surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
So player 2 is essentially a dungeon master? Am I getting that straight? And he's the one who controls the narrative?
FUCK YES!!
I feel like Tim Schäfer just released his new metal game that promised me to be the fucking shit...only with Rohrer I know it will be awesome.
Ironically enough, I donated more money for passage than Sleep is death costs.
I feel like Tim Schäfer just released his new metal game that promised me to be the fucking shit...only with Rohrer I know it will be awesome.
Ironically enough, I donated more money for passage than Sleep is death costs.
Wait a minute, Deadly Premonition AND a new Rohrer game within the same week?
Is this christmas or am I dead and in Heaven?
Is this christmas or am I dead and in Heaven?
This is going to be great for all those couples who like to explore PC indie gaming together. Eh....
How do the two games communicate?
What happens if you want to swap who does what?
Looks good, will probably buy if I can find a friend to give the free 2nd player to.
What happens if you want to swap who does what?
Looks good, will probably buy if I can find a friend to give the free 2nd player to.
This game looks pretty fun, but I'm wondering how the two players connect. Do I have to have a specific person to play with, or can I just find a random person? Also, this game can only be good as the GM...
I reckon I've got a mate that it'd be amazing to play with, but also someone I want to offer it to first...
Sort of like Bakushow, it's most likely only as good as you make it.
Sort of like Bakushow, it's most likely only as good as you make it.
So it's like Vampire The Masquerade Redemption or Neverwinter Knights, but without the gameplay? Got it.
Also, this isn't very encouraging: "It is easiest to play over a local network. Have a friend over and plug in two laptops, or play over local WiFi. It can be played remotely over the Internet, but one player will probably need to fiddle with his or her router settings. Instructions for remote Internet play are included."
Also, this isn't very encouraging: "It is easiest to play over a local network. Have a friend over and plug in two laptops, or play over local WiFi. It can be played remotely over the Internet, but one player will probably need to fiddle with his or her router settings. Instructions for remote Internet play are included."
@hpv: Where'd you find that?
Well, I'm living with one person I was considering playing it with next year, so LAN = no problem, but I don't know if she would like it or not.
I suppose I could buy it twice (if I like it) as it's only a fiver or so...
Well, I'm living with one person I was considering playing it with next year, so LAN = no problem, but I don't know if she would like it or not.
I suppose I could buy it twice (if I like it) as it's only a fiver or so...
Interesting. But the fact that there NEEDS to be 2 players is a bit of a turn off. Will definitely try it tho.
I'm probable not going to play this at all, but will buy it anyway. I listened to him on a life well wasted Podcast and he is the only person in the games industry who need and should actually have some of my money.
It looks interesting now but it doesn't look like something that could hold my attention for more than a few hours. Do you plan on writing a review for it, Anthony?
My opinion;
Passage was shitty, pretentious garbage.
This, however, looks REALLY FREAKING awesome, but just glazed over in a layer of pretentiousness - a layer which you can ignore. I think Jason thinks of it as "art", but to be, it just looks freaking FUN!
Oh, man... it's like Omegle meets The Sims or something.
Passage was shitty, pretentious garbage.
This, however, looks REALLY FREAKING awesome, but just glazed over in a layer of pretentiousness - a layer which you can ignore. I think Jason thinks of it as "art", but to be, it just looks freaking FUN!
Oh, man... it's like Omegle meets The Sims or something.
I was planning on writing a DnD homebrew campaign, but seeing this yesterday made me completely drop that idea and now I want to just plan out stories for this game.
@Nathaniel607, I think people praised it way too much. It's good for what it is, a game you play once or twice and 'get' it, and has an interesting concept. I don't think it should be held up like the holy grail of indie gaming, however.
@DrManik
Well, I didn't see any merits to it. Was boring, and the only message it really delivered was the tired old story of "carpe diem".
Well, I didn't see any merits to it. Was boring, and the only message it really delivered was the tired old story of "carpe diem".
