default header

Submissions

[PC] [MAC] Machinarium

Moderator: JC Denton

[PC] [MAC] Machinarium

Unread postby Worm » 12 Dec 2010 23:45

**

Machinarium is promising at first glance. It has an imaginative setting to explore, with detailed backgrounds in a neat hand-drawn style. It's got a very consistent aesthetic (albeit one that's annoying cutesy--the main character looks like something a third grader would scribble on the back of his math paper), and much of the animation avoids that ugly "paper doll" look commonly seen in Flash games. Even the electronic music is pretty cool. Unfortunately, the simplistic interface and puzzle design result in a game that's merely decent, with plenty of atmosphere but few interesting things to do.

Like Amanita Design's earlier Samorost games, Machinarium is Flash-based and involves solving puzzles by clicking various hotspots on each screen to move around and activate objects. Two improvements to Machinarium are the addition of an inventory and your interaction with hotspots being limited to the reach of your character, both of which force the player to think at least a little bit about what he's trying to do instead of sweeping the screen for anything clickable.

Still, like the Samorost games, there's often little indication of what a hotspot will do before you poke it. This results in a lot of aimless clicking, hoping for something different to happen, rather than piecing together a solution in your brain and then trying to implement it. By itself, this isn't so bad--figuring out how a strange world works is half the fun--but there are very few multi-step actions you need to perform. Most of the time, getting something interesting to happen with a hotspot means you're already done with it. The inventory puzzles don't fare much better, with most items either obviously functioning as keys or as missing components for other inventory items.

My biggest disappointment with this game is the wasted potential of the theme. The game's called Machinarium, for Christ's sake, and it's set in a robot city. It seems so obvious to include puzzles that involve figuring out complicated piping, wiring, or other power sources, or trying to operate large machines with interconnected parts. The detailed backgrounds offer plenty of opportunity for clues, and it would fit the control scheme, too. There's a reason why games like Myst focus on mechanical puzzles--if all the player can do is click and drag without a list of actions to choose from, it makes sense to design puzzles with lots of buttons, toggles, and sliders.

Sadly, when Machinarium does give you anything resembling a mechanism to play with, it's usually some dumb mini-game like a 9-tile sliding puzzle. There are at least a half-dozen of these throughout the game, not including a couple action mini-games (such as a Space Invaders clone). This kind of puzzle design (or lack thereof) is really inexcusable for adventure games at this point. They're transparently tacked-on with no attempt to plausibly integrate them into the environment. I solved most of them with random fiddling, so they don't even add much challenge.

Speaking of challenge, Amanita Design included both in-game hints and walkthroughs for every screen, in case it wasn't already obvious that they are afraid of alienating their less-intelligent customers. You have to play a mini-game to unlock the walkthrough, but then you get to see hand-sketched storyboards that show step-by-step solutions for the puzzles. It's bad enough that they make the answers available at all, but I'm tempted to deduct a star for putting art in there that only encourages players to look at the damn thing.

I suppose the best I can say about Machinarium is that there's nothing particularly bad about it. There's a great sense of exploration, I found the world charming despite my complaints, and not much in the game seemed stupid or nonsensical. It's a decent game, but a step backward in everything other than perhaps visual style.
Last edited by Worm on 13 Dec 2010 18:07, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Worm
 
Joined: 20 Dec 2008 21:06

Unread postby callousfire » 13 Dec 2010 10:04

This is a well-written review, but I feel it may be lacking in comparisons to other adventure games, both classical and contemporary. That sort of context is what really gives strength to Insomnia reviews. It would help to show what qualities good adventure games have that this game may be missing. The references to Myst and verb sheets are good, though.

Before I knew you had decided to write the full review, I gave it a try myself. We arrived at similar conclusions, but through slightly different routes. The rules for this sub-forum state that re-reviewing games is permitted, but it doesn't say if I should make a new thread with a duplicate title, or add my review on to this existing thread. Without knowing the proper etiquette, I hesitate to say more.
callousfire
 
Joined: 12 Dec 2010 21:43

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2010 11:18

First off, both of you cut it out with the fucking "verb" nonsense (callousfire is even worse with his absurdly idiotic "verb sheets" -- I mean for christsake!) It makes you look like a couple of artfags that started playing games last year. I've been reading reviews of adventure games since the early '80s, and it's only in the last couple of years or so that people started using the "verb" nonsense. How did all the OTHER people review all those games without the "verb" fagotry? Obviously you weren't around to see it, but trust me, they did just fine. (Does the word "action" mean anything to you?)

callousfire, start a new thread with your review. As for your criticism of Worm's review, that he didn't happen to bring up many other adventure games, it is a moot point if there are no meaningful comparisons to be made. We don't namedrop games for the sake of namedropping them -- a tactic which is extremely obvious and pathetic to a person who knows what to look for. If Worm has failed to make a comparison that would have shed more light on Machinarium, then fucking point it out -- don't just simply say "you didn't namedrop enough games". And the thing with these so-called "indie" games is that, because their designers only got into videogames in the last two-three years, they haven't played anything else so their games are usually completely lacking in established conventions which would have justified comparisons to OTHER games that EMPLOY these conventions. That's also why they are so easy to review, even by people inexperienced with the genre in question.

As for Worm's review, my only hesitation is with the score. I know that people are thinking that I am determined to give all these games one or at most two stars, but that's not how it is. From what I've seen of Braid and Super Meat Boy, I'd be prepared to give them three if they held up under closer inspection. But Machinarium does not seem to be quite worth that rating, at least from what Worm has told us about it. There doesn't seem to be any real praise in his review, nothing that would make me feel like seeking out and playing this game. Take for example my R-Type Tactics review. Despite my quite severe criticisms, I fucking love that game. I mean check this out:

I wrote:I was, at least, glad to see that in one respect the use of the R-Type theme was beneficial to the game, and I soon discovered many others. I loved how an additional layer of strategy was introduced by limiting the fuel and ammunition in each ship, requiring you to constantly resupply them. I loved how, instead of dreaming up some sci-fi equivalent to potions or spellcasters, the designers force you to dock your ships into a capital ship in order to repair them. I loved how all of R-Type's signature elements -- the side-on view, the Force, the charge shot, the different weapon types, the giant bosses -- were intertwined with the mechanics of the game in meaningful, and sometimes even brilliant ways. I loved the brisk, serious tone of the campaign, free from anime clips of emo transsexuals blabbing endlessly about the fate of their nonsensical and boring universe. I did hate the ugly and insufferably slow battle animations (whoever was responsible for those needs to play either a Fire Emblem or a Wars game asap), but I turned them off and promptly forgot about them. And I absolutely loved the hex-covered little maps, with swirling dust clouds or slowly drifting space junk in the background, and with excellent music setting the mood for atmospheric confrontations.


http://insomnia.ac/reviews/playstationp ... petactics/

An entire paragraph full of unrestrained love about the game. And Worm barely has a single sentence that I could term solidly positive, let alone enthusiastic. A three-star game is a GOOD, perhaps even VERY GOOD game in some respects, that unfortunately manages to shoot itself in the foot in some ways -- that somehow seriously fucks up. Not a subpar genre effort that has absolutely no outstanding aspects about it and nothing new to bring to the table.

Here's an exercise for you, Worm. List five well-known games that you would consider worthy of a five-star rating, then five worthy of a four-star rating, and so on down to one star. Then see in which category Machinarium fits in best. Alongside which other games, of whose score you feel 100% certain? If you still feel Machinarium is worth the three-star rating, very well, but in that case perhaps you should consider expanding a little on what you like about the game?

