IDDQDerp

[Dubious_wolf]

I love how Dishonored, pilfers all this stuff from the Thief series, AND MAKES A BETTER FUCKING THIEF GAME.
I am tilting like crazy watching the playback of Thief (2014).
All of the rage.
The flat doors. The unnecessary set pieces. the bad dialogue. I was really thinking, 'man this is the game I'm getting into stealth games.' then I watch this crap and just decided to go download the originals off Steam...

AND GARRETT IS JUST A KLEPTOMANIAC NOW?!?!?!

'It's who I am'

NO IT ISN'T YOU DUMB FUCK. STEALING IS YOUR OCCUPATION, NOT YOUR PURPOSE FOR BEING!! GAH!!! TILT ALL THE DAYS!


Ok I think I got it all out...

[phlip]

Just watched the end of the Bulletstorm video, and...

So, the guy who fell in the glowing pool of goop never came back? And then us walking through said goop never ended up having any effect? Did that stuff ever end up doing anything at all? It's said to be heavily toxic in the exposition, but...

And then the final boss, that has been our alleged motivation all game, is fought via a series of QTEs, despite all the earlier boss battles being actual battles... and then they survive anyway, as some sort of badly-executed sequel hook?

So disappointing...

[empath]

Anton Chekhov is gonna haunt Rick Remender for distracting the audience with all this unnecessary detail...

[Prospero101]

On the bright side, you can be pretty sure that, if a character picks up a gun in the first act, he's going to fire it in the second. Or the first. Or three seconds after he gets it.

[Canageek]

I liked how if you pay attention to the environment you actually get hints of what is going on. Bulletstorm is not a game in which I'd expected to find environmental storytelling.

Also: Chekhov's gun is the worst thing to happen to writing, pretty much ever, particularly TV. It leads to predictable plots, particularly in any mystery ever. Just look for the character that is introduced in the first act then not again until the third act. Red herrings and one offs are a good thing-- Look at Fallout 3. Sometimes there is a body in a bathtub because there is a body in a bathtub, because it makes sense for the setting and to set the mood. Sometimes there should be a gun on the mantel simply because it makes sense for there to be a gun on the mantel.

That said, they were planning a sequel, but the first game didn't sell well enough.

[empath]

Also: Chekhov's gun is the worst thing to happen to writing, pretty much ever, particularly TV. It leads to predictable plots, particularly in any mystery ever. Just look for the character that is introduced in the first act then not again until the third act. Red herrings and one offs are a good thing-- Look at Fallout 3. Sometimes there is a body in a bathtub because there is a body in a bathtub, because it makes sense for the setting and to set the mood. Sometimes there should be a gun on the mantel simply because it makes sense for there to be a gun on the mantel.

There's the rub; IT STILL SERVES THE MOOD OR ATMOSPHERE OR SETS THE SCENE. You can argue that all the 'trivial' details in the Capitol Wasteland are still relevant to the story.

What ol' Anton was fighting against was the meaningless padding of spending two pages to describe a meal a character ate that served no purpose to the story apart from increasing the word count; similarly going on for reams to detail the weather outside which then has no bearing or relevance to the actions of the story's characters.

[Dominic Appleguard]

The dangers of taking a thesis too seriously. Reminds me of the Bechdel Test.

[deathjavu]

Not so much "too seriously" as "overestimating the original meaning"...

much as with the bechdel test.

I mean, these types of things usually have very specific meanings and they mean just that, no more.

[Kapol]

And then the final boss, that has been our alleged motivation all game, is fought via a series of QTEs, despite all the earlier boss battles being actual battles... and then they survive anyway, as some sort of badly-executed sequel hook?

That's one of the things I really hated about the game. The unnecessary sequel hook at the end. I know they wanted to make more games. I would have liked to see more Bulletstorm. But being like "So nothing change. You just traded Ishi for Triska." was stupid. Maybe they'd have done something with it in game 2, but I can't see that as any poor decision.

