I couldn't find a thread on this but if there is, point me at it.
I just bought and finished it based on a couple of recommendations here and there. TB putting it as 2013 GOTY and saying it was his favorite game ever put me over the edge.
What a waste of $7. I was bored the entire time. Steam says it was only 3 hours long but it felt like twice that. I had to take numerous breaks to stay awake. The controls are terrible. There was a lot of frustrating moments and even the controls actually changed.
I'll spoiler the rest but there's no specifics in there.
Spoiler:
The story was tired, predicable, and devoid of any twists. I only finished it thinking that there had to be some twist that I wasn't seeing but no.
Brothers was very close to being my GOTY for 2013 as well, coming in just slightly behind Tomb Raider. Thought nearly everything about it was absolutely wonderful. The gameplay, the incredibly beautiful artwork (it's one of the better looking games out there, especially towards the end), interesting but not crazy-hard puzzles, and the amazing emotional connection I had to the story and characters. It's one of only two times I can recall where a game actually caused me to tear up a bit (To The Moon being the other)
It obviously won't be everyone's cup of tea, but I thought it was utterly brilliant and is one of my favorite games in years.
There was a lot of frustrating moments and even the controls actually changed.
Not sure what you're referring to here. The control scheme was the same throughout.
I'll spoiler the rest but there's no specifics in there.
Spoiler:
The story was tired, predicable, and devoid of any twists. I only finished it thinking that there had to be some twist that I wasn't seeing but no.
Not exactly sure what you were looking for, as I thought the story was fantastic. Especially towards the end where (MAJOR SPOILER)
Spoiler:
Little Brother can't figure out how to cross the river, then leans on the skill he learned from Big Brother even though he wasn't there.
Maybe I just connected with it more because it drew some significant parallels with my own family.
Last edited by Skinypupy on Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
I was underwhelmed as well. I didn’t think it was awful or anything, just nothing special. The gibberish language made it so I never learned anything of value about the characters and meant the story had to be overly simplistic; as such I never became attached to the characters. The control scheme was interesting at times and there were a couple neat set pieces but otherwise the rest was utterly forgettable.
Skinypupy wrote:
Not exactly sure what you were looking for, as I thought the story was fantastic. Especially towards the end where (MAJOR SPOILER)
Spoiler:
Little Brother can't figure out how to cross the river, then leans on the skill he learned from Big Brother even though he wasn't there.
Maybe I just connected with it more because it drew some significant parallels with my own family.
In that spoiler is exactly what I meant when they changed the controls from right trigger to left. The story didn't give me the impression of why that it gave you. Dunno.
I would be curious to find out if the people that like this have siblings, I do not.
Lordnine wrote:I was underwhelmed as well. I didn’t think it was awful or anything, just nothing special. The gibberish language made it so I never learned anything of value about the characters and meant the story had to be overly simplistic; as such I never became attached to the characters. The control scheme was interesting at times and there were a couple neat set pieces but otherwise the rest was utterly forgettable.
Exactly. I never formed an emotional connection. For me it wasn't the lack of language though since Ico did hit me hard. Maybe it was the too cliched story combined with boring and short. I just wanted it to end halfway through. If it had been interesting and longer, I may have formed emotions.
Skinypupy wrote:
Not exactly sure what you were looking for, as I thought the story was fantastic. Especially towards the end where (MAJOR SPOILER)
Spoiler:
Little Brother can't figure out how to cross the river, then leans on the skill he learned from Big Brother even though he wasn't there.
Maybe I just connected with it more because it drew some significant parallels with my own family.
In that spoiler is exactly what I meant when they changed the controls from right trigger to left. The story didn't give me the impression of why that it gave you. Dunno.
I would be curious to find out if the people that like this have siblings, I do not.
The idea there was (again, MAJOR SPOILER):
Spoiler:
Little Brother finally realized that he had to take care of himself and couldn't depend on his brother to carry him anymore...signified by using the trigger for Big Brother's action but having Little Brother doing the movements on his own.
That was a part that really hit home for me, but if you felt no emotional attachment to the characters to begin with, then I'm sure it was simply annoying. There's lots of little touches like that throughout the game that are significant if you are invested in the characters.
Brothers seems to be a game that people either absolutely love or are simply underwhelmed by. It either connects with you on an emotional level and you can forgive some of the rudimentary gameplay, or it doesn't. If there's no connection for you at all, I can totally see how you would come away wondering what all the fuss was about. I think the final paragraph from the Giantbomb review summed up my thoughts pretty well:
Brothers isn't necessarily an uplifting game; to compare it to a fairytale is to evoke the original meaning of that term, the one designed to scare small children. Some grim things occur in the course of the brothers' quest. But the brothers' commitment to their goal and to each other is so strong, the various parts of this game so superbly crafted and woven together, that it's hard not to feel deeply touched when you finally reach the end of the road and see how deftly this game marries its gameplay to its themes in a way few have before. If you're the sort of person who thinks video games are capable of not just entertaining us but also making us think and feel, you owe it to yourself to play Brothers.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
Major spoilers about very specific story elements.
Spoiler:
I think I've figured out what I thought was so wrong with the game. It's the lack of choice given to the player. You are forced to be evil.
Examples:
Locking the troll (or ogre, whatever) in the cage. What if his friends don't find him in time? He will die. There was no logical reason the female couldn't come back and drop the chain, or do so on her way to escape. You could have just run from him.
Dropping the troll into the pit. Again, you could have just run from him when he's loose, or very especially once he is hanging by his hands. There was absolutely no reason to mash his fingers and kill him.
Moving dead giant limbs, dismembering, dropping off cliffs, and shooting one in the head with a crossbow. Considering how much the brothers are able to climb in other parts of the game, I can't fathom that they couldn't have climbed over these things instead of disrespecting dead creatures in such ways. Again, that's just evil.
The spiderwoman. There was no reason to keep pulling her legs off once she was no longer a threat. Just walk away.
Had we been given the option of being "good", it would have made for a far better game.
ibdoomed wrote:Major spoilers about very specific story elements.
Spoiler:
I think I've figured out what I thought was so wrong with the game. It's the lack of choice given to the player. You are forced to be evil.
Examples:
Locking the troll (or ogre, whatever) in the cage. What if his friends don't find him in time? He will die. There was no logical reason the female couldn't come back and drop the chain, or do so on her way to escape. You could have just run from him.
Dropping the troll into the pit. Again, you could have just run from him when he's loose, or very especially once he is hanging by his hands. There was absolutely no reason to mash his fingers and kill him.
Moving dead giant limbs, dismembering, dropping off cliffs, and shooting one in the head with a crossbow. Considering how much the brothers are able to climb in other parts of the game, I can't fathom that they couldn't have climbed over these things instead of disrespecting dead creatures in such ways. Again, that's just evil.
The spiderwoman. There was no reason to keep pulling her legs off once she was no longer a threat. Just walk away.
Had we been given the option of being "good", it would have made for a far better game.
That's certainly an ...interesting perspective. I suppose we should ignore the fact that the creatures in both of those examples were actively trying to kill the Brothers?
If killing monsters that are trying to kill you is "evil", then I would imagine that enjoying any game would be difficult. Do you get upset when Mario stomps on those poor innocent mushrooms?
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
Actually, I agree with ibdoomed on this one. If the game had let me choose to do various things then I would have cared more about the characters because they would have become an extension of me, or at the very least, someone I could relate with.
ibdoomed wrote:Major spoilers about very specific story elements.
Spoiler:
I think I've figured out what I thought was so wrong with the game. It's the lack of choice given to the player. You are forced to be evil.
Examples:
Locking the troll (or ogre, whatever) in the cage. What if his friends don't find him in time? He will die. There was no logical reason the female couldn't come back and drop the chain, or do so on her way to escape. You could have just run from him.
Dropping the troll into the pit. Again, you could have just run from him when he's loose, or very especially once he is hanging by his hands. There was absolutely no reason to mash his fingers and kill him.
Moving dead giant limbs, dismembering, dropping off cliffs, and shooting one in the head with a crossbow. Considering how much the brothers are able to climb in other parts of the game, I can't fathom that they couldn't have climbed over these things instead of disrespecting dead creatures in such ways. Again, that's just evil.
The spiderwoman. There was no reason to keep pulling her legs off once she was no longer a threat. Just walk away.
Had we been given the option of being "good", it would have made for a far better game.
That's certainly an ...interesting perspective. I suppose we should ignore the fact that the creatures in both of those examples were actively trying to kill the Brothers?
If killing monsters that are trying to kill you is "evil", then I would imagine that enjoying any game would be difficult. Do you get upset when Mario stomps on those poor innocent mushrooms?
That's an assumption you are making. Probably because you, like all of us, want to believe that we are not generally the bad guys.
Spoiler:
Let's look at the caged troll situation first. We have no idea why the female was caged. Perhaps she was a mass murderer? From the jailers perspective, some tiny shits just invaded your jail and freed your prisoner, your job would be to stop them. That's not evil, that's defensive.
How about the second troll you dropped? Again, some tiny shits are invading your home, you defend yourself and they first trap you in a hole and while you hang on for your life, they stomp on your fingers and murder you.
The spiderwoman? She could be just surviving and part of that is eating... also again, she was cowering and trying to escape at 3 or 4 limbs left but you finished her off...
These two shits rampage through their world, doing whatever it takes, murdering anyone in their path, destroying anything they wish (that guy probably put a lot of work into that glider), because they don't want their father to die. He's so much more important than anyone else. Who knows why he's even sick? It could be natural causes for all we know.
Lordnine wrote:Actually, I agree with ibdoomed on this one. If the game had let me choose to do various things then I would have cared more about the characters because they would have become an extension of me, or at the very least, someone I could relate with.
Which would have made it an entirely different game. One that it seems you would have liked more, and one that I would have liked significantly less. This was intended to be a short, narrative-driven game, not an open world sandbox. One of the reasons I thought it worked so well is because I could just soak in the cool atmosphere and roll with the narrative the game provided.
That's an assumption you are making. Probably because you, like all of us, want to believe that we are not generally the bad guys.
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Let's look at the caged troll situation first. We have no idea why the female was caged. Perhaps she was a mass murderer? From the jailers perspective, some tiny shits just invaded your jail and freed your prisoner, your job would be to stop them. That's not evil, that's defensive.
How about the second troll you dropped? Again, some tiny shits are invading your home, you defend yourself and they first trap you in a hole and while you hang on for your life, they stomp on your fingers and murder you.
The spiderwoman? She could be just surviving and part of that is eating... also again, she was cowering and trying to escape at 3 or 4 limbs left but you finished her off...
These two shits rampage through their world, doing whatever it takes, murdering anyone in their path, destroying anything they wish (that guy probably put a lot of work into that glider), because they don't want their father to die. He's so much more important than anyone else. Who knows why he's even sick? It could be natural causes for all we know.
And the same assumptions could be made in the opposite direction as well. For example,
Spoiler:
I'd say the brothers mercifully finished the job after the spider tried to have them for lunch. Yes, she was "just surviving", but if that involved eating you, I doubt you'd just sit back and say "well, go ahead if you need to survive". Wouldn't you fight for survival as well?
And which is more evil: Tearing the limbs off a dangerous predator and walking away to let it die a painful death, or putting it out of it's misery?
Besides, I can't really wrap my brain around approaching a game from the perspective that I'm the evildoer slaughtering thousands of innocent prison guards, monsters, and minions of hell. Seems like that would take the enjoyment out of nearly every game, but to each their own. ::
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
Someone on another forum reminded me of another complaint, the fake danger. I hate fake danger in games. If you want to put me in danger, good, I'm all for that, but don't fake it. For instance, the balance beams, you cannot fall off them, I tried on almost every one I went across, it's not possible. It's like the infamous chandelier in uncharted 3.
ibdoomed wrote:Someone on another forum reminded me of another complaint, the fake danger. I hate fake danger in games. If you want to put me in danger, good, I'm all for that, but don't fake it. For instance, the balance beams, you cannot fall off them, I tried on almost every one I went across, it's not possible. It's like the infamous chandelier in uncharted 3.
ibdoomed wrote:Someone on another forum reminded me of another complaint, the fake danger. I hate fake danger in games. If you want to put me in danger, good, I'm all for that, but don't fake it. For instance, the balance beams, you cannot fall off them, I tried on almost every one I went across, it's not possible. It's like the infamous chandelier in uncharted 3.
How do you feel about roller coasters?
I've never thought the point of a roller coaster was risk of death. I thought it was the feeling of speed and weightlessness.
You guys may not have played uncharted 3 but in it there's a building on fire and you are escaping, there's several characters around and someone keeps saying "hurry hurry". So at one point you have to swing across a room on a chandelier that's on fire and someone says it's about to fall, but it won't, you can hang from it for hours (I did when I had to leave the game at that point in an emergency) and it never falls, you never die.
And that happens in pretty much every game ever. Pretty much every rpg game gives you a quest and makes it sound urgent but you can run around doing everything else without consequence. I would love it if they stopped doing that, but my point is, it is common enough that I find it unlikely that the chandelier in Uncharted 3 (which I finished) is infamous because of it
Yeah, the only hits on Google I see when searching for "Chandelier Uncharted 3" are walkthroughs for that part of the game. Hardly the stuff of infame...infamousity...er, infaminess. Whatever.
When I was a boy, I laid in my twin-sized bed and wondered where my brother was. - Mitch Hedberg
I played this one game that nobody ever heard of where you only have 150 days of game time to find a water chip or else your underground town will explode or something and you'll lose.
Also was this space game with lots of groovy themed music where these aliens that use agonizers from Star Trek will destroy all these other alien races and also yours unless you stop them within 3 or 4 years of game time.
killbot737 wrote:I played this one game that nobody ever heard of where you only have 150 days of game time to find a water chip or else your underground town will explode or something and you'll lose.
Also was this space game with lots of groovy themed music where these aliens that use agonizers from Star Trek will destroy all these other alien races and also yours unless you stop them within 3 or 4 years of game time.
Yes, there are a few that have actual time limits, but for the most part most RPGs have a story line where "OMG, you must deliver this warning to the king before the orc horde wipes us all out" and in reality you can take your time doing whatever you want with no real risk. They really need to work on that...even if they don't want you to lose the game they should put in consequences for farting around
Oh I know what you're saying. There have been games where I've done the exact same thing as the "chandelier" move. Your partner or whoever keeps saying "Hurry! Hurry!" and I'm poking around trying for achievements or secrets or whatever.
It's extra funny when wherever you are is rumbling and crumbling over and over again. Just kill me already!
IceBear wrote:They really need to work on that...even if they don't want you to lose the game they should put in consequences for farting around
Yeah, but isn't "farting around" just, you know, playing the game? I'm not crazy about there being consequences for that, unless it's something that's particularly plot driven.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
I am thinking about stuff like Dragon's Age where you are told of an imminent attack by the Dark spawn and I am searching every nook and cranny and doing all kinds of inconsequential side quests. I remember even leaving an area where something bad was just about to happen and came back towards the end of the game to finish it up. I know it's a fine line between fun and unfun just wish they'd either drop the urgency or make consequences.
The Mass Effect games were even worse.. Reapers are invading? No rush, I have all these side quests and seducing to do, it can wait
killbot737 wrote:I played this one game that nobody ever heard of where you only have 150 days of game time to find a water chip or else your underground town will explode or something and you'll lose.
Yeah, but the game contained mechanisms for softening that time limit. And one of the first player made mods was to remove that limit all together. Clearly *some* people would prefer to take their time (even if it's in game time) and/or explore rather than follow the plot with any sense of urgency. That's fine, people should enjoy the games they play. If you (universal you) have such high or stringent requirements that you are constantly disappointed in the games you play, well, that sucks for you I guess.
Without being on the design team (and even then) it is unlikely that you are going to get a game that matches your (universal your) exacting specifications.
I finally played this, and I loved it. The art was awesome, the story was touching, and the mechanics were new to me and enjoyable. I basically played it in one day on Saturday , and I'm still thinking about it on Monday.
I also played the game this weekend. It was good, but not great. I think how invested you get into the story makes the difference between whether you thought of Brothers as good or great. I loved the beautiful world, I loved the unique control scheme. The story was hard for me to get invested in (I guess it was a bit too obvious). I loved that the game was short -- I've become a big fan of shorter games now that I have such a huge backlog.
Overall a good game, though. I would definitely recommend it on sale.
I just finished this game. It's a charming little adventure, with nice and naughty things that the boys can do along the way. It's short, but has more memorable moments than many longer games. It was worth going back and picking up the achievements I'd missed.
The puzzles are mostly standard Tomb Raider-type puzzles except for that one "ah ha!" moment mentioned in an earlier spoiler. That puzzle not only required some outside-the-box thinking, it carried the theme of the story. The whole game is really about that one moment.
:
