-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Quantum Conundrum |OT| A game made by Kim Swift - lead designer on Portal 1
- Thread starter MRORANGE
- Start date
D
Deleted member 102362
Unconfirmed Member
Finished the game a few days ago: Thoughts (though this is repeating a lot of what this thread has already said
Good:
-Several of the puzzles were clever.
-The dimension shifting elements were enjoyable, and I liked figuring out how they worked together to solve a puzzle.
-Game did a good job of acclimating you to using the different dimensions, and then on using them together.
Mediocre:
-JDL's voice acting (I love him otherwise.)
-Music was OK. Not bad, not great.
-Hallways, level aesthetics got boring/repetitive after a while.
Bad:
-The humor. The game was rarely, if ever, funny. Games that try to be funny and fail can become painfully awkward, which this one often does, especially when JDL relays a bad pun. I like bad puns, but these...maybe it was the delivery?
-The story was near-impossible to care about. The setup felt meaningless (kid visiting uncle.) Nothing was built up during the course of the narrative. I have no problem playing games that make storytelling secondary or non-existent, but when a game does try to incorporate some focus on it, they'd better do a darn good job of it.
-As clever as some of the puzzles were, some of them were very frustrating to figure out, aka just not all that fun.
-
-
Overall? I went into this game with an open mind. I was determined not to compare this to Portal and to see it for what it was. And what I saw was an unsuccessful Portal clone.
Good:
-Several of the puzzles were clever.
-The dimension shifting elements were enjoyable, and I liked figuring out how they worked together to solve a puzzle.
-Game did a good job of acclimating you to using the different dimensions, and then on using them together.
Mediocre:
-JDL's voice acting (I love him otherwise.)
-Music was OK. Not bad, not great.
-Hallways, level aesthetics got boring/repetitive after a while.
Bad:
-The humor. The game was rarely, if ever, funny. Games that try to be funny and fail can become painfully awkward, which this one often does, especially when JDL relays a bad pun. I like bad puns, but these...maybe it was the delivery?
-The story was near-impossible to care about. The setup felt meaningless (kid visiting uncle.) Nothing was built up during the course of the narrative. I have no problem playing games that make storytelling secondary or non-existent, but when a game does try to incorporate some focus on it, they'd better do a darn good job of it.
-As clever as some of the puzzles were, some of them were very frustrating to figure out, aka just not all that fun.
-
The ending. One of the most abrupt, unexpected, and dissatisfying endings I've ever played in a game. I seriously thought that when I entered whatever it was I was entering, it would take me into the final section of the game, the section which would demand that I take my knowledge of the four dimensions and utilize them in the most complex way yet so I could solve the mystery of how my uncle became trapped in another dimension and then I rescue him!
Nope.
Nope.
Credits song. Terrible. The lyrics are just awful. Quantum Conundrum, YOU ARE NOT PORTAL. Stop trying to be it.
Overall? I went into this game with an open mind. I was determined not to compare this to Portal and to see it for what it was. And what I saw was an unsuccessful Portal clone.
Yeah, I saw a lot of previews/reviews doing it, but I wanted to try to get that out of my mind when I actually played it. I did not succeed.
krameriffic
Member
Just finished it. It gets more engaging later, but in a bad way. I was bored for the first ~2 hours of the game and could barely bring myself to slog through it, and then I was frustrated through the second half when the puzzle solving took a back seat to the platforming, feathering objects around with a hair trigger on the antigravity, and lots of annoying conveyor belt puzzles. There are practically no challenging puzzles, but I suppose if you like first person platforming with some mechanics, this might be the game for you.
There was only one puzzle in the game that I found actually challenging as a puzzle and it was the one where you choose one of the four IDS batteries and have to acquire the other 3 in order afterwards. It was a clever little gimmick, but poorly implemented. I could not solve it when I started with the antigravity battery, but it was literally trivial when I started with the time slow. Time slowing immediately let me get the light dimension from behind the fan, which let me laboriously block crates for about 5 minutes to get the antigravity battery and then the heavy battery.
