In defense of the game, people who finished it said it's not sympathetic at all towards the pedophile. I'm halfway through so I'll see what my conclusion on this subject is at the end.
It is not sympathetic to him. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Henry and Richard (two real villains in the game) both have tragic pasts, but neither are forgiven and their spirits are wiped away forever leaving them dead.
it also doesn't imply that all victims of abuse become abuser or villains. Lily for her part only unleashed the Maw to save her younger sister. It also doesn't imply Lily is suicidal. She wants to kill herself to kill the Maw but starving him is another option her little sister came up with.
In defense of the game, people who finished it said it's not sympathetic at all towards the pedophile. I'm halfway through so I'll see what my conclusion on this subject is at the end.
The evidence brought to light that the developers themselves seem to use it as a "toy" for their story. People just accusing others as overreacting or worst despite said evidence saying otherwise is the fucking "receipts".
That being said, brawn is acknowledging something they didn't notice so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt here and apologize about the accusation.
I'm not the mod who locked that thread but I thought it was best if someone dived in and gave some context.
This discussion point is clearly an incredibly sensitive one. We've had threads like this before for countless games but we'd usually ask (and I think this makes sense?) that a thread around subject matter like this be made either by someone who has played the game first-hand and is giving their personal opinion on it or, failing that, be based on a written feature/article by a reputable source. With all the respect in the world to OP, it's really tough to have this kind of thread around such a sensitive and emotive subject matter when a third of the thread is complaining that the OP hasn't actually played the game and another third is complaining that the tweets the thread is based upon didn't finish it or see some important context or whatever. Our report queue completely blew up in an instant and it was deemed that a thread based on second hand impressions from a fairly small Twitter account wasn't really sufficiant reason to host a thread that was already a battleground and receiving really serious reports.
I know that lock messages can sometimes seem a bit short and not very descriptive so I apologise for that.
The issue isn't being silenced or anything. It's actually already happened in the review threads and this OT from what I can remember (I haven't even played the game beyond the first bit, but I remember the points being raised in one of these threads before). If someone has some personal opinion from their own experience of playing the game that they want to kick off a discussion about then that would maybe be a better place to form the conversation from. It'll at the very least stop them from being criticised for not having played the game for the entire thread.
The evidence brought to light that the developers themselves seem to use it as a "toy" for their story. People just accusing others as overreacting or worst despite said evidence saying otherwise is the fucking "receipts".
I don't know what possessed you to accuse another user of being an apologist for pedophilia over the interpretation of a videogame that is apparently shared by others but it is really innapropiate. And it makes me extremely uncomfortable that people are trying to use it to win internet arguments.
The video evidence of a story segment that seem to want insert pedophilia in a sympathetic light on the cycle of abuse and you had to come off as an apologist of pedophilia.
Actually I'm going through the video and it looks like Emma missed some details (or maybe it's explained further ahead in the game). But basically:
She says Thomas "freed" him or excused away Richard's sins.
Actually Thomas imprisoned Richard in his own body by like breaking the link between Richard's soul and his body or something. Richard became immobile and unable to talk for the rest of his life. If I remember correctly, Richard going from being an artist to being apparently brain dead is something that was explained in one of the audio diaries or letters scattered around.
She says Thomas killed the one good part of Richard (his little boy persona).
Maybe this is up for interpretation, but Thomas says multiple times that this is all just stuff Richard uses as a deflection. It's not his true self.
She says that it would have been logical for Thomas to kill Richard rather than "save" him.
Again, I think she missed the detail about what Richard's fate was afterwards. But Thomas actually has a discussion with his spirit self where they decide that killing him might risk his ability to be in Lilly's life (potential legal consequences) so he decides to do the thing where Richard is now seemingly brain dead for the rest of his life.
I'm not the mod who locked that thread but I thought it was best if someone dived in and gave some context.
