Telltale Autumn Sale

Joystiq review

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/06/30/review-puzzle-agent/

3/5 - seems to be a mainly negative review (copy of Professor Layton but not as good)
«13

Comments

  • edited June 2010
    So, that means Puzzle Agent will be out soon? I mean, if people are already reviewing it, it must be done.
  • edited June 2010
    Wow I disagree with their review.

    Here's mine for what it's worth: http://buttonbasher.net/2010/06/30/you-see-them-dont-you-a-nelson-tethers-puzzle-agent-review/
  • MRNMRN
    edited June 2010
    Lol at that review...
  • MRNMRN
    edited June 2010
    KLind wrote: »
    Wow I disagree with their review.

    Here's mine for what it's worth: http://buttonbasher.net/2010/06/30/you-see-them-dont-you-a-nelson-tethers-puzzle-agent-review/

    10/10??

    WOW!!!

    How long is the game, BTW?
  • edited June 2010
    Seems like the first reviewer had a negative attitude before he played the game. It just feels that way.
  • edited June 2010
    That was quite a bad review.
    Im not saying its bad because im biased and love Telltale, but in that review he kept comparing it to Professor Layton. I understand using Professor Layton when talking about the Puzzles but the characters and setting are not suposed to be any thing like 'Professor Layton' its Grinkle where the characters all look the same and usually have no names.
  • edited June 2010
    MRN wrote: »
    10/10??

    WOW!!!

    How long is the game, BTW?

    I feel very strongly about this game and it's series potential.

    As for length it seemed about the same length as a typical Telltale episode if not a little bit shorter. Your mileage may vary depending on how long you spend stumped on puzzles.
  • MRNMRN
    edited June 2010
    ^^Thanks :)
  • edited June 2010
    Pretty awful review. In every sentence there seems to be contours of arguments, he mentions Professor Layton. It's ridiculous, really.
    In fact, a similar critique could be leveled against the whole of the game's tone. It wants to be quirky, funny, oddball, mysterious and a little unnerving, but it never goes far enough in any of those directions to be particularly effective. What you're left with feels like Brett Ratner trying to make a David Lynch movie, and the result is unfortunately mushy, even more so when compared to the specific, deliberate charm of Layton.

    The game is subtle, and that's a bad thing, because Professor Layton is "deliberately charming"? Give me a break.
  • edited June 2010
    im really not expecting anything amazing from this game (tho its telltale so i wouldnt be surprised if i'm wrong on this =P) but i basically got it for free so it doesnt bother me if its bad
  • edited June 2010
    also it seems he didnt like the game because it rips off Professor Layton, but he complains when it does stuff differently to Professor Layton :confused:.
  • edited June 2010
    to me its a weird review because its mostly negative, but in the end they give it a 3/5, which is not a bad score.
  • edited June 2010
    I don't get this "Professor Layton rip off" thing. By this standard 90% of all games are rip offs (not to mention, all adventure games must be rip offs of early Kings Quests :rolleyes: )
  • edited June 2010
    Yeah, it seems like a situation where he heard it was going to be like Professor Layton, which is one of his favorite games and was disappointed. And since he was so disappointed that he said they should've never even tried to copy Layton.
  • edited June 2010
    also it seems he didnt like the game because it rips off Professor Layton, but he complains when it does stuff differently to Professor Layton :confused:.

    Well, no, he complains that most things that Puzzle Agent did, Layton did better. That's not quite the same thing.

    It seems enjoyment of the game is very much tied to the Layton-shaped elephant in the room: if you can get past the fact that, yeah, it's fairly derivative, then you'll have a good time. If you can't, then you might want to lower your expectations now.