Most of the time, the the puzzles feel like rehashes of previous puzzles and the only challenge I found in most of them was in the execution of the awkward platforming and using the right dimensional shifts at the right time. When you start mixing 3-4 shifts in harmony alongside flying on a couch through lasers and low ceilings, you've left your puzzle game in the dust for a pure platformer, and I fucking hate platformers.
For a game so rich with mechanics, both in the hands of the player AND in the hands of the AI, the game never felt really clever to me. There's all kinds of stuff happening in the game compared to something like Portal, but it ends up feeling cluttered and unimaginative rather than clever and interesting. Where Portal 2 has about 7 "things" that all feel nicely distinct (lasers, light bridges, excursion funnels, faith plates, and the 3 paints) QC just feels like an arbitrary mishmash of random shit happening.
Portal is beautiful in its simplicity, and to this day map makers are putting up maps that do new and unique things with a small set of mechanics. Those kinds of puzzles feel great to figure out because when you get stumped on them, you feel like they've legitimately made a hard puzzle rather than just inventing some new rules. Once the real game starts about halfway through, QC feels like cluttered by comparison, with at any time a whole bunch of cheesy different ways that I could approach each puzzle and do it successfully.
It's a subtle thing that I feel about it and I'm not sure if I'm explaining it properly, but so many of the mechanics felt contrived later on. Like, we want to have the player do something, so rather than cleverly using stuff we already implemented, we'll just add some weird new thing (like the robots that rushed forward in a region to knock blocks over the edge out of your reach). The stuff that they reuse is always the same schtick, while Portal does such cool things with such a small subset of tricks up its sleeve.
I'm not even sure what happened at the end, and quite frankly I don't care. At that point I was frustrated and sick of the game and just wanted to finish it because I spent the money on it. I wasn't intrigued by what was happening and I was sick of John de Lancie babbling incoherent, unfunny nonsense into my ear.
There was only one puzzle in the game that I found actually challenging as a puzzle and it was the one where you choose one of the four IDS batteries and have to acquire the other 3 in order afterwards. It was a clever little gimmick, but poorly implemented. I could not solve it when I started with the antigravity battery, but it was literally trivial when I started with the time slow. Time slowing immediately let me get the light dimension from behind the fan, which let me laboriously block crates for about 5 minutes to get the antigravity battery and then the heavy battery.
Most of the time, the the puzzles feel like rehashes of previous puzzles and the only challenge I found in most of them was in the execution of the awkward platforming and using the right dimensional shifts at the right time. When you start mixing 3-4 shifts in harmony alongside flying on a couch through lasers and low ceilings, you've left your puzzle game in the dust for a pure platformer, and I fucking hate platformers.
For a game so rich with mechanics, both in the hands of the player AND in the hands of the AI, the game never felt really clever to me. There's all kinds of stuff happening in the game compared to something like Portal, but it ends up feeling cluttered and unimaginative rather than clever and interesting. Where Portal 2 has about 7 "things" that all feel nicely distinct (lasers, light bridges, excursion funnels, faith plates, and the 3 paints) QC just feels like an arbitrary mishmash of random shit happening.
Portal is beautiful in its simplicity, and to this day map makers are putting up maps that do new and unique things with a small set of mechanics. Those kinds of puzzles feel great to figure out because when you get stumped on them, you feel like they've legitimately made a hard puzzle rather than just inventing some new rules. Once the real game starts about halfway through, QC feels like cluttered by comparison, with at any time a whole bunch of cheesy different ways that I could approach each puzzle and do it successfully.
It's a subtle thing that I feel about it and I'm not sure if I'm explaining it properly, but so many of the mechanics felt contrived later on. Like, we want to have the player do something, so rather than cleverly using stuff we already implemented, we'll just add some weird new thing (like the robots that rushed forward in a region to knock blocks over the edge out of your reach). The stuff that they reuse is always the same schtick, while Portal does such cool things with such a small subset of tricks up its sleeve.
