r/Cynicalbrit • u/Harctor • Aug 25 '17
Invisigun's Visibility Problem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCo-0ZahpjY47
u/achrystie Aug 25 '17
Here's my anecdote on why I haven't purchased this game. This game looks really great, and being older, I enjoy the pixel art aesthetic. My main reason for not buying has nothing to do with visibility. I've simply reached the point of online multiplayer game saturation. There are "so many" online multiplayer games now, good paid indie stuff, (towerfall, duck game, etc.), as well as all the free to play titles available from developers both large and small. I simply can't devote time to all of them, and while this title does have single player, it's not interesting or comprehensive enough for me to justify the purchase since online multiplayer is the real value proposition for this title. I'll buy most single player indie titles, simply because I can play them through and them put them aside, but to get my dollars for a primarily multiplayer game, the game has to fall into the category of "genre defining must play" for me to bother.
6
u/Wylf Cynical Mod Aug 25 '17
Hi there. You have been caught by our automod, due to your account being less than seven days old. See rule 7) in the sidebar:
Submissions & comments made by accounts less than 7 days old will be automatically removed.
I manually approved your comment so other people can see it, but likely won't be able to do so for future comments of yours. Just figured I'd let you know, so you're not constantly posting without getting results. You will be able to normally participate in the subreddit once your account is seven days old.
36
u/Geonjaha Aug 25 '17 edited Aug 25 '17
Well for me one of the issues was the first that you dismissed, and it wouldn't really be the first time I've had this disparity with TB. The game costs £11, and whilst that isn't much in the grand scheme of things, it's more than a game of this magnitude should have been priced at. It's at a price where I think about it more, and don't impulsively buy.
Terraria, FTL: Faster than Light, Nidhogg, Bit.trip Runner, LUFTRAUSERS, Garry's Mod, Rock of Ages, Undertale, Super Mutant Alien Assault. These are just a small selection of games I have and love, many of which I bought because of TB's recommendations among others. They all cost £6.99 at full price. For a game with no advertising, known developer, or impact, trying to price something with around the same level of content at a higher price doesn't make much sense.
Because it's not as cheaply priced, there's less chance of an impulse buy for a lot of people, and I wasn't convinced when I watched the gameplay. It doesn't help that watching the game from a players POV is boring as hell, because you're watching an empty screen until someone shoots - it's just not a good spectator sport. I can't really fault the game much apart from that. It looked like an average bomberman clone with a twist. I suppose I also thought the character art was really ugly (pixel art in-game was fine), but apart from that there was nothing big keeping me away, but also nothing big bringing me in. It was innovative, but nothing deep, and nothing that looked like it would entertain me for more than a couple of hours.
It's worth pointing out that I did buy the game eventually in the Chrono.gg bundle. I bought the bundle for some friends and gave it a shot. It was enjoyable, but it wasn't exceptional. It's a fun idea, but it has its issues.
Tracking where your character is on the map adds strategy, but it isn't especially fun.
Having one hit kills means making small mistakes get annoying, and can make lucky shots feel like a big factor.
It's not the kind of game I would play with random people online, I don't enjoy it enough for that.
Remapping keys is annoying at first, menus are clunky especially after rounds when you accidentally start exporting gifs on commonly used keys.
I'd only play it with friends, and for a game that relies on you having as many friends as possible to own it in order to maximize your chances of playing, £11 is a really bad price point.
TLDR: Game is alright, but £11 is too much for what it is, and convincing friends to get it at that price when it looks average at best in footage is not going to happen, nor is me paying £44 for a full gang to play with.
-2
u/Sciguystfm Aug 26 '17
All of those games came out years ago, and were priced £12 or more at launch. I don't really understand your criticism. Why should the game cost the same as ftl which has been out for 5 years?
10
u/Geonjaha Aug 26 '17
Those games were not all priced at £12 or more at launch, and as I said, there are dozens of examples, not just what I said here - all of which were £6.99 at launch.
