DO NOT BUY

[Thomas]

This game is atrocious. Your actions mean nothing there is no plot. You can't say "This is an indie game it doesn't need a plot" to you I say stop being stupid. This game has more plot holes than Pirates 3 did. For the love of god DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. With so many good games on greenlight trying to get in. I wish I could get a refund.

[Crispin]

Lawl, I get what you mean. But it wasnt that bad. I did feel like I wasted my time and money though.

[tombo]

I politely disagree

[duckness]

U wanna complain more, then go get "Thirty Flights of Loving" off steam.

[Kraken]

Lol I agree get "Thirty Flights of Loving"

[Thomas]

My problem is we now have to get games greenlighted in while garbage like this is sitting nice and pretty on steam and it's not like this game is old this pile of rubbish is still pretty new and the problems could be fixed if the person making it would update the stupid thing and take out the holes.

[The Ax-Man]

You do realize the point of the game is to interpret the small details for yourself, right? There isn't SUPPOSED to be a completely fleshed out, all-answers-found story told to the player. It's up to you to piece it together and make your choices based on what you think happened.

Let me ask you, did you open the safe? Have you looked at Ben Rivers' website and seen the MP3, pictures, and video relating to more details and places in-game? Or checked the related Twitter account controlled by Rachel's husband?

There are a ton of small details, and it's up to YOU to piece them all together in a coherent way. It has a story; it's just not holding your hand through the process of telling it to you.

Though, I will agree with you on one thing; Pirates 3 was a steaming pile. XD

[Halowii]

I agree Hiei, They can't trick me with the "oh, that's all for your interpretation" thing. Ax-Man, This isn't a David Lynch film, with thousands of little plots and clues and weird stuff. No, this a straight forward plain game about going from A to B and touching completely irrelevant things in the meanwhile. A Good left to your interpretation game is Lone Survivor. Home is not. 'Cause Home is not only bad for its finish, and lot of people forget it, It's bad because while playing you are doing ANYTHING, you're being cheated so badly that you can only think that in the end all this ♥♥♥♥♥♥ experience should worth the ending. And the ending is the worst of all, following by the fact that the programmer laughs in your face saying "ey, go here to my blog and discuss your own interpretation". The thing is that people want to believe that all the effort deserves the ending and that simply you haven't got the point. No, men, you have the point, and the point is that this is a amateurish first project with no script at all. Nah, You can't trick me. EVERYONE can make HOME, you just have to get a default videogame creator and put rats and knifes and guns and some other stereothypical stuff here and there, then let the people think that you have actually a script and publish it for a very small prize for everything to defend your creation. It's only 2 bucks, but they're wasted. It's not a crime like if it would cost 60$, but It's not worth the prize.

Sorry for my bad english, I'm trying hard to make me understand.

[The Ax-Man]

You guys obviously don't have to enjoy or appreciate the game for what it is. But I do think you're being a bit harsh on it. I mean... it's $2. What did you seriously expect for $2? I think there is some real story that Ben has in mind for the game, but he's got no obligation to tell us. The same thing goes with Ed McMillen and the connections between Time ♥♥♥♥ and Binding of Isaac; the story is there, and able to be determined, but he won't come right out and tell us what the story means.

Halowii, I haven't played Lone Survivor (or seen a single David Lynch project, for that matter, though I'd absolutely love to see Twin Peaks and Mulholland Drive), so I can't really say much to your comparisons. However, the game isn't meant to be some grand project for all to contemplate at length. For the hour it might last, it's probably good for a few minutes of pondering what you've seen. Because, despite what you said about it, there ARE small details you can notice and consider for the overall progression of events. The game is presented in an odd way; you're basically just backtracking and discovering the remains of whatever events occurred beforehand. So yeah, it's boring, and basically a 2D point and click game. But the small amount of contemplation involved, and the fact that it did require SOME skill to program properly, leads me to think it's worth a measly $2.