$9 for two copies of this game? My preorder is already in!
I'm really excited to see if I can pull off playing this game with my girlfriend without her realizing it's two player. That slideshow really gives the impression that you could fool someone into thinking that the game is like magic or something. Can't wait to try this out for myself and learn the interface :)
I'm really excited to see if I can pull off playing this game with my girlfriend without her realizing it's two player. That slideshow really gives the impression that you could fool someone into thinking that the game is like magic or something. Can't wait to try this out for myself and learn the interface :)
I'm not trying to be insulting or anything, but I don't get why this is something new. How this is any different from sitting down with a friend and telling a second-person story where the other person gets to decide what the protagonist does? It's like a pen and paper game without the rulebooks and with pixel graphics and the illusion of MAAAGIC.
So... whycome the excitement?
So... whycome the excitement?
Klempky:
That's a fair question, honestly. If the game doesn't do something to spur you into a particular sort of creativity, or give you really interesting opportunities with its tools, it could definitely become a slightly more structured version of Pictochat.
That's a fair question, honestly. If the game doesn't do something to spur you into a particular sort of creativity, or give you really interesting opportunities with its tools, it could definitely become a slightly more structured version of Pictochat.
Hmmm it goes against my own ideas on how video games should be and the "New Gamist Manifest" just sounds like the work of some artsy indie fag...but the idea seems so rich and promising i might just buy it so the creator will continue with this out of the box thinking and I can give an informed recommendation to people I know who would enjoy this sort of thing.
How is putting D&D for two people into a graphical interface particularly "out of the box" thinking?
I have to agree with klempsky on this.
What we have here is pretty much just a restrictive version of what could be played with pen and paper; yes, the visuals and separation of players one and two adds some nice polish, but that's pretty much it; the only real special thing I see here is that the separation of players would make it seem more like the game itself was reacting to you, and not the second player, but overall you could get the same effect by chatting over AIM with someone extremely pretentious. For you to get ay actual meaning out of the game you would probably have to play with Rohrer himself. Furthermore, although it is interesting to have a game where NPCs actually react like real people, that's pretty much all it is; an interesting little experiment. Furthermore, because NPCs react like real people, their responses seem like they would be pretty predictable, unless player 2 would deliberately try to do something unnatural, in which case it would become more like The Path.
You could experiance the exact same thing by going into a house and just doing the sorts of things done in the game.
In any case, the idea is new and could definately be utilized, but in this situation, it seems like it wouldn't be special in any way; as far as I know, you go around doing stuff in a House. Cool?
This seems like it could be implemented better by using a multitude of real life people for individual NPCs in some sort of epic online rpg adventure, or something as simple as an all human animal crossing village; using just two people doesn't seem like it would make a big enough impact. Using real people for NPCs has so many better possible uses for simulating real situations than a guy in a house.
That's just me though; anyone else can feel free to check it out and enjoy it by all means; if you do, thats great. I just personally would want to buy a game to see what sort of experience the developer has created for me, not having to somehow flail around and wonder what sort of thing I'm personally experiancing.
Ack, I wrote a lot, and probably made myself sound like a jerk. Shit. >.>
Also, is it just me or was calling your own game 'magic' like, extremely pretentious?
What we have here is pretty much just a restrictive version of what could be played with pen and paper; yes, the visuals and separation of players one and two adds some nice polish, but that's pretty much it; the only real special thing I see here is that the separation of players would make it seem more like the game itself was reacting to you, and not the second player, but overall you could get the same effect by chatting over AIM with someone extremely pretentious. For you to get ay actual meaning out of the game you would probably have to play with Rohrer himself. Furthermore, although it is interesting to have a game where NPCs actually react like real people, that's pretty much all it is; an interesting little experiment. Furthermore, because NPCs react like real people, their responses seem like they would be pretty predictable, unless player 2 would deliberately try to do something unnatural, in which case it would become more like The Path.
