Opinions on how TCR & FG are dealing with AAMFP criticism

[Fortigurn]

The details of those comments essentially boil down to 'this thing from Amnesia 1 wasn't in Amnesia 2', so yeah. :p

No they're not just saying that. They aren't objecting to the absence of X because X was in TDD, they're objecting to the absence of X because X is what made the gameplay great, and what made TDD great.

I wonder what would happen if it wasn't made public that TCR was behind A Machine For Pigs.

People would still have said player should be more involved in the game, should have their hand held a lot less, and should be able to interact more with the environment.

The fact is TDD was extremely well received in part because it broke with the current trend of dumbing down games. Instead it involved the player directly with the environment, at an intellectual level as well as a direct interactive level. It provided genuine choices, there were sometimes alternative paths or methods to secure objectives, there was a set of game mechanics balanced carefully against each other to enhance immersion and challenge the player (light, sanity, consumable resources, visibility to monsters), good puzzle complexity, and a hub design providing a satisfying degree of free roaming. The player had the kind of control over their character which enhances immersion, instead of being pushed along rails from one cut scene to the next.

This was precisely what Frictional aimed at, as described by Thomas in an interview entitled 'Amnesia creator wishes fewer games were “something that a ten-year-old can enjoy”'. When TCR removed several game mechanics which were in TDD, simplified puzzles, reduced interaction with the environment, included far more hints, pushed the player along a linear path, increased the number of cut scenes and other moments during which the player was not in control, they departed from precisely what made TDD so refreshing and satisfying to its fan base. They also exposed themselves to the criticism of dumbing down Amnesia, which is one of the most commonly found complaints about MFP.

Thomas' description here about one of the essential elements of a good video game, is precisely where MFP fails to deliver.

My view is that the main point of interaction in storytelling is to create a sense of presence, the feeling of being inside the game's world. In order to achieve this, there needs to be a steady flow of active play. If the player remains inactive for longer periods, they will distance themselves from the experience. This is especially true during sections when players feel they ought to be in control. The game must always strive to maintain and strengthen experience of "being there".

Whether you read professional reviews or casual forum comments, the failure of MFP to live up to this specific aspect of gameplay is a sentiment echoed repeatedly in critiques of MFP. I believe it's a valid criticism.