TIGSource Forums

Runman creator, Tom Sennett, released a new game today. It is called Deepack Fights Robots. It is $9.95 USD and runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux(its flash). Honestly this looks great and I thought I'd just point it out to all you guys! Its available here linky (http://deepaksave.us/)

there seems to be no demo what is this :(

i hope terraria didn't start a new trend

at the very least demos help you know if the game runs on your computer

the trailer does a good job of making it look exciting, but I can't really tell what is going on.

I guess it's a metroidvania? with graphics that look like they were drawn by a preschooler. eh. also looks like it's marketed towards kids, doubt it's my kind of game.

runman was drawn similarly and was still pretty good

i would guess that it's directed towards the kids in each of our hearts, rather than to literal kids

if by good you mean fun then I guess I agree, but the art style is quite hideous in both of the games.

$10?  I'm sorry, but that's a little bit steep, seeing as this looks like a lower caliber game than Runman, which was free.

That's probably the point of the charm. It's so badly done (by professionals' standards) that it's pretty good. I like it...for some reason.

Exciting? You bet.

Agh, I think he went overboard this time with the "colorful" graphics. The site hurts my eyes. Then I watch the trailer for the game, and it also hurts my eyes.

Runman didn't abuse colors as much as this. I don't think I could play this game without massive eye strain.

If something this funky hurts you eyes, I feel sorry for ye who couldn't handle Toejam & Earl because it hurts his eyes.

Nope, that's hyperbole. The Genesis color palette can't even generate the full bright colors he's using.

And Toejam & Earl had pretty decent graphics anyway, good contrast, seperation of foreground and background, all that stuff. These on the other hand are just really hard to look at.

Runman on the other hand was fine. It didn't have full bright flashing rainbow colors. It just had simple one shade backdrops and the simple colors and thick outlines were enough to provide visual contrast.

Come on the graphics are not that flashy, you don't know what flashy is, also the art standard is higher than you may thought. ???

I still think he could have done with a little less seizure inducing colors. It hurts my eyes. Is it just me? Maybe I'm sensitive to this kinda thing.



(Edit: Also no, I'm not epileptic)

the website hurts my eyes but I dunno about the game.

how long's it been out? haven't seen any blogs (indie games, rps) write about it yet.

You must have missed it, RPS did a write up earlier in the week (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/05/31/fetch-your-shades-deepak-fights-robots/). John Walker mentioned that it was inspired by Bubble Bobble but I'd say that it's also inspired by Rainbow Islands due to the retina-searing colour so it should be right up my alley.

This is also inaccurate. Bubble Bobble had really dark graphics. The game used pitch black backgrounds and a very simple tileset.

(http://www.arcade-museum.com/images/118/118124206556.png)

Rainbow Islands substituted the black with a dark shade of blue.

(http://www.arcade-museum.com/images/118/1181242155295.png)


Compare that to this:

http://deepaksave.us/ss1.png

the colors look eye-straining to me too but i'm sure it's intentional -- you can't make a game look that way by accident. as much as tom sennett says he hates art games and that he's a funware engineer or whatever, most of his games are art games

If Runman was an art game, then I'm the Queen of England.

that's obviously wrong because runman was an art game and you are not the queen of england

How can you be so sure?

There are some things you just have to be willing to stick your neck out for.

yeah but in the absence of reviews of the games or knowing anyone who bought and played the game all i can do is say 'i won't buy it unless there's a demo'

I know a lot of people are on a first name basis here. But I've never really been a big fan of any of this nepotism. Buying a game based on a person's name alone doesn't work out for me.

I agree with Paul, I have to see how the game plays first, which is hard due to the lack of a demo.

Thus I can only judge based on screenshots and the trailer, both of which really hurt my eyes and make it hard to focus on what's even going on.

Nepotism? :lol:

Never met the dude, but from playing his previous games anyone can see for themselves that Tom Sennet has a good design sense that carries over to this latest game. If people are buying his game based on his "name," it's more that they trust him to make a fun game based on the strength of his previous work.

John Romero was once the guy who designed the levels in Doom, rather than the "Daikatana guy." A name isn't enough to judge the quality of a game. Just sayin'.

Plus the TIGSource front page at one point used to be full of nepotism and games hyped up based on name alone. I remember seeing things like this one game that a forum member here made overnight just to test out Construct (I think?) and one of the front page editors hyped it to be his next big thing. The guy unfortunately had a lot of explaining to do when a bunch of people complained about it not living up to their expectations. No offense guys, but you aren't exactly the best at recommending games.

Though to be fair, the front page is doing a much better job these days.

Anyway, give me a demo and I'll make up my own mind. But right now all we have is some screenshots and a video both of which make it really hard to see what the game is about.

I understand what everyone is saying. I didn't actually post it here because it was from Tom Sennett but more with the intention of showing people what I though looked like a cool game. I have now changed the name of the topic to the actual title of the game rather than who made it. No nepotism was intended. Also I agree that the lack of demo is annoying but if you want more information try reading the  rps review  (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/05/31/fetch-your-shades-deepak-fights-robots/) as others have suggested.

It's just me, not everyone. Sorry. You didn't have to do that, although I still stand by the fact that there's no demo and not much to judge this game on other than screenshots and a video. The RPS link isn't really a review either, more like "hey, the guy who made Runman made a new game and it's 10 bucks!"

so has anyone in this thread actually bought it? and can describe it?

Uhmm, I bought it.
It's fun but it's kinda hard to describe.
You have to collect a few atom looking thingies (which can be seen in the video), then you get the bigger atom thingy that spawns and gain superpowers. Then you fly around the level and kill the baddies. And then you go on to the next level.

I'm not completely sure if it was worth the money, but it is fun. Dunno.

sorry but the trailer kinda looks like shit

a profound tableau. to bear witness to such a crisis of consumer confidence, sheltered, shivering in a blanket of indecisiveness. where were you. where were you when it all fell apart. it has been tortured, ulcerated, inflamed by your bilious attitudes. it is in pain. it is painful. and you add insult to injury and distend it with hot air. you inflict this but ultimately i suppose you view it as necessary. when next we meet it shall be as enemies.

Well, that's not very reassuring. Guess I'll pass on this one.

this game is really fucking cool
and yes it is like bubble bobble

and if you think comparing screenshots is a good way to judge a comparison of the rules and play of one game to another, welp

i agree it's too bad about the lack of a demo, but really i could care less since i played runman for free, and tom sennett has been working on this game for a while

buy it, it's great

apparently the reason this game has no demo is because tom sennet didnt want to ruin the surprise of the game and ruin it for the customer