Surprised so many people dislike Broken Age (or found it average). I played it inbetween Grim Fandango, the original Broken Sword, and Days of the Tentacle and Broken Age was probably my second favourite after Grim Fandango (mostly missed out on adventure games when I was young).
Anyways, good to see people are liking this one, totally unexpected game I really want to play. Is there a release date for android?
I mean BA doesn't even have on hover mouse descriptions. :/ It's far stronger a story then it is a game, as all of Schafer's solo efforts are. But he's light years better at writing stories then doing the nuts and bolts of an adventure game it seems.
I mean BA doesn't even have on hover mouse descriptions. :/ It's far stronger a story then it is a game, as all of Schafer's solo efforts are. But he's light years better at writing stories then doing the nuts and bolts of an adventure game it seems.
We've disagreed about this before I think, but something like that doesn't bother me at all. I like that the genre is very fluid and I'm not married to the idea of 'an adventure game needs the 9 verbs at the bottom of the screen to be good'. Different mechanics work for different games. For some games that means one click-interactions, for others it means the multiple verbs, etc. For BA, it worked better not to have the mouse over descriptions for its presentation. That's hardly a deal breaker for me. None of this makes a game harder or easier, it's just a different approach to building these games and different types of puzzles and presentation details come out of all of that. I love throwback games like this, I love game that try new things or a more modern approach. Most of all, I love the variety.
In the end, I ended up really liking Broken Age and I think the puzzles in the second half are some of Schafer's best. I have some problems with it, but in the end the good vastly outweighs the bad for me, and it's still one of my favorite adventure games. Not every game needs to try and become another Monkey Island, as much as I love those games, especially the first two. Not just story/character wise, gameplay as well. I've played those games (and games like it) a thousand times already when I was a kid, and a lot of their strength was in how surprising and innovative they were. While Gilbert doing a throwback like this is clearly something special, I don't want every new adventure game to stop at that point. Let me see what else is possible. Something old can be very fun, but I want something new as well.
I don't agree at all that Tim Schafer doesn't know how to do the nuts and bolts of adventure games - he's made some of the top entries in the genre. Maybe not to everyone's tastes, but clearly for a lot of people. The reputation of all the adventure games he's been involved in doesn't come from nowhere. Hearing him talk about the deeper design decisions is always super insightful, and I think a lot of newer adventure game designers can learn a lot from him. He's a legend of the genre for a reason.
No. Ron Gilbert has always spoken out about his preference for the 'no dead ends' approach (which I agree with a lot), and this game has the same approach. They even joke about it at one point in the game.
So you can freely explore and try whatever you want without having to worry about screwing it all up for yourself or having to manage a million save games.
No deadends by design (always possible there's a bug though).
Interesting to note that maniac mansion and zak mckracken didn't have deadends by design, but because lucasfilm had very few people testing the games back then. This was less of an issue by the time Monkey Island came out.
Interesting to note that maniac mansion and zak mckracken didn't have deadends by design, but because lucasfilm had very few people testing the games back then. This was less of an issue by the time Monkey Island came out.
Wouldn't a lack of QA lead to more unintentional dead ends than fewer? Unless I'm just not following.
Also while Maniac Mansion was WAAAY more forgiving than Sierra games, wasn't it still technically possible to screw yourself over if you got too many or the wrong combination of kids killed? I mean getting someone killed was practically an easter egg in and of itself, but still.
Wouldn't a lack of QA lead to more unintentional dead ends than fewer? Unless I'm just not following.
Also while Maniac Mansion was WAAAY more forgiving than Sierra games, wasn't it still technically possible to screw yourself over if you got too many or the wrong combination of kids killed? I mean getting someone killed was practically an easter egg in and of itself, but still.
Although I'm not sure he's right about those early adventure games being designed to have no dead ends but them not having the QA capabilities to iron them out. I'm pretty sure that the original quote was that Ron Gilbert said that, if he could go back in time, he would have designed them not to have those dead ends, but at the time games having those kind of dead ends was pretty much the norm. Starting with Monkey Island they made the deliberate decision not to have dead ends anymore, but I don't think that was ever the plan with games like Maniac Mansion and Zak back in the day, when they were originally designing them. That was more of a design regret that came later. Things like the kids dying in Maniac or being able to run out of money/air in Zak was very much by design, not something they overlooked.
- The final truth is anticlimatic and a cliché. The only one way to make it worst I could think of would have been "it was all a dream". Monkey Island 2 might have done something similar, but man that was handled so much better.