    All I care about are whether the puzzles are good and interesting, and whether the story is worthwhile. Honestly, I'm worried that it will fall in the same trap that Layton fell in, that most of the puzzles will be "chestnuts" (puzzles that are so well-known that most seasoned puzzlers could give you the answer without thinking about the problem at all).
  • MRNMRN
    edited June 2010
    Paintbrush wrote: »
    I don't get this "Professor Layton rip off" thing. By this standard 90% of all games are rip offs (not to mention, all adventure games must be rip offs of early Kings Quests :rolleyes: )

    Yeah, it's like saying: "Oh noes, all the Adventure Games are rip offs of the early text adventure game but with images :eek:!!!!!!111!!Q!!!"
  • edited June 2010
    Trust me, based on the puzzles we've seen so far... I don't think that's going to be an issue.

    And, considering the Layton games, or at least the first one, dunno about the others, were a direct fork of a brain teaser book in Japan... Same puzzles, same order, etc...

    You get the idea. Chestnuts be expected in Layton's case as a result of the origin of the puzzles.
  • edited June 2010
    Yadda wrote: »
    Trust me, based on the puzzles we've seen so far... I don't think that's going to be an issue.

    And, considering the Layton games, or at least the first one, dunno about the others, were a direct fork of a brain teaser book in Japan... Same puzzles, same order, etc...

    You get the idea. Chestnuts be expected in Layton's case as a result of the origin of the puzzles.

    Actually, the sock puzzle shown in the second review is very much a chestnut.
  • edited June 2010
    Well, yeah. The Professor Layton games had puzzles which were directly taken from existing puzzle books. Not just in Japan, but in the West as well. I did know the majority of those puzzles, from the start, though one can always alter a tiny rule or position in them, to make them have a different answer. It's what makes those puzzles really lasting.

    Of course, the review really didn't tell me anything other than the guy's personal opinion about the atmosphere of the game. Or anything about whether it is voice acted all the way through, etc. Telltale games are generally 'talky' type of games, where Professor Layton has no voice work outside of a few *specific* animated scenes and soundbites when you solve or fail a puzzle attempt.
  • edited June 2010
    Actually, the sock puzzle shown in the second review is very much a chestnut.

    I chose that screencap mainly to show the other kind of puzzle (Brain Teasers; Click Puzzles). It's one of the easier solutions in the game, for what it's worth. They're not all as simple as that.
  • edited June 2010
    Actually... I meant that the first Layton game was a direct lift from a SINGLE puzzle book. with all elements preserved. At least, if I recall correctly.
  • edited June 2010
    KLind wrote: »
    I chose that screencap mainly to show the other kind of puzzle (Brain Teasers; Click Puzzles). It's one of the easier solutions in the game, for what it's worth. They're not all as simple as that.

    Fair enough. I'm not so much concerned about "simple" though as I am "trite". Whether that puzzle is simple or not isn't the point; I knew the answer without thinking about it at all because I have seen it dozens upon dozens of times.

    If a company really wants to out-Layton Layton, they need to hire someone who's good at producing original, never-before-seen brain teasers and puzzles, or at least creative enough to hide the fact that they're not all that new. I'd love a computer game from Greg Brume (http://pandamagazine.com/) or Mark Halpin (http://www.markhalpin.com/puzzles/puzzles.html) for example, because their puzzles are consistently interesting.
  • edited June 2010
    Regardless of what that reviewer thinks, I recon this game is going to be great. From what little I've seen of it, it looks to me to have the potential of becoming a full series. I'm looking forward to the other Pilot releases too.
    Paintbrush wrote: »
    I don't get this "Professor Layton rip off" thing. By this standard 90% of all games are rip offs (not to mention, all adventure games must be rip offs of early Kings Quests :rolleyes: )

    Exactly. This is my argument too. Just because the gameplay is the same, that doesn't mean it's a complete rip off. This is a game set in the world of Grickle. That to me already makes it unique and stands it apart from Layton.
  • edited June 2010
    Some of those Mark Halpin puzzles look pretty tricky for most people to get. I think one of the reasons for Layton's choice of puzzles is that they want the average person to be able to complete them. So the main things they avoided were puzzles that had to be solved in parts. (ex. Any puzzle where the result is a solution of multiple puzzles you have to solve). Puzzles that require too long of an explanation to get going through them. And/or puzzles that are served too vaguely as to give little indication on how to even look at the puzzle.