Also: Chekhov's gun is the worst thing to happen to writing, pretty much ever, particularly TV. It leads to predictable plots, particularly in any mystery ever. Just look for the character that is introduced in the first act then not again until the third act. Red herrings and one offs are a good thing-- Look at Fallout 3. Sometimes there is a body in a bathtub because there is a body in a bathtub, because it makes sense for the setting and to set the mood. Sometimes there should be a gun on the mantel simply because it makes sense for there to be a gun on the mantel.

I think (and I say that being honestly unsure) you're missing the point. Saying that there should be a gun on the mantle is different than describing the setting. Now, if you go into more detail than necessary to set the scene, then that's bad.

"Good" example: "The hunter's room was dimly lit. The light flickered, bouncing and dancing in the fireplace. The glimmer of light sparkled off his favorite musket, rusted and dusty from it's long rest. He sat in front of the fire, staring into the flame. A man lost in the void of his mind."

Bad example: "The hunter's room was dimly lit. The light flickered, bouncing and dancing in the fireplace. The glimmer of light sparkled off his favorite musket, rusted and dusty from it's long rest. The rounded end gaped into the darkness of the study. The relic was made of old steel and dark oak wood. The trigger was dulled from years of use. A simple touch could send the weapon back into action..." Cue the gun never playing a part in the book and/or never being mentioned again.

For movies, TV, and games, this is a bit different. You can have stuff in the background that isn't necessary for anything but scenery. But if you have the scene focused on something that's complete unnecessary (which, for the record, red hearings and the like are not. They just serve a different purpose), then you're wasting time and adding nothing to the media. For games, this might be cutting to a cutscene to show something happen, but it's not relevant to the plot or even goes against something that happens later (such as what was mentioned with Bulletstorm).

So having that skeleton in the bathtub is fine in Fallout. If it forced you to focus on that skeleton for no good reason, then it would be.

[deathjavu]

What Chekov was arguing for was not to have things that were unimportant- everything in a story should serve a purpose.

The purpose is not always plot related.

Being a red herring is still a purpose.

Setting a tone or mood is still a purpose.

Really it's just about paring down a story for maximum impact. If something in the story isn't doing anything you want it to do, why leave it there?

(It's worth noting that Chekov primarily wrote plays and short stories. Short stories, in particular, need to follow this rule to have any emotional punch.)

[Canageek]

Thanks everyone; I've only heard the quote

Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there.
—Anton Chekhov

Which doesn't leave room for say, the gun to be hanging there as set dressing to help establish the personality of the person; A hunting rifle says very different things about a person then say, an old WWII infantry rifle or a modern assault rifle. They can serve a purpose WITHOUT being fired, but his rule doesn't leave room for that; if it is on the wall, it must be fired. If it isn't it shouldn't be there.

I could be being far to literal though.

Back on topic: you thought the ending of Bulletstorm was bad? With the two of them in an escape pod, an obvious romance brewing since male and female characters can never work together without sexual tension? Unresolved plot hooks? Nothing resolved?

Then go play Space Marine, an awesome game right up till the end, when you throw away all the battle skills you've been homing for THE GAMES ONLY QUICK TIME EVENT. Then well, I won't spoil the ending, but damn if it doesn't suck.

You know, movies and books figured out how to leave things open for a sequel long ago. Star Wars is an excellent example: You accomplish your goal at the end, the Death Star is destroyed. But the Empire is still out there, ready for more movies. Heck, even in the final one the Emperor is dead, but the rest of his forces are still out there.

What you do with Bulletstorm should be the general is left to die on the planet, and then if you do a sequel you go after the people who paid him to take out the populace, or go after his CO who let him get away with having his own private kill-team.

Or Space Marine (ROT13ed for spoilers): Lbh unir gur Fcnpr Znevarf tb bss, urebvp, ohg unir n fubg bs gur bar Fcnpr Znevar gnyxvat gb fbzr Terl Xavtugf sbe sberfunqbjvat. Zbir gur fprar bs uvz orvat yrnq bss gb gur fgneg bs gur arkg tnzr, vs lbh znxr vg.