- The answer to too many mysteries is freely given, or heavily foreshadowed, in Chuck's journals.
- Never explained who killed the German guy and Franklin, who kidnapped the agents, why the sheriff is trying to stop you, why the 5 characters suddenly start to work together.
Even if the game revolve around the "it's a videogame" excuse, it feels like it's just being very cheap there, also considering some of those questions are used in the marketing material.
- Goddamn Edna scared the sh*t out of me, once again, after 25 years
This was a great return to the DOTT world (even if it actually isn't), hope we'll see more games with the same vibe from Ron Gilbert
(to be pedantic, it's not actually the DOTT world since Ron Gilbert didn't work on that game. That was Dave Grossman and Tim Schafer. Ron Gilbert made Maniac Mansion, and they sort of explained in DOTT that MM was a game based on the Edison's early adventures within that world. So it's a game within a game (both figuratively and, you know, literally). Typical Lucasarts fourth wall breaking stuff).
^But like I said, that's just me being pedantic, I get what you're saying and I like to think that it's the same world as well.
That's unless they specifically reference DOTT in the ending, but I'm not ready to read your spoiler just yet. I have seen some MM, Zak, Monkey Island and Indiana Jones stuff in the game though.
Although I'm not sure he's right about those early adventure games being designed to have no dead ends but them not having the QA capabilities to iron them out. I'm pretty sure that the original quote was that Ron Gilbert said that, if he could go back in time, he would have designed them not to have those dead ends, but at the time games having those kind of dead ends was pretty much the norm. Starting with Monkey Island they made the deliberate decision not to have dead ends anymore, but I don't think that was ever the plan with games like Maniac Mansion and Zak back in the day, when they were originally designing them. That was more of a design regret that came later. Things like the kids dying in Maniac or being able to run out of money/air in Zak was very much by design, not something they overlooked.
I took it to mean that only the "game overs" were by design, and stuff that caused dead ends wasn't caught in testing, as most of the dead ends are only dead ends depending on your team composition.
(to be pedantic, it's not actually the DOTT world since Ron Gilbert didn't work on that game. That was Dave Grossman and Tim Schafer. Ron Gilbert made Maniac Mansion, and they sort of explained in DOTT that MM was a game based on the Edison's early adventures within that world. So it's a game within a game (both figuratively and, you know, literally). Typical Lucasarts fourth wall breaking stuff).
Thanks for the clarification, I've just always put DOTT and MM under the same umbrella. What Ron and Tim have worked on has always been too chaotic for me to keep track!
I took it to mean that only the "game overs" were by design, and stuff that caused dead ends wasn't caught in testing, as most of the dead ends are only dead ends depending on your team composition.
A combination: he says there too that a lot of that stuff was just how those things were done back in the day, and some of the dead ends came from them not thinking things through. So while, if they had more QA capabilities back then, some of those dead ends wouldn't have been there perhaps, it wouldn't be completely dead end free. The deliberate design decision to have no dead ends at all of any sort came when they started Monkey Island. Which seems obvious now and how most adventure games post-Monkey Island work, but the idea to just not have them at all at that point just wasn't there yet.
Thanks for the clarification, I've just always put DOTT and MM under the same umbrella. What Ron and Tim have worked on has always been too chaotic for me to keep track!
Handy reminder, just concerning the Lucasarts adventures:
Ron was the lead designer on Maniac Mansion, Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, and Monkey Island 1 and 2.
Tim was a writer on Monkey Island 1 and 2 (with Dave Grossman as a co-writer and Ron as the lead), the co-lead designer on Day of the Tentacle with Dave Grossman, and the lead designer on Full Throttle and Grim Fandango.
Also note that none of those three guys worked on the Monkey Island games after 2, although Ron was consulted on Telltale's Tales of Monkey Island (the fifth game) and Dave Grossman was a designer and writer on that.
Thanks for the clarification, I've just always put DOTT and MM under the same umbrella. What Ron and Tim have worked on has always been too chaotic for me to keep track!
A combination: he says there too that a lot of that stuff was just how those things were done back in the day, and some of the dead ends came from them not thinking things through. So while, if they had more QA capabilities back then, some of those dead ends wouldn't have been there perhaps, it wouldn't be completely dead end free. The deliberate design decision to have no dead ends at all of any sort came when they started Monkey Island. Which seems obvious now and how most adventure games post-Monkey Island work, but the idea to just not have them at all at that point just wasn't there yet.
