next »

[kiwasabi]

"it's pretty clear that he's under the false impression that "No flaws=good"."

Uhh, so flaws are good? What planet are you from?

-Adam

[kiwasabi]

It's not, of course. I downloaded the peer-review build today and played for a solid 5-6 minutes before I got bored of the idea. It's no way as original as he claims and the art direction is laughable.
It's not a terribly bad game, it just doesn't stick out, and won't.

Agreed, I grabbed the peer review yesterday and while it's not the worst game I've ever seen, it doesn't hold my attention for more than a few minutes. It gets pretty annoying once the harder enemy types show up.

So the million generic indie platformers that come out are SO innovative (such as Spelunky), yet Flytrap is just another generic game? And the art direction is laughable? Uh, what? Did it need to have crappy pixelated graphics or what?

Also, two of you downloaded the game for peer review, yet only one person has approved the game. Feel free to FINISH your peer review.

People didn't think Pac-man was that great at first either.

[kiwasabi]

"By the way, Flytrap was also specifically designed to appeal to both genders.

-Adam"

Well, the Kirby games must be the king of games for females then.   

It's looks fine and all, but I don't see how it's the greatest game ever made.

You don't know what you're talking about, you haven't even played the game. Yes you inhale like Kirby, but that's the only similarity. There isn't a generic platformer wrapped around that one mechanic like in Kirby.

Also, Kirby isn't really about consumption too much; you spit out the enemies more than you swallow them.

[TheDustin]

Adam (if this really is you), I'll just say off the bat that this is a place for  , and if you fly off the handle we won't put up with it. If you want a rational talk about the game we're down for it. If you aren't --and are going to be a dick -- you'll just justify all of the negative attention you've brought upon yourself.

You're off to a bad start, bringing up past problems with Cthulu and insulting CASinclair, both of which are good people. Sinclair was noting that the game isn't bad; it's just bland. You yourself have proclaimed it "the best game" amongst other things, so he's just noting that the graphics are meh. Which I totally agree with, it doesn't seem to stand out in any particular fashion. And other people have noted that it wears thin after five or so minutes; not really the mark of any "best" games I have heard of. I personally do not own a 360 so I won't pass my own judgement off of it, but from what I'm hearing it isn't the amazing game you're trying to drum it up to be.

Dustin

EDIT: Just saw that you posted two more posts, and from that I see you're just attention-mongering. 

[aeiowu]

Hey Adam,

I think what CAsinclair was getting at was that there's a lot more that makes a game successful than "no flaws". To be honest, I'm not sure what that even means: "no flaws". What's erupted due to your outrage over your game's troubles isn't exactly constructive and I don't think anyone here means you any harm.

If you could manage to take a step back from all of this and maybe recognize a few things about the shitty part of being creative.

1. When you're starting out, you're going to make terrible shit. It will be awful. People might tell you it's ok to avoid embarrassing you (the nice-n-easy way out) or just because they think you could use some encouragement. When you bring it into the public, that's when reality hits and it's always tough in the beginning. Do your best to weather the storm and if you have to lash out, try to do so privately or amongst close friends/family. Vent. It's healthy.

The one saving grace in all this is that hopefully there's some part of you that knows you can do a lot better. Listen to that and follow it.

2. Criticism might sting at first, but nobody got anywhere worthwhile by avoiding pain their whole life. Take criticism in all it's forms as positive thing, even when it's not. This whole thread is filled with what looks like insults to you and your game that you worked so hard on, but many of them can be turned into constructive ways to inform your future games so that they may be received better.

3. Revisit the reason you're doing this as often as possible. You've mentioned a few times around various sites that the game was "developed to reach a wide audience" (not verbatim) and such. It feels to me that perhaps your motives for game development are primarily monetary. That's probably a crass generalization from little-to-no-information but I think you'd do well to take stock of what's happened with FlyTrap, where you are as a developer and where you want to be.

I hope that helped. Shit gets rough, believe me, I know. Most people don't make it through.

[kiwasabi]

Oh and my programmer most certainly did not rip me off, and quite the opposite, did me an incredible favor.

[kiwasabi]

Sinclair was noting that the game isn't bad; it's just bland. You yourself have proclaimed it "the best game" amongst other things, so he's just noting that the graphics are meh. Which I totally agree with, it doesn't seem to stand out in any particular fashion. And other people have noted that it wears thin after five or so minutes; not really the mark of any "best" games I have heard of. I personally do not own a 360 so I won't pass my own judgement off of it, but from what I'm hearing it isn't the amazing game you're trying to drum it up to be.

