It's times like this that I most regret my commitment to a 20 hour deadline. You'd think it would be on those long nights when I'm stuck with a bad game and I have to summon my willpower to even look at it. But those moments are somewhat heroic. I may curse my ridiculous life goals and rue my own stubbornness, but I can't help thinking, "I set myself a challenge, and this is what that means."
No, the worst part of playing every game for exactly 20 hours is when I finish a decent game early. That's when I really start to question myself. Because to finish a game entirely is an appropriate and proper end to one's time with it. Especially if it's like Trine 3 and it only takes six and a half hours to reach 100% completion, including all of the Achievements. So what exactly am I doing, playing it all the way through a second (and, as seems likely, third) time?
Because it's not a bad game, there's none of this macho "this is an ordeal I must endure" going on. All I'm really doing is marking time. Reaching an arbitrary point on the clock for no reason other than to maintain my consistency. And while that is enough, and I expect my next couple of runs through the game will be tolerable, it just starts to feel silly.
Ah well. Trine 3 never really presents you with the sort of sadistically dangerous traps that pepper Trine 2's later levels. There's no acid-spewing pipes or lava-filled foundry to make your way past. The final (and thus, presumably, most difficult) level is a lovely redwood forest that is perhaps a bit more vertical than some of the others, but nonetheless pretty easy to navigate.
The only truly difficult part of the game is the final boss. That's where my friend and I got stymied on co-op. It is a significant and distressing spike in the overall difficulty of the game. Most levels, the deadliest thing you have to face is falling down a pit and then respawning just a little ways away. The boss summons monsters, creates deadly rings of poison, and hurls flaming boulders that you have to reflect back in order to deal damage. It is a chaotic and stressful fight after seven levels of casual platforming.
That's why I gave up in multiplayer. We tried it two or three times and I got the impression that it would be one of those things where the only way to beat it would be to get really intense and unfun about it, and I don't want to turn my hanging out time into a hyper competitive hothouse.
That being said, I think Trine 3, like the other Trine games, is noticeably easier in single-player mode. I beat the final boss on my first try, and got 100% completion roughly 20 minutes sooner than my friend and I achieved 90% completion. I'm not sure why this should be the case. Normally, you'd think that more people would make a task easier. And while some co-op games solve this by scaling up the difficulty, Trine 3 doesn't appear to do so,
I think what happens is that with multiple players, you can't half-ass your way around obstacles. Your solutions have to be stable enough to stand up to multiple uses. Also, talking your way through the problem-solving process eats up a certain amount of time. Finally, the way respawning works may be slightly more time-efficient in single player. I also can't discount the time I saved by relying on knowledge gleaned from my previous playthrough, though that was seven months ago and I didn't often notice it helping me.
Regardless, I didn't miss out on much not finishing the multiplayer. Trine 3 has the temerity to end on a cliffhanger, and I can only imagine it's because they ran out of time and/or money, because the plot isn't nearly strong enough to merit it. Basically, you learn the origin of the Trine - a pair of heroic sisters voluntarily entered these soul-capturing artifacts in order to trap an evil, immortal sorcerer in a third until such time as heroes might come along and find the sorcerer's enchanted heart and thereby slay him permanently. The Trine is one of the three artifacts, inhabited by the soul of one of the sisters. Over the course of the game, the Trine breaks and the evil sorcerer uses this opportunity to break out of his own artifact prison. The heroes have to reassemble the Trine to gain enough power to stop the villain. This involves platforming an collecting little doodads called "Trinangles." In the end, it turns out that you get about 2/3rds of the way through this process, including the large, unnumbered piece you get by defeating the final boss, and then the sorcerer breaks the third artifact, letting out the Trine spirit's sister, who appears not to be friendly, and then . . . we'll have to wait for the sequel to find out.
The practical upshot of all this is that I have literally no reason to keep playing this game. Everything I could possibly have wanted from it, I've already gotten. Yet I'm going to play it two more times, because I am a fundamentally ridiculous person.
Sigh.
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
Monday, March 12, 2018
Trine 3: The Artifacts of Power - 2/20 hours
Trine 3 is, on balance, a delightful little game. It's easily as gorgeous as either of its predecessors, and the characterization of the three heroes is stronger than it's ever been. The voice acting is top notch and the cast has an easy chemistry that makes it believable that they've been on multiple adventures together (I don't know if they recorded their lines together, but if not, then it's impressive how natural their conversations sound).