I'm not even sure what happened at the end, and quite frankly I don't care. At that point I was frustrated and sick of the game and just wanted to finish it because I spent the money on it. I wasn't intrigued by what was happening and I was sick of John de Lancie babbling incoherent, unfunny nonsense into my ear.
Wok
Member
Wait for 10 a.m. PST. There will be sales.
The general consensus is that it's a bad Portal clone.
However, I played through it and enjoyed it immensely. If you can get over the flaws, you should hopefully appreciate that it does exactly what a puzzle game like this is supposed to do. It has those standard moments of elation when you figure out a puzzle. It also has moments where you realize what the game wants you to do and you say: "Are you fucking kidding me?" and look at your screen in despair. Then you manage to do it and feel awesome.
In any case, YMMV. Even if that's something that you're looking for, you might not have the same experience that I did. Might be worth holding out, unless it really sounds like something you'd enjoy.
I've been crawling through the game, playing a puzzle or two each night I get on. Not sure what stage of completion I am at.
I'm enjoying it, but I do agree that the atmosphere of the game is pretty lacking. It's like they were actively trying to portray the professor as a douchebag.
With the way he refers to the protagonist in the beginning, I thought it would figure into the plot, actually.
I'm enjoying it, but I do agree that the atmosphere of the game is pretty lacking. It's like they were actively trying to portray the professor as a douchebag.
With the way he refers to the protagonist in the beginning, I thought it would figure into the plot, actually.
SpacePirate Ridley
Member
Im so sad that JdL's work here is not to par with his usual work. That and the writing that brings his acting down.
It could have been awesome with a good writer.
Not only that, George Jetson's shirt and Marty McFly's shoes also.
It could have been awesome with a good writer.
Was just playing, and noticed something. The professor's glasses here, look a lot like Jensen's from Deus Ex: Human Revolution. He also mentions, they're clothes he picked up from the future.
Not only that, George Jetson's shirt and Marty McFly's shoes also.
Just beat it. I really love the mechanics and the puzzles were really fun. I didn't get stuck like I did in Portal 1 & 2.
Story didn't bother me because I wasn't playing for it but was very basic like I expected.
I don't know if this is considered spoilery so:
I'll buy DLC levels if/when they put any out cause I would love to play some more.
Story didn't bother me because I wasn't playing for it but was very basic like I expected.
I don't know if this is considered spoilery so:
thought the ending sequence was pretty cool until the actual ending :/
I'll buy DLC levels if/when they put any out cause I would love to play some more.
But... it's just Portal all over again but slightly worse. Nonsensical test chambers, ambiguous comedy narrator, anthropomorphic machines, and even a 4th wall song over the credits. And the puzzles are worse as Portal had a much "purer" mechanic that could be built on in so many ways.
If she made another Portal for money at the behest of a publisher then fine, that's like how Nolan North gets asked to do Nathan Drake by other companies even though he can do a full range. But if this is genuinely the game she wanted to make and she can't recognise that it's a Portal clone, then she's creatively bankrupt.
I think it's the Portal 2 she wanted to make. She wasn't allowed full creative control, so she went elsewhere, but Valve kept all her toys. They've acquired better toys, while she's helmed a largely disappointing game. She insists she still hasn't played Portal 2, either, which would be a baffling decision considering the game she set out to make. It's all kind of sad. : (
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Honestly, that's pretty disrespectful to the 6 other classmates who helped her achieve the career she wanted. Jeep Barnett, her classmate from Digipen, was the project lead on Portal 2 and she can't even play the game to prove a point or something?
Co-op in Portal 2 was better than anything in Portal 1.
I was slightly incorrect. She's said she hasn't played very much of Portal 2, and does not have an opinion on it, as of May. Still sounds like a measure of indignation and, I agree, you'd think she'd be more invested in what she helped build, and the success of her fellow Narbacular Drop team members.
I think now that the reason Picard hated Q wasn't that he was an all-powerful space meddler, but that his voice constantly grated on Picard's nerves.
The bad music and fiddly platforming in this is making it hard to love, even something like powering up a generator is trickier than it should be.
The bad music and fiddly platforming in this is making it hard to love, even something like powering up a generator is trickier than it should be.
I feel like I missed something, where did this come from?
Just beat the PS3 version.
The puzzles were too easy. There wasn't a single point that stumped me or even really tripped me up in trying to figure out how it worked, so mentally I was bored by them somewhat. My only occasional problem was executing the solution.
Graphics were simplistic but okay for what they were doing. I have an SSD in my PS3 so I can't ever really comment on texture pop anymore, really didn't notice much.
The house didn't make sense. Like, Portal and Portal 2 felt significantly more like they could be actual places that just so happened to contain puzzles under the proper circumstances. Quantum Conundrum felt like the puzzles were designed first, then rooms were designed around them, then hallways between them were added last. Running into the same segue between puzzle time and time and time again only reinforced this feeling.
The story and the uncle were forgettable. All his humor fell completely flat and was kind of cringe worthy Ike's the best character but is kind of like Loosum in Rage: cute but doesn't really do anything.
The ending was surprisingly abrupt with the final puzzle being so stupidly easy I wouldn't even bother calling it a puzzle.
There are a number of collectables and a secret puzzle room but the game didn't do enough for me to want to go through the puzzles and get all of the collectables.
I'll consider picking up the DLC if it's priced right, has decent narrative, is single player, and a good challenge. If not, I'll skip.
I'd give it a 6.5 or 7 out of 10. There's more right with the game than there is wrong, but it's too rough around the edges and the gameplay fails to be compelling enough on its own to warrant anything more than that.
The puzzles were too easy. There wasn't a single point that stumped me or even really tripped me up in trying to figure out how it worked, so mentally I was bored by them somewhat. My only occasional problem was executing the solution.
Graphics were simplistic but okay for what they were doing. I have an SSD in my PS3 so I can't ever really comment on texture pop anymore, really didn't notice much.
The house didn't make sense. Like, Portal and Portal 2 felt significantly more like they could be actual places that just so happened to contain puzzles under the proper circumstances. Quantum Conundrum felt like the puzzles were designed first, then rooms were designed around them, then hallways between them were added last. Running into the same segue between puzzle time and time and time again only reinforced this feeling.
The story and the uncle were forgettable. All his humor fell completely flat and was kind of cringe worthy Ike's the best character but is kind of like Loosum in Rage: cute but doesn't really do anything.
The ending was surprisingly abrupt with the final puzzle being so stupidly easy I wouldn't even bother calling it a puzzle.
There are a number of collectables and a secret puzzle room but the game didn't do enough for me to want to go through the puzzles and get all of the collectables.
I'll consider picking up the DLC if it's priced right, has decent narrative, is single player, and a good challenge. If not, I'll skip.
I'd give it a 6.5 or 7 out of 10. There's more right with the game than there is wrong, but it's too rough around the edges and the gameplay fails to be compelling enough on its own to warrant anything more than that.
D
Deleted member 102362
Unconfirmed Member
Joshua Weier was the lead on P2. Barnett was one of the programmers. The former's last name is pronounced "Wire," and the latter gets his head shaved once a year.
I'd be shocked if Swift hasn't played Portal 2 yet. If true, that's kinda sad.
Itd make sense if she hasnt, she was kind of working on a game for the majority of the time Portal 2 was out. Of course if she truly has no intention to ever play it, thats pretty sad.
Robot Pants
Member
......this is out already?!
TO THE STEAM STORE!
TO THE STEAM STORE!
Picked this up from the Summer Sale today, and I'm super disappointed in how poorly ir runs on my laptop, with next to no graphics options, unless I'm missing something?
Otherwise, I haven't gotten very far yet, but it seems like a Portal clone (which I expcted and kind of wanted) but without any of the clarity and elegant design that made Portal so great. Not sure how far I'll be able to get with such bad performance, but I'm really hoping this gets much better.
Otherwise, I haven't gotten very far yet, but it seems like a Portal clone (which I expcted and kind of wanted) but without any of the clarity and elegant design that made Portal so great. Not sure how far I'll be able to get with such bad performance, but I'm really hoping this gets much better.
