Simon 3, my opinion
Rikard Peterson
will disagree with me, but I found this game to be the best of the
three Simon the Sorcerer games. I had fun. Let's take a closer look at
the game then, shall we?
Graphics.
When I first saw the screenshots of the new Simon game, I thought the
graphics were ugly. And that's how the game looks, but I got used to it
pretty quickly. It's not particulary pretty, but it works. It really
does. The effects in the end was nice, too.
Interface.
I think they did a good job with the interface. Granted, I had no
problems with Grim Fandango's controls either, which this is based on,
but I think most people will find Simon's controls easy to use. It's
mostly keyboard based, with Simon turning his head at important items
but you can use the mouse in the inventory screen and save/load menus
if you want. There was no pixelhunting at all in this game. Maybe it
was beacuse of the sparse graphics that you can't miss any items, but
it was nice nevertheless.
Moving around mostly worked fine. They have included phone booths that
let you teleport to another area quickly, but you had to get to a booth
in order to teleport to another which led to a little more running
around than I was happy with. It would have been nice if they had
allowed the teleportation from anywhere since the map is pretty big.
Sound.
The music is nice, but I would have liked more of it. Now there are
vast areas with the same background music and at times that was a
little annoying. Sound effects are nothing particular. The acting was
good and was what made the chunky 3d characters come alive. The
dialogue made me laugh on many occations.
Plot.
I had fun and was surprised on several occations by the directions the
plot took. I do have to admit that I am easily surprised. They also
handled the whole sequel thing very good, IMO, building on the previous
games without going over the same things again.
Puzzles.
I really liked the last puzzle. I couldn't solve it without looking in
a walkthrough, but I still think it's great. In general I liked the
puzzles.
There has been some talk about "arcade sequences" in Simon3d. Yes,
there are timed minigames, but once you know what you are supposed to
do there are plenty of time to solve them so I didn't see it as a
problem, and I generally dislike that sort of thing.
Bugs/Technical Problems.
I experienced no bugs, but I installed the patch before playing. I
started playing the game on a 233MHz Pentium II with a 4MB ATI Rage
graphics card. That's just below the recommended system, but I only had
two problems: Slow loading times and bad transparency effects. No
problems at all with my new computer (AMD XP 1800+, Geforce 4, Win XP).
Conclusion.
I don't think I'll put this game on my "top ten", but I did enjoy
playing it and don't regret buying it or spending the many hours I have
spent playing it (it is not a short game).
Rikard
gita lal
wrote:
<snip>
>I don't think I'll put this game on my "top ten", but I did enjoy
>playing it and don't regret buying it or spending the many hours I have
>spent playing it (it is not a short game).
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the game, Rikard :)
--
.gita
Murray Peterson
news:Xns92ACBFDEBC4Btr...@130.133.1.4:
> Tonight I finished Simon the Sorcerer 3d, laughing. I know some people
> will disagree with me, but I found this game to be the best of the
> three Simon the Sorcerer games. I had fun. Let's take a closer look at
> the game then, shall we?
> [snip]
Thanks. From your experience, it sounds like I should not consider this
game a total write-off.
--
Murray Peterson
Email: murray_...@shaw.ca (remove underscore)
URL: http://members.shaw.ca/murraypeterson/
Laura
> > Tonight I finished Simon the Sorcerer 3d, laughing. I know some people
> > will disagree with me, but I found this game to be the best of the
> > three Simon the Sorcerer games. I had fun. Let's take a closer look at
> > the game then, shall we?
> > [snip]
I had fun with the game too. But then I don't buy any game expecting
the earth to move or to compare it to Dante or Dickens. I really just
hope to be overall entertained or challenged or some combination of
things that offsets the pain of parting with my money. I have spent
30.00 taking 3 kids to what turns out to be a 2 hour waste of time
movie. SO in comparison most games - even the not so great ones, are a
much better value to me than other entertainment forms.