How are the graphics "meh"? Please analyze them for me.

[kiwasabi]

I think what CAsinclair was getting at was that there's a lot more that makes a game successful than "no flaws".

Oh really? Ever heard of Halo? It's nothing original, but has very few flaws (the first one at least). And it's one of the biggest franchises ever.

Also, Flytrap has a lot of originality behind it, but you're all too busy hating it to see how good it is.

-Adam

[TheDustin]

Also, Flytrap has a lot of originality behind it, but you're all too busy hating it to see how good it is.

-Adam

This right here is why I'm not going to bother speaking with you any further. You aren't willing to listen to our criticism, you find yourself infallible. I wish you the best of luck, sincerely man, but if you don't improve your attitude no one is going to want to associate with you.

[John Nesky]

How are the graphics "meh"? Please analyze them for me.

I can only speak for the graphics in the screenshots, having not played the game. But the ground is clearly two textures blended together using something akin to perlin noise, and then distorted for perspective. Lighting is simulated with a gradient on top. Real ground does not look like that, in particular ground is not flat and the lighting depends on the angle of the surface.

The perspective of the tornado in the second screenshot looks weird to me, but maybe it looks better in motion.

EDIT: The colors are "loud" and "busy". Maybe this is totally the aesthetic you're going for, but it tends to make things look more flat and it makes it harder to "read" shapes. I think more contrast between the important objects and the background would be nice, and less sharpness and contrast where the player doesn't need to focus attention, like most of the background.

[Oddball]

WTF dude. It's not your place to declare your own game as the greatest game ever. That's the province of history and personal preference. No one here has actually said the game is terrible. Those that have played it say it's ok for a five minute distraction and those that have commented on the art say it looks dated. Not really that bad considering some of the comments games get on the front page. You need to calm down, take stock, and work to improve. Especially on your people skills.

[team_q]

People aren't hating on your game, if anything they find it unremarkable. They 'hate' the way you acted.

Dude, two things you gotta learn to take, criticism and a joke.

[kiwasabi]

How are the graphics "meh"? Please analyze them for me.

I can only speak for the graphics in the screenshots, having not played the game. But the ground is clearly two textures blended together using something akin to perlin noise, and then distorted for perspective. Lighting is simulated with a gradient on top. Real ground does not look like that, in particular ground is not flat and the lighting depends on the angle of the surface.

The perspective of the tornado in the second screenshot looks weird to me, but maybe it looks better in motion.

EDIT: The colors are "loud" and "busy". Maybe this is totally the aesthetic you're going for, but it tends to make things look more flat and it makes it harder to "read" shapes. I think more contrast between the important objects and the background would be nice, and less sharpness and contrast where the player doesn't need to focus attention, like most of the background.

So, basically you want the game's graphics to be more old school.

[kiwasabi]

Those that have played it say it's ok for a five minute distraction and those that have commented on the art say it looks dated.

If my art looks dated, then 99% of the games on this site have graphics from the stone ages.

Also, the people who played the game who are only calling the game "meh" are just trying to appeal to the general negative attitude towards me.

[kiwasabi]

People aren't hating on your game, if anything they find it unremarkable. They 'hate' the way you acted.

Right, and they're transferring that hatred of my character towards their judgment of my game.

[John Nesky]

So, basically you want the game's graphics to be more old school.

I am pretty confused about the connection between this and what I said.

[team_q]

Right, and they're transferring that hatred of my character towards their judgment of my game.

Okay, but you are still perpetuating it, how does this help your cause?

[kiwasabi]

So, basically you want the game's graphics to be more old school.

I am pretty confused about the connection between this and what I said.

I think more contrast between the important objects and the background would be nice, and less sharpness and contrast where the player doesn't need to focus attention, like most of the background.

I took this to mean, "make most of the background less detailed".

What objects don't have enough contrast to the background?

[kiwasabi]

Right, and they're transferring that hatred of my character towards their judgment of my game.

Okay, but you are still perpetuating it, how does this help your cause?

What would you propose that I do?

[John Nesky]

By "busy", I'm referring to the difference between this and this. The second one is less busy, and thus easier to interpret quickly. These images are exaggerated and Fly Trap isn't as busy, but I personally would still appreciate it if the frogs were brighter and had stronger shadows than the background.

(both images are from this excellent guide)