Depends how confident you are in the upcoming DLC. I thought the game was great, so spring for the SP I'd say.
Good post.. Pretty much sums up how I feel. I bought the season pass too :/
I'm still working my way through it. But there is very little to keep me coming back.
I don't really consider the amended part much better. Not only is it disrespectful to that group to say this, but it's shitty practice from a design POV. How would you not want to play the most loved/critically acclaimed game of the genre? It's the queen of hubris to say that you're so much more talented than anyone else in the world, that there's not a single thing you could learn from the game (as a developer in the genre).
You guys are reading far too much into the fact that she supposedly didn't play much Portal 2. It's not "disrespectful" nor is it being a bad designer.
You guys may find this shocking but a lot of game designers play a little bit of a game and get enough of a feel for it that they don't have to play the rest. Sure, that means you might miss out on some cool tidbits in the later parts of the game but it might not make sense to experience 90% of the game in the first hour then spend another bunch of hours to see that remaining 10%. Most games are very front-loaded in terms of mechanics and design.
The fact that a game designer didn't play a lot of a game says that game designers working on active projects are busy - nothing more.
It's not insulting if you don't play much of a game your buddies worked on. Everyone understands that people are busy.
You guys may find this shocking but a lot of game designers play a little bit of a game and get enough of a feel for it that they don't have to play the rest. Sure, that means you might miss out on some cool tidbits in the later parts of the game but it might not make sense to experience 90% of the game in the first hour then spend another bunch of hours to see that remaining 10%. Most games are very front-loaded in terms of mechanics and design.
The fact that a game designer didn't play a lot of a game says that game designers working on active projects are busy - nothing more.
It's not insulting if you don't play much of a game your buddies worked on. Everyone understands that people are busy.
Which is fine if you're talking about the FPS or RPG genre. Completely understandable. But this genre is not large. It's literally composed of a small group of games. Only a few of which are noteworthy. And clearly there were lessons she could have learned from spending 5 - 15 hours with the genre's greatest game. To me it's more akin to somebody saying they want to be a published author, but don't read books because they hate reading.
spindoctor
Member
You have to admit, in this particular case, it's not just a matter of 'some game designer didn't play some game'. You would imagine that this particular designer would have a closer connection to the the game in question. Not to mention Portal 2 is absolutely spectacular and I'm sure there are lessons to be learned in it for every game designer. More so for one who is basically cloning the overall structure of the game in their own work.
I don't think Portal 2 is close to the quality of Portal 1. Not only did she spend a lot of time playing the genre's greatest game, she designed it.
More Fun To Compute
Member
No point fighting it. We got an enjoyable game what else matters.
spindoctor
Member
I'm a big fan of both Portal games but I've never understood this opinion. Portal 1 was new sure, but it was also a 16 level tutorial followed by only 2 'real' levels. And somehow that is better than the entirety of the Portal 2 experience (including both single player and co-op)? That's just wrong.
Those 'real' levels are the worst part of both Portals. Traversal with a portal gun is mind numbingly easy.
IMO Portal 2 is two different games.
There's Co-op, which is the same exact gameplay as Portal, just WAY better.
Then there's the single player. Which from a storytelling POV, is also way superior to 1.
I think it's fairly safe to assume she didn't have much to do with the story in 1. And even if she didn't think it was important or the reason for it's success, playing 2 may have given her some clarity that story was vitally important to the genre. And having that atrocious narrator for QC was actually worse than not having anything at all. Because it really is that distracting and off-putting.
And all of this is besides the point. Her statements are just classless. If she's that bitter about not getting her way and refuses to play it out of spite, just lie. Say you loved it and am happy your former college friends have continued their success. It wouldn't have killed her to have taken the gracious approach.
Regardless of how involved she was in the actual writing, she was involved in the decision to have a story. Portal didn't have the voice over initially, play testing found it was too sterile an experience, so they decided to add the voice over to help pull people thru the game. She knew it was important, that's why it's in QC. It's shit in QC, which is a shame, but it's there.
