Great story and music, but let’s talk about the things that can be improved...

[Yirg]

I think the story is every bit as interesting and touching as it's made out to be, and the music is very nice, especially in the second half of the game (I do think Born a Stranger and Laments of a Stranger were overused in the first half and I almost turned the music off at some point, good thing I didn't).

Most other aspects however can be improved. Here are some suggestions for simple changes (most of them are of the "low hanging fruit" variety) that I think could improve the game significantly:

- Make physical memory links and mementos easier to find (e.g. make them glimmer). Scanning a scene with the mouse trying to find memory links doesn't provide very good gameplay. It feels like work, especially in the larger outdoors maps.
- Get rid of the tile-flipping puzzles. These don't make much sense and aren’t any fun. A better alternative would be to present close ups of memory links (including their name) and have some animation that shows the machine automatically linking them (or find an interesting and sensible way for the player to link them).
- Unify the Memento Configure and Activate dialogs. I can’t think anyone ever chooses to cancel these dialogs, so why repeat asking?
- Have a different color for dialog bubbles (per character). This would make it easier and quicker to follow the dialog. Another option is to move the name of the character inline the text, like in a play or a script.
- Display the full content of Notes in the main game screen (as they are collected). What’s the point of having to switch out to the Notes screen to read them, when usually they are just one-liners?

A special edition of the game with the above changes would make me re-purchase it. As it is now, I’d rather just watch an LP.

And here are more significant chances (which unfortunately would require significant budget):

- Switch to a modern graphic engine, with 3rd person perspective, highly detailed maps, characters and objects and proper human mechanics/motion. The current pixelated 640x480 view is sort of a turn off, and is probably one of the main reasons why people don’t finish the game (or why many of those who got it in a bundle didn’t even bother to play it). Think about how nice a game like Brothers – A Tale of Two Sons looks. Now imagine the story of To the Moon presented in such a way. Wow.
- Replace the dialog bubbles with actual voice acting, and add cut-scenes with two or more camera angles and, where needed, close ups on characters. Tomb Raider Legend (and other games in the series) is an example for a game that uses this effectively. There are many others, though probably nothing with a budget similar to that of To the Moon (maybe the Cat Lady is close).

Feel free to share your thoughts and other suggestions…

[JC21]

Yirg님이 먼저 게시:

- Switch to a modern graphic engine, with 3rd person perspective, highly detailed maps, characters and objects and proper human mechanics/motion.
- Replace the dialog bubbles with actual voice acting, and add cut-scenes with two or more camera angles and, where needed, close ups on characters.

I can imagine how this would look. Bad 3d graphics similar to games from the late 90s. Terrible emotionless voice acting like in most games and the music playing silently in the background because the game is full of dialogues. Thanks but i wouldn't buy that abomination.

Stop trying to change it to something different.

[Da_NKP]

JC21님이 먼저 게시:

Yirg님이 먼저 게시:

- Switch to a modern graphic engine, with 3rd person perspective, highly detailed maps, characters and objects and proper human mechanics/motion.
- Replace the dialog bubbles with actual voice acting, and add cut-scenes with two or more camera angles and, where needed, close ups on characters.

I can imagine how this would look. Bad 3d graphics similar to games from the late 90s. Terrible emotionless voice acting like in most games and the music playing silently in the background because the game is full of dialogues. Thanks but i wouldn't buy that abomination.

Stop trying to change it to something different.

At least Final Fantasy VII had an excuse: those graphics were good back then.

Now though, no.
(And I might actually cry if they did voice acting for a FFVII remake)

[vycyous]

I love the game exactly how it is. The pixel art is great and the low resolution and system requirements mean that virtually anyone with a computer built since the turn of the century can run this game. Plus, somehow the whole presentation and story really just seemed to fit together very nicely.

[Yirg]

I just finished another indy game that nicely demonstrates the second group of suggestions (the ones I described in the OP as being probably too expensive for an indy developer). The name of the game is Contrast, and as I expected, these features augment a good story and make it into a great game.

- Modern graphic engine, with 3rd person perspective, highly detailed maps, characters and objects and proper human mechanics/motion. CHECK
- Actual voice acting, cut-scenes with two or more camera angles and, where needed, close ups on characters. CHECK.

...and of course real gameplay beyond the story. CHECK.

I can only imagine how amazing To The Moon could have been if effort was spent to surround its great story with interesting gameplay and better production values. If not going this route, than the opposite direction would have also been preferable - stripping all the pseudo-gameplay aspects of the game and releasing it as a narrated story alongside its very nice soundtrack, or even as just a script or a novella.

[JC21]

As you can see in contrast with Contrast 3d-graphics don't make a game better. Check it's metacritic rating compared with To the Moon.

[Yirg]

Most negative metacritic ratings are old. I guess the game was released with bugs that took time to patch. Have you played this game? It's production values are amazing for an indy game and they support the story very well.

I agree that To The Moon has a more interesting story, but its production values really hamper it, and its lack of gameplay makes one question why they made a computer game out of this story.

[JC21]

Did you read Steam reviews for Contrast? A lot of negative reviews are from this summer.

[Yirg]

There are always bad reviews and grades. Heck, if you check the IMDB rating for a popular movie that you consider to be great I assure you you'll see hundreds and sometimes thousands of bad grades. It has a lot to do with expectations, and by simply viewing the screenshots of both games it would be clear to any gamer that they need to expect much more from Contrast than they do from To The Moon.

BTW, I guess that fact that you ignored my question means that you didn't play Contrast? I played both games, so I'm talking from experience.

[JC21]

You can check my profile. It's not hidden if I have the game. I can't check if you played it or not though.

People go to watch a movie based on popularity and advertisement. They even go to watch a movie with a theme they never liked and then they give a bad rating to it. Contrast is not that popular or well advertised. I am not even sure anyone would have a good expectation from it after reading the reviews or the ratings for the game.

I am not just going to believe you that it's the best game ever. A "positive" comment might be that it has the best story ever or the best gameplay ever. You can't give a reason for that comment. "Positive" is subjective. Negative reviews only give reasons that's why they are the most truthful and worth reading. So when most people say it's 3 hours long (1 hour less than to the moon and it costs twice as much) and that the gameplay is bad... you have to believe them...

[Yirg]

I don't usually check other people's profile, expecting them to care about privacy the way I do. Anyway, I see now that you didn't play Contrast.

I believe most people check the screenshots before buying. The screenshots for both games set a certain level of expectation regarding the game's production values and this in turn impacts overall expectations. I agree that the reviews also set a certain level of expectation, but going over the reviews of both games (at least on Steam) wouldn't make such a huge difference. 90% of the 674 reviews for Contrast are positive. To The Moon has an even higher percentage, but there are still plenty of negative reviews if one is looking specifically for them. Personally, I look at the screenshots and videos, check the reviews briefly to see that the game is not a dud, and if it's compelling enough it gets added to my wishlist and then purchased at the right time.

As for value, Contrast is now $3.75 gamersgate.com, so even if it's not long that's still plenty of value. I wouldn't recommend paying full price for it, or any other game for that matter. I also bought To The Moon on sale, and although I played it to the end (you don't have to believe me), I didn't feel as satisfied. This had nothing to do with how long it was or how much I paid. It was because how great it could have been. Money doesn't factor much into my judging of a game's quality. I just buy when a game is on sale and move on from the cost aspect. I never have to hurry to buy a game at full price because my backlog is so long, so there's never any rush.

[JC21]

A simple solution about privacy... don't use personal information in your profile. I don't see why it should be hidden if you have a game or if you played it or not.

You can't judge a game by its screenshots and trailers. It's what the company that sells it wants you to see. Don't trust the positive reviews either. The percentage of positive reviews means nothing. Just because most people like it doesn't mean you are going to like it too. Read the negative reviews and then watch a random gameplay video on youtube. You will most likely notice all the negative points you read in those reviews. In the end you might not care about some of these points and actually buy the game.

It's €3.75 here at the same website. If you want to compare prices during a sale... it's just as much as Dishonored was during this weekend on Steam (a game with 12.5 hours of gameplay and much better ratings and reviews).

[Da_NKP]

Just to be sure, this mini flamewar is not about graphics, right?

I don't mind having my comment counter shoot through the roof; in fact, I am ususally excited when there's a new comment on some given forum.

This could be the case here, but it sounds like this is still about graphics.

I did look at Contrast or whatever. It looks interesting. I wouldn't call the graphics "modern" as much as "cartoonish" but still, they're not pixelated.

I didn't buy the game or play it. I may, but as of now, I haven't. However, if we're talking about graphics, I don't need to. I've already seen the graphics level, and I can just make the assumption that the game is at least decent. But that doesn't really matter.

Once again, if this is all about graphics, that's personal choice. There is no superior graphics form. Some may take more people, some may take more attention to detail, and some require different things. The point is, people like different things, and the idea that someone would talk down an amazing game just because it uses a form of graphics that doesn't agree with you is practically beyond belief.

So I leave off with this: If you (or anyone else) fit into that category, just say, "I would have preferred different graphics because x doesn't personally agree with me."

For example: I would have preferred that Minecraft had different graphics because Voxel art doesn't personally agree with me.

There. Easy. Done.

[JC21]

Of course there is a superior graphics form. The one with the most detail... The problem is that graphics is not the only important thing in a game that makes it good. A game can have bad graphics and be enjoyable or good graphics and suck. Noone questioned that Contrast has better graphics. Would that type of graphics fit in any type of game though? Do the graphics make it a better game? Obviously not.

Leave Minecraft alone...

[Da_NKP]

JC21님이 먼저 게시:

Of course there is a superior graphics form. The one with the most detail... The problem is that graphics is not the only important thing in a game that makes it good. A game can have bad graphics and be enjoyable or good graphics and suck. Noone questioned that Contrast has better graphics. Would that type of graphics fit in any type of game though? Do the graphics make it a better game? Obviously not.

Leave Minecraft alone... :happymeat:

It is true that great games can have poorly done graphics and that games with amazingly well done graphics can literally be less than a movie game-wise.

But I ask you, what is "better": graphics where detail rivals real life or graphics where every pixel is vital?

My Answer: Neither; to each his own.

Also, Minecraft is awesome, and there is nothing wrong with it, but it just isn't my cup of tea...
I can think of some people who wouldn't appreciate Chatelise (which is on the steam store), but it is my cup of tea.

[Yirg]

My criticism about To The Moon has to do with a lot more than graphics. Read the OP. Basically anything but the story and music can be improved greatly.

My points about Contrast, as an indy game with great production values, also have to to with a lot more than graphics. See the parts above about voice acting, cut scenes, and game play.