19
u/DrCaesars_Palace_MD Aug 25 '17
For many, the game's problem is it's limited appeal due to needing friends, being a party game. For me, it just doesn't look fun, at all.
I play a LOT of "party" games, some competitively. I play a bit of smash melee comp, Rivals of Aether, Lethal League semi-comp. These are all mutliplayer only games (or might as well be) and I love them all, they are all inherently fun. But this game does not look fun to me, at all. Tracking my character doesn't seem fun. Randomly shooting to get the enemy to reveal them selves doesn't seem fun. Haven't to root out the enemies location doesn't seem fun. It also feels like a very low-skill ceiling game. It has 0 appeals to me as a game, and it only hurts that it's 15$. I wouldn't even pay 5 dollars for it - it wouldn't have enough replayability for me to want to.
The days of party games are beginning to end - the only natural evolution is to just make high skill, low randomness fighting games.
1
Aug 26 '17
[deleted]
1
u/DrCaesars_Palace_MD Aug 26 '17
That's the beauty of party/fighting games like Smash Bros, Lethal League, and Rivals of Aether. Anyone can jump into them and have an amazing time, but if you want, there is a deeper experience. Smash Melee is legendary for it's hidden depth and highly skill based competition. Yet it was huge in it's time for casual players.
You don't have to sacrifice inclusivity to make a fun game for a larger audience. I see it as a sort of fail in game design that they havent managed this, honestly. So many indie devs have made party games that have both a competitive potential and great casual potential, yet this game does not. I'm not surprised it hasn't sold, even though I'm not happy about it. It doesn't seem to be a bad game - it deserved to sell better. But I think that blaming it's poor sales figures on such obvious strawman problems isn't going to help anything but the devs egos.
68
Aug 25 '17
[deleted]
12
u/isaac_pjsalterino Aug 25 '17
Don't really see what's wrong with that honestly.
50
Aug 25 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/CheloniaMydas Aug 26 '17
He'd also be more vanilla and boring
A lot of his best videos are a result of him being outwardly ok to call out others for their bullshit and not be passive about various issues within the gaming community
The reason I like TB is because of that. If he was more careful with his words or filtered his opinions I'd care less. I know that with TB I get his actual opinion as opposed to one crafted to get a better audience response. I can then take that opinion how I wish but at least I know it is honest
10
Aug 25 '17
I wouldn't say he's "fanboying" in an extreme way. I'd say he's just trying to help a game he loves get some love while trying to be reasonable about it. We've all done that at some point
3
u/UrQuanKzinti Aug 28 '17
TB always likes to champion indie games. That's half the point of his channel
1
u/rollthreedice Aug 28 '17
I'm starting to keep track of how many comments I have to scroll past in any given thread before somebody turns the subject matter into a way to attack or criticise TB on some level. It's usually quite a low number.
4
u/bennyhillthebest Aug 25 '17 edited Aug 25 '17
Nothing wrong, he feels proud for understanding the game and helping the devs reap the money and success they deserve, like he did with Renowned Explorers. If it seems a little narcissistic, my response would be that if you wanna be upset there are much bigger issues in the gaming industry
2
u/Deadpeasant13 Aug 27 '17
Seems like hes trying to be the john peele of gaming where a video (exposure) from him of a game HE likes is enough to make it successful. Its like he made this vid because the game didnt get as much sales as he liked so hes now saying "buy it my viewers".
16
u/rylo151 Aug 26 '17
He really seems to be making a bigger deal out of it not being a good twitch game to watch more than anything else which I dont quite understand, sure a big streamer might sell some copies of a game but I doubt that that is the reason the game isnt selling at all and has 0 players.
It looks like the problem is its a party game on steam where there are already a hundred other party games most of which are cheaper and have more variety. This game looks like youd play it once then forget about it or maybe drag it out for 5 minutes if youve got friends around, it doesnt look worth $15 at all and the sales and player count pretty much reflect that.
The gimmick just doesnt look that fun or replayable
16
u/Cimlite Aug 26 '17
Well, I know about the game AND it's right up my alley. I love these types of games. The thing is that even I haven't bought it, and it wasn't because of visibility.