This discussion point is clearly an incredibly sensitive one. We've had threads like this before for countless games but we'd usually ask (and I think this makes sense?) that a thread around subject matter like this be made either by someone who has played the game first-hand and is giving their personal opinion on it or, failing that, be based on a written feature/article by a reputable source. With all the respect in the world to OP, it's really tough to have this kind of thread around such a sensitive and emotive subject matter when a third of the thread is complaining that the OP hasn't actually played the game and another third is complaining that the tweets the thread is based upon didn't finish it or see some important context or whatever. Our report queue completely blew up in an instant and it was deemed that a thread based on second hand impressions from a fairly small Twitter account wasn't really sufficiant reason to host a thread that was already a battleground and receiving really serious reports.
I know that lock messages can sometimes seem a bit short and not very descriptive so I apologise for that.
The issue isn't being silenced or anything. It's actually already happened in the review threads and this OT from what I can remember (I haven't even played the game beyond the first bit, but I remember the points being raised in one of these threads before). If someone has some personal opinion from their own experience of playing the game that they want to kick off a discussion about then that would maybe be a better place to form the conversation from. It'll at the very least stop them from being criticised for not having played the game for the entire thread.
So watching the entire segment play out and seeing how it's executed is not good grounds to talk about this, and you need to pay the developers (who in your opinion are being very offensive) in order to be able to criticize their work?
I'm sorry, I don't want to come off as an asshole, but why are we ignoring the fact that there was an entire video in the thread, showing the problematic stuff and the execution of them in the story? How is that not good enough to know if that segment is problematic or not?
Here's the Era guidelines for creating Tweet threads:
"If you are citing any sources (including articles or videos) while creating a thread, please scrutinize them to make sure that they are reliable ones. Try not to create threads based on random tweets, conspiracy theories, tabloids, or other questionable sources."
So it looks like the guideline is there to prevent the posting of unreliable information or information that was not vetted well enough. This, meanwhile, was a thread based on a Twitter opinion and seems to fall outside of the purview of this guideline. The guideline is to prevent questionable sources, not to silence insight or prevent alternate takes on a game.
Questionable sources, yes. But that tweet thread had both an expounding tweet thread, longer video, and corroboration with other tweet threads and at least one videogame review. Sure, the OP could have been edited, but enough was there for discussion.
Take this from someone who tried for many months to get random shit-stirring tweets and takes out of political threads.
As for pedophilia, this is why you don't use it in a literary fashion as a subtext or background unless you really know what you're doing and have it editorially vetted. Just here alone we've got people accusing others of being apologists, and judging its appropriateness in the game based on if the player is guaranteed to be unsympathetic to it. Just because people remain unsympathetic doesn't mean what was presented is okay or doesn't paint others in a poor way.
Because this site can be overly eager to close threads and will often do so with fairly poor reasoning (tons of threads get close for having the gall to be too old even if topic matters are still relevant and people will get directed to make a new thread for... some reason). There's ton of threads made on random Tweets all the time, but that one got the boot because it's easier to try to contain some things than let them all have their own threads and play out on their own terms.
Videos displaying gameplay breakdown should absolutely constitute a thread, especially when it's examining stuff this serious.
So watching the entire segment play out and seeing how it's executed is not good grounds to talk about this, and you need to pay the developers (who in your opinion are being very offensive) in order to be able to criticize their work?
I'm sorry, I don't want to come off as an asshole, but why are we ignoring the fact that there was an entire video in the thread, showing the problematic stuff and the execution of them in the story? How is that not good enough to know if that segment is problematic or not?
I'm still watching the video but it looks like there was some details the streamer missed (I explained in my post above) which would definitely explain her reaction.
Maybe games shouldn't talk about sensitive subjects without writers giving input from direct experience. There's a good discussion to be had there. But I think this streamer missed a couple story details and I don't blame her because I think the game builds it up by hinting at it with the collectible audio diaries scattered around.
- About as good, narrative wise as their previous best work
- Bloober just isn't very skilled in weaving sensitive subjects into their narratives
- Bloober, please, if puzzles are going to remain one of the only gameplay hooks in your games, please get better at designing said puzzles
- Wonderful OST
- Great visuals
- The split world POV did absolutely jack for me
Actually I'm going through the video and it looks like Emma missed some details (or maybe it's explained further ahead in the game). But basically:
She says Thomas "freed" him or excused away Richard's sins.
Actually Thomas imprisoned Richard in his own body by like breaking the link between Richard's soul and his body or something. Richard became immobile and unable to talk for the rest of his life. If I remember correctly, Richard going from being an artist to being apparently brain dead is something that was explained in one of the audio diaries or letters scattered around.
She says Thomas killed the one good part of Richard (his little boy persona).
Maybe this is up for interpretation, but Thomas says multiple times that this is all just stuff Richard uses as a deflection. It's not his true self.
She says that it would have been logical for Thomas to kill Richard rather than "save" him.
Again, I think she missed the detail about what Richard's fate was afterwards. But Thomas actually has a discussion with his spirit self where they decide that killing him might risk his ability to be in Lilly's life (potential legal consequences) so he decides to do the thing where Richard is now seemingly brain dead for the rest of his life.
The second point doesn't seem as up for debate to me.
It's the part of Richard that Thomas kills to render him braindead in the first place, isn't it? It's clearly a genuine part of Richard, and Thomas even apologizes to him as he's strangling the kid. Something like (watched this a few days ago) "I'm sorry kid, I know you tried to run, tried to hide, but as long as you're alive the Beast is, too." That element of Richard is clearly real, clearly "pure" and Thomas acknowledges it through his dialogue in the only contrite lines he has in Richard's psyche. This to me reads like a strong implication that Richard is afflicted by his own trauma, and even if you don't buy that it's certainly meant to show some innocence, some sympathetic part of him.
But yeah, even with the reasons the mods gave, I think that other thread should be reopened. The lock doesn't make sense, the reasoning wasn't as stated, and the conversation is more restricted and drowned out in here. Barring that, the invitation for someone else to make the thread is a good one.
I'm not the mod who locked that thread but I thought it was best if someone dived in and gave some context.
This discussion point is clearly an incredibly sensitive one. We've had threads like this before for countless games but we'd usually ask (and I think this makes sense?) that a thread around subject matter like this be made either by someone who has played the game first-hand and is giving their personal opinion on it or, failing that, be based on a written feature/article by a reputable source. With all the respect in the world to OP, it's really tough to have this kind of thread around such a sensitive and emotive subject matter when a third of the thread is complaining that the OP hasn't actually played the game and another third is complaining that the tweets the thread is based upon didn't finish it or see some important context or whatever. Our report queue completely blew up in an instant and it was deemed that a thread based on second hand impressions from a fairly small Twitter account wasn't really sufficiant reason to host a thread that was already a battleground and receiving really serious reports.
I know that lock messages can sometimes seem a bit short and not very descriptive so I apologise for that.
The issue isn't being silenced or anything. It's actually already happened in the review threads and this OT from what I can remember (I haven't even played the game beyond the first bit, but I remember the points being raised in one of these threads before). If someone has some personal opinion from their own experience of playing the game that they want to kick off a discussion about then that would maybe be a better place to form the conversation from. It'll at the very least stop them from being criticised for not having played the game for the entire thread.
Like I mentioned in a previous post, in hindsight I should have made the video a lot more visible. I suspect even the mod who locked it might have missed it. The thread was never meant to focus on the tweets. The tweets were leading up to the video. Which I did watch. From what I can tell, it shows all the relevant story portions of the segment that is being criticised (with non-relevant gameplay portions having been edited out for convenience, because the video is already long enough as it is).