The game's main flaw is small, but hard to ignore - going to 3D adds nothing to the series' gameplay, and in fact harms Trine 3 much more than it helps. The addition of a third dimension allows for some new puzzle mechanics - so far; rotating things horizontally (instead of just vertically) and tying Zoya's ropes around poles - but the price for this is that the 3D controls make everything you do just a bit sloppier. This is especially true for maneuvering the wizard's boxes and swinging on the thief's grappling hook. Having to deal with a third axis of movement makes those powers significantly harder to use.
Nonetheless, imprecise controls would not, in themselves, be sufficient to condemn the move to 3D, were it not for the fact that Trine 3's 3D is poorly implemented. Done well, 3D can give you a real sense of immersion and scale. The Trine series has always had beautifully crafted levels, and a 3D Trine that gave you the experience of being surrounded by that beauty, of existing within it, would be worth a certain degree of awkwardness in the controls. Unfortunately, Trine 3 presents its 3D from a fixed and distant camera angle, and thus it strongly resembles its side-scrolling predecessors, only with more difficult jumps and the embarrassing possibility of falling off the front and back of the screen.
Don't get me wrong, Trine 3 is still the loveliest entry of a characteristically lovely series, and the 3D contributes to that, but it's probably not worth it.
This is just griping, though. The core Trine gameplay remains solid, and it's still a charming fairy tale with a pinch of modern sensibilities (plus, we learn that Pontius is a proto-marxist), so I expect my first runthrough will be relatively painless. I just hate to see a good game waste effort on a self-destructive gimmick.
The game's main flaw is small, but hard to ignore - going to 3D adds nothing to the series' gameplay, and in fact harms Trine 3 much more than it helps. The addition of a third dimension allows for some new puzzle mechanics - so far; rotating things horizontally (instead of just vertically) and tying Zoya's ropes around poles - but the price for this is that the 3D controls make everything you do just a bit sloppier. This is especially true for maneuvering the wizard's boxes and swinging on the thief's grappling hook. Having to deal with a third axis of movement makes those powers significantly harder to use.
Nonetheless, imprecise controls would not, in themselves, be sufficient to condemn the move to 3D, were it not for the fact that Trine 3's 3D is poorly implemented. Done well, 3D can give you a real sense of immersion and scale. The Trine series has always had beautifully crafted levels, and a 3D Trine that gave you the experience of being surrounded by that beauty, of existing within it, would be worth a certain degree of awkwardness in the controls. Unfortunately, Trine 3 presents its 3D from a fixed and distant camera angle, and thus it strongly resembles its side-scrolling predecessors, only with more difficult jumps and the embarrassing possibility of falling off the front and back of the screen.
Don't get me wrong, Trine 3 is still the loveliest entry of a characteristically lovely series, and the 3D contributes to that, but it's probably not worth it.
This is just griping, though. The core Trine gameplay remains solid, and it's still a charming fairy tale with a pinch of modern sensibilities (plus, we learn that Pontius is a proto-marxist), so I expect my first runthrough will be relatively painless. I just hate to see a good game waste effort on a self-destructive gimmick.
Sunday, March 11, 2018
Trine 3: The Artifacts of Power - Initial Thoughts
About the Game (From the Steam Store Page)
Experience a fairytale world of breathtaking sceneries and face a myriad of physics-based puzzles, wonderful contraptions, dangerous foes and enchanting creatures.
Trine 3: The Artifacts of Power is a platforming game of action, puzzles and adventure, and the sequel to the award winning Trine and Trine 2. Reunite with the familiar heroes - Pontius the Knight, Amadeus the Wizard and Zoya the Thief in an all-new adventure, now for the first time in full 3D!
Playable in single-player or in co-up with up to three players, both locally or online.
Previous Playtime
6.8 hours
Expectations and Prior Experience
My friend Daniel and I played almost the entire game in co-op. We stopped at the very last level because the final boss was too frustrating to be much fun, but until then it was a charming and creative 3D puzzle platformer.
If I'm being completely honest, though, after playing Trine 2 and, subsequently, Trine, I have to say that Trine 3 is the weakest entry in the series. The move to 3D was handled reasonably well, but it resulted in less tightly-constructed puzzles and an overall shallower experience (no pun intended). It's still decent enough that I have no special fear of having to play it 3+ times in a row, but I know already that it's not going to be a high point for me.
So let's just get it out of the way quickly so I can move on to even more unforgivingly co-operative games to play by myself.
Experience a fairytale world of breathtaking sceneries and face a myriad of physics-based puzzles, wonderful contraptions, dangerous foes and enchanting creatures.
Trine 3: The Artifacts of Power is a platforming game of action, puzzles and adventure, and the sequel to the award winning Trine and Trine 2. Reunite with the familiar heroes - Pontius the Knight, Amadeus the Wizard and Zoya the Thief in an all-new adventure, now for the first time in full 3D!
Playable in single-player or in co-up with up to three players, both locally or online.
Previous Playtime
6.8 hours
Expectations and Prior Experience
My friend Daniel and I played almost the entire game in co-op. We stopped at the very last level because the final boss was too frustrating to be much fun, but until then it was a charming and creative 3D puzzle platformer.
If I'm being completely honest, though, after playing Trine 2 and, subsequently, Trine, I have to say that Trine 3 is the weakest entry in the series. The move to 3D was handled reasonably well, but it resulted in less tightly-constructed puzzles and an overall shallower experience (no pun intended). It's still decent enough that I have no special fear of having to play it 3+ times in a row, but I know already that it's not going to be a high point for me.
So let's just get it out of the way quickly so I can move on to even more unforgivingly co-operative games to play by myself.
Stronghold 3 - 20/20 hours
Sometimes people ask me why I do this - why I subject myself to these games I don't particularly like, playing them for longer than is reasonably necessary. I usually answer with something self-deprecating about vanity and living up to the self-created myth of my own endurance.
But that's only part of the story. Over and above a stubborn determination to stick to my goal, it's moments like this that keep me going. Sitting here, looking back at 120 hours of an impulsively purchased game bundle and knowing that I will never have to play any of them again . . . it is . . . immensely satisfying. There were actually tears in my eyes as I hit the delete button to remove Stronghold 3 from my hard drive. The relief was profound. It was like a burden being lifted from shoulders.
The game itself was all right, but probably the least essential of the series. Its only addition to the Stronghold formula was its 3D graphics, and they wound up being less attractive than Stronghold 2 while also imposing a dubious new limitation on the gameplay - the ability to rotate buildings off the rectilinear resulted in sloppier cities and less efficient lines of transit. Maybe that makes the game truer to its medieval setting, but I'd have appreciated a snap-to-grid option, because realism matters less to me than neatness.
But that's not that big a deal. The real problem with Stronghold 3 is that it's not put together very well. I had to quit free build mode when my 400+ population city ground my computer to a halt. There was a noticeable delay between me moving my mouse and the program responding to the input. At times it would freeze entirely. I even had to fire up the task manager and force quit the game. Then when I would try and start over, it would crash immediately, forcing me to reset my computer entirely.
But even that isn't my real issue. My real issue is that I wanted something from the game it couldn't deliver - a more detailed and realistic sim with my little characters going about their imaginary lives and a version of siege warfare that revolved more around stockpiling food and resources than the tactical micromanagement of units. It's probably an unfair opinion, because I'm basically asking the game to be something its not, but that's just the way it is.
Overall, I'd say that if you're interesting in the Stronghold series, it's pretty arbitrary which one you go with, except that Stronghold 3 should probably be your last choice. Whatever it is you like about the series, another entry does better, and the one thing it does do best - being in 3D - isn't much of a selling point.
Although, if you do get the opportunity to play the entire series for 120 hours and then quit, I can highly recommend it.
But that's only part of the story. Over and above a stubborn determination to stick to my goal, it's moments like this that keep me going. Sitting here, looking back at 120 hours of an impulsively purchased game bundle and knowing that I will never have to play any of them again . . . it is . . . immensely satisfying. There were actually tears in my eyes as I hit the delete button to remove Stronghold 3 from my hard drive. The relief was profound. It was like a burden being lifted from shoulders.
The game itself was all right, but probably the least essential of the series. Its only addition to the Stronghold formula was its 3D graphics, and they wound up being less attractive than Stronghold 2 while also imposing a dubious new limitation on the gameplay - the ability to rotate buildings off the rectilinear resulted in sloppier cities and less efficient lines of transit. Maybe that makes the game truer to its medieval setting, but I'd have appreciated a snap-to-grid option, because realism matters less to me than neatness.
But that's not that big a deal. The real problem with Stronghold 3 is that it's not put together very well. I had to quit free build mode when my 400+ population city ground my computer to a halt. There was a noticeable delay between me moving my mouse and the program responding to the input. At times it would freeze entirely. I even had to fire up the task manager and force quit the game. Then when I would try and start over, it would crash immediately, forcing me to reset my computer entirely.
But even that isn't my real issue. My real issue is that I wanted something from the game it couldn't deliver - a more detailed and realistic sim with my little characters going about their imaginary lives and a version of siege warfare that revolved more around stockpiling food and resources than the tactical micromanagement of units. It's probably an unfair opinion, because I'm basically asking the game to be something its not, but that's just the way it is.
Overall, I'd say that if you're interesting in the Stronghold series, it's pretty arbitrary which one you go with, except that Stronghold 3 should probably be your last choice. Whatever it is you like about the series, another entry does better, and the one thing it does do best - being in 3D - isn't much of a selling point.
Although, if you do get the opportunity to play the entire series for 120 hours and then quit, I can highly recommend it.
Friday, March 9, 2018
Stronghold 3 - 5/20 hours
It's come down to this. My final Stronghold game has become a pure battle of wills. Not that the game is particularly bad, but this is the sixth game in the series and it adds basically nothing to the Stronghold formula.
It's actually kind of astonishing how . . . consistent this series has been. There's some tinkering around the edges. Some buildings have slightly different functions. Feasting for the sake of honor has been streamlined. There used to be buildings that could produce one of two different weapons (such as bows and crossbows), depending on how you set it - those have been split into two different buildings. There's one new unit, the ranger, whose tactical role I have not yet discerned. But none of these changes really effect how he game is played. Even Stronghold Legends' hero units were more like window dressing. The only game in the series that feels significantly different than the baseline is Stronghold Crusader Extreme.
The only thing I can think of is that the original Stronghold must have a powerful constituency somewhere and they don't want a great deal of innovative mechanics or dramatic gameplay refinements, but prefer the game just the way it was, only with more sophisticated graphics. Thus it keeps getting conservative sequels. It makes sense that people who like the game might want more of the same, but it's always been my preference for video game sequels to push the original's central idea forward. Five times so far, I've been hoping for a more sophisticated and nuanced medieval town/siege warfare simulator and the series has only fitfully delivered.
On the other hand, they have managed to developed a characteristic Stronghold flavor that remains more or less constant through the games, so you always know what you're getting . . . for better or worse.
It's actually kind of astonishing how . . . consistent this series has been. There's some tinkering around the edges. Some buildings have slightly different functions. Feasting for the sake of honor has been streamlined. There used to be buildings that could produce one of two different weapons (such as bows and crossbows), depending on how you set it - those have been split into two different buildings. There's one new unit, the ranger, whose tactical role I have not yet discerned. But none of these changes really effect how he game is played. Even Stronghold Legends' hero units were more like window dressing. The only game in the series that feels significantly different than the baseline is Stronghold Crusader Extreme.
The only thing I can think of is that the original Stronghold must have a powerful constituency somewhere and they don't want a great deal of innovative mechanics or dramatic gameplay refinements, but prefer the game just the way it was, only with more sophisticated graphics. Thus it keeps getting conservative sequels. It makes sense that people who like the game might want more of the same, but it's always been my preference for video game sequels to push the original's central idea forward. Five times so far, I've been hoping for a more sophisticated and nuanced medieval town/siege warfare simulator and the series has only fitfully delivered.
On the other hand, they have managed to developed a characteristic Stronghold flavor that remains more or less constant through the games, so you always know what you're getting . . . for better or worse.
Tuesday, March 6, 2018
Trine 2 - 20/20 hours
Most of my discussion of Trine 2 has centered around my cold. So let me just say that the worst of it has passed and I'm now back up to about 95% - and that will be the last of it. It wasn't the sort of game I'd play to distract me from my health problems, but it also did not add excessively to my burden.
I'm actually at a loss for any superlatives to attach to Trine 2. It's definitely the best of the Trine games, with the best balance between length, difficulty, and story, but the series as a whole is . . .
. . .
. . .
. . . Above average in a forgettable way. Like, if I'm honestly ranking the various platformer games I've played, it's better than Hell Yeah! (by quite a significant margin), and it's better than Fez (less dramatically so, but still) and it's better even than Apotheon (though that's a tough call), but it doesn't have disgusting hell rabbits, or twisty 3D perspective puzzles, or art direction that belongs in a museum. It just does everything it's supposed to do and does it well. The controls are almost perfectly functional, enough so that the few errors (sometimes, you will grapple things you didn't mean to, or summon boxes imprecisely) are forgotten after a few seconds. The puzzles are clever and keep you on your toes, even if they never rise to the level of memorable spectacle. The graphics are gorgeously lush, colorful, and detailed, and the only fault I can possibly find with it is that the world it depicts is kind of generic.
All in all, I'm in a weird position. I can unreservedly recommend Trine 2. It was worth the time to play and though I received it as a gift, I would consider it a fair bargain at its full price. However, it is taking up precisely zero real estate in my head. That's probably why it took me longer to finish than Stronghold Crusader Extreme. There just wasn't anything for my imagination to hook onto, either good or bad. It was pleasant, fun in a way most games should strive to be, but if it weren't so good, it would be the definition of "average."
I'm actually at a loss for any superlatives to attach to Trine 2. It's definitely the best of the Trine games, with the best balance between length, difficulty, and story, but the series as a whole is . . .
. . .
. . .
. . . Above average in a forgettable way. Like, if I'm honestly ranking the various platformer games I've played, it's better than Hell Yeah! (by quite a significant margin), and it's better than Fez (less dramatically so, but still) and it's better even than Apotheon (though that's a tough call), but it doesn't have disgusting hell rabbits, or twisty 3D perspective puzzles, or art direction that belongs in a museum. It just does everything it's supposed to do and does it well. The controls are almost perfectly functional, enough so that the few errors (sometimes, you will grapple things you didn't mean to, or summon boxes imprecisely) are forgotten after a few seconds. The puzzles are clever and keep you on your toes, even if they never rise to the level of memorable spectacle. The graphics are gorgeously lush, colorful, and detailed, and the only fault I can possibly find with it is that the world it depicts is kind of generic.
All in all, I'm in a weird position. I can unreservedly recommend Trine 2. It was worth the time to play and though I received it as a gift, I would consider it a fair bargain at its full price. However, it is taking up precisely zero real estate in my head. That's probably why it took me longer to finish than Stronghold Crusader Extreme. There just wasn't anything for my imagination to hook onto, either good or bad. It was pleasant, fun in a way most games should strive to be, but if it weren't so good, it would be the definition of "average."
Friday, March 2, 2018
Trine 2 - 11/20 hours
For much of the last three days, every time I thought about playing Trine 2, I was in physical pain. The facts are unrelated, of course, but it's hard to convince your brain of that. I hope this doesn't retroactively change my opinion of the game, because it's really quite good.
I especially like the way the main story seamlessly transitions into the DLC. When you defeat Rosabel's dragon, it at first appears that the credits will scroll, but a goblin runs onscreen and interrupts, saying that there's more to come. And then you play the DLC levels, a semi-sequel about Amadeus's (the wizard's) wife getting kidnapped by goblins.
That whole plotline is somewhat problematic, because Margaret's characterization relies heavily on the "shrewish housewife" stereotype. It's kind of amusing that her monstrous captors got more than they bargained for, but they didn't do anything interesting enough with the idea to make up for how regressive it was.
I guess plot isn't that important to the Trine series, though. It's presented very in a very minimalist fashion. There's not a lot of worldbuilding, and the characterization is distinct, but shallow, and done mostly through the characters' mid-level quips. It's easy to forget what exactly is going on when you solve puzzles for 40 minutes and then watch a 1 minute cutscene.
I think they're deliberately going for a "fairy tale" aesthetic, which works well with the colorful levels and broadly drawn enemies, but, of course, it puts me at a loss for stuff to write about.
My next move is to go back through the game and try and get 100% completion. It will likely take me longer than I have left, but that's not a problem. The real concern is that there's a significant difficulty spike in the later levels, and I might get stuck having to collect a bunch of xp that requires precision platforming I am still too plague-ridden to tolerate.
Ah well, at least it's not Stronghold.
I especially like the way the main story seamlessly transitions into the DLC. When you defeat Rosabel's dragon, it at first appears that the credits will scroll, but a goblin runs onscreen and interrupts, saying that there's more to come. And then you play the DLC levels, a semi-sequel about Amadeus's (the wizard's) wife getting kidnapped by goblins.
That whole plotline is somewhat problematic, because Margaret's characterization relies heavily on the "shrewish housewife" stereotype. It's kind of amusing that her monstrous captors got more than they bargained for, but they didn't do anything interesting enough with the idea to make up for how regressive it was.
I guess plot isn't that important to the Trine series, though. It's presented very in a very minimalist fashion. There's not a lot of worldbuilding, and the characterization is distinct, but shallow, and done mostly through the characters' mid-level quips. It's easy to forget what exactly is going on when you solve puzzles for 40 minutes and then watch a 1 minute cutscene.
I think they're deliberately going for a "fairy tale" aesthetic, which works well with the colorful levels and broadly drawn enemies, but, of course, it puts me at a loss for stuff to write about.
My next move is to go back through the game and try and get 100% completion. It will likely take me longer than I have left, but that's not a problem. The real concern is that there's a significant difficulty spike in the later levels, and I might get stuck having to collect a bunch of xp that requires precision platforming I am still too plague-ridden to tolerate.
Ah well, at least it's not Stronghold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)