I doubt she's on bad terms with Valve, QC got a few special TF2 items, etc.
But that makes it sound like she was everything great about Portal. Which she wasn't. That was the Valve collective that resulted in that. And all games have stories. So that it initially had a story to explain context doesn't matter. It had to have it. It's the rule of videogames. The form it evolved into had almost nothing to do with her (if anything).
I'm beginning to wonder just how much involvement she had with anything. Is it accepted fact that she was the driving force behind Narbacular Drop? Or was this a collective project where somebody had to be the spokesperson to the public? And because she was female and had a great personality, became the spokesperson (which people then falsely attached too much weight to)?
Given all this, and given the fact that her reputation had now put her into the position where she truly was in charge of a game, I find it curious she wouldn't really try and distill why those games were so successful. If things were gonna happen with QC, it was going to be all on her shoulders this time.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Portal 2 co-op is so much better than 1 it's not even funny.
Two things, no, it doesn't sound like she was everything great about the game. She didn't write the prose, if she helped with the story or not. And no, not all games have to have a story. Puzzle games have historically not had them.
She was the lead designer on Portal. I don't think there has ever been anything to suggest she wasn't heavily involved in designing the game, unless Valve were lying to everyone just because some people might find her a more appealing spokesperson for a project.
QC has a number of disadvantages when compared to Portal, it's practically three times the length, didn't have all of Valve to play test and give feedback, and whoever wrote it is clearly not competent.
I agree with half of that, the co-op isn't even funny.
Ravensmash
Member
So I'm playing through this at the moment.
Definitely enjoyable, and the puzzle design is brilliant.
Can't help but feel that it's lacking a bit of charm though (especially compared to Portal, etc.) and it feels a bit hollow in terms of characters and narrative. Not affecting the gameplay much, but yeah.
Edit: Saying that, once you get into using the
dimension, the game becomes incredibly fun.
Definitely enjoyable, and the puzzle design is brilliant.
Can't help but feel that it's lacking a bit of charm though (especially compared to Portal, etc.) and it feels a bit hollow in terms of characters and narrative. Not affecting the gameplay much, but yeah.
Edit: Saying that, once you get into using the
slow mo
KodeAndGame
Member
Not enough pages in this thread!
This game is a lot of fun and the polish is great. Love Portal so Kim Swift definitely knows what she's doing. More good games under her belt than Jonathan Blow
EDIT: Haven't followed any comments that Kim made nor do I know why there's so much backlash as I'm reading this thread..... will continue to read.
This game is a lot of fun and the polish is great. Love Portal so Kim Swift definitely knows what she's doing. More good games under her belt than Jonathan Blow
EDIT: Haven't followed any comments that Kim made nor do I know why there's so much backlash as I'm reading this thread..... will continue to read.
Just finished it. Brilliant game. The game mechanics and the puzzles are very clever.
It is so difficult to come up with new concepts, so hats off. You can really see the Portal influences, the way the rooms are set-up and the final stretch. The story, humor and premise is not as good as Portal and that will make it less memorable but the gameplay is still awesome. They should have made the 3 aisles of the mansion more distinctive and more logically constructed but it's not a big deal. The ending could have been a lot better too.
Nonetheless, it's my Downloadable Game of the Year so far.
It is so difficult to come up with new concepts, so hats off. You can really see the Portal influences, the way the rooms are set-up and the final stretch. The story, humor and premise is not as good as Portal and that will make it less memorable but the gameplay is still awesome. They should have made the 3 aisles of the mansion more distinctive and more logically constructed but it's not a big deal. The ending could have been a lot better too.
Nonetheless, it's my Downloadable Game of the Year so far.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Tizoc
Member
Got the game as it was a Plus Freebie, made it to the 1st Generator, for the most part...it's OK IMO. The only puzzle I enjoyed so far was the one where you had to put 3 cores into tubes. At first I thought it'd take a long time to complete, but managed to do it in under 10 minutes.