Not to sound rude to anyone disappointed with the game, but if you do believe that you could possibly waste $2 on something so simple, I would suggest never buying into any indie title in the future, especially when it's a first project or two. The fact that anyone could think two whole dollars could be wasted when it's such an insignificant amount in the grand scheme of what is likely a daily/weekly lifestyle is rather arrogant. Just my opinion on the thought.

[Halowii]

Ok, I can't complain with the prize, It's just 2 bucks. BUT the fact that this is a 2$ game doesn't make it better, nor It means that people can't say a bad word about it. So, yes, It's lame but since It's just 2 $ It's a great game? I don't think so. I think that as a game It's pretty bad, no matter how much It cost. So I can't talk about the prize, but the game quality, and I think that the game doesn't diserve the waste of time, nor money. It's just a personal opinion, of course, and I respect all of the other opinions, but I can't understand why people says that this is a great game 'cause it only cost 2$. There is only a few things you can do with 2$, but a lot of games and films that diserves this two hours best. Ok, 2 hours isn't the time of your life, but, hell, I simply didn't enjoy the game lol.

[The Ax-Man]

Oh, I never said it was GREAT, though. Just that it's hard to complain about it being $2 (actually $3, but not much of a difference, there). I went into it expecting a short adventure, where I examined stuff and tried to piece together what happened. And that's what I got; hell, that's what I wanted out of it, so I'm satisfied.

Actually playing through it right now; I'll be playing through it again later to try the one thing I didn't do on this playthrough (jump down the second drop in the factory). As far as I can tell, I've done everything else (up to the point where you *SPOILERS* either find Rachel in the basement of your house, or don't) so far. I enjoy the thought behind the story, the small details you can miss if you don't do every little thing possible (did anyone else turn around to check on that rustling in the forest?...).

[Luftmensch]

Yawn.

[calm |HG]

Първоначално публикувано от The Ax-Man:

You do realize the point of the game is to interpret the small details for yourself, right? There isn't SUPPOSED to be a completely fleshed out, all-answers-found story told to the player. It's up to you to piece it together and make your choices based on what you think happened.

Let me ask you, did you open the safe? Have you looked at Ben Rivers' website and seen the MP3, pictures, and video relating to more details and places in-game? Or checked the related Twitter account controlled by Rachel's husband?

There are a ton of small details, and it's up to YOU to piece them all together in a coherent way. It has a story; it's just not holding your hand through the process of telling it to you.

Though, I will agree with you on one thing; Pirates 3 was a steaming pile. XD

I agree with you.

[piggeh]

It was £2, it passed around an hour of my time (well, 46 minutes). I didn't find it entertaining enough to play through again, but it was something a bit different. I would view it more as someone's hobby project then anything serious.

[johnnywhitebread]

They say "It's a unique horror game." I guess that's kind of like calling a roller skate "a unique pizza." With enough work you could probably stretch a roller skate out flat and eat it, but I can't help but think that you would be worse off for the experience, besides now having to push yourself along on only one roller skate.

That's how I feel about Home. It's not a horror game. There was no horror. If you get right down to it, there was no game, either. It was, at best, a walking tour of Who Caresville. I had a friend that voiced a similar complaint about Dear Esther. That, however, actually had a story to tell. Home has no story. Don't bother to argue that it does, because narratives have structure. Home is just walking around poking things.

I was bored after the first third of the game. I only continued to slog through it because there is no save feature and because of the general human propensity to not want to have had their time wasted. "Surely," I thought, "with a game as boring as this, the ending must be spectacular for it to have gotten any good reviews."

To sum it all up, this game has no payoff, no resolution, no explanation and no justification for its existence. It has the worst replay value of all the games that I have ever played, and please bear in mind that I rather enjoyed The Little Mermaid on NES. As a matter of fact, instead of playing Home, go find The Little Mermaid and give that a spin. It's shorter, more satisfying, probably cheaper (especially if you get the rom), and you won't hate the programmers when you're done with it.

[Lestrade]

I must say, I would definitely like to bill my next title as "a unique pizza."

I commented in another thread about some specifics regarding the game's development that might shed some light on some of the issues you're having or feel are wrong with the game. I know it's not everyone's thing, and I sincerely thank you folks for even trying it out.