Simon 3D is not like the first two games in some ways and in others it
is. - On a few game aspects, I thought it was better. I thought the
dialogue was more adult and funnier in many places. It has keyboard,
it has aggrivating arcade games - but it is very long, has some
memorably funny characters and has an amazing end puzzle. I figure I
got 50 hours of game time and ended up happier at the end with value
received, than I have with some other games. SO to me - it was a good
deal. :)
Laura
Murray Peterson
news:3d41c74.02101...@posting.google.com:
> I had fun with the game too. But then I don't buy any game expecting
> the earth to move or to compare it to Dante or Dickens.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if adventure games matured to that level of
artistry? The mind boggles...
Laura
> > I had fun with the game too. But then I don't buy any game expecting
> > the earth to move or to compare it to Dante or Dickens.
>
> Wouldn't it be wonderful if adventure games matured to that level of
> artistry? The mind boggles...
And I don't doubt that some piece of interactive graphic fiction may
well rise to that level. There have been games that truly did rise
above the level of others. In that they made me think or brought some
emotional conectivity to the process. I just meant that I don't go
into a game with - what to me are unrealistic demands for 20 or 30
dollars. I certainly wouldn't expect to get a decent piece of
sculpture or art for anywhere near that price. Even if by an unknown.
I think it's more like dating. If you accept a date with someone and
carry with you the expectations that if the earth doesn't move then it
was a terrible date - you won't have many dates or at least not enjoy
them when you are on them. I never really carried any more
expectations than that it would be fun, diverting, or maybe good
conversation - in other words better than the enjoyment that I would
have had without that date. I approach entertainment or purchases the
same way. I don't have any other expectations than - after I am done -
I don't regret spending the money. If it surpasses that level of
expectation - then good. If it moves past that - I am thrilled. Maybe
I am just advocating a more realistic approach to how a game can be
viewed. It certainly allows for a balanced view, without all the
outrage and such. People can take these things way too seriously.
Laura
Murray Peterson
> Maybe
> I am just advocating a more realistic approach to how a game can be
> viewed. It certainly allows for a balanced view, without all the
> outrage and such. People can take these things way too seriously.
I understand -- even though I write reviews of the games, I try not to hold
them all up to some unreachable standard. If I did, I would never enjoy
any games at all, and then what would I do with my spare time? :-)
Laura
> I understand -- even though I write reviews of the games, I try not to hold
> them all up to some unreachable standard. If I did, I would never enjoy
> any games at all, and then what would I do with my spare time? :-)
I think that you are balanced in your reviews. I have read many of
them and enjoyed the read. I was probably preaching at the choir a
little - another just releasing a personal rant. I research the web on
a daily basis and just get a little cranky at times by some of the
posts and whines. Gaming is a hobby with me and a well invested one. I
did see some post recently where people were talking about story lines
and someone compared Syberia to Dickens and found the game story
wanting. Well duh! They then wondered why game developers didn't offer
stories like Dickens. I felt like posting - well they are probably
can't as Dickens is dead and if he were alive he wouldn't take 10
cents per unit as a payoff for his work.... But I didn't. I just find
it ludicrous that people would truly have that sort of expectation for
the plot line of a PC game.
What I do take seriously is that someone spent a good chunk of their
days and nights pulling together any given game. They may have thought
it was great or maybe they thought it would be fun. Whatever they did
- they didn't set out to ruin someone's life over a plot thread or a
glitch. I respect people who do these things, as there are much easier
and more immediately lucrative ways to make a living - if they even
manage to do that with any given game. Many gamers are outraged that
there was a bug or that the graphics weren't 100% along with an
amazing plot. What exactly did they expect for 20.00? I just think
that if people grew up, chilled out or whatever - they might truly
recognize the limits of what can be built on a tight budget, see the
true value of what they have purchased, enjoy themselves more.
Perception is everything in the market place. Perhaps part of the
reason it is dificult to attract capital and investment into adventure
games is the widespread view that adventure gamers want the
unachievable and at a low price. Console gamers spend 50.00 plus per
game and if it doesn't suit them - they toss it and go onto the next
one. They may say the game blows or whatever - but they don't think
that it was a personal matter that was foisted upon them. AT least
perceptionally that is not the way it seems on the surface in print
and in related mags/venues.
