The most brilliant thing that the game does is when you call the insurance company and they keep you holding the line for over 12 minutes (the gameplay cycle). The gameplay is purely trial and error and even some things that you guess right don't work if you don't do it like the game expects you to do it. I'd say that's explaining WHY he didn't like this game in a pretty eloquent fashion. And then he says that fundamentally flawed design is all over this game. He first explains a design mistake found in some memorable puzzles in adventure games (puzzles that become memorable for their bad design) and why it is indeed a mistake. It’s like trying to play Punch-Out while wearing real boxing gloves." 12 Minutes effectively trades on this design mistake. It’s memorable for the wrong reason the puzzle exhibits the fundamental disconnect between a control scheme and pace designed for thought and an obstacle made for dexterity. "Many of the most notorious puzzles in adventure gaming are timing-based. You seriously don't understand why? Give the paragraph you're quoting another read: Wed 12th Jan "I understand the reviewer didn't enjoy the game but what I don't really understand is WHY the reviewer didn't enjoy the game". Not caring, though? That’s something of a different matter. It can be haunting, not knowing the answers. Nothing wrong with ambiguity, if it's in service of something. A lame, shock-value twist that doesn’t explain anything to any satisfaction, instead trading in ambiguity. We're talking about Hang on, that makes no sense stupid. Not the fun kind of incredulous stupid, like No More Heroes, say. That way, perhaps you’ll enjoy the story - we thought it was stupid. You could just look at a guide, but then the game really will last twelve minutes. It’s like trying to play Punch-Out while wearing real boxing gloves.Įssentially, you’re tasked with repeating the loop over and over again, hearing banal dialogue you’ve already heard dozens of times, looking for that one little thing you could do differently that may result in the slightest crumb of new information. Many of the most notorious puzzles in adventure gaming are timing-based. Touch screen input might have helped in handheld mode, but it's not present here. And when you're under time pressure? Forget about it. See, fiddly inventory management, complete with dragging objects using the left analogue stick and buttons, never feels good. Not in this genre it’s a bit of a clash of styles. A novel gimmick, for sure – The Last Express did it, but not a whole lot else did. It’s a point-and-click adventure, more or less, that plays out in real time. Yes, that first loop raises many questions (among them, How much was James McAvoy paid to be in something even worse than X-Men Apocalypse? Does Nintendo have a refund policy?) but getting to the answers is going to require an enormous amount of repetition, arbitrary guessing and the ability to overcome incredible amounts of ennui. Also, Groundhog Day is good.Īs a game – that is, as a puzzle for the player to solve – 12 Minutes is profoundly unengaging. In fact, it’s only really the famous actor and the time loop that it has in common. Okay, maybe they’re not exactly the same. It’s the same basic premise, after all famous actor goes into house, eats cake, gets assaulted by policeman, chokes to death, wakes up in the time loop. It’s almost impossible to avoid comparing 12 Minutes to the classic existential horror movie, Groundhog Day.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |