Portal seems to be the darling of the game industry right now. Praise has been heaped upon it from all angles and has recieved several 2007 GOTY nods. I'm not seeing it. There are several flaws that make the game irritating at best and it is with pleasure that I introduce them now.
Depth
Yes. It is.
One of the only complaints you generally hear about the game is that it's too brief, which is really more of a compliment than anything else. And it
is short, no argument there. As a game, it's also incredibly shallow. Really, one might say that it's just a tech demo which had a coat of paint slapped on it before being included in The Orange Box. The portal gun is a neat idea, but the impression I received from playing this was that they were fiddling around with the concept for a Half-Life game and felt the need to introduce the gun in some way first. So, a story that would require a minimal amount of additional work was wrapped around the idea to justify it as being a complete game instead of just a demo. Hell, even the story (such as it is), the testing of the portal gun, lends itself to this idea.
Tutorial
Pretty soon, I might be able to actually play the game!
Most games produced today have some kind of tutorial system, be it an independant level or integration into the first section of the game. Portal has this as well, but it carries on entirely too long. Half the game consists of having your hand held while the game points out this detail or that. By the time you have the various elements all introduced to you in a fairly simplistic manner, there's only two more "tests" to complete before the escape sequence. Why am I spending nearly a majority of the game learning how to play it?
Physics
Chell: Some kind of fucking gymnast superwoman
Now, this next bit may seem like a minor quibble, but it really annoys the hell out of me. It would seem that some consideration was given to the physics of Portal, as they often made use of the "momentum effect" (where you travel through portals with no loss of inertia). How is it that Chell is able to flip herself upright on a constant basis regardless of the distance to the ground? Even if she were a world-class gymnast, the sheer improbablility of it shatters my suspension of disbelief. That bitch should be breaking her neck on a constant basis.
There are more, but that whole thing about landing on her feet has me too annoyed to even bother. Portal might be innovative, but it's certainly not the infallible piece of programming so many reviews have made it out to be. Innovation isn't always good either. We recently managed to get a sixty-three year old woman to bring a child to term. You can't tell me that kind of scientific ingenuity is progress.
I see where you're coming from on a lot of your points, but you have to understand that we ultimately play games for entertainment. Portal delivered us entertainment like we've never experience. On paper, a FPS-puzzle game sounds like a horrible idea. In execution, it proved to be an oustanding gaming experience and was certainly my suprise hit of the year.
The only thing I have a problem with is your dislike for the "training" levels. They are in integral part to the games story and advancement.
You're a test subject in a lab. You need to follow procedure to test out their newest technology. However, as you go on you slowly learn that you aren't safe. In order to survive you need to rely on both the portal gun, and your wit to make it out of the facility alive.
I was nothing but amazed with the game. I didn't go on about how great the game was all over the internet, but I see a lot of potential for improvement in the future.
And doesn't she have some weird shoes on? maybe they like balance her? I thought that's why she wore them....
I'll agree and disagree because I hate FF7 and everyone else loves it....
Depth: No one said this would be HL: Ep 3. Personally, I thought the whole test subject aspect was even MORE story than they would include. All I knew going in was that it was a puzzle game using the HL engine. I was blown away by the detail AND the actual manner in which the story unfolded, however brief it may have been. I mean, how deep is Tetris? And that shit's considered a classic.
Tutorial: That's the point of the game, though. Your whole experience within the context of the game is that you ARE A TEST SUBJECT. Therefore, of course everything is a tutorial. THAT'S THE IDEA.
Physics: Okay, you kinda have me there. At least they thought to add leg enhancements to her to make it at least somewhat plausible she could jump and run and fall like that.
I think it deserves all the plaudits it has received and more (it was a much more surprising and refreshing experience than even BioSock and DEFINITELY more enthralling than Super Mario Galaxy).
I personally don't want there to be a sequel of any kind to it. I think it's a great little nugget of a game, although I know it's gonna end up in HL: Ep 3 anyway. Plus, it was just too popular to not end up with a sequel.
I'm curious as to why you think a video game should be that realistic. If the character broke their neck after going through a portal, what fun would that be?
I've often thought about the possibility of a "fall-damage on" feature for Portal. Most of the puzzles wouldn't be made all that much more difficult for it, so long as you focused and made sure to open a portal that would counteract your speed or angle.
But my reasons for all of this are much more... material.
I've often thought about the possibility of a "fall-damage on" feature for Portal. Most of the puzzles wouldn't be made all that much more difficult for it, so long as you focused and made sure to open a portal that would counteract your speed or angle.
But my reasons for all of this are much more... material.
You're dead wrong.
If you read the thing from the two main guys from the project, you'd see that they were working on an incredibly minimal budget, and a large number of the cool things they wanted didn't make it due to lack of funds.
It was not made by the Half Life guys, it was made by some people who came out of college and got picked up by Valve. Yes, it does tie into the Half Life universe, but it's not a half life game, and never was.
Also, the story was integral to the game. Without GLaDOS the game would not have been nearly as entertaining. She is Portal just as much as Chell is.
Also, while I didn't give a fuck about the flipping through the air and whatnot because playing a game that's about creating portals that can warp you from one place to another instantaneously needs you to suspend belief from the start.
That being said, those spring things on her feet? I suspect they're probably weighted in a specific way that makes her always hit the ground. Or that's the kind of explanation I'd expect from someone, as it makes sense.
In the end, it comes down to budget and fun. If you broke your neck every time you got out of a portal, the game would become frustrating, and would lose it's fun factor. Then all of the problems were really caused by budget. They wanted more, but didn't have the money to do it.
Portal 2 will more than likely have significantly more depth and whatnot.
I don't get why some people are so obsessed with realism in games.
I agree though, it's certainly not GOTY. It was good though. I'll probably never play it again.
Depth:
This is a puzzle game, at it's core. It was a shock to me the game had ANY story at all. It follows the format of a short story, a medium sadly not used often in gaming (see Saga Frontier). This is reflected in the gameplay depth, and it's all the better for it. No it's not deep, nor does it pretend to be. You're mistaken is saying this is a "complete game". It's not. It's comparable to any other Episodic game, and that's what it's sold as.
Tutorial:
A lot of people are dumb. No, seriously, they are. The concept can be very unusual to those not versed in abstract spatial reasoning. So beating it in there slowly is to make sure that more people have a chance to play the game.
Physics:
Gameplay > Realism. They had the things you were complaining about at some point in development, and it was frustrating instead of fun. Not to mention it simply takes away possibilities for puzzle development. So why would you hamper your game design for the sake of being "realistic"?
Also at best I think you have maybe... 0.75 valid complaints, so does it still get you points?
And validity is subjective, so I hope so.
Be warned. If you don't like something other people like, YOU ARE WRONG. Especially if you give reasons for your opinion.
Anyway, good post and awesome/clever title. Hope you get the 4000 points.
HAHAHAHAHAH
Here, for making me laugh, I bought you a calendar.
Personally, I think you set your expectations too high. Most of our expectations were fairly low when we played it, and we were surprised with the charm and the humor. You expected it and anticipated the Star Wars trilogy, where Portal obviously falls short.