I hope you won't feel I am trying to bully you into changing your score. I am just trying to help you deliver a better critique. If you feel convinced of your score we will of course keep it.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby callousfire » 13 Dec 2010 15:37

I called them verbs and not actions because they were hold-overs from text adventure parsers, where an individual action consisted of a verb and a noun. In that context, calling each element by their part of speech was necessary. Early graphical adventure games still required you to type verb and noun combinations for an individual action, before eventually employing a clickable list of verbs, and then finally switching to the implied "use". But, yes, "verb" is mostly misused these days to say that Mario's "verb set" consists of "run" and "jump" which is a lot of hogwash.

I'll post my review later today.
callousfire
 
Joined: 12 Dec 2010 21:43

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2010 16:34

"The verb was implied in the noun parser of the point-and-click hold-overs of the part of speech elements." Fuck off, fagot. You've made two posts in this thread without offering the slightest, remotest hint of insight on either Worm's review or Machinarium. Even worse, you've forced me to have the phrase "verb sheets" published on my site. Like I said: fuck off back to wherever it is you came from.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2010 16:50

I just googled Machinarium to find some screens and check at least the game's visual aspect.

Image

Are you people serious? Worm, can you seriously tell me you see nothing wrong with this? Nothing at all worth mentioning? Is there not a single English-speaking person left who has any visual taste at all?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby Worm » 13 Dec 2010 17:28

Yeah, he looks like a cross-eyed retard that some third-grader drew on the back of his math paper. His design is probably the worst in the game. I don't care for some of the specific choices, but overall it's still better-looking than most graphic adventure games I can think of--old or new--even if it's not near the top of the pile. It's a damn sight better than the junk Telltale Games is churning out these days (e.g. the new Monkey Island games).

As for the rest, yes, I am giving this game too much credit for showing a base level of competence. It's consistently mediocre instead of having a mix of notably good and bad spots, so I changed the rating to two stars.

I added a line in the introduction about the character design, changed "verbs" to "actions" (I was thinking of the SCUMM interface, but of course not all games used a list like that, and I absolutely do not want to be associated with the "verbs" nonsense that has become popular recently), and changed the final line to "a step backward" instead of "not a step forward," which is more accurate and matches the lowered rating.
User avatar
Worm
 
Joined: 20 Dec 2008 21:06

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2010 18:14

I am looking at more screens, and I have to say that apart from character design the game is stunning. Pretty much the same deal with Braid, really. Execrable character design but stunning backgrounds, combined with tepid game design. If we had half stars these games should be getting 2.5/5. As it stands, however, we don't, so we have to make a choice between two and three...

I am editing your review right now and trying to combine your revised text w¡th your last post (which is much better written than your revisions), so don't touch anything. You are being very lucid on your analysis of the mechanics, but the aesthetic part of your review is quite vague and practically an afterthought. As if you were embarrassed to admit (and describe) how much you like it in that respect, or perhaps don't know how to communicate your feelings, or even that you are supposed to do so.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2010 19:25

Review is up, and new thread is here:

http://forum.insomnia.ac/viewtopic.php?t=3397

I made one or two major edits in the first paragraph, and several minor ones elsewhere, so check everything and let me know if you want to make further additions, corrections, etc. Also, let me know if you'd like to be credited with your real name or a pen name instead of your forum username.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 14 Dec 2010 11:11

Via email:

callousfire wrote:I would like to congratulate you on your superior knowledge of gaming terminology. I checked my old issues of Amiga Format for reviews of Lucasarts SCUMM games, and you were absolutely correct that "action menu" was the term I should have used. It was a mistake to try to lecture you on the history of adventure games—you clearly remember it better than I do.


Now imagine how ludicrous those people would have looked if they had called it the "verb menu". I can't fathom the amount of nonsense one must have been exposed to in order to finally come to view phrases like "verb sheets" as anything other than ridiculous.

Then he proceeded to send me his review, which is so stilted, so amateurish, and worst of all so unsure of itself that it makes one wonder why he'd bother writing it at all.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands


Return to Submissions

cron