[robelirobban]

I pondered the question about open world in Alan Wake while I was playing and my conclusion is that it would never work. Anyone ever been frustrated because your mission is halfway across the map/town/etc.? Imagine if that would happen in Alan Wake, some serious pace-breaking right there.

The openness that is Alan Wake is enough. Sure, maybe a few more non-essential places to explore within the area would be cool. Like a dark scary house with some extra ammo or whatever. I really felt that the game awarded exploration much more than games usually do, (could be because of my over-usage of flares ).

[Zereta]

Nope. The linearity lends itself nicely to the type of experience Alan Wake is trying to give us. If they can give us Open World and STILL maintain that nice tight experience, sure, why not. But don't break a structure that isn't broke.

[shwhjw]

The bad thing about open world is that it makes collectables (i.e. coffee flasks, manuscript pages, TVs and radios) much harder for the player to find.
It's alright in some games where the collectables don't actually affect how the player sees the story, but AWs collectables are much more in-depth, and actually have a purpose.

I usually give up finding everything in an open-world game, because it's so huge, and tedious trying to find something you don't have a clue where to find.

[ilold]

i want something linear but not too linear. Alan wake was great in terms of "linearity"

[killer7ita]

Yes, i would like an open-world.

[cubanito305]

I vote Yes, Yes 2.0 and Hell Yes.

Now I got to say that I don't understand many of the people in here. Most of them voted no yet they followed their response by saying oh but I want more exploration, freedom and character interaction. I don't get it, there are only two options on the poll. The I want more exploration but I don't want the game to be open world option do not exist in that poll.

One is choosing no, that means that the game is perfect the way it is and that the game should still be linear. It also means keep the exploration, freedom and character interaction the way it currectly is.

The other one is choosing yes I want Alan Wake 2 to be an open world. In that second option falls more exploration, freedom and more character interaction. So if you want those things for god sakes don't vote no. Either don't vote or vote yes. Unless you really want AW2 to be as linear as the first game, then you can vote no. I'm really puzzle by the answers so far.,

I personally would love Alan Wake to be like Deadly Premonition when it comes to handling the open world debate. Deadly Premonition had an unbelivable great story, with great character interaction and freedom. Yet when it came time to the fighting the game became linear. Those sections of the game were actually more linear that what Alan Wake was. Inside this missions Remedy can control the mood, the atmosphere and the scares. That's the reason why RMD took open world gameplay out of AW wasn't it. Because they wanted to control the mood, the pacing and the scares.

Now I'm going to talk about sales. The weeks prior to May 18 I kept seeing a lot of posts all over the internet when people were asking if they should get AW or RDR. Well guess what 9 out of 10 of those people chose RDR over AW. Now why was that. One of the main reason were that RDR was open world and AW was not, simple as that. The other reason was lenght and multi player but the main reason was open world. Alan Wake as an open world game would have sold way more copies that what it currently is going to sell.

Why well because a open world spychological thriller is something that no one has ever see. Alan Wake in 2006 was groundbreaking, it was fresh, it was in the mouth of every journalist out there. Alan Wake in 2010 is a third person action game like many others on the market, with a good story and a low 80's on Metacritic. That's it.

Alan Wake was the game that made me buy a 360, it was the game that when I went to sleep at night I dreamed of playing. Yet when I got it in my hands it was nothing special.

I know that the guys at RMD don't care one bit about my opinion and that's fine but I still think that Alan Wake 2 can be a 95% game on Metacritic. I still think that AW 2 could be the greatest game ever. But it needs to change and to improve in many aspects and that's why I'm going to be in here advocating for Open World gameplay, for more enemy diversity and for more character interaction among other things. BTW yes I'm buying AW 2 no matter what happens, the story alone is enough for me.

[sdrawkcab]

As I stated in another thread, it depends on the goal of the developers. If they want a tight, intense story...open world will NEVER work! When people have the option to do what they want...the story can NEVER be told the way it is intended. For this to work, Remedy would have to change their goal for Alan Wake. It would have to be, somewhat a different game; a game where a tight, compelling story isn't the main focus.

So...I voted no!

[Stark Viking]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubanito305

I vote Yes, Yes 2.0 and Hell Yes.

...

I agree with your thoughts!

[Pauloselhombre]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robelirobban

I pondered the question about open world in Alan Wake while I was playing and my conclusion is that it would never work. Anyone ever been frustrated because your mission is halfway across the map/town/etc.? Imagine if that would happen in Alan Wake, some serious pace-breaking right there.

The openness that is Alan Wake is enough. Sure, maybe a few more non-essential places to explore within the area would be cool. Like a dark scary house with some extra ammo or whatever. I really felt that the game awarded exploration much more than games usually do, (could be because of my over-usage of flares ).

I agree with this. A lot. The little side areas in the game were great, and a heck of a lot more that you normally get in a linear game, but I'm greedy for more, although I wouldn't want open-world I'd quite like to see a few areas like this that trigger extra cutscenes or encounters (Spoiler:

show spoiler

when you explore the farmhouse near the Evil Dead reference and as you leave the farmer turns up and shouts "Stay away from my daughter!"

was excellent, but more things that are unique, much like the aforementioned Spoiler:

show spoiler

Evil Dead reference

would be excellent).

Like (just as an example) if you enter a house and find a manuscript page (an optional or 'secret' page that doesn't count towards the normal total) reading something like:


"Lucy did as she was asked and tied the knots as tight as she could. She could see the fear in David's eyes and she wanted nothing more than to untie him, but she had made him a promise.

The last week had been strange, even by Bright Falls' usual standards. Over the last few days, the night had been full of gunshots and strange noises. Quiet nights and clear skies had given way to violent storms within seconds, only to fade away as quickly as they had arrived. On top of that, people had been acting weird. Several of the neighbours had vanished without a trace.

Lucy swore that if they made it through the night they would leave Bright Falls in the morning and never look back."

Then, upon approaching the stairs you hear a Taken shouting and someone else sobbing uncontrollably. When you get upstairs you find a Taken tied down to a bed and a young woman huddled in the corner crying. You can kill the Taken or you can leave them thrashing against their bonds. If you kill them, the woman just keeps crying and staring blankly at the bed. If you leave without killing 'David' then as you leave the house you hear a crash, followed by screams, and if you go back upstairs you find the bed in pieces and a trail of blood leading to a smashed window.

That kind of thing would be awesome, imo. The blood could be left out in order to fit more with the style of the game as it is of course.

[robelirobban]

Well, I technically didn't say I wanted open-world, just that I wanted a bit more exploration than there already were. Not in the sense of epic open maps but more like buildings at random places in the world. For example, in episode 6 (No spoilers) you can come across a building, enter it and have some phunz. Or... you can skip it.

Still, that is called linear... Because without linearity, a story can't be told in the same epic way! Imagine this: You travel at daytime to a mission-location just to find out that it HAS to be night before you even can begin! What to do, add a "wait" function as in Oblivion? Naah, good narratives need a path, not a field!

[JTX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubanito305

I vote Yes, Yes 2.0 and Hell Yes.

Now I got to say that I don't understand many of the people in here. Most of them voted no yet they followed their response by saying oh but I want more exploration, freedom and character interaction. I don't get it, there are only two options on the poll. The I want more exploration but I don't want the game to be open world option do not exist in that poll.

One is choosing no, that means that the game is perfect the way it is and that the game should still be linear. It also means keep the exploration, freedom and character interaction the way it currectly is.

The other one is choosing yes I want Alan Wake 2 to be an open world. In that second option falls more exploration, freedom and more character interaction. So if you want those things for god sakes don't vote no. Either don't vote or vote yes. Unless you really want AW2 to be as linear as the first game, then you can vote no. I'm really puzzle by the answers so far.,

I personally would love Alan Wake to be like Deadly Premonition when it comes to handling the open world debate. Deadly Premonition had an unbelivable great story, with great character interaction and freedom. Yet when it came time to the fighting the game became linear. Those sections of the game were actually more linear that what Alan Wake was. Inside this missions Remedy can control the mood, the atmosphere and the scares. That's the reason why RMD took open world gameplay out of AW wasn't it. Because they wanted to control the mood, the pacing and the scares.

Now I'm going to talk about sales. The weeks prior to May 18 I kept seeing a lot of posts all over the internet when people were asking if they should get AW or RDR. Well guess what 9 out of 10 of those people chose RDR over AW. Now why was that. One of the main reason were that RDR was open world and AW was not, simple as that. The other reason was lenght and multi player but the main reason was open world. Alan Wake as an open world game would have sold way more copies that what it currently is going to sell.

Why well because a open world spychological thriller is something that no one has ever see. Alan Wake in 2006 was groundbreaking, it was fresh, it was in the mouth of every journalist out there. Alan Wake in 2010 is a third person action game like many others on the market, with a good story and a low 80's on Metacritic. That's it.

Alan Wake was the game that made me buy a 360, it was the game that when I went to sleep at night I dreamed of playing. Yet when I got it in my hands it was nothing special.

I know that the guys at RMD don't care one bit about my opinion and that's fine but I still think that Alan Wake 2 can be a 95% game on Metacritic. I still think that AW 2 could be the greatest game ever. But it needs to change and to improve in many aspects and that's why I'm going to be in here advocating for Open World gameplay, for more enemy diversity and for more character interaction among other things. BTW yes I'm buying AW 2 no matter what happens, the story alone is enough for me.

I still don't see everyone's fascination with metacritic. People complain about AW being in the 80's on metacritic while the same site has GTA IV sitting at a whopping 98...there's obviously something wrong with the formula here and I have no idea why anyone would take metacritic seriously at all when talking about how good a game is. Most of my favorite games are in the 80's on metacritic while some of my most hated (MW 2, GTA IV) are dominating it. Deadly Premonition, the game your praising in your post, has a freaking 66 on metacritic and it sounds to me like you enjoyed the game. At the same time though your criticizing Alan Wake for being in the 80's.

As for the game being open world, I highly doubt they're going to do that in the sequel seeing as how they've already stated that it just doesn't work. People can huff and puff all they want to on here thinking they might change Remedy's minds for Alan Wake 2 but it won't work. Alan Wake 2 will be the same format as Alan Wake as far as linearity. I could see them adding more daytime interaction and letting the player explore the town a little more though (yes it is possible to be able to explore Bright Falls in the daytime without the game being open world).

[Sirea]

Voted no. Deadly Premonition had open world, and I never used it. It felt too distracting from the story.

[Griffle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTX

My vote is no. I really enjoyed the linear experience of Alan wake...and I trust remedy 100% when they say open world doesn't work with the game.

I second that.

[WakingLife]

They got a good thing going with the tv series, episode style, gameplay.
So I think open world would just take away and pretty muck ruin the story.
Plus my girlfriend doesn't mind watching Alan Wake...witch says alot about the story line...she says it's like watching a tv series.

[ancient]

All-or-nothing approach... and we keep running in circles when debating it: dismissing open world elements as not feasible by default.

It's fine to a have a fully linear story during the story progression sequences. However, more exploration of Bright Falls/interaction with NPCs (most likely - during the daytime) would make perfect sense. It would only enrich the experience.

This is what we mean when talking about the impression found in year 2005-2006 era footage/promise/concept.

[Danzaiver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ancient

All-or-nothing approach... and we keep running in circles when debating it: dismissing open world elements as not feasible by default.

It's fine to a have a fully linear story during the story progression sequences. However, more exploration of Bright Falls/interaction with NPCs (most likely - during the daytime) would make perfect sense. It would only enrich the experience.

This is what we mean when talking about the impression found in year 2005-2006 era footage/promise/concept.

That's right, having an open world doesn't mean that the game shouldn't have a linear story. Linear stories can also be done in open world games.

Exploration is a factor that isn't in Alan Wake, the Thermos collecting make us to take another roards appart from the main road to reach the goal, but exploration would be something very interesting.

[Mirror Peak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shwhjw

The bad thing about open world is that it makes collectables much harder for the player to find.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robelirobban

Anyone ever been frustrated because your mission is halfway across the map/town/etc.? Imagine if that would happen in Alan Wake, some serious pace-breaking right there.

These are my two biggest issues with having it as an open world game. Also, about being able to explore during the day, I thought that was a pretty cool idea. But then I thought, why? Sure, it would be fun to talk to NPC's and find collectables, but you don't have to worry about the taken. So there isn't a whole lot of excitement to be had there.

[Thejeti]

NO PLOX XD
because I think that the linear feeling of AW makes this game so brillant, in exchange if you give open world i think that the story will be a loose point, you will be walking on the town but what do you get of it, and reviewers will say: oh no alan wake its a no open world lets troll it meow meow xD

[ReFrEsCo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubanito305

I vote Yes, Yes 2.0 and Hell Yes.
One is choosing no, that means that the game is perfect the way it is

It does not mean its perfect it just means that we don't want a sandbox game. Alan wake is far from perfect in gameplay, and design.

---My interpretation of what it would be like to have open world alan wake---

Oh hey alan look I know you probably dont want to drive from here to here but instead of having a cutscene were this is already done we are going to make you drive. See how much fun this is, look how we are taking away from the excitement and horror by making you drive. Oh hey you made it, ohh sorrry you gotta drive all the way back to the other place, we just like wasting your time, it looks good to have a longer game so we just drag this out for you.
Alan by the way instead of having a straightforward path to go we are going to confuse the hell out of you by having so many directions and oh look we can't have exciting cut scenes because you just go around them and dont trigger them. Hurray for developers having less control over what the user experiences in the game, but hey u can talk to a couple people, makes up for it right?
Sorry if I was a bit offensive, just trying to get my point across

[Pauloselhombre]

When it comes down to it, they've settled on the TV series format now. That means the pacing needs to be tight otherwise the effect will be lost. According to the video commentary, Remedy even cut a few explorable paths from one level in order to keep the pace of the gameplay working right. It's clear that Remedy like telling a solid, carefully paced story, and that can't work with open world. The two things are very much mutually exclusive.

Sure (as I mentioned earlier), I like the idea of more explorable areas, primarily because the world is so rich and beautifully presented that I just selfishly can't get enough However, I trust Remedy after experiencing what they've done so far. Sure there's a lot of time spent in woods, but the pace of the gameplay is often pretty much perfect. I'd much rather have more gameplay and story focused on those same ideals than a complete overhaul that could compromise everything that was great about Alan Wake. After all, I can't imagine anyone watched the first season of LOST and then complained that it wasn't a documentary.

[hb02]

Ideally i would like it linear with more open paths, so you can go inside the houses and such.

BUT if you think about it, this is a genre title. In order to keep up the tension and atmosphere, you have to have enemies attacking you pretty consistently. If its even a semi open world, and it allows you to walk around for 30 minutes doing nothing but having fun exploring.... well the game is going to have to supply you with ALOT of ammo so you can be able to walk around and explore on your own. Alot of ammo is sorta the anti-thesis to the tension in the type of genre.

Just look at a game like Dead Rising, you're allowed to walk around and do whatever you want. They constantly provide you with weapons and the enemies are everywhere, but there is no tension or atmosphere.

I'll take Remedy's word and say open world doesn't work well with this type of genre. I'm sure open world would be amazing and fun, but it would be at the price of the atmosphere that Alan Wake has.

[Artyx80]

Voted no. hb02 pretty much told what I was thinking. Atmosphere and tension would be lost in open world styled AW. Just think about it, many square miles with woods and mountains with pretty much nothing on it? Yeah, it would be cool to drive to the sunset through Bright Falls town, but that would be pretty much it. Bright Falls is a small town with lots of nature. As OW it just wouldn´t work. I hope though that the linearity will be on AW2 WITH more exploration. Just little wider "levels" and more daytime gameplay. All I want...

[cubanito305]

Quote:

I still don't see everyone's fascination with metacritic. People complain about AW being in the 80's on metacritic while the same site has GTA IV sitting at a whopping 98...there's obviously something wrong with the formula here and I have no idea why anyone would take metacritic seriously at all when talking about how good a game is. Most of my favorite games are in the 80's on metacritic while some of my most hated (MW 2, GTA IV) are dominating it. Deadly Premonition, the game your praising in your post, has a freaking 66 on metacritic and it sounds to me like you enjoyed the game. At the same time though your criticizing Alan Wake for being in the 80's

You know what's the funny thing. Well the funny thing is that the Metacritic score is not only extremely important but also crucial when it comes to many big decisions. Check out the September 2009 Game Informer article called: " Critical Mass - Do Companies Put Too Much Stock In Metacritic?" Metacritic is a big deal whether you like it or not.

I'm going to quote a few important parts. I'm going to put them on a spoiler tag to make my post shorter.Spoiler:

show spoiler

" to developers like Glen Schofield, the effects are very real. “Dead Space on the Xbox 360 had 78 reviews. 51 of them were 90 or above, but we got an 89 as our final score. We only had one 65 so…how do you get 51 that are above 90 and end up with 89? That brought us down one point. The difference between an 89 and a 90 is a big ass deal.”

How big of a deal? It can put a lot of pressure on the entire organization, from development teams to marketing and public relations. Some publishers tie a game’s Metacritic score into the dev team’s bonus money, and high-level decisions can be made before a game’s release depending on what that company anticipates the Metacritic score to be. Maybe a company plays it safe with a game so as not to risk a lower score at the expense of taking a chance on a possibly cool, but risky, direction. Some teams are forced to gauge the time and money needed to implement a feature against what it may or may not gain them in Metacritic points.

“It is a big deal. Everything’s set to one-click to go the Metacritic page for the game you’re working on, and people are constantly F5-ing and updating. You do a game that’s rated in the 70s and you feel pretty bad. It’s not a great feeling. I know when scores were coming in for Dead Space, people were yelling, ‘It just went up a point. We’re up to 16th!’ They were looking to where we are overall, and it’s a huge deal. The first few weeks are really, really exciting when it comes out.”

Also are you comparing Deadly Premonition a game made in a ****ing basement by a few japanese people to Alan Wake. Are you proud or glad that Alan Wake is in the low 80's on Metacritic? Is Remedy proud that Alan Wake is in the low 80's.? I'm not.

If I remmember correctly one of the main goals of Remedy for Alan Wake was that the game had to have an average of more than 90%. Well guess what they felt short, no shame in admiting that. It doesn't matter how many reviews are over 90 or how many reviews are 100. The average is 83% period.

What's worse is that when people like me or Danzaiver or ancient critizise the game we are inmediately classified as trolls. When all we are trying to do is give our opinions and help Remedy get that 90% average. All we are trying to do is help AW2 become a better game but I guess critizasing and trying to help nowadays means " If you don't like it make your own damn game."

The entire community in here is too quiet, I guess AW is a perfect game with nothing to fix then. Even massively acclaimed games like Mass Effect 2 have a lot of critizism from their own community. There is a thread in the ME forums called " Dissappointment with Mass Effect 2? An open disscussion. That thread has as of now 123 pages full of critizism and ME2 has a 96% average on Metacritic and could easily win GOTY 2010. I have also seem in other threads a lot of fans ferociously arguing with Bioware developers and none of them shy when it comes to getting in the developers face and telling them what they want in both Mass Effect and Dragon Age games. If a Bioware developer tries to be funny and throw puns back at the fans he will be eaten alive. I'm not making that up, if someone in here frequents the Bioware forums regularly them they know what I'm talking about. That community is hell for the developers.

Yet in here it is all roses and flowers and 10 out of 10's. And the few people who have the balls to call it like it is are labeled "Trolls". Well I'm not going to go anywhere, I'm staying right here and everytime I get the chance I'm going to keep giving my opinion on how I think AW2 could be a better game. Starting with the fact that I do believe that open world gameplay would do miracles for the AW franchise, financially and in popularity. The only way to make AW2 better is through hard critizism and strong opinions. And that's exactly what I'm going to do. I'm just trying to help and I'm hopefull that everyone will also try to help AW2 be a great game.

[Dark]

Not completely open world.

Either stay as Alan Wake was originally

During the day it's freeroam, do what you want, stock up on supplies etc then at night the missions begin

or keep the game linear and have free roam as a bonus unlock upon completition

[Caffeine]

Quote Cubanito305:

"Yet in here it is all roses and flowers and 10 out of 10's. And the few people who have the balls to call it like it is are labeled "Trolls". "

You have the balls to call it like it is?
You would have balls if you could focus more on the positive things instead of the much easier way: Negativity.

It's common knowledge that being positive takes more energy, more balls.
And you say it like it is? lol, it's still all YOUR opinion and I totally disagree. Appreciate what they made, give them credit like most people do here. They are a professional gaming company and they know how to make a stunning game like AW. Even if this game got an average 60% on any review website it's about YOUR experience and not theirs.

[BxB402]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caffeine

Quote Cubanito305:

"Yet in here it is all roses and flowers and 10 out of 10's. And the few people who have the balls to call it like it is are labeled "Trolls". "

You have the balls to call it like it is?
You would have balls if you could focus more on the positive things instead of the much easier way: Negativity.

It's common knowledge that being positive takes more energy, more balls.
And you say it like it is? lol, it's still all YOUR opinion and I totally disagree. Appreciate what they made, give them credit like most people do here. They are a professional gaming company and they know how to make a stunning game like AW. Even if this game got an average 60% on any review website it's about YOUR experience and not theirs.

Actually....negativity takes no more balls than positivity. Trust me. I can see where some people come from in disliking aspects of Alan Wake....honestly...it's something not everyone will love, despite a lot of us loving it a lot. And to have the cajones to come out with honest dislikes in light of all the positive is ballsy, and then to come out with positives in light of the true flaws is also ballsy. It's all opinion.

Then again, I can also see how some gripes are really just bullcrap gripes and whines that can be applied to 99% of games that people somehow seem to still bitch and moan about every damn time as if they havent ever touched an actual video game before or somehow expect every game to be perfect.

We all have balls to defend our position, despite possible disagreement...but somethings either way can just be stupid.

BTW: I'm still in the middle of the open world thing. They should open it up a little bit, but not enough to be truly considered open world. DO what they can to preserve and keep the story...but expand it to include some extra roamage. I like to explore...but I don't want to get completly lost in the woods with no way other than a super long ass walk to get where I need to go and be bored off my ass for 10 minutes just walking or driving. Zelda balances all of that really well without being considered sandbox or open world and keeping a tight story. Something like Zelda is something to look at if they want to open it up a bit. Not emulation...but ideas.

[JTX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubanito305

You know what's the funny thing. Well the funny thing is that the Metacritic score is not only extremely important but also crucial when it comes to many big decisions. Check out the September 2009 Game Informer article called: " Critical Mass - Do Companies Put Too Much Stock In Metacritic?" Metacritic is a big deal whether you like it or not.

I'm going to quote a few important parts. I'm going to put them on a spoiler tag to make my post shorter.Spoiler:

show spoiler

" to developers like Glen Schofield, the effects are very real. “Dead Space on the Xbox 360 had 78 reviews. 51 of them were 90 or above, but we got an 89 as our final score. We only had one 65 so…how do you get 51 that are above 90 and end up with 89? That brought us down one point. The difference between an 89 and a 90 is a big ass deal.”

How big of a deal? It can put a lot of pressure on the entire organization, from development teams to marketing and public relations. Some publishers tie a game’s Metacritic score into the dev team’s bonus money, and high-level decisions can be made before a game’s release depending on what that company anticipates the Metacritic score to be. Maybe a company plays it safe with a game so as not to risk a lower score at the expense of taking a chance on a possibly cool, but risky, direction. Some teams are forced to gauge the time and money needed to implement a feature against what it may or may not gain them in Metacritic points.

“It is a big deal. Everything’s set to one-click to go the Metacritic page for the game you’re working on, and people are constantly F5-ing and updating. You do a game that’s rated in the 70s and you feel pretty bad. It’s not a great feeling. I know when scores were coming in for Dead Space, people were yelling, ‘It just went up a point. We’re up to 16th!’ They were looking to where we are overall, and it’s a huge deal. The first few weeks are really, really exciting when it comes out.”

Also are you comparing Deadly Premonition a game made in a ****ing basement by a few japanese people to Alan Wake. Are you proud or glad that Alan Wake is in the low 80's on Metacritic? Is Remedy proud that Alan Wake is in the low 80's.? I'm not.

If I remmember correctly one of the main goals of Remedy for Alan Wake was that the game had to have an average of more than 90%. Well guess what they felt short, no shame in admiting that. It doesn't matter how many reviews are over 90 or how many reviews are 100. The average is 83% period.

What's worse is that when people like me or Danzaiver or ancient critizise the game we are inmediately classified as trolls. When all we are trying to do is give our opinions and help Remedy get that 90% average. All we are trying to do is help AW2 become a better game but I guess critizasing and trying to help nowadays means " If you don't like it make your own damn game."

The entire community in here is too quiet, I guess AW is a perfect game with nothing to fix then. Even massively acclaimed games like Mass Effect 2 have a lot of critizism from their own community. There is a thread in the ME forums called " Dissappointment with Mass Effect 2? An open disscussion. That thread has as of now 123 pages full of critizism and ME2 has a 96% average on Metacritic and could easily win GOTY 2010. I have also seem in other threads a lot of fans ferociously arguing with Bioware developers and none of them shy when it comes to getting in the developers face and telling them what they want in both Mass Effect and Dragon Age games. If a Bioware developer tries to be funny and throw puns back at the fans he will be eaten alive. I'm not making that up, if someone in here frequents the Bioware forums regularly them they know what I'm talking about. That community is hell for the developers.

Yet in here it is all roses and flowers and 10 out of 10's. And the few people who have the balls to call it like it is are labeled "Trolls". Well I'm not going to go anywhere, I'm staying right here and everytime I get the chance I'm going to keep giving my opinion on how I think AW2 could be a better game. Starting with the fact that I do believe that open world gameplay would do miracles for the AW franchise, financially and in popularity. The only way to make AW2 better is through hard critizism and strong opinions. And that's exactly what I'm going to do. I'm just trying to help and I'm hopefull that everyone will also try to help AW2 be a great game.

Obviously AW isn't a perfect game. Numerous people in here who have praised the game have also called out AW's flaws. This is strictly a disagreement on the linear/open world aspect of the game. Of course I would like the meta score to be higher for Remedys sake and sales wise but I don't judge how good a game is based on a metacritic score that picks and chooses which reviews to count.

Edit - When have you ever been labeled as a troll on here? You gave your full opinon of the game in the rate alan wake thread and it seemed to me everyone agreed with the things you pointed out...even people that rated alan wake at 9's and 10's in the thread. Your opinion was respected and you certaintly were not labeled as a "troll'. You might have been expecting back lash but I didn't see it. Like you said you expect us to respect your opinion in being dissapointed with the game well we expect you to respect our opinion in being more than satisfied with the game.

[Danzaiver]

To be honest with you guys, just look at the comments the dev have made in this thread. Pretty funny right?

Only because we talk about Alan Wake having an open world we are labeled as crazy son of guns that want and want and want. This is a forum were the devs post regulary, and trust me, is like going to a religious forum and saying that some saint wasn't so good at all.

I mean look at the Constructive Criticism thread! Way to be humble there right? Is like "Oh that's good but you know what? No"

I mean, compare Assassins Creed 1 vs AC2, they added so many cool thinks that I'm sure were suggested by the fans and the game turned out to be an excellent game compared to the first one that was very repetitive.

Alan Wake for me has no replay value after I beat it on Nightmare. The game itself is repetitive somehow.

And for god's sake, being positive is easy! Is like saying to your mother that she looks great in her bathingsuit when she doesn't. Saying the truth is hard and need some balls. Go an tell Hideo Kojima that MGS4 was lame, or tell Shigery Miyamoto that Zelda is lame. Good luck on that!

I respect the opinion of everybody, if you like a linear game I respect that, hell Max Payne was linear and I love it a lot, I'm thinking on playing again sometime soon. But Alan Wake had so much potencial with not the sandbox, but let's say a game where you can explore meet the characters.

I personaly can't remember a cool place in the game, I was to frustrated trying to kill the takens, then I found my car and drove for like 5 minutes or less and then keep walking that I couldn't actually enjoy the world in the game.

Again, if you like linear games that's very good I respect your point of view, but what I don't like is that some people thread us like we are stupid kids or some kind of random forum poster that ask for "I want horses on Alan Wake! I want them now!"

No, we are just trying to give ideas about how an open world, interaction with the characters and exploring can make AW2 a very good game, not just for me or cubanito, but for everyone that tries it. Hell, the 2006 trailers showed a lot of potencial, now I only see a linear game that isn't that much long and have no exploration or interaction with the characters.

Well, again I respect that some people like the game to be linear, that's ok for me, but people don't respect OUR point of view and make us feel that if we where random forums posters with no idea about games.

[ancient]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubanito305

What's worse is that when people like me or Danzaiver or ancient critizise the game we are inmediately classified as trolls. When all we are trying to do is give our opinions and help Remedy get that 90% average. All we are trying to do is help AW2 become a better game but I guess critizasing and trying to help nowadays means " If you don't like it make your own damn game."

...

The only way to make AW2 better is through hard critizism and strong opinions. And that's exactly what I'm going to do. I'm just trying to help and I'm hopefull that everyone will also try to help AW2 be a great game.

What's even worse, they ban the IP addresses of the critics Yes, they did it. I find it fascinating.

The only problem - it can be bypassed. I guess they realized it and eventually unbanned it.

...and all of this just because we are not satisfied with the 8/10 or B+ game and want it to be a thoroughly convincing 10/10 on all fronts, including the critical front.

::

To the developers:

I know it's possible to dodge absolutely every criticism with "we know it better" attitude: the creation is perfect, the story style is perfect, the formula is perfect, nothing needs to be changed. Those who enjoy the game the way it is - fine. But, I guess, we, the loyal supporters since May 2005, who spread the early word-of-mouth (I personally wrote over 20 blog entries advertising the existence and the beauty of Alan Wake), have the right to express frustration over the direction the game was steered into over the last few years, without having our heads slammed with an IP-ban hammer. To express an alternative position that maybe, just maybe, the focus could be slightly different.

Sure, full open-world doesn't work but the elements of more open interaction might well be the sweet spot.

Good developers listen to both types of views, not just the praise.

Yep, once again - 2K Marin developers were sitting en masse in the forum during the launch period of Bioshock 2, listening to all feedback: wanting to learn what was good, what went wrong, what could be improved. The views of the fans were impressively polarized, starting from "2K Marin, you screwed the game", ending with "the best game I've ever played". Oh my, we are a rather calm community here

Most impressively we had Jordan Thomas, the creative director of Bioshock 2 himself, participating in those discussions where he went several extra miles of explaining the context, intents, motivations of Bioshock 2 story. The effort that helped tremendously to deepen the understanding of the core idea the creators intended to convey. Jordan heard a lot of mixed views, both harsh views and glorifying views... yet through all this process he remained absolutely humble and reflective, which is astonishing for a role of this caliber and the intellectual personality he is known for. "The game could have been even more personal", he used to admit, which is absolutely true.

An honest exchange of ideas and views.

...and because of this interaction, based on this not-always-glorifying feedback, I'm sure Bioshock 3 will become a better game overall: improving on the strengths, eliminating the weaknesses, introducing new ideas. I adore both Bioshocks but even I had a long long long list what could be improved. Just because no creation is perfect. It's human. It's humble to admit.

Here, we either consistently talk down opposing views ("we tried it; the only shape Alan Wake could have taken; period") or simply shut up the vocal critics through a sneaky IP ban The problem is... living in adoration-only faux reality most certainly does not help to improve the game (starts to seem indicative of the root problem - one truth only) whereas it's the acceptance of different viewpoints and the interaction between them that moves the progress train forward and helps uncover new fascinating ideas. The feedback-based creative synergy.

Heck, the concept of Alan Wake is hypnotizing. I have printed screenshots in my office for several years already It's the implementation that stumbles.

::

We all share the goal of Alan Wake becoming a top-notch, triple A game with a potential for a ground-breaking fourth "A". When looking at this goal, there's certainly room for improvement.

[Omega]

No, but I'd like Remedy to increase the "exploration" part of the game even more. It was a smart decision to get rid off the open world structure IMO, because thanks to that the game is paced almost perfectly.

[cubanito305]

Quote:

Obviously AW isn't a perfect game. Numerous people in here who have praised the game have also called out AW's flaws. This is strictly a disagreement on the linear/open world aspect of the game. Of course I would like the meta score to be higher for Remedys sake and sales wise but I don't judge how good a game is based on a metacritic score that picks and chooses which reviews to count.

Edit - When have you ever been labeled as a troll on here? You gave your full opinon of the game in the rate alan wake thread and it seemed to me everyone agreed with the things you pointed out...even people that rated alan wake at 9's and 10's in the thread. Your opinion was respected and you certaintly were not labeled as a "troll'. You might have been expecting back lash but I didn't see it. Like you said you expect us to respect your opinion in being dissapointed with the game well we expect you to respect our opinion in being more than satisfied with the game.

Your right and I apologize if I came on too strong on my previous post. I'm just really passionate when it comes to this. You and I actually agree on a lot of things believe it or not. Like Mafia II for example. I'm really excited for that game and it somehow applies to the topic because Mafia II is not really sandbox but it has a lot of open world features while being story drive experience.

Your also correct when you said that people so far have been respecting my opinion. I was indeed expecting a backlash after my review and it didn't happen, which tells me that most of the people in here are mature adults and that they understood my post the way I intended it to be.

I think I'm going to personally lay off the open world debate because is not getting anywhere and I'm getting mad for stuff I just can't control. I'm staying out of this thread for good. Again I'm sorry if I said anything to harsh and I definitely respect your opinion and everyone elses. Peace.

[JTX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubanito305

Your right and I apologize if I came on too strong on my previous post. I'm just really passionate when it comes to this. You and I actually agree on a lot of things believe it or not. Like Mafia II for example. I'm really excited for that game and it somehow applies to the topic because Mafia II is not really sandbox but it has a lot of open world features while being story drive experience.

Your also correct when you said that people so far have been respecting my opinion. I was indeed expecting a backlash after my review and it didn't happen, which tells me that most of the people in here are mature adults and that they understood my post the way I intended it to be.

I think I'm going to personally lay off the open world debate because is not getting anywhere and I'm getting mad for stuff I just can't control. I'm staying out of this thread for good. Again I'm sorry if I said anything to harsh and I definitely respect your opinion and everyone elses. Peace.

Its all good man. Yea we all want Alan wake to be the best it can be and there are many things remedy can do to make the sequel even better...and I believe it will be. I'm sure they've been reading suggestions and comments from what we liked and what we didn't to take into account with Alan Wake 2. I just honestly don't see them drastically changing the style of the game since they've already stated it doesn't work for the direction they're going. It's just a difference of opinion and we can state them in a civilized mature manner.

Btw can't wait for mafia 2 :-)

[yogibbear]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ancient

What's even worse, they ban the IP addresses of the critics Yes, they did it. I find it fascinating.

The only problem - it can be bypassed. I guess they realized it and eventually unbanned it.

...and all of this just because we are not satisfied with the 8/10 or B+ game and want it to be a thoroughly convincing 10/10 on all fronts, including the critical front.

::

To the developers:

I know it's possible to dodge absolutely every criticism with "we know it better" attitude: the creation is perfect, the story style is perfect, the formula is perfect, nothing needs to be changed. Those who enjoy the game the way it is - fine. But, I guess, we, the loyal supporters since May 2005, who spread the early word-of-mouth (I personally wrote over 20 blog entries advertising the existence and the beauty of Alan Wake), have the right to express frustration over the direction the game was steered into over the last few years, without having our heads slammed with an IP-ban hammer. To express an alternative position that maybe, just maybe, the focus could be slightly different.

Sure, full open-world doesn't work but the elements of more open interaction might well be the sweet spot.

Good developers listen to both types of views, not just the praise.

Yep, once again - 2K Marin developers were sitting en masse in the forum during the launch period of Bioshock 2, listening to all feedback: wanting to learn what was good, what went wrong, what could be improved. The views of the fans were impressively polarized, starting from "2K Marin, you screwed the game", ending with "the best game I've ever played". Oh my, we are a rather calm community here

Most impressively we had Jordan Thomas, the creative director of Bioshock 2 himself, participating in those discussions where he went several extra miles of explaining the context, intents, motivations of Bioshock 2 story. The effort that helped tremendously to deepen the understanding of the core idea the creators intended to convey. Jordan heard a lot of mixed views, both harsh views and glorifying views... yet through all this process he remained absolutely humble and reflective, which is astonishing for a role of this caliber and the intellectual personality he is known for. "The game could have been even more personal", he used to admit, which is absolutely true.

An honest exchange of ideas and views.

...and because of this interaction, based on this not-always-glorifying feedback, I'm sure Bioshock 3 will become a better game overall: improving on the strengths, eliminating the weaknesses, introducing new ideas. I adore both Bioshocks but even I had a long long long list what could be improved. Just because no creation is perfect. It's human. It's humble to admit.

Here, we either consistently talk down opposing views ("we tried it; the only shape Alan Wake could have taken; period") or simply shut up the vocal critics through a sneaky IP ban The problem is... living in adoration-only faux reality most certainly does not help to improve the game (starts to seem indicative of the root problem - one truth only) whereas it's the acceptance of different viewpoints and the interaction between them that moves the progress train forward and helps uncover new fascinating ideas. The feedback-based creative synergy.

Heck, the concept of Alan Wake is hypnotizing. I have printed screenshots in my office for several years already It's the implementation that stumbles.

::

We all share the goal of Alan Wake becoming a top-notch, triple A game with a potential for a ground-breaking fourth "A". When looking at this goal, there's certainly room for improvement.

Okay i agree with your sentiments...but I was one of the big critics of Bioshock 2 and i got banned multiple times from Bioshock 1 and Bioshock 2 forums in the suggestions/problems/issues/improvements threads. So clearly you cannot keep using 2k as this "holy grail" of developer-community feedback. I in fact much prefer these forums and the RMD devs here than the 2k devs by leaps and bounds. I have no idea what your issue with RMD is and I have no idea why you keep jumping back to 2k. But their forums are by far and above the worst i have ever ever ever visited ever since about 2 months before bioshock 1 was set to release. Before that they were great and i loved visiting them. Since i only visit them every month or so and had to create multiple accounts and use a proxy server to voice my criticisms of Bioshock 2 (which funnily enough were almost identical to my criticisms of Bioshock 1) so case in point they did not "listen" to my feeedback, or maybe like RMD are saying to you my feedback was crap and 2k's vision was better therefore they ignored and banned my comments. Just some food for thought.

Sorry if this sounds critical of you, I am trying to be critical of 2k as I do not agree with your use of them as some amazing developer. In fact i have decided they are to be avoided en masse from here on ever since Bioshock 2 and Borderlands.

In fact almost every criticism of Bioshock 1 and 2 2k dodged with 2k Liz's favourite slogan "this is how we intended it to be" or "this is the direction we wanted to take" or some other bs.

[ancient]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yogibbear

I am trying to be critical of 2k as I do not agree with your use of them as some amazing developer. In fact i have decided they are to be avoided en masse from here on ever since Bioshock 2 and Borderlands.

...

my criticisms of Bioshock 2 (which funnily enough were almost identical to my criticisms of Bioshock 1)

You are confusing 2K Marin as the developer vs. 2K Games as the publisher.

I'm focusing about the developer's (2K Marin) attitude here. Jordan Thomas, creative director, in particular and his posts during the launch period - probably the smartest person in the entire gaming industry. His every third word is "meta" and every fourth word - "philosophy"

I remember you there and I remember why you got banned. I believe 2K Liz was most likely right in that situation but it's just my opinion

In terms of general mood, I also prefer Alan Wake forums because it's much calmer.

Fanboyz used to eat anyone expressing a single critical thought against Bioshock 2 before the release date when the hype machine was in full motion (I was burnt alive ). It got much calmer after the release.

But here I'm focusing about the developer's attitude.

::

In terms of not paying attention: I would argue 2K Marin did pay a lot of attention to Bioshock 1 criticism:

& They massively improved the quality of the second half of the game (compared to the anti-climactic ending of the first game).
& They've refined the gameplay. Both I and the reviewers and most of the players find it much smoother. Better hacking. Better research.
& They introduced several small touches I find instinctive and impossible to resist ("this way..."; the new rescue animation)
& The fact that: "you do feel like their daddy, as odd as that sounds", to quote one reviewer. This game is far more emotional.
& Better choices. The third one in particular, the more I think about it...
& The very fact that the more you think about it, the more themes you uncover. This point is fully subjective, of course. Still, tells something
& A very subtle core message. You need to reach the second half, not just the first 4 hours you claimed playing; it's near the end

They lost a few things in the process (bits of atmosphere, bits of supporting characters and bits of graphics), but that's a different discussion. I'm sure they will learn.

I personally have no problem with DRM that so infuriated you. My PC is healthy and running, for the record Multiplayer was fun.

I do agree about Games for Windows Live being a poor choice: DLCs and the elite club of Live countries certainly do not help to promote a worldwide community. However, that points to... guess what? The owner of this system. Microsoft

Microsoft makes excellent software development tools (credit where credit is due; Visual Studio is the king of the industry) but their business practices are sometimes beyond my understanding.

[mgetter]

ive thought about this a bit. i think a fully open world game wouldnt work. i would wander around aimlessly and lost so often during the night segments. however, i think an open-world for the daytime segments (or atleast more freedom to explore then) would be really awesome.

however, if i had to vote for all open world or stay as it was, id vote against open world.

[MikkiRMD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ancient

I know it's possible to dodge absolutely every criticism with "we know it better" attitude: the creation is perfect, the story style is perfect, the formula is perfect, nothing needs to be changed.

Neither I nor any of my colleagues have ever claimed anything of the sort, and I wish you would stop implying that we have or do.

Also: we experimented with this thing extensively, and found that it wasn't doing what we wanted it to do. Nobody is saying that it absolutely could not be done, but we weren't able to do it (as evidenced by the fact that we didn't), and frankly, at the risk of being labeled a jerk, I find it a little unlikely that the problems we encountered are going to be solved here. Nobody's saying that you can't talk about it, of course, but perhaps you could find a way to do it without constantly taking little pot shots at us. That's pretty inconsiderate at best and makes me disinclined to keep talking to you.

[mgetter]

Mikki, just curiously, would you guys ever consider making the daytime segments a bit larger? I loved Bright Falls and really wanted to explore it just a bit more - talk to more people, see things, really get a sense of the town (without having to worry about being attack the entire way such as in the section towards the end hahaha)

[JTX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ancient

Those who enjoy the game the way it is - fine. But, I guess, we, the loyal supporters since May 2005, who spread the early word-of-mouth (I personally wrote over 20 blog entries advertising the existence and the beauty of Alan Wake), have the right to express frustration over the direction the game was steered into over the last few years, without having our heads slammed with an IP-ban hammer.

Sounds like your implying that the only people who enjoyed the game like it is now are newcomers...and that the "loyal supporters" (the true fans of Alan Wake ) are all dissapointed with the way the game is now which is complete bull shit. I've followed the game since 2006 and I'm not dissapointed at all. I guess that means everyone who enjoyed the game the way it is now are not "loyal supporters" and "true fans". You can't call yourself a loyal supporter when you never even purchased the damn game let alone played it. You have a shitty and know it all my crap don't stink attitude on here and every post you make is negative towards the game and remedy unless you are talking about 2k or bioshock. I don't expect everyone to like the game obviously but your going a little overboard with it.

[ancient]

Max Payne 1 & 2 A stellar example of gaming, dream sequences in particular.

Made by Remedy.

[ancient]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTX

You have a shitty and know it all my crap don't stink attitude

Proves the point, I guess.