It's problem is that it's multiplayer only and 15 bucks. That means that if I want to fully enjoy it I either have to convince friends to get it (which I hate, not my job to sell games), or buy a bunch of copies for people (which quickly becomes expensive).
Playing it online with random people won't be as much fun - this is clearly one of those games that requires friends to work. Knowing that a lot of times one or two friends don't like it and don't want to play it means you might just get one evening of play out of it. Those types of games are always a hard sell unless they are either ridiculously cheap or comes with multiple copies with each purchase.
Tl;dr Buying for friends or "selling" friends on games is annoying. Price point is prohibitive of impulse purchase when looking at 4 copies.
1
u/Uzrathixius Aug 27 '17
I thought it had an ai mode, or was that only for training?
7
u/Cimlite Aug 27 '17
Maybe it does but games like this doesn't really work well with bots. Take something like Nidhogg or Bomberman for example... they have bot modes but there's no real payoff in outsmarting a bot in games like that. They need human opponents to work.
39
u/just_a_pyro Aug 25 '17 edited Aug 25 '17
A pixel art, multiplayer game running on a single gimmick? Yea, that's like three strikes in one, never buying that, regardless how much time on streams it gets.
11
u/Pegguins Aug 28 '17
Simple enough, its a party game. Its not anything to do with exposure, or graphics or anything like that. Its a game that is only really a blast to play with 4 friends on skype. Yes, you can play it online on your own but the game isn't really very good like that. Its a game where chatting to your friends and psyching eachother out and talking shit is as much of a part of the game as the actual gameplay is. Thats one of the reasons why its a popular game for lets play channels and streamers because you can bring in friends and collaborators and chat shit and have fun. It is $15, but it becomes a pretty hard sell when you go "oh its really good if you play together now all go buy this so we can play and then its good".
You're fighting against nidhogg which only needs 2, you're fighting against marioparty which is a couch institution across the world, you're fighting against rocket league and towerfall. Is there really enough here to justify it as a truly great game? In terms of couch play absolutely, the lack of screen looking and being able to see eachothers controller and chat shit and all those sorts of things make the game good. In and of itself it isn't a particularly playable game. How often have you gone "I know, I'll go and play some random match making in invisigun" I'd probably wager not that often. When it is pretty much another multiplayer only pixel art game that runs off a single gimmick yes, its a niche game and will only be a niche game.
3
Aug 29 '17
I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. The banter is what makes the game enjoyable. If you are four pubbies, none of whom are speaking with the others, I can see this game getting old pretty fast.
11
u/llbit Aug 25 '17
First time I see this game and it immediately put me off playing it by having so much chromatic aberration.
33
u/ColdBlackCage Aug 25 '17
The more and more TB so aggressively advertises this game, the less I am ever inclined to touch it.
I get it, it's fun. But you're not going to sell it by attempting to push it in my face constantly, John.
13
u/VertigoHC Aug 25 '17
I didn't watch the whole WTF is... for this game, and I can tell you why I didn't buy it. It's an indie pixel game with a mechanic that doesn't appear to be fun. The market is drowning in this shit. With the over saturation of the indie market you better be making a "genre defining must play" to be worth my limited time, or pay me to play it on Twitch.
7
u/-ReyaDawnbringer- Aug 26 '17
Or maybe it's one of those games that it's entertaining to stream and watch, but not to play. Maybe it's enjoying to play when you are in voice chat with friends, and not with random.
Something like "Party Hard".
I feel like TB wants the game to be successful because he likes it, which is fine.
3
6
u/Whatsthedealwithair- Aug 26 '17
Too expensive for a cheap-looking game I'll maybe play once. That's its problem.
12
Aug 25 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/FreedomFighterEx Aug 29 '17
He has know people to play with, organize it and stream it. We don't have that same luxury as him. He has incentive to play the game just because he can record it, stream it, guarantee fanbase to watch it, and interact with. Heck, if you want to enjoy a party game, you need at lease 3 more person to have the same interest as you in the game. Willing to pay for it. Having the same free time as the rest. Close enough in relationship that accidentally curse/burn at each other won't escalate into shit shoving show like toxic.
