Frictional Games Forum (read-only)

In this interview, Dan talks about how he got into making games, talks about Dear Esther and A Machine for Pigs.

Enjoy!

Interview starts at around 2:25






And for all those old school RuneScapers (^_^), this is the famous Maxboison interviewing him!

Cool, thanks.

Grip himself was even unsure if Amnesia at all is a "game" yet.
I think, games normally are for fun. But Amnesia is not for fun, it's like some kind of serious games.

(10-28-2012, 12:57 PM)Googolplex Wrote: [ -> ]Grip himself was even unsure if Amnesia at all is a "game" yet.
I think, games normally are for fun. But Amnesia is not for fun, it's like some kind of serious games.

Of course it's supposed to be and is fun. You're just arguing the semantics of the word "fun" and you seem to think that "fun" is synonymous with "shallow" and "immersion-breaking". To me "fun" is something I enjoy playing because it is well made, has smooth controls and is not boring. That doesn't mean I consider Amnesia just a way to pass time. You could also argue the semantics of "game"; there is no shame attached to the word because a game is just an interactive artform. Just like "movie" and "song" have no negative connotations (unless you're an elitist douchebag). Why not disperse with all the pointless bullshit and just talk about the aesthetic qualities the game has?

EDIT: Also, I hate to break this to you, but Thomas is just a human being like you and me. He is not God and while he has a lot of good ideas when it comes to horror he also has many questionable and perhaps even detrimental ideas. Don't pretend like you have a deeper understanding of horror just by quoting him because you don't.

I fail to see how Amnesia would not be a game, it got all the components of a game so I think it is safe to say that AMFP will be a game.
And who would want to play a boring game? If you are bored by playing it then why would you play it? Just because something isn't fun in a way that makes you laugh doesn't mean that it is not a fun experience. It is fun to play Amnesia, it entertains you but not in a way that is about humor but about experience and immersion. I disagree fully with the "games are normally for fun". You seem to be stuck in the thought that something serious and interesting can't be fun. Fun doesn't mean that it is childish and/or full of laughs.

To me games are for entertainment, and fun is a kind of entertainment that is very popular, but you can do a lot more things with entertainment in general than just fun, horror being one of them.

Kinda interesting conversation about what is a game and what is not. If you don't mind the intrusion into conversation - I would say it's just a matter of genre. Similar to the movies, where we have melodramas, adventures aka Indiana Jones, horror movies, etc - but all of them are still movies. Nobody's saying that slow art-house horror movies like... hmm... the Shining for example is a less movie than... ooh... Terminator. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mind. But I believe it's not about what's game and what's not. It's all just about different genre. No?

Quote:To me games are for entertainment...

But what is entertainment? For some people it's running around and shooting. For example for me personally that's boring. Yeah I'm serious. But Dear Esther was INCREDIBLY entertaining for me personally, while lots of people were bored. So it's also a question what is objectively an entertainment? And I don't know the answer. I'm mean I can tell what is entertainment subjectively, but objectively... I don't know, I don't know. Who knows?

Dishonored, if you're looking for fun.
MFP if you want a savory, but short experience.
I'd wait until people have had it for a while, that way you can get all the best custom stories sure to come. JUST STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM THE FORUM TILL YOU'VE PLAYED THAT SHIT LIKE THE REST OF US!! Cause we're gonna be talking the hell outta it.

---

(10-28-2012, 02:56 PM)Alex Ros Wrote: [ -> ]Kinda interesting conversation about what is a game and what is not. If you don't mind the intrusion into conversation - I would say it's just a matter of genre. Similar to the movies, where we have melodramas, adventures aka Indiana Jones, horror movies, etc - but all of them are still movies. Nobody's saying that slow art-house horror movies like... hmm... the Shining for example is a less movie than... ooh... Terminator. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mind. But I believe it's not about what's game and what's not. It's all just about different genre. No?

Quote:To me games are for entertainment...

But what is entertainment? For some people it's running around and shooting. For example for me personally that's boring. Yeah I'm serious. But Dear Esther was INCREDIBLY entertaining for me personally, while lots of people were bored. So it's also a question what is objectively an entertainment? And I don't know the answer. I'm mean I can tell what is entertainment subjectively, but objectively... I don't know, I don't know. Who knows?

I know, son. I know.

(10-28-2012, 01:58 PM)Bridge Wrote: [ -> ]EDIT: Also, I hate to break this to you, but Thomas is just a human being like you and me. He is not God and while he has a lot of good ideas when it comes to horror he also has many questionable and perhaps even detrimental ideas. Don't pretend like you have a deeper understanding of horror just by quoting him because you don't.

Thomas is not god, but his attitude for game development is 100% correct and the only right way games should go on. Not only horror games, I'm sure, if he would make an RPG or racing game it also would be good. But the studio is too small for games like that and don't even have enough money.
But Thomas is the king of horror and I totally agree with him in every single detail. I mean, look at all the AAA+ games from big publishers, they all have dumbed down gameplay, action oriented and filled with symbols and XP-points poping up the screen. Enemies have livetime energy and you get rewarded by killing an enemy. This is the bullshit of modern games. And Thomas is a miracle in my opinion, understand the true meaning of a game. He doesn't also make games just for money, it's rather his own dream to make proper games and bring the genre back to the roots. Show the world what real games are.
He is not god, but if god would make a game, it would be like Thomas' games.

(10-28-2012, 08:10 PM)Googolplex Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-28-2012, 01:58 PM)Bridge Wrote: [ -> ]EDIT: Also, I hate to break this to you, but Thomas is just a human being like you and me. He is not God and while he has a lot of good ideas when it comes to horror he also has many questionable and perhaps even detrimental ideas. Don't pretend like you have a deeper understanding of horror just by quoting him because you don't.

Thomas is not god, but his attitude for game development is 100% correct and the only right way games should go on. Not only horror games, I'm sure, if he would make an RPG or racing game it also would be good. But the studio is too small for games like that and don't even have enough money.
But Thomas is the king of horror and I totally agree with him in every single detail. I mean, look at all the AAA+ games from big publishers, they all have dumbed down gameplay, action oriented and filled with symbols and XP-points poping up the screen. Enemies have livetime energy and you get rewarded by killing an enemy. This is the bullshit of modern games. And Thomas is a miracle in my opinion, understand the true meaning of a game. He doesn't also make games just for money, it's rather his own dream to make proper games and bring the genre back to the roots. Show the world what real games are.
He is not god, but if god would make a game, it would be like Thomas' games.

To its roots? You mean these roots?



Seriously, the concept of "AAA" entertainment is nothing new. The "mainstream" is just made of people like you and me that usually don't have any real interest in art. It's unfortunate, but it's nothing to condemn.