You could experiance the exact same thing by going into a house and just doing the sorts of things done in the game.
In any case, the idea is new and could definately be utilized, but in this situation, it seems like it wouldn't be special in any way; as far as I know, you go around doing stuff in a House. Cool?
This seems like it could be implemented better by using a multitude of real life people for individual NPCs in some sort of epic online rpg adventure, or something as simple as an all human animal crossing village; using just two people doesn't seem like it would make a big enough impact. Using real people for NPCs has so many better possible uses for simulating real situations than a guy in a house.
That's just me though; anyone else can feel free to check it out and enjoy it by all means; if you do, thats great. I just personally would want to buy a game to see what sort of experience the developer has created for me, not having to somehow flail around and wonder what sort of thing I'm personally experiancing.
Ack, I wrote a lot, and probably made myself sound like a jerk. Shit. >.>
Also, is it just me or was calling your own game 'magic' like, extremely pretentious?
The naysayers should at least wait for the game to come out before starting up the hate machine.
If it's executed well, it could be a great Indie title. I, for one, can think of some pretty hilarious ways to use a game like this.
If it's executed well, it could be a great Indie title. I, for one, can think of some pretty hilarious ways to use a game like this.
I love how people say Passage was pretentious hahah. People love to throw that word around without even knowing what the fuck it means. It is simply something Jason Rohrer made for people to experience. Something he "felt" and wanted to express; you know, the very -idea- of art. Thats pretentious?
HE is not the one placing importance upon the game, others are. It's important to make that divide. If you don't like the game, cool, you don't have to, but that doesn't make it bad. Whether you enjoyed it or not, it is good design, and it has an audience who appreciate its themes. Don't be so ignorant.
HE is not the one placing importance upon the game, others are. It's important to make that divide. If you don't like the game, cool, you don't have to, but that doesn't make it bad. Whether you enjoyed it or not, it is good design, and it has an audience who appreciate its themes. Don't be so ignorant.
@Skribble
Hmmm... why is it pretentious, let's see... well, first of all it's;
Adjective
1. Marked by an unwarranted claim to importance or distinction
Second, it's also;
2. Ostentatious; intended to impress others
But I think that's about it.
Hmmm... why is it pretentious, let's see... well, first of all it's;
Adjective
1. Marked by an unwarranted claim to importance or distinction
Second, it's also;
2. Ostentatious; intended to impress others
But I think that's about it.
@Skribble
Also, don't even pretend he wasn't placing importance on it. The very act of making the game places unwarranted importance on it.
"Something he "felt" and wanted to express; you know, the very -idea- of art. Thats pretentious?"
Yeah, that kinda is. Especiall if the thing you want to express is basiclly just "DUR your gonna' die!".
Also, don't even pretend he wasn't placing importance on it. The very act of making the game places unwarranted importance on it.
"Something he "felt" and wanted to express; you know, the very -idea- of art. Thats pretentious?"
Yeah, that kinda is. Especiall if the thing you want to express is basiclly just "DUR your gonna' die!".
@Perry Simm
Big game developers try new things all the time but never get the praise that people pile on this crap.
Independent developers are great as long as they stop making 'indie as a genre' games and actually try something new.
Big game developers try new things all the time but never get the praise that people pile on this crap.
Independent developers are great as long as they stop making 'indie as a genre' games and actually try something new.
@ Perry: Except this is not different... at all. You could do this on a message board, just role-playing with people. (It's lame, but I mean you *can*, anyhow.) Jason Rohrer's only good game has been Primrose. http://primrose.sourceforge.net/
I mean look at how he describes his game called Gravitation: "my fourth game, about mania, melancholia, and the creative process." Like are you KIDDING me? It's fine if you would like to subtly inject an underlying theme into a video game, but something so heavy-handed and pedantic as this.. just, ugh. Games should focus on being games first, and let "big picture stuff" come second. That's one thing Jim Sterling is 100% correct on, is that indie developers need to cut the fuck out with this pretentious shit and just make solid games.
I mean look at how he describes his game called Gravitation: "my fourth game, about mania, melancholia, and the creative process." Like are you KIDDING me? It's fine if you would like to subtly inject an underlying theme into a video game, but something so heavy-handed and pedantic as this.. just, ugh. Games should focus on being games first, and let "big picture stuff" come second. That's one thing Jim Sterling is 100% correct on, is that indie developers need to cut the fuck out with this pretentious shit and just make solid games.
The difference between role playing on a forum and this is that presumably you could get someone into the game without them realizing it is two player, just like the chap in the slideshow. If you do it well enough it could be really fantastic to that person to not realize that the game is being controlled.
Also saying "you could just do this on paper/in a forum" is a little silly, I mean its not even out yet and it does put visuals to what you're doing in many ways. I mean you may as well argue that you could play any game on a forum.
*you step off of a train into a train station filled with threatening looking guards. A mans voice welcomes you to City 17 over a speaker while pontificating a speech about his great works. Exits E, type inv to check your inventory*
GASP ITS HALF LIFE 2, WHY BOTHER PLAYING THE GAME WHEN YOU COULD JUST DO IT ON A FORUM DERPDERP
But then again if you're the kind of person who thought it looked stupid, you're probably not the kind of person people would want to play this with anyways... so, despite how stupid I think your arguments are I dont actually care what you think about this I suppose
Also saying "you could just do this on paper/in a forum" is a little silly, I mean its not even out yet and it does put visuals to what you're doing in many ways. I mean you may as well argue that you could play any game on a forum.
*you step off of a train into a train station filled with threatening looking guards. A mans voice welcomes you to City 17 over a speaker while pontificating a speech about his great works. Exits E, type inv to check your inventory*
GASP ITS HALF LIFE 2, WHY BOTHER PLAYING THE GAME WHEN YOU COULD JUST DO IT ON A FORUM DERPDERP
But then again if you're the kind of person who thought it looked stupid, you're probably not the kind of person people would want to play this with anyways... so, despite how stupid I think your arguments are I dont actually care what you think about this I suppose
And for anyone who said 'Jim Sterling would hate this and thinks this shit should stop' and such, in Podtoid 90 Jim says:
"Imagine a videogame where the nonplayer characters are being played by actual gamers who are providing in real time the games script and reacting according to how the player is acting. It would be completely impossible to do but it would be a great experiment to try to have all the nonplayer characters played by real people"
Sound familiar? How about we let Jim Sterling speak for Jim Sterling and you can just speak for yourself.
"Imagine a videogame where the nonplayer characters are being played by actual gamers who are providing in real time the games script and reacting according to how the player is acting. It would be completely impossible to do but it would be a great experiment to try to have all the nonplayer characters played by real people"
Sound familiar? How about we let Jim Sterling speak for Jim Sterling and you can just speak for yourself.
But...
Preordering it will mean <i>less</i> money goes towards Jason Rohrer, someone I actually give a shit about.
What I do?
Preordering it will mean <i>less</i> money goes towards Jason Rohrer, someone I actually give a shit about.
What I do?
Oh, and also, do I give the second code to my best friend, who also likes games, or to my partner, so I can totally do him in-game, keeping with this month's c-blog theme?
See, I would complain about how this is an unnecessary piece of software, except for the fact that items and NPCs can be shared by players. I find this to be particularly intriguing- now do you not only have whatever tools you can come up with to tell stories, you have anything that anyone on the internet can devise. I feel like this would be a super-fun experience at a LAN party; you could have people take turns giving the main character different orders while the GM hastily responds and adds more to the story. Speaking of which, I'd like to know if you can create new sprites in game, or if they have to be imported. I feel like being able to make them in-game would make stories much more exciting- you don't have to be confined to whatever you start out with. I'll be watching this with intrigue.
The pics look great. At ~$10 for 2 players, this game is a really good deal. Flat Belly
follow