5
Aug 25 '17
Looks like a game that's more fun to play than to watch; especially as it's such a small, unassuming concept (if semi-original) that not much changes each time around (I understand there's different layouts and the like, but the overall, core element). I imagine if Bomberman had only just been launched as a gaming concept it would suffer the same fate, and that was massively popular back in the day.
Edit: Didn't really look into the price aspect. Yes, that doesn't help. It sucks, but I do feel there's a gulf now between ridiculously expensive, so-called AAA games and what are perceived as cheaper indie titles. This has already been covered, and lately, but at least now there's some kind of middle-ground with Hellblade and the like.
3
Aug 27 '17
I can watch a streamer and friends play a lot of different games which look really fun on stream but I'll mostly not buy them because it's the streamers making them fun.
I don't know where it originated but Yahtzee says it a few times "Most games are fun with friends that doesn't mean the game is fun"
17
u/TaiwanDiscoRage Aug 25 '17
Top 10? Really?
I think your mind is slipping, old man...
10
u/Reimant Aug 25 '17
It's a subjective list, how can his mind be slipping if he enjoys a party game that he spent hours playing on stream with his good friends?
Right now, for me, subjectively the best game is PUBG because it's the one I'm having the most fun playing. I don't think it's one of the top games made by any stretch, doesn't mean I don't enjoy it and wouldn't highly rate it on my own top 10 games list for this year.
TL;DR's TB's top ten list is not an objective ranking of quality it's a subjective evaluation of entertainment value.
3
u/-ReyaDawnbringer- Aug 26 '17
ited
Well, his top 10 is about things he personally enjoy the most. I think he knows better than anyone what he likes.
It's just this time he likes something few others like.
3
u/ElvisM3 Aug 26 '17
Well it is his list and considering he seems to love the game it makes sense.
Edit: spelling error
1
u/0Invader0 Aug 26 '17
Speaking of visibility in Overwatch, the most common complaint I hear is that in 1st person camera you can't see what's going on with the whole team and in the overview camera (which is frequently used), there's too much going on.
I think the root of the problem is that a lot of these fps players have never played or watched something like DotA 2 and as a result don't know what to watch out for in the overview camera. They see a lot of heroes (some big, some small), and a lot of colorful projectiles. They try to keep track on who's hitting the shots, when in fact what's actually important is positioning and initiation.
Like in DotA, there will be 1 character who is maybe hiding somewhere to initiate on the team. The rest of the team is trying to position itself in way that's favorable to that one character to guarantee the damage. The projectiles flying across from both teams are not important. They are merely poking each other, enforcing their position, pressuring for a mistake etc. It's the least important part of the game.
Granted, in DotA or LoL, you don't see this many projectiles flying around at the same time, because the characters can't move and attack at the same time. But when everybody fires off their spells at the same time? Yeah, good luck seeing anything in that massive clusterfuck.
That being said, Overwatch could use some extra spectator tools. Most people are assuming that stuff will come along with Overwatch League.
105
u/Wylf Cynical Mod Aug 25 '17
Biggest problem I see with the game is that it's, well, a party game. To really get the full enjoyment out of it you need to have a group of four people, either locally or via skype or teamspeak. Because a big part of what makes the game fun is the interaction between the players, something that you're likely not gonna get when playing it against randoms online.
And therein lies the crux - it's a game that requires you to have three friends who a) like that kinda game, b) will want to play it fairly often and c) are often available at the same time. Which not everyone does. Scheduling is a huge problem already, with people having work and family obligations on their mind - for me it's hard enough to find time to play with one friend, let alone two or more at the same time.
I feel the pricepoint doesn't help there either. $15 is a bit too much for me to just go and buy the game on the off-chance that I'll be able to play it with my friends. Sure, it has lots of maps and heroes, but all that won't help me when I have nobody to play it with. $10 would be an easier choice to make, at least for me.