next »

[ak]

my thoughts on the game, quoted from the frontpage

Paul Eres said 1 day later:
what. who else could make a game in 48 hours that gets on the frontpage of tigsource, timw’s indiegames blog, and WIRED of all places? and gets more comments in those blogs and in the forums than games that have been worked on for years, like au sable? people will probably remember this game for years, and remember the tricks it used (if in fact the conspiracy theory is true). not to mention all the tigsource frontpage trolls it peeved off (its greatest accomplishment). for 2 days that’s pretty good, i’ve nothing but admiration for it.

Well, first of all, Cactus is pretty "famous" in the indie games community (even the Times talked about him) so i'm guessing any game he makes from now on will get good coverage. That's not a critic, i'm just saying, his reputation kinda works for him now.

Then yes, you're right, a lot of people talk, argue, comment about it. So what ? The guy says the game sucks, and that's his opinion, but i don't see how the fact that a lot of people talked about it says the contrary.

[team_q]

Cactus Twittered about his IGF game, and that made the rounds right quick on twitter.

I liked this game before, I love it now.

[TheCube]

Oh man, I got to the sword in about 10 minutes with few problems (and of course ran right into it) but I just thought everybody else sucked and I ruled.

This game is evil, but awesome.  But evil.

[team_q]

I like that I have to meta game the game to get the good ending.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Then yes, you're right, a lot of people talk, argue, comment about it. So what ? The guy says the game sucks, and that's his opinion, but i don't see how the fact that a lot of people talked about it says the contrary.

the 'so what' is that there are different measures of success. sometimes giving players some fun is the goal, sometimes it isn't. cactus is famous for saying that games don't have to be fun. the nyt article reiterated that. my point was that if you only judge the success of a game by how much enjoyment you personally as an individual had with that game, that's a petty short-sighted measure of that game's value. it's kind of like saying 'i don't have any use for a cell phone or a bank account, so cell phones and bank accounts suck'.

[ak]

I, of course, agree with that, and i agree that making people talk can be a sign of success. But to me it's a success if it makes people talk about something bigger than the game itself (ie Edmund who lead to interesting discussions about rape, the way it should be discussed etc).

I'm saying that the game is bad, i'm just not convinced that it's "genius" or that "people will remember this game for years". But maybe it'll help people think gaming possibilities differently and lead to new ideas, who knows.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

people are talking about things beyond the game itself, though -- just read some of the comments here, or on the frontpage. for instance, someone on the frontpage made a very interesting point: if you think this game is "playing" you, what does that say about normal games, and how they are playing you even more dastardly?

[ak]

Seems like my edit came too late I confess i did not see the comments on the frontpage, i only read the posts here that are more like "wtf can't jump".

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

besides, another measure of success (which i called its greatest) was annoying the frontpage trolls; one of them even threatened to leave unless 'art games' get a warning label so he doesn't have to play them! if he leaves, that'd be even more of a success.

[John Nesky]

if he leaves, that'd be even more of a success.

Antagonism creates more antagonism.

[The North]

if he leaves, that'd be even more of a success.

Antagonism creates more antagonism.

I enjoy a good platitude myself.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

not in all cases. sometimes standing up to a bully gets the bully to stop doing what he's doing, sometimes it gets him to bully more. depends on the situation. in any case, the indie games community certainly doesn't gain much from people who hang around just to make fun of every game that indie devs release.

[John Nesky]

Ooh, I like this "platitude" word. Must remember that one. 

[moi]

i'm sure cactus and podunkian care about "stars"

Actually yes, I'm sure they do, I think they're some sort of proletarian versions of blow and rohrher

[FrankieSmileShow]

...And it turns out it was just bugs

[MaloEspada]

Tragedy and Comedy.
The tragic part is the infinite amount of random bug variants.
The comic part is both cactus and podunkian watching this thread and laughing their asses off.

[Christian Knudsen]

A game that plays you and trolls the trolls. How postmodern.

[pgil]

this has also been my experience, i never got any bugs, no matter what i tried. although perhaps the 'review copy' he sent me was bug-free, so that the review wouldn't mention the bugs?

Fucking brilliant :D. Who else got review copies?

[cactus]

Sorry about the radio silence, we felt it was necessary to let this experiment live its own life for a while.

Anyway, this should pretty much make everything clear:
www.superfundungeonrun.com/clarity.zip

And here's a bugfree version of the game:
www.superfundungeonrun.com/dungeonv2.zip

Also, sorry to anyone who was offended by the idea behind the game. Even if we in some ways tried to play you, you'll have to remember that we spent a bit over two days making this game, so the joke is really on us. (Although, this wasn't meant to be a joke, but an amusing experiment.) Hopefully you'll all agree that this indeed did convey a bit of tragedy and some comedy one way or another

Thanks for playing and making this game a worthwhile project for us!

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

yay!

edit: edited the frontpage