monster]

I understand, I just don't agree, since I loved the game.

Trying to justify this I might say that I liked the fact that the game exerted a huge amount of control over me, that at certain times I died and it wasn't even my fault. My reaction wasn't "this game is unfair" but rather "ooh you sneaky bastard", I liked the fact that the game was faking me out and playing with my expectations, it also freed me of having only myself to blame when failing.

I can totally understand the other side of it, like it totally makes sense, but I just didn't experience it when playing. So to say that it is inherently "bad design" is pure nonsense.

 

[Amir0x]

I understand, I just don't agree, since I loved the game.

Trying to justify this I might say that I liked the fact that the game exerted a huge amount of control over me, that at certain times I died and it wasn't even my fault. My reaction wasn't "this game is unfair" but rather "ooh you sneaky bastard", I liked the fact that the game was faking me out and playing with my expectations, it also freed me of having only myself to blame when failing.

I can totally understand the other side of it, like it totally makes sense, but I just didn't experience it when playing. So to say that it is inherently "bad design" is pure nonsense.

I believe it is bad game design, pure and simple. That said, the first part of your comment was where we should be in the discussion. We can disagree with the merits of the trial-and-error gameplay without any of the other bullshit we've had in this thread so far.

 

[The Friendly Monster]

I believe it is bad game design, pure and simple. That said, the first part of your comment was where we should be in the discussion. We can disagree with the merits of the trial-and-error gameplay without any of the other bullshit we've had in this thread so far.

Well in that case bring on more "badly designed" games .

 

[SapientWolf]

Apparently the sole remaining positive aspect of dying in LIMBO is servicing some lame meta joke that art house elitists think is super duper hip.

I think they did it just to anger existentialists.

 

[Empty]

I like the game way more than him, but i agree with Amir0x about some unfair puzzles being bad game design. Then again i don't find I Wanna Be the Guy hilarious or interesting either, so maybe that humour is lost on me.

 

[Pakkidis]

Trying to beat the game with 5 or less deaths. I find some of the puzzles in the first half of the game harder than the second.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Apparently the sole remaining positive aspect of dying in LIMBO is servicing some lame meta joke that art house elitists think is super duper hip.

Limbo's gameplay, its repetitive deaths, perfectly serve its concept, themes, and even its 'plot'. I have massive admiration for that, because almost no games manage this harmony (which Johnathan Blow would probably call ludonarrative consonance), almost no game designers know how to create or sustain it, and almost no game players ever even stop to think about it.

On a simple level, Limbo asks us to consider our attitude to death in videogames and the ways we take it for granted (just as, say, Bioshock briefly asked us to consider the linearity and narrative determinism of videogames). You could take it further and say it prompts us to consider our attitude to any and all arbitrary frustrations and suffering we encounter in the real world.

The title wasn't chosen at random, and this isn't just a convenient setting for a videogame. It's a gameworld that mirrors the states of being lost, stuck, trapped, frustrated (and this is a puzzle game, remember). Limbo argues -- through the very nature of its gameplay, through its unavoidable deaths -- that arbitrary and repetitive suffering can be surmounted by perseverance, by open-mindedness to new discoveries or approaches, and above all by a healthy mentality.

I would argue Limbo offers a lesson, along with cool art and some nifty puzzles, that you have unequivocally refused to even consider. The moment it asks you to question something you have long since internalized as standard ("Dying in a videogame is bad; it is the enemy of progress; I know this because in the games I have played, dying has hampered my progress."), you just get angry and frustrated. This saddens me, honestly, because games that are this clever, as well as being this fun (and I found Limbo fun 97% of the time while I was playing), are exceedingly rare.

In short: if you tend to rage over Limbo's "bad game design", you may find ordinary day-to-day living very, very difficult to bear.

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

I just finished it in one four hour sitting. Incredible experience. Playing it in a dim room with my lamp on and the volume cranked up made it extremely chilling, but I'm sure the atmosphere would've been just as impactful in daylight as the art style and generally grim nature of the game really made it an experience that Braid and P.B. Winterbottom never came close to touching. I never expected to be chased by a giant spider, decapitated or to view other children hanging from ledges.

To an extent I agree that the game relies quite a bit on a trial and error way of playing, however as I progressed throughout the game and got a better understanding of the mechanics I found myself dying less as I learned from my mistakes much quicker. The checkpoints were so good that I never felt that it was penalising me for dying, so it didn't lead to frustration. Of course, the puzzles were much easier than some of those found in the likes of Braid and P.B. Winterbottom, but that was quite nice as it resulted in a fluid experience for me. With the former games I used to solve one puzzle at a time, then go back to it later for a crack at the next ridiculous obstacle. Here I was able to explore the world in one go, taking in the variety of puzzles and giving the game a true sense of exploration and adventure.

My feelings about the end are mixed. On one hand, it was was quite underwhelming as

Spoiler

it just stopped abruptly with absolutely no sense of closure, and the last puzzle wasn't anything "epic"

but on the other hand I loved how subtle and subdued it was. It didn't feel out of place with the rest of the game and the ambiguity gives what little story there is some room for personal interpretation. I must admit I was expecting the game to have some huge twist or metaphysical message like Braid, but now I'm glad it didn't.

One of the best games of the year, if not this gen. Complaints about price and length honestly baffle me, but then that happens with most games these days, not just XBLA titles.

 

[MetatronM]

For all this talk about "trial and error" in this game, I'm a little over halfway through it and have found very little of that. There are a few puzzles I've come across like that where the solution becomes really obvious after dying once or where there's a bit of an unexpected twist part way through a sequence, but for the most part the game seems to take what you've learned previously and forces you to examine the situation before making a move. Plus you start to expect those unexpected twists and start looking out more for things that would otherwise be surprises if you weren't on your guard.

I've seen more ingenuity than trial-and-error randomness so far, though that's not to say it isn't there at all.

That said, I also don't consider a little trial and error to be a particularly bad thing. If it was ALL trial and error, then yeah that would be a problem, but lots and lots of the puzzles can be easily navigated the first time through with a little thought, and really most of my deaths have been more about a lack of execution on my part rather than my having to die to figure out what's going on.

 

[d0c_zaius]

Apparently the sole remaining positive aspect of dying in LIMBO is servicing some lame meta joke that art house elitists think is super duper hip.

tryingwaytoohard.jpg

liking the way the gameplay ties into the theme and story = "blowing" the game. gotcha, guy.

 

[Brother Sport]

Death or failure is part of experiencing a game, you will fail sooner or later. Just like real life. What you do is learn from your mistake and try it again. This is exactly what Limbo does, it's no different from any other game out there, they just don't show you how you can make it through alive. What you do in Limbo is experiencing puzzles inch by inch, replaying segments constantly. Granted, that death belongs in this game on another level, what ever level that might be. But is it good gameplay? People like Amir0x, looking for fun, might disagree.

 

[Shake Appeal]

On a base level, I can't understand why dying (which takes two or three seconds at most, followed by a near-instant load, usually to above five steps back from where you were) is such a chore in this game. It's like five seconds tops every time until you are back at it. It's painless! It's puzzling through Limbo that's meant to be hard.

 

[Draft]

Man this thread has me confused. :lol

I bought my 1600 points card for this game but was a bit underwhelmed by the game play aspects of the demo. From reading the thread it seems like the actual game play is fairly simple overall. Debating between this and DeathSpank and can only grab one right now with the points I have. Both games seem to have issues unfortunately. I thought one of them would be a home run.

Limbo is a home run. Get Limbo.

 

[soldat7]

Pretty cool that you can turn off the death animations (cuts to black). It's a bit too disturbing seeing a child mangled in such ways.