KickStarter Hero-U: Rogue to Redemption - adventure-RPG from the creators of Quest for Glory

[Aeschylus]

More bullshit, misinformation and lies. Once again your claims have been put to the test:

Verdict: bold-faced lie.

It's clear that you're scraping the bottom of your bag of tricks.

Type 'pick nose' you dumbass. /parserfail

 

[Infinitron]

Yah dood, I was being silly. Kool, though.

Maybe we need a new name for the types of challenges you typically faced in the Quest for Glory games. A new category - more "organic" than the "puzzles" in classic adventure games, but still contextual, set-piece, situation-specific.

I don't really know what's "organic" about them except that your attempts at solving them sometimes fail if your skill numbers are too low.

For example, the "get a seed from a seed plant" >quest< is solvable by throwing rocks (requires lots of throwing practice) or climbing the wall (although attempting to do this and failing yields the text box: "Perhaps there is another way to achieve your objective"). Alternatively, if you chose the magic user and bought the Fetch spell, you can use Fetch -- spells in this game are basically inventory items like any other.

It's interesting how typically adventure-gamey the spells are too. You use spells on specific items in specific situations in order to solve the >quest< in the prescribed way. Fetch, open, whatever -- you can't open things they deem "unopenable," you can't fetch things they deem "unfetchable," but you can certainly open and fetch the handful of things they intended you to be able to open and fetch if you're a Magic User.

Well, compare those to "use rubber-chicken-with-a-pully-in-the-middle on cable"

Haha, well, I don't get your point at all, but that doesn't sound any less logical than this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OW19ivNcR7A#t=286s

My point is that adventure game puzzles typically feel more contrived and artificial.

 

[suejak]

Oh my.

 

[suejak]

Yah dood, I was being silly. Kool, though.

Maybe we need a new name for the types of challenges you typically faced in the Quest for Glory games. A new category - more "organic" than the "puzzles" in classic adventure games, but still contextual, set-piece, situation-specific.

I don't really know what's "organic" about them except that your attempts at solving them sometimes fail if your skill numbers are too low.

For example, the "get a seed from a seed plant" >quest< is solvable by throwing rocks (requires lots of throwing practice) or climbing the wall (although attempting to do this and failing yields the text box: "Perhaps there is another way to achieve your objective"). Alternatively, if you chose the magic user and bought the Fetch spell, you can use Fetch -- spells in this game are basically inventory items like any other.

It's interesting how typically adventure-gamey the spells are too. You use spells on specific items in specific situations in order to solve the >quest< in the prescribed way. Fetch, open, whatever -- you can't open things they deem "unopenable," you can't fetch things they deem "unfetchable," but you can certainly open and fetch the handful of things they intended you to be able to open and fetch if you're a Magic User.

Well, compare those to "use rubber-chicken-with-a-pully-in-the-middle on cable"

Haha, well, I don't get your point at all, but that doesn't sound any less logical than this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OW19ivNcR7A#t=286s

My point is that adventure game puzzles typically feel more contrived and artificial.

Maybe. For the record, in the vid you're dropping a rubber chicken in front of a bush with tentacles and eyeballs so that it will walk to the side and you can go pick up the elderberries you need for the witch's pie. (This is the only solution for fighters/thieves.)

 

[FeelTheRads]

Haha, well, I don't get your point at all

Well, you don't really get much, you show that with each and every post you make. It's why I keep telling you to give up. You're only embarrassing yourself more and more. Really, it's a friendly advice.

but that doesn't sound any less logical than this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OW19ivNcR7A#t=286s

OMG THROW ROCK TO MAKE SOMETHING FALL SO ILLOGICAL OMG HOW DID THEY CAME UP WITH THAT

 

[suejak]

...the chicken is a rubber chicken.

Jaesun, you better get to Brofisting this guy STAT.

 

[Jaesun]

Awww poor shitposter.

 

[suejak]

Jaesun, I'm sorry I made fun of you in the three threads or whatever it was

 

[ghostdog]

butthurt about brofisting too, here let me brofist you to make you fell better ^

 

[suejak]

Thanks bud :D

 

[SCO]

Why are you having this discussion?

Who cares?

Why?

 

[suejak]

It's coz Quest for Glory is full of puzzles, dawg!!!

