Opinions on how TCR & FG are dealing with AAMFP criticism

[Fortigurn]

Here is valid criticism and feedback on the game: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/09/...-for-pigs/

Predictably, you link to an article containing virtually no criticism whatsoever, and commenting almost exclusively on the story and themes. Gameplay and mechanics are touched on briefly in a mere two paragraphs, here.

There are precious few chases or games of hide and seek, and I finished the entire game without dying. In fact, I don’t even know if it’s possible to die. Several times, I was wounded and cowered in the dark, bleeding, but there are no health bars or sanity meters – even the lantern is eternally charged. Dropping the inventory system and mechanics of its predecessors, AMFP does not allow confrontations and death to detract from its narrative.

During the opening couple of hours, when the total deviation from Amnesia’s template is less obvious, I missed the mechanical parts of the game. There’s precious little to do and, as Jim noted, the phantom children who act as motivation and bait are unconvincing – we’ve seen them too often before and they seem like a borrowing from a lesser place. Being charitable, I reckon that might be the point – they are a horror trope that has survived from 1899 to the present, a reminder that very little changes in a game that is, at its foundation, about the fear of change. That’s a stretch though. They’re probably just slightly naff ghost kids, although they do have a significant role to play as the story develops.

Some of those same comments have been made by people such as myself.

* 'There are precious few chases or games of hide and seek'
* 'there are no health bars or sanity meters – even the lantern is eternally charged'
* 'I missed the mechanical parts of the game'
* 'There’s precious little to do'
* 'the phantom children who act as motivation and bait are unconvincing'
* 'They’re probably just slightly naff ghost kids'

When we make these comments it's apparently unacceptable, whereas you're perfectly ok with them being made by the author of that article. Or perhaps you just didn't read the article.

Not that people like you will ever read or appreciate that.

I have read it before, and I agree with it. But it is not an examination of the game, critical or otherwise. It's almost exclusively a commentary on the story, its delivery, themes, and symbolism. It also contains virtually no negative comments about the game at all, which is clearly the kind of reception you think every review should provide.

After all, your point of existence on these forums now is to whine and tell everywhere how bad the game is.

This exposes you as a blind fanboi at best, a troll at worst. People such as myself 'enjoyed the game considerably' (as I have said more than once), and are not saying 'how bad the game is'; we are praising it for what it is, while criticizing aspects we believe could have been improved. You are simply not being intellectually honest.