Questionable sources, yes. But that tweet thread had both an expounding tweet thread, longer video, and corroboration with other tweet threads and at least one videogame review. Sure, the OP could have been edited, but enough was there for discussion.
Take this from someone who tried for many months to get random shit-stirring tweets and takes out of political threads.
As for pedophilia, this is why you don't use it in a literary fashion as a subtext or background unless you really know what you're doing and have it editorially vetted. Just here alone we've got people accusing others of being apologists, and judging its appropriateness in the game based on if the player is guaranteed to be unsympathetic to it. Just because people remain unsympathetic doesn't mean what was presented is okay or doesn't paint others in a poor way.
I totally agree with you if it wasn't clear from the context of my post. I don't think the lock was warranted, or that the rule against "random Tweets" that's present in the guidelines is meant to address Tweets about opinions or alternate takes. It seems to be there to prevent misinformation and unreliable sources; what was in the old thread was an opinion (and an important one to discuss, imo!) that should have been free from the lock.
- About as good, narrative wise as their previous best work
- Bloober just isn't very skilled in weaving sensitive subjects into their narratives
- Bloober, please, if puzzles are going to remain one of the only gameplay hooks in your games, please get better at designing said puzzles
- Wonderful OST
- Great visuals
- The split world POV did absolutely jack for me
I have no idea what the split screen is supposed to do. Except making everything look dumber and also tank the performance. I'm genuinely confused as to why they implemented that.
I have no idea what the split screen is supposed to do. Except making everything look dumber and also tank the performance. I'm genuinely confused as to why they implemented that.
Finished the game last week, overall liked it, but it was uneven, the sections with
Thomas, in which the pedophile stuff happens and the other flashback with the hound happens, I felt that were the worse parts of the game, and just found them boring, the handling of the themes didn't help either, about the suicide stuff at the end with Lily I disagree with the interpretation that it meant that trauma can only be cured by death, since the main character immediately rejects this option, but if in the sequel Lily is killed then there would be a stronger case for that, also if I remember right the moral dilemma was with the decision of Lily of saving herself and her sister knowing that a lot more people would die by letting the monster out.
I don't get it. When I look at footage of the split screen all I can think of is that it looks stupid and immersion breaking that she's pushing air in one part of the screen and pushing a box in another part (to make things worse, it's badly implemented in that it's blatant that they just make the box invisible but leave the animation unchanged). What effect is it trying to have on the player? It just seems to be them flexing with some technology they thought was cool, but that doesn't improve the game in any way.
I am at "find a way to stop Henry", it's the second time I am playing as Thomas. I have to cross a pit and a monster comes from the other side. I use my spirit powers to move a bookshelf over but just...can't. It says use the left stick to move objects but nothing is working. I am sure I am missing something really obvious here?
I am at "find a way to stop Henry", it's the second time I am playing as Thomas. I have to cross a pit and a monster comes from the other side. I use my spirit powers to move a bookshelf over but just...can't. It says use the left stick to move objects but nothing is working. I am sure I am missing something really obvious here?
I don't get it. When I look at footage of the split screen all I can think of is that it looks stupid and immersion breaking that she's pushing air in one part of the screen and pushing a box in another part (to make things worse, it's badly implemented in that it's blatant that they just make the box invisible but leave the animation unchanged). What effect is it trying to have on the player? It just seems to be them flexing with some technology they thought was cool, but that doesn't improve the game in any way.
It does work well with some of the puzzle solving. Having to be cognizant of two perspectives kept me engaged and it also fits well within the game's dual reality narrative. In praxis it is more than just a gimmick.
I just finished it and frankly speaking I've no idea how this game managed a 76 MC score. The main hook of the game only serves to tank performance on pc and little else. The voice acting is just awful with very few exceptions. The OST they touted so much felt so incredibly generic that I find it hard to believe Akira Fucking Yamaoka worked on it (even the vocal tracks felt weak).
The gameplay is basically non-existent, the puzzles are so basic you have to wonder what the purpose of having them even is and the "stealth" sections are laughably simple.
But worst of all is the game is just not scary, at all. They have to resort to jumpscares (as usual) to get something out of you (which I think there's just one in the entire game...) because the atmosphere just isn't there. There's no tension, no fear, nothing.
All in all, it feels like a wasted opportunity. They should've invested their time and money on a gameplay loop that's actually fun, add some combat and a bigger focus on the "other" world (the only relatively cool thing about the game).
man, I'm peeved lol. Great little romp, I enjoyed my time with it. Story got a little muddled around Lilliane being held captive until being an adult. coulda been a real emotional moment for Marianne to have to kill her sister to end this tragedy and save this demon spawn from taking over the world more. I know it would be a tough decision, and a perfect theme to explore in the next game coupled with trying to find her father. why can't these writers commit to these difficult decisions??? Ugh, after both Little Hope and this ending I'm just so frustrated. Perfect way for me to just forget your game and the story you were trying to tell. Ok, end rant.
Just beat the game. My comments/impressions from the other day remain unchanged. The game is excellent. Very picturesque and atmospheric. I just loved how it was a very beautiful and satisfying walking simulator. Again, like Life Is Strange or What Remains of Edith Finch but with a horror twist to it.
I also really completely disagree with that other thread about the game's story. I found nothing insulting or disgusting or whatever with the story. Controversial sure... I could see it maybe skirting the line with insensitive but I didn't find anything outright insulting or disgusting. To me the game was excellent, and the twists/turns in the storyline made sense to me, and didn't warrant the vitriol I saw in the other thread.
Just finished. Pretty mediocre game. The split screen gimmick added absolutely nothing. Really unimaginative "puzzles". Decent visuals. 4.5/10 it's the best I can do.
Not that far into it but I can say coming off Man of Medan and Little Hope this game is so much better. The dialogue doesn't feel like a 12 year old wrote it and you get to actually walk around and explore without being interrupted with cutscenes and cheesy jump scares every 10 seconds.
- About as good, narrative wise as their previous best work
- Bloober just isn't very skilled in weaving sensitive subjects into their narratives
- Bloober, please, if puzzles are going to remain one of the only gameplay hooks in your games, please get better at designing said puzzles
- Wonderful OST
- Great visuals
- The split world POV did absolutely jack for me
finished it today and pretty much agree with this.
And the times in the game where you
are not playing as Marianne
I did not care at all and wanted it to be over as quickly as possible. The split screen also gave me kind of a headache in the beginning. Overwhelming trying to focus on both, I mostly just started ignoring the spiritual world and focusing on physical world.
Just beat the game. My comments/impressions from the other day remain unchanged. The game is excellent. Very picturesque and atmospheric. I just loved how it was a very beautiful and satisfying walking simulator. Again, like Life Is Strange or What Remains of Edith Finch but with a horror twist to it.
I also really completely disagree with that other thread about the game's story. I found nothing insulting or disgusting or whatever with the story. Controversial sure... I could see it maybe skirting the line with insensitive but I didn't find anything outright insulting or disgusting. To me the game was excellent, and the twists/turns in the storyline made sense to me, and didn't warrant the vitriol I saw in the other thread.
Its absurd because there was no direct implication of what occurred, and I had completely different ideas about what was going on. I can see how thats one thing to consider, but I in that case they have missed a lot of the stuff that the game had been trying to tell them. The massacre at the hotel Niwa, all of the references to the genocides of the past (or at least the hunt for Polish Jews in 1939) and the title movie showing old black and white film of the children growing up in the Polish Peoples' Republic in the 50s and 60s and 70s.
The first thing I thought about after the Child Eater chapter, was the Goya picture Saturn Devouring His Son, which deals with the story about a titan who feared that one of his children would one day usurp his power, and went on to eat each one of his children as soon as they were born. Because the real enemy in the game, the demons they refer to that corrupt peoples minds, is most likely an allegory for the failed socialist state that in its paranoia started to hunt down and kill their own citizens for the same reasons as the titan of the Greek myth.