 

[SCO]

My ignore list is full of retards too. Welcome home

 

[suejak]

 

[Alex]

What is the point you guys are trying to make anyway? The only thing get from this discussion is that I was reminded that QfG puzzles really could have used some more difficulty in them.

 

[Jaesun]

There is no point. It's a shitposter spergin in a thread.

Welcome to the Codex.

 

[suejak]

Well, the discussion was originally that the proposed new game doesn't seem to have interesting puzzles, which is something that I claimed QfG has always had.

Some fella came along and said, "If you want puzzles, you should play adventure games. Adventure games suck the cock. I hate them so much omg. God I hate them."

Then everybody kind of ignored him (a theme of posters in this thread who are not me), and I said, "QfG was mostly puzzles."

This ___dog guy came along and said, "There are like 6 puzzles in QfG."

I set out to show him that the game is "mostly puzzles."

This resulted in me being hilarious and brilliant in turns, while other people ignored each other and reposted the same info in an attempt to be the one to slam dunk me on the issue of whether you can pick your nose or not.

Then some other guy ignore-listed me and Jaesun tried to troll me for a while.

Basically, this thread is about me. Feel free to subscribe/ignore, but remember I'm an Obama supporter and I like JE's views on feminism.

 

[Infinitron]

I'm loving this thread

 

[Alex]

Actually, I think I just understood what the issue is here. I think Suejak is calling the normal mode of interaction in QfG puzzles. But since their point is not so much to challenge the player, but having him explore the world and interact with those things, people don't really like calling them that. The answers don't usually require so much of a logical leap, like in Monkey Island, or an understanding of systems, like in Maniac Mansion, but rather just understanding how the setting works, like in Ultima 7. I don't really care if people call this puzzles or not, but it is an important distinction between QfG puzzles and, say, Larry puzzles.

 

[Infinitron]

Except Larry 5?

 

[suejak]

You may be right, yeah. It's true that every class has basically one solution to every problem, and it's true that that solution is very often inventory-based; and if the solution isn't, the reward is probably a unique, single-use inventory item. It's true that you spend a lot of the time in the games getting items and holding on to them until you find the one place to use them. It's true that you'll probably face instant death if you do the wrong thing in your attempt to get the items.

But we can call these "Things to Do" rather than puzzles.

In which case, I want this specific kind of Things to Do to have a heavy presence in the new game. Sure hope so. I love the Things to Do in QfG.

 

[DalekFlay]

Except Larry 5?

The LucasArts Sierra game.

 

[Infinitron]

Except Larry 5?

The LucasArts Sierra game.

Hah, not even that.

 

[iamlindoro]

I sincerely hope all the argument that this game will be in any way like QfG end up being right-- I'd be very happy to be wrong. Unfortunately, when you compare the Kickstarter Pitch video with this trailer for the other "Puzzle Adventure" by Brawsome, Macguffin's Curse, it's fairly clear that Hero U will be reusing a fair amount of the gameplay code:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lTN59fiM7-g

The wireframe demo in the kickstarter uses this same view and tile based game mechanic.

First off, having played MacGuffin's Curse, my impression is that this approach doesn't lend itself to traditional style adventure at all. The puzzles are extremely simplistic and the "free play/open world" type approach isn't present. I should also mention that Brawsome has also put out a traditional point and click adventure (Jolly Rover) that is much more traditional in terms of point and click adventure. However, this approach appears not to be under consideration.

It may all be academic anyway. New backer numbers and the dollar amount are slowing down and the trend in a few days at this rate will be to miss the minimum. To reiterate, though, I concede that the developer (Brawsome) is capable of making a fun traditional point and click adventure. I concede that the Coles are capable of building a very fun Adventure RPG in that kind of environment. They just don't appear to want to do so. Now, if they abandon the (IMO) simplistic top down tile based approach that is (again IMO) ugly, not fun given the one playable example by this developer, and which ruins the excitement of exploring a new, hand-drawn locale, I will be first in line to support them. The Coles have repeatedly said that they will only use the painted backdrops to enhance diaglog, cutscenes, and the like. That's just not what I personally want. I want to explore those environments, not a game board from CLUE.

 

[The Round Peg]

I don't think the Kickstarter will reach its goal at its current rate.