Again, I took that to mean killing the progression branches (like how Michael's unique path becomes useless if the film gets exposed) being what was fine for the day, but not realising that some of the branch killers stopped your entire game if your team setup was a certain way was where QA would have helped.
My biggest problem with this game, and games like it, is how muddled the pacing becomes once you introduce more characters. There's many simultaneous puzzles going on right now for me with no clear indication of which one I should knock out first.
At the moment:
- I have a dead
battery which I need to charge
, but haven't seen anywhere I can do so.
- I need a tube to put into the
clock-in machine outside the factory
, yet haven't seen one that size.
- I managed to get the
watch
and
tools
, and even though I know how to stop the
radio in the jail cell via the radio station shut off, I have no music to replace.
- No idea how to find the missing
joke book page.
- No idea how to get into the
safe with a fingerprint scanner on it. I thought I was clever in refilling the fingerprint powder with soot, as I was going to use it on something Chuck had touched and use another piece of sticky tape on it, then put that on the scanner, but I haven't found anything else for me to dust
. I feel my thought process on this one is correct.
- No idea how to get through the
woods. I was thinking it had something to do with the muddy water, and following footprints, but no leads just yet.
- No leads on how to get a
voided check to the lawyer.
. I showed him the
stub
, but it wasn't good enough.
- I found a
pizza flyer
but have no idea where that location it references is.
I feel pretty smart having solved everything up to this point on my own, but goddamn there's a lot going on.
-Can't help the first two yet as I'm in the same position.
-You'll obtain the music via the end of a certain quest line once you've obtained access to Thimblecon.
-The page is in the circus area.
-Can't help you with the safe yet; I think you're on the right track though. My guess would be his fingerprints are in the factory.
-I'd explore a few more of the stores for a certain item to help direct your way.
-Who else might deal with a cheque in the town? I couldn't find the stub prior so thanks for the hint there. I was just looking at the balance book without opening it.
-Read the entire flyer to note where this might be used. I'm still unsure regarding the secret meeting place at the moment though.
Are there deadends in this game? I've always prefered the LucasArts adventures where you can't get stuck or die (except for Indy 3 and 4 since those were pretty much adventure/action hybrids).
Apparently you can actually die by pressing something but you'll be told quite explicitly you'll die if you press this button. It's basically a joke death.
Apparently you can actually die by pressing something but you'll be told quite explicitly you'll die if you press this button. It's basically a joke death.
Ron did say he'd like to be on Vita, but that was when the project started. Don't think he's said anything recently, the only future platforms that are solidly announced are ios, android and ps4, with switch a strong possibility.
Argh. I hate begging for hints but I'm stuck again.
I'm in the factory, and it's in lockdown. The computer is rebooting after I played the game, said fizzscum, and Uncle Chuck had his little moment... I don't seem to have any options left.
Argh. I hate begging for hints but I'm stuck again.
I'm in the factory, and it's in lockdown. The computer is rebooting after I played the game, said fizzscum, and Uncle Chuck had his little moment... I don't seem to have any options left.
. Just finished the flashback to the girl programmer and now have no direction. Each of the three Crim Trina has one green light and i have no idea what tread to pull.
. Just finished the flashback to the girl programmer and now have no direction. Each of the three Crim Trina has one green light and i have no idea what tread to pull.
The map is the main point right now, the store is empty of them, the newspaper has the lady stopping me whenever i reach for there map. Spent about 15 minutes thinking of how to get her to follow a story and leave.
Apart from that I have a voodoo head, some dust, no finger tap and no murder weapon.
The map is the main point right now, the store is empty of them, the newspaper has the lady stopping me whenever i reach for there map. Spent about 15 minutes thinking of how to get her to follow a story and leave.
Apart from that I have a voodoo head, some dust, no finger tap and no murder weapon.
The map is the main point right now, the store is empty of them, the newspaper has the lady stopping me whenever i reach for there map. Spent about 15 minutes thinking of how to get her to follow a story and leave.
Apart from that I have a voodoo head, some dust, no finger tap and no murder weapon.
Just finished the game. Really great, one of the best adventure games I've played in a while. I know from the initial kicks tarter they mentioned multiple endings. Is that still the case? Also
i tested out the agents and when i realised they had the same dialogue and limitations (refusing to look in bins) i gave up switching or using them as a team.
i tested out the agents and when i realised they had the same dialogue and limitations (refusing to look in bins) i gave up switching or using them as a team.
I took it to mean that only the "game overs" were by design, and stuff that caused dead ends wasn't caught in testing, as most of the dead ends are only dead ends depending on your team composition.