Laura
Robert Norton
@posting.google.com:
> Many gamers are outraged that
> there was a bug or that the graphics weren't 100% along with an
> amazing plot. What exactly did they expect for 20.00?
We expect that a game creator would care as much about the game as we, the
players, do. That means that the person or persons making the game are
willing to spend hundreds of hours *thinking* about the game, how it works,
playing it, testing it. It doesn't have to have the newest graphics. It
has to be fun.
David Adrien Tanguay
>> Many gamers are outraged that
>>there was a bug or that the graphics weren't 100% along with an
>>amazing plot. What exactly did they expect for 20.00?
>
> We expect that a game creator would care as much about the game as we, the
> players, do. That means that the person or persons making the game are
> willing to spend hundreds of hours *thinking* about the game, how it works,
> playing it, testing it. It doesn't have to have the newest graphics. It
> has to be fun.
I recently received an e-mail from Laurent Le Besnerais about his experience
working on Mystery of the Nautilus. They had one month to design the game,
puzzles and story, and six months total for the entire project. And the suits
were ordering changes throughout, screwing things up. And to top it off, they
never got paid for it and so their company folded.
The sad part for us is that Laurent won't be making any more games. I
didn't think much of Nautilus, but it seemed to be on the right track, like
Journeyman Project series, or the Nancy Drew series. It's hard to expect
great adventures when they're all made by rookies.
--
David Tanguay d...@thinkage.ca http://www.thinkage.ca/~dat/
Thinkage Ltd. Kitchener, Ontario, Canada [43.24N 80.29W]
Laura
> has to be fun.
Well said. That is the bottom line after all.
Laura
Robert Norton
news:3DB32FCB...@thinkage.ca:
> working on Mystery of the Nautilus. They had one month to design the
> game, puzzles and story, and six months total for the entire project.
> And the suits were ordering changes throughout, screwing things up.
> And to top it off, they never got paid for it and so their company
> folded.
> The sad part for us is that Laurent won't be making any more games. I
> didn't think much of Nautilus, but it seemed to be on the right track,
> like Journeyman Project series, or the Nancy Drew series. It's hard to
> expect great adventures when they're all made by rookies.
Thanks for this info. It's not too suprising. You can't expect somebody
to make art when you come in every few days and say "the picture size
needs to be cut in half" or "change the color scheme to mostly blues".
First there has to be somebody (or team) with a compelling idea, then you
have to let them go do their thing. It does *not* have to be very
expensive.
I think you could make a parallel with the music industry. You can't
just pull five good looking guys off the street and call them a band, and
expect to get good music out of them. They have to have music making in
their souls, they have to be willing to make music even if they don't get
paid.
David Hadley
news:Xns92ACBFDEBC4Btr...@130.133.1.4...
> I experienced no bugs, but I installed the patch before playing. I
> started playing the game on a 233MHz Pentium II with a 4MB ATI Rage
> graphics card. That's just below the recommended system, but I only had
> two problems: Slow loading times and bad transparency effects. No
> problems at all with my new computer (AMD XP 1800+, Geforce 4, Win XP).
>
I have a 266MHz with 16Mb graphics card. But I get very slow framerate, that
makes the game virtually unplayable.
Can I ask what you did to get it to work on your 233MHz computer? I have
tried technical support but they aren't any help.
Rikard Peterson
I did nothing special. I guess my old Fujitsu was fast for its speed.
Or maybe there is some other reason... I had Windows 98 on that
computer, and plenty (192 MB) of RAM (which is plenty for a computer
of that age). That might be it, you probably have less memory in your
computer. Buy some more and it'll likely go a bit faster.
Rikard
David Hadley
some. Or buy a new pc. Or steal one. Decision decisions.
"Rikard Peterson" <trumg...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92B32DAED817tr...@130.133.1.4...