There is also
the Red House location, literally the home of the red socialist movement, which is displayed poignantly in how Thomas is walking along endless rows of archived data on their citizens.
The belly of the beast.
Thats basically how I see it, and the only other theory I had going was that this character was some kind of Hannibal Lecter psycho, where the sexual aspect of the incident would be far from the worst thing about it. That he had actually eaten her or something. But I think its far from that simple, its an allegory for how a state can fail so hard in taking care of its children that they start acting in evil, malicious ways to each other. And those are the demons that the player was supposed to free Richard from, not because the game was trying to "support a paedo" as was implied in a couple of random tweets, but because healing people is the only way to make society great again after having gone through decades of the abuse that some of the communist governments exposed their citizens to. Even if you have to heal every soul, one by one.
Its absurd because there was no direct implication of what occurred, and I had completely different ideas about what was going on. I can see how thats one thing to consider, but I in that case they have missed a lot of the stuff that the game had been trying to tell them. The massacre at the hotel Niwa, all of the references to the genocides of the past (or at least the hunt for Polish Jews in 1939) and the title movie showing old black and white film of the children growing up in the Polish Peoples' Republic in the 50s and 60s and 70s.
The first thing I thought about after the Child Eater chapter, was the Goya picture Saturn Devouring His Son, which deals with the story about a titan who feared that one of his children would one day usurp his power, and went on to eat each one of his children as soon as they were born. Because the real enemy in the game, the demons they refer to that corrupt peoples minds, is most likely an allegory for the failed socialist state that in its paranoia started to hunt down and kill their own citizens for the same reasons as the titan of the Greek myth.
There is also
the Red House location, literally the home of the red socialist movement, which is displayed poignantly in how Thomas is walking along endless rows of archived data on their citizens.
The belly of the beast.
Thats basically how I see it, and the only other theory I had going was that this character was some kind of Hannibal Lecter psycho, where the sexual aspect of the incident would be far from the worst thing about it. That he had actually eaten her or something. But I think its far from that simple, its an allegory for how a state can fail so hard in taking care of its children that they start acting in evil, malicious ways to each other. And those are the demons that the player was supposed to free Richard from, not because the game was trying to "support a paedo" as was implied in a couple of random tweets, but because healing people is the only way to make society great again after having gone through decades of the abuse that some of the communist governments exposed their citizens to. Even if you have to heal every soul, one by one.
Basically what I said in the now closed thread. The horror and trauma are not so subtle analogies about the horror and trauma of a nation existing through the holocaust and ww2 and then the soviet occupation.
Now whether an individual finds that a good analogy is a different discussion.
Considering how nations like Poland and Hungary use their nation's trauma as an excuse to free themselves of any ownership of history and to justify they're current surge of far right nationalism, the analogy can get a little messy.
Basically what I said in the now closed thread. The horror and trauma are not so subtle analogies about the horror and trauma of a nation existing through the holocaust and ww2 and then the soviet occupation.
Now whether an individual finds that a good analogy is a different discussion.
Considering how nations like Poland and Hungary use their nation's trauma as an excuse to free themselves of any ownership of history and to justify they're current surge of far right nationalism, the analogy can get a little messy.
Basically what I said in the now closed thread. The horror and trauma are not so subtle analogies about the horror and trauma of a nation existing through the holocaust and ww2 and then the soviet occupation.
Now whether an individual finds that a good analogy is a different discussion.
Considering how nations like Poland and Hungary use their nation's trauma as an excuse to free themselves of any ownership of history and to justify they're current surge of far right nationalism, the analogy can get a little messy.
Even if we run with that interpretation, and ignore the individual ramifications of the narrative, is the overall message that Poland can't be saved? Seems like some wack nihilistic shit.
However it's framed, as literal or metaphorical, the message still ends up being "everyone can't be saved".
I found the graphical glitches a bit annoying. I'm curious how much others experienced. I found the rainbow sparkles came and went randomly and weren't too frequent. I also experienced a couple of occasions of what appeared to be black squares -- anyone else see these?
If artifacts hadn't been mentioned in the DF look at the game (and I didn't have an extra year warranty on my new consoles), I'd probably have been far more disturbed by the graphics issues.
Finding this game boring and cumbersome as fuck to play. There are some VERY nice visuals but I can't really say anything, even the music (which I was hugely excited for given Yamaoka's involvement), is particularly good.
Can anyone tell me how far in I am? I just reached...
... the part after the dog and the forest, where you run away from the pursuer, and it keeps randomly changing between both realities
Finding this game boring and cumbersome as fuck to play. There are some VERY nice visuals but I can't really say anything, even the music (which I was hugely excited for given Yamaoka's involvement), is particularly good.
Can anyone tell me how far in I am? I just reached...
... the part after the dog and the forest, where you run away from the pursuer, and it keeps randomly changing between both realities
Whew, can barely run it ha ha, but I still been enjoying it enough, actually quite a bit up until, well, the trigger warning stuff really kicked in. Guess shall see how this ends, but yeeeeah at the dayroom stuff. And they should have at least put the trigger warning when starting a new game instead of it passing by before the start menu.
It a shame, cause the game has a lot of cool things going for it, and the atmosphere is outstanding. It definitely feels very Silent Hill ish and it does it so well.
Just finished it. I really liked it pretty much from start to finish. I liked the way the story unfolded and came together at the end.
The graphics in some areas are simply gorgeous. If this is what a AA game from a small studio in the console launch window can look like we're in for some amazing visuals in the next few years.
The only parts I really didn't like were the ledge shimmying sections. There was no real game mechanic there, it was just slow for no reason.
Just beat the game. My comments/impressions from the other day remain unchanged. The game is excellent. Very picturesque and atmospheric. I just loved how it was a very beautiful and satisfying walking simulator. Again, like Life Is Strange or What Remains of Edith Finch but with a horror twist to it.
I also really completely disagree with that other thread about the game's story. I found nothing insulting or disgusting or whatever with the story. Controversial sure... I could see it maybe skirting the line with insensitive but I didn't find anything outright insulting or disgusting. To me the game was excellent, and the twists/turns in the storyline made sense to me, and didn't warrant the vitriol I saw in the other thread.
I come away with the same impressions although I do feel there was potential for implementing more emergent gameplay elements with the monster akin to Resident Evil or Alien Isolation.
Loved the voice acting of the monster by the way, very surprised to see it's Troy Baker.
you look through a door in the spirit world and see a bathtub with blood. It's draining and out if nowhere a "thing" pops up in the eye hole with this demonic growl. The main character jumps back, the door swings open, blood continues to drain in the tub revealing a knife that you need to cut the door blocking flesh
Went through The Medium on game pass and here are my thoughts:
The story was fine and good enough to keep me going to the end although I won't go into whether I agree or disagree with some of the choices they made with the subjects they touch on. The graphics were pretty good and it's a nice looking game, I liked the idea of the split worlds but I don't think it was used as well as it could be. The clock puzzle for example, the game needed more of that kind of stuff.
My main issues were with the gameplay itself. Moving around all felt very stiff and it kinda felt like I was playing a game from about 10 years ago. One of my biggest gripes were the puzzles in that they all pretty much solved themselves and I didn't really get stuck. You would walk into a room, use her sixth sense power to see objects, pick everything up and move on. The chase and stealth sequences were pretty frustrating and there were times the character would say out loud "this is tedious" and I thought yeah you're right.
I can see what they were trying to do but.. it just didn't click with me. I'd probably give it a 5 or 6/10.