[romangoro]

Thanks everyone; I've only heard the quote

Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there.
—Anton Chekhov

Which doesn't leave room for say, the gun to be hanging there as set dressing to help establish the personality of the person; A hunting rifle says very different things about a person then say, an old WWII infantry rifle or a modern assault rifle. They can serve a purpose WITHOUT being fired, but his rule doesn't leave room for that; if it is on the wall, it must be fired. If it isn't it shouldn't be there.

The thing with Chejovs' Gun is that it's used the wrong way around, "The writer put a Thing there because it's going to be used", while the actual intent is kinda the opposite, "if the reader sees the Thing he'll focus on it and expect it to be used". I'm not sure if the example we are discussing, from the game, qualifies.

The best example I've heard of this effect is this: Two actors in the cast of a play, one got angry with the other one for some reason, and wanted to ruin the other's big scene. So when one launches onto the Big Monologue, the other places a wine glass right on the border of the table. Result: the audience completely ignores the monologue expecting someone to drop that cup.

[empath]

ANYWAYS...

Getting back to Dark Souls et al.; I was checking my few webcomix that update on Sundays, and I chanced upon this blog post: Blaster Nation

"accidentally"?

[Prospero101]

No offense, Canageek, but this classics major would have OBLITERATED you had the others not gotten to you first.

*puts more bullets into Chekhov's gun*

[Boofinka]

Sorry to interrupt the literary discussion, but I'm catching up on IDDQDERP and Alex leading the missiles back to their shooters in Rocketbirds' jetpack sessions was BALLER AS FUCK. Just straight BOSS.

[iamafish]

I tend to agree with Canageek about Chekhov's gun.

Bear in mind that Chechov was writing short stories and plays, where economy is all important. You don't want unnecessary set dressings, because it distracts the audience. You don't want to describe irrelevant things in a short story because you want to keep the pace up.

however, this rule does not necessarily apply to longer works, or more visually expansive ones. There is far more space in a TV show, Film, video game or full-length novel for the kind of atmosphere building and character development that people are talking about, in which it makes perfect sense to include things that are not directly relevant to the plot.

Chekhov's gun needs to be applied to the context, rather than dogmatically stated. It's like pretty much any rule that any writer uses; it's only a rule, you're allowed to break it. Sticking dogmatically to guidelines like Chekhov's gun or Campbell's hero's journey leads to dull, predictable stories.

Guidelines like these are best used are there to help you when you get stuck. Feel that your story is too flabby and you want to make it more efficient? apply Chekhov's gun. not sure where you take the plot next? Use the Hero's Journey to guide you. When your writing is ruled by these guidelines, you get stifled and your creativity suffers. When you allow them to guide you down the path your story wants to go, then they aid creativity.

However, I do tend to agree that having that dude fall into the goo, and drawing your attention to it, was rather misleading. The game would have been better off generally just allowing a lot of the things it drew you attention to to just happen. By taking you out of the immersion of controlling what you look at to show you something, it actually has a negative effect on the atmosphere, tension and immersion.

I'd love games to be a lot more hands off, like Bioshock or Fallout, which show the player things subtly, without grabbing control and saying 'look at this!', and trust players to engage with the experience directly and by their own volition. Makes players much more engaged in the experience that way.

[ch3m1kal]

While the discussion here is interesting, I think you're all giving a game where someone says "I'm going to kill your dicks" far too much credit when it comes to writing.

The monster in the pit was just a simple throwaway gag. Just a play on the fact that you go into the room and expect some kind of setpiece battle, only for the big bad monster to unceremoniously die in the pit of science juice. I actually thought it was one of the game's better attempts at humour.

Or it could have been part of a larger sequence that got cut, I guess we'll never know.

More on-topic, I'm personally loving all the Alex presence on streams lately and I'm really looking forward to whatever the next IDDQDERP game is going to be. Though I really hope it's not Remember Me, that game is just a huge pile of missed opportunity and squandered potential, with the occasional spark of brilliance.

[ritchards]

Amusingly, I just used this discussion to work out who the killer was in the latest Mentalist episode... and I was right!

[Jenelmo]

In crime shows I usually just use the method of finding the well know actor in what seems to be an insignificant role

[Canageek]

I just look for the character that is introduced in the first act then isn't in the second act. I used to really like procedural but then I realized they never introduced an uneeded character, and they all use a 3 part structure, so it was really easy to spot the killer after a while.

[ritchards]

Rocketbirds: Hardcore Chicken is currently on Steam Sale:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/215510/

[empath]

Okay, from what I gathered from the first 1/2 hr of Remember Me, Dontnod Entertainment IS SUPER FULL OF HUBRIS.

The ENTIRE INTERFACE is needlessly obtuse, if it's even POSSIBLE to substitute a perfectly-functional and comprehensible term with LITERALLY MADE-UP JARGON, they will have done it.

It's conceivable that idiom and language will change in another seventy or so years, but to throw such a drastically different language at someone IN A TUTORIAL MENU SYSTEM is just going to alienate them.

To sit down and think "we really need to call attention to how drastically different our dystopian future world is, and the best way is to change even every proper noun in the tutorial messages" is to hold the importance 'your vision' DANGEROUSLY HIGH...at the risk of driving away your audience.

And to think, the only buzz this game got was 'the flack the lead dev (note - it's all about HIM, not his team...danger, danger...ego inflation detected) got from publishers for having a female protagonist' - imma go check what the actual reviews had to say about the game itself...

[The E]

Remember Me is one of those games where the idea of the game is much more interesting and engaging than the reality of it. Back when it was announced, I was completely hyped for it, its sense of style and the Phillip K Dick-ish nature of what the story was hinted to be, combined with the post-Human Revolution cyberpunk future void that needed filling drawing me in like a moth to the flame.

Then, when I actually played it, it all broke down somewhat. When the game turned out to be anything but the open experience I wanted it to be (which, to be fair, was my own delusion; I don't recall them ever claiming to be an open world-style affair), I was prepared to forgive it. After all, I like Uncharted and Tomb Raider and The Last of Us and games of that ilk, so that was an easy adjustment to make. Then the reality of the combat system, which tried very hard to be Batman: Arkham <blank> but failed hit, and the ultimate disappointment of the memory remix sequences and the lack of power to influence the story made itself felt, and I put this game into the heap of games I haven't been able to finish.

Remember Me, then, is a game that had tons of potential, that had a lot of things going for it, but which ultimately failed to live up to that potential because the people making that game weren't skilled enough, or didn't have enough time and money to really make this into the game it could and should have been. Which is sad not only because this game isn't that good, but also because the realities of this industry mean that it's rather unlikely that we're ever going to see what this team can do once it applies the lessons learned from this game to another.

[empath]

Yeah, that's what the majority of the reviews got into - it was an okay game, but it had so much promise to be so much more. :/


But come on - with all the tutorial information, they couldn't just write something like "...use your Pressen, or attack moves, to build Combos..." into ANYWHERE?!?

[Master Gunner]

I think it was the licensed game for the first SpiderMan movie that had a feature I really liked, and I think would have vastly improved this game.

There was a tutorial arena you could access from the menu, which was just a large white room with some guys periodically spawning in it, where you could practice your moves and combos as you unlocked them.

Remember Me even has the perfect in-universe justification for such a system (see the between-act cutscenes where Nillin is monologing). I think being able to roll-your-own combos is a great idea - but without a risk-free place to practice them, it's difficult for a player to take full advantage of it.

The other thing is that the combat system needed to be tightened up considerably - Nillin is a dex fighter, not a tank, and the controls need to reflect the speed of her actions.


Outside of the combat, the game is pretty good - The art direction is fantastic, the flavour is good (while silly, I do somewhat appreciate them going whole-hog with the concept...just not in the menu system), having a female protagonist (who isn't a complete hack job) is admirable, and while the writing/story isn't the greatest, it's perfectly servicible. Then there's the aspects that are precision-targetted to tickle Alex's fancy (dem robutts).

It would have being nice to have at least some open-world sections (and you would think that the memory-hacking aspect would lend itself well to having multiple ways to complete missions), but as a linear brawler, well, you could do worse.

-----

Overall, my impression of the game is that it really makes me want to play Oni again.