    I guess the idea is that they need to be original while keeping the fundamental difficulty along the lines of the previous puzzle games. With the exception of some extra-hard mode. As of right now, some of the existing puzzle types have been redone because of a single rule or position changed, which changes the outcome. Those will seem familiar, but with a few gotchas. Case in point, in Layton 1, they had the good ol' get these folks across a river in one raft puzzle. However, they changed a rule from the version of the puzzle I did before, so I kind of had to do it anew instead of just coming up with a memorized answer.
  • edited June 2010
    akaimizu wrote: »
    Some of those Mark Halpin puzzles look pretty tricky for most people to get.

    Oh, they most definitely are, but I also know he's smart enough to make puzzles for all ability levels. Any puzzle creator worth his salt can adapt the difficulty level to fit the audience. I don't want people to take my links and say "Oh, he wants hard puzzles" because, while I *love* hard puzzles, that's not the point I was trying to make.
  • edited June 2010
    Reviews are for fools. People have to make up their own opinions. I never listen to what other people tell me... If I did, I would have missed out on COUNTLESS amazing movies, books and games.
  • edited June 2010
    Fair enough. I'm not so much concerned about "simple" though as I am "trite". Whether that puzzle is simple or not isn't the point; I knew the answer without thinking about it at all because I have seen it dozens upon dozens of times.

    If a company really wants to out-Layton Layton, they need to hire someone who's good at producing original, never-before-seen brain teasers and puzzles, or at least creative enough to hide the fact that they're not all that new. I'd love a computer game from Greg Brume (http://pandamagazine.com/) or Mark Halpin (http://www.markhalpin.com/puzzles/puzzles.html) for example, because their puzzles are consistently interesting.

    To be perfectly honest, since this is a Grickle game, I'm much more interested in art, atmosphere, story and general ambiance than I am with the specifics of the puzzles.

    I mean, classic puzzles are that for a reason, producing wholly new ones can be quite the task, if you're aiming for a diverse audience.

    I'm sure this is one of the dangerous points of making a game like this. You have to fend off all the eggheads (not meant derogatory) who focuses only on the puzzles.

    I'd be a lot more worried if the puzzles weren't properly integrated into the style and mindset of the game itself, than that the puzzles are somehow unoriginal, because quite frankly, when you've played enough adventure games and solved enough puzzles, nothing is really very inventive.
  • edited June 2010
    Raum wrote: »
    I'd be a lot more worried if the puzzles weren't properly integrated into the style and mindset of the game itself, than that the puzzles are somehow unoriginal, because quite frankly, when you've played enough adventure games and solved enough puzzles, nothing is really very inventive.

    One of the biggest problems in modern gaming is the idea that everything's been done to death, so why even focus on invention? If everyone thought like that, then why even bother making games? Just make movies if the puzzles are just hackneyed pauses between scenes that we've seen millions of times already.

    It kills me when people say "I'll settle for unoriginality if the story's good." Why settle? We can have our cake and eat it too!

    I just want to reiterate that I am not talking about Puzzle Agent, a game I have no right to criticize because I have not yet played. I'm talking about the general state of gaming.

    Edit: Also, "creating wholly new ones can be quite the task"? I shouldn't demand more of my games because it might be hard for the designers? Boo hoo for them. I'd gladly wait longer for a truly great game.
  • edited June 2010
    I saw this on Twitter earlier today, seems appropriate to share here.

    The state of the video game industry summed up in 3 images...

    602_3.jpg

    What's even better is that the reviews of said games (and other similar "AAA" titles) always get good reviews and little is said about the fact that they're all essential ripping each other off.
  • edited June 2010
    I saw this on Twitter earlier today, seems appropriate to share here.

    The state of the video game industry summed up in 3 images...

    602_3.jpg

    What's even better is that the reviews of said games (and other similar "AAA" titles) always get good reviews and little is said about the fact that they're all essential ripping each other off.

    I disagree with your image. Not one of those games featured plasma rifles and hostile aliens,
  • edited June 2010
    602_3.jpg
    At least Modern Warfail is trying to be unique by splashing orange-lemonade in your face instead of blood.
    And yeah I agree with you here. This genre get's more and more boring fo years now.
  • edited June 2010
    Actually, it looks to me like a jar of jam exploded in front of the camera!
  • edited June 2010
    Actually, it looks to me like a jar of jam exploded in front of the camera!

    Maybe some badly coloured strawberry jam. I think I can agree on that.
  • edited June 2010
    602_3.jpg

    Looks like they've realised how many children play Modern Crapshot 2 and have self-censored by making them paintball guns.
  • edited June 2010
    Looks like they've realised how many children play Modern Crapshot 2 and have self-censored by making them paintball guns.

    Nah. They just wanted to cover over half of the screen with it and noticed that while this might look hardcore it makes the player almost completely blind.
  • edited June 2010
    My favorite is all the people criticizing the "bad framerate" of Puzzle Agent. Some people...
  • edited June 2010
    I'm almost solely after the Grickle mood, that's the reason why i care about his voice. I expect the music to be moody as well and if there even comes a convincing game then i wouldn't mind. Dunno Prof. Layton is quite lame compared to Grickle if You're looking at the Art only.
  • edited June 2010
    IMHO both Grickle and Layton art-wise have their own charms. I'm a fan of anime, so the FMV scenes in layton appeal to me. But Grickle's style is one all it's own, and it's a great style at that.
  • edited June 2010
    One of the biggest problems in modern gaming is the idea that everything's been done to death, so why even focus on invention? If everyone thought like that, then why even bother making games? Just make movies if the puzzles are just hackneyed pauses between scenes that we've seen millions of times already.

    It kills me when people say "I'll settle for unoriginality if the story's good." Why settle? We can have our cake and eat it too!

    I just want to reiterate that I am not talking about Puzzle Agent, a game I have no right to criticize because I have not yet played. I'm talking about the general state of gaming.

    Edit: Also, "creating wholly new ones can be quite the task"? I shouldn't demand more of my games because it might be hard for the designers? Boo hoo for them. I'd gladly wait longer for a truly great game.

    Oh please. Like this has anything to do with what I said.

    Invention, in this case, is making logical conundrums that are topologically different. Anyone who's dabbled just a tad with mathematics, game mechanics or puzzles know that essentially, most of what is produced is very similar in how it functions, if you look at it in a more abstract fashion. Puzzles generally aren't inventive, at all; and they pretty much can't be, unless they're made a lot more advanced.

    This has nothing to do with how gaming as a whole is bad, the strawman-argument of me "settling for less" or whatever you're blabbering on about. This has to do with how designing good games aren't about just sitting down "being innovative", but about making sure the game ends up as a work that feels whole and autonomous. The design process isn't just arbitrary throwing together "innovative" stuff. You've got to take into account if the puzzle elements fits into the story, the feel of the game, if you can incorporate (or even use existing) premises of the setting or artwork, if the puzzle fits the humour or the atmosphere, or even the pacing.

    You act as if similar puzzles is some kind of key indicator of gaming quality in general. Of course it isn't. Yes, gaming is in shambles right now, but that has nothing — at all — to do with how classic puzzles are used in puzzle games like Professor Layton or Puzzle Agent. I can tell you that right now, even without knowing anything about the puzzles in PA. So, let's just wait and see how the puzzles incorporate into the game, and don't get our panties in a twist just because some simpleton over at Joystiq can't think outside of comparisons.
  • edited June 2010
    @Yadda
    Personally i can't stand the Layton art style.

    On the other Side i really enjoy the Grickle Look and it's One of those rare games where you don't have to differ between the Cover Art and how the Game Looks in real.

    I was often asking for Games which Look like the Concept/Cover Art and here